ENGLISH Tesla, mind control and free energy without any wires or cables; humanimals on parade; Darkmoon on the disaster of attacking Iran; words “husband’ and “wife” offend militant homos in Britain

by John de Nugent on March 21, 2012

=================powerful video on Nikola Tesla

This great Yugoslav created free energy, transmitted without wires or cables of any kind.

When you watch this fascinating video, you will see that he was right to fear that mind control could result.

The next video (the spelling mistakes of which are a minor irritant) shows how human DNA itself can become a receiver of dangerous mind control waves.

I guess the next question is: which inventive mind of today are you laughing at and not supporting as he seeks to protect and uplift mankind?
.
.

=================LEFTIST RACE TRAITOR AND HACKER ARRESTED BY FBI

http://www.whitenewsnow.com/a3p-american-third-position-party/29761-hackers-arrested-jeremy-hammond-hacked-a3p-whitenewsnow-stratfor-etc-2.html

This is said to be the first time that the FBI has ever helped a pro-White group.

Hammond is a self-hating white punk with dread locks who assaulted peaceful white civil rights workers exercising their constitutional right to peacefully assemble at a Chicago David Irving event. Hopefully he’ll learn some racial realities in federal prison.
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Hammond

http://www.whitenewsnow.com/content/491-hackers-arrested-jeremy-hammond-hacked-a3p-whitenewsnow-stratfor-etc.html

.
===========MORE ON THE HUMANIMALS

My last blog, dealing with humanimals, got a big reaction, including Facebook deleting my account with 900 friends.

Here is the humanimal Zuckerberg at Facebook who did it, with his Chinese squeeze, Priscilla Chan.

 

 

 

Here some nice pix of humanimals from a British website… Lynndie England, who is still proud she tortured Iraqis at the Abu Ghraib prison, looking like some kind of evil beaver….with clear Neanderthal features, such as no neck, protruding mouth and round face…..

Hardline: Lynndie England, who was found guilty of abusing Iraqi prisoners in 2004, has refused to apologise
No remorse: England, who suffers from PTSD, said she misses the routine of the military
Misconduct: The scandal came eight years before another military misconduct. Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, pictured, has been accused of killing 16 civilians in an attack on Afghan villagers earlier this month
Misconduct: The scandal came eight years before another military misconduct. Staff Sgt. Robert Bales, pictured, has been accused of killing 16 civilians in an attack on Afghan villagers earlier this month. Note the protruding neanderthalic mouth.
The shocking misconduct came eight years before that of another U.S. solider. Staff Sgt. Robert Bales has been accused of shooting dead 16 Afghan civilians, including nine children, as they slept.

It has since emerged that Bales, who has never paid on a fraud judgment against him for stealing clients’ life savings, was committed to his career as a stock trader

until the 9/11 attacks when he gave it all up and enlisted in the US Army.

Wiki:

He is married and has two children.[53][54] He was born and grew up in Norwood, Ohio, but later moved to Bonney Lake, Washington.[55] After high school, Bales studied business at the Ohio State University for three years, but didn’t graduate.[56][57] He then moved to Florida, where he started a financial company.[56][57] In connection with the business, Bales was found liable for financial fraud related to the handling of a retirement account and was ordered to pay $1.4 million in civil damages.[58] The victim said he “never got paid a penny” of the award.[58] In 2001, shortly after the fraud, he went out of business. He enlisted in the Army two months after the September 11 attacks. As a member of the military, laws shield Bales from some financial obligations.[59][57]

 

There is a Jewish cemetery in Norwood, Ohio, north of Cincinnati…..

http://maps.google.com/maps/place?hl=en&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&biw=1909&bih=960&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=norwood+ohio+jewish&fb=1&gl=us&hq=jewish&hnear=0x8841b29236bcf655:0xfcd3cb7432729b90,Norwood,+OH&cid=10140810820744952132&ei=0TRrT5-_D8OT0QGb-LSzBg&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=map-marker-link&resnum=6&ved=0CFYQrwswBQ

As of this writing (Thursday, March 22, 2012 at 10:23 AM EST), Wiki deleted its article specifically on “Sergeant Robert Bales”…..

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/soldier-who-killed-16-afghans-robert-bales-had-debts-of-15m-7579491.html

Is this Bales guy a part-JEW???  (a hate-crazed part-Jew like Robert  Zimmerman, the Floridian who killed an unarmed black teen in his gated community….Zimmerman has a Jew father and latina mother; he is NOT white!)

The killings have endangered relations between the U.S. and Afghanistan and threaten to upend U.S. policy over the decade-old war.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2117216/Lynndie-England-STILL-refuses-apologise-Abu-Ghraib-abuses.html#ixzz1pkM7mzQm

.

 

++++++++++++++++ON THE DISASTER OF ATTACKING IRAN

Writing in the Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mj-rosenberg/aipac-iran_b_1265984.html), political commentator MJ Rosenberg advances the audacious theory that Israel has no wish to go to war right now, but is more interested in flexing its muscles and playing cat-and-mouse games with America. It wants to show everyone that Israel is now the Cat and America the Mouse:

“Netanyahu and his camp followers do not really want a war now. They just want it understood that they can dictate whether there is one or not. And when. In other words, they want to show who is boss.”

The whole Rosenberg article says Congressmen are enraged at how the jews throw their weight around…

Armageddon Approaches

February 21, 2012 — 339 Comments

Dr. Lasha Darkmoon

“An Israeli attack on Iran would create a disaster.” — Zbigniew Brzezinski

“The entire lake will become a killing field…the Gulf will run red with American blood.” — Military specialist Mark Gaffney.

Bombing Iran could be the final nail in the coffin of America—a decaying and morally bankrupt superpower where torture has been normalized and where the President is now free to kill anyone he chooses, anywhere in the world, who he happens to suspect is a terrorist.
Right now, Iran appears to be the object of universal detestation, at least among those who control the mainstream media and who are anxious to persuade the easily duped masses that Iran is a major threat to civilization.

 



Iran is perfectly capable of shutting down the Strait of Hormuz if it wishes, doing immense damage to the US navy in the process. It possesses a vast array of anti-ship weapons called Sunburn missiles, which it has procured from Russia and China over the last decade. These are state-of-the-art weapons developed by the Russians as a low-cost challenge to the expensive, tech-heavy weaponry of the US. Specifically, they are designed to sink ships, including America’s titanic aircraft carriers.
The imminent conflict, which now belongs in the high probability spectrum, is a conflict into which Russia and China cannot fail to be drawn. Their interests are inextricably linked with those of Iran. You could say that Iran is their semi-independent protectorate and ally.
If Iran were attacked and if Russia and China stood by and did nothing, they would lose face forever. They would be signaling to the world that they are weaklings, only too ready to cower at the feet of the American superbully. Indeed, they would then be next on America’s hit list.
Russia has a new 100-ton monster of a ballistic missile in the pipeline. It is aptly named Satan. And it will be used to devastating effect against America if America gets too big for its boots and gets overly aggressive.
Chinese Major General Zhang Zhaozhong recently stated that if America or Israel attacked Iran, “China will not hesitate to protect Iran—even with a third world war.”

*          *          *

A few points need to be clarified.
The US Navy is an efficient and professional organization, at the cutting edge of modern warfare, but the Strait of Hormuz is not the kind of environment in which the American navy would be invulnerable.
The Iranians can be expected to have a field day in the narrow confines of the Persian Gulf, virtually drawing American ships into a series of ambushes.
If one samples the technical literature on various military websites, one finds there is a lively debate going on about American ship defense systems. Nobody claims that any such system offers full protection against ship missile strikes. Right now, most ships remain vulnerable to such strikes, including America’s leviathan aircraft carriers.

These impressive Nimitz-class aircraft carriers each come with a full complement of 7–8 supporting ships, 70 or more assorted aircraft, and up to 6000 marines on board. In a 2004 article, military specialist Mark Gaffney, author of Dimona: The Third Temple? (1989), opines:  “The US Navy’s largest ships, the massive carriers, have now become floating death traps….In the Gulf’s shallow and confined waters evasive maneuvers will be difficult, at best, and escape impossible….The Gulf will run red with American blood.”

As for oil tankers, these are even more vulnerable than aircraft carriers. If attacked, these will sink easily, clogging up vital sea lanes and doing immense environmental damage to the entire Persian Gulf region.
It is of interest to note that the US is busy working on a new generation of laser defense to counter the sophisticated  anti-ship missiles possessed by Iran. However, these are still in process of development. This gives Iran a relative advantage if it is attacked now rather than later. Ironically, the longer America and Israel delay in attacking Iran, the better their chances of successfully countering the retaliatory measures they can expect from Iran.
Both America and Israel are unfortunately just not ready to wage the type of warfare they prefer to wage and at which they so excel: shooting fish in a barrel.
Unlike Iraq, which the warmonger neoconservatives told us would be a  “cakewalk—easily conquered in six weeks—Iran is unlikely to offer its American and Israeli antagonists easy opportunities to indulge in their fish-in-a-barrel fantasies.
Our courageous remote control warriors, hunched over their keyboards far from the din of battle, may be able to rain down death and destruction on innocent civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, meanwhile salving their consciences by calling their victims “terrorists”, but there is nothing they can do with their drones to stop Iran’s deadly missiles from blowing up American aircraft carriers or sinking oil tankers in the Persian Gulf.

*          *          *

The Sunburn is perhaps the most lethal anti-ship missile in the world (see also here), designed to fly as low as nine feet above groundwater level and at more than 1,500 miles per hour. The missile uses a jerky pop-up maneuver for its terminal approach. This enables it in effect to dodge, or jump out of the way, of the Phalanx and other anti-missile defense systems: in short, to hit its target bang-on without being intercepted en route.
Given their low cost, these ship missiles are perfectly suited for close quarter naval conflict in the pond like environment of the Persian Gulf.
The Sunburn is versatile and easy to use. It can be fired from practically any platform, including the back of a flatbed truck. It has a 100-mile range, which is all that is necessary in the narrow Persian Gulf, with its 40-mile width round the Strait of Hormuz.
Fired from shore, the Sunburn will punch a room-sized hole through  any ship in the Strait of Hormuz in a fraction of a second.
These missiles therefore present a serious threat to the US Navy. Their power to inflict horrendous damage on hostile intruders simply cannot be exaggerated.
Developed by the Russians, and made fully available to China and Iran, the SS-N-22 Sunburn, a supersonic anti-ship missile, has been described as the most lethal missile in the world today.” (See also here for other anti-ship missiles designed, built, or operated by Iran. See here for a discussion of anti-ship missiles and US capability to defend against them.)
Compared to the Exocet, the Sunburn is a much larger and faster missile. It possesses a far greater range. Its guidance system is spot-on. The Sunburn can deliver a 200-kiloton nuclear payload (a 750-pound conventional warhead) within a range of 100 miles, more than twice the range of the Exocet. It seems the missile was specifically designed to defeat the US Aegis radar defense system.
The Sunburn’s astonishing accuracy was demonstrated recently in a live test staged at sea by the Chinese and observed by US spy planes. Not only did the Sunburn missile destroy the dummy target ship, it scored a perfect bull’s eye. It succeeded in hitting the crosshairs of a large “X” mounted on the ship’s bridge.
Unlike America’s drones, the Sunburn is not in the business of creating “collateral damage.” It does not kill innocent civilians by the score. It kills only the enemy.
In a 2004 article, Mark Gaffney writes:

US ships in the Gulf will already have come within range of the Sunburn missiles and the even more advanced SS-NX-26 Yakhont missiles, also Russian-made (speed: Mach 2.9; range: 180 miles) deployed by the Iranians along the Gulf’s northern shore. Every US ship will be exposed and vulnerable. When the Iranians spring the trap, the entire lake will become a killing field.

The Sunburn’s payload hit, with its 750-pound conventional warhead, is apparently insufficient to sink an aircraft carrier, but it is enough to sink most other ships and their crews. So it is generally opined in the technical literature.
No conclusive studies, however, have been carried out to determine the effect of a swarm of missiles attacking an aircraft carrier simultaneously. Perhaps there is no need for such a study. Common sense will tell you that a swarm of killer bees is much more dangerous than a single bee. One bee you can easily swat; a swarm of bees you cannot.
An astute observer of the military situation has offered this comment:

Aegis and RAM systems do not stop Sunburn missiles. Those systems were designed to stop subsonic not supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles. Even then they were unsuccessful in stopping an Iraqi (subsonic) Exocet when it struck the American warship Stark during the Iran-Iraq war.
Supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles travel faster than a rifle bullet and it would take no more than three of them to sink an aircraft carrier. In fact, any surface ship is a floating coffin.
If anyone out there knows of a technology that can stop a rifle bullet in full flight, please let me know what it is.

“You don’t have to be Hannibal preparing for the Battle of Cannae,” military observer Russ Winter writes, “to see that the Strait is a potential “shooting gallery”.
The Strait of Hormuz is in fact an ideal ambush location for large and cumbersome ships that offer such easy targets you would have to be blind to miss them.

Without a doubt, the Iranians have marked out every firing spot along the Persian Gulf coast. Locating these hiding holes with low-flying attack helicopters will not be easy. Helicopters can be shot down.
Equally impressive is Iran’s missile range: 1500 miles and growing.  Hostile Bahrain and Qatar can easily be hit by the longer-range versions of the Sunburn or Onyx. So can the Saudi oilfields.
Indeed Israel itself, though further away, could suddenly find itself under a shower of deadly missiles, not only from distant Iran, but from Hezbollah just across the Lebanese border.
“This is going to be the Big One,” says Justin Raimondo, “a war that will make the invasion of Iraq look like a dress rehearsal for Armageddon.”

*          *          *

It is commonly acknowledged that Israel cannot go it alone in fighting Iran. To wage a successful war against Iran, Israel needs American help. Israel would naturally prefer America to do its dirty work for it.
Should Israel act alone, it would face the extraordinary problem of needing to refuel its bombers en route to targets about 1,000 miles away and refueling them again on the way back.
It has been suggested that the United States should provide Israel with three KC-135 refueling tankers. Some of these Israeli supporters in America claim they do not themselves advocate an Israeli attack on Iran, but they are kindly disposed to Israel and wish to see it supplied with tankers that would “extend the effective range of Israeli aircraft” and “improve Israeli credibility.” (See here)
Israel has of course achieved a modest success in destroying the nuclear facilities of two other relatively primitive countries in the region: Iraq and Syria. These two past Israeli successes are not overly impressive. As achievements, they are small beer. That is, compared to the massive challenges Israel would have to face in Iran.
When Israel destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor in June 1981, it was one ground-level building it destroyed. That simple operation required 14 Israeli aircraft. Israel’s other success, demolishing a partially constructed Syrian facility in September 2007, involved targeting a rudimentary warehouse-like structure built on a single floor—an exceptionally easy ground-level target.
The potential targets in Iran are not only far more numerous: they are widely dispersed and buried deep underground. Many of them are probably secret facilities whose very existence is unknown.
There is the fuel-enrichment plant at Natanz, a collection of below-ground facilities used to produce enriched uranium. Then there is the newer Fordow fuel-enrichment plant near Qom, built into the side of a mountain and buried deep underground under several layers of reinforced concrete. It is generally acknowledged that to crack open Fordow, and destroy its alleged nuclear weaponry, would be a task beyond Israel’s modest capacity. At a pinch, America could do it, maybe; but certainly not Israel acting on its own.
There are two other Iranian nuclear sites Israel would need to attack: the heavy-water reactor at Arak and the yellowcake-conversion plant at Isfahan.
There are three possible routes to Iran: north over Turkey, south over Saudi Arabia, or a central route across Jordan and Iraq. The US, having officially withdrawn from Iraq in December, is no longer under obligation to defend Iraqi skies from Israeli planes. The Iraqis themselves are of course unable to do so.  (See here.)
The recent Robb-Wald Report tells us that Israel has enough GBU-28 bunker-busting bombs to “severely damage, though likely not completely destroy, Iran’s known underground nuclear sites in a single well-executed operation.”
Perhaps even this is no more than wishful thinking. Note the loaded phrase: “known underground nuclear sites.” Best not to mention the unknown ones.

To achieve victory in Iran, Israel would be stretched to the limit. It would have to deploy several B-2 stealth and B-52 bombers, fighter-bombers and helicopters, along with ship-launched cruise missiles. It would not only  need to take out Iran’s underground nuclear facilities—an impossible task—but it would have to destroy Iran’s communications systems, air defense and missile sites, Revolutionary Guard Corps living quarters, munitions storage depots, airfields, and ship and port facilities—not to mention missile boats, minelayers and midget submarines.
Given that Israel, for all its vaunted might, was unable to defeat valiant little Hezbollah in 20o6, the chances of it stealing an easy victory from Iran would seem to belong in the realms of fantasy.
Not all Americans are in favor of aiding and abetting Israel in yet another rampage of wanton destruction—not after the crimes of Gaza which have left an indelible stain on Israel’s already dubious reputation.
Destroying Iran’s infrastructure may make sense to some callous Americans, but to many others it would seem a cruel and vicious enterprise. To poison a population of 74 million people, most of them women and children, with tons of depleted uranium, while putting thousands of other innocents into wheelchairs, is not an achievement likely to bring honor or prestige to Israel.
Not all of us have forgotten the lessons of history. We are cognizant of the fact that Iran has not started a war for 30o years. That it simply wishes to be left alone. And that it is Israel, rather than Iran, that seems to suffer from a serious pathological problem—a “collective madness”—with more than enough blood on its hands.
Speaking on behalf of Israel’s countless critics, one political pundit writes:

The US cannot eradicate the Iran regime. It cannot bring Iran under its control, that is, not without creating a disaster for itself and the entire world….Doing that entails huge costs and risks to the US, all the countries in that region, and the many other countries that would be affected by it, including Russia, China, India, Pakistan and Afghanistan….Right now, Obama must stop Israel from attacking Iran. (Emphasis in original). He must do so in the strongest ways available to him, like denying airspace to Israel for refueling its bombers. … The US [should] prevent Israel…from flying over Iraq and refueling.

Sound advice, it seems to me. Why support Israel? Cui bono? Iran has much more to offer America than Israel does.
Iran has oil in abundance, Israel has none. Iran does not hold America’s political class to ransom. Iran does not try to browbeat successive American administrations into putting Iranian interests before American ones. Iran’s dual citizens do not spy on America or sell American military secrets to Russia and China—there are no Iranian Rosenbergs or Jonathan Pollards. Iran does not coerce Americans into fighting and dying for it in foreign wars. Iran does not expect $3 billion a year in handouts, and even more in loan guarantees that never get repaid.
Iran would be a far greater asset to America than Israel could ever be. Israel is a liability and a burden.
More fool America for cuddling up to a “friend” who has stabbed it in the back in the past—the Lavon affair, the USS Liberty incident, the Jonathan Pollard betrayal—and is more than likely to stab it in the back again at some time in the foreseeable future.
Dump Israel. That’s my advice. Before Israel sets the world on fire, taking America with it.

*          *          *

Obama has in recent months begun to make it clear to Israel that the United States would not get involved in a war started by Benjamin Netanyahu without preliminary US approval.
Indeed, on January 20, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, informed Netanyahu that the US would not defend Israel if it launched an attack on Iran that had not been coordinated in advance with the US.
In May 2008, Netanyahu’s predecessor, Ehud Olmert, had requested the approval of George W Bush for an air attack on Iran. To his credit, Bush had refused to countenance any such move.
Netanyahu has since defied the US administration by refusing to assure Washington that he would consult them before making a decision to attack Iran.
Other US officials have apparently made it clear to Netanyahu that the US, unless fully consulted, would refuse to come to Israel’s aid in the event of Israel declaring war on Iran unilaterally.
If Israel did that, it would be on its own.
It would be a mistake for Israel to assume that America is under obligation to protect it from the consequences of its own folly. (For more details, see here.)
Writing in the Huffington Post, political commentator MJ Rosenberg advances the audacious theory that Israel has no wish to go to war right now, but is more interested in flexing its muscles and playing cat-and-mouse games with America. It wants to show everyone that Israel is now the Cat and America the Mouse: “Netanyahu and his camp followers do not really want a war now. They just want it understood that they can dictate whether there is one or not. And when. In other words, they want to show who is boss.”
It’s time for a showdown.
The capital of America needs to be moved back to Washington. Tel Aviv is too far away.

*          *          *

When Zbigniew Brzezinski says, “An Israeli attack on Iran would create a disaster”, he must be taken seriously.  
An old hand, and an expert on Russia, Brzezinski is the acclaimed author of  The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. One cannot help wondering what Brzezinski thinks of the controversial statement  made by Leonid Ivashov, former member of the Russian Joint Chiefs of Staff, which aired on Russia Today TV on February 1, 2012:

Russia does not want any military operations to be waged against Iran or Syria. These two countries are allies, and both are considered guaranteed partners of Russia. A strike against Syria or Iran is an indirect strike against Russia and its interests.

Later he adds, significantly, striking a chord with people like me who believe that America is now a crypto-fascist state masquerading as a democracy:

Everybody should acknowledge that Fascism is making great strides on our planet. What they did in Libya is nearly identical to what Hitler and his armies did against Poland and then Russia. Today, therefore, Russia is defending the entire world from Fascism.

No need to ask who the New Fascists are.
Just turn on your television sets and you will see their smiling faces, telling you how much they love and cherish you—as long as you vote for them—and as long as you die for them in foreign wars for the aggrandizement of Israel.

*          *          *

It certainly needs to be asked: How much longer will America continue to fight Israel’s wars? What hold does Israel have over America? Is America prepared to sustain immense damage to its vital interests on behalf of an unstable and insolent ally that remains, if numerous polls are to be believed, the world’s most hated nation?
There are some indications that not all American operatives, especially in the armed forces and the CIA, are overly impressed with Israel’s increasingly irresponsible behavior. A significant rift in the friendship appears to be developing, a rift that will hopefully grow in time as America finally comes to its senses.
Relations could once again reach rockbottom, as when former US Secretary of State James Baker uttered his infamous remark about Israel’s Jewish American supporters: “F**k the Jews, they don’t even vote for us.” http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/may/13/aipac-iran-us-obama
Former Centcom chief and retired Gen. Joe Hoar recently complained of a certain shady Israeli operation involving the terrorist group Jundullah, in which Mossad thugs had the impudence to masquerade as CIA agents: “Israel is playing with fire. It gets us involved in their covert war, whether we want to be involved or not.”

Israel’s Covert War against Iran

The tension between longsuffering Iran and an insufferable Israel, goading it to frenzy, is now at fever pitch.

Here is part of an interview between journalist Eleanor Hall and Iran specialist Geneive Abdo who is director of the Iran program at the National Security Network in Washington. I have compressed drastically in the interests of economy, but the full version can be read here:

ELEANOR HALL: Iran’s leadership says it’s sheer lies that it’s behind the [recent] attacks [on Iranian embassies in India and elsewhere] and that the Israelis have planted the bombs themselves to discredit Iran?

GENEIVE ABDO: Well I think that’s entirely possible. I mean, if you consider what the Israelis did for many years in Lebanon and other parts of the Middle East, that theory is not so farfetched.

ELEANOR HALL: How incendiary is the relationship between Iran and Israel right now? Are we looking at an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities…?

GENEIVE ABDO: I think it’s certainly a decision Israel is taking very seriously.

ELEANOR HALL: So how dangerous do you think the situation is right now?

GENEIVE ABDO: I think it’s very dangerous. Far more dangerous than any escalation tension we’ve seen in 30 years.

ELEANOR HALL: So, how dangerous could it become if the Israelis do strike?

GENEIVE ABDO: It’s an extremely dangerous situation. The Iranians will not take this lightly, and they will use all the resources at their disposal to attack. They will cause chaos in the region, because their whole survival is on the line….You know, they could launch attacks on Latin America. They’ve even said that they would launch attacks on American soil. They will send missiles to Tel Aviv….If you consider what the Israelis have done in Lebanon…I don’t think that gives us much hope…

If Israel decides to launch an all-out attack on Iran, we can be sure of one thing: the towers of Tel Aviv will come toppling down. Not necessarily now, but one day in the distant future, when it is decided that vengeance is a dish best served cold.
The nuclear complex at Dimona could well be destroyed—if not now, later on, in the fullness of time—making Israel an uninhabitable wasteland.
Given its miniscule size, Israel could be destroyed in a single day, if not by Iran, then almost certainly by Russia or China.
Only a week ago, Alireza Forghani, head of the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s strategic team, was quoted as saying: “It would only take nine minutes to wipe out Israel.”
No one seriously expects to see the annihilation of Israel right now, but Israel will have to take the consequences of its actions one day.
Israel will reap what it sows as Armageddon approaches.
The clock is ticking…
_______________________________________________________________________

Dr Lasha Darkmoon (email her) is an academic with higher degrees in Classics. She is also a poet and translator. Her articles can be sampled here, her poems here.

 

===================WORDS “HUSBAND’ AND ‘WIFE” OFFEND FANATIC BRITISH HOMOSEXUALS

(SOURCE: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2115677/Dont-use-words-husband-wife-Coalitions-sex-wedding-reforms-axe-terms-official-documents.html)

 

 

Don’t use the words husband and wife! Coalition’s same-sex wedding reforms would axe terms from official documents

  • ‘Bride’ and ‘bridegroom’ could even be removed  from marriage certificates

By Steve Doughty

PUBLISHED: 19:02 EST, 15 March 2012 | UPDATED: 09:32 EST, 16 March 2012

Reforms to allow same-sex marriage will see the words husband and wife removed from official forms, it was revealed last night.

Tax and benefits guidance and immigration documents must be rewritten so they no longer assume a married couple is a man and a woman.

And private companies will be told to overhaul paperwork and computer databases containing the words.

Spouse and spouse: The words husband and wife will be axed from official documents under the proposed same-sax marriage reforms
Spouse and spouse: The words husband and wife will be axed from official documents under the proposed same-sax marriage reforms

Marriage certificates could even be affected by the Coalition proposals, with rules possibly axing terms such as bride and bridegroom.

 

The reforms – promised by Prime Minister David Cameron last autumn and set out in a consultation paper launched yesterday – intend to open civil marriage to gay and lesbian couples for the first time.

A different category – religious marriage – will be reserved for male and female couples.

Pledge: Prime Minster David Cameron promised the reforms last autumn
Pledge: Prime Minster David Cameron promised the reforms last autumn

The proposals have triggered a furious row, with the Church of England accusing the Coalition of misunderstanding the law of marriage.

But Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone warned religious leaders not to ‘fan the flames of homophobia’ with ‘inflammatory’ language.

New versions of documents will‘replace references to husband and wife with the more neutral terms spouses and partners’.

The cost of the red tape revolution demanded by the ‘Equal Civil Marriage’ plans will run into millions, according to an official analysis published alongside the consultation paper.

Businesses will be given ‘lead-in time’ – a period of grace to change their websites and databases before their failure to recognise same-sex marriage runs foul of the law.

The consultation paper, produced by Home Secretary Theresa May and Miss Featherstone, has set aside three months for public responses before civil servants begin to draw up the new legislation.

And the axing of the terms husband and wife is spelled out in an ‘impact analysis’ published by the Home Office alongside the paper.

A thing of the past: UK border agency forms would replace the words husband and wife with spouses and partnersA thing of the past: UK Border Agency forms would replace the terms with spouses and partners

It said UK Border Agency forms and staff guidance would replace husbands and wives with spouses and partners.

‘Some tax, National Insurance Contributions and tax credit legislation will have to be changed where there is a specific reference to a husband and wife,’ it added.

References to go include direct mentions of husband and wife and phrases about couples ‘living together as husband and wife’. Forms and IT systems and guidance for Revenue and Customs staff will need to change, it added.

Argument: Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone believes marriage 'should be open to everyone
Argument: Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone believes marriage ‘should be open to everyone

The removal of gender-specific language also has sweeping implications for marriage services.

The Home Office declined to say yesterday how ministers intend to change the wording of ceremonies.

Currently couples marrying in a register office must pledge to take each other as ‘my wedded husband’ or ‘my wedded wife’.

If marriage law is reformed in line with the rewrite of red tape, then couples will be required at a civil wedding to pledge themselves to ‘my wedded partner’.

The Church of England said: ‘Arguments that suggest “religious marriage” is separate and different from “civil marriage”, and will not be affected by the proposed redefinition, misunderstand the legal nature of marriage in this country.

‘They mistake the form of the ceremony for the institution itself.’

The Roman Catholic bishops of England and Wales said in a statement: ‘It is alarming to note that children are not  mentioned at any stage in this consultation document about marriage.’

But Miss Featherstone said yesterday: ‘I believe that if a couple love each other and want to commit to a life together, they should have the option of a civil marriage, whatever their gender.

‘Marriage is a celebration of love and should be open to everyone.’

PRO-MARRIAGE MP’S DEATH THREATS

Death threat: MP David BurrowesDeath threat: MP David Burrowes [JDN: LOOK AT HIM, WITH HIS FAIR HAIR AND BLUE EYES. OBVIOUSLY A NAZI. PROBABLY HAS A GAS CHAMBER IN HIS CAR. ;-)]

A senior MP who defended the institution of marriage has received death threats and hate mail, it emerged last night.

Tory David Burrowes, a ministerial aide to Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude, said he has been sent scores of intimidating emails and messages on social networking sites over his opposition to gay marriage.

Mr Burrowes, a Christian father of six, was forced to pass on the messages to police.

He said he was more worried about the intolerance displayed in the threats than the actual risk to his life.

But the North London MP has had to seek security advice after one website published details of his travel arrangements and urged campaigners to confront him.

‘Since I raised my head above the parapet on this issue I have received a barrage of death threats and hate mail,’ he told the Mail. ‘But I am more concerned about the curtailment of freedom of speech than the actual threats.

This is an example of general hostility, vitriol and hatred which will drive a wedge between people of different views.’

Mr Burrowes said teachers had already confided in him that they feared they would have to promote gay marriage if the Government pushed through the law change.

In an article for the Conservativehome website, Mr Burrowes said he feared the consultation over the proposals would lead to ‘a further erosion of freedom of expression’, adding: ‘I can put up with the intolerance and abuse sent my way for not just supporting marriage but daring to express my view on the subject!

‘But I am concerned for the teacher who feels her conscience constrained by a change in the law when declaring her belief in “traditional” marriage.’

Ministers have tried to placate furious Conservative MPs by offering them a free vote on the issue.

Comments (948)

Why not just ban anything that dares hint of being heterosexual such as mother, father, brother sister, uncle aunt , son daughter grandmother and grandfather and god mother godfather and of course girl and boy. This is getting to be a nonsense Is heterosexuality going to be the love that dare not speak its name? Just stick to spouse where ever the couple wish it, but I am someone’s wife and not ashamed of it

- June, CI , Essex, 16/3/2012 17:36

Click to rate     Rating   463

How much further down the pan can they force the UK, and it is force — as none of us voted for this or anything like it.

- FsASTSyd1, St.Neots UK, 16/3/2012 17:27

Click to rate     Rating   406

Report abuse

We soon won’t be allowed to call ourseves male or female for fear of upsetting the Gender-confused !

- cc, mk, 16/3/2012 17:25

Click to rate     Rating   437

Report abuse

Judges 17 vs. 6 “but every man did that which was right in his OWN eyes.” Seems that the heart of man never changes!

Report abuse

This is all so unneccessary. For a start, I am gay and have no objection to the term ‘husband and wife’, that’s what a married man and woman are and have always been. To call them anything else is ridiculous and it does not offend gay couples. The fact is that the majority of gay people do not care about this> It’s a small minority of the gay community that is pushing for it. It’s just a shame that these gay activists think they can speak for everyone and Cameron goes along with it. In the long run it doesn’t do any good and causes more harm. But this issue isn’t what the majority of gay people want. It’s just a shame that it doesnt come across like that.

- Spencer, Kent, 16/3/2012 17:24

Click to rate     Rating   309
{JdN: True, actually…. It is the Jews using the militant homosexuals to DESTROY the white birth rate and family.]
Click to rate     Rating   55

Report abuse

UTTER NONSENSE !

- TerryM, Newport Pagnell, 16/3/2012 17:21

Click to rate     Rating   219

Report abuse

Any government which finds itself opposed by the Pope AND the Archbishop of Canterbury needs to sit down and have a good think about things. – Christian, Province of Britannia, 16/3/2012 16:36 ———————————————— Click to rate     Rating   177

 

===============please donate

I need to film and edit the final video, and redo this website to a mass-appeal website. Others have been making big sacrifices. How about you?

This is how you can help financially:

–checks, postal money orders and other money orders that are left blank in the recipient area — or made out to “John de Nugent”

.

$50 in US cash Thursday from the True North, Proud and Free (Canada). The banknote itself honors President (and general) Ulysses Grant, who during the War Between the States (called wrongly the “Civil War” — it was not a war between angry civilians — the French and Germans call it correctly the “Secession War”) banned all Jews from a three-state military district for illegal cotton trading and other swindles. (A panicky Abraham Lincoln had General Halleck order Grant’s order rescinded.)

 

–sending valuable jewelry or gold coins

–cash in an envelope, even with a fake return address (no risk there!)

–bank wire to my Woodforest bank account (contact me for details at john_denugent@yahoo.com; one comrade does this every month!)

–PAYPAL (write me for details) –gift cards for BestBuy, Walmart, Barnes & Noble bookstores, etc.

I need your donation urgently to pay for the new website and for the final video, which will be the most devastating attack on the Jews FOCUSING ON CHILD MOLESTATION, THE MOST HATED CRIME ON EARTH, and the most inspiring appeal to the Aryan soul inside us, of all times.

=============A STRONG ECONOMY COMES FROM A HEROIC RACE

“Now, the truth is that the State in itself has nothing whatsoever to do with any definite economic concept or a definite economic development. It does not arise from a compact made between contracting parties, within a certain delimited territory, for the purpose of serving economic ends. The State is a community of living beings who have kindred physical and spiritual natures, organized for the purpose of assuring the conservation of their own kind and to help towards fulfilling those ends which Providence has assigned to that particular race or racial branch. Therein, and therein alone, lie the purpose and meaning of a State.”

“Economic activity is one of the many auxiliary means which are necessary for the attainment of those aims. But economic activity is never the origin or purpose of a State, except where a State has been originally founded on a false and unnatural basis. And this alone explains why a State as such does not necessarily need a certain delimited territory as a condition of its establishment.”

“This condition becomes a necessary pre-requisite only among those people who would provide and assure subsistence for their kinsfolk through their own industry, which means that they are ready to carry on the struggle for existence by means of their own work. People who can sneak their way, like parasites, into the human body politic and make others work for them under various pretenses can form a State without possessing any definite delimited territory.”

“This is chiefly applicable to that parasitic nation which, particularly at the present time preys upon the honest portion of mankind; I mean the Jews.

The Jewish State has never been delimited in space. It has been spread all over the world, without any frontiers whatsoever, and has always been constituted from the membership of one race exclusively. That is why the Jews have always formed a State within the State.”

“One of the most ingenious tricks ever devised has been that of sailing the Jewish ship-of-state under the flag of Religion and thus securing that tolerance which Aryans are always ready to grant to different religious faiths. But the Mosaic Law is really nothing else than the doctrine of the preservation of the Jewish race. Therefore this Law takes in all spheres of sociological, political and economic science which have a bearing on the main end in view.”

“The instinct for the preservation of one’s own species is the primary cause that leads to the formation of human communities. Hence the State is a racial organism, and not an economic organization.”

“The difference between the two is so great as to be incomprehensible to our contemporary so-called ‘statesmen’. That is why they like to believe that the State may be constituted as an economic structure, whereas the truth is that it has always resulted from the exercise of those qualities which are part of the will to preserve the species and the race. But these qualities always exist and operate through the heroic virtues and have nothing to do with commercial egoism; for the conservation of the species always presupposes that the individual is ready to sacrifice himself.

The sacrifice of the individual existence is necessary in order to assure the conservation of the race. Hence it is that the most essential condition for the establishment and maintenance of a State is a certain feeling of solidarity, wounded in an identity of character and race and in a resolute readiness to defend these at all costs.”

With people who live on their own territory this will result in a development of the heroic virtues; with a parasitic people it will develop the arts of subterfuge and gross perfidy unless we admit that these characteristics are innate and that the varying political forms through which the parasitic race expresses itself are only the outward manifestations of innate characteristics. At least in the beginning, the formation of a State can result only from a manifestation of the heroic qualities I have spoken of. And the people who fail in the struggle for existence, that is to say those, who become vassals and are thereby condemned to disappear entirely sooner or later, are those who do not display the heroic virtues in the struggle, or those who fall victims to the perfidy of the parasites…”

“The qualities which are employed for the foundation and preservation of a State have accordingly little or nothing to do with the economic situation. And this is conspicuously demonstrated by the fact that the inner strength of a State only very rarely coincides with what is called its economic expansion. On the contrary, there are numerous examples to show that a period of economic prosperity indicates the approaching decline of a State. If it were correct to attribute the foundation of human communities to economic forces, then the power of the State as such would be at its highest pitch during periods of economic prosperity, and not vice versa.”

“It is specially difficult to understand how the belief that the State is brought into being and preserved by economic forces could gain currency in a country which has given proof of the opposite in every phase of its history. The history of Prussia shows in a manner particularly clear and distinct, that it is out of the moral virtues of the people and not from their economic circumstances that a State is formed.”

“It is only under the protection of those virtues that economic activities can be developed and the latter will continue to flourish until a time comes when the creative political capacity declines. Therewith the economic structure will also break down, a phenomenon which is now happening in an alarming manner before our eyes. The material interest of mankind can prosper only in the shade of the heroic virtues. The moment they become the primary considerations of life they wreck the basis of their own existence.”

Adolf Hitler
Mein Kampf

Here is a new video series full of both the vilest anti-Hitler Jew lies, on the one hand, and yet superb video footage on the other hand, much of it colorized and thus much more lively than the old black-and-white.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79wkEB9Vauo&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWx_1qBpmeE&feature=related

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: