Thursday, August 31, 2017

Lincoln Unmasked

Lincoln Unmasked
Lincoln Met With Hitler’s Approval
Lincoln’s Great Immoral Crusade
Lincoln Unmasked
“Harry Jaffa, the dean of what DiLorenzo calls the “Lincoln cultists,” has more than once compared the Southern cause to that of Nazi Germany. DiLorenzo embarrasses Jaffa in this book by pointing out passages in Hitler’s Mein Kampf in which the German leader expressed both his support for Lincoln’s war and his unwavering opposition to the cause of states’ rights and political decentralization (which, as a dictator seeking absolute power, he naturally sought to overturn in Germany). Hitler even adopted Lincoln’s fanciful retelling of American history in which the states were creatures of the Union rather than vice versa.”

October 12, 2006
Thomas DiLorenzo’s The Real Lincoln (2002) was as much an event as it was a book. Here was a brutally frank treatment of a political figure we are all expected to treat with a quiet awe, and certainly not with the kind of serious and sustained scrutiny reserved for mere mortals. With every major aspect of the standard narrative that students are taught about Lincoln laughably and grotesquely false, this book was a shocking reminder of suppressed truths. It sold extremely well, managing the truly astonishing feat of reaching number two in Amazon sales rank in the face of (surprise!) a complete media blackout. That kind of success, in the absence of a major marketing and publicity campaign, is almost completely unheard of.
In the wake of his last book, How Capitalism Saved America, DiLorenzo has returned to Lincoln once more in the brand new Lincoln Unmasked. Although readers should without a doubt read both books, Lincoln Unmasked is in some ways even more incisive and relentless than The Real Lincoln. To get an idea of this latest book’s breadth, consider just some of its chapter titles: "The Lincoln Myths — Exposed," "Fake Lincoln Quotes," "The Myth of the Morally Superior u2018Yankee,’" "An Abolitionist Who Despised Lincoln," "The Truth about States’ Rights," "Lincoln’s Big Lie," "A u2018Great Crime’: The Arrest Warrant for the Chief Justice of the United States," "The Great Railroad Lobbyist," "The Great Protectionist," "The Great Inflationist," "Lincolnite Totalitarians," "The Lincoln Cult on Imprisoning War Opponents," and "Contra the Lincoln Cult."
The reader of Lincoln Unmasked is in for a great many mischievous pleasures. Consider: Harry Jaffa, the dean of what DiLorenzo calls the "Lincoln cultists," has more than once compared the Southern cause to that of Nazi Germany. DiLorenzo embarrasses Jaffa in this book by pointing out passages in Hitler’s Mein Kampf in which the German leader expressed both his support for Lincoln’s war and his unwavering opposition to the cause of states’ rights and political decentralization (which, as a dictator seeking absolute power, he naturally sought to overturn in Germany). Hitler even adopted Lincoln’s fanciful retelling of American history in which the states were creatures of the Union rather than vice versa.
In Germany, Hitler promised that the Nazis "would totally eliminate states’ rights altogether: Since for us the state as such is only a form, but the essential is its content, the nation, the people, it is clear that everything else must be subordinated to its sovereign interests. In particular we cannot grant to any individual state within the nation and the state representing it state sovereignty and sovereignty in point of political power." Thus the "mischief of individual federated states…must cease and will some day cease…. National Socialism as a matter of principle must lay claim to the right to force its principles on the whole German nation without consideration of previous federated state boundaries." Which side was the Nazi one again, Professor Jaffa?
DiLorenzo punctures all the typical Lincoln myths (about slavery, the war, and so on) and then some. One example will have to suffice: Lincoln’s admirers then and now, anxious to show him to be a convinced Christian, claim that Lincoln exclaimed, after viewing the graves at Gettysburg: "I then and there consecrated myself to Christ. Yes, I do love Jesus!" The trouble is, the quotation is phony: Lincoln never said anything like it. By all accounts a skeptic, Lincoln had to be transformed by his supporters into a respectable, pious Christian. No wonder one astute clergyman observed that Lincoln became a Christian "six months after his death."
One of the most important contributions of Lincoln Unmasked is its treatment of how the Lincoln myth is employed today. The Lincoln legacy can be and has been cited on behalf of all manner of political atrocities, from the decimation of civil liberties to the waging of war against civilian populations. The religious veneer of Lincoln’s political rhetoric seared into the American consciousness the idea of the U.S. government as an instrument of God’s will, to be employed without mercy against any force so impious as to resist it. This conception of the federal government works even for politicians who might feel uncomfortable with openly religious language: the idea of a righteous central authority steamrolling all opposition — ipso facto wicked and perverse, of course — as part of the inevitable forward march of history fits quite nicely into just about any nationalist agenda, left or right. This is why the Lincoln myth is so stubborn, so resistant to evidence, and so difficult to overturn: the entire American political class has a vital stake in its preservation.
Eric Foner, the Marxist professor of history who has spent much of his career at Columbia University, has even cited Lincoln on behalf of the preservation of the Soviet Union. DiLorenzo cites a February 1991 article in The Nation called "Lincoln’s Lesson," in which Foner denounced the secession movements in Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Georgia, and called upon Mikhail Gorbachev to suppress them with the same ruthlessness Lincoln showed the South. According to Foner, no "leader of a powerful nation" should tolerate "the dismemberment of the Soviet Union." "The Civil War," he explained with approval, "was a central step in the consolidation of national authority in the United States." And then: "The Union, Lincoln passionately believed, was a permanent government. Gorbachev would surely agree." For all the talk about slavery, there it is in a nutshell: the "Civil War" and Lincoln’s legacy involved the violent suppression of independence, exactly what Foner wanted to see in the Soviet Union. What better condemnation of Lincoln could we ask for?
With Christmas now on the horizon, I urge readers not merely to buy and read this book. Buy ten copies and give them as gifts. Our political and intellectual establishments thrive on lies and propaganda, and they hate nothing more than someone who exposes them, revealing them for the liars and ignoramuses they are. That is why they hate Thomas DiLorenzo and why we owe him our respect, and our thanks.
This article will appear in the winter issue of Southern Partisan magazine and is printed here with permission.
Professor Thomas E. Woods, Jr. [view his websitesend him mail] holds a bachelor’s degree in history from Harvard and his Ph.D. from Columbia. He is senior fellow in American history at the Ludwig von Mises Institute. His books include How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization (get a free chapter here), The Church and the Market: A Catholic Defense of the Free Economy, and the New York Times bestseller The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History.

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

Liberal/progressive/left neo-nazis now ban the historic movie “Gone With The Wind”

Liberal/progressive/left neo-nazis now ban the historic movie “Gone With The Wind”

Liberal/progressive/left neo-nazis now ban the historic movie “Gone With The Wind”

'Gone with the Wind' – Latest effort to ‘rewrite American history’ hits Memphis theater

Refusing to show such a historically significant film is an example of trying to rewrite America’s history: it should be shown and talked about and not called insensitive, says writer and political activist Jeffrey Mark Klein.
After targeting monuments commemorating the lives of Confederate leaders, the split in US society is now moving to the world of the big screen.
After targeting monuments commemorating the lives of Confederate leaders, the split in US society is now moving to the world of the big screen.
The Orpheum Theater in Memphis, Tennessee said it would cancel its annual showing of the 1939 classic movie 'Gone with the Wind.' Directed by Victor Fleming, the film about love during the Civil War, which grabbed eight Academy Awards, has been accused of being “racist and insensitive” by some people.
The theater remained rather vague about the number of people who disagreed with the showing of the film, saying only they had “numerous comments” from viewers.
Based on Margaret Mitchell's 1936 novel, the film is set on a Southern plantation during the Civil War and Reconstruction periods.
Canceling the showing after 34 consecutive years of being featured at The Orpheum fired up social media. Some tweets were accompanied with the hashtag #HattieMcDaniel after the actress, who played the house maid Mammy. For her role in the film, McDaniel became the first African American to win an Academy Award.
The film's producer, Daniel O. Selznick, reportedly collaborated closely with the black community to avoid any accusations of racism.
RT talked to writer and political activist Jeffrey Mark Klein who suggest that, from monuments to award-winning movies, the country's left-wing is trying to rewrite American history.
“It is funny that they say it is insensitive only because we are talking about two different time periods for historical context,”Klein told RT. “The movie itself was made in the 1930s, so historically that movie was not only acceptable but very well received in the 30s. And the movie itself takes place in the 1860s".
Klein agreed the film is insensitive is “pretty accurate for the time period in which the movie takes place,” it seems “weird”to hear those same arguments many decades later. There is also the question as to whether the theater management, with the bottom line as its main consideration, succumbed to pressure from a small group of individuals who found the film somehow racist.
It is a sad thing… It is really odd, if you think about it. Over here our artistic community…is fond of pushing the envelope of what is culturally acceptable, what is the norm, trying to break taboos, trying to get people to think differently about life. We are not going to change history. We have in our country this sad legacy and for many decades slavery was lawful in the US. I don’t think we can wish that away. I don’t think we should cover it up. I think we should learn from that mistake. - political analyst and writer Charles Ortel, to RT.
“If they had patrons tell them we don’t want to see ‘Gone with the Wind’ and those patrons voices outweigh the voices of the patrons who want to see ‘Gone with the Wind’, then as a business owner they just need to make whatever decision is going to make them the most money,” he said. “But if they are just giving into a few loud people who are claiming ‘Gone with the Wind’ is bad, I think that is stupid.”
Regarding the historical feat of Hattie McDaniel, who starred as a house servant in the film, being the first black person to win an Oscar, the "movie has very historical significance even just for that fact”
“A lot of the people that claim this movie is insensitive care so much about identity politics, they should be excited about the fact that Hattie McDaniel is an Oscar winner because of this movie. They should want this movie not only shown but talked about all the time. It is almost hypocritical not to show it,” he continued.
There is also the question of the film's place in history, which certainly cannot be denied.
“Gone with the Wind’ is ... a cinematic feat; it progressed film forward both in terms of the art of filmmaking, the art of storytelling and progressiveness".
And indeed if we going to care about slavery in 2017, it still exists in parts of Africa, in parts of the Middle East, maybe in Asia. Instead of doing something so silly as to barring a play, we ought to decide how much of America’s resources and our allies resources might be dedicated finally to wiping slavery out from the face of the Earth once and for all. This is a kind of story that will get airtime and attention in the mainstream media, though I suspect it deserves criticism rather than adulation. - political analyst and writer Charles Ortel
Asked how such a film could find itself on the wrong side of history, so to speak, Klein suggested it is a "reaction" to the recent protests that rocked Charlottesville and Berkley.
This, he said, amounted to an attempt to "rewrite America's history," which he called "wrong."
"I feel like most people recognize the removal of historical statues seems to be an attempt to rewrite America’s history and not showing a historically significant movie would also be an example of trying to rewrite America’s history. I think it is a similar type of reaction, but I think it is the wrong reaction.”
Finally, there remains the possibility that the management of the theater is "afraid that radical left groups like Antifa are going to show up and destroy the theater if they show a movie like ‘Gone with the Wind’ because it may be deemed culturally insensitive, despite the fact that it is very culturally significant…
Radical left groups are known to act very irrationally, especially in the face of logic and accurate American history,” Klein concluded.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Why Does The New York Times Hate White People?

Why Does The New York Times Hate White People?
Why Does The New York Times Hate White People?

Monday, August 28, 2017

Gilad Atzmon Explains the Murder of the West by Identity Politics

 Gilad Atzmon Explains the Murder of the West by Identity Politics
Gilad Atzmon Explains the Murder of the West by Identity Politics

Strange, isn’t it, that one Jew, Gilad Atzmon, understands the dire situation of the Western World far better than does the entirety of the Western intellectual class, including its large Jewish component.
Read this and if you are successful in doing so, that is, not too handicapped by the low level of education to which Western “education” has degenerated, you will understand very much.
It is likely that Identity Politics has put the Western World into a situation from which recovery is impossible. All the rest of the world need do is to wait.
By Gilad Atzmon

In my recent book Being in Time – a Post Political Manifesto, I pointed out that the West and America in particular have been led into a disastrous Identity (ID) clash. This week in Virginia we saw a glimpse of it.
In the book I argue that the transition from traditional Left ideology into New Left politics can be understood as the aggressive advocacy of sectarian and divisive ideologies. While the old Left made an effort to unite us all: gays, blacks, Jews or Whites into a political struggle against capital, the New Left has managed to divide us into ID sectors. We are trained to speak ‘as a…’: ‘as a Jew,’ ‘as a black,’ ‘as a Lesbian.’ The new left has taught us to identify with our biology, with our gender, sex orientation and our skin colour, as long as it isn’t ‘White’ of course.
In Being in Time, I noted that it was a question of time before White people would also decide to identify with their biology. And this is exactly what we saw in Virginia last weekend. 
Tragically, ID politics is a vey dangerous political game. It is designed to pull people apart. It is there to introduce conflict and division. ID politics doesn’t offer a harmonious vision of society as a whole. Quite the opposite, it leads to an increasingly fractured social reality. Take, for instance, the continuous evolution of the LGBT group. It is constantly expanding to include more and more sectarian sexually oriented social subgroupings (LGBTQ, LGBTQAI and even LGBTQIAP ).
In the New Left social reality, we, the people are shoved into ID ghettos that are defined by our biology: skin colour, sexual orientation, the Jewish mother, etc.
Instead of what we need to do: fight together against big money, the bankers, the megacorporations, we fight each other, we learn to hate each other. We even drive our cars over each other.
I am opposed to all forms of ID politics, whether it is White, Black, Jewish, Gender or sex oriented. But, obviously if Jews, Gays and others are entitled to identify with their ‘biology’, white people are entitled to do the same. I think that universalism is what we used to call it when we still cared about intellectual integrity.
The problem created by ID politics is extremely grave. ID politics doesn’t offer a prospect of peace and harmony. Within the context of ID politics, we cannot envisage a peaceful resolution of the current ID clash. Can anyone foresee the LGBT community embracing KKK activists into their notion of ‘diverse society?’ The same can be said about the KKK, are they going to open their gates to cultural Marxists? 
ID politics equals ID clash, an irreconcilable conflict with no end, the complete destruction of American and, to a certain extent, Western civilisation.  This may explain why George Soros and his open society are invested in this battle. As long as the working people are fighting each other, no one bothers to challenge the root cause of our current dystopia, namely the banks, global capitalism, wall street, Mammonism and so on.
The remedy is clear. America and the West must, at once, break away from all forms of ID politics. Instead of celebrating that which separates us, we must seek what unites and makes us into one people.  I am advocating a radical spiritual, ideological and metaphysical transition. Whether or not we like to admit it, these moments of unity are often invoked by waves of patriotism, nationalism and religious figures. But they could also be inspired by the spirit of justice, equality, compassion and love.  Neither the New Left or the Alt Right offers any of the above. They are equally invested in Identitarian ideologies. The electoral success of Trump, Corbyn and even Sanders or Le Pen points at a general human fatigue.  Readiness for change is in the air.

The Identitarian Shift & the Primacy of the Symptom

(Being in Time – a Post Political Manifesto  pg. 49)

ID politics manifests itself as a set of group identification strategies. It subdues the ‘I’ in favour of symbolic identifiers: the ring on the appropriate ear, the nose stud, the type of skullcap, the colour of the scarf and so on.
Within the ID political cosmos, newly emerging ‘tribes’ (gays, lesbians, Jews, Blacks, Whites,vegans, etc.) are marched into the desert, led towards an appealing ‘promised land’, where the primacy of the symptom (gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, skin colour etc.) is supposed to evolve into a world in itself. But this liberal utopia is in practice a sectarian and segregated amalgam of ghettos that are blind to each other. It has nothing in common with the promised universal, inclusive cosmos.
‘The personal is political,’ as the common feminists and liberal preachers have disseminated since the 1960s, is a phrase designed to disguise the obvious; the personal is actually the antithesis of the political. It is, in fact, the disparity between the personal and the political that makes humanism into an evolving exchange known as history. Within the Identitarian discourse, the so-called ‘personal’ replaces true and genuine individualism with phony group identification – it suppresses all sense of authenticity, rootedness and belonging, in favour of a symbolism and imaginary collectivism that is supported by rituals and empty soundbites.Why are we willing to subject ourselves to politics based on biology, and who wrote this new theology found in pamphlets and in the growing numbers of ID Studies textbooks? Is there a contemporaneous God? And who created the ‘pillar of cloud’ we are all to follow?
It is clear that elements within the New Left, together with Jewish progressives and liberal intelligentsia, have been at the heart of the formation of the ideological foundation of ID politics. At least traditionally, both Jewish liberals and the Left were associated with opposition to any form of exclusive political agenda based on biology or ethnicity. Yet, one may wonder why does the New Left espouse such an exclusivist, sectarian and biologically driven agenda?

Social Media is A Tool of the CIA

Social Media is A Tool of the CIA
Social Media is A Tool of the CIA
Professor Michel Chossudovsky

Social Media is A Tool of the CIA: “Facebook, Google and Other Social Media Used to Spy on People”
Global Research, August 28, 2017
A CBS news article published in 2011 entitled “Social Media Is a Tool of the CIA. Seriously”  reveals the “unspoken truth” which the mainstream media including CBS have failed to address. 
The CIA is  “using Facebook, Twitter, Google (GOOG) and other social media to spy on people.”
This article published by CBS refutes the lies of the MSM (and CBS). It confirms the insidious relationship between the CIA, the Search Engines,  Social Media and major advertising conglomerates: “You don’t need to wear a tinfoil hat to believe that the CIA is using Facebook, Twitter, Google (GOOG) and other social media to spy on people. That’s because the CIA publishes a helpful list of press releases [link inactive] on all the social media ventures it sponsors, via its technology investment arm In-Q-Tel. …
The report acknowledges that “privacy” is threatened by the advertisers, yet at the same time these advertisers are “in bed with the CIA”,  acting on behalf and in liaison with US intelligence.
Screenshot of CBS article
The Privatization of Spying
Spying on individuals is a highly profitable undertaking for private companies on contract to the CIA, NSA, Homeland Security. The CBS report suggests in no uncertain terms that the personal information pertaining to millions of Americans collected by one of the World’s largest ad agencies is sold to the CIA. 
THE INVESTMENT ARMS of the CIA and Google are both backing a company that monitors the web in real time — and says it uses that information to predict the future.
The company is called Recorded Future, and it scours tens of thousands of websites, blogs and Twitter accounts to find the relationships between people, organizations, actions and incidents — both present and still-to-come. In a white paper, the company says its temporal analytics engine “goes beyond search” by “looking at the ‘invisible links’ between documents that talk about the same, or related, entities and events.”
Screenshots of Wired News report
Freedom of Expression
Social Media and Search engines are being used to Spy on Americans! But not only on Americans. The process of personal data collection is worldwide.
What is at stake, however, is not only the issue of “Privacy”. The online search engines also constitute an instrument of online media censorship.  
Google has introduced algorithms intended to downgrade independent and alternative media. In this regard, the Guardian reported (December 2016) on “How Google’s search algorithm spreads false information with a rightwing bias. 
Screenshot of Guardian article
Independent online media is targeted. Freedom of Expression on internet based news outlets is being routinely shunted by Google:
“New data compiled by the World Socialist Web Site, with the assistance of other Internet-based news outlets and search technology experts, proves that a massive loss of readership observed by socialist, anti-war and progressive web sites over the past three months has been caused by a cumulative 45 percent decrease in traffic from Google
Below are excerpts of the CBS News 2011 article, to read the entire article click here:
The world’s largest database on individuals
One of the main threats to privacy comes from advertisers, who want to track everything consumers do on the web and scrape their online accounts for personal information. It shouldn’t be surprising, therefore, to learn that the CIA and the worlds largest ad agency network, WPP (WPPGY), have been in bed together on a social media data-mining venture since at least January 2009. WPP currently claims to own the world’s largest database of unique individual profiles — including demographic, financial, purchase and geographic histories. WPP’s Visible Technologies unit took an investment from In-Q-Tel in fall of 2009. Visible Technologies develops tools that can scan social media networks such as Twitter and Facebook. …
Google and CIA: old friends 
Are you seeing a trend yet? Google (GOOG) has been a partner with the CIA since 2004 when the company bought Keyhole, a mapping technology business that eventually became Google Earth. In 2010, Google and In-Q-Tel made a joint investment on a company called Recorded Future, which has the Minority Report-style goal of creating a “temporal analytics engine” that scours the web and creates curves that predict where events may head.
Google is already helping the government write, and rewrite, history. Here, from its transparency report, are some stats on the amount of information it has either given to the government or wiped from the web based on requests by U.S. agencies:
  • 4,601 requests from U.S. government agencies for “user data
  • Google complied with government requests for user data 94% of the time.
  • 1,421 requests for “content removal
  • Google complied with content removal requests 87% of the time.
  • 15 requests were from “executive, police etc.”
  • 1 was a national security request.
emphasis added. To Read the complete CBS News article by Jim Edwards click here  

The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Prof Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, 2017


Click image


(China, France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States)


Larry Romanoff,

contributing author

to Cynthia McKinney's new COVID-19 anthology

'When China Sneezes'

When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis

manlio + maria


Read more at Moon of Shanghai

World Intellectual Property Day (or Happy Birthday WIPO) - Spruson ...

Moon of Shanghai

J. Bacque

20 questions to Putin

President of Russia Vladimir Putin:

Address to the Nation

Address to the Nation.

The President of Russia delivered the Address to the Federal Assembly. The ceremony took place at the Manezh Central Exhibition Hall.

January 15, 2020

State of the Nation


“Copyright Zambon Editore”



De Hiroshima até hoje: Quem e como nos conduzem à catástrofe





Um auto retrato surpreendentemente sincero do Presidente da Rússia, Vladimir Putin



Personagens Principais em 'Na Primeira Pessoa'

Parte Um: O Filho

Parte Dois: O Estudante

Parte Três: O Estudante Universitário

Parte Quatro: O Jovem especialista

Parte Cinco: O Espia

Parte Seis: O Democráta

Parte Sete: O Burocrata

Parte Oito: O Homem de Família

Parte Nove: O Político

Apêndice: A Rússia na Viragem do Milénio

Daniele Ganser


Subtitled in EN/PT

Click upon the small wheel at the right side of the video and choose your language.


“Glory to God in the highest,

and on Earth

Peace, Good Will toward men.”

This Christmas, Give Peace