The Kotex-Industrial Complex II

Update 3: Vikram Gandhi, Kiran’s father, also has this on his resume:

Vikram is also a member of the Bretton Woods Committee, Washington DC, which plays an important role in promoting economic growth, reducing poverty and maintaining global financial stability.”

The Bretton Woods Committee is an annual meeting of  the leading figures of the financial world and the world of international policy-marking.

Gandhi is listed with his financial firm, VSG Capital Advisors.

Vikram Gandhi also leads Asha Impact, a non-profit involved in “impact investing,” which is another trendy term for investing in social uplift schemes, where there is a higher risk involved and a longer term horizon for returns.


Update 2: Kiran Gandhi’s father is Vikram Gandhi, an investment banker, whose professional background is described as follows on Wikipedia:

After a successful career in investment banking spanning more than two decades in New York and Hong Kong, he decided to return to India with the desire to actively participate in the development and growth of his country. [3] He also served as Vice-Chairman at Credit Suisse,[4] Co-Head of Global FIG at Morgan Stanley,[5] Country Head and President of Morgan Stanley India, Founding Member of Harvard University’s South Asia Initiative,[6] Co-founder of The Giving Back Foundation, Board Member at India Inclusive Innovation Fund – a US $1 billion Venture Capital Impact Investment Fund and Board of Director at Grameen Foundation appointed by Nobel Peace Prize winner Muhammad Yunus.[7]

He is also the member of Standing Council of experts to assess and make recommendations regarding the international competitiveness of Indian Financial Sector by Department of Finance, Ministry of Finance, Government of India.[8]

Vikram Gandhi and his wife have positioned themselves to profit from the growth in disposable income in the emerging markets.

With their clout in international financial circles, they stand positioned to influence the Indian government’s policies on international financial flows and investment.

There’s free-bleeding here, alright. But it’s not from Kiran Gandhi.

It’s from the Indian economy, the tax-payer (a small and brutalized class in India), small businessmen, and consumers, to Western investors.

“Free-bleeding” is marketing hype and just one more example of MANAGED capitalism at work.

Update 1:

Kiran Gandhi’s mother is Meera Gandhi (who is half Irish). She holds an MBA and is the CEO and founder of the Giving Back Foundation.

Private foundations have long been a favorite tool for the pursuit of long-term financial interests of families, circumventing government taxation and scrutiny.

Here are some of the charities that Gandhi’s Foundation supports:

Gandhi has supported charities with strong female leadership programs and workshops, in part because of the role models in her life: Hillary Clinton, Cherie Blair, and Gandhi’s own mother, an Irish woman living in India. These charities include the Cherie Blair Foundation for Women in the United Kingdom and the Eleanor Roosevelt Leadership Center in the United States.[5]”


Other charities Gandhi is involved with either directly or through her Foundation include the Happy Home and School for the blind in Mumbai, the Robert F. Kennedy Centre for Justice & Human Rights, the Cambodian Landmine Relief Fund, Centrepoint, Give to Colombia and The American Friends of Prince William and Prince Harry.[9]

That is the second direct link to the British ruling family (intermarried with the Rothschilds). The first one is Prince Charles’ leadership role in Water Aid, the NGO which was instrumental in making “free tampon distribution” government policy in India.

The Giving Back Foundation lists as its partners and affiliates a powerful group of non-profits (the ones in red are those which struck me the most):

Aid for Aids InternationalAlways Dream FoundationAsha Dan (Mother Teresa’s homes for orphans);  Asha FoundationAsia SocietyAUW (Asian University for Women Bangladesh);  Birch Wathen Lenox School (Aids);  Bono One/Red (Aids);  Boston University (graduate grant programs for travel and work);  Brain Trauma Foundation Brown University;  Cambodia Landmine Museum and Relief FundCancer Patients Aid AssociationCentrepoint (Friends of the Foundation of Prince William and Prince Harry);; Cherie Blair Foundation For Women;   Children’s Hope India in New York City;  Clinton Global Initiative;  Crafts CenterCRY (children’s rights);  Donna Karan’s Urban Zen (connects and collaborates in well-being, preserving cultures and inspiring changes);  Eleanor Roosevelt Leadership Center (ERLC);  FERI (Franklin Eleanor Roosevelt Institute;  Foundation Reach and Heal ProgramGlobal Ovarian CancerGrameen (microcredit financing);  Habitat for Humanity (building homes for the poor);  Happy Home and School for the Blind, Mumbai;  Harrow SchoolHema DoraHip Hop Youth Summit Council (bringing back literacy to young people in the Hip Hop culture);  Human Rights Watch;  I Create (children’s rights);  Indian Merchants’ ChamberInnocence in Danger (for abused children);;  Kalashiri School of ArtsKhel Shala PunjabKids for Kids in Hong KongKilkenny Day Care Center (Alzheimer’s Disease in Ireland);  Lavelle and Co. Girls’ Mentoring;;  Lighthouse For The BlindLoomba Foundation (assisting widows);  Mane AmericaMotor Neuron Disease AssociationNew York City BalletNew York Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (promoting family and education);  One To World (Fulbright) (bringing together diverse people);  The Play CompanyPratham (program for street children in India);  Resolve The National Infertility AssociationRFK Center for Human JusticeRoyal National Institute of the Deaf, (assisting the deaf in the UK);  Same Sky (educating village children in Africa);  Scenic HudsonSt. Michael’s Girls Hostel and School, Delhi;  Tails of Hope (eradicating diseases affecting companion dogs);  Thorntree (education for village children in Kenya);  Tiger TimeTropical Clinics, Kenya;  United World Colleges/Pearson School (bringing together diverse students);  Vendanta Academy in IndiaVersailles FoundationWaterkeeper AllianceThe Wayuu Taya Foundation (educating indigenous tribe in Venezuela;  Women’s Education Project;  and The Woodstock Film Festival among others.



Following up on my previous post about the Menstrual Meme that’s being pushed by the alternative media, I  took a look at the commercial interests behind the scenes.

Which company could be hooked up with the US government  back-stage of the Menstrual Meme?

Kiran Gandhi has come out endorsing “Thinx” (which is apparently the brain-child of another Indian-American, Miki Agrawal).

That’s why Gandhi is determined to raise awareness both of period shaming and lack of access to feminine products in developing countries. She’s now partnering with Thinx, a period underwear company that helps women stay dry while on the go, and AfriPads, which makes low-cost, reusable sanitary pads out of Uganda.”

Thinx donates to Afri-Pads for each sale it makes in the US. Both are attempts to compete for the $15 billion a year female hygiene industry:

In Uganda, Canadian Paul Grinvalds and American Sophia Klumpp believed that a reusable menstrual pad could be manufactured locally. The pad could be made to last a year or more with only hand washing, and be affordable to almost all Ugandan girls and women.

Following a pilot project in early 2009, a Dutch private equity investor saw the business and social potential of the idea. The investor, along with several others, provided the necessary capital—and AFRIpads was born. A.T. Kearney has supported the startup on a pro bono basis ever since.

Today, the company operates two factories with a combined staff of 60 employees, mostly rural Ugandan women, and is in talks to ship products in bulk to major nonprofit organizations, including World Vision, War Child Holland, United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF), Rotary International and United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). As AFRIpads grows, it plans to build its own distribution network and sell directly to consumers.

The demand for such a product in Africa and across the developing world is undeniable. A recent Credit Suisse economic study finds that 53 percent of the almost 700 million Indian women who earn less than $1,000 per year are likely to spend more money on menstruation hygiene products in the next 12 months, and similar spending trends are expected in China, Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

– See more at:


In addition, the “free-bleeding” movement has been pushing LunaPads, which makes reusable products for developing countries and also makes Diva Cups, which the media has been pushing through activist blogs.

When you read LunaPads’ site, you notice that Kofi Annan has endorsed them and that they work with NGO’s in dozens of developing nations:

Since its inception, in partnership with dozens of groups, individuals, and NGOs, Lunapads has helped provide over 14,000 girls and women in 17 nations with over 85,000 menstrual pads and/or menstrual underwear, giving them an immediate, essential and sustainable means to remain in school or at work. In addition to working closely with AFRIpads to support our One4Her program, we are also shareholders of AFRIpads, which has supplied over 500,000 girls and women with their reusable sanitary pad kits.

Visit our blog and read the PDFs below to learn more about the impact of out work with Pads4Girls.


In 2014 Pads4Girls joined United Girls of the World, a non-profit society also under Madeleine and Suzanne’s leadership. United Girls has a broader mandate, to assist in the area of critical issues affecting girls and women around the world, empowering them by providing the tools they need to develop positive self-esteem. Please visit the United Girls of the World website to learn about our other programs such as G Day for Girls.


To help us continue our work with Pads4Girls, please make a donation at the United Girls of the World website.

TAX RECEIPTSIf you are in Canada and would like to receive a Charitable Tax Receipt (for donations greater than CAD$25), please make your donation online at the Tides Canada Foundation. We are unable to issue Charitable Tax Receipts to US donors, unless they are greater than USD$1,000. If you are located in the US and would like to make a donation greater than USD$1,000, please contact us via email to make arrangements.


Pads4Girls has partnered with many different groups over the years to bring washable cloth pads to girls and women in the developing world, including:

So a whole network of influential and well-funded NGO’s distributing free reusable tampons in developing countries is behind the “Menstrual Meme”.
As non-profits, these NGOs encourage the public to donate to what they’re doing, the donations  being tax-exempt.

At the same time, at least one of them – AfriPads, which calls itself a “social business’ – has “shareholders” (people invested in the outfit) who belong to the company (LunaPads) that is selling products at a profit in the West.

Behind AfriPads are wealthy Dutch investors hoping for long-term returns.

Thus the “non-profit,” “social-service” angle acts as an excellent marketing tool for a Western for-profit company that is competing in the market in Asia and Africa, which is why Kiran Gandhi’s face is on the campaign.

Now, why not, if there is such a market?

Nothing wrong, if  these tampon companies were really competing, without the support of a manipulative, possibly intelligence-run campaign, demanding government subsidies and privileged treatment in the Western and Indian market.

How privileged?

Consider that LunaPads claims to be a private outfit, but it’s tied to heavily-subsidized NGO’s and social businesses that are using government and the media to push its interests.

At the same time, the government has been taxing their private competitors (Always and Kotex, for example), as non-essential.

Note: Earlier this year, after public pressure, the UK and Canadian governments both lifted the tax on sanitary products (hitherto described as “luxury” goods).

Now these two companies (Always and Kotex) may indeed be making sub-standard products, but that is for the market to decide.  The larger companies themselves, J&J in India, for instance, have benefited from private-public partnerships. The newer “green” companies are trying to get in, also in partnership with the governments, NGO’s, and international finance.

There’s also another, bigger problem.

On the other side of the equation, local Indian producers, like Arunachal Muruganathan, who put years into developing a cost-effective sanitary napkin that he sells in India, face subsidized competition from abroad and neglect from their own governments:

Muruganantham seemed set for fame and fortune, but he was not interested in profit. “Imagine, I got patent rights to the only machine in the world to make low-cost sanitary napkins – a hot-cake product,” he says. “Anyone with an MBA would immediately accumulate the maximum money. But I did not want to. Why? Because from childhood I know no human being died because of poverty – everything happens because of ignorance.”

He believes that big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas he prefers the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. “A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it,” he says.”

But, it seems when the Indian government, which, like Western governments, is now in the feminine hygiene business, set out to look for a partner, they didn’t pick Muruganantham, even though he won national recognition from the IIT’s (the prestigious technology institutes of the public sector) and from the government itself.

Instead, the Indian government picked partners from big business:

According to P C Vinoj Kumar, a journalist who was until recently working for Tehelka, the two major players in the Indian sanitary napkins market are P&G (who own the Whisper brand) and Johnson & Johnson (who own the Stayfree & Carefree brands). He says that the Government will most likely strike a public private partnership with them or a third player, Kimberly Clark Lever (a JV between Kimberly Clark & Unilever).

“What really ticked me off was when I heard that the Government was providing these napkins at a highly subsidized rate. This would mean that it would buy those napkins at a higher cost from elsewhere. What is the need of that, when my technology provides with a similar product at a cheaper price and at the same time generates a lot of rural employment,” says Muruganatham. Muruganatham laments that the newly announced central government scheme apart from involving a lot of corruption, will effectively kill an innovation that has the potential of providing employment to millions of Indians, especially women.”

How did that happen?

As always, the finger-prints of the Western ruling class can be spotted in the whole business.

First came the international intervention, with a foreign NGO’s pronouncement:

The surveys conducted by Unicef with the help of Nielsen India Private Limited and social organisations Vatsalya and Water Aid revealed that over 85% girls used old tattered clothes during menstruation. Almost half of the girls did not even wash the old cloth before using it, while an equal number re-used the cloth several times.”

Checking out Water Aid’s Wikipedia page, I find that it was set up as a charitable trust by none other than the UK’s “water industry.”

The charitable trust structure is the usual  – and legal – method whereby private interests can protect themselves from taxation.

Water Aid’s creation was in response to the UN’s Drinking Water & Sanitation decade (1981-1990) and its first president was Prince Charles, from the ruling Windsor family that is intermarried with the Rothschilds.

Water-Aid could not be any more obviously a face of the global world order.

And it is Water-Aid that has promoted the notion that the Indian government should have a program for free tampons.

That seems to explain why the Indian government didn’t partner with a local actor.

[Note: I don’t believe the government should be in the business of feminine hygiene in the first place.]

Likewise, in Africa, the Western NGOs’ are competing against local small businesses that are supplying the market, as well as against the big foreign brands, on which wealthier women have come to depend:

 Such projects haven’t been snag-free: Komera found Rwandan women were skeptical about the quality of cheap, locally-produced pads which didn’t look much like the imported brands they knew. Laadli has been excluded from the Indian government’s subsidised pads programme..

The Misandric Law has a great list of the growing list of legal sanctions imposed on men and men alone:

The List of Legal & Social Sanctions Against Men

“. . . . In the ’90s, we’ve entered a phase of “female chauvinism.” You see –and hear — female chauvinists everywhere — in movies, novels, on television and worst of all, in real life.

Such meanness does not go undetected by men.

The word “misandry” (hatred of men), in fact, is insinuating its way into the male vocabulary as a form of protest. Men’s organizations have long argued misandrists always focus on men as violent and abusive, and this has had dramatic effects on a man’s and/or father’s sense of self, their social valuation, and their potential for being criminalized.

Today’s men remain competitively individualistic, despite the growing trends that impose a frightening number of legal and social sanctions against masculinity per se. These sanctions have been initiated under the guise of “protecting” women and children.

Unlike women’s groups of the 60’s, men’s competitive individualism – a valuable quality in the protection of their family – has worked against them in developing the kind of networking needed for combating the criminalization of men as a class.

Sadly, most men will think these legal sanctions are focused on the other (really bad) guy, until they innocently encounter the system. Meanwhile, the misandric legislation is growing by leaps and bounds.

The following list exemplifies the growing body of laws and social sanctions against men:

Domestic Violence (VAWA – clearly unconstitutional legislation):

“A surprising fact has turned up in the grimly familiar world of domestic violence:

Women report using violence in their relationships more often than men. This is not a crack by some antifeminist cad; the information will soon be published by the Justice Department …”

legal representation and support available free to all women, not men.
recantation is not allowed in most jurisdictions
the physically “bigger” individual will be taken to jail

can be alleged and prosecuted via anonymous source

restraining orders are virtually automatic

loss of parental rights for the accused (read Dad)

loss of 2nd amendment rights (gun ownership)

risk of criminal charges and imprisonment

elevation from misdemeanor to felony consequences

does not provide punitive awards for false allegations


“few of these divorces involve grounds such as desertion, adultery or violence.

The most frequent reasons given are “growing apart” or “not feeling loved or appreciated.”

(Surveys consistently show that fathers are much more likely than mothers to believe parents should remain married.) ”

legal representation and support available free to many women, or must be paid by the husband/spouse. Not available to men

75% of all divorces are initiated by wives

nearly all divorces are initiated by wives when children are involved

false allegations of child or spouse abuse have become more frequent with presumed guilt issuing to the husband

loss of parental rights for the dad is an 87% probability

family courts can and do negate shared parenting

arrangements agreed to by divorcing spouses,

awarding physical custody to the mom
alimony: can be a lifetime award to the wife after five years of marriage

can mean a lifetime of court appearances and attorneys’ fees

child support awards are arbitrary and capricious,

but at minimum extract 35% of the dad’s net income

– and are constantly reviewed for income increases
loss of home and family is virtually assured for dads.”

More at


Ambassadors For Christ: Mtegemee Yesu

I just discovered Rwanda’s magnificent gospel choir, “Ambassadors for Christ.”

The song is Mtegemee Yesu.

Even in tough times, it says, trust in Jesus.

The subtitles are in English, but even without the translation from Swahili, the meaning comes through.

Rwanda is around 90% Christian, one of the many predominantly Christian African countries that make the continent a new bastion of Christianity, supplanting Europe.

Mtegemee Yesu

1. Mambo mengi yanakupata ndugu….yanayokuumiza moyo Hata ukimwomba Mungu waona…. kama vile amekutenga Maisha magumu shida tupu….. wabebeshwa dunia nzima unapapasa hapa na pale…. bila kuata msaada
2. umeanza kukata tamaa…. imani yako inayumbayumba unajisikia mpweke …..umeachwa kama yatima utokako ni mbali sana…… kiasi kwamba huwezi rudi mbele huendako nako giza….. umekosa matumaini Kiitikio Magumu shida yakupatayo ndugu…. ni ya muda kidogo kamwe yasikutenganishe na yule… rafiki wa kweli Hebu itegemee ahadi yake ….kwamba atakuwa nawe hata kwenye wakati huo mgumu….. mtegemee yesu
3. Umezongwa nazo shida nyingi…. lakini mkumbuke Ayubu Alivyozidiwa nayo majaribu…. alisimama imara Tabu yako imefanywa wimbo…. na waumini wenzako sawa na wale marafiki za ayubu …walivyomcheka
4. Usiruhusu shida yako… ikunyakue mikononi mwa bwana jibu lako ni yeye pekee…. tegemeo na kimbilio hata wenzako wakucheke…. vumilia utayashinda ndugu jipe moyo mtetezi yupo…. magumu atarahisisha


Political Zionism Is Esau

Back to Esau and Jacob.


Recently, famed Johns Hopkins neuro-surgeon Dr. Ben Carson has come out with the risible statement that the rationale for Isis is to be found in Genesis, in the tale of Esau and Jacob.

Indeed it is, only not in the way Dr. Carson intends it.

Anyone who has studied the matter with any integrity will immediately identify Esau in today’s world, because no less than the Jewish Encyclopedia has made the identification explicitly.


It admits that Esau (under the name of Edom, which means Red) is in Jewry.

That is to say, by the time of Jesus, the descendants of Esau were living as Judeans and Judahites, even though they were neither Jews nor Israelites by birth.


The word Jew when used to refer to a single ethno-religious community is a coinage from the nineteenth century.

There were no Jews, as we know them, before that time.

When the word Jew is inserted into the Bible, it is an anachronism.

At the time of Jesus, there were only Judahites (those who belonged to the tribes of Judah, one of the twelve tribes descended from Jacob’s twelve sons) and Judeans, people who lived in the kingdom of Judea.

Judea was the southern Israelite kingdom, which had split from its northern half and had gone into and captivity and returned, like its northern sister.

The word Judean does not identify a race any more than the word New Yorker identifies a race.

A New Yorker may be Chinese or African or Italian in ethnic origin. He gets his name from where he lives, not from his racial identity.

So also, the term Judean included people of all kinds of racial make-up, including many who had nothing to do with the original Israelites or Judahites and who were often sworn enemies of them.


One such enemy was Idumea, which is the Greek rendering of the word Edom.

Edom/Idumea is the region where the descendants of Esau lived and dominated  – a strong-hold in the mountains that includes the great city of Petra in Jordan.

As a nation, the Idumeans of Biblical times were the vicious and unrepentant enemies of the sons of Jacob, sacking, looting and attacking them at every turn.


God had given foreknowledge of this generational enmity to Rebecca, when Esau and Jacob were still twins in her womb.

He had let her know that the two would engender nations that would struggle with each other and that her second-born would eventually rule over her first-born.

This was prophetic knowledge, however, not predetermination, as Calvinists teach. God in no way forced Esau to play this unfortunate role.


From birth, Esau was marked for his carnal role.

He was covered with hair all over and reddish (Edom).

He was a hunter, fond of venison, fleshly in appetite, and careless of family tradition and piety.

From the New Testament, we learn that he was also sexually immoral and idolatrous.

From the Book of Jasher, an apocryphal text quoted by Jewish authorities, we learn that Esau was so great a hunter that he killed King Nimrod of Babylon and seized from him the garments that God wove for Adam and Eve when they found themselves naked.

These magical vestments had been passed down from the first family, through Seth, to Noah, to Ham, Cush and then to Nimrod and they bestowed the power of conquest on their possessor.


In Genesis, Nimrod is the legendary warrior-king of Babylon who seeks to challenge the heavens with his mighty tower of Babel.

He is a type of anti-Christ and thus of Satan.

[I will explain in another post why I think the equation with Esau and Satan/Serpent is misleading and dangerous and is one often made by people who have a racist agenda – either against Gentiles (if they are Jews) or against Jews/non-whites (if they are Aryan supremacist) or against whites (if they are black supremacists).

Each of the groups I’ve mentioned likes to equate Esau with whichever group they want to claim is genetically Satanic.

But Esau is not descended from Satan (however he is conceived and with whatever validity).

All of mankind today is descended from Noah, who was considered perfect by God, drunkenness and all.

Esau is  DELUDED by Satan, which is quite a different thing.]

Thus, by association and by the possession of the magic garments, Esau becomes an anti-Christ type (repeat, TYPE) as well.

[Note: The notion that there is a single “anti-Christ” who will oppose God at the end is not even in the Bible, which mentions the anti-Christ spirit, and also, Satan, a red dragon, a beast (two, actually) and a whore (of Babylon), but really doesn’t posit a figure called Anti-Christ, in the modern sense.]


According to the Book of Jasher – which, keep in mind, is apocryphal and part of Rabbinical lore and not canonic – it is after the slaying of Nimrod that Esau sells his birthright for the red pottage (lentils), because, believing absolute power to be in his grasp, he has no use for the mere birth-right.

Not knowing (or caring) that the birth-right includes the honor of siring the Messiah, he chooses instead worldly power and his belly, proving himself unworthy, as God had predicted to Rebecca.

Genesis tells us that Esau disobeyed God’s covenant with his forefathers and intermarried with Hittite women. [The Hittites were the descendants of Heth.]

Esau also intermarried  with the family of Ishmael and with the Canaanites, who practiced such vile customs as child sacrifice and ritual prostitution.

Genesis mentions how much sorrow Esau’s disobedience and his foreign wives caused Isaac and Rebecca. They did not want all they had striven for to be dissipated and lost in the houses of inimical in-laws.

This is no doubt the reason the anxious mother used such wiles to deprive her unworthy first-born of the primogeniture.


Jacob, her second-born, was no saint, of course.

He allowed his mother to manipulate him into cheating his father and then engaged in trickery himself against her brother, Laban, also a wily man.

But Jacob, who is described as a “mild” man, was true to his father’s traditions and to the Abrahamic covenant.

He didn’t practice idolatry or intermarry with the vicious Canaanites. So God was able to shape him to his destiny and eventually make him Isra-el – a prince (Isra) of God (El), or by virtue of God.


The story of Jacob and Esau is used by St Paul to reprimand Jews who did not want to admit Gentiles into the company of believers in Jesus.

Jacob, he said, was a type of the Gentile believer. Esau was a type of the Jewish unbeliever.

Just as the Jews had the law and racial descent on their side, Esau had the law of primogeniture on his. Yet, Esau was indifferent to his privilege, just as unbelieving Jews were indifferent to the privilege of birthing the Messiah.

Thus, God had given salvation to the “second-born” – the Gentiles, as he had given the birth-right to the second-born, Jacob.


But, in a more literal way too, Esau is in Jewry.

By the first and second century before Christ, the Edomites/Idumeans had been forcibly converted to Judaism from their Canaanitish ways.

Many had been circumcised and were indistinguishable from Jews by external appearance.

However,  they were not true Israel, either by tribal descent, nor in their hybrid customs.

They worshiped “they know not what,” as Jesus put it, preferring their own customs and “traditions of men” over the true teachings of Torah.

Many of the Pharisees and Sadducees who attacked Jesus were not Jews by birth, as he himself noted.


Remarkably, Jesus was not a Judahite either.

[I have corrected this statement below]

Jesus was a Levite (a descendant of Jacob’s son Levi) on his mother’s side  (since Mary was the cousin of Elizabeth, wife of Zacharaiah, the Levitical priest).

And he was grafted onto the house of Judah (the most famous of Jacob’s twelve sons) on his father’s side.

Thus, he was an Israelite by descent on both accounts.

[Added: Researching this a bit more, I find that the two genealogies – in Mark and in Luke – are taken to be genealogies of Mary, not Joseph, even though Joseph’s name is inserted into them.

This is because Joseph was adopted by Mary’s father, Heli, since he had no sons to inherit his property.

This makes Jesus descend from BOTH the Levitical line (the priestly line) and the Judahite (the kingly line).]

On the other hand, was Jesus NOT a Judean. He lived in Galilee, not Judea.

[Added: However, the Gospels note that he was born in Bethlehem of Judea, which is connected to David and the messianic prophecy.]

IMPORTANT CORRECTION (added 10/8/2015): The House of Judah (as opposed to the tribe of Judah) included Judah, Levi, and Benjamin, so that Jesus DOES belong to both the priestly and the ruling line of Israel, through his mother, which is the descent that makes him a Jew legally.]


Jesus’s unclear parentage and his residence in Nazareth and Galilee were the reasons why many Judeans did not see Jesus as the Jewish messiah.

Ironically, these skeptics were often not Judahites or Israelites themselves.

They were often Samaritans, Idumeans, and Canaanites.

For instance, the Herodians and Zealots were Idumeans with Idumea’s violent, revolutionary spirit.

It was these Edomite-Jewish rebels who, in the century after Jesus’ crucifixion, provoked Rome into crushing the Jews and destroying the Temple of Jerusalem (Herod’s temple) in 70 AD.

With the end of Temple worship, the Old Testament Jewish world was destroyed once and for all.

This was the judgment of the last days (of the Old Covenant) that Jesus predicted so accurately.


The descendants of these pseudo-Jewish Edomites are arguably a major (or substantial) part of the modern Talmudic/Rabbinal tradition that is now regarded, erroneously, as the rebirth of Biblical Israel.

This being the case, since the Idumeans do not descend from Jacob, contemporary Ashkenazy Jews at least cannot be direct genetic descendants of ancient Israel.

Of course, genetics is beside the point.


Biblical Israel was always a nation of “promise” and “faith,” first and foremost.

In so far as modern Zionists are either Kabbalists/Talmudists who reject Jesus as a blasphemer and reprobate or communists who consider religion a fraud they cannot by definition be true “Israel,” even if they were descended directly from Abraham.


Jesus made that very point to his enemies when he called them children of the Serpent.

[This term has had its own malign legacy.

Christian Identity and some other groups have taken this to mean that contemporary Jews – a mixed-race of  Euro-Turco-Mongolic people with genetic affinity to the Idumeans – are descended from Satan/the Serpent, which is surely a thoroughly racist and dangerous notion.

But, as I will show in other posts, the imprecations Jesus pronounced on his critics had NOTHING  to do with racial/genetic descent.

They had to do with the absence of faith in the unseen/spiritual kingdom to which he was trying to lead them. 

By accusing them of descent from “their father, the devil,” he was accusing them of moral affinity/moral descent, not a blood-line connection.

It was a moral pronouncement, not a thesis on DNA.

Esau, after all  was a child of Abraham. What did that get him?]

In short, contemporary “Israel” with its blood-line claim is a religious imposter, credible only to people who choose to ignore the very texts from which “Israel” claims authority.


Zionist Anglo-Israel and the Sanhedrin that has orchestrated her rise to world dominion are Esau incarnate.

They are his spiritual (and likely, genetic) descendants.

They are heirs only in name and not in truth to the religion whose mantle they ostentatiously wear.

Nonetheless, because Isaac did in the end give Esau one blessing, their charade has been allowed its moment in history.

It will collapse soon.

Just as that ancient blessing that Esau cadged was an empty one because its substance had already been taken by the one who knew its worth, Jacob, so also political Zion is an empty spectacle.

The kingdom it seeks today has already met its true ruler…. two thousand years ago.



Filthy America: Baby Chop Shops

Planned Parenthood Sacrifices Babies & Sells Their Body Parts

h/t to Rush Limbaugh for the term, “baby chop shops”


The pro-life advocates behind the four shocking videos exposing Planned Parenthood selling the body parts of aborted babies for research have released a 5th video today that catches a Planned Parenthood official discussing how the abortion business sells “fully intact” aborted babies.

The video, which follows Senate Democrats defeating a bill to de-fund Planned Parenthood, makes it appear the Planned Parenthood abortion business may be selling the “fully intact” bodies of unborn babies purposefully born alive and left to die.

Planned Parenthood could be breaking the federal law known as the Born Alive Infants Protection Act that requires abortion clinics, hospitals and other places that do abortions to provide appropriate medical care for a baby born alive after a failed abortion or purposefully birthed to “let die.” That would be one of the potential ways Planned Parenthood could produce a “fully intact” baby to sell to StemExpress for research. Most “crunchy” abortion methods would do damage to the baby’s body.

The fifth undercover video in the controversy over Planned Parenthood’s sale of aborted baby parts shows the Director of Research for Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, Melissa Farrell, advertising the Texas Planned Parenthood branch’s track record of fetal tissue sales, including its ability to deliver fully intact aborted babies.”

Lila: Please note that Planned Parenthood sells itself to the public, which supports it with tax dollars, as a “family planning” outfit that counsels pregnant women. In practice, it is an abortion mill.