New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Campaigning Against Woodrow Wilson

Flanders

Council Member
If you are sick of the pablum media-supported wannabes force-feed the country, change your diet with Ted Cruz’s foreign policy. Here’s a small taste:

. . . speaking out for freedom “is qualitatively different from saying U.S. military forces should intervene to force democracy on foreign lands.”

XXXXX

Cruz says he is a hawk on some issues, like preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. But on other foreign policy questions, like whether to support the Syrian rebels in their fight against Bashar al-Assad, he is more hesitant because he doesn’t see how it will benefit American interests.

XXXXX

Cruz says “if and when U.S. military force is required,” it should only “proceed under three preconditions.” You might call it the “Cruz Doctrine.”

“First, it should begin with a clearly stated objective at the outset. It should be directly tied to U.S. national security,” he said.​

You gotta love a guy who diplomatically says “To hell with Peace Without Victory.”

“Second, we should use overwhelming force to that objective. We should not have rules of engagement that tie the hands of our soldiers and sailors and airmen and Marines.”​

A president with a worldview stated in this next excerpt is the exact opposite of everything the United Nations has been dumping on Americans since 1945:

The final point in the Cruz Doctrine is that the U.S. military should not be asked to help birth democratic societies.

“Third, we should get the heck out,” he said. “It is not the job of the U.S. military to engage in nation building to turn foreign countries into democratic utopias.”​

This is the one that chokes the UN-loving global government crowd:

. . . he doesn’t believe America should use the military to help spread democracy abroad.​

NOTE: It is fair to say that Ted Cruz does not want to keep the world safe for democracy. You can even say that Ted Cruz is campaigning against America’s most destructive president ever —— Woodrow Wilson.

I have never watched a presidential debate, but I will record them next year if Cruz is there. Ted Cruz’s attendance makes fast-forwarding through the worn-out horse manure worth the effort:


. . . a far more interesting — and important — debate is the one likely to emerge between Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas.”

The Cruz Doctrine: Ted Cruz Opens Up About His Foreign Policy Worldview
Jamie Weinstein
10:55 PM 04/28/2015

http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/28/the-cruz-doctrine-ted-cruz-opens-up-about-his-foreign-policy-worldview/

Every wannabe who advocates amnesty, a path to citizenship, or whatever they call it these days must also support this:

The U.S. State Department announced this week that the first major contingent of Syrian refugees, 9,000 of them, have been hand-selected by the United Nations for resettlement into communities across the United States.

XXXXX

. . . the U.S. government has been the most active of all nations in accepting Islamic refugees from other war-torn countries, such as Iraq, Somalia and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Now, the Syrians will be added to the mix. They are cleared for refugee status by the U.N. high commissioner on refugees (UNHCR), who assigns them to various countries.

XXXXX

“The United States accepts the majority of all UNHCR referrals from around the world. Last year, we reached our goal of resettling nearly 70,000 refugees from nearly 70 countries. And we plan to lead in resettling Syrians as well,” the statement reads. “We are reviewing some 9,000 recent UNHCR referrals from Syria. We are receiving roughly a thousand new ones each month, and we expect admissions from Syria to surge in 2015 and beyond.”​

The debate moderator should ask every wannabe to state his position on accepting, or rejecting, the UN’s authority to force immigrants on this country. Better still, Ted Cruz could ask Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio if they put-in with the United Nations deciding which, and how many, immigrants get citizenship?

The United States, with its commitment to accepting 70,000 displaced people a year, absorbs more refugees than all other countries combined. This number is understated, however, as once refugees get to the United States they are placed on a fast track to citizenship and are able to get their extended families to join them in the states under the government’s Refuge Family Reunification program.

The State Department works to place refugees in 180 cities across 49 states.

U.N. sending thousands of Muslims to America
Posted By Leo Hohmann On 12/11/2014 @ 7:53 pm

http://www.wnd.com/2014/12/u-n-sending-thousands-of-muslims-to-america/

Incidentally, Democrats have an easy time of it in presidential debates because their party created the immigration disaster along with everything else that is wrong in this country. In short: Democrats have only to repeat the usual liberal garbage they spouted in every election since FDR without fear of getting hit with embarrassing questions.

One final issue with sovereignty implications.

It will take a superabundant of conservative Americans in both Houses of Congress to do what is best for the country regardless of Democrats:


The Civil War era’s 14th Amendment, granting automatic citizenship to any baby born on American soil, is a proud achievement of the Party of Lincoln.

But now House Republicans are talking about abolishing birthright citizenship.

XXXXX

The 14th Amendment, King told the panel, “did not contemplate that anyone who would sneak into the United States and have a baby would have automatic citizenship conferred on them.” Added King, “I’d suggest it’s our job here in this Congress to decide who will be citizens, not someone in a foreign country that can sneak into the United States and have a baby and then go home with the birth certificate.”​

Turnabout is fair play

For decades, the parasite class complained that every industrialized country —— except America —— had some form of universal healthcare. Should abolishing birthright citizenship get off the ground, I can already hear Lefties the world over begin their caterwauling the instant Americans turn the international argument back on the open-borders crowd:


. . . King said the United States in this case should follow “almost every other industrialized country” in abolishing birthright citizenship.

 

Flanders

Council Member
The debate moderator should ask every wannabe to state his position on accepting, or rejecting, the UN’s authority to force immigrants on this country. Better still, Ted Cruz could ask Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio if they put-in with the United Nations deciding which, and how many, immigrants get citizenship?
I do not want to waste my time on the presidential race this far out; nevertheless, now that Mike Huckabee threw his hat in the ring he can jump all over the United Nations as well as nailing opponents like Bush and Rubio. As far as I know —— Mike is the only wannabee who made it clear that he would take the United States out of the United Nations:


Mike’s only mistake is not calling the United Nations a rattlesnake:

Huckabee: Iran a Rattlesnake that Can't Be Tamed
By Julie Stahl
CBN News Mideast Correspondent
Monday, February 16, 2015

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/insideisrael/2015/February/Huckabee-Iran-a-Rattlesnake-that-Cant-Be-Tamed/

The rattlesnake is not the deadliest snake in the world —— the United Nations is.

SUGGESTION: The United Nations should be called the inland taipan:



Snakes are creatures of nature, while everything about the manmade United Nations is far deadlier than a snake’s natural instincts. With a lot of help from the media, United Nations poison has avoided detection since its birth. The United Nations strikes without warning. There is no known-antivenin for a bite from the United Nations.

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., has received a response to his letter demanding answers from Secretary of State John Kerry about the planned resettlement of dozens of foreign refugees in his state.

Congressman seeks to unlock secret refugee program
Posted By Leo Hohmann On 05/04/2015 @ 9:19 pm

http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/congressman-seeks-to-unlock-secret-refugee-program/

Defanging all of the current snakes in the federal government, and the media, is no cure. HR 75 is the only known-protection against future snake infestations:
American Sovereignty Restoration Act 2013

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr75/text
 

Flanders

Council Member
The debate moderator should ask every wannabe to state his position on accepting, or rejecting, the UN’s authority to force immigrants on this country. Better still, Ted Cruz could ask Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio if they put-in with the United Nations deciding which, and how many, immigrants get citizenship?
While television is burying this country under multiculturalism, same-sex marriage, plane crashes, natural disasters, and Baltimore Bullshit, this is what they should be broadcasting around the clock until it is stopped:


Report: Major Problems with U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program
By Sierra Rayne May 8, 2015

A report by the Center for Security Policy (CSP) has uncovered major problems within the Refugee Resettlement Program (RRP).

The foreword by Frank Gaffney describes the source of the concerns:

According to the sacred texts and traditions of Islam, Mohammed left his home town of Mecca in the 7th Century and traveled with a small band of followers to the city of Yathrib (now Medina), in what has become known as the hijra (migration). He did so with intent of establishing a new base of operations from which to conquer and rule.

Hijra remains the model to this day for jihadists who seek to populate and dominate new lands. Their migrations are not for the purpose of assimilating peacefully in a new host nation, adopting as their own its traditions and legal systems. Rather, Mohammed’s followers, in keeping with the example established by their prophet, are driven first to colonize and then to transform non-Muslim target societies—whether through violent means or via stealthy, pre-violent ones favored by the Muslim Brotherhood when it is not powerful enough to use violence decisively.

Two major terrorism incidents on American soil are directly connected to the refugee program. The Somali Christmas Tree bomber was a resettled refugee in Portland, Oregon, while the Boston bomber family was granted asylum in the U.S. and received protection and care under the 1980 Refugee Act.

Ongoing illegal immigration crisis at the U.S. southern bordeR
In addition to concerns over the RRP, the report also describes the incoherence of some narratives surrounding the ongoing illegal immigration crisis at the U.S. southern border:

In addition to expanding the definition of ‘refugee,’ for the purposes of this report, one must be increasingly concerned with the OTMs (Other than Mexicans) crossing the border along with the ‘children.’ Indeed there are reports of Somali young men and women who cross the border and request asylum after making a journey that included stops in Russia and Cuba before reaching Central America; one wonders where they obtained the huge sums of money needed for a journey of that length and who was instructing them when they reached the US border.

These are exactly the details the mainstream media has failed to investigate. How exactly do young individuals from very poor source nations obtain the money for the trip? What actors inside and outside the United States are financing these illegal migrations?

The questions hint at the tip of the iceberg many informed and concerned citizens are starting to ask. After all these decades and tens of millions of illegal migrants across the U.S. border, why is the money trail so poorly defined?

The CSP report also describes the jihadist strategy at play, a well-established strategy that is presently underway in Minnesota. Confused citizens who think that events in their locale are merely disconnected can instead refer to what is taking place in Minnesota to help put the picture together.

Perhaps the most troubling news in the report involves who is promoting an increasing refugee influx:

[A] public scoping meeting in Washington in 2013 was dominated by critics, when only two years prior to that, the meeting room was filled with those ‘stakeholders’ pushing for more refugees, including much to this writer’s shock, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (one of nine major federal contractors) which was asking for more Rohingya (Burmese) Muslims to be admitted to the US ... Refugee resettlement has become a major money-maker for what can only be described as the ‘Religious Left,’ whose goal is to change the demographic make-up of the 180-plus cities and towns in which they presently work.

By examining the financial reports of various VOLAGs (voluntary agencies; non-governmental organizations), the report paints a picture of large quantities of federal dollars expended by the U.S. State Department and the Office of Refugee Resettlement (Department of Health and Human Services) to resettle refugees. Since the VOLAGs are paid by the head, “the system is set up in such a way that there is no incentive to slow the flow because the VOLAG/contractors have offices to run and staff to pay.”

Top salaries within some of these VOLAGs appear to be staggeringly high. In 2012, the Ethiopian Community Development Council obtained 96 percent of its funding from taxpayers, and had a top salary of more than $233,000. The Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society—funded 61 percent by taxpayers—had a top salary of over $323,000. The Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service obtained 97 percent of its funds from the taxpayers in 2012, having a top salary of $214,000. Of the $456 million in total 2012 revenue for the International Rescue Committee, 73 percent was derived from taxpayers—and the top salary was $485,321.

Sovereignty issues are at play. The U.N. picks the majority of refugees for the U.S., and the current United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees is Antonio Guterres—the former Socialist President of Portugal and former President of the Socialist International.

Corporate connections also appear to be driving many of the problems with the refugee program
Corporate connections also appear to be driving many of the problems with the refugee program:

Following the breakup of Yugoslavia, President Bill Clinton entangled the U.S. in the bloody civil war between the Muslim Bosnians and the non-Muslim Serbs and Croatians. As a result, the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (RAP) admitted at least 80,000 supposedly persecuted Bosnians over a very short period of time. Initially, large numbers went to Iowa to work in the meat packing industry, as we learned from an agricultural publication, which made it clear that Clinton was using the refugee program to benefit friends in the meat processing industry in need of cheap labor (a practice that still goes on today).

All states except Wyoming have refugee programs, and 180 cities have refugee resettlement offices run by the nine major VOLAGs. In 2014, the top resettlement states were Texas, California, New York, Michigan, and Florida.

Several “pockets of resistance” against the resettlement programs have arisen, including Nashville, the Atlanta suburbs, Amarillo, Lewiston (ME), St. Cloud (MN), Springfield (MA), Lynn (MA), and Manchester (NH), among others.

Problems in the RRP have been overlooked and exacerbated by both sides of the aisle, not just the Democratic Party:

One demonstration of Republican complicity in the program is a 2014 letter to the Republican Party in which Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan, joined by other Republican Party stalwarts, ask that the party continue and expand its support for the RAP. Laughably, they link the program to the Reagan Presidency with not a word about its origin in the minds and actions of Senator Ted Kennedy and President Jimmy Carter.

The CSP report should serve as a wake-up call for those who have seen something unusual taking place in their town, but perhaps haven’t been able to put the pieces together yet.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/71806
 
The U.S. State Department announced this week that the first major contingent of Syrian refugees, 9,000 of them, have been hand-selected by the United Nations for resettlement into communities across the United States.

XXXXX
. . . the U.S. government has been the most active of all nations in accepting Islamic refugees from other war-torn countries, such as Iraq, Somalia and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Now, the Syrians will be added to the mix. They are cleared for refugee status by the U.N. high commissioner on refugees (UNHCR), who assigns them to various countries.
Maybe those who are getting rich(er) from the War on Terror should pay for the support of their victims?
"Criticism of companies such as Halliburton in the context of the Iraq War draw heavily on the stereotype of the businessman profiteer. Slogans relating to 'blood for oil' have a similar implication.

"Steven Clemons, a senior fellow at the New America Foundation think tank, has accused former CIA Director James Woolsey of both profiting from and promoting the Iraq War.[8]

"The Center for Public Integrity has reported that US Senator Dianne Feinstein and her husband, Richard Blum, are making millions of dollars from Iraq and Afghanistan contracts through his company, Tutor Perini Corporation.[9][10]Feinstein voted for the resolution giving President George W. Bush the authority to invade Iraq.

"Indicted defense contractor Brent R. Wilkes was reported to be ecstatic when hearing that the United States was going to go to war with Iraq. 'He and some of his top executives were really gung-ho about the war,' said a former employee. 'Brent said this would create new opportunities for the company. He was really excited about doing business in the Middle East.'”[11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_profiteering#In_the_United_States
 

Flanders

Council Member
Maybe those who are getting rich(er) from the War on Terror should pay for the support of their victims?
"Criticism of companies such as Halliburton in the context of the Iraq War draw heavily on the stereotype of the businessman profiteer. Slogans relating to 'blood for oil' have a similar implication.
To georgephillip: I understand your position. My problem is that war profiteers who start wars are the real villains. In this case the war was started by Islamic fundamentalists. Our guys 0nly turned a buck.

"The Center for Public Integrity has reported that US Senator Dianne Feinstein and her husband, Richard Blum, are making millions of dollars from Iraq and Afghanistan contracts through his company, Tutor Perini Corporation.[9][10]Feinstein voted for the resolution giving President George W. Bush the authority to invade Iraq.
To georgephillip: No squawk from me on that one. Di Fi is a crook in a class all of her own.
 
To georgephillip: I understand your position. My problem is that war profiteers who start wars are the real villains. In this case the war was started by Islamic fundamentalists. Our guys 0nly turned a buck.
Islamic fundamentalists who were originally recruited and supported by the US to drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan and then turned loose in the Balkans a decade later. Bin Laden's public critique of US foreign policy in the Middle East began in 1982 when he called for a boycott of US goods because of American support for Israel's invasion of Lebanon. Muslims across the Middle East can point to a half-century of US support for corrupt Arab dictators and colonial regimes from Palestine to Pakistan as reasons for 9/11.
 

Flanders

Council Member
Islamic fundamentalists who were originally recruited and supported by the US to drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan and then turned loose in the Balkans a decade later. Bin Laden's public critique of US foreign policy in the Middle East began in 1982 when he called for a boycott of US goods because of American support for Israel's invasion of Lebanon. Muslims across the Middle East can point to a half-century of US support for corrupt Arab dictators and colonial regimes from Palestine to Pakistan as reasons for 9/11.
To georgephillip: A few thoughts of my own on the topic.

America should support any government that is not threatening this country. Choosing sides is not new.

Wilson chose Great Britain over Germany when Germany was not a threat to America. A monumental blunder to be sure, yet Wilson remains a hero to Democrats.

Democrats supported the Soviet Union, and Nazi Germany, until Hitler stuck it to Stalin. Then-Senator Harry Truman called it right in 1941:


If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible, although I don't want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances. Neither of them thinks anything of their pledged word. Harry Truman

Truman would be remembered as a genius had FDR not dragged America into another European war.

Socialists supported North Vietnam during a war that Communists started —— and won thanks to American traitors.

In the 1980s, RR called it right because Afghanistan Muslims were a much lesser threat than was the Soviet Union.

Conversely, Bill Clinton had no justification for intervening in the Balkans. He deliberately killed Christians in order to benefit Muslims. Obviously, he chose the wrong side. A small blunder when compared to World War One, yet Bill Clinton remains a hero to Democrats.

Bottom line: Once the Clintons, and Taqiyya, made the mistake of choosing which side to manipulate they clearly chose the wrong side. Neither the Clintons, nor Taqiyya, had the diplomatic skills to at least appear neutral. Proof: The Arab Spring is a disaster that must be blamed on Taqiyya the Liar and Hillary Clinton.

Taqiyya the Liar also agrees with Muslims killing Christians. The longer he can avoid admitting that America is fighting a war against Islam the more Christians that ISIS can slaughter.

Finally, militarily weak countries also choose sides in that they bet on picking the winner. Betting on America over China, Russia, and Islam is no longer a sure thing because of the perceived weakness Democrats have been projecting for decades.
 
Wilson chose Great Britain over Germany when Germany was not a threat to America. A monumental blunder to be sure, yet Wilson remains a hero to Democrats.
Wilson and Clinton were puppets of the same master, imho. Carroll Quigley, a mentor of Bubba, reveals who pulled their strings:
"American historian Carroll Quigley in his book 'Tragedy & Hope'
The aim of the international bankers was nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in at frequent private meetings and conferences.
p2
a memo, discreetly circulated among England's wealthy aristocrats and bankers, in 1862, in the early months of the American Civil War
Slavery is likely to be abolished by the war power and all chattel slavery abolished. This I and my European friends are in favor of for slavery is but the owning of labor and carries with it the care of the laborers, while the European plan, led on by England, is that capital shall control labor by controlling wages... It will not do to allow the greenback, as it is called, to circulate as money any length of time, as we can not control that. But we can control the bonds and through them the bank issues."


It's alleged that powerful capitalists such as JP Morgan and JD Rockefeller put Wilson in office in 1912 because they believed a Democrat would have a better chance of selling the Federal Reserve than a Republican tool like Taft or Harding.

Two years later, Morgan was functioning as an agent for British war interests. It seems clear to me both Democrats and Republicans take turn serving the richest Americans at the expense of most Americans.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Engdahl_F_William/American_Oligarchy_GOM.html
 

Flanders

Council Member
To Queen Titania: Interesting video. A clever mixture of fact, fiction, interpretation, and opinion.

“Blame The Jews” is not new. Wilson took America into WW I for reasons of his own. If Wilson did incorporate Palestine into his thinking it was very minor.
 
To Queen Titania: Interesting video. A clever mixture of fact, fiction, interpretation, and opinion.

“Blame The Jews” is not new. Wilson took America into WW I for reasons of his own. If Wilson did incorporate Palestine into his thinking it was very minor.
Freedman was Jewish, soppy date:) - which is why I posted him. And he was there, much of what he says is first hand knowledge.

He converted to Christianity later in life.

The British gave the Zionists Palestine, not Wilson.
 

Flanders

Council Member
The British gave the Zionists Palestine, not Wilson.
To Queen Titania: That makes sense. Freedman’s theory about Wilson’s involvement with Palestine makes no sense at all.

The “Blame the Jews” interpretation of World War One has more holes in it than the holes in a bag lady’s under-drawers.

For one thing, the combined wealth and influence in the hands of America’s wealthiest Jew-haters far outweighed the combined wealth and influence of every wealthy Jew in the world. Wealthy Americans taking part in establishing a Jewish state in Palestine, or anywhere else, is absurd.

Even assuming Jews controlled print press, and infant radio, for propaganda purposes at the time there was no television. Jewish propaganda was not possible.

Incidentally, we had a bit of a discussion in this thread where I gave some of my views on Wilson and WW I in #15 permalink.


 
To Queen Titania: That makes sense. Freedman’s theory about Wilson’s involvement with Palestine makes no sense at all.

The “Blame the Jews” interpretation of World War One has more holes in it than the holes in a bag lady’s under-drawers.

For one thing, the combined wealth and influence in the hands of America’s wealthiest Jew-haters far outweighed the combined wealth and influence of every wealthy Jew in the world. Wealthy Americans taking part in establishing a Jewish state in Palestine, or anywhere else, is absurd.

Even assuming Jews controlled print press, and infant radio, for propaganda purposes at the time there was no television. Jewish propaganda was not possible.

Incidentally, we had a bit of a discussion in this thread where I gave some of my views on Wilson and WW I in #15 permalink.



'The Jews' being whom?

In this case it was the Zionists, the German Zionists, in particular, who did a deal with the British War Cabernet, after Germany had won WWI ( it had also won WWII and the same thing happened) The deal was that they would manipulate the US into the War for Palestine. Which all came out during the meetings deciding the wicked and spiteful Versailles Treaty of which Freedman was privy too.

When given to believe that we have been or are about to be attacked, we fight, no matter who owns the Media, those who protest are soon silenced in a torrent of Nationalistic bull shit . Before WWII the British people, down trodden and not recovered from many many Wars, were left in no doubt that they/we were gearing up to War but not until it was declared did they know who they were going to fight -Russia or Germany. We will not find this in modern History Books but we will find it in the writings of the day.

WWI was a bloody nonsense which destroyed Europe, the best of us was murdered between 1914 - 1918 - Wilson was manipulated into it and the US $ began its journey to the Top of the heap.

All Wars and so called Revolutions are Bankers Wars --- they are the only winners, if one can even call it winning.
 

Flanders

Council Member
'The Jews' being whom?
To Queen Titania: You tell me!

Zionism (noun)

An organized movement of world Jewry that arose in Europe in the late 19th century with the aim of reconstituting a Jewish state in Palestine. Modern Zionism is concerned with the development and support of the state of Israel.

Zionist adjective & noun

Zionistic adjective

XXXXX

Jewry (noun)

1. The Jewish people.

2. A section of a medieval city inhabited by Jews; a ghetto.

XXXXX

Jew (noun)

1. An adherent of Judaism as a religion or culture.

2. A member of the widely dispersed people originally descended from the ancient Hebrews and sharing an ethnic heritage based on Judaism.

3. A native or inhabitant of the ancient kingdom of Judah.​

In this case it was the Zionists, the German Zionists, in particular,
To Queen Titania: Enlighten me. I cannot see a distinction between Zionists and Jews in Freedman’s interpretation of WW I?
 
Zionists at the time of WWII wanted a Jewish Home Land, specifically Israel. At that time of great philosophical divides there were also great divides withing Jewish thinking too -many hated Zionism and formed the Jewish Bund - now forgotten for The Zionist won, and he who wins writes The History Books.

Some would say that a Jew is one who follows the Torah --- as we might say a Christian is one who follows The Bible, a Muslim one who follows the Q'uran.

The question of Zionism and their demand of Palestine sits though, not in a Holy Book but in a perceived ethnicity but since then we have come to understand, through DNA, what Freedman said, to be true, that 92% of todays and those at the time of WWI are Khazars, so Jewish converts in fact and not Judeans but Asiatic peoples. So, as some say, mainly outspoken Jews such as Freedman and Prof Roger Dommergue, 92% of 'Jews' are in fact False Jews with a very very different History to the one we are told which belongs only to less than 10% of all so called Jews.

As I see it we live in The Khazarian Empire which, though insidious, in fact is no different than many other Empire in many ways, one of those ways being that- as not all of the British were to blame for the faults of Empire, nor did they all gain from Empire --- just so with The Jewish Empire of today. for that is what its name is sssshhhhh

The Emperors New Cloths -
 
Last edited:
"Thomas W. Lamont, a partner in J.P. Morgan, in a speech before the American Academy of Political and Social Science in Philadelphia, April 1915
[W]e are turning from a debtor into a creditor... We are piling up prodigious export trade balance .... Many of our manufacturers and merchants have been doing a wonderful business in articles relating to the war [WWI]. So heavy have been the war orders running into the hundreds of millions of dollars, that now their effect is beginning to spread to general business.

"... [The] question of trade and financial supremacy must be determined by several factors, a chief one of which is the duration of the war. If...the war should come to an end in the near future...we should probably find Germany, whose export trade is now almost wholly cut off, swinging back into keen competition very promptly.

"... [Another factor that] is dependent on the duration of the war, is as to whether we shall become lenders to foreign nations upon a really large scale... Shall we become lenders upon a really stupendous scale to these foreign governments?... If the war continues long enough to encourage us to take such a position, then inevitably we would become a creditor instead of a debtor nation, and such a development, sooner or later, would tend to bring about the dollar, instead of the pound sterling, as the international basis of exchange."

The War to End All War set the US dollar on a trajectory that transformed the country's economy from debtor to creditor and back again; as long as bankers of any race or ethnicity can profit from war, Carroll Quigley remains a prophet:

"
American historian Carroll Quigley in his book 'Tragedy & Hope'

"The aim of the international bankers was nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in at frequent private meetings and conferences."

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Engdahl_F_William/American_Oligarchy_GOM.html
 

Flanders

Council Member
Zionists at the time of WWII wanted a Jewish Home Land, specifically Israel. At that time of great philosophical divides there were also great divides withing Jewish thinking too -many hated Zionism and formed the Jewish Bund - now forgotten for The Zionist won, and he who wins writes The History Books.

Some would say that a Jew is one who follows the Torah --- as we might say a Christian is one who follows The Bible, a Muslim one who follows the Q'uran.

The question of Zionism and their demand of Palestine sits though, not in a Holy Book but in a perceived ethnicity but since then we have come to understand, through DNA, what Freedman said, to be true, that 92% of todays and those at the time of WWI are Khazars, so Jewish converts in fact and not Judeans but Asiatic peoples. So, as some say, mainly outspoken Jews such as Freedman and Prof Roger Dommergue, 92% of 'Jews' are in fact False Jews with a very very different History to the one we are told which belongs only to less than 10% of all so called Jews.

As I see it we live in The Khazarian Empire which, though insidious, in fact is no different than many other Empire in many ways, one of those ways being that- as not all of the British were to blame for the faults of Empire, nor did they all gain from Empire --- just so with The Jewish Empire of today. for that is what its name is sssshhhhh

The Emperors New Cloths -
To Queen Titania: This is where I get off:

 
"Thomas W. Lamont, a partner in J.P. Morgan, in a speech before the American Academy of Political and Social Science in Philadelphia, April 1915
[W]e are turning from a debtor into a creditor... We are piling up prodigious export trade balance .... Many of our manufacturers and merchants have been doing a wonderful business in articles relating to the war [WWI]. So heavy have been the war orders running into the hundreds of millions of dollars, that now their effect is beginning to spread to general business.

"... [The] question of trade and financial supremacy must be determined by several factors, a chief one of which is the duration of the war. If...the war should come to an end in the near future...we should probably find Germany, whose export trade is now almost wholly cut off, swinging back into keen competition very promptly.

"... [Another factor that] is dependent on the duration of the war, is as to whether we shall become lenders to foreign nations upon a really large scale... Shall we become lenders upon a really stupendous scale to these foreign governments?... If the war continues long enough to encourage us to take such a position, then inevitably we would become a creditor instead of a debtor nation, and such a development, sooner or later, would tend to bring about the dollar, instead of the pound sterling, as the international basis of exchange."

The War to End All War set the US dollar on a trajectory that transformed the country's economy from debtor to creditor and back again; as long as bankers of any race or ethnicity can profit from war, Carroll Quigley remains a prophet:

"
American historian Carroll Quigley in his book 'Tragedy & Hope'

"The aim of the international bankers was nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in at frequent private meetings and conferences."

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Engdahl_F_William/American_Oligarchy_GOM.html
LOL Not sure if your 'winner' to my post above was for the 'I'll bugger off' or 'I like clarity' ;)
 
Top