For two hours, this writer will be speaking and taking questions on "What Is Judaism?" at a hotel in the Lansing, Michigan area on Saturday morning, May 12.
If you live in Michigan or you know of someone who does, please spread the word about this important event.
For information and directions to the speech, contact The Battle of Ideas Forum at the following e-mail address:
sobranevents@gmail.com
Thanks for any help you can lend in publicizing my speech.
I hope to see you there!
Sincerely,
Michael A. Hoffman II
***
Monday, April 30, 2007
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Zionist moves against Russia
Neocon Bush Administration and Zionist Moneymen Target Russia
***
Putin Suspends Treaty in Response to U.S. Plan
By Peter Finn
Washington Post Foreign Service | Thursday, April 26, 2007; 9:52 AM
MOSCOW, April 26 -- President Vladimir Putin said today that he was suspending Russia's obligations under the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty, ratcheting up a tense stand-off with NATO over U.S. plans to station a missile defense system in Eastern Europe...
In a wide-ranging speech that mostly centered on domestic issues, Putin also noted pointedly that ... "There is a growth in the flow of money from abroad for direct interference in our internal affairs. There are those who, skillfully using pseudo-democratic rhetoric, would like to return to the recent past -- some to loot the country's national riches, to rob the people and the state; others to strip us of economic and political independence.''
...The Russians agree with the U.S. that they could easily overwhelm the anti-missile system. However, they refuse to see the issue as it is described by American officials. Rather, their opposition stems from they see as a series of broken promises during NATO's eastward expansion. Russian officials believe they had a commitment when Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary joined NATO, that the alliance would not station bases on the territory of the old Warsaw Pact or expand into the former Soviet Union. Both things occurred.
Given that record, Russian officials say, the missile defense system, once established, could be quickly expanded by the U.S. and become a real strategic threat to Russia....
***
To have Mr. Hoffman's essays and columns e-mailed to you free-of-charge or obligation, send an e-mail to: HoffmanWire-subscribe@topica.com When you receive Topica's e-mail in response to your subscription request, simply click on your reply button; that's all there is to it. You need not visit Topica's website in order to subscribe. You may easily unsubscribe, hassle-free, at any time.
**
***
Putin Suspends Treaty in Response to U.S. Plan
By Peter Finn
Washington Post Foreign Service | Thursday, April 26, 2007; 9:52 AM
MOSCOW, April 26 -- President Vladimir Putin said today that he was suspending Russia's obligations under the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty, ratcheting up a tense stand-off with NATO over U.S. plans to station a missile defense system in Eastern Europe...
In a wide-ranging speech that mostly centered on domestic issues, Putin also noted pointedly that ... "There is a growth in the flow of money from abroad for direct interference in our internal affairs. There are those who, skillfully using pseudo-democratic rhetoric, would like to return to the recent past -- some to loot the country's national riches, to rob the people and the state; others to strip us of economic and political independence.''
...The Russians agree with the U.S. that they could easily overwhelm the anti-missile system. However, they refuse to see the issue as it is described by American officials. Rather, their opposition stems from they see as a series of broken promises during NATO's eastward expansion. Russian officials believe they had a commitment when Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary joined NATO, that the alliance would not station bases on the territory of the old Warsaw Pact or expand into the former Soviet Union. Both things occurred.
Given that record, Russian officials say, the missile defense system, once established, could be quickly expanded by the U.S. and become a real strategic threat to Russia....
***
To have Mr. Hoffman's essays and columns e-mailed to you free-of-charge or obligation, send an e-mail to: HoffmanWire-subscribe@topica.com When you receive Topica's e-mail in response to your subscription request, simply click on your reply button; that's all there is to it. You need not visit Topica's website in order to subscribe. You may easily unsubscribe, hassle-free, at any time.
**
Buying the War: Bush's Mouthpiece Media Exposed by Bill Moyers
"Buying the War," Bill Moyers' absolutely devastating, documentary exposé of George W. Bush's pro-war, mouthpiece "news" media, can be viewed online here:
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/btw/watch.html
Don't miss it! (it's that important) -- and tell a friend!
"Bill Moyers' April 25 PBS special 'Buying the War' (is) the most powerful broadcast-TV indictment yet of the news media's role as key enablers in the march to war in 2002 and 2003. While much of the evidence presented of the media's role as cheerleaders for the war was not new, it was skillfully assembled, with many fresh quotes from interviews along with numerous embarrassing statements by journalists and pundits that proved grossly misleading or wrong. Several prominent media figures, prodded by Moyers, admitted the media failed miserably, though few took personal responsibility. In fact, as he pointed out, the many pundits who got everything wrong in the run-up to the war — and then everything wrong about it since — continue to flourish on TV talk shows and with newspaper and magazine columns." --Greg Mitchell, Editor and Publisher (media watchdog blog).
***
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/btw/watch.html
Don't miss it! (it's that important) -- and tell a friend!
"Bill Moyers' April 25 PBS special 'Buying the War' (is) the most powerful broadcast-TV indictment yet of the news media's role as key enablers in the march to war in 2002 and 2003. While much of the evidence presented of the media's role as cheerleaders for the war was not new, it was skillfully assembled, with many fresh quotes from interviews along with numerous embarrassing statements by journalists and pundits that proved grossly misleading or wrong. Several prominent media figures, prodded by Moyers, admitted the media failed miserably, though few took personal responsibility. In fact, as he pointed out, the many pundits who got everything wrong in the run-up to the war — and then everything wrong about it since — continue to flourish on TV talk shows and with newspaper and magazine columns." --Greg Mitchell, Editor and Publisher (media watchdog blog).
***
Thursday, April 19, 2007
The Copycat Effect
by Michael A. Hoffman II
Copyright ©2007. All Rights Reserved
I am besieged by persons requesting further analysis of the Virginia Tech massacre and a full-length analysis is in preparation. Meanwhile, a comment on the case as it has unfolded thus far. Many persons have written to ask what I meant by the term, "magic Number 33 Blacksburg funerary rite." Well, we have had several of these, most spectacularly King/Kill-33, the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
By "funerary rite" I mean that America is haunted by death this week. Of course we should be haunted by the deaths in Iraq every day, but obviously we are not. The CIA/Mossad inspired Shiite/Sunni fratricidal extermination machine is operating at full throttle, sending the Arabs out of this world at the minimum speed required by the Zionists and the neocons (although they always hope for more). They can't kill "Amalek" fast enough, but most Americans don't care. It's business as usual. After all, those are not "Jews" dying over there. Arab blood is mighty cheap.
But we reap what we sow and Cho served up those desserts in Virginia, though I do not in any way condone, excuse or mitigate the horrible crime committed in his slaughter of the innocent, quite patently orchestrated by the same dark forces that are overseeing the carnage in Iraq. I am only observing a fact; that it takes a massacre of Americans to put America in a "funerary" or thanatos mode, to haunt our asylum as it were.
So death has come to our house. What does that signify?
It signifies that all of a sudden I am getting ten times the e-mail I normally receive.
It signifies that we have had our spines tingled (all 33 segments) and we are, for a change, awake and on high alert. The near presence of death tends to have that effect.
Even those most contumacious of all sleepwalkers will have to admit that college campuses are on high alert across the nation; that something almost went down in Rochester, New York; that the fuse is lit, the human time bombs are ticking.
We are, in this third week in April in the seventh year of the new millennium, "getting the fear" as Charlie Manson called it, and fear--except of God-- is what the devil loves best. Violence, especially the kind that is accelerated in the Videodrome, is contagious.
We are alert, we are awake but we are also full of fear. Most any psychologist can tell you that in such a state people are highly susceptible to being imprinted and conditioned.
"In what way?" you ask. In many ways that I will enumerate in my treatise, but the one that concerns us most immediately and with greatest impact right now, is what my colleague Loren Coleman terms, "The Copycat Effect."
You can bet your bottom dollar that the Cryptos put Cho Seung Hui on national television, instead of just publishing a transcript of his statements, in the hopes that more candidates will come forward, guns and hammers in hand.
To understand this portion of the psychodrama, I recommend that you read Loren's prescient book, "The Copycat Effect: How the Media and Popular Culture Trigger the Mayhem in Tomorrow's Headlines." Here's the relevant URL:
http://www.amazon.com/Copycat-Effect-Popular-Tomorrows-Headlines/dp/0743482239/ref=sr_1_3/104-5421219-4259102?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176997440&sr=1-3
To have Mr. Hoffman's essays and columns e-mailed to you free-of-charge or obligation, send an e-mail to: HoffmanWire-subscribe@topica.com When you receive Topica's e-mail in response to your subscription request, simply click on your reply button; that's all there is to it. You need not visit Topica's website in order to subscribe. You may easily unsubscribe, hassle-free, at any time.
***
Copyright ©2007. All Rights Reserved
I am besieged by persons requesting further analysis of the Virginia Tech massacre and a full-length analysis is in preparation. Meanwhile, a comment on the case as it has unfolded thus far. Many persons have written to ask what I meant by the term, "magic Number 33 Blacksburg funerary rite." Well, we have had several of these, most spectacularly King/Kill-33, the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
By "funerary rite" I mean that America is haunted by death this week. Of course we should be haunted by the deaths in Iraq every day, but obviously we are not. The CIA/Mossad inspired Shiite/Sunni fratricidal extermination machine is operating at full throttle, sending the Arabs out of this world at the minimum speed required by the Zionists and the neocons (although they always hope for more). They can't kill "Amalek" fast enough, but most Americans don't care. It's business as usual. After all, those are not "Jews" dying over there. Arab blood is mighty cheap.
But we reap what we sow and Cho served up those desserts in Virginia, though I do not in any way condone, excuse or mitigate the horrible crime committed in his slaughter of the innocent, quite patently orchestrated by the same dark forces that are overseeing the carnage in Iraq. I am only observing a fact; that it takes a massacre of Americans to put America in a "funerary" or thanatos mode, to haunt our asylum as it were.
So death has come to our house. What does that signify?
It signifies that all of a sudden I am getting ten times the e-mail I normally receive.
It signifies that we have had our spines tingled (all 33 segments) and we are, for a change, awake and on high alert. The near presence of death tends to have that effect.
Even those most contumacious of all sleepwalkers will have to admit that college campuses are on high alert across the nation; that something almost went down in Rochester, New York; that the fuse is lit, the human time bombs are ticking.
We are, in this third week in April in the seventh year of the new millennium, "getting the fear" as Charlie Manson called it, and fear--except of God-- is what the devil loves best. Violence, especially the kind that is accelerated in the Videodrome, is contagious.
We are alert, we are awake but we are also full of fear. Most any psychologist can tell you that in such a state people are highly susceptible to being imprinted and conditioned.
"In what way?" you ask. In many ways that I will enumerate in my treatise, but the one that concerns us most immediately and with greatest impact right now, is what my colleague Loren Coleman terms, "The Copycat Effect."
You can bet your bottom dollar that the Cryptos put Cho Seung Hui on national television, instead of just publishing a transcript of his statements, in the hopes that more candidates will come forward, guns and hammers in hand.
To understand this portion of the psychodrama, I recommend that you read Loren's prescient book, "The Copycat Effect: How the Media and Popular Culture Trigger the Mayhem in Tomorrow's Headlines." Here's the relevant URL:
http://www.amazon.com/Copycat-Effect-Popular-Tomorrows-Headlines/dp/0743482239/ref=sr_1_3/104-5421219-4259102?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176997440&sr=1-3
To have Mr. Hoffman's essays and columns e-mailed to you free-of-charge or obligation, send an e-mail to: HoffmanWire-subscribe@topica.com When you receive Topica's e-mail in response to your subscription request, simply click on your reply button; that's all there is to it. You need not visit Topica's website in order to subscribe. You may easily unsubscribe, hassle-free, at any time.
***
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Process Church of the Alchemical Judgment, Blacksburg
WashingtonPost.com (home page) Tuesday, April 17, 2007 | 1:53 p.m. ET:
"Officials say shooter was 23-year-old Cho Seung Hui of Centreville, Va."
Preliminary investigative notes on Virginia Tech Massacre
Copyright©2007 by Michael A. Hoffman II. All Rights Reserved
There is a definite discrepency between accounts of the shootings by local law enforcement and university officials on one hand, and Federal authorities on the other.
As of early morning on April 17 (prior to the news conference), the local officials were saying that they do not believe the same man did all the shootings. Federal authorities insist that he did.
The Washington Post reports this morning that local police say they were "led to believe" that the first shooting, in the dorm, was an isolated incident involving a girlfriend, but "refused to elaborate" on why they thought that.
Question: did federal officials deliberately mislead the locals about the first shooting and if so, did this enable the killing of 30 more people two hours later, in the classroom building?
Moreover, in yesterday's Washington Post, reporters Robert E. Pierre and Susan Kinzie revealed that cell phone service on the Virginia Tech campus was obstructed during the shootings.
There are several other anomalies in this case (magic number 33 Blacksburg funerary rite, the Columbine anniversary, the postponement of Alberto Gonzales testimony etc.). Stay tuned.
***
There is a definite discrepency between accounts of the shootings by local law enforcement and university officials on one hand, and Federal authorities on the other.
As of early morning on April 17 (prior to the news conference), the local officials were saying that they do not believe the same man did all the shootings. Federal authorities insist that he did.
The Washington Post reports this morning that local police say they were "led to believe" that the first shooting, in the dorm, was an isolated incident involving a girlfriend, but "refused to elaborate" on why they thought that.
Question: did federal officials deliberately mislead the locals about the first shooting and if so, did this enable the killing of 30 more people two hours later, in the classroom building?
Moreover, in yesterday's Washington Post, reporters Robert E. Pierre and Susan Kinzie revealed that cell phone service on the Virginia Tech campus was obstructed during the shootings.
There are several other anomalies in this case (magic number 33 Blacksburg funerary rite, the Columbine anniversary, the postponement of Alberto Gonzales testimony etc.). Stay tuned.
***
Friday, April 13, 2007
Buchanan defends Imus; Hoffman responds
The Imus Lynch Party
by Patrick J. Buchanan
[MICHAEL HOFFMAN'S COMMENTARY ON BUCHANAN'S DEFENSE OF IMUS IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWS THIS COLUMN].
Are we really a better country because, after he was publicly whipped for 10 days as the worst kind of racist, with whom no decent person could associate, he was thrown off the air? Cards on the table. This writer works for MSNBC, has been on the Imus show scores of times, watches Imus every morning, and likes the show, the music and the guys: the I-Man, Bernie, Charles and Tom Bowman. And Imus is among the best interviewers in our business. Not only does he read and follow the news closely, he listens and probes as well as any interviewer in America. Because he is a comic, people mistake how good a questioner he is.
Is "Imus in the Morning" outrageous? Over the top at times? Are things said every week, if not every day, where you say, "He's going too far"? Yeah. But outrageousness is part of the show, whether the skits are of "Teddy Kennedy," "Reverend Falwell," "Mayor Nagin" or "The Cardinal." And when Imus called the Rutgers women's basketball team "tattooed ... nappy-headed ho's," he went over the top. The women deserved an apology. There was no cause, no call to use those terms. As Ann Coulter said, they were not fair game.But Imus did apologize, again and again and again.
And lest we forget, these are athletes in their prime, the same age as young women in Iraq. They are not 5-year-old girls, and they are capable of brushing off an ignorant comment by a talk-show host who does not know them, or anything about them. Who, after all, believed the slur was true? No one. Compare, if you will, what was done to them – a single nasty insult – to the savage slanders for weeks on end of the Duke lacrosse team and the three players accused by a lying stripper of having gang-raped her at a frat party. Duke faculty and talking heads took that occasion to vent their venom toward all white "jocks" on college campuses. Where are the demands for apologies from the talk-show hosts, guests, Duke faculty members and smear artists, all of whom bought into the lies about those Duke kids – because the lies comported with their hateful view of America? And hate is what this is all about.
While the remarks of Imus and Bernie about the Rutgers women were indefensible, they were more unthinking and stupid than vicious and malicious. But malice is the right word to describe the howls for their show to be canceled and them to be driven from the airwaves – by phonies who endlessly prattle about the First Amendment. The hypocrisy here was too thick to cut with a chainsaw. What was the term the I-Man used? It was "ho's," slang for whores, a term employed ad infinitum et ad nauseam by rap and hip-hop "artists." It is a term out of the African-American community. Yet, if any of a hundred rap singers has lost his contract or been driven from the airwaves for using it, maybe someone can tell me about it.
If the word "ho's" is a filthy insult to decent black women, and it is, why are hip-hop artists and rap singers who use it incessantly not pariahs in the black community? Why would black politicians hobnob with them? Why are there no boycotts of the advertisers of the radio stations that play their degrading music? Answer: The issue here is not the word Imus used. The issue is who Imus is – a white man, who used a term about black women only black folks are permitted to use with impunity and immunity. Whatever Imus' sins, no one deserves to have Al Sharpton – hero of the Tawana Brawley hoax, resolute defender of the fake rape charge against half a dozen innocent guys, which ruined lives – sit in moral judgment upon them.
"It is our feeling that this is only the beginning. We must have a broad discussion on what is permitted and not permitted in terms of the airwaves," says Sharpton. It says something about America that someone with Al's track record can claim the role of national censor. Who is next? And why do we take it? I did a bad thing, but I am not a bad person, says Imus. Indeed, whoever used his microphone to do more good for more people – be they the cancer kids of Imus Ranch, the families of Iraq war dead now more justly compensated because of the I-Man or the cause of a cure for autism?
"We know of no spectacle so ridiculous as the British public in one of its periodic fits of morality," said Lord Macaulay. Unfortunately, Macauley never saw the likes of the Revs. Sharpton and Jackson. Imus threw himself on the mercy of the court of elite opinion – and that court, pandering to the mob, lynched him. Yet, for all his sins, he was a better man than the lot of them rejoicing at the foot of the cottonwood tree.
***
HOFFMAN RESPONDS TO BUCHANAN'S DEFENSE OF IMUS
By Michael A. Hoffman II
Buchanan's anti-Biblical logic: it's no big deal if someone falsely accuses women of prostitution: after all, black men do it and Imus is only being tasked for it because he is white.
But what does the Bible say about false witness, Mr Buchanan? What do St. Paul, the Church and the saints say about the value of a good name and reputation?
Buchanan is as severely kicked in the head by modern processing as any Joe Sixpack, alleging that the "ho" allegation against the Rutgers women was more "unthinking and stupid than vicious and malicious." If calling an innocent woman a prostitute is not malicious, then what is?
He says that no one believed Imus anyway. When I first heard Imus' allegation quoted in the newspaper I deduced that one or more of the Rutgers women had been caught selling sex. Otherwise, how would anyone dare utter so grievous a charge in public? But somehow the clairvoyant Buchanan can say that no one believed Imus.
Buchanan has fallen for the Cryptocracy's race card. He is letting his loyalty to race trump justice. If we disrespect and label as whores those black women who attempt to do what we have told them all along to do -- enter the system, play by the rules, study hard so as to earn our approbation -- what is left for them and on what basis we will live together in society, if not on the basis of mutual respect, which those women have surely earned?
Buchanan trivializes the bearing of false witness and excuses it based on a dozen different alibis. Heads up Buchanan and Imus: don't call my daughter by any such filthy libel. You'll lose more than your job if you do.
And this isn't merely a case of a "fit of morality." It's a case of violating one of the Ten Commandments, which Buchanan is wont to quote when it suits him, but not here.
Buchanan says that unjustly calling women whores is a trait of African-Americans, a "rap and hip-hop trait." But pious black folk have never institutionalized that trait in their religion. This writer does, however, know of a religion whose adherents exert an inordinate influence over our media of mass communication and entertainment, whose holy book decrees that the best woman that ever lived, Mary the mother of God, is a "ho."
What would have happened to a black talk show host if he had accused Judaic female athletes of being "shikses" (female abominations) and "zonah" (prostitutes)? Would he have had the kind of glittering defense, sympathy and celebrity sidekick excuse-making that Imus has enjoyed from Buchanan and other leaders like him?
Would the fact that the Talmud calls Mary a whore and that Judaic leaders are involved in all sorts of shady deals and false accusations, just as Sharpton is, exculpate the black talk show host? You know it wouldn't.
Would the fact that the rabbis have a low opinion of their own Judaic women, teaching that they are prone to witchcraft and sexually akin to meat from a butcher shop, ameliorate public false witness against innocent Judaic women? You know it wouldn't.
American society has been Talmudized to such an extent that "whore lore" is all over our media, and Imus, Buchanan's favorite shock-jock, has drunk deeply from that kosher sewer, yet black culture alone takes the hit.
Citing the black stripper in the Duke lacrosse case in this context, is about as low as Buchanan can go. Every race has its share of harlots. Buchanan's faint hint of guilt by association is disgraceful. And who the heck cares what Dick Cheney's cheerleader, Ann Coulter --herself guilty of false witness --says about anything? She is a paradigm of the mindless hate and incivility that is deluging our society.
If we desire to take the measure of Pat Buchanan, if we want to determine how utterly unhinged he is from the common law, common decency and common sense, we have only to ponder this most depraved of all his paragraphs: "And lest we forget, these are athletes in their prime, the same age as young women in Iraq. They are not 5-year-old girls, and they are capable of brushing off an ignorant comment by a talk-show host who does not know them, or anything about them."
In western civilization the loss of one's good name was considered among the greatest misfortunes that could befall any human being. Our ancestors regarded their reputation as all they really possessed, all that would remain of them after they left this earth. Buchanan wipes that entire history out by relegating it to the realm of cry-baby 5-year-old girls.
Buchanan is not the voice of "conservatism." He's not conserving our heritage or history. He's the voice of radical transformation under a conservative label. He himself has been so dumbed-down and degraded by daily immersion --by his own admission--in shows like "Imus" that he can't think with the mind of a Biblical Christian.
Buchanan is the cooked frog in the famous cautionary tale. He was not at first boiled, he only jumped into the waste waters of media culture while they were lukewarm, but he stayed inside the pot while it was ever so gradually heated to boil, and now he's cooked.
The same can be said for the millions of other Ann Coulter-quoting, Imus watching, Talmudized Americans whom the System allows the safety valve device of venting their rage on blacks and Arabs, as a substitute for an assault on the real rulers of America, the robbers who have stolen our churches, our media and our heritage and recycled it back to us in the crippled and deluded form that Buchanan peddles.
The knights of old were chivalrous because they rescued every innocent woman in distress, no matter what her rank or station. Buchanan mounts his steed not on behalf of the slandered women, but in defense of "I-Man," their false accuser, an arrogant clown, alleged to be a daring taboo-breaker, but in fact someone who would never slime Judaic females the way he slimed those Rutgers women.
As Buchanan has implied, Imus is highly intelligent. He obviously thought he would get away with his false witness because, since Sept. 11, the Cryptocracy has seen to it that there has been a deliberate conflation of dark skin with dark deeds.
No matter what the Talmud says about Judaic ladies or what "gangsta" rappers say about black ladies, every woman innocent of the deed deserves our defense and protection. That this even needs to be stated, and to an alleged paladin of western values no less, shows how far gone we are in the alchemists' Videodrome.
FOR FURTHER REFERENCE
"Don Imus, Trash-Talk and the Decline of Civility in America"
http://www.revisionisthistory.org/page1/page11/page11.html
"Pat Buchanan's Double-Dealing"
http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2007/04/pat-buchanans-double-dealing.html
Michael A. Hoffman II is the editor of Revisionist History newsletter. He is also the author of six books, including "They Were White and They Were Slaves," and "Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare."
Copyright ©2007 RevisionistHistory.org
To have Mr. Hoffman's essays and columns e-mailed to you free-of-charge or obligation, send an e-mail to: HoffmanWire-subscribe@topica.com When you receive Topica's e-mail in response to your subscription request, simply click on your reply button; that's all there is to it. You need not visit Topica's website in order to subscribe. You may easily unsubscribe, hassle-free, at any time.
***
by Patrick J. Buchanan
[MICHAEL HOFFMAN'S COMMENTARY ON BUCHANAN'S DEFENSE OF IMUS IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWS THIS COLUMN].
Are we really a better country because, after he was publicly whipped for 10 days as the worst kind of racist, with whom no decent person could associate, he was thrown off the air? Cards on the table. This writer works for MSNBC, has been on the Imus show scores of times, watches Imus every morning, and likes the show, the music and the guys: the I-Man, Bernie, Charles and Tom Bowman. And Imus is among the best interviewers in our business. Not only does he read and follow the news closely, he listens and probes as well as any interviewer in America. Because he is a comic, people mistake how good a questioner he is.
Is "Imus in the Morning" outrageous? Over the top at times? Are things said every week, if not every day, where you say, "He's going too far"? Yeah. But outrageousness is part of the show, whether the skits are of "Teddy Kennedy," "Reverend Falwell," "Mayor Nagin" or "The Cardinal." And when Imus called the Rutgers women's basketball team "tattooed ... nappy-headed ho's," he went over the top. The women deserved an apology. There was no cause, no call to use those terms. As Ann Coulter said, they were not fair game.But Imus did apologize, again and again and again.
And lest we forget, these are athletes in their prime, the same age as young women in Iraq. They are not 5-year-old girls, and they are capable of brushing off an ignorant comment by a talk-show host who does not know them, or anything about them. Who, after all, believed the slur was true? No one. Compare, if you will, what was done to them – a single nasty insult – to the savage slanders for weeks on end of the Duke lacrosse team and the three players accused by a lying stripper of having gang-raped her at a frat party. Duke faculty and talking heads took that occasion to vent their venom toward all white "jocks" on college campuses. Where are the demands for apologies from the talk-show hosts, guests, Duke faculty members and smear artists, all of whom bought into the lies about those Duke kids – because the lies comported with their hateful view of America? And hate is what this is all about.
While the remarks of Imus and Bernie about the Rutgers women were indefensible, they were more unthinking and stupid than vicious and malicious. But malice is the right word to describe the howls for their show to be canceled and them to be driven from the airwaves – by phonies who endlessly prattle about the First Amendment. The hypocrisy here was too thick to cut with a chainsaw. What was the term the I-Man used? It was "ho's," slang for whores, a term employed ad infinitum et ad nauseam by rap and hip-hop "artists." It is a term out of the African-American community. Yet, if any of a hundred rap singers has lost his contract or been driven from the airwaves for using it, maybe someone can tell me about it.
If the word "ho's" is a filthy insult to decent black women, and it is, why are hip-hop artists and rap singers who use it incessantly not pariahs in the black community? Why would black politicians hobnob with them? Why are there no boycotts of the advertisers of the radio stations that play their degrading music? Answer: The issue here is not the word Imus used. The issue is who Imus is – a white man, who used a term about black women only black folks are permitted to use with impunity and immunity. Whatever Imus' sins, no one deserves to have Al Sharpton – hero of the Tawana Brawley hoax, resolute defender of the fake rape charge against half a dozen innocent guys, which ruined lives – sit in moral judgment upon them.
"It is our feeling that this is only the beginning. We must have a broad discussion on what is permitted and not permitted in terms of the airwaves," says Sharpton. It says something about America that someone with Al's track record can claim the role of national censor. Who is next? And why do we take it? I did a bad thing, but I am not a bad person, says Imus. Indeed, whoever used his microphone to do more good for more people – be they the cancer kids of Imus Ranch, the families of Iraq war dead now more justly compensated because of the I-Man or the cause of a cure for autism?
"We know of no spectacle so ridiculous as the British public in one of its periodic fits of morality," said Lord Macaulay. Unfortunately, Macauley never saw the likes of the Revs. Sharpton and Jackson. Imus threw himself on the mercy of the court of elite opinion – and that court, pandering to the mob, lynched him. Yet, for all his sins, he was a better man than the lot of them rejoicing at the foot of the cottonwood tree.
***
HOFFMAN RESPONDS TO BUCHANAN'S DEFENSE OF IMUS
By Michael A. Hoffman II
Buchanan's anti-Biblical logic: it's no big deal if someone falsely accuses women of prostitution: after all, black men do it and Imus is only being tasked for it because he is white.
But what does the Bible say about false witness, Mr Buchanan? What do St. Paul, the Church and the saints say about the value of a good name and reputation?
Buchanan is as severely kicked in the head by modern processing as any Joe Sixpack, alleging that the "ho" allegation against the Rutgers women was more "unthinking and stupid than vicious and malicious." If calling an innocent woman a prostitute is not malicious, then what is?
He says that no one believed Imus anyway. When I first heard Imus' allegation quoted in the newspaper I deduced that one or more of the Rutgers women had been caught selling sex. Otherwise, how would anyone dare utter so grievous a charge in public? But somehow the clairvoyant Buchanan can say that no one believed Imus.
Buchanan has fallen for the Cryptocracy's race card. He is letting his loyalty to race trump justice. If we disrespect and label as whores those black women who attempt to do what we have told them all along to do -- enter the system, play by the rules, study hard so as to earn our approbation -- what is left for them and on what basis we will live together in society, if not on the basis of mutual respect, which those women have surely earned?
Buchanan trivializes the bearing of false witness and excuses it based on a dozen different alibis. Heads up Buchanan and Imus: don't call my daughter by any such filthy libel. You'll lose more than your job if you do.
And this isn't merely a case of a "fit of morality." It's a case of violating one of the Ten Commandments, which Buchanan is wont to quote when it suits him, but not here.
Buchanan says that unjustly calling women whores is a trait of African-Americans, a "rap and hip-hop trait." But pious black folk have never institutionalized that trait in their religion. This writer does, however, know of a religion whose adherents exert an inordinate influence over our media of mass communication and entertainment, whose holy book decrees that the best woman that ever lived, Mary the mother of God, is a "ho."
What would have happened to a black talk show host if he had accused Judaic female athletes of being "shikses" (female abominations) and "zonah" (prostitutes)? Would he have had the kind of glittering defense, sympathy and celebrity sidekick excuse-making that Imus has enjoyed from Buchanan and other leaders like him?
Would the fact that the Talmud calls Mary a whore and that Judaic leaders are involved in all sorts of shady deals and false accusations, just as Sharpton is, exculpate the black talk show host? You know it wouldn't.
Would the fact that the rabbis have a low opinion of their own Judaic women, teaching that they are prone to witchcraft and sexually akin to meat from a butcher shop, ameliorate public false witness against innocent Judaic women? You know it wouldn't.
American society has been Talmudized to such an extent that "whore lore" is all over our media, and Imus, Buchanan's favorite shock-jock, has drunk deeply from that kosher sewer, yet black culture alone takes the hit.
Citing the black stripper in the Duke lacrosse case in this context, is about as low as Buchanan can go. Every race has its share of harlots. Buchanan's faint hint of guilt by association is disgraceful. And who the heck cares what Dick Cheney's cheerleader, Ann Coulter --herself guilty of false witness --says about anything? She is a paradigm of the mindless hate and incivility that is deluging our society.
If we desire to take the measure of Pat Buchanan, if we want to determine how utterly unhinged he is from the common law, common decency and common sense, we have only to ponder this most depraved of all his paragraphs: "And lest we forget, these are athletes in their prime, the same age as young women in Iraq. They are not 5-year-old girls, and they are capable of brushing off an ignorant comment by a talk-show host who does not know them, or anything about them."
In western civilization the loss of one's good name was considered among the greatest misfortunes that could befall any human being. Our ancestors regarded their reputation as all they really possessed, all that would remain of them after they left this earth. Buchanan wipes that entire history out by relegating it to the realm of cry-baby 5-year-old girls.
Buchanan is not the voice of "conservatism." He's not conserving our heritage or history. He's the voice of radical transformation under a conservative label. He himself has been so dumbed-down and degraded by daily immersion --by his own admission--in shows like "Imus" that he can't think with the mind of a Biblical Christian.
Buchanan is the cooked frog in the famous cautionary tale. He was not at first boiled, he only jumped into the waste waters of media culture while they were lukewarm, but he stayed inside the pot while it was ever so gradually heated to boil, and now he's cooked.
The same can be said for the millions of other Ann Coulter-quoting, Imus watching, Talmudized Americans whom the System allows the safety valve device of venting their rage on blacks and Arabs, as a substitute for an assault on the real rulers of America, the robbers who have stolen our churches, our media and our heritage and recycled it back to us in the crippled and deluded form that Buchanan peddles.
The knights of old were chivalrous because they rescued every innocent woman in distress, no matter what her rank or station. Buchanan mounts his steed not on behalf of the slandered women, but in defense of "I-Man," their false accuser, an arrogant clown, alleged to be a daring taboo-breaker, but in fact someone who would never slime Judaic females the way he slimed those Rutgers women.
As Buchanan has implied, Imus is highly intelligent. He obviously thought he would get away with his false witness because, since Sept. 11, the Cryptocracy has seen to it that there has been a deliberate conflation of dark skin with dark deeds.
No matter what the Talmud says about Judaic ladies or what "gangsta" rappers say about black ladies, every woman innocent of the deed deserves our defense and protection. That this even needs to be stated, and to an alleged paladin of western values no less, shows how far gone we are in the alchemists' Videodrome.
FOR FURTHER REFERENCE
"Don Imus, Trash-Talk and the Decline of Civility in America"
http://www.revisionisthistory.org/page1/page11/page11.html
"Pat Buchanan's Double-Dealing"
http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/2007/04/pat-buchanans-double-dealing.html
Michael A. Hoffman II is the editor of Revisionist History newsletter. He is also the author of six books, including "They Were White and They Were Slaves," and "Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare."
Copyright ©2007 RevisionistHistory.org
To have Mr. Hoffman's essays and columns e-mailed to you free-of-charge or obligation, send an e-mail to: HoffmanWire-subscribe@topica.com When you receive Topica's e-mail in response to your subscription request, simply click on your reply button; that's all there is to it. You need not visit Topica's website in order to subscribe. You may easily unsubscribe, hassle-free, at any time.
***
Don Imus, Trash-Talk and the Decline of Civility in America
by Michael A. Hoffman II
http://www.revisionisthistory.org/page1/page11/page11.html
My daughter studies piano and classical Latin, is an honor student and a first-string point-guard in AAU basketball. She has many role models, among them the college women's NCAA championship teams.
Don Imus said that the black women on the championship Rutgers basketball team were nappy-headed. But those women did not design the texture of their hair, God did. Imus said they are whores ("ho's"). To utter that slander, when they are in fact scholar-athletes, is like something out of the Talmud.
False witness against the German people is a deadly sin; how can false witness against black women at Rutgers, who are trying their best to contribute to our society, be anything less grave?
Of course Imus has the absolute constitutional right to speak his mind. But I have no problem with sponsors and networks who speak theirs by no longer supporting or employing him; that too is their constitutional right.
His accusation against the university women is being described as a "racial" slur. The media are omitting the fact that his accusation was also a sexual slur, an imputation of moral turpitude. I notice that Imus does not accuse scantily-clad cheerleaders and half-time dancers of being "ho's," only the women athletes in the modestly long uniforms. It seems that he has no problem with women who shimmy and shake for him half-dressed. His problem seems to be with women who pursue a higher education, while excelling at a difficult and demanding collegiate sport, modestly attired.
Mr. Imus has talked trash, and trash-talk is a symptom of the incivility and decaying standards in dress and deportment which we see on display in America today. From George Bush's pride in his slovenly speech and unbecoming swagger, to the I-just-rolled-out-of-bed-and-came-to-the-mall-in-my-pajamas fashion statement, which some Americans favor for all occasions, our nation appears to have lost its sense of shame and self-respect.
The attempt to make Imus' attack on the Rutgers women a black/white-divide issue, reveals a hidden agenda. Imus' false witness is so unjust and despicable that fifty years ago Americans North and South, black and white would have, in unison, decried and repudiated it as nausea worthy of either a drunk or a bum. But in our 21st century, Imus is an underground hit, slyly commended by the outlaw kulchur as just the sort of shock-o-rama titillation that drives up ratings, thanks to the enthusiasm of American kids-gone-wild on the devolutionary road from angels to beasts.
This case is not without its contradictions. Some of the sick behavior can be found in black male "gangsta" circles where the slur Imus wielded is a not uncommon epithet. This too needs to be addressed. Moreover, the exploitation of the controversy by corrupt demagogues like Al Sharpton does no one any credit, but then it was Imus who chose to go running to Sharpton. Furthermore, to be credible, it is incumbent on American society, including the television networks, to combat reverse discrimination and hatred of poor and working class whites.
In Miami on April 10, during the Imus controversy, NBA basketball star Adam Morrison, who is white, was repeatedly racially harassed and called "white trash" throughout the game. Yet it was Morrison who was the one who was fined, for having, in exasperation, responded with an obscene gesture. Nothing happened to the racial heckler, nor did the heckler's anti-white bigotry become an issue in the press. To be effective, to unite us, justice must be blind.
But the fact that there are bigots among other races in no way diminishes the offense against the Rutgers team. Imus should know better; with his prominent position comes responsibility. And let's be real. Any black talk-show host who called a sports team comprised of Judaic girls "shikses" or "zonah," would be out of a job faster than you can spell A-D-L.
With all the temptations that assail young people of any color nowadays, the Rutgers ladies have set an academic and athletic example that requires courage and asceticism, dignity and self-respect, precisely the qualities fathers like this writer pray their daughters will evince in these strange and challenging times. The popularity of Don Imus is in exact proportion to the degree to which Americans have lost their dignity and perhaps to some extent, even their souls; hence, the need to mock those who have not.
Copyright ©2007 RevisionistHistory.org
To have Mr. Hoffman's essays and columns e-mailed to you free-of-charge or obligation, send an e-mail to: HoffmanWire-subscribe@topica.com When you receive Topica's e-mail in response to your subscription request, simply click on your reply button; that's all there is to it. You need not visit Topica's website in order to subscribe. You may easily unsubscribe, hassle-free, at any time.
***
http://www.revisionisthistory.org/page1/page11/page11.html
My daughter studies piano and classical Latin, is an honor student and a first-string point-guard in AAU basketball. She has many role models, among them the college women's NCAA championship teams.
Don Imus said that the black women on the championship Rutgers basketball team were nappy-headed. But those women did not design the texture of their hair, God did. Imus said they are whores ("ho's"). To utter that slander, when they are in fact scholar-athletes, is like something out of the Talmud.
False witness against the German people is a deadly sin; how can false witness against black women at Rutgers, who are trying their best to contribute to our society, be anything less grave?
Of course Imus has the absolute constitutional right to speak his mind. But I have no problem with sponsors and networks who speak theirs by no longer supporting or employing him; that too is their constitutional right.
His accusation against the university women is being described as a "racial" slur. The media are omitting the fact that his accusation was also a sexual slur, an imputation of moral turpitude. I notice that Imus does not accuse scantily-clad cheerleaders and half-time dancers of being "ho's," only the women athletes in the modestly long uniforms. It seems that he has no problem with women who shimmy and shake for him half-dressed. His problem seems to be with women who pursue a higher education, while excelling at a difficult and demanding collegiate sport, modestly attired.
Mr. Imus has talked trash, and trash-talk is a symptom of the incivility and decaying standards in dress and deportment which we see on display in America today. From George Bush's pride in his slovenly speech and unbecoming swagger, to the I-just-rolled-out-of-bed-and-came-to-the-mall-in-my-pajamas fashion statement, which some Americans favor for all occasions, our nation appears to have lost its sense of shame and self-respect.
The attempt to make Imus' attack on the Rutgers women a black/white-divide issue, reveals a hidden agenda. Imus' false witness is so unjust and despicable that fifty years ago Americans North and South, black and white would have, in unison, decried and repudiated it as nausea worthy of either a drunk or a bum. But in our 21st century, Imus is an underground hit, slyly commended by the outlaw kulchur as just the sort of shock-o-rama titillation that drives up ratings, thanks to the enthusiasm of American kids-gone-wild on the devolutionary road from angels to beasts.
This case is not without its contradictions. Some of the sick behavior can be found in black male "gangsta" circles where the slur Imus wielded is a not uncommon epithet. This too needs to be addressed. Moreover, the exploitation of the controversy by corrupt demagogues like Al Sharpton does no one any credit, but then it was Imus who chose to go running to Sharpton. Furthermore, to be credible, it is incumbent on American society, including the television networks, to combat reverse discrimination and hatred of poor and working class whites.
In Miami on April 10, during the Imus controversy, NBA basketball star Adam Morrison, who is white, was repeatedly racially harassed and called "white trash" throughout the game. Yet it was Morrison who was the one who was fined, for having, in exasperation, responded with an obscene gesture. Nothing happened to the racial heckler, nor did the heckler's anti-white bigotry become an issue in the press. To be effective, to unite us, justice must be blind.
But the fact that there are bigots among other races in no way diminishes the offense against the Rutgers team. Imus should know better; with his prominent position comes responsibility. And let's be real. Any black talk-show host who called a sports team comprised of Judaic girls "shikses" or "zonah," would be out of a job faster than you can spell A-D-L.
With all the temptations that assail young people of any color nowadays, the Rutgers ladies have set an academic and athletic example that requires courage and asceticism, dignity and self-respect, precisely the qualities fathers like this writer pray their daughters will evince in these strange and challenging times. The popularity of Don Imus is in exact proportion to the degree to which Americans have lost their dignity and perhaps to some extent, even their souls; hence, the need to mock those who have not.
Copyright ©2007 RevisionistHistory.org
To have Mr. Hoffman's essays and columns e-mailed to you free-of-charge or obligation, send an e-mail to: HoffmanWire-subscribe@topica.com When you receive Topica's e-mail in response to your subscription request, simply click on your reply button; that's all there is to it. You need not visit Topica's website in order to subscribe. You may easily unsubscribe, hassle-free, at any time.
***
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Pat Buchanan's Double-Dealing
Recurring mental illness plagues the Republican pundit as evidenced by his column on the Democrats' response to the Iraq War
By Michael A. Hoffman II
Pat Buchanan is a textbook double-mind. He can wax eloquent one moment with scintillating commonsense, and with his next breath deflate his entire case with the most glittering schizophrenia this side of Bedlam.
The wisdom of the New Testament teaches that "The double-minded man is unstable in all his ways." The double-minded man can't fight effectively, can't keep his word, can't be trusted.
In his column of April 10, "What a Lack of Courage Cost" (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55113) Mr. Buchanan writes:
"The Democratic Congress thus faces this April a humiliating climb-down, and all because of a Democratic Senate's vote in October 2002 – Tom Daschle, Reid, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd all assenting – to give George Bush his blank check for war. 'If I had known then what I know now, I would never have voted for the war,' John Edwards assures us of the most important vote that he, Hillary, Biden, and Dodd ever cast – the votes that ensured America would commit the greatest strategic blunder of their lifetimes.
"This is not to absolve President Bush of culpability for what historians will surely call 'Bush's War,' or the neoconservatives who howled for war on Iraq from the moment the planes hit the towers, and who had plotted and propagandized for war on Iraq for years before 9/11. Yet Democratic courage in October 2002 might have stopped the stampede, for Democrats were the last, best hope of the opponents of war. But they failed the nation."
Buchanan's analysis of the stunning failures of the Democrats is right-on. It is also a stunning case of megalomania, for it was none other than Patrick J. Buchanan who, in 2004, after witnessing Bush's Iraq war in all its sanguinary senselessness for more than nineteen months, got on his hands and knees and begged Bush to take him back, comparing himself to the penitent pirate Lafitte: "Bush is right on taxes, judges, sovereignty, and values. Kerry is right on nothing. The only compelling argument for endorsing Kerry is to punish Bush for Iraq. But why should Kerry be rewarded?
"...There is a final reason I support George W. Bush. A presidential election is a Hatfield-McCoy thing, a tribal affair. No matter the quarrels inside the family, when the shooting starts, you come home to your own. When the Redcoats approached New Orleans to sunder the Union and Jackson was stacking cotton bales and calling for help from any quarter, the pirate Lafitte wrote to the governor of Louisiana to ask permission to fight alongside his old countrymen. 'The Black Sheep wants to come home,' Lafitte pleaded. It's time to come home. --Pat Buchanan, "Coming Home," November, 2004.
With his ringing endorsement of Bush in 2004, Buchanan "failed the nation," but he's banking on the same notoriously short-term American memory that Bush depends upon, to put across a brazenly hypocritical attack on the Democrats in 2007 that represents misdirection reminiscent of a stage magician.
Buchanan, like Joseph Ratzinger, the current "conservative" pope of Rome, both serve the Cryptocracy by compounding the confusion and false flag operations that are central to the processing of humanity.
Pope Benedict XVI operates in the same schizoid realm as Buchanan. Benedict was praised to the skies by "conservative" Catholics for having last month condemned the liberal Catholic proposition that the "seeds of the Word" can be found in the pagan religions. Conservatives swooned at Benedict's "tough stand" against this "moral relativism," even wondering whether the condemnation represented the first move in an eventual papal repudiation of Vatican Council II itself. Wow!
But while he is making this stirring profession, Pope Benedict is fast-tracking the canonization of John Paul II, the pontiff who praised the Voodoo religion, when he met with its high priests in the African nation of Benin, on the grounds that Voodoo contains "the seeds of the Word"! ("L'Osservatore Romano," February 10, 1993).
Benedict's condemnation of "Seeds of the Word" pagan ecumenicism while proposing its very own papal proponent for sainthood, is more than just incompetence. It is a sub-rosa double-dealing mockery of the kind most often found in the Occult -- the horse laugh of lordly initiates having a joke at the expense of amnesiac, never-learn-a-thing peasants.
Both Buchanan and Benedict are double-dealers. They constitute the fake opposition. They are attack dogs leashed on a chain of gold as part of the Videodrome's carnival attractions.
It didn't used to be this way. In times past, to qualify as an opposition political or religious leader, a man had to speak with consistent conviction and hew to those convictions in good times and bad. His record was checked and deviation from stated principles resulted in loss of credibility and drastic erosion of popular support. Nothing of the kind has befallen Black Sheep Buchanan or Pope Benedict Arnold. The former is still highly regarded as an oracle of red meat paleo-conservatism, and the latter is revered as the leader of the eleventh hour rally of the West against the forces of secularism and the barbarians at the gates.
In our time, nutcases in ermine robes, accompanied by the fanfare of media trumpets, contradict their principles and misdirect their followers time after time, in perpetuity, and continue to be lionized as crusader knights in the war on cosmic evil.
Copyright ©2007. All Rights Reserved
For further research:
Patrick J. Buchanan Endorses Bush for President
http://www.revisionisthistory.org/wire2.html
Questioning the Record of Pope John Paul II
http://www.revisionisthistory.org/christian1.html
***
By Michael A. Hoffman II
Pat Buchanan is a textbook double-mind. He can wax eloquent one moment with scintillating commonsense, and with his next breath deflate his entire case with the most glittering schizophrenia this side of Bedlam.
The wisdom of the New Testament teaches that "The double-minded man is unstable in all his ways." The double-minded man can't fight effectively, can't keep his word, can't be trusted.
In his column of April 10, "What a Lack of Courage Cost" (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55113) Mr. Buchanan writes:
"The Democratic Congress thus faces this April a humiliating climb-down, and all because of a Democratic Senate's vote in October 2002 – Tom Daschle, Reid, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd all assenting – to give George Bush his blank check for war. 'If I had known then what I know now, I would never have voted for the war,' John Edwards assures us of the most important vote that he, Hillary, Biden, and Dodd ever cast – the votes that ensured America would commit the greatest strategic blunder of their lifetimes.
"This is not to absolve President Bush of culpability for what historians will surely call 'Bush's War,' or the neoconservatives who howled for war on Iraq from the moment the planes hit the towers, and who had plotted and propagandized for war on Iraq for years before 9/11. Yet Democratic courage in October 2002 might have stopped the stampede, for Democrats were the last, best hope of the opponents of war. But they failed the nation."
Buchanan's analysis of the stunning failures of the Democrats is right-on. It is also a stunning case of megalomania, for it was none other than Patrick J. Buchanan who, in 2004, after witnessing Bush's Iraq war in all its sanguinary senselessness for more than nineteen months, got on his hands and knees and begged Bush to take him back, comparing himself to the penitent pirate Lafitte: "Bush is right on taxes, judges, sovereignty, and values. Kerry is right on nothing. The only compelling argument for endorsing Kerry is to punish Bush for Iraq. But why should Kerry be rewarded?
"...There is a final reason I support George W. Bush. A presidential election is a Hatfield-McCoy thing, a tribal affair. No matter the quarrels inside the family, when the shooting starts, you come home to your own. When the Redcoats approached New Orleans to sunder the Union and Jackson was stacking cotton bales and calling for help from any quarter, the pirate Lafitte wrote to the governor of Louisiana to ask permission to fight alongside his old countrymen. 'The Black Sheep wants to come home,' Lafitte pleaded. It's time to come home. --Pat Buchanan, "Coming Home," November, 2004.
With his ringing endorsement of Bush in 2004, Buchanan "failed the nation," but he's banking on the same notoriously short-term American memory that Bush depends upon, to put across a brazenly hypocritical attack on the Democrats in 2007 that represents misdirection reminiscent of a stage magician.
Buchanan, like Joseph Ratzinger, the current "conservative" pope of Rome, both serve the Cryptocracy by compounding the confusion and false flag operations that are central to the processing of humanity.
Pope Benedict XVI operates in the same schizoid realm as Buchanan. Benedict was praised to the skies by "conservative" Catholics for having last month condemned the liberal Catholic proposition that the "seeds of the Word" can be found in the pagan religions. Conservatives swooned at Benedict's "tough stand" against this "moral relativism," even wondering whether the condemnation represented the first move in an eventual papal repudiation of Vatican Council II itself. Wow!
But while he is making this stirring profession, Pope Benedict is fast-tracking the canonization of John Paul II, the pontiff who praised the Voodoo religion, when he met with its high priests in the African nation of Benin, on the grounds that Voodoo contains "the seeds of the Word"! ("L'Osservatore Romano," February 10, 1993).
Benedict's condemnation of "Seeds of the Word" pagan ecumenicism while proposing its very own papal proponent for sainthood, is more than just incompetence. It is a sub-rosa double-dealing mockery of the kind most often found in the Occult -- the horse laugh of lordly initiates having a joke at the expense of amnesiac, never-learn-a-thing peasants.
Both Buchanan and Benedict are double-dealers. They constitute the fake opposition. They are attack dogs leashed on a chain of gold as part of the Videodrome's carnival attractions.
It didn't used to be this way. In times past, to qualify as an opposition political or religious leader, a man had to speak with consistent conviction and hew to those convictions in good times and bad. His record was checked and deviation from stated principles resulted in loss of credibility and drastic erosion of popular support. Nothing of the kind has befallen Black Sheep Buchanan or Pope Benedict Arnold. The former is still highly regarded as an oracle of red meat paleo-conservatism, and the latter is revered as the leader of the eleventh hour rally of the West against the forces of secularism and the barbarians at the gates.
In our time, nutcases in ermine robes, accompanied by the fanfare of media trumpets, contradict their principles and misdirect their followers time after time, in perpetuity, and continue to be lionized as crusader knights in the war on cosmic evil.
Copyright ©2007. All Rights Reserved
For further research:
Patrick J. Buchanan Endorses Bush for President
http://www.revisionisthistory.org/wire2.html
Questioning the Record of Pope John Paul II
http://www.revisionisthistory.org/christian1.html
***
Monday, April 02, 2007
Talmud Sacrifice Halted in Jerusalem Temple Mount
EDITOR'S NOTE: Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz is "nasi" (head) of the revived Sanhedrin, and translator of the only uncensored edition of the Talmud ever to be published in English. You will note that his Sanhedrin couldn't find a Cohen with a lineage of 2,000 years, only one "hailing from a lineage 1,000 years old," coinciding with the mass conversion of Khazaria to Judaism. It seems that a faux Old Testament religion peopled by impostor-Jews is seeking to revive a Temple service that has been forever extinguished by Yahweh -- from beginning to end, a macabre charade!
***
Court prevents groups from sacrificing live animals at Temple Mount
By Nadav Shargai and Amiram Barkat
Haaretz | April 2, 2007 (Passover begins at sundown)
In their efforts to sacrifice a live animal at the Temple Mount, the New Sanhedrin Council adopted an almost underground modus operandi. Rabbis Adin Steinsaltz, Israel Ariel, Yishai Baved and their associates secretly located a butcher, found a Cohen hailing from a lineage 1,000 years old and worked out a plan to quickly erect an altar on the Temple Mount.
They tried to revive the customs of the ancient Sanhedrin tribunal, which was the highest judicial body for the Jewish people in Israel some 1,600 years ago. They sought to slaughter a sacrificial animal across from the Western Wall.
The activists, who belong to various religious circles such as the Temple Mount and Land of Israel Faithful Movement, also petitioned the High Court of Justice for the right to perform the ritual.
Their plans were thwarted on Sunday when the court rejected their request, ruling that "the rights of the petitioners to practice their faith are outweighed by other considerations such as public order and safety."
Despite the ruling, the followers decided to hold a colorful procession on Sunday in Jerusalem, heading to the Western Wall along with two sheep. The Temple Mount Movement followers present were joined by partners from the Temple Institute, which has for years prepared the traditional holy tools and utensils for the Third Temple, according to Torah specifications. The spectacular display did not, however, persuade authorities to allow the participants to perform the practice.
Their petition to the court was by no means the first one. In recent years, the High Court of Justice rejected several such petitions filed by the Temple Mount Movement and other associations, dedicated to erecting the Third Temple on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. The court invariably cited the same reasons for its ruling.
In Passover 1991, dedicated believers decided it was time for action, and tried to sacrifice a lamb in the premises. They were, however, quickly stopped by police.
One of the most daring plans to perform the religious ritual at the holy site belongs to the ultra right-wing religious movement Kach. Some 20 years ago, its members worked out an plan to infiltrate the Western Wall Plaza at dusk with a lamb and foldable altar. The plan never materialized, partly owing to the fact that Passover that year coincided with the Muslim holiday of Ramadan.
Earlier and bolder still was the plan of the Temple Mount Movement to hire a helicopter pilot to parachute a ready-made altar onto the Western Wall Plaza. There, it would serve a group of followers on the ground, sacrificial lamb in hand. As in previous cases, the plan never quite took off the ground.
***
***
Court prevents groups from sacrificing live animals at Temple Mount
By Nadav Shargai and Amiram Barkat
Haaretz | April 2, 2007 (Passover begins at sundown)
In their efforts to sacrifice a live animal at the Temple Mount, the New Sanhedrin Council adopted an almost underground modus operandi. Rabbis Adin Steinsaltz, Israel Ariel, Yishai Baved and their associates secretly located a butcher, found a Cohen hailing from a lineage 1,000 years old and worked out a plan to quickly erect an altar on the Temple Mount.
They tried to revive the customs of the ancient Sanhedrin tribunal, which was the highest judicial body for the Jewish people in Israel some 1,600 years ago. They sought to slaughter a sacrificial animal across from the Western Wall.
The activists, who belong to various religious circles such as the Temple Mount and Land of Israel Faithful Movement, also petitioned the High Court of Justice for the right to perform the ritual.
Their plans were thwarted on Sunday when the court rejected their request, ruling that "the rights of the petitioners to practice their faith are outweighed by other considerations such as public order and safety."
Despite the ruling, the followers decided to hold a colorful procession on Sunday in Jerusalem, heading to the Western Wall along with two sheep. The Temple Mount Movement followers present were joined by partners from the Temple Institute, which has for years prepared the traditional holy tools and utensils for the Third Temple, according to Torah specifications. The spectacular display did not, however, persuade authorities to allow the participants to perform the practice.
Their petition to the court was by no means the first one. In recent years, the High Court of Justice rejected several such petitions filed by the Temple Mount Movement and other associations, dedicated to erecting the Third Temple on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. The court invariably cited the same reasons for its ruling.
In Passover 1991, dedicated believers decided it was time for action, and tried to sacrifice a lamb in the premises. They were, however, quickly stopped by police.
One of the most daring plans to perform the religious ritual at the holy site belongs to the ultra right-wing religious movement Kach. Some 20 years ago, its members worked out an plan to infiltrate the Western Wall Plaza at dusk with a lamb and foldable altar. The plan never materialized, partly owing to the fact that Passover that year coincided with the Muslim holiday of Ramadan.
Earlier and bolder still was the plan of the Temple Mount Movement to hire a helicopter pilot to parachute a ready-made altar onto the Western Wall Plaza. There, it would serve a group of followers on the ground, sacrificial lamb in hand. As in previous cases, the plan never quite took off the ground.
***
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
