Women and the Illuminati

[qntal]

Hi! Here is something to read, some people may get offended, but I will post it anyway. Beware though. It comes from Savethemales website and I am a big fan of Henry Makow, as you guessed it I am not a feminist, very far from that. I am not against women either. Here it is:



Falun Dafa Teacher, Li Hongzhi---SCROLL DOWN For "Illuminat Rebel Issues Warning"
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend
"When Women acted like Women..."

January 11, 2007

falun.jpg

Kent writes:

I just read your article entitled "The Effect of Sexual Deprivation on Women". I agree with everything 100%. I am already familiar with many of these concepts by studying Falun Dafa, a Chinese Buddhist meditation practice. Check out this quote from Falun Dafa's teacher Li Hongzhi:


Question:

In today’s society, the concept of equality between men and women prevails. As
female disciples, how can we be gentle and tender while progressing diligently
in cultivation?


Teacher: At present, people have commented that women are
becoming more and more liberal and their character is also getting stronger. In
fact, you’re not being driven by your benevolent side. I don’t believe strength
is necessarily reflected in the appearance of a person. If in your daily life
you’re like a gentle, true woman, your competence will let you have everything
you deserve all the same. It’s not necessary for you to be tough and manly. Do
you understand the principles I’m talking about? (Applause)

In other words, if you’re a woman, you need to act like one, kind and gentle. Only that way can you gain respect and love from men. If you’re not kind and gentle, men will be afraid of you when they see you.

(Laughter) You’ll then be denied the love and even the family affection that you’re supposed to have. From the opposite perspective, let’s not only talk about women. We men should also behave like men. However, today’s society in this world has become corrupt. I can only ask my disciples to behave this way, which is not achievable by the society.

I remember that before the fifties, men in the West were very gentlemen-like. They treated women with respect. Because women acted like women, men loved to help them, respect them and care for them. At the same time, in a feminine way, women cherished their husbands. This was human behavior. Yet today you have distorted all of this.

In Asian society, women have become overly strong, making the men act like women. I can tell you that, in your bones you want your men to be strong, yet in your mind you want to keep them under your control. Isn’t this contradictory? If the way of the society becomes like this, will men still be able to walk around with pride? Will they have their manhood?

Two people can’t be the head of one household, just as there can’t be two kings
living on the same mountain. Consequently, when two tigers fight, one has to
get hurt. (Laughter) Disharmony will find its way into families. How is it going to work if two kings live under the same roof? One has to be the head of the household. That’s why there are divorces and discord. You always say this: “Men comment that this woman doesn’t act like a woman; women remark that this man doesn’t act like a man.”


It's even more blatant in Western society where when they marry each other, they have already divided up their property: “When we divorce in the future, this
belongs to me and that belongs to you.” It’s even more blatant. The feeling of
a woman relying on her man when they’re married is simply nonexistent; yet a
man doesn’t feel that once this woman marries him, she has entrusted him with
her whole life and that he should be responsible to her. These kinds of
thoughts have simply disappeared. Self interest and individual freedom have
taken over everything. Where do you then find the warmth of a family? You argue and try to win against each other—no one wants to listen to each other. I’m telling you, this is not a human state! (Applause)

Today’s society and its media are leading people to discuss individual freedom
and to be self-indulgent with individuality. I can tell you, this unrestrained
individuality might make you appear to be free, but actually, you’ll never get
sweet happiness anymore. You’ll never ever have someone else you can trust! (Applause)


(Lecture at the US East Coast Conference, 1999)

The practice is also fiercely anti-communist. Check out the book "Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party" when you get a chance: http://ninecommentaries.com/

Just wanted to let you know of this great practice. Best of luck to you!
Articles >>

Henry Makow is the author of A Long Way to go for a Date. He received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto. He welcomes your feedback and ideas at henry@savethemales.ca.
UPDATED SUNDAY IN BOLD----(Listen to Zagami interview -link below article)
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend
Illuminati Rebel Issues Dire Warning, Battle Cry

January 05, 2007

zagami.jpg


By Henry Makow Ph.D.

At the New Year, Leo Zagami, 36, has an urgent message.

The Illuminati plan to "Nazify" the West by the year 2012 and persecute all believers in God, using the pretext of war, terror and economic collapse.

The scion of an ancient Illuminati family, Zagami had a religious conversion (to Islam) last June and rebelled. He'd had enough of the horrifying Satanic, black magic rituals, mind control and torture that was going on inside the lodges, behind closed doors.

On Saturday he posted on his web site Illuminati Confessions names of high ranking Masons who are ready to do battle with the Satanists. He has organized his own security detail and even posted a personal phone number to address serious questions.

"These are the end times; it's no joke," Zagami says in an January 3 interview on his website.

"The cosmic alignment on the 21st of December 2012 gives you 6 years to prepare... So its about time you all wake up and fight for your right to stay free under one God before they take complete control and start persecuting the true believers in the one God. …Get your swords and get ready to fight to defend your faith or perish…This is a war against Satan so please wake up in the western countries or you might wake up in a nightmare one morning in December 2012."

"From 2010 you will start feeling the big changes in the air more and more but in 2012 you will have the clear evidence of the end of this civilization in front of your eyes….the total NAZIFICATION of the western countries by 2010 before the economic situation starts to badly crack for everyone. Then social tension will hit a peak never seen before and internal conflicts could eventually become in 2012: CIVIL WAR!"

“Are you ready to die for God and your believe in a positive change for the world or are you all a bunch of cowards in the hands of the devil, just talking and talking with no sense of reality?”

As an ex-member of the Comitato Esecutivo Massonico - Masonic Executive Committee (MEC) of Monte Carlo, Zagami was, until recently, a true insider, a 33rd degree Freemason, and a high-member of the infamous Freemasonic P2 (Propaganda 2) Lodge. He was the "prince", prepared to take over from the older Illuminati "king", Licio Gelli.

The reason I have overlooked Zagami until now is that he suggests Illuminati power resides in the Vatican with the Jesuits. I maintain that that the world central banking cartel, headed by the Rothschilds, calls the shots. They use Freemasons, Zionists, Jesuits, Vatican, Socialists, Liberals, Communists, Feminist and Gay activists, Neo Cons, all intelligence agencies, media, foundations etc. to exercise control.

But it would be stupid to continue to overlook Zagami's invaluable testimony over an academic disagreement. I don't think Zagami lets the Zionists off the hook. He merely focuses on what he knows first-hand.

The Illuminati is like the mob. Does it matter if the Chicago, London or New York families are in charge? They are overlapping circles dedicated to the same perverse end.

Greg Szymanski again deserves our thanks for featuring Zagami on his web site since October. Jeff Rense also deserves credit for posting Greg's stories. The material below is partially a summary from Greg's interviews.


THE ILLUMINATI PUPPET SHOW

Zagami describes the world as "a global puppet show in the hands of the usual families of idiots, who usually never change their ways century after century."

"They all work together, including Hugo Chavez who really is helping Bush's agenda by his theatrical performances," said Zagami. Chavez is controlled by the Vatican and working with the New World Order as are all other leaders of the world's major government's and religions.

"This is how they operate with the top layers working together for one purpose in what they think is the perfect cover-up. Wahabi or Wahibi [the Saudis] were created by the Zionists and their English friends who think they are the lost tribe of Israel. The same happened with Arafat and the so-called Muslim Brotherhood created by the English intelligence."

Of course, the Muslim Brotherhood also might be behind Iranian leaders and the leaders of the Iraqi Insurgency. It's all theatre put on for the yokels.

In an email to me Sunday, Leo called the Iraq-Iran-Israel conflict a "foreign intelligence show" and Ahmaninejad a "well known Satanist with no real connection to Islam."

He said Putin's conflict with the Rothschilds is also a "charade." He is also Illuminati controlled.

Zagami challenges his former colleagues in Freemasonry to "go public with your pagan satanic worship and your black magic you bunch of cowards, that's what I say to them. The European aristocracy has always been ruled by sorcery and black magic …have always used black magic and evil forces … for domination over their own citizens. They learned these satanic ways from their Masters in Rome who got them in turn from the Greeks, the Egyptians, the Sumerian...its a never ending tale of constant manipulation…of mankind."

He says G.W. Bush is the son of "the most powerful man in the illuminati and he was built by his father and the CIA to become the ultimate Antichrist Vatican Zionist puppet and it doesn't really matter if he is in the White House or not because the Bush will always rule in the present situation any future actor that goes in the White House now. Remember Anton LaVey founder of the Church of Satan and Mind War controller of the CIA was a close friend of George H. Bush, and they planned together the satanic future of his son George W.Bush and the coming of the age of Satan after 9/11 a long time ago when LaVey was still alive."

He says 666 is everywhere these days: "the Hebrew equivalent of our "w" is the letter "vav" or "waw". The numerical value of vav is 6. So the English "www" transliterated into Hebrew is "vav vav vav", which numerically is 666. And you can't definitely have a business these days without a web site WWW, then we have the video surveillance and last but not least the micro chipping coming up. The micro chipping will be the ultimate Mark of the Beast and will put us fully in the hands of Satan and his evil controllers ready for Armageddon against the Messiah. So we need to rebel before that to help the coming back of the real Messiah."

"All religions are corrupt by the illuminati these days including most of Islam, the Jews, the Evangelical, Protestant and the Born-Again side of Christianity, all ruled secretly by Freemasonry, the intelligence services, the Knights of Malta and last but not least the usual Jesuits so genuine [religious] dialogue is almost impossible."

CONCLUSION

Leo Zagami sees himself as "the last idealist in the Illuminati." It is a hopeful sign that courageous and decent men like him should appear at this time. It would be a far greater sin to spurn a genuine hero than to be taken in by an imposter. At the same time, the Illuminati has always feigned divisions: FDR, Hitler all championed the "people."

"YOU ARE LIVING IN A ILLUMINATI PRISON BUILT BY THE JESUITS AND FINANCED BY THE ZIONIST," Leo emailed me. I agree about the "Illuminati prison part." For the rest, I will continue to ask Leo questions and do my own reading and thinking.

The elite is building an abattoir before our eyes: the New World Order. The events of 9-11 are proof of their intent to use it. We have a choice: To go like sheep to the slaughter, or to take Zagami's advice, and prepare.
-----

Listen to an interview with Leo Zagami on Red Ice
Articles >>

Henry Makow is the author of A Long Way to go for a Date. He received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto. He welcomes your feedback and ideas at henry@savethemales.ca.
Comments for "Illuminati Rebel Issues Dire Warning, Battle Cry "

Pedro said (January 10, 2007):

It took me a long time and effort to separate an
individual from his/her skin color, religion and
political affiliation; nationalism from imperialism; zionism from judaism. The distinctions of real importance lie hidden beneath the ground and pioneers like yourself help us see them.

Mr. T said (January 10, 2007):

Back in the 80's a rock group / band called, "Mike and The Mechanics",
wrote and and played a song which was immortalized on MTV in video for as well.

Although I am not sure of what the meaning is by the writters and co authors of
this music / song.... It is my deep opionion they were speaking to us all regarding a violent struggle that would eventually take place somewhere in the world. Posibbly considering the New World order or the Illuminati.

People should be aware that allegiances to the skull and cross bones are very real,
the Free Mason, Knights of Columbus and other organizatiions do practice and awear allegiance
to Satan. It is true!

I am not a memeber but do know some who are and have told me of secret "knocks" to get in to
meetings, secret information that they swear by that they are never to tell anyone and the rituals
are quite distrubing to ay the least (i.e., being blind folded and passing many tests) with the exclusive promise of never discussing with anyone (not even family memebers).

I will say I am a Christian and will die for my beliefs....to engage the Born Again movement as part of this group is possible, but I only will pray, and give testimony to Jesus Christ. Now there is a great imposter who is coming on the scene who will claim to be God Incaranate and perform great and wonderful miracles onlt to decieve many "even the elect". I agree with the article!


Here are part of the lyrics:

“SILENT RUNNING”
(Mike and the Mechanics)


Take the children and yourself
And hide out in the cellar
By now the fighting will be close at hand
Don’t believe the church and state
And everything they tell you
Believe in me, I’m with the high command

Can you hear me, can you hear me running?
Can you hear me running, can you hear me calling you?
Can you hear me, can you hear me running?
Can you hear me running, can you hear me calling you?

There’s a gun and ammunition
Just inside the doorway
Use it only in emergency
Better you should pray to God
The Father and the Spirit
Will guide you and protect from up here


Alex said (January 09, 2007):

I have guns, guts, and GOD. Even if they come for me in the darkest dark of night, unless they mini-nuke the whole house (which wouldn't go over very well in the neighborhood), I Will take One, Two, maybe even THREE of the misguided sons of some poor Jewish/Christian/Muslim/Pagan/Illuminati/Satanist "mother" with me into the depths of Eternity. If THAT should transpire, I, of course, will leave it up to GOD ALMIGHTY to judge the actions of all of us in that situation.

Bottom line, I may fight them on my lawn, but I refuse to bow down to them in the Public Square, the Marketplace, or the Church/Synagogue/Temple. I leave it up to the Creator of All to use me as HE Wills, and save me and my miserable sinning soul at the Time of HIS Choosing.

James said (January 08, 2007):

Dear Mr Makow,

Re: Illuminati Rebel Issues Dire Warning. Its not that I wish to be a cynic; but how is a simple man to know that Mr. Zagami is not an insider still and remains loyal to group?

In 1996 a NWO card game was released that depicted many of the events to follow (i.e. 911) One of the final event cards* depicted hippies standing over a cop. One hippy had evidently broken a peace sign over the cops back
and he was down like a dog. What is the meaning if this card except to suggest that the masses would be stirred to revolt? By Whom? one may ask.

Recently on Fox News, John Gibson was interviewing Danny Bonaduce and Gibson
let it slip that 30% of the US public believe 911 was an inside job. This is a very odd admission for an agency that wishes to hide the facts of 911 at all costs. - especially when it is not demonstrably true on the street.

But he lent so much credibility to the movement by that statement, I cannot believe it was not in line with planning. There have been many other similar items inconsistent with a crime that was truly intended to remain hidden.

Why does Fox continue to have 911 guests on when they repeatedly get the best of the hosts? And then there is CNN and Alex Jones/Charlie Sheen via
Showbiz Tonight and their online poll. Ted Turner is hardcore NWO . Why should CNN permit this except that it is wanted?

Then we have Lou Dobbs and Keith Olberman fanning the flames. Are they turning around now also?

Re 911. All the evidence was left in the wide open. It seems likely that the 911 truth movement is part 2 of the ultimate pie in the face. Your rebel insider is perhaps a change agent.


David Livingstone said (January 08, 2007):

Wow!

I agree with what Zagami says. I think he is right. The Illuminati is likely headed in the Vatican. I believe Phelps did some important research, but he was wrong to suppose that the conspiracy was Catholic. It is occult, and directly against anyone, including any sincere Catholics.

The Jesuits came before the Illuminati, and derived from the Allumbrados, the precursors of the Illuminati. Loyola was a conversos Jew.

This also conforms to Svali's account of Satanic rituals beneath the Vatican. She also mentioned the date of 2012.

Actually, from my studies, I've come to realize that the Illuminati are not just the bankers. More importantly, they are the aristocracy. Specifically, the Order of the Garter. This is an order of Witchcraft, of which the Queen is the head, and which goes back to the fourteenth century. It was started by Edward III.

More specifically, it is believed to go back to John of Gaunt. Interestingly, Rowling, author of Harry Potter, though she denies any affiliation to the occult, features a family of Gaunt.

Their descendants were all involved in the war of the Rose. The Illuminati is also known as the Order of the Rose.

The rose is a Kabbalistic symbol, mentioned in the Zohar as being a symbol of the "Jewish congregation".

It's all about the rose. It means rose-cross, or red cross of the Templars. It is found in rose-line, or Rosslyn, the Chapel of the Sinclairs. And, as strange as this may sound, red hair is their characteristic feature. It is a sign of descent from the Edomites, or more specifically, the Scythians of southern Russia, who were the Lost Tribes. They were known to the Jews of the Middle Ages as Red Jews. They later became Khazars. All the leading bloodlines of Europe descend from them. That's the point of Brown's book, that Da Vinci, painted the Magdalene with red hair, it is the ultimate signal.

The rose refers to the Satanic bloodline. This is the essence of it, because from it is supposed to issue the anti-Christ. This is what I have followed in my book. I know it is intricate, but this is how we discover it. You will find that a single bloodline, through intricate intermarriage, has shaped much of modern history, as part of an occult conspiracy to overturn the worship of God.

It's like Svali said, the Illuminati is headed by the Rothschilds, but also the English royal family, and the Habsburgs. It's all about the bloodline.

http://www.thedyinggod.org

Phil said (January 08, 2007):

Dear Mr Makow, it's always a pleasure to read your articles, especially the ones exposing feminism. In regard to the latest I read about Zagami and the Illuminati, and your mention of 666, are you aware of the co-relationship between 666 and FOX news ? Virtually the only word in the English language that could be created from these numbers is FOX.

F = 6th letter in the alphabet

O = 15th letter 1+5 = 6

X = 24th letter 2+4 = 6

An incredible co-incidence or by design?

Ben in Australia said (January 08, 2007):

An interesting article. I simply can't buy the cheap and unreliable information that Zagami is selling. I agree wholeheartedly with Jean's
comment, and was very impressed with Richard's. It seems like Zagami has demonised so many opponents of the NWO,[Chavez, Ahmaninejad] and lumped them into the same category as the actual evil-doers; surprise, surprise. Secondly, if he
wasn't a paid misinformist, a bullet would've been lodged in his skull before he even muttered the word 'Illuminati'. This whole thing just doesn't add up.

Finally, and to me, most importantly, he actually expects us to believe that George W. Bush is THE Anti-Christ! GW is nothing but a puppet,plain and simple. He doesn't have the intelligence, nor the physical form, to be the Beast. This is just another attempted diversion. I'm of the firm
belief that the Anti-Christ is yet to emerge. He will be of Jewish or Arabic origin, and will be a tall and largely built individual with physical
resemblance to an actual beast. After reading the interviews on Zagami's site, I am totally convinced that he is fraudulent or a paid misinformist. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.
-----

Ben,

Chavez and Ahmaninejad may not be real opponents of the nwo. There may be other reasons Zagami hasn't been killed, like genuine internal divisions in the elite.

Henry

Tony from Ireland said (January 08, 2007):

Demonising all factions, though I notice that none of the recent zionist leaders from Israel were mentioned, which looks very suspicious to me, is all very nice and simple. It effectively says to people, 'there is no-one and nothing to believe in'. This would tend to sow confusion, dissenchantment and fear - exactly as anyone who wishes to stay in control would want. All a bit too convenient.
Is Feminism Destroying Men? (See a male reader's reply below)
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend

January 04, 2007

femfist.jpg

By Rosie Boycott---Daily Mail, London

So what exactly do women need men for these days?


Evidently, they don't need them to pay bills, to put up shelves, to fix the car, mow the lawn or provide a socially acceptable set-up in which to rear children.

Remember, a munificent benefits system means that single women, with or without children, no longer need a man to provide for them - the state has taken on that role.

Since the Divorce Act of 1969, which made it possible for women to leave a marriage, keep the kids and receive alimony, an increasing number of women are choosing to bring up children alone.


Even the provision of sperm is now something that women can sort out alone, without actually having sex with a man. The internet now boasts several companies which will deliver fertile semen through the mail.

My father's generation defined their wives: nowadays, the role has completely reversed and men are defined by women. As a result, their definition of themselves has faltered and society has been cruel towards their attempts to redefine themselves.

And yet, when the women's movement started in Britain, we all believed it would mean a liberation for men as well as for women.

What could be worse, we argued, than - like most men - working every day from when you left education till you retired at 65, solely financially responsible for your wife and kids, long office hours denying you the chance to spend meaningful time with your children.

That life was as much of a prison as being a full-time wife and mother.

When I co-founded the magazine Spare Rib in 1972, the lot of women was very distant from today's reality.


In those days, a woman couldn't get a mortgage without her husband's or her father's signature. Universities were predominantly for men, as were medical schools and colleges of law.

Women were still meant to be their father's daughters until they became their husband's wives.

But if we started out hoping to bring an improvement to the lives of men as well as women, by the time the Seventies came round, the idea of the women's movement being of possible benefit to men had withered on the vine.

Women's rights became just too urgent and too immediate, and though everyone knew that whenever women change there must be a reciprocal change for men, it was somehow assumed it would all work itself out in the great melting pot of life.

To ensure that women did better at school, committees were formed and studies undertaken and the style of teaching changed.

Thus, in recent years, it has no longer been just the single, terrifying three- hour exam that determined your success, a winner-takes-all mentality generally thought to be more applicable to the male brain.

Continual assessment worked better for women, who, it is thought, respond better to a more considered approach to work.

Meanwhile, the nature of the workplace itself changed. As Western countries shifted from land-based to factory-based and then to knowledge-based economies, so the need for brawn and physical strength diminished.

Physically, men no longer have any advantage over women in professional life; their place has now been taken by machines, and the multitasking skills of human interaction which women do better at are precisely those prized by employers.

So what are men to do? While we applaud a woman who takes on a man's world and succeeds, woe betide a man who strays too far into women's territory.

A man who keeps house, brings up the children and does the shopping is more likely to be considered a weedy loser than an individual who has made a considered stance.

Working at home, we all believe, is something men do only because they've been fired or can't get a good enough job to allow them to afford childcare.

In short, men are being squeezed at every turn. Somewhere along the line towards the liberation of women we have stripped them of all their primary functions and made them miserable.

Their subservient position starts in school. Girls have now overtaken boys in public exams to such an extent that educators now question whether the system hasn't swung too far in their favour by using continuous assessment in preference to one-off exams.

Then there is the fact that the whole notion of learning a trade has been abolished in favour of purely academic studies.

Jobs which give satisfaction, especially for poorer white males - who are now the worst-performing group in our education system - have become almost impossible to come by.

Women, meanwhile, are groomed relentlessly to succeed. How did we get into such a predicament? No feminist I ever knew wanted to see a world in which men were beaten by women: a world in which one dominant group was just replaced by another.

Our problem is, I think, largely to do with the fact that our ideas of success are still derived from making money and being top-dog in the office.

Sadly, women's liberation, which ought to have made it easy for both sexes to choose their roles in life, has actually managed to denigrate the role of motherhood and caring.

So when men dip into our pond, we see them as failures, not as individuals who might have made a skilful and necessary adaptation to a new set of rules.

As long as society continues to rate making money so far above running the home, both men and women will think they have failed if they do not succeed in the workplace.

We are already seeing the consequences of this erosion of men's social position. Our jails are overflowing, predominantly with young men who've lost their way. Male suicide rates are up. Alcoholism rates are up. Not only are boys doing less well at school, they're also dropping out with greater frequency than girls.

While their traditional role in society is being ripped from them, young men are losing the social compass which once came naturally. Women now demand that their men not only succeed in business and maintain a fat bank balance: now they're expected to be emotional, open, caring-and-sharing types, too. That may be fine for some, but for others it is clearly not.

The current crop of teenage men's magazines - most of which are openly hostile to women, regarding them as nothing more than sex objects - seem to me to be a confused cry for help.

Unable to find a place in this new world order, the magazines are taking their readers back to a time when men did rule the roost and women were merely chattels. Their message is angry: a brutal and simple-minded response of many men to the alienation they feel from mainstream society.

For many men, the realisation that twentysomething women now outearn them will only add to their bitterness.

Money, the talisman around which all our ideas of success and failure revolve, causes more marital discord than any other issue: studies at Arkansas State University by Randall Kesslering, who examined 112,740 women, show that for every £10,000 a wife's earnings rise relative to the family's overall income, the chances of marital break-up rise by 1pc.

So who's driving those divorces? Disappointed women who can't bear to be married to a weaker man, or men who cannot abide being in thrall to a more powerful woman? No doubt we will know in time.

The truth is that women - from a position of being able to do very little some 30-odd years ago - can now, literally, do it all.

Even many books for toddlers, with the exception of titles like Bob The Builder and Postman Pat, no longer have men in them.

But the fact is that if women choose to have a baby on their own or walk out on their marriage, the state is there to pick up the pieces. Of course, children's books reflect this.


Everyone needs to feel they have a purpose in life, to be challenged and to be useful. Society has bent over backwards to liberate women and to give them equal opportunities - from taking out a mortgage to a woman's legal right to terminate a pregnancy.

But the agenda of women's rights was based on the premise that you can fix equality for women with no reference at all to men.

And so, in the process, we have unwittingly undermined men, making their role very hard to define. Because ultimately if women can look after themselves, we are forced to ask the question: "What are men for?"

We need, urgently, to start reassessing our priorities. We need to start to rate homemaking as highly as money-making. We need to stop believing - erroneously - that happiness derives solely from money. We need to learn to respect and value the crucial role that parents (women and men) play in their children's upbringing.

As someone who has watched the position of women change so dramatically, I cannot help but be thrilled to see just how well we have done. But our success must never be at the expense of men and their own sense of fulfilment. Otherwise, it will not be any sort of success at all.
-----

Response from a Reader, John

The article you posted "Is Feminism Destroying Men?" by Rosie Boycott is both arrogant and false. The author apparently senses that something is wrong with feminism, but doesn't have the slightest ideas of what it might be. The over tone is that women have been so successful and dominant in recent years, and now they need to pause and take pity on men.

She makes a number of mistakes. For instance, she credits the success of feminism to women, when it fact it is part of the larger conspiracy you write about so elegantly. (My son tells me that the most ardent feminists are men.) She claims that women no longer need men because machines now do the (brute) work once done by men. She fails to realize that it is men who conceive, design, build, program, operate, and repair these machines. She claims that the state provides the services once provided by husbands and family. She fails to realize the the government is a very poor service provider, witness Katrina, and still must marshal the labor of men. Who is going to take care of them when the system breaks down, such as in a natural disaster or economic collapse? She thinks that women's so-called multi-tasking ability makes them ideal employees in the modern work force, but in fact it just means an inability to focus. Women have abandoned the roles there are really good as they have tried to beat men at their own game. Men excel in almost every area, even in those traditionally attributed to women, or in jobs you would think women should have and advantage.

The notion that women can get pregnant by mail order is patently absurd--no one should ever even consider selecting the father of one's child by catalog. Children need to be conceived and raised in love by both parents. It is a statistical fact that single women make the absolute worst parents. In fact, men and women together tend to put each other on their best behavior.

She writes "Everyone needs to feel they have a purpose in life, to be challenged and to be useful. Society has bent over backwards to liberate women and to give them equal opportunities - from taking out a mortgage to a woman's legal right to terminate a pregnancy." That is, women have the right to enter into a never ending cycle of debt, and to murder they own children so they will have the time to pay for it.

Actually, men are hurt less by feminism than are women. The the title of the article should be "Is Feminism Destroying Women (and Murdering Children)?




Satan, Kim Jong Il More Popular than Dubya
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend

December 31, 2006

poll.jpg

"I'm afraid that before we have seen the last of Dubya, he will be the most hated man in America." --Henry Makow, March 6, 2002


"The War on Terror: A B Movie Directed by an Evil Cabal"




Girl Power Dept. "Middle School Girls Gone Wild"
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend

December 30, 2006

aaamadbrit.jpg

(This article illustrates how the American female is being neutered so that she will not demand love (i.e. marriage) for sex ensuring she will be less likely to form a successful family. -Henry )

By LAWRENCE DOWNES
NY Times Published: December 29, 2006


It’s hard to write this without sounding like a prig. But it’s just as hard to erase the images that planted the idea for this essay, so here goes. The scene is a middle school auditorium, where girls in teams of three or four are bopping to pop songs at a student talent show. Not bopping, actually, but doing elaborately choreographed re-creations of music videos, in tiny skirts or tight shorts, with bare bellies, rouged cheeks and glittery eyes.

They writhe and strut, shake their bottoms, splay their legs, thrust their chests out and in and out again. Some straddle empty chairs, like lap dancers without laps. They don’t smile much. Their faces are locked from grim exertion, from all that leaping up and lying down without poles to hold onto. “Don’t stop don’t stop,” sings Janet Jackson, all whispery. “Jerk it like you’re making it choke. ...Ohh. I’m so stimulated. Feel so X-rated.” The girls spend a lot of time lying on the floor. They are in the sixth, seventh and eighth grades.

As each routine ends, parents and siblings cheer, whistle and applaud. I just sit there, not fully comprehending. It’s my first suburban Long Island middle school talent show. I’m with my daughter, who is 10 and hadn’t warned me. I’m not sure what I had expected, but it wasn’t this. It was something different. Something younger. Something that didn’t make the girls look so ... one-dimensional.

It would be easy to chalk it up to adolescent rebellion, an ancient and necessary phenomenon, except these girls were barely adolescents and they had nothing to rebel against. This was an official function at a public school, a milieu that in another time or universe might have seen children singing folk ballads, say, or reciting the Gettysburg Address.

It is news to no one, not even me, that eroticism in popular culture is a 24-hour, all-you-can-eat buffet, and that many children in their early teens are filling up. The latest debate centers on whether simulated intercourse is an appropriate dance style for the high school gym.

What surprised me, though, was how completely parents of even younger girls seem to have gotten in step with society’s march toward eroticized adolescence — either willingly or through abject surrender. And if parents give up, what can a school do? A teacher at the middle school later told me she had stopped chaperoning dances because she was put off by the boy-girl pelvic thrusting and had no way to stop it — the children wouldn’t listen to her and she had no authority to send anyone home. She guessed that if the school had tried to ban the sexy talent-show routines, parents would have been the first to complain, having shelled out for costumes and private dance lessons for their Little Miss Sunshines.

I’m sure that many parents see these routines as healthy fun, an exercise in self-esteem harmlessly heightened by glitter makeup and teeny skirts. Our girls are bratz, not slutz, they would argue, comfortable in the existence of a distinction.

But my parental brain rebels. Suburban parents dote on and hover over their children, micromanaging their appointments and shielding them in helmets, kneepads and thick layers of S.U.V. steel. But they allow the culture of boy-toy sexuality to bore unchecked into their little ones’ ears and eyeballs, displacing their nimble and growing brains and impoverishing the sense of wider possibilities in life.

There is no reason adulthood should be a low plateau we all clamber onto around age 10. And it’s a cramped vision of girlhood that enshrines sexual allure as the best or only form of power and esteem. It’s as if there were now Three Ages of Woman: first Mary-Kate, then Britney, then Courtney. Boys don’t seem to have such constricted horizons. They wouldn’t stand for it — much less waggle their butts and roll around for applause on the floor of a school auditorium.

The Role of Women as the Builders of Nations
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend

December 23, 2006
aaaygwoman.jpg By Swami Shivananda, Divine Life Society, Rishikesh

The performance of domestic duties, the management of her household, the rearing of children, the economising of the family means- these are a woman’s proper office. She is already endowed with divine power. She already governs the world by her power of gentle love and affection. To make noble citizens by training her children, and to form the character of the whole human race is undoubtedly a power far greater than that which a woman could hope to exercise as a voter or a law-maker, as a president, minister or judge.

The mother's impressions strike deep root in the brain of the foetus that dwells in the womb. If the pregnant woman does Japa (repetition of Lord's name with or without rosary) and Kirtan (Singing the Lord's glories), if she studies religious books and leads a pious life during pregnancy, the foetus is endowed with spiritual inclination or spiritual tendency.

A woman’s natural sphere of activity is the home, where she can prove most helpful to man, because she is the most adored. She can be patriotic by living in a simple homestead, bringing forth noble, cultured citizens, politicians, warriors and saints.

In the West babies are born and brought up in nursery schools and maternity homes. They do not know the health giving, affectionate, tender and soul-expanding caresses of their mothers. They do not know what it is to sleep in the warm embrace of a loving mother. Brought up in the atmosphere of bargain and economics, they develop even in their teens, an unceasing devotion to the dollar and mammon.

The social atmosphere in the West is overcharged with sex. Early marriages may be rare in the West but not early sex-indulgence. There cannot be real love between the parties. Marriage becomes a contract, not a sacrament. Hence there are countless divorces.

India recognises the ideal of motherhood as the highest for a woman. There is so much talk in the West about the emancipation of women. Scrutinise her closely and you will find her a slave of appetites, fashions, and the dollar. In our Vedic period women enjoyed an honourable and exalted position. They occupy a high position now also. The object of marriage is mutual happiness of the parties, the raising of children, and worship and service of the Lord.

Coming to the forefront in blazing daylight is certainly not the test or criterion of the true greatness of a woman.

The happiness for a woman lies not in catering for carnal passions, not in challenging man in his own field by forgetting her natural course of duties, but in leading the ideal life as taught in the sacred scriptures; the crowning glory of womanhood. Then alone will woman be restored to the original dignity of the Universal Mother, which she is to every Indian now.

Woman’s place is in the home

The eternal fidelity of a Hindu woman to her husband makes her an ideal of the feminine world. It makes her sublime. This lofty virtue of fidelity runs deep in the heart of every Hindu woman of India, superior to any of the other countries in national integrity and honour.

The inspiring force of the home is the woman. The home is the origin and beginning of every form of social organisation. It is the nursery of the nation. It is the sweet place wherein children are trained for future citizenship. The woman illumines the home through the glory of motherhood. Man is incapable of doing the domestic duties incident upon the rearing of children. Good habits, right conduct and formation of good character are created in children spontaneously in a well regulated home under the personal influence of the mother. The loving kindness and the cultured gentleness of the mother help the children to unfold their native talents and dormant capacities quickly. Children absorb ideas by suggestion and imitation. Early training and impressions formed at early age are lasting. The mother at home can do the formation of character very efficiently. Therefore, home is the most beautiful training ground for the building of character in children under the personal guidance of the mother.

Woman is the backbone or bedrock to sustain religion and national strength, peace and prosperity. Manu declares:

"The woman who always does good, who is efficient in work, sweet in speech, devoted to her duty and service of her husband, is really no human being but a goddess."

If the mother trains her children on the right lines from the early age, she is rendering great service indeed to the nation and national culture. Women have good and ample opportunities of improving national health and increasing prosperity. It is they who really build the nation. They can utilise their talents and abilities in making the home a cradle of culture, character, personal ability and religious revival. It is therefore wrong to say that their lives are cramped and stunted by attending to the duties at home, and that no scope is given for their evolution and freedom. This is a sad mistake indeed.

The life of a woman is as noble and serious as that of a man. There is no doubt about this.

It is the women who keep up the life and happiness of the home through their smiles, tender affection, sweet speech, grace, angelic presence and charming personalities. The home will be a real void without them. It will lose its peculiar charm and beauty without their presence.

Women are the mothers of the home. The extraordinary ability, intellectual attainments and magnetic personalities of modern women are standing monuments of their undoubted equality with men. The personal influence of women at home is essential to unify the various interests of the family. It is women alone who can rear or nurse children. Hindu wives are queens of their own homes. The husbands should treat their wives with intense love and respect. They should be regarded as equals in all respects and held in the light of partners in life.

If a man earns and the wife stays at home, it does not mean that the woman is a parasite and a slave. She is indeed the builder of the nation. Verily, women exercise an authority over their husbands through their love, tenderness, affection, grace, beauty, selfless service, fidelity, purity and self-abnegation.

Source: http://www.hinduism.co.za/motherho.htm, 14th July 2006.

"Heterosexuality is Nature's Norm," says Sensible Lesbian Libertarian Camille Paglia
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend

December 18, 2006

cam.jpg


Which brings us to another subject, the furor this past month over a report by psychiatrist Robert Spitzer of Columbia University that, from his rather cursory interviews with 153 men and 47 women, the "reparative therapy" endorsed by conservative Protestant groups can in some cases change sexual orientation from gay to straight. That Spitzer had helped to persuade the American Psychiatric Association to drop the classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973 makes his current study harder to dismiss.

Nevertheless, screeching gay activists immediately descended on the media to denounce and defame Spitzer as a tool of the far right. This was a good example of the fascist policing of public discourse in this country by nominal liberals who have become as unthinkingly wedded to dogma as any junior member of the Spanish Inquisition. Why should the fluidity of sexual orientation threaten any gay secure in his or her identity?

What gay ideologues, inflated like pink balloons with poststructuralist hot air, can't admit, of course, is that heterosexuality is nature's norm, enforced by powerful hormonal cues at puberty. In the past decade, one shoddy book after another, rapturously applauded by p.c. reviewers, has exaggerated the incidence of homosexuality in the animal world and, without due regard for reproductive adaptations caused by environmental changes, toxins or population pressure, reductively interpreted bonding or hierarchical behavior as gay in the human sense.

Because of the unblushing dishonesty of strident activists and campus "queer theorists," whose general knowledge of science would fit into Marie Antoinette's thimble, we are ironically further from understanding homosexuality than we were in 1970, when popular culture was moving into the seductive gender-bending era typified by the brilliant David Bowie. With the emphasis on external "politics," all respect for psychology has been lost. Did no one notice the grotesquely misogynous dialogue put into gay men's mouths on "Queer as Folk"? That kind of catty aversion to the female body is learned, not inborn, and it can be partly traced to early family relations, before personal memory has even gelled.

My political philosophy as a libertarian says that government has no business intervening in any consensual private behavior. My professional ethic as a thinker and writer, however, says that self-knowledge is our ultimate responsibility. In vicious attacks like the one on Spitzer, gay activists, with all their good intentions, are aligning themselves with the forces of ignorance and repression. Too little reliable work is currently being done in homosexuality because free inquiry cannot be conducted in a politicized atmosphere of harassment and intimidation.

May 2001 http://archive.salon.com/people/col/pag ... index.html
Visit ClubConspiracy.com
Henry Makow © 2006

[pilotdreams]

Hi! Here is something to read, some people may get offended, but I will post it anyway. Beware though. It comes from Savethemales website and I am a big fan of Henry Makow, as you guessed it I am not a feminist, very far from that. I am not against women either. Here it is:



Falun Dafa Teacher, Li Hongzhi---SCROLL DOWN For "Illuminat Rebel Issues Warning"
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend
"When Women acted like Women..."

January 11, 2007

falun.jpg

Kent writes:

I just read your article entitled "The Effect of Sexual Deprivation on Women". I agree with everything 100%. I am already familiar with many of these concepts by studying Falun Dafa, a Chinese Buddhist meditation practice. Check out this quote from Falun Dafa's teacher Li Hongzhi:


Question:

In today’s society, the concept of equality between men and women prevails. As
female disciples, how can we be gentle and tender while progressing diligently
in cultivation?


Teacher: At present, people have commented that women are
becoming more and more liberal and their character is also getting stronger. In
fact, you’re not being driven by your benevolent side. I don’t believe strength
is necessarily reflected in the appearance of a person. If in your daily life
you’re like a gentle, true woman, your competence will let you have everything
you deserve all the same. It’s not necessary for you to be tough and manly. Do
you understand the principles I’m talking about? (Applause)

In other words, if you’re a woman, you need to act like one, kind and gentle. Only that way can you gain respect and love from men. If you’re not kind and gentle, men will be afraid of you when they see you.

(Laughter) You’ll then be denied the love and even the family affection that you’re supposed to have. From the opposite perspective, let’s not only talk about women. We men should also behave like men. However, today’s society in this world has become corrupt. I can only ask my disciples to behave this way, which is not achievable by the society.

I remember that before the fifties, men in the West were very gentlemen-like. They treated women with respect. Because women acted like women, men loved to help them, respect them and care for them. At the same time, in a feminine way, women cherished their husbands. This was human behavior. Yet today you have distorted all of this.

In Asian society, women have become overly strong, making the men act like women. I can tell you that, in your bones you want your men to be strong, yet in your mind you want to keep them under your control. Isn’t this contradictory? If the way of the society becomes like this, will men still be able to walk around with pride? Will they have their manhood?

Two people can’t be the head of one household, just as there can’t be two kings
living on the same mountain. Consequently, when two tigers fight, one has to
get hurt. (Laughter) Disharmony will find its way into families. How is it going to work if two kings live under the same roof? One has to be the head of the household. That’s why there are divorces and discord. You always say this: “Men comment that this woman doesn’t act like a woman; women remark that this man doesn’t act like a man.”


It's even more blatant in Western society where when they marry each other, they have already divided up their property: “When we divorce in the future, this
belongs to me and that belongs to you.” It’s even more blatant. The feeling of
a woman relying on her man when they’re married is simply nonexistent; yet a
man doesn’t feel that once this woman marries him, she has entrusted him with
her whole life and that he should be responsible to her. These kinds of
thoughts have simply disappeared. Self interest and individual freedom have
taken over everything. Where do you then find the warmth of a family? You argue and try to win against each other—no one wants to listen to each other. I’m telling you, this is not a human state! (Applause)

Today’s society and its media are leading people to discuss individual freedom
and to be self-indulgent with individuality. I can tell you, this unrestrained
individuality might make you appear to be free, but actually, you’ll never get
sweet happiness anymore. You’ll never ever have someone else you can trust! (Applause)


(Lecture at the US East Coast Conference, 1999)

The practice is also fiercely anti-communist. Check out the book "Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party" when you get a chance: http://ninecommentaries.com/

Just wanted to let you know of this great practice. Best of luck to you!
Articles >>

Henry Makow is the author of A Long Way to go for a Date. He received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto. He welcomes your feedback and ideas at henry@savethemales.ca.
UPDATED SUNDAY IN BOLD----(Listen to Zagami interview -link below article)
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend
Illuminati Rebel Issues Dire Warning, Battle Cry

January 05, 2007

zagami.jpg


By Henry Makow Ph.D.

At the New Year, Leo Zagami, 36, has an urgent message.

The Illuminati plan to "Nazify" the West by the year 2012 and persecute all believers in God, using the pretext of war, terror and economic collapse.

The scion of an ancient Illuminati family, Zagami had a religious conversion (to Islam) last June and rebelled. He'd had enough of the horrifying Satanic, black magic rituals, mind control and torture that was going on inside the lodges, behind closed doors.

On Saturday he posted on his web site Illuminati Confessions names of high ranking Masons who are ready to do battle with the Satanists. He has organized his own security detail and even posted a personal phone number to address serious questions.

"These are the end times; it's no joke," Zagami says in an January 3 interview on his website.

"The cosmic alignment on the 21st of December 2012 gives you 6 years to prepare... So its about time you all wake up and fight for your right to stay free under one God before they take complete control and start persecuting the true believers in the one God. …Get your swords and get ready to fight to defend your faith or perish…This is a war against Satan so please wake up in the western countries or you might wake up in a nightmare one morning in December 2012."

"From 2010 you will start feeling the big changes in the air more and more but in 2012 you will have the clear evidence of the end of this civilization in front of your eyes….the total NAZIFICATION of the western countries by 2010 before the economic situation starts to badly crack for everyone. Then social tension will hit a peak never seen before and internal conflicts could eventually become in 2012: CIVIL WAR!"

“Are you ready to die for God and your believe in a positive change for the world or are you all a bunch of cowards in the hands of the devil, just talking and talking with no sense of reality?”

As an ex-member of the Comitato Esecutivo Massonico - Masonic Executive Committee (MEC) of Monte Carlo, Zagami was, until recently, a true insider, a 33rd degree Freemason, and a high-member of the infamous Freemasonic P2 (Propaganda 2) Lodge. He was the "prince", prepared to take over from the older Illuminati "king", Licio Gelli.

The reason I have overlooked Zagami until now is that he suggests Illuminati power resides in the Vatican with the Jesuits. I maintain that that the world central banking cartel, headed by the Rothschilds, calls the shots. They use Freemasons, Zionists, Jesuits, Vatican, Socialists, Liberals, Communists, Feminist and Gay activists, Neo Cons, all intelligence agencies, media, foundations etc. to exercise control.

But it would be stupid to continue to overlook Zagami's invaluable testimony over an academic disagreement. I don't think Zagami lets the Zionists off the hook. He merely focuses on what he knows first-hand.

The Illuminati is like the mob. Does it matter if the Chicago, London or New York families are in charge? They are overlapping circles dedicated to the same perverse end.

Greg Szymanski again deserves our thanks for featuring Zagami on his web site since October. Jeff Rense also deserves credit for posting Greg's stories. The material below is partially a summary from Greg's interviews.


THE ILLUMINATI PUPPET SHOW

Zagami describes the world as "a global puppet show in the hands of the usual families of idiots, who usually never change their ways century after century."

"They all work together, including Hugo Chavez who really is helping Bush's agenda by his theatrical performances," said Zagami. Chavez is controlled by the Vatican and working with the New World Order as are all other leaders of the world's major government's and religions.

"This is how they operate with the top layers working together for one purpose in what they think is the perfect cover-up. Wahabi or Wahibi [the Saudis] were created by the Zionists and their English friends who think they are the lost tribe of Israel. The same happened with Arafat and the so-called Muslim Brotherhood created by the English intelligence."

Of course, the Muslim Brotherhood also might be behind Iranian leaders and the leaders of the Iraqi Insurgency. It's all theatre put on for the yokels.

In an email to me Sunday, Leo called the Iraq-Iran-Israel conflict a "foreign intelligence show" and Ahmaninejad a "well known Satanist with no real connection to Islam."

He said Putin's conflict with the Rothschilds is also a "charade." He is also Illuminati controlled.

Zagami challenges his former colleagues in Freemasonry to "go public with your pagan satanic worship and your black magic you bunch of cowards, that's what I say to them. The European aristocracy has always been ruled by sorcery and black magic …have always used black magic and evil forces … for domination over their own citizens. They learned these satanic ways from their Masters in Rome who got them in turn from the Greeks, the Egyptians, the Sumerian...its a never ending tale of constant manipulation…of mankind."

He says G.W. Bush is the son of "the most powerful man in the illuminati and he was built by his father and the CIA to become the ultimate Antichrist Vatican Zionist puppet and it doesn't really matter if he is in the White House or not because the Bush will always rule in the present situation any future actor that goes in the White House now. Remember Anton LaVey founder of the Church of Satan and Mind War controller of the CIA was a close friend of George H. Bush, and they planned together the satanic future of his son George W.Bush and the coming of the age of Satan after 9/11 a long time ago when LaVey was still alive."

He says 666 is everywhere these days: "the Hebrew equivalent of our "w" is the letter "vav" or "waw". The numerical value of vav is 6. So the English "www" transliterated into Hebrew is "vav vav vav", which numerically is 666. And you can't definitely have a business these days without a web site WWW, then we have the video surveillance and last but not least the micro chipping coming up. The micro chipping will be the ultimate Mark of the Beast and will put us fully in the hands of Satan and his evil controllers ready for Armageddon against the Messiah. So we need to rebel before that to help the coming back of the real Messiah."

"All religions are corrupt by the illuminati these days including most of Islam, the Jews, the Evangelical, Protestant and the Born-Again side of Christianity, all ruled secretly by Freemasonry, the intelligence services, the Knights of Malta and last but not least the usual Jesuits so genuine [religious] dialogue is almost impossible."

CONCLUSION

Leo Zagami sees himself as "the last idealist in the Illuminati." It is a hopeful sign that courageous and decent men like him should appear at this time. It would be a far greater sin to spurn a genuine hero than to be taken in by an imposter. At the same time, the Illuminati has always feigned divisions: FDR, Hitler all championed the "people."

"YOU ARE LIVING IN A ILLUMINATI PRISON BUILT BY THE JESUITS AND FINANCED BY THE ZIONIST," Leo emailed me. I agree about the "Illuminati prison part." For the rest, I will continue to ask Leo questions and do my own reading and thinking.

The elite is building an abattoir before our eyes: the New World Order. The events of 9-11 are proof of their intent to use it. We have a choice: To go like sheep to the slaughter, or to take Zagami's advice, and prepare.
-----

Listen to an interview with Leo Zagami on Red Ice
Articles >>

Henry Makow is the author of A Long Way to go for a Date. He received his Ph.D. in English Literature from the University of Toronto. He welcomes your feedback and ideas at henry@savethemales.ca.
Comments for "Illuminati Rebel Issues Dire Warning, Battle Cry "

Pedro said (January 10, 2007):

It took me a long time and effort to separate an
individual from his/her skin color, religion and
political affiliation; nationalism from imperialism; zionism from judaism. The distinctions of real importance lie hidden beneath the ground and pioneers like yourself help us see them.

Mr. T said (January 10, 2007):

Back in the 80's a rock group / band called, "Mike and The Mechanics",
wrote and and played a song which was immortalized on MTV in video for as well.

Although I am not sure of what the meaning is by the writters and co authors of
this music / song.... It is my deep opionion they were speaking to us all regarding a violent struggle that would eventually take place somewhere in the world. Posibbly considering the New World order or the Illuminati.

People should be aware that allegiances to the skull and cross bones are very real,
the Free Mason, Knights of Columbus and other organizatiions do practice and awear allegiance
to Satan. It is true!

I am not a memeber but do know some who are and have told me of secret "knocks" to get in to
meetings, secret information that they swear by that they are never to tell anyone and the rituals
are quite distrubing to ay the least (i.e., being blind folded and passing many tests) with the exclusive promise of never discussing with anyone (not even family memebers).

I will say I am a Christian and will die for my beliefs....to engage the Born Again movement as part of this group is possible, but I only will pray, and give testimony to Jesus Christ. Now there is a great imposter who is coming on the scene who will claim to be God Incaranate and perform great and wonderful miracles onlt to decieve many "even the elect". I agree with the article!


Here are part of the lyrics:

“SILENT RUNNING”
(Mike and the Mechanics)


Take the children and yourself
And hide out in the cellar
By now the fighting will be close at hand
Don’t believe the church and state
And everything they tell you
Believe in me, I’m with the high command

Can you hear me, can you hear me running?
Can you hear me running, can you hear me calling you?
Can you hear me, can you hear me running?
Can you hear me running, can you hear me calling you?

There’s a gun and ammunition
Just inside the doorway
Use it only in emergency
Better you should pray to God
The Father and the Spirit
Will guide you and protect from up here


Alex said (January 09, 2007):

I have guns, guts, and GOD. Even if they come for me in the darkest dark of night, unless they mini-nuke the whole house (which wouldn't go over very well in the neighborhood), I Will take One, Two, maybe even THREE of the misguided sons of some poor Jewish/Christian/Muslim/Pagan/Illuminati/Satanist "mother" with me into the depths of Eternity. If THAT should transpire, I, of course, will leave it up to GOD ALMIGHTY to judge the actions of all of us in that situation.

Bottom line, I may fight them on my lawn, but I refuse to bow down to them in the Public Square, the Marketplace, or the Church/Synagogue/Temple. I leave it up to the Creator of All to use me as HE Wills, and save me and my miserable sinning soul at the Time of HIS Choosing.

James said (January 08, 2007):

Dear Mr Makow,

Re: Illuminati Rebel Issues Dire Warning. Its not that I wish to be a cynic; but how is a simple man to know that Mr. Zagami is not an insider still and remains loyal to group?

In 1996 a NWO card game was released that depicted many of the events to follow (i.e. 911) One of the final event cards* depicted hippies standing over a cop. One hippy had evidently broken a peace sign over the cops back
and he was down like a dog. What is the meaning if this card except to suggest that the masses would be stirred to revolt? By Whom? one may ask.

Recently on Fox News, John Gibson was interviewing Danny Bonaduce and Gibson
let it slip that 30% of the US public believe 911 was an inside job. This is a very odd admission for an agency that wishes to hide the facts of 911 at all costs. - especially when it is not demonstrably true on the street.

But he lent so much credibility to the movement by that statement, I cannot believe it was not in line with planning. There have been many other similar items inconsistent with a crime that was truly intended to remain hidden.

Why does Fox continue to have 911 guests on when they repeatedly get the best of the hosts? And then there is CNN and Alex Jones/Charlie Sheen via
Showbiz Tonight and their online poll. Ted Turner is hardcore NWO . Why should CNN permit this except that it is wanted?

Then we have Lou Dobbs and Keith Olberman fanning the flames. Are they turning around now also?

Re 911. All the evidence was left in the wide open. It seems likely that the 911 truth movement is part 2 of the ultimate pie in the face. Your rebel insider is perhaps a change agent.


David Livingstone said (January 08, 2007):

Wow!

I agree with what Zagami says. I think he is right. The Illuminati is likely headed in the Vatican. I believe Phelps did some important research, but he was wrong to suppose that the conspiracy was Catholic. It is occult, and directly against anyone, including any sincere Catholics.

The Jesuits came before the Illuminati, and derived from the Allumbrados, the precursors of the Illuminati. Loyola was a conversos Jew.

This also conforms to Svali's account of Satanic rituals beneath the Vatican. She also mentioned the date of 2012.

Actually, from my studies, I've come to realize that the Illuminati are not just the bankers. More importantly, they are the aristocracy. Specifically, the Order of the Garter. This is an order of Witchcraft, of which the Queen is the head, and which goes back to the fourteenth century. It was started by Edward III.

More specifically, it is believed to go back to John of Gaunt. Interestingly, Rowling, author of Harry Potter, though she denies any affiliation to the occult, features a family of Gaunt.

Their descendants were all involved in the war of the Rose. The Illuminati is also known as the Order of the Rose.

The rose is a Kabbalistic symbol, mentioned in the Zohar as being a symbol of the "Jewish congregation".

It's all about the rose. It means rose-cross, or red cross of the Templars. It is found in rose-line, or Rosslyn, the Chapel of the Sinclairs. And, as strange as this may sound, red hair is their characteristic feature. It is a sign of descent from the Edomites, or more specifically, the Scythians of southern Russia, who were the Lost Tribes. They were known to the Jews of the Middle Ages as Red Jews. They later became Khazars. All the leading bloodlines of Europe descend from them. That's the point of Brown's book, that Da Vinci, painted the Magdalene with red hair, it is the ultimate signal.

The rose refers to the Satanic bloodline. This is the essence of it, because from it is supposed to issue the anti-Christ. This is what I have followed in my book. I know it is intricate, but this is how we discover it. You will find that a single bloodline, through intricate intermarriage, has shaped much of modern history, as part of an occult conspiracy to overturn the worship of God.

It's like Svali said, the Illuminati is headed by the Rothschilds, but also the English royal family, and the Habsburgs. It's all about the bloodline.

http://www.thedyinggod.org

Phil said (January 08, 2007):

Dear Mr Makow, it's always a pleasure to read your articles, especially the ones exposing feminism. In regard to the latest I read about Zagami and the Illuminati, and your mention of 666, are you aware of the co-relationship between 666 and FOX news ? Virtually the only word in the English language that could be created from these numbers is FOX.

F = 6th letter in the alphabet

O = 15th letter 1+5 = 6

X = 24th letter 2+4 = 6

An incredible co-incidence or by design?

Ben in Australia said (January 08, 2007):

An interesting article. I simply can't buy the cheap and unreliable information that Zagami is selling. I agree wholeheartedly with Jean's
comment, and was very impressed with Richard's. It seems like Zagami has demonised so many opponents of the NWO,[Chavez, Ahmaninejad] and lumped them into the same category as the actual evil-doers; surprise, surprise. Secondly, if he
wasn't a paid misinformist, a bullet would've been lodged in his skull before he even muttered the word 'Illuminati'. This whole thing just doesn't add up.

Finally, and to me, most importantly, he actually expects us to believe that George W. Bush is THE Anti-Christ! GW is nothing but a puppet,plain and simple. He doesn't have the intelligence, nor the physical form, to be the Beast. This is just another attempted diversion. I'm of the firm
belief that the Anti-Christ is yet to emerge. He will be of Jewish or Arabic origin, and will be a tall and largely built individual with physical
resemblance to an actual beast. After reading the interviews on Zagami's site, I am totally convinced that he is fraudulent or a paid misinformist. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.
-----

Ben,

Chavez and Ahmaninejad may not be real opponents of the nwo. There may be other reasons Zagami hasn't been killed, like genuine internal divisions in the elite.

Henry

Tony from Ireland said (January 08, 2007):

Demonising all factions, though I notice that none of the recent zionist leaders from Israel were mentioned, which looks very suspicious to me, is all very nice and simple. It effectively says to people, 'there is no-one and nothing to believe in'. This would tend to sow confusion, dissenchantment and fear - exactly as anyone who wishes to stay in control would want. All a bit too convenient.
Is Feminism Destroying Men? (See a male reader's reply below)
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend

January 04, 2007

femfist.jpg

By Rosie Boycott---Daily Mail, London

So what exactly do women need men for these days?


Evidently, they don't need them to pay bills, to put up shelves, to fix the car, mow the lawn or provide a socially acceptable set-up in which to rear children.

Remember, a munificent benefits system means that single women, with or without children, no longer need a man to provide for them - the state has taken on that role.

Since the Divorce Act of 1969, which made it possible for women to leave a marriage, keep the kids and receive alimony, an increasing number of women are choosing to bring up children alone.


Even the provision of sperm is now something that women can sort out alone, without actually having sex with a man. The internet now boasts several companies which will deliver fertile semen through the mail.

My father's generation defined their wives: nowadays, the role has completely reversed and men are defined by women. As a result, their definition of themselves has faltered and society has been cruel towards their attempts to redefine themselves.

And yet, when the women's movement started in Britain, we all believed it would mean a liberation for men as well as for women.

What could be worse, we argued, than - like most men - working every day from when you left education till you retired at 65, solely financially responsible for your wife and kids, long office hours denying you the chance to spend meaningful time with your children.

That life was as much of a prison as being a full-time wife and mother.

When I co-founded the magazine Spare Rib in 1972, the lot of women was very distant from today's reality.


In those days, a woman couldn't get a mortgage without her husband's or her father's signature. Universities were predominantly for men, as were medical schools and colleges of law.

Women were still meant to be their father's daughters until they became their husband's wives.

But if we started out hoping to bring an improvement to the lives of men as well as women, by the time the Seventies came round, the idea of the women's movement being of possible benefit to men had withered on the vine.

Women's rights became just too urgent and too immediate, and though everyone knew that whenever women change there must be a reciprocal change for men, it was somehow assumed it would all work itself out in the great melting pot of life.

To ensure that women did better at school, committees were formed and studies undertaken and the style of teaching changed.

Thus, in recent years, it has no longer been just the single, terrifying three- hour exam that determined your success, a winner-takes-all mentality generally thought to be more applicable to the male brain.

Continual assessment worked better for women, who, it is thought, respond better to a more considered approach to work.

Meanwhile, the nature of the workplace itself changed. As Western countries shifted from land-based to factory-based and then to knowledge-based economies, so the need for brawn and physical strength diminished.

Physically, men no longer have any advantage over women in professional life; their place has now been taken by machines, and the multitasking skills of human interaction which women do better at are precisely those prized by employers.

So what are men to do? While we applaud a woman who takes on a man's world and succeeds, woe betide a man who strays too far into women's territory.

A man who keeps house, brings up the children and does the shopping is more likely to be considered a weedy loser than an individual who has made a considered stance.

Working at home, we all believe, is something men do only because they've been fired or can't get a good enough job to allow them to afford childcare.

In short, men are being squeezed at every turn. Somewhere along the line towards the liberation of women we have stripped them of all their primary functions and made them miserable.

Their subservient position starts in school. Girls have now overtaken boys in public exams to such an extent that educators now question whether the system hasn't swung too far in their favour by using continuous assessment in preference to one-off exams.

Then there is the fact that the whole notion of learning a trade has been abolished in favour of purely academic studies.

Jobs which give satisfaction, especially for poorer white males - who are now the worst-performing group in our education system - have become almost impossible to come by.

Women, meanwhile, are groomed relentlessly to succeed. How did we get into such a predicament? No feminist I ever knew wanted to see a world in which men were beaten by women: a world in which one dominant group was just replaced by another.

Our problem is, I think, largely to do with the fact that our ideas of success are still derived from making money and being top-dog in the office.

Sadly, women's liberation, which ought to have made it easy for both sexes to choose their roles in life, has actually managed to denigrate the role of motherhood and caring.

So when men dip into our pond, we see them as failures, not as individuals who might have made a skilful and necessary adaptation to a new set of rules.

As long as society continues to rate making money so far above running the home, both men and women will think they have failed if they do not succeed in the workplace.

We are already seeing the consequences of this erosion of men's social position. Our jails are overflowing, predominantly with young men who've lost their way. Male suicide rates are up. Alcoholism rates are up. Not only are boys doing less well at school, they're also dropping out with greater frequency than girls.

While their traditional role in society is being ripped from them, young men are losing the social compass which once came naturally. Women now demand that their men not only succeed in business and maintain a fat bank balance: now they're expected to be emotional, open, caring-and-sharing types, too. That may be fine for some, but for others it is clearly not.

The current crop of teenage men's magazines - most of which are openly hostile to women, regarding them as nothing more than sex objects - seem to me to be a confused cry for help.

Unable to find a place in this new world order, the magazines are taking their readers back to a time when men did rule the roost and women were merely chattels. Their message is angry: a brutal and simple-minded response of many men to the alienation they feel from mainstream society.

For many men, the realisation that twentysomething women now outearn them will only add to their bitterness.

Money, the talisman around which all our ideas of success and failure revolve, causes more marital discord than any other issue: studies at Arkansas State University by Randall Kesslering, who examined 112,740 women, show that for every £10,000 a wife's earnings rise relative to the family's overall income, the chances of marital break-up rise by 1pc.

So who's driving those divorces? Disappointed women who can't bear to be married to a weaker man, or men who cannot abide being in thrall to a more powerful woman? No doubt we will know in time.

The truth is that women - from a position of being able to do very little some 30-odd years ago - can now, literally, do it all.

Even many books for toddlers, with the exception of titles like Bob The Builder and Postman Pat, no longer have men in them.

But the fact is that if women choose to have a baby on their own or walk out on their marriage, the state is there to pick up the pieces. Of course, children's books reflect this.


Everyone needs to feel they have a purpose in life, to be challenged and to be useful. Society has bent over backwards to liberate women and to give them equal opportunities - from taking out a mortgage to a woman's legal right to terminate a pregnancy.

But the agenda of women's rights was based on the premise that you can fix equality for women with no reference at all to men.

And so, in the process, we have unwittingly undermined men, making their role very hard to define. Because ultimately if women can look after themselves, we are forced to ask the question: "What are men for?"

We need, urgently, to start reassessing our priorities. We need to start to rate homemaking as highly as money-making. We need to stop believing - erroneously - that happiness derives solely from money. We need to learn to respect and value the crucial role that parents (women and men) play in their children's upbringing.

As someone who has watched the position of women change so dramatically, I cannot help but be thrilled to see just how well we have done. But our success must never be at the expense of men and their own sense of fulfilment. Otherwise, it will not be any sort of success at all.
-----

Response from a Reader, John

The article you posted "Is Feminism Destroying Men?" by Rosie Boycott is both arrogant and false. The author apparently senses that something is wrong with feminism, but doesn't have the slightest ideas of what it might be. The over tone is that women have been so successful and dominant in recent years, and now they need to pause and take pity on men.

She makes a number of mistakes. For instance, she credits the success of feminism to women, when it fact it is part of the larger conspiracy you write about so elegantly. (My son tells me that the most ardent feminists are men.) She claims that women no longer need men because machines now do the (brute) work once done by men. She fails to realize that it is men who conceive, design, build, program, operate, and repair these machines. She claims that the state provides the services once provided by husbands and family. She fails to realize the the government is a very poor service provider, witness Katrina, and still must marshal the labor of men. Who is going to take care of them when the system breaks down, such as in a natural disaster or economic collapse? She thinks that women's so-called multi-tasking ability makes them ideal employees in the modern work force, but in fact it just means an inability to focus. Women have abandoned the roles there are really good as they have tried to beat men at their own game. Men excel in almost every area, even in those traditionally attributed to women, or in jobs you would think women should have and advantage.

The notion that women can get pregnant by mail order is patently absurd--no one should ever even consider selecting the father of one's child by catalog. Children need to be conceived and raised in love by both parents. It is a statistical fact that single women make the absolute worst parents. In fact, men and women together tend to put each other on their best behavior.

She writes "Everyone needs to feel they have a purpose in life, to be challenged and to be useful. Society has bent over backwards to liberate women and to give them equal opportunities - from taking out a mortgage to a woman's legal right to terminate a pregnancy." That is, women have the right to enter into a never ending cycle of debt, and to murder they own children so they will have the time to pay for it.

Actually, men are hurt less by feminism than are women. The the title of the article should be "Is Feminism Destroying Women (and Murdering Children)?




Satan, Kim Jong Il More Popular than Dubya
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend

December 31, 2006

poll.jpg

"I'm afraid that before we have seen the last of Dubya, he will be the most hated man in America." --Henry Makow, March 6, 2002


"The War on Terror: A B Movie Directed by an Evil Cabal"




Girl Power Dept. "Middle School Girls Gone Wild"
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend

December 30, 2006

aaamadbrit.jpg

(This article illustrates how the American female is being neutered so that she will not demand love (i.e. marriage) for sex ensuring she will be less likely to form a successful family. -Henry )

By LAWRENCE DOWNES
NY Times Published: December 29, 2006


It’s hard to write this without sounding like a prig. But it’s just as hard to erase the images that planted the idea for this essay, so here goes. The scene is a middle school auditorium, where girls in teams of three or four are bopping to pop songs at a student talent show. Not bopping, actually, but doing elaborately choreographed re-creations of music videos, in tiny skirts or tight shorts, with bare bellies, rouged cheeks and glittery eyes.

They writhe and strut, shake their bottoms, splay their legs, thrust their chests out and in and out again. Some straddle empty chairs, like lap dancers without laps. They don’t smile much. Their faces are locked from grim exertion, from all that leaping up and lying down without poles to hold onto. “Don’t stop don’t stop,” sings Janet Jackson, all whispery. “Jerk it like you’re making it choke. ...Ohh. I’m so stimulated. Feel so X-rated.” The girls spend a lot of time lying on the floor. They are in the sixth, seventh and eighth grades.

As each routine ends, parents and siblings cheer, whistle and applaud. I just sit there, not fully comprehending. It’s my first suburban Long Island middle school talent show. I’m with my daughter, who is 10 and hadn’t warned me. I’m not sure what I had expected, but it wasn’t this. It was something different. Something younger. Something that didn’t make the girls look so ... one-dimensional.

It would be easy to chalk it up to adolescent rebellion, an ancient and necessary phenomenon, except these girls were barely adolescents and they had nothing to rebel against. This was an official function at a public school, a milieu that in another time or universe might have seen children singing folk ballads, say, or reciting the Gettysburg Address.

It is news to no one, not even me, that eroticism in popular culture is a 24-hour, all-you-can-eat buffet, and that many children in their early teens are filling up. The latest debate centers on whether simulated intercourse is an appropriate dance style for the high school gym.

What surprised me, though, was how completely parents of even younger girls seem to have gotten in step with society’s march toward eroticized adolescence — either willingly or through abject surrender. And if parents give up, what can a school do? A teacher at the middle school later told me she had stopped chaperoning dances because she was put off by the boy-girl pelvic thrusting and had no way to stop it — the children wouldn’t listen to her and she had no authority to send anyone home. She guessed that if the school had tried to ban the sexy talent-show routines, parents would have been the first to complain, having shelled out for costumes and private dance lessons for their Little Miss Sunshines.

I’m sure that many parents see these routines as healthy fun, an exercise in self-esteem harmlessly heightened by glitter makeup and teeny skirts. Our girls are bratz, not slutz, they would argue, comfortable in the existence of a distinction.

But my parental brain rebels. Suburban parents dote on and hover over their children, micromanaging their appointments and shielding them in helmets, kneepads and thick layers of S.U.V. steel. But they allow the culture of boy-toy sexuality to bore unchecked into their little ones’ ears and eyeballs, displacing their nimble and growing brains and impoverishing the sense of wider possibilities in life.

There is no reason adulthood should be a low plateau we all clamber onto around age 10. And it’s a cramped vision of girlhood that enshrines sexual allure as the best or only form of power and esteem. It’s as if there were now Three Ages of Woman: first Mary-Kate, then Britney, then Courtney. Boys don’t seem to have such constricted horizons. They wouldn’t stand for it — much less waggle their butts and roll around for applause on the floor of a school auditorium.

The Role of Women as the Builders of Nations
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend

December 23, 2006
aaaygwoman.jpg By Swami Shivananda, Divine Life Society, Rishikesh

The performance of domestic duties, the management of her household, the rearing of children, the economising of the family means- these are a woman’s proper office. She is already endowed with divine power. She already governs the world by her power of gentle love and affection. To make noble citizens by training her children, and to form the character of the whole human race is undoubtedly a power far greater than that which a woman could hope to exercise as a voter or a law-maker, as a president, minister or judge.

The mother's impressions strike deep root in the brain of the foetus that dwells in the womb. If the pregnant woman does Japa (repetition of Lord's name with or without rosary) and Kirtan (Singing the Lord's glories), if she studies religious books and leads a pious life during pregnancy, the foetus is endowed with spiritual inclination or spiritual tendency.

A woman’s natural sphere of activity is the home, where she can prove most helpful to man, because she is the most adored. She can be patriotic by living in a simple homestead, bringing forth noble, cultured citizens, politicians, warriors and saints.

In the West babies are born and brought up in nursery schools and maternity homes. They do not know the health giving, affectionate, tender and soul-expanding caresses of their mothers. They do not know what it is to sleep in the warm embrace of a loving mother. Brought up in the atmosphere of bargain and economics, they develop even in their teens, an unceasing devotion to the dollar and mammon.

The social atmosphere in the West is overcharged with sex. Early marriages may be rare in the West but not early sex-indulgence. There cannot be real love between the parties. Marriage becomes a contract, not a sacrament. Hence there are countless divorces.

India recognises the ideal of motherhood as the highest for a woman. There is so much talk in the West about the emancipation of women. Scrutinise her closely and you will find her a slave of appetites, fashions, and the dollar. In our Vedic period women enjoyed an honourable and exalted position. They occupy a high position now also. The object of marriage is mutual happiness of the parties, the raising of children, and worship and service of the Lord.

Coming to the forefront in blazing daylight is certainly not the test or criterion of the true greatness of a woman.

The happiness for a woman lies not in catering for carnal passions, not in challenging man in his own field by forgetting her natural course of duties, but in leading the ideal life as taught in the sacred scriptures; the crowning glory of womanhood. Then alone will woman be restored to the original dignity of the Universal Mother, which she is to every Indian now.

Woman’s place is in the home

The eternal fidelity of a Hindu woman to her husband makes her an ideal of the feminine world. It makes her sublime. This lofty virtue of fidelity runs deep in the heart of every Hindu woman of India, superior to any of the other countries in national integrity and honour.

The inspiring force of the home is the woman. The home is the origin and beginning of every form of social organisation. It is the nursery of the nation. It is the sweet place wherein children are trained for future citizenship. The woman illumines the home through the glory of motherhood. Man is incapable of doing the domestic duties incident upon the rearing of children. Good habits, right conduct and formation of good character are created in children spontaneously in a well regulated home under the personal influence of the mother. The loving kindness and the cultured gentleness of the mother help the children to unfold their native talents and dormant capacities quickly. Children absorb ideas by suggestion and imitation. Early training and impressions formed at early age are lasting. The mother at home can do the formation of character very efficiently. Therefore, home is the most beautiful training ground for the building of character in children under the personal guidance of the mother.

Woman is the backbone or bedrock to sustain religion and national strength, peace and prosperity. Manu declares:

"The woman who always does good, who is efficient in work, sweet in speech, devoted to her duty and service of her husband, is really no human being but a goddess."

If the mother trains her children on the right lines from the early age, she is rendering great service indeed to the nation and national culture. Women have good and ample opportunities of improving national health and increasing prosperity. It is they who really build the nation. They can utilise their talents and abilities in making the home a cradle of culture, character, personal ability and religious revival. It is therefore wrong to say that their lives are cramped and stunted by attending to the duties at home, and that no scope is given for their evolution and freedom. This is a sad mistake indeed.

The life of a woman is as noble and serious as that of a man. There is no doubt about this.

It is the women who keep up the life and happiness of the home through their smiles, tender affection, sweet speech, grace, angelic presence and charming personalities. The home will be a real void without them. It will lose its peculiar charm and beauty without their presence.

Women are the mothers of the home. The extraordinary ability, intellectual attainments and magnetic personalities of modern women are standing monuments of their undoubted equality with men. The personal influence of women at home is essential to unify the various interests of the family. It is women alone who can rear or nurse children. Hindu wives are queens of their own homes. The husbands should treat their wives with intense love and respect. They should be regarded as equals in all respects and held in the light of partners in life.

If a man earns and the wife stays at home, it does not mean that the woman is a parasite and a slave. She is indeed the builder of the nation. Verily, women exercise an authority over their husbands through their love, tenderness, affection, grace, beauty, selfless service, fidelity, purity and self-abnegation.

Source: http://www.hinduism.co.za/motherho.htm, 14th July 2006.

"Heterosexuality is Nature's Norm," says Sensible Lesbian Libertarian Camille Paglia
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | Send to a Friend

December 18, 2006

cam.jpg


Which brings us to another subject, the furor this past month over a report by psychiatrist Robert Spitzer of Columbia University that, from his rather cursory interviews with 153 men and 47 women, the "reparative therapy" endorsed by conservative Protestant groups can in some cases change sexual orientation from gay to straight. That Spitzer had helped to persuade the American Psychiatric Association to drop the classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973 makes his current study harder to dismiss.

Nevertheless, screeching gay activists immediately descended on the media to denounce and defame Spitzer as a tool of the far right. This was a good example of the fascist policing of public discourse in this country by nominal liberals who have become as unthinkingly wedded to dogma as any junior member of the Spanish Inquisition. Why should the fluidity of sexual orientation threaten any gay secure in his or her identity?

What gay ideologues, inflated like pink balloons with poststructuralist hot air, can't admit, of course, is that heterosexuality is nature's norm, enforced by powerful hormonal cues at puberty. In the past decade, one shoddy book after another, rapturously applauded by p.c. reviewers, has exaggerated the incidence of homosexuality in the animal world and, without due regard for reproductive adaptations caused by environmental changes, toxins or population pressure, reductively interpreted bonding or hierarchical behavior as gay in the human sense.

Because of the unblushing dishonesty of strident activists and campus "queer theorists," whose general knowledge of science would fit into Marie Antoinette's thimble, we are ironically further from understanding homosexuality than we were in 1970, when popular culture was moving into the seductive gender-bending era typified by the brilliant David Bowie. With the emphasis on external "politics," all respect for psychology has been lost. Did no one notice the grotesquely misogynous dialogue put into gay men's mouths on "Queer as Folk"? That kind of catty aversion to the female body is learned, not inborn, and it can be partly traced to early family relations, before personal memory has even gelled.

My political philosophy as a libertarian says that government has no business intervening in any consensual private behavior. My professional ethic as a thinker and writer, however, says that self-knowledge is our ultimate responsibility. In vicious attacks like the one on Spitzer, gay activists, with all their good intentions, are aligning themselves with the forces of ignorance and repression. Too little reliable work is currently being done in homosexuality because free inquiry cannot be conducted in a politicized atmosphere of harassment and intimidation.

May 2001 http://archive.salon.com/people/col/pag ... index.html
Visit ClubConspiracy.com
Henry Makow © 2006

Man, Ive always wanted to be the guy that does this!! the guy that has to quote a huge post, anyhow, I would agree with about half the post.

[Mr. North]

This statement;

A Woman’s place is in the home

more or less sums up the whole article.

[looproll]

what the hell is all this crap?

[cloudcounter]

Anti simitic drivel.
I am a christain zionist . And am going to take over the world right?
lol

[niss]

WWW = Vav Vav Vav = 666

F = 6
O = 15 = 1+5 = 6
X = 24 = 2+4 = 6

Quite the fucking stretch of the imagination.

Gentlemen....we have the answer....now lets make up the riddle.

[swede]

Check this out, and as an added bonus, it's written by a female - Feminism and the control of Womanhood.

http://www.newswithviews.com/Levant/nancy75.htm

[Hedley]

What's wrong with triple-six? Is it Very Bad?

[looproll]

Oh, damn! What happened to the tank of that RC-51!? Smash it in for stunting, or what? Nice aircraft.

[gowest]

excellent read swede