Friday, 24 February 2012
A HPANWO book review:
I was drawn to read the book Atlas Shrugged by a mysterious and irresistible urge that I can’t articulate or explain rationally; these kinds of things happen to me from time to time, as those who know me well will attest. I’d first heard the name of the author, Ayn Rand, many years ago, on a curious website claiming to be authored by the Illuminati, one that I now can’t find. I thought it was a strange name and wondered who he, or she, was. The website preached Atheo-Materialism, eugenics and social Darwinism; many of its proposals horrified me. I took heart from the fact that this website is not by the real Illuminati, as if the real Illuminati would use the Internet; but I cannot take heart from the fact that the real Illuminati are even worse than their imaginary equivalents on this site!
I soon found out afterwards that Ayn Rand was a philosopher who had been born in Russia in 1905 but became a naturalized American citizen as a young woman. Her name at birth was Alisa Zinovyevna Rosenbaum, but like many expatriate Russians, like the actors Richard Marner and Yul Brynner, she changed her name. She founded the philosophical school of Objectivism; the ethical tenet of which is that Man has no moral duty to anything other than his own happiness, prosperity and well-being. According to this notion Altruism, giving of yourself for others, is a crime against yourself; modesty is a delusion and that anybody who tries to persuade you to abandon your own rational self-interest for anything else is a violator. Rand pulls no punches and regards her philosophical opponents as evil and objects of hatred, “monsters” she says. Here are two interviews with her, one in 1959: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ukJiBZ8_4k and this one twenty years later, three years before her death in 1982: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx-LpRSbbeA . Incidentally one of her most prominent fans was Allan Greenspan and he attended her funeral.
Rand’s radical new ideas were mostly absorbed by the public through her polemic novels, two in particular: The Fountainhead in 1943 and Atlas Shrugged in 1957. These two books changed many people’s lives and she quickly built up a veritable army of admirers making her one of the world’s greatest “pop philosophers”. Atlas Shrugged is parodied in my favourite novel of all time Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea’s The Illuminatus! Trilogy. One of the antagonists is a veritable prediction of Ann Coulter, a woman called Atlanta Hope who writes a novel called Telemachus Sneezed. I thought I should look at the serious side too, so I bought the real McCoy. One thing that struck me immediately was its size. In Illuminatus! we hear about Telemachus Sneezed in the story because a character reads it during a plane flight. You’d probably have to fly round the world a dozen times to get through Atlas Shrugged! It’s over 645,000 words; this makes it almost double the length of my own novel Evan’s Land, see: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2010/11/evans-land-online.html . It was in a single volume, a huge doorstep of a book; over a thousand pages of small-type text; nevertheless I picked it up and began. The title comes from the Greek myth of Atlas. He is the Titan whose job it is to hold the world up on his shoulders and the book’s cover had a photo of a statue of Atlas, see at the top of the article. By the act of shrugging, it meant that he dropped his load and the world fell down to Hades or wherever. The story is set in a dystopian world in which corrupt global Socialism is taking hold of everything and all nations on Earth are being converted into “People’s States”. The USA is one of the last bastions of freedom left on the planet and the government is clamping down on free enterprise and private industry wherever they can. The two main protagonists are a woman called Dagny Taggart and man called Hank Reardon. The two are both industrialists; Dagny is co-director of a railway company and Hank runs a steelworks. Both are hard-working visionaries; Dagny has dreams of creating grand railways and Hank has invented a new super-strong alloy which he unoriginally and immodestly christens “Reardon Metal”. The socialistic state bureaucrats of the story, who are jointly known as “the looters”, try to appropriate the metal and nationalize Reardon’s mills under new collectivist laws, “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs”, as they say; and Hank’s main task in the story is to stop them. His attitude personifies Rand’s idea of the virtue of selfishness. In one memorable scene Hank’s brother says to him: “Henry, you must be more careful what you say to people. You’ll make them think that all you’re interested in is making lots of money for yourself.” Hank replies simply: “But that is all I’m interested in.” Hank and Dagny meet one day and a romance develops between them. There is a lot of love interest in this story and virtually all the major male protagonists fall in love with Dagny, often causing friction that reflects the author’s own personal life. Rand herself was married to a man she loved, but also had a very intense relationship with one of her young students. The backdrop to this tale is the constant decline of the world's infratructure around them, economically, socially and morally. In one scene Hank and Dagny go off on a driving holiday and come across a whole town full of starving unemployed workers surrounding a derelict factory. They explore the factory and make a discovery that is one of the most interesting in the book, but I’ll come to that in a moment. This degeneration of society has two main causes: firstly, the increasing ruthlessness of the government in its agenda to nationalize everything and strip all people of their intellectual rights and private property; and secondly, that all the greatest industrialists are mysteriously disappearing. This is the enduring enigma of the novel and the only clue is a name that becomes a catchphrase: John Galt. Everywhere Dagny and Hank go they come across people who ask almost out of some strange habit: “Who is John Galt?”
What made me glad I read the book was that it has an unexpected element of conspiratorial-awareness that I hadn’t expected; nothing in Rand’s interviews or other writings indicates it (Although I’ve yet to read The Fountainhead). In the abandoned and ruined factory Hank and Dagny discover a strange broken machine that turns out to be a Free Energy device, similar to the ones invented by Nikola Tesla, see: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2011/05/nikola-tesla-as-close-as-it-gets.html . This machine is seized by the “looters” and secreted away in a hidden chamber in Dagny’s main railway station. It is kept from the people for the very reason Tesla’s was in real life: to preserve the power of the Elite and keep the masses from technology that could liberate them from control. Dagny sets off to track down the inventor of the machine; the only clue she has to go on is a strange cigarette end with a dollar sign as its logo. She eventually manages to catch one of the vanishing industrialists mid-sodding off and chases him by roads, rail and eventually in the air. He takes off in a light aircraft and she pursues him in another. The aircraft flies off to a remote corner of the Rocky Mountains and as it descends into a valley it dematerializes. As Dagny follows she sees only uninhabited mountainside and is perplexed, but then it turns out that the scenery is just a holographic projection, another science-fictional aspect to the novel. Beneath it is secret idyllic commune based on Objectivist principles and run by a tall, handsome man with a Greek god-like appearance, and it is revealed that he is John Galt. It turns out he is the inventor of the Free Energy device and the community is powered by a working model. The machine is kept inside a small building with a lock on the door activated by a human voice when he or she utters the words: “I swear by my life, and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine”. The lock is obviously very sophisticated because it can tell whether you really mean it and understand the words when you speak them! It is only when Dagny learns to do so that she can open the door to the building and see the miraculous machine inside. In this wonderful place she finds all the great industrialists, scientists, artists, musicians and all the other “movers and shakers” of the world who have disappeared; and they explain to her that they’re all on strike, and they call her a “scab” for not joining in too. The chapter in which Dagny finds John Galt and his paradisiacal haven is entitled Atlantis, and we can draw a lot of connotations from that.
Dagny returns to the outside world to find Hank still locked in a battle to save his life’s work from the looters; unfortunately during her stay in “Galt’s Gulch” she went off Hank and fell in love with John Galt. There’s a sex scene in which Dagny and Galt make love in the railway tunnel leading to the underground Taggart station; of course it’s all very poetic and metaphorical, this was the 1950’s after all and Rand was no DH Lawrence! Then the love triangle becomes a square when another of the heroes, Fransico D’Anconia, announces that he is in love with Dagny too. The square almost unbelievably expands into a pentagon when it is revealed that Dagny’s secretary, Eddie Willers, also has a secret crush on her! But he wisely keeps his feelings to himself. Unfortunately the authorities soon after find out who John Galt is and realize what he’s done, and they kidnap him. They realize that they need the “movers and shakers” after all and beg him to call off the strike. He refuses and so they torture him with electric shocks. The novel ends with something of an anticlimax, I think, when John Galt is busted out of custody by the other strikers and they all fly off back to Galt’s Gulch to wait for the total collapse of civilization before coming out of the shadows to build the world anew. In the final scene of the novel the lights of the cities go out as the strikers’ aircraft fly off into the mountains.
The novel was published amidst a storm of controversy; it quickly became a book you either loved or hated. The critics panned it; the socialist Gore Vidal called it: “Nearly perfect in its immorality” and it was likewise described as “a homage to greed” and “written out of hate”. Those with political Leftist sympathies were the bulk of the book’s adversaries; some obviously just disliked its economic theory, glorifying capitalism and laissez-faire deregulation. However some even denounced it as fascistic, playing on the Nazi Aryan imagery of the heroes and that the looters were intended to be seen as Jewish. Once again we get this paranoid nonsense about antiSemtism, see: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2010/07/how-anti-semitic-are-you.html Rand herself is from a secular Jewish family, so no doubt she’s been labeled a self-hater! However Rand was inspired by the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, who opposed conventional morality, “slave morality” as he called it, and wanted to replace it with “aristocratic morality”. Despite my general disdain for “Duh Cwitics”, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.com/2008/06/critics.html and for Leftist politicians, I do find elements of the book disturbing. Rand thinks that her economic model would create a paradise on Earth, but total and sudden deregulation of the economy could result in chaos and the destruction of the lives of those less well off. I don’t share Rand’s worship of fixated self-interest and I don’t consider it unethical or “self-sacrificing” to care what happens to other people. How many people remember that a mild form of her Objectivist economy has been already tried out here in Britain under Margaret Thatcher, and for many people in this country it was a disaster. Immediate and complete deregulation of all industry would not turn the world into a global Galt’s Gulch; it would set the corporatocracy loose to plunder and pillage like Vikings on Viagra! This is not to say that Rand’s economic ideas are totally distasteful and useless. They might work very well in the future after a social and spiritual revolution that ends the Illuminati control and occupation of this world; I’m just saying that they are not the method for achieving it. However my own ideas on post-Illuminati society do echo Rand’s model up to a point, even though I’d never heard of Rand when I came up with them. In some ways her notions resemble EF Schumacher and even David Icke in their theoretical structure. To find out more go to the HPANWO Index in the Links column and see the articles in the section called The post-Illuminati World.
Ayn Rand is a very poetic and romantic writer who fills her prose with emotion, but this emotional content is fairly raw, primitive and polarized. The primary feeling the characters have for each other is hate. The heroes' hate for the looters and the looters’ hate for them. The only other emotion is love, but a very obsessive and infatuated form of love; rather adolescent and immature. Maybe this reveals something about the author’s own psychology and her very turbulent personal life. A film has been made starring Helen Mirren in the title role on this very subject, The Passion of Ayn Rand, see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TcMTKPoitQ I’m not trying to sound smug here. Ayn Rand is only human and there have been times in my life when I’ve also acted way below my age in matters of the heart. A few years ago I was totally smitten by a girl at work called Vicky; I sent her Valentine cards and everything. Unfortunately Vicky didn’t feel the same way about me, but she was very nice about the whole thing, see: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2008/02/valentines-day.html I look back now and feel a bit embarrassed about the things I did and said during that period of my life, but maybe that just makes me no different to anybody else, least of all Ayn Rand. One of the things that disturbs me the most about Rand’s ideas, although this aspect is not explored in the book, is her attitude to disabled people, especially the mentally handicapped. As you’ll see if you listen to her interviews she sometimes comes out with statements that frighteningly smack of eugenics, but she always quickly qualifies and dampens them down when challenged. Supposing whoever was behind that fake Illuminati website has taken her at her word; what if others do in the future? In the 1979 interview that I post above she says she objects to “kneeling buses”. I assume she means the kind of bus that makes up the majority of the ones we see on the roads of our cities today; the buses that can lower themselves down on their suspension so that their doorway touches the ground to let wheelchairs on board. Why does she object to them? What’s wrong with them? How do they involve any self-sacrifice on the part of able-bodied people? How are we “lowering ourselves”? Rand sometimes comes out with some deeply stupid and crazy notions, ones that could be dangerous.
Ayn Rand has inspired many modern political movements. At many Tea Party rallies you’ll see people carrying placards with the classic words from the book: “Who is John Galt?”; and Ron Paul, one of the few politicians I’d trust to tell me the time of day, has spoken publically about his respect for Rand. There is an idea going round these various movements that Atlas Shrugged is a prophetic novel like George Orwell's 1984; in the current world of bailouts and austerity measures it’s an understandable conclusion to reach. I disagree with that though. The novel is definitely allegorical but to understand the allegory we need to look into the past not the future. Although the book is set in a dystopian America, the way the government imposes socialism and collectivism on the population is what happened in Rand’s native Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution of October 1917 and it’s very likely that this experience greatly stimulated her philosophical work. She lived though this period and attended university in the new Soviet Union. Thank goodness she managed to get out of the country before Stalin came to power otherwise Atlas Shrugged would never have been written because its author would have been dead!
In the end though my feelings for the book are mixed and I don’t regret reading it at all. Despite the negativity of the critics the book has developed a minor cult following over the years and decades since its publication and I admire anything that incites the population to “defy the critics”. One of the aspects I enjoyed about the book was that despite its virulent anti-socialist theme it also strongly opposes snobbery. Dagny, Hank and the other major characters, despite the fact they are rich industrial Elitists, have a lot of humanity in their hearts. They are very down-to-Earth and have many working-class friends. In fact it is one of Dagny’s friends, a man who runs a cigarette stall on the Taggart Transcontinental station, who first gives her a clue to the whereabouts of John Galt when he shows her the strange fag-end with the dollar sign on it. There’s a quite moving scene where Dagny opens her new railway line and the staff all come out in support of her. (Ayn Rand went on a train-driving course herself as research for this scene).
All in all, this is a book that can only do good because whether you love it or hate it, I promise it will stimulate your mind and get you thinking. What’s more I’ve just bought a copy of The Fountainhead which I want to read next and I’ll review that too if I think it’s necessary. We may be approaching a period in history when some of Ayn Rand’s philosophy could be useful, even essential. The only mistake made is that so many people, including Rand herself, think it can be applied to today’s world; it can’t. Rand’s philosophy is way ahead of its time. The ideas themselves are not yet ripe for picking, and the world is not yet ready for them to be applied with safety or justice.
New HPWA article: http://hpanwo-hpwa.blogspot.com/2012/02/what-now-for-hpwa.html
Latest HPANWO Voice articles: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.com/2012/02/olympic-terror-drill.html
Latest HPANWO TV films: http://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.com/2012/02/find-bearsac-now.html
Tuesday, 14 February 2012
When I first became conspiratorially-aware a number of years ago now the question passed through my head that probably passes through everybody’s when faced with the revelations which such awareness brings: If there’s a conspiracy, who’s behind it? If you go online or read a few books you’ll find any number of accusations and nominees queuing up to answer your question: Americans, Muslims, the British, aliens, undersea monsters, big business, the Devil; there’s even a very long and detailed speech by Michael Shrimpton of the Marlborough Group claiming that it’s Germany, another name to add to that long, long list! See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ai5XSVZ5Adg Finger-pointing of this kind is a very serious matter; firstly because any errors can lead to terrible injustice; and the labelling with congenital liability of entire creeds and nations of people as accountable for the actions of their rulers or authorities comes with devastating consequences for them. History has shown that this can lead to horrific suffering and even mass-murder, and often as a result of allegations far less heinous than being behind the New World Order. The particular theory I’m going to address in this article is one of the most widespread in the conspiratorial community: that the New World Order global super-conspiracy, and all the systemic auxiliary conspiracies that come with it, is organized and implemented by Jews. This is a question that is one of the most politically incorrect it’s possible to mention and just to ask it, regardless of your answer, can lead to charges of antiSemitism, see: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2010/07/how-anti-semitic-are-you.html . However on HPANWO we do not back down to such hysterical nonsense and if there’s a suggestion that the culprits of the New World Order are the Jews then we’re going to address it, after all if it’s true then what good can we gain by denying it? Don’t the people of the world have a right to know?
The Jewish Theory is the term I will use for convenience; I mean it to relate to all the various super-conspiracy notions involving Jews as the main perpetrators. It is one commonly held both within the conspiratorial community and beyond it into the realms of the extremities of conventional politics and religious philosophy, like radical Islam and the Far Right. It is based out of analysis into almost all areas of human activity, from religion, politics, human races, and especially economic. Jews, as a distinct racial group as well as being a religion and culture, are said to be behind the various oppressive machinations of the world’s financial system that is currently afflicting most countries in the world, especially Greece at the time of writing, and has done so throughout history. These ideas have a long history that date back to the Gospels and the story of Jesus’ attack on the money-lenders in the Temple of Jerusalem; it’s the only scene in the Bible in which Jesus exhibits physical violence and so has become one of the most renowned. Jews are often called “Christ-killers” because they were the ones who had Jesus executed. A motive for this is often hard to pin down, but it ranges from revenge from those aforementioned Jewish money-lenders; to the Jews as a people killing Christ simply because they work for the Devil! These ideas are said to be promoted in Mel Gibson’s 2004 film The Passion of the Christ. The theories linking Jews to economic oppression are numerous, and they have spread out from the Biblical precedent of the Temple scene; they claim that all Jews are rich, tight-fisted and greedy. They bamboozle the common people out of their wealth through their financial expertise and their control of the banks, and they plan to economically enslave the entire human race, with themselves as masters of the world. There is said to be evidence supporting this from the lips of world Judaism itself: even the most fundamental Jewish text, the Talmud, outlines the concept of Jewish supremacism and their contempt for the rest of humanity whom they regard as mere goyim, “cattle”. Not only that, but anybody who defends the Talmudic influence by saying: “It’s only a very old book! How many Christians follow every word of the Bible?” will be immediately shown a more contemporary document: The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, a do-it-yourself guide to taking over the planet; this is apparently proof that the Jews of the world still scheme and plot the downfall of mankind into the modern era. Many well-respected figures in the early 20th Century spoke out against the Jewish peril and tried to alert the ignorant masses to the perceived Nemesis which faced them. Among them was Henry Ford, pioneer of the personal motor car that is such a major part of today’s world; and Charles Lindbergh, the great businessman and aviator who first flew an aircraft across the Atlantic Ocean from the United States to France. For people with these viewpoints Adolf Hitler was effectively a civil rights advocate and freedom-fighter! His emergence onto the world stage was like the coming of the Messiah. After his defeat in the Second World War it is said that the victorious Jews decided to psychologically traumatize the world with a new ruse: the Holocaust. They pretended that millions of their people had been viscously exterminated by the Nazis. The shame of this crime gave them the ability to moral blackmail their victims as well as steal their money and seize their lands. By putting their own people into management of the mainstream media and ensuring Jewish nepotism in show-business they found that they could also control the minds of the populace to ensure they never rebelled against God’s Chosen. Through their engineering of the revolutions in America, France and Russia the Jews made sure their kind of people stayed in control of the world.
It all sounds very neat and simple, doesn’t it? We have a problem, the cause of the problem has been identified and therefore the solution is obvious; but is that how the world really works? I have no doubt that the world is being conspired against completely and on every level, but is it because of the Jews? Can that possibly be the basic solution? To answer this we need to understand who the Jews are and where they come from. Judaism as a faith and culture is very old, by far the oldest major international religion in existence. It dates back to the beginning of history; as the Bible states, it emerged among the Bronze Age tribes in what is now the Holy Land. The early Jews were cruelly enslaved and persecuted by the first historical civilizations of Egypt, Persia and Iraq, but according to the Bible they won their freedom, and a new and exclusive homeland with the help of God’s direct intervention, see: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2011/12/ark-of-covenant.html . This immediately raises a question regarding the theory I outlined above: Civilization is far older than we’ve been led to believe by conventional academia; the Earth is littered by artefacts and highly sophisticated stone constructions that are far older than academia says human societies with the ability to erect them have existed, see Graham Hancock’s website on the Links column. However history begins with the rising of two civilizations in the late 4th Millennium BC: Egypt and Sumer. This is a big subject that needs to be explored fully in its own article; but suffice to say for the purposes of this discussion I suspect that these two civilizations, especially the Sumerian one, were secretly sponsored by the covert organization that I call the Illuminati. The Illuminati itself has its origins in prehistory in one of the societies that left behind the ancient monuments that conventional scholars deny even exist. This immediately makes it clear that the Illuminati cannot be Jews; this is because the Illuminati is far older than Judaism and that Judaism arose outside the Illuminati’s original sphere of influence. Judaism was from the outset very much a pre-Illuminati culture that was one among many. Not only that, but the early Illuminati-sponsored societies fiercely oppressed and imprisoned the Jews. The objective of the Israelite prophets also doesn’t match the theory that Jews are behind the New World Order: the goal of Moses and his successors has always been the establishment of a homeland for their people in the country currently occupied by the modern state of Israel (Israel in reality has nothing to do with Jews, but I’ll come to that in a moment); this is the original and basic definition of the term Zionism. It was never and has never been the ambition of the Jewish people to take over the world, nor impinge their will on any non-Jewish person other than those who threaten the safety of the “Promised Land” and its citizens. Critics of this defence and proponents of the Jewish Theory point to the racist propaganda in the Talmud; they say that the Talmud promotes viewing gentiles as donkeys, prohibits sex and marriage between Jews and gentiles, and that it’s right by God to abuse gentiles etc. This has been challenged as a misunderstanding or deliberate distortion of the Talmud, see: http://talmud.faithweb.com/ . The supposedly offending passages are dialogues discussing various ideas in an academic hearing and the conclusion of that hearing is that these bigoted notions are not true. Jewish lore contains a lot of egalitarian wisdom about how all humans are descendents of Adam and are children of God; the Talmud contains strict rules of good conduct in its dealings with gentiles. This has allowed Jewish communities to flourish in many areas of the world and, contrary to popular belief, they have had many successful and peaceful political relationships with the gentile populations they share their lands with. A classic example is Palestine. After the fall of the Roman Empire and the rise of Islam the Sephardic Jews continued to live in the Holy Land for over 1500 years and got on perfectly well with their Muslim neighbours. So when a bomb goes off on a bus in Jerusalem or the Israeli air force bombs a housing estate on the West Bank, it is not the modern manifestation of some kind of ancient struggle; it is a conflict that did not exist before 1947. Don’t believe the hype!
The answer to all the above is often the publication only about a century ago of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. As with the Talmudic commentary, this does make sense on the surface. The text is very straightforward and unequivocal, containing sentences like: “The political has nothing in common with the moral. The ruler who is governed by the moral is not a skilled politician... ... The Goyim are bemused with alcoholic liquors; their youth has grown stupid on classicism and from early immorality, into which it has been inducted by our special agents - by tutors, lackeys, governesses in the houses of the wealthy, by clerks and others, by our women in the places of dissipation frequented by... ... Ever since that time we have been leading the peoples from one disenchantment to another, so that in the end they should turn also from us in favour of that King-Despot of the blood of the Jews, whom we are preparing for the world. The King of the Jews will be the real Pope of the Universe...” The problem is that this entire document is a forgery. It may well have been based on a real political textbook because it resembles so many more recent ones like Silent Weapons for a Quiet War, but the Jewish angle has been fraudulently transcribed into it by its publisher; that’s a proven fact and I describe that in more detail in this article: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2008/02/protocols-of-zion.html . The film The Passion of the Christ has caused a massive controversy and in some cases the demonization of its director Mel Gibson. However once one digs beneath the fanatical veneer one sees a different story. Gibson has his defenders, among them Whoopi Goldberg, see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ccAPIEfAIU . As she says, would a black woman like her really be friends with Mel Gibson if he were a racist? Would she invite him to her home as a guest and allow him in the same room as her children? The Passion of the Christ is no more antiSemitic than the story it follows very faithfully, one of the oldest and most famous stories in the world. If Gibson’s film of it is to be banned as antiSemitic then we’d also have to ban the Gospels. The Passion of the Christ differs from other interpretations of Jesus’ last days only by its realism in its use of reconstructed Latin, Aramaic and Hebrew dialogue; and the very brutal scourging scene which has been described as one of the most violent and disturbing ever released in the cinema. It’s also interesting to note that the Gospels themselves are not as antiSemitic as they’ve usually been interpreted. For instance, from a theological point of view, the despising and rejecting by the Jews of Jesus was foretold and preordained by the prophets. This means that the Jews were effectively just following a script. Even the much-maligned Judas Iscariot; imagine how pissed off God would have been if Judas had refused to betray Christ! He’d have been in worse trouble than he ended up in anyway! He can’t win! This was a point not lost to my Catholic mother who caused a bit of a stir one Easter by making a Simnal cake with thirteen apostles on it. She felt sorry for Judas for the reasons I’ve just mentioned and wanted to redeem him. The way Jesus was executed was by crucifixion, a punishment that led to the crucifix being adopted as the symbol of the entire Church (a rather gruesome and morbid motif, I used to think as a child). This was a uniquely Roman form of punishment and it was used throughout their empire; if you ever saw the film Spartacus you’ll see the hero and his comrades being dispatched in the same way. This indicates that the death sentence on Jesus was a strictly Roman affair for an act of treason against the Roman state, not the Pharisees’ dominion. It’s unlikely that the Romans would release a convicted traitor just because of the Passover. A Jewish execution would have involved stoning, as we saw in earlier part of the Gospels where Jesus defends an adulteress with the classic line: “Who among you is without sin? Let him cast the first stone!”
On the 9th of February 1933 the following appeared in a newspaper called Jewish World (Thanks to *Kia* on the HPANWO Forum for digging this one up, although I can’t locate a source; as far as I can see there’s never been a newspaper of that name. EDIT: It might be this one. See: http://jewishworldnews.org/): “The great ideal of Judaism is that the whole world shall be imbued with Jewish teachings, and that a universal brotherhood of nations- a greater Judaism in fact. All the separate races and religions shall disappear.” Unfortunately in all cultures, races and religions there are ignorant and bigoted people. You could take that sentence and replace the word “Judaism” with white, black, Christian, American, almost anything you can imagine and it could match what some idiotic person has said at some time; and this needs to be challenged and resisted. But we must not fool ourselves by thinking this is the problem, that this is the basis for the New World Order. We’ve already established that Jews were not part of the original Illuminati foothold on planet Earth, they developed independently and were sworn enemies of those Illuminati-occupied states. Then, goes the theory: if they are behind the New World Order then they must have somehow infiltrated those states and taken them over. But does this then mean that there was no New World Order originally planned by the Illuminati before the Jews got involved? You see that the idea just doesn’t logically add up. Is there any other evidence from history that Jews were a malign and corrosive influence on society? According to some historians the evidence lies in the fact that Jews were banished from so many kingdoms during the Middle Ages. However these kingdoms were ruled by kings and queens that were definitely part of the Illuminati network; their lineage and involvement with the Occult can be traced right back to the Illuminati beachhead states of Sumer and Egypt so if Jews were somehow involved with their conspiracy you’d have thought the European Crowns would have welcomed them in with open arms; “OK, Ishmael, come on in and have a cigar. You take care of the money and I’ll deal with the wars!” There is a theory that there is some kind of secret conflict between different “sides” within the Illuminati; this is a possibility, but I can’t see how it can be the “Jewish Illuminati” versus the “non-Jewish Illuminati” to any great extent. How could such a fundamental conflict not have brought down the entire New World Order thousands of years ago? If I’m wrong and this conflict is real then how does it do us any good to take sides in it ourselves? Are the non-Jewish Illuminati somehow our allies?
In today’s world we see a planet on which Jews have supposedly been given a part of it as a homeland by the international community: Israel. This aberrant fiefdom has developed into one of the most brutal and corrupt regimes in the modern world; it carries out atrocities with impunity against its neighbouring lands and people, and suppresses them within its own borders. It exploits the tragedy of those who suffered under the Nazis to generate sympathy and guilt among other nations. What a terrible memorial Israel is to all the many Jews who died at the hands of others throughout history! See: http://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.com/2011/01/holocaust-memorial-day_26.html Israel has multiple foreign support organizations in the powerful Western countries like AIPAC and the British Israeli lobby, see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E70BwA7xgU Any Jew who criticizes Israel is lambasted under the absurd label of being a “self-hater”. Any gentile who criticizes Israel, like me, courts accusations of antiSemitism, despite the fact that this whole article is intended to be a long and detailed defence of Jews! Jews financial and banking activities are said to be behind the revolutions in America, France and Russia; the most common accusation is that Communism is a Jewish front because Karl Marx was a Jew and the Russian Revolution was funded by Jews. Actually Marx is credited with inventing Communism; but he was inspired by many pervious thinkers like John Ruskin who was an English gentile. What’s more, although Western involvement in the Bolshevik Revolution was real and deeply suspicious there’s no reason to think that there was something directly related to Judaism about it. There’s no doubt that the banking system is clearly a terrible burden on this world and one of the central tools of Illuminati power, but not all bankers are Jewish by any means. It’s true that a disproportionate number of them are Jewish, but sheer weight of numbers does not always count as evidence of control. Jewish culture has always traditionally been very fiscally sound. All nations have their particular areas of expertise; the Germans are good at science, the British are great seafarers, the Spanish are great fashion designers, the French are great cooks and Jews are very sensible with money. This means that Jews may have naturally gravitated towards banking for very innocent reasons long before the modern banking system arrived. In the same way that the French are not in control of Monsanto and the GMO food agenda just because they’re good cooks, the Jews are not the instigators of the money conspiracy just because they happen to be good bankers. If you look into the history of the banking system it lies primarily with the Black Nobility in Italy and the Knights Templar, much more Catholic than the Jewish. There’s nothing inherently evil about banking and money, indeed money has existed since pre-Illuminati Neolithic times; it’s the manipulation of money as a tool of control that is the problem. What’s more I do wonder about the ulterior motives of Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh for their antiSemitic remarks; could it be envy and insecurity as a result of business rivalry? Lindbergh was not a man of good mental health anyway. He had five children all of whom died in infancy; the first was kidnapped and murdered amidst much publicity. I don’t think this could possibly have washed over him without leaving a few marks. Another claim is that Jews control the media. In fact the BNP leader Nick Griffin once wrote a book in which he made a big deal out of the fact that 11% of the BBC’s employees were Jewish, that’s double the number you’d expect based on the national British ratio of Jews to everybody else in the country, roughly 5%. But as with the banks, Jews have a long traditional cultural association with show-business that dates back to the ages of the Diaspora before their emancipation in Europe when the Theatre and other performing arts were the only places they could use their talents to earn a living. Many Jews have honoured this tradition by becoming film directors, producers and script-writers, and why on Earth shouldn’t they? Somebody on the David Icke Forum a few days ago issued me a challenge: “Name me ten Hollywood producers who are not Jewish”; I couldn’t. But my reply to him was: “So what?” Does the asymmetrical presence of Jews in Hollywood mean Jews run Hollywood for the purposes of the conspiracy according to the Jewish Theory? I’d say “no”. If you look at what Hollywood is and what it produces you’ll see a huge variety of different themes and subjects. There are many instances where people have analyzed Hollywood films for all kinds of propaganda, like Robbie Graham and his Silver Screen Saucers blog: http://silverscreensaucers.blogspot.com/ (Also see my HPANWO TV reportage on the 2011 Leeds Exopolitics Conference: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2011/08/exopolitics-leeds-2011.html). I myself have written about famous films and the encoded messages within them. However when it comes to Hollywood we find that there is no single direction of persuasion at all. Hollywood proudly releases as many very progressive and anti-establishment films as it does pro-authority ones. Even individual directors like Stephen Spielberg, who is a Jew, has made many films on the subject of UFO’s and aliens which project very diverging Exopolitical ideologies. One of his early ones from 1977, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, was a very nonConformist and anti-establishment film yet he also remade War of the Worlds in 2005, a very depressing and pessimistic prediction of mankind’s interaction with ET’s. This wouldn’t make sense if Spielberg was somehow an agent of a Jewish cabal controlling Hollywood. What muddies the waters of this theory even more is that some of the most hyped films in the recent history of cinema have been a series of extremely reactionary and monolithic pro-establishment movies made by Roland Emmerich; examples are Independence Day, Godzilla and 2012. In my view these films count as the most overrated ever, but the relevant point here is that Emmerich comes from an upper class German gentile background. Another interesting film maker is Ridley Scott; his films are of infinitely better quality than Emmerich’s, but they also contain powerful militaristic and authoritarian conceptions. Scott is a British gentile too. Interestingly he’s also produced promotional videos by Common Purpose, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.com/2009/11/ridley-scott-makes-common-purpose.html . So how does this relate to the concept of Jewish control? I don't think it does.
One of the most bizarre claims made by Jewish Theorists is that Jews control pornography. This begs the question why pornography has anything to do with the New World Order, especially when they’re also reputed to be the engineers of Feminism. I personally regard pornography as pretty harmless; contrary to popular belief 99% plus is completely legal and features only consenting adults. What I find far more sinister are what have become known as “Lad Mags”, ones with titles like Front, Loaded, Nuts and Zoo etc. Porn merely panders to our natural biological instincts whereas Lad Mags try to change the way men think, but that’s a story for another article. There are several radio shows discussing pornography as it relates to Jews; it’s a favourite topic of discussion on the Far Rightist podcast Goyfire, see: http://www.goyfire.com/ The hosts change from episode to episode but the shows almost always include a very angry little man called Alex Linder who vocally and furiously explains what he thinks is going on. It’s a supposed plan to exterminate the white European race, “europids” as he calls us, by a process of “miscegenation”; this is a form of genocide carried out by forcing or manipulating a people to interbreed with another race until the original race no longer contains any members with a pure genome. And who does Linder think is behind this plot? You guessed it! Jews in control of the porn industry are promoting interracial sex and therefore the production of half-cast children in order to eliminate all white people. There is indeed a category of pornography called “interracial” which portrays black and white people having sex together. However Linder doesn’t explain why this is just one of many categories of pornography that cater to every individual porn-viewer’s tastes; interracial sex is not promoted above all the others. Strangely enough Alex Linder seems to object to interracial porn more vociferously when it involves black men with white women. He is curiously not so narked when it’s vice versa; white men with black women trouble his mind much less, and this could reveal something very interesting about his personal psychology. He rants on about “cuckold interracial”, this is a porn film in which a black man makes love to a white woman, usually she’s a pretty blonde with blue eyes, in front of her jealous white husband. I can’t help wondering if Alex Linder is actually just expressing his own personal insecurities through false political activism. Maybe he just can’t stand the thought of white women preferring black men to him. A lot of women find black men attractive, not only because they tend to be very “well-blessed”, but because black people in general are mesomorphic; this means they have naturally better muscle-tone than whites, giving them a more appealing physique. There’s another interesting website run by a British man who is anonymous, but goes by the Internet soubriquet of “Guessedworker”, see: http://majorityrights.com/ He has a terrible bee in his bonnet about the singer Seal’s marriage to the German supermodel Heidi Klum, obviously because she fits into the Nazi Aryan stereotype and that Seal is a good-looking black man, who no doubt has the physical characteristics to give her a good time in bed. Perhaps “Guessedworker” is worried that he doesn’t. Interracial sex is not something that bothers me at all, and indeed there are plenty of black women I find very sexually desirable so I’d be a hypocrite if I did; does this really spell the death-knell for white people? It strikes me that if somebody was serious about wanting to exterminate the white race, then miscegenation seems a poor way to go about it. Firstly, in humans, this would take many completely cooperative generations, and then only if the ratio of blacks with whites in society was far greater. Anything remotely short of 50%, about 10% in the case of Europe, would result in black people being miscegenated themselves, as has actually happened many times in the past. If you go to Lisbon in Portugal today you’ll see very few black people, and they’re all recent immigrants, but there was a time when there were a large number of black servants and freed slaves in Lisbon. Where did they go? Nowhere, they were miscegenated into the population and their descendents are the white people of Lisbon today. Race-mixing is not like mixing paint; you don’t end up with everybody “grey”, half-cast to different degrees. It’s more like picking black and white balls out of a bag. Genes can be recessive and active, as Gregor Mendel discovered, and which they are will depend on how they’re sorted. So a black and white person might have a baby that is half-cast, but that child will not produce “quarter cast” offspring; their subsequent children will be either black or white and with succeeding generations the minority genes become more recessive until they cease to have an effect. Also if Jews are really doing this then why? What is their motive for using black people as a weapon against whites? How will this aid their New World Order? Is the presence of white people in the world inimical to the New World Order? If so why? And wouldn’t this also mean the Jews will be exterminating themselves? How racially different are Jews to the rest of us anyway? Although the DNA of Jews does contain particular signatures and are from “haplogroups” that display their origins among the Ashkenazi of central and Eastern Europe, their physical characteristics look fairly indistinguishable from anybody else. There are certain traits that have become known as “Jewish looks” like the big nose, pasty skin, dark hair and eyes, but many gentiles have this physiognomy too. For instance, although Jewish actors like Sacha Baron Cohen and Daniel Radcliffe do have these kinds of looks, so do the gentile actors Liam Neeson and Aidan Turner. So I suspect we’re dealing here with a mixture of a misunderstanding of genetics and Alex Linder’s and Guessedworker’s feelings of sexual inadequacy.
Aidan Turner and Liam Neeson, they look Jewish but are not.
The idea that Jews were behind 9/11 is based on two reports: firstly that the Jews working at the World Trade Centre were phoned up by Mossad and warned to stay off work on September the 11th 2001. In actual fact over 300 Jews died in the attacks on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon, including 5 Israelis. If Mossad had really been behind 9/11 then they’d not have left such a red flag in the record by rescuing the common Jews from disaster. No, they’d have left them to die, sacrificed for political goals as they have been so many times in the past. An even bigger giveaway was the “dancing Israelis”, see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRfhUezbKLw I can understand that the most ruthless Zionists would celebrate 9/11, knowing that the US would now be galvanized into supporting a more aggressive anti-Islamic policy in the Middle East that would benefit Israel, but I’d have thought that if these men were Mossad agents who were actively involved in the plot to carry out 9/11 they would keep a slightly lower profile. As I explain in my article linked above, How AntiSemitic are YOU?, this is a very difficult topic to ever explore in a rational and equitable way. Any mention of it can cause explosions of hysteria. Criticism of the Israeli tyranny is equated as hatred of Jews; opponents of babies being circumcised are labelled as racists against Jewish rites, although there are distinct secular and healthcare motives for opposing infant circumcision.
It’s indisputable that the agenda for the New World Order exists; most of what I upload to HPANWO is about exposing that fact; but in our desperate search for answers we must not be lazy, nor let our anger run away with us, nor be too eager to accept the easiest and quickest answers we find. The real perpetrators of the Global Conspiracy want nothing more than for people who are becoming aware of their existence to get sidetracked down a blind alley. I'm certain that the New World Order is not in any way shape or form the work of Jews. When we yell: “It’s the Jews!” we not only condemn millions of completely innocent people to what is effectively Original Sin. We’ll be in a position where we can demand anything from them and do anything to them. What depravity is there that we will not stoop to and not be able to justify? It’s vital that we therefore hold onto our rationality, our understanding and our temperance at all times during the turbulent years to come. The I-Ching, the ancient Chinese book of divination, has a hexagram entitled Revolution. It says that in a revolution two mistakes must be avoided at all costs: Firstly, it is important not to move with excessive haste, in thought or deed, nor be excessively harsh. Secondly any revolution must be based on a higher and inner truth. Any revolution not founded on a divine purpose will come to grief.
Latest HPANWO Voice articles (All new material): http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.com/2012/02/council-prayers-banned.html
Latest HPANWO TV films: http://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.com/2012/02/nothing-works-anymore.html
Wednesday, 1 February 2012
This article is based this David Icke Forum thread: http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=5601
See here for background: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2011/07/skeptical-renaissance.html
As far as James Randi goes there's a sense that he is "The Last Word” on any Paranormal claim, even among those who are not among his closest of supporters. James Randi is wont to be the Alpha and Omega, The Final Arbiter, on them because he has his Million Dollar Challenge, and/or that all the scientists love him etc etc. He has a reputation of being "lily-white" in his conduct and totally above-board, transparent, honest-as-the-day-is-long and flawless; but is this justified, or is there another side to the one-sided Angel that Randi is supposed to be? Firstly it’s important to bear in mind that Randi is a showman, he has a lifetime’s experience in communicating with and entertaining the public on stage and screen; this will have given him a “way” with people. He is also a stage conjuror, an illusionist who can make rabbits pop out of hats, cards change suits and watches disappear. Who’s to say he may not even be capable of carrying out a few tricks under supposed “laboratory conditions”? Amidst the throngs of adulation, there are some voices raised that will hopefully give us a moment of pause; one is the book Randi’s Prize by Robert McLuhan which I recently read myself, see: http://www.skeptiko.com/randi-prize-exposed-in-new-book/ This is an excellent critique of the rarely-questioned “Skeptical Norm” that is accepted almost on the nod by millions around the world. If you listen to James Randi you’ll notice that he talks as if he’s the only real Paranormal investigator in the world. He occasionally refers to his peers briefly, but usually only to denounce them in an extremely patronizing manner as naive babes-in-arms who glide around haunted houses like Tolkienian Elves: "Ah, I'll put a camera there!... Ah, I'll put another camera there!... Ah, I'll put a crystal there!" It is he alone whom he regards as a streetwise “lean, mean gangsta”; to me he stinks of a “Hey-man-I’ve-been-there”- Poser, see: http://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2008/11/hpanwo-guide-to-being-ive-been-there.html , a bit like Project Avalon’s “Charles”, see: http://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.com/2011/03/charles-doing-washing-up.html I think this Randi Bubble needs busting! Let’s see if I can help do it...
Project Alpha was the scheme devised by James Randi in 1981 to expose what he saw as deficiencies in parapsychology investigations. For some reason he seems to enjoy doing tricks to make people look and feel like fools; he says his motives are benevalent, to get people thinking critically about their own beliefs, but are they? I wonder if there's a hint of sadism and intellectual oneupmanship behind his activities. Another example is the Carlos hoax, which starred the actor Jose Alvarez (who just happens to be the cousin of 9/11 Truth campainger Willy Rodriguez), see: http://www.skepdic.com/carlos.html Here’s an official video about Project Alpha: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1S5CRcqJQo Randi planted two illusionists in a parapsychology institute to see how far they could get pretending to have real supernatural powers, when all they were doing was stage magic. According to Randi, the scientists investigating them swallowed their claim hook, line and sinker. They declared unequivocally that this was the “real thing”. Then, at the moment the two were presented to the world, they came clean and admitted the whole thing was a hoax. Project Alpha has attained the status of D-Day or Trafalgar in the Skeptic community. However does it deserve to be so? This is what I found on a webpage that has now been removed:
Today a reader, Travis, asked me about Project Alpha, the famous episode from the early 1980s in which superSkeptic James Randi arranged for two young magicians to infiltrate a parapsychology lab in order to confound the researchers. Over the years, this strange incident has assumed almost legendary proportions in the minds of some Skeptics and reporters, who claim that the researchers were totally fooled. Here, for instance, is the way the story is told in Las Vegas Style magazine, with my comments and corrections in brackets and in bold font:
By 1979 BANACHEK [one of the magicians in question, whose real name is Steve Shaw] was starting to draw national attention as a gifted performer in extra sensory perception crafts. That was also the year that McDonnell-Douglas Aircraft awarded a $500,000 grant to Washington University in St. Louis for the establishment of the McDonnell Laboratory for Psychical Research. [Incorrect - the grant was not bestowed by the corporation, but by James S. McDonnell as a private gift.] The lab was supposed to come up with evidence that things like bending a fork with your thoughts was a real thing. If the idea of spending half a million clams on fork bending seems just a little soft in the head, you're not alone. James Randi was an internationally known magician and an active investigator of paranormal claims when McDonnell-Douglas [sic] made the grant. He decided to send two young illusionists into the MacLab to debunk it. BANACHEK was one of the illusionists.
For three years [he] was subjected to every test the pros could come up with to prove he had authentic psychic powers. He bent things, burned things, moved things and knew things. He passed every test with flying colours [false - see Thalbourne's article, linked below] and at the end of the three year period the McDonnell Laboratory for Psychical Research proudly announced to the scientific community that they had the real thing in the form of BANACHEK [false - no such announcement was made]. OMNI Magazine did a spread on BANACHEK. Discover Magazine said "...his demonstrations were just phenomenal." Even the National Enquirer called him a "Prodigy. Nobody like him in his field."
Mid bow for the McDonnell folks James Randi drops his bomb that BANACHEK had been working for him for the past three years and what's more everything he did was an illusion. Remember? Illusions are ideas creating misleading appearances. And mislead BANACHEK did. You know you have a major coup in your pocket when you sting the National Enquirer. [Really?] The guys at the Laboratory for Psychical [Research] were crushed. [False - they had already suspected Shaw and his partner of fraud, and had dismissed them both more than a year earlier.]
I guess Las Vegas Style subscribes to the motto "print the legend." The actual facts behind this case are thoroughly presented in a paper I found online in PDF (Adobe) form: "Science Versus Showmanship: A History of the Randi Hoax," by Michael A. Thalbourne.
Originally I had thought of summarizing this article, but there's no need to do so because it speaks for itself. Thalbourne, who was a participant in some of the events, writes in a straightforward, engaging style and lays out the key facts and timeline in the clearest possible way.
The case is also covered, in less detail, by John Beloff in Parapsychology: A Concise History.
As both Beloff's and Thalbourne's accounts make clear, there is much less to Project Alpha than its cheerleaders would have us believe. Regardless of what the National Enquirer may have said, the researchers never publicly committed themselves to the view that the phenomena they observed were genuine. They remained properly cautious in their published remarks. Indeed, they privately came to the conclusion that the two test subjects were not worth studying any further, and politely terminated the experiments. Even so, Randi had the chutzpah to hold a press conference claiming that the lab had been successfully duped - a story that is repeated to this day.
To nail down this point, I direct your attention to the appendix that follows the bibliography in Thalbourne's paper, where the published conclusions of the researchers are reproduced. This document is dated September 1, 1981, more than one year before Randi's January, 1983, press conference exposing the hoax. Regarding the test subject Mike Edwards (Shaw's partner in trickery), the researchers write:
The outcome of this research is suggestive of psychokinesis but inconclusive; due to its exploratory nature ... ordinary explanations exist for these effects, given the conditions under which they have been observed. Thus, although several events of interest have transpired, we do not claim that evidence conclusive of "psychic ability" has yet been demonstrated in our research. [Emphasis added] [Thalborne article: http://www.aiprinc.org/para-c05_Thalbourne_1995.pdf Source: http://michaelprescott.typepad.com/michael_prescotts_blog/2007/03/project_alpha.html
A very prominent critic of James Randi, Rupert Sheldrake, who was mysteriously attacked by a man wielding a knife several years ago, has spoken publically about his misgivings to do with Randi here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YB3SAD-gHTc . He says unequivocally that Randi is a liar. Not only is his Million Dollar Challenge far from being the bottom line on the issue of the Paranormal, but Randi has misrepresented Sheldrake’s own work. No doubt Randi regards (or says he regards) Sheldrake as being one of these white dress-wearing, wide-eyed flower-children who make up the entire world of Parapsychology, apart from himself.
These critiques and accusations may be true or they may be false; they involve details of investigations and commentaries that I myself have not had a part in. This article is not intended to be a one-sided and unequivocal disparagement of James Randi; I merely wish to provide a leaning-post of balance from the one-sided and unequivocal worship and adoration he has had showered upon him in abundance over his 50 year career of Skeptic debunking. I encourage all HPANWO-readers to research for themselves and make up their own minds.
Latest HPANWO Voice articles: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.com/2012/01/life-on-venus.html
Latest HPANWO TV films: http://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.com/2012/01/ben-emlyn-jones-live-at-ldidg.html