Category Archives: Media

Moral Melodrama Of Migrant Crisis

Posted on by

From the always insightful Brendan O’Neill at Spiked.com:

This media-orchestrated moral drama, complete with invasive photos of dead children, highly inappropriate comparisons with the Holocaust, and the performative piety of politicians and the Twitterati holding up pro-refugee placards or promising to open their homes to migrants, confirms that what ought to be a democratic discussion — the question of what caused this crisis and where refugees should go — has been reduced to an opportunity for virtue-advertising in which rational thought and public engagement are positively frowned upon.

The most striking thing about the outburst of ostentatious concern for the refugees is its bad faith. What is presented to us as a sad humanitarian disaster that somehow materialised over the past seven days is in fact traceable to the disintegration of the Middle East over the past five years and the hollowing-out of 50 years worth of state structures in Libya and the knock-on destabilising effect that had across north Africa — globe-shaking events which our governments in the West played no small part in bringing about. ……

Indeed, the value of the refugees seems to lie in the extent to which, through playing dutiful humanitarian victims, they might help Western politicians assume the role of smiling saviour and in the process repair their flagging moral authority. It’s well known that sections of the hard right have a tendency to dehumanise asylum seekers, treating the complex human beings who cross borders as an amorphous threat. Over the past week we have seen that the other side in this discussion, those who pose as friends of migrants, also play the dehumanisation game. Where the right criminalises migrants, liberals infantilise them, reducing them from moral agents who have made a decision to migrate to childlike victims in need of rescue by virtuous Westerners. The much-shared, wept-over photo of three-year-old Aylan Kurdi spoke to the new Western view of the migrant: as hapless, helpless; pathetic; children requiring our care. The hard right juxtaposes itself to the threatening migrant; the pseudo-humanitarian left presents itself as lifesaver to the childish migrant. Both sides dehumanise them, for self-serving reasons.”

Privacy Expert Questions Europe’s Migrant Crisis

Posted on by

Privacy Surgeon.com:

I’m starting to believe the so-called “migration crisis” facing Europe is little more than a tragic confidence trick. Worryingly, however, it involves dangerous consequences for the rights of every EU resident.

I’m not being heartless. Yes, thousands of refugees have lost their lives in the struggle to reach EU borders. Many more are living in a desperate plight, often at the mercy of human traffickers. That’s not my point.

Relatively few of us have genuinely got to grips with the realities of this situation. It’s a massively complex issue that goes to the heart of geopolitics and national dynamics, but intelligent people should not be sucked into the orchestrated rhetoric that is being peddled. This isn’t the first time we’ve faced such circumstances – and it certainly won’t be the last.

The migration issue is trending across the political landscape of nearly all EU countries. Emerging from the hysteria over rising numbers of asylum seekers is a mix of innovative and humane solutions. Sadly, the “crisis” is also spotlighting the very worst of Europe, spewing out a raft of reactions that defy the very basis of the values that Europe is supposed to uphold.

Instead of making an effort to find a rational way through the difficult issues, some governments have cheered on a contagion mentality which has genuinely terrified entire populations that the barbarians are at the gate. It feels like Donald Trump’s shadow has fallen across Europe.

At one level (though certainly not for the migrants themselves) the situation is nowhere near as dramatic as some media outlets are portraying. At another level, the crisis is far worse for Europe than anyone could imagine. This situation could trigger a backlash for civil liberties across the EU.

Let’s deal first with the raw figures.

At the risk of simplification, here is the top level statistic. The EU’s external border force, Frontex, which monitors the flow of people arriving at Europe’s borders, says some 340,000 migrants have been detected at EU borders since the beginning of 2015. That compares with 123,500 in the same period last year.

My response is “what’s the big deal?”

[Lila: Exactly my reaction. Anyone who has actually been in populous, poor, or war-torn countries, would find the numbers nothing so extraordinary.]

…….

During World War II, refugees flooded from Germany to Switzerland, as any Sound of Music fan will remember. Between 1933 and 1939, about 200,000 Jews fleeing Nazism were able to find refuge in France. At around that time several hundred thousand Spanish Republicans fled to France after their loss to the Nationalists in the Spanish Civil War. Unlike the EU of today, nations coped with such circumstances.

It’s true that the current headline figures can look dramatic. More than 300,000 migrants have risked their lives trying to cross the Mediterranean to Europe so far this year, according to the UN. This compares with 219,000 for the whole of 2014.

Nearly 200,000 people have landed in Greece since January this year, while another 110,000 made it to Italy.

To put the current situation into a statistical perspective, imagine a town of 10,000 people calling emergency meetings and getting into a froth of paranoia because ten migrants show up at the town hall office. 

Having said that, the total population of the EU member states is just over half a billion. Is anyone seriously arguing on any basis of rationality that a region of five hundred million people can’t find a way to absorb a peak of an extra half million migrants? In the view of many observers, this isn’t so much a migrant crisis as it is a crisis of political fragility over Europe’s teetering economy and employment.

To put the current situation into a statistical perspective, imagine a town of 10,000 people calling emergency meetings and getting into a froth of paranoia because ten migrants show up at the town hall office. Most of us would condemn such a response.

In line with this reasoning, let’s try to put the situation is a historical context.

Some people might like to forget that the decade leading up to 2001 saw the one of the bloodiest conflicts of modern times – and right on Europe’s doorstep. The Bosnian and Yugoslav wars saw genocide that murdered between 100,000 and 200,000 people (depending on whose figures you accept). States that are now happily part of the European family of nations were obliterating entire communities at the time your fifteen year old child was born. Now, all is forgiven – and almost forgotten.

But at the time, there was misery and human displacement at a scale that people these days can barely understand. Vast waves of refugees poured out of the carnage and tried for a new life in Europe and elsewhere.

Europe whines about a “crisis” of having to deal with an overflow that’s equivalent to less than one tenth of one percent of its population. Compare this to what Croatia agreed to burden at the time of the conflict.

The U.S. Ambassador to Croatia, Peter Galbraith, tried to put the number of refugees in Croatia into perspective during an interview in 1993. He said the situation would be the equivalent of the United States taking in 30,000,000 refugees. The number of Bosnian refugees in Croatia stood at 588,000. Serbia took in 252,130 refugees from Bosnia, while other former Yugoslav republics received a total of 148,657 people.”

Muslims Shout Allahu Akbar & Other Scary Stuff

Posted on by

LRC:

“Laszlo Kiss-Rigo, Bishop of Szeged-Csanad in southern Hungary, said the migrants “come here with cries of ‘Allahu Akbar.’ They want to take over.” He added that Pope Francis “doesn’t know the situation” and that many so-called refugees are actually economic migrants.”

My thoughts on this:

The situation in Austria and Hungary appears to be different from the one in the UK.

I  think (without proof so far) that the migrants are very likely being infiltrated by social-media revolutionaries.

I base this on my feeling that Jade Helm 15 was a feint or possibly a dry run for insertion/extraction of provocateurs, gun-running and such like, intended to be used not at the US-Mexican border  but in Europe.

That was why I made note earlier in the summer of the number of military exercises going on around the continental mass in Asia, India, and in Europe.(Google it).

Then I got into a bit of trouble with Caesar Augustus here…for a couple of months…and just got back to blogging.

Something is being prepared for sure.

But again, I expect a lot of exaggeration, obfuscation, and red herrings to make any theory come a cropper and the critic look foolish.

I also consider “Camp of the Saints” to be very shrewd propaganda and a “seeding of memes” planted in order to foment and frame the very scenario we have going on here.

The use of Indians in the book, rather than blacks or Muslims seems to be a dead give-away that it was propaganda and programming, rather like the Turner Diaries.

It is a book in the mold of “Brave New World,” – not so much a prophecy as a revelation of a project in the works.

Besides, Trump is clearly a a weapon of mass distraction. What is he distracting from?

Then again, the Sept. 11 date and the various self-serving prophecies of rabbis like Jonathan Cahn and other Messianic preachers scaring American Christians suggest that something is coming up this fall.

Cahn’s “Messiah” might be “humanity,” or “Israel,” or  “revolution,” – all of which can be read into the Jade Helm logo.

However, a chant of Allahu-Akbar by itself means nothing. Might as well get upset about a bunch of rambunctious Americans shouting  Go USA.

Muslims use the phrase for all sorts of secular reasons, and it doesn’t mean heads are going to roll.

Whites get frightened by even normal crowds and noise when dark-skinned people are involved. A friend of mine visited Delhi on Independence Day and thought there was a revolution going on. All it was was the parade and a bunch of people in the streets following it around, quite calmly, actually. But he was sure something was up.
Even a bandh, which is pretty common in India, can be terrifying if you haven’t seen one before. Students lying on railway tracks, throwing stones, the occasional bus set afire. Hooliganism from young people with no employment prospects, organized by political activists. Not very safe and some property damage.
But not necessarily Gog and Magog either.

As for economic refugees, of course, they are that. And what is wrong? Must they be at death’s door to be allowed to escape? It seems to me any middle-class person would want to get out of an open prison like Eritrea, even though it might not literally persecute them and even though foreigners are there investing. It’s one thing to be a foreigner with a Western passport and hard currency and English, in countries like that. It’s another to actually have to live there.

Only fairly well-to-do people can pay the various fees, bribes, and permits needed to move out of countries that are war-torn, ruled by dictatorships, or otherwise in a mess. Only the middle-class can afford clothes and food and travel expenses. Is that their fault?

The very poor never leave.

As for Pope Francis, his sentiments are right, but his application of the Bible and his motivation are a bit suspect with me.

Personally, I consider him a masonic pope, but then, I’m not a Catholic and wouldn’t take any pope’s word for dogma.

On the other hand, the Zionisation of the world means I would need to research any bishop quite well before I accepted their estimations of what is going on at face-value.

UK Migrant Numbers Wildly Exaggerated

Posted on by

The Irish Times reports that the UK Media is wildly exaggerating the numbers of migrants and refugees arriving in Britain.

Would that media be influenced by the New World Order cartel interested in inflaming race and civilizational war and enhancing surveillance and control?

I guess so.

From the Irish Times:

The United Nations special representative for migration Peter Sutherland has accused the British media of exaggerating “beyond belief” accounts of migrants and asylum seekers flooding into the United Kingdom.

Mr Sutherland said media reports that “thousands of migrants” were attempting to travel to Britain from Calais through the Channel Tunnel had been “calculated to inflame tensions”.

“The total figure that we’re talking about is at most between five and 10,000 people who are living in dreadful conditions,” Mr Sutherland told RTÉ’s Morning Ireland programme.”

The UK population is around 65 million, which is 6500 times greater than the number of people coming in. The dependency ratio as given by the UN is over 50%, meaning that over half the population is dependent on welfare and less than 50% works.

The population pyramid is stationary, with a declining birth rate and low death-rate.

The problem is not the people coming in. The problem is the people already in who are not working.

The problem is government welfare policy, not people.

The same welfare mentality that is blamed on immigrants, exists among the native-born.

It exists because politicians need vote-banks and bureaucrats need empire.

And demagogues need something to demagogue.

What kind of conditions do these migrants suffer, while they are demonized by mafia and intelligence-propped up billionaires descended from immigrants and partnered with drug barons, underage sex-traders, and intelligence operatives.

The Naval Service patrol ship LÉ Niamh discovered the bodies of 14 migrants below deck on an overcrowded trafficking barge in the Mediterranean earlier this week while rescuing 453 people from the vessel.

The 14 migrants are believed to have died of crushing and asphyxiation after they were herded with more than 500 others on board a wooden barge that left Libya in the early hours of Monday.

More than 2,000 refugees and migrants are estimated to have died or gone missing while trying to cross the Mediterranean so far this year, according to the UNHCR.

Western Europeans, who spread their populations over every continent, often through force and fraud, now demonize refugees from countries they themselves wrecked.

Christians besieged, you say.

What Christians? I ask.

 

European Migration Crisis: Some Facts

Posted on by

I will be blogging about the migration crisis in Europe, how it’s being spun, and to what end.

Bear with me.

There was enough to do with Merkel and Trump just this past week, and I barely touched the points I wanted to make.

But for a start, here are some numbers about migration that  you will never hear from the “Third-World Apocalypse” crowd, whether libertarians (Charles Burris) or paleo- conservative (Pat Buchanan).

They are all apparently acolytes of Malthus, Marx, and Paul Ehrlich (the notorious communist/green environmental scare-monger)  on this subject, for they conveniently omit from their NWO-funded propaganda the following facts:

WESTERN COUNTRIES SEE RELATIVELY FEW REFUGEES

Of the countries that receive the most refugees, no European or North American country even makes the top 10.

Western countries, even today, are seeing a small and manageable number of refugees. Countries experiencing refugee numbers large enough to strain their resources include Turkey, Lebanon and Pakistan;

Turkey has effectively built an entire large city of hundreds of thousands of people, complete with a school system and public utilities, populated entirely with Syrians.”

Source for numbers below is UN High Commission for Refugees:

Major refugee-hosting countries, end of 2014:
#1-5 (approx. numbers read from graph)

Turkey (1.6 million), Pakistan (1.5 m), Lebanon (1.18 m), Iran (1 m), Ethiopia (600k)

Major refugee-hosting countries, end of 2014:
#6-10

Jordan (650 k), Kenya (475 k), Chad (425 k), Uganda (400k) , China (300k).

LRC Outs Itself

Posted on by

UPDATE

I see that Lew Rockwell is now linking to a piece calling Trump a fraud.

Good. I wish there was  a little less sound and fury about the tools being used by the Sanhedrin and a lot more about the Sanhedrin.

ORIGINAL POST

Lew Rockwell claims Clinton was “less bad” than Bush senior.

Really?

Under Clinton, Iraq was destroyed with crippling sanctions that killed more people than Gulf War I.

Under Clinton, liberals took over the machinery of power, and espionage and financial theft were rampant.

Bush Senior, however, bad, made some feeble attempts to stand up to the Jewish lobby.

Rockwell is sorely mistaken.

First, there was the 2012 campaign that many of us think enabled the re-election of Obama. Then after Paul’s pandering to Romney throughout, Rockwell back-pedalled and claimed Paul had refused Romney’s offers.

The Clinton era enabled the financialization of the economy, which was a way for the Jewish power entity (as a group, not individuals or ordinary people) to undermine and hollow out the manufacturing section and control it, through debt, credit, the ratings game, market rigging, LIBOR fixing, and all the other tricks of the NWO cartel.

I couldn’t care less for the GOP. I care even less for the DEMs.

But it amounts to NWO sycophancy to claim Clinton is “better” in anything.

What with the republishing of sites with large amounts of disinformation like Altucher and Zero-Hedge and the celebration of monarchy and (via proxy Bionic Mosquito) the Merovingians (Rothschild blood-line), you have to wonder what is going on there.

Nothing we haven’t known since 2008, though.

 

Matt Walsh: Trump Fans Are Embarrassing Conservatism

Posted on by

Matt Walsh rises to the top of the class in this outstanding commentary on Trump – the best I’ve read yet.

If only the rest of the conservative-libertarian chumps woke up and smelled the phony:

Illegal Mexicans are bringing crime. Got it. Agreed. But what about, like, everything else that’s going on? Anything on that, Trump? Anything?

Well, to be fair, The Donald has on rare occasion given the public a more in depth look at his views. For instance, he wrote a book back in 2000 where he discourses about the need for assault weapons bans, legal abortion, socialized medicine, and higher taxes.

This is your right wing hero, friends. But you shouldn’t be surprised. This is the man who spent the better part of the previous two decades using his money to keep Democrats in power.

He’s given a considerable amount to Republicans as well, but that doesn’t negate or mitigate the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars this “conservative businessman” gifted to Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Rahm Emanual, Chuck Schumer, Charles Rangel, and other liberal darlings. He didn’t just vocally support liberal policies prior to his recent foray into Republican politics; he actively worked to empower the progressive tyrants who would enact those policies.

In fact, a look at Trump’s financial activity reveals that he was an especially active Democrat booster during the 2006 midterms; the election that put Reid and Pelosi in power. Meanwhile, Trump has solidified his conservative credentials by coming out, at various points, in favor of eminent domain, bailouts, and executing government whistle blowers.

So, alright, he’s a draft dodging, twice divorced reality star who supports gun control and abortion and corporate welfare, and who donates to Democrats, gives money hand over fist to the Clinton Foundation, and has worked tirelessly for many years to keep the worst sorts of liberals in office. At least, he was all of these things until about four years ago, when he decided to start scamming conservatives.”

And later in the same piece:

To quote Chesterton:

You will hear everlastingly that the rich man cannot be bribed. The fact is, of course, that the rich man is bribed; he has been bribed already. That is why he is a rich man.

Chesterton wrote that a hundred years ago, and I’m now convinced he composed it after being plagued with a prophetic nightmare about a future scam artist named Donald Trump.

And if Trump can question a man’s wartime heroism, isn’t it fair to point out that he was born rich? Trump came from wealth and managed to stay wealthy with the help of bankruptcy and reality TV. Nice. Congratulations. But if Trump can prefer soldiers who don’t get captured, I think I’m within my rights to prefer arrogant, haughty, dishonest billionaires who didn’t start off as spoiled, private schooled elites.

That’s just me, though. We all have our preferences. And really, I have a distaste for all arrogant, haughty, dishonest billionaires who want to be president, whether they’re self-made or, like Trump, got a head start from daddy.

Yes, Donald Trump says dumb things, but my issue with him goes much deeper than mere words. My issue is that he’s a spurious liberal swindler with little character, no integrity, no credibility, counterfeit ideas, and a feeble grasp on the issues. He does not deserve your support. He has done nothing for it, except spew a million hollow platitudes into a loudspeaker hoping a certain percentage of them resonate with the disaffected right wing masses. If you think that qualifies a man for the presidency, I don’t know what to tell you.

Yes, I know you are sick of typical politicians who lie and cheat and avoid taking a stand when it matters. I get it. I am too. And that’s exactly why you should be sick of Donald Trump.”

Bret Stephens On Donald Trump

Posted on by

Bret Stephens in a hard-hitting piece in the WSJ on Donald Trump:

For now let’s speak plainly about what the Trump ascendancy says about the potential future of the Republican Party and the conservative movement.

It says that we may soon have a conservative movement in which the American creed of “give us your tired, your poor” could yield to the Trumpian creed that America must not become a “dumping ground” to poor immigrants from Latin America, as if these millions of hardworking and God-fearing people are a specimen of garbage.t says that a movement that is supposed to believe in defending old-fashioned values and traditions against the assorted degradations of the postmodern left might allow itself to be led by a reality-TV star whose meretricious tastes in trophies, architectural and otherwise, mainly remind me of the aesthetics of Bob Guccioni“

and

“The leader isn’t the problem. The people are. It takes the demos to make the demagogue.”

Well, here Mr. Stephens is only saying things I said a while back:

“Rule of the Demos”

Regarding Donald Trump, I made a similar observation about his houses and his wives:

“Obama Birth Certificate A Forgery Says Sheriff Arpaio”

I once exchanged a couple of emails with Stephens, I guess before he took a look at my blog and passed out.

I take some faint consolation in thinking that a bit of my thinking got through to him in some way, perhaps not in the way I hoped for.

In any case, I know he’s a neocon, but not everything neocons say and do is wrong.

On Trump the demagogue, Stephens is correct and it’s a shame to see this impresario, who shilled for the oligarchy at the most crucial time, being passed off as a folk-hero by libertarians and conservatives, no less. I’ve no doubt the whole Trump candidacy is intended to make any rational criticism of immigration look bad and thus drive more people to the liberal-left consensus on that and other things.

Trump, the bankster-shill, is a Trojan-horse, and any knowledgeable person pushing him is not a dupe but a knave.

Indians Say No To Fraudulent “Menstrual Revolution”

Posted on by

An eye-opening article from a woman who is involved with women’s public health in India who spots the “menstrual revolution” for what it is.

[For my previous posts on Kiran Gandhi’s free-bleeding stunt and Asha Impact (her family’s foundation, with extensive ties to the Western NGO circuit and the globalist foundations), see

“Behind “Tampon” Gandhi, menstrual hot-lines at $8/call”

“The Kotex-Industrial Complex II”

“The Kotex-Industrial Complex I: Another Indian Stooge“]

Also note that the magazine (Swarajya) from which I took the excerpt below is run by Indians with extensive ties to the right-wing of the globalist order, i.e., they are the “controlled opposition,” as you can see from the fact that they style themselves the “liberal right-wing”; seem to endorse globalist stooge Narendra Modi; and buy into some of the globalist memes themselves.

In other words, this site is not the authentic, Indian right, but a globalist-endorsed Indian right, much like large parts of the “Men’s rights” movement in the West is globalist-endorsed.]

The most often quoted statistic, is of a study done by A.C Nielson and Plan India, which states “Only 12% of India’s 355 million menstruating women use sanitary napkins (Sns). Over 88% of women resort to shocking alternatives like unsanitised cloth, ashes and husk sand.” Here is why this study and others like it are incorrect in representing Indian women:

  • The lesser known fact about this study is that it only interviewed 1033 women, i.e. < 0.00029% of India’s menstruating women! How this sample size is representative of a country as diverse as India is really questionable.
  • Even if 88%  women might be using cloth, it is absolutely incorrect to club the usage of sand, ash husk in the same percentage bracket. The usage of sand, ash husk or dried leaves for menstrual absorption happen in extreme conditions (less than 1%), such as in Rajasthan where some women have been using fine sand for ages since water is scarce. In these cases, we need to further investigate if indeed such usage has been detrimental to their health, since such practices have prevailed for hundreds of years. Obviously if such practices were harmful, people would have let it go a long time ago
  • On what basis are they calling the cloth ‘unsanitized’? Are the cloth pads being sold by foreign NGOs sanitized? In fact, if we look at the stitched cloth being sold by NGOs, it is more difficult to dry and sanitize it in sunlight because the inner layers are never exposed to sunlight. Whereas, the loose cloth used by rural Indian women can be opened and dried with complete exposure to sunlight. It is foolish to take a traditional practice such as using cloth, and package it to give it the look of a modern pad, and in the process missing out on the point of maintaining hygiene using cloth!

Pads for India, reusables for the West

The hypocrisy is such that while foreign organizations are promoting the need to introduce sanitary napkins in India by saying that 88% of Indian women are using cloth, in their own country they are promoting reusable cloth pads and menstrual cups, citing environmental reasons. If that is the case, then India is far ahead of the rest of the world in being environment friendly.

In the light of the latest wave of western feminism, movements (such as the Free Blood Movement) which promote women’s right to bleed without using any product are being applauded and encouraged. At the same time, international organizations look down upon indigenous women who for generations have bled naturally without using any product.

But what took the cake was when, at the conference, an excited American activist told me that I should tie up with one of these cloth-pad making NGOs (which I’d rather not name) to start distributing cloth pads to rural Indian women because it is environment friendly and a safer alternative to sanitary napkins! Imagine the drama of telling our rural women to throw away their piece of menstrual cloth and instead use my packaged version of it, which by the way will also cost them. Imagine teaching her about being environment friendly as a new concept, when all along she has not used a single bit of environmentally damaging menstrual product. Imagine trying to educate her about cloth being healthy, when she and all generations before her have been quietly following natural methods of managing menstruation.

The ridiculousness of the suggestion made me both laugh and seethe with anger.”