Protect Democracy & Expose Western Liberal Democracy

Posts tagged ‘USA’

The Great Criminals: Roosevelt, Stalin, and Churchill – Part One


The Great Criminals - Roosevelt, Stalin, and Churchill in Yalta

In the grounds of the Livadia Palace, Yalta, during the Three Power Conference the British wartime Prime Minister Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill (1874 – 1965), the 32nd President of the United States of America Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882 – 1945) and the Soviet leader Joseph Stalin (1879 – 1953) (Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili). (Photo by Keystone/Getty Images)

Indeed the three figures who were used to shape the world after WWII, Roosevelt, Stalin, and Churchill are great criminals who must be put in trial for what they did.

Without jumping into Antisemitism, it is necessary to check out the Turkic Jewish influence and ancestry of a Dutch, a Cossack, and a Spencer.

Part One: The Crimes of Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR)

Franklin Delano Roosevelt the Great Criminal

By James Buchanan

Sixty years ago one of the most evil men in world history, Franklin Delano Roosevelt died. Without World War Two, FDR would have been seen as a dishonest bungler who couldn’t get America out of the Great Depression –but because he helped win a major war (which Americans had no need to fight), historians meekly assume the war was necessary and ignore the evidence that the war was provoked.

Roosevelt began his career as a corrupt politician out of New York. He became assistant secretary of the Navy prior to World War One and there is a strong suspicion that Roosevelt and First Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill conspired to arrange the sinking of the Lusitania…

The Lusitania incident is extremely significant in understanding FDR (and Churchill). These men were willing to allow the deaths of 1,201 civilians in an arranged attack way back in the year 1916 when such a deliberate mass murder was inconceivable for most civilized people.

 

Roosevelt surrounded himself with Jewish advisors –a sure sign of a corrupt president. FDR failed to tell Americans about the mass murder of 30 million White Christians by Jewish commissars in the Soviet Union in the 1920s and ’30s. Instead, FDR saved all his indignation and hatred for National Socialist Germany, which had removed the Jews from power and brought great prosperity to the German people.

FDR secretly ordered the US Navy to wage war against German submarines long before the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt also supplied massive shipments of war materials for England and the Soviet Union prior to Dec. 7th, 1941 in violation of the Neutrality Act, passed by Congress.

Roosevelt deliberately provoked the attack on Pearl Harbor by cutting off oil to Japan and issuing an ultimatum to the Japanese Empire that they stop their war against China. (Curiously, FDR never felt an urge to issue an ultimatum to the British Empire to stop their war against Germany and Italy.) Roosevelt knew that Pearl Harbor was about to be attacked, but withheld this information since the Japanese might call off the attack if American forces were prepared, sent out more search planes and spotted their fleet halfway to Pearl Harbor. FDR blamed the commander of Pearl Harbor for the ensuing disaster.

Over 2,000 Americans died at Pearl Harbor because of FDR’s political maneuvering and treachery. An even worse disaster took place in the Philippines. Because FDR had sent most of our war production to England and the Soviet Union, our soldiers on the Philippines lacked sufficient tanks, artillery and fighter planes to withstand a Japanese assault. Over 80,000 American soldiers became POWs and half of these men died in captivity –thanks in large part to Roosevelt’s treachery.

Many Jews and empty-headed Gentiles praise Roosevelt for “winning” World War Two, but what exactly was won in that war? America could have spared itself anywhere from 250,000 to 400,000 deaths if it stayed out of World War Two. Germany never had any plans to invade the US and lacked an adequate navy to do so. The Japanese only attacked America after extreme provocations and hoped to sign an armistice rather than fight a war to the death. Because of America’s involvement in World War Two, most of eastern and central Europe became enslaved by the Communists and millions of innocent civilians were liquidated by the same Jewish commissars, who killed so many innocent people before the war.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt is one of the greatest criminals in world history. His death just weeks before the end of the war was almost certainly an act of God to show the world that a man may conquer the world, but God decides where his soul will go.

Comment: His original family name was actually Rosenfeld, Jewish. It explains a lot.

 

FDR’s Crimes

By Daniel Larison, May 13, 2005

Still, we can recognize crimes as crimes, which brings me back to Roosevelt. Why are Americans still treating this monster as a hero?

I hardly know where to start. His contempt for the U.S. Constitution he was sworn to defend, in everything from creating a national welfare state to putting U.S. citizens in concentration camps, is almost a minor item on his ledger. So are his deceits in getting the United States into World War II, while assuring the American public that he was doing everything he could to keep us at peace.

Long before that war began, he befriended Joseph Stalin by granting diplomatic recognition to the Soviet Union, shortly after it had deliberately starved millions of Ukrainians. During the war, he made an alliance with Stalin, not as a regrettable necessity, but with effusive praise for “Uncle Joe.” He even urged Hollywood to make pro-Soviet films to dispel “prejudice” against Soviet Communism and lent a hand in the production of the egregious propaganda movie Mission to Moscow. (Jack Warner later called the film the worst mistake of his long career.)

As the war progressed, Roosevelt ordered the massive bombing of Japanese and German cities for the express purpose of killing as many civilians as possible. His victims, from Tokyo to Berlin, numbered in the millions. He was uninhibited by the ancient principle of Christian civilization that warfare should spare noncombatants.

But that wasn’t enough. Meanwhile Roosevelt launched the Manhattan Project to develop the atomic bomb, which could obliterate whole cities in a flash. He thereby took the world into a dreadful new era in history, which concerned him not at all.

Long after Pearl Harbor is forgotten, the name of Franklin Roosevelt should “live in infamy.” Yet the United States still officially honors him when an official apology to the entire human race would be more fitting.

Binary Economics Challenging the Right, Left, and Khazarians


Binary Economics Challenging the Right, Left, and Khazarians

Binary Economics Challenging the Right, Left, and Khazarians

“The Roman arena was technically a level playing field. But on one side were the lions with all the weapons, and on the other the Christians with all the blood. That’s not a level playing field. That’s a slaughter. And so is putting people into the economy without equipping them with capital, while equipping a tiny handful of people with hundreds and thousands of times more than they can use.”    –Louis O. Kelso in Bill Moyers: A World of Ideas II, Public Opinions from Private Citizens, (1990, both book and video) page 214, ISBN 0385416644

Binary economics, also known as Two-factor Economics, is a theory of economics that endorses both private property and a free market but proposes significant reforms to the banking system. According to theories first proposed by Louis Kelso, widespread use of central bank-issued interest-free loans to fund employee-owned firms can finance economic growth whilst widening stock ownership in a way which binary economists believe will be non-inflationary.

Binary economics rejects the claim that neoclassical economics alone promotes a ‘free market’ which is free, fair and efficient. (e.g., as an interpretation of the classical First Fundamental Theorem of Welfare Economics). Binary economists believe freedom is only truly achieved if all individuals are able to acquire an independent economic base from capital holdings, and that the distribution of ownership rights can “deepen democracy”.

Although elements of binary economics can be found elsewhere (e.g., Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum 1891; the Distributism economic ideology of G.K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc; and Harold Moulton (1935) The Formation of Capital, the first clear formulation of the subject was in 1958. This was done by Louis Kelso (lawyer and economist, 1913-1991) and Mortimer Adler (the American Aristotelian philosopher, 1902-2001) in their unhappily titled, but momentous, book The Capitalist Manifesto (1958).

Let us hope Trump Administration will work to remove the myth that the conflict is between Right and Left. Even most the Republicans and Democrats themselves are in illusion that it is Right versus Left. I have great hopes in India and the rest of BRICS to promote Binary Economics all over the world as a viable ideological alternative for Right and Left and rid the world from the poisonous Khazarian politics and economics. Humanize Capitalism.

 

Louis Orth Kelso, founder of Kelso & Company and inventor of ESOPs

Louis Orth Kelso, founder of Kelso & Company and inventor of ESOPs

Louis Orth Kelso (December 4, 1913 – February 17, 1991) was a political economist, corporate and financial lawyer, author, lecturer and merchant banker who is chiefly remembered today as the inventor and pioneer of the employee stock ownership plan (ESOP), invented to enable working people without savings to buy stock in their employer company and pay for it out of its future dividend yield.

Kelso created the ESOP in 1956 to enable the employees of a closely held newspaper chain to buy out its retiring owners. Two years later Kelso and his co-author, the philosopher Mortimer J. Adler, explained the macro-economic theory on which the ESOP is based in The Capitalist Manifesto (Random House, 1958). In The New Capitalists (Random House, 1961), the two authors present Kelso’s financial tools for democratizing capital ownership in a private property, market economy. These ideas were further elaborated and refined in Two-Factor Theory: The Economics of Reality (Random House, 1967) and Democracy and Economic Power: Extending the ESOP Revolution Through Binary Economics (1986, Ballinger Publishing Company, Cambridge, Massachusetts; reprinted 1991, University Press of America, Lanham, Maryland), both co-authored by Patricia Hetter Kelso, his collaborator since 1963.

Kelso’s next financing innovation, the Consumer Stock Ownership Plan (CSOP), in 1958 enabled a consortium of farmers to finance and start up a fertilizer plant. Despite fierce opposition from the major oil companies who dominated the industry, Valley Nitrogen Producers was a resounding success. Substantial dividends first paid for the stock and then drastically reduced fertilizer costs for the farmer-shareholders.

Kelso regarded the ESOP and CSOP as pragmatic proof that his revolutionary revision of classical economic theory, and the financial techniques he derived from this new perspective, were sound and workable in the economic and business world.

Kelso long believed that he had not originated a new economic theory but only discovered a vital fact that the classical economists had somehow overlooked. This fact was the key to understanding why the private property, free market economy was notoriously unstable, pursuing a roller coaster course of exhilarating highs and terrifying descents into economic and financial collapse.

This missing fact, which Kelso had uncovered over years of intensive reading, research and thought, drastically modifies the classical paradigm which has dominated formal economics since Adam Smith. It concerns the effect of technological change on the distributive dynamics of a private property, free market economy.

Below is a video of Louis Kelso being interviewed by Harold Hudson Channer. Made in 1987, this video is extraordinarily topical.

 

Rodney Shakespeare and his BinaryEconomics.net

Rodney Shakespeare was Visiting Professor of Binary Economics at Trisakti University, Jakarta where he taught on the international postgraduate Islamic Economics and Finance program.

He is a Cambridge MA; a qualified UK Barrister; and a well-known paper presenter and lecturer particularly at Islamic conferences dealing with money, the real economy, and social and economic justice. He is a co-founder of the Global Justice Movement  and the author of BinaryEconomics.net. In 2000 he received the (Martin Luther) King-Kelso Award. He broadcasts with Press TV, Russia Today, Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting and various other TV and radio stations.

Rodney’s first book on binary economics The Two-factor Nation was published in 1976. He is co-author (with Robert Ashford) of the standard textbook on binary economics Binary Economics – the new paradigm (1999).

Rodney Shakespeare is co-author (with Peter Challen) of the subsequent text Seven Steps to Justice (2002) which further develops binary economics, and is also author of The Modern Universal Paradigm (July, 2007) containing later developments in particular relating to paradigmatic understanding and the appeal of binary economics to people of faith and of good faith.

Binary economics is the expression of a new universal paradigm or new understanding of reality that creates a new economics, a new politics, a new justice and a new morality. It also addresses the big environmental issues. Without the new modern universal paradigm there will be no peace, nor an end to colonialism and racism.

 

Quick Technical Summary of Binary Economics

  1. Commercial banks to lend (at interest), as they wish, only their own money and, with permission, that of depositors. Commercial banks not allowed creating new money.

NB This creates a limited pool of money enabling reasonable interest rates to be paid to depositors.

  1. Central (or National or European) Bank to create interest-free loan money for productive capacity and, in particular, for the spreading of productive capacity (and thus the associated consuming capacity), over time, to every person in society. This is counter-inflationary because new, widespread productive (and consuming) capacity comes into existence while the money which created it is cancelled.
  2. The Central Bank interest-free loan money to be administered by the commercial banks only allowed making a reasonable administration charge.
  3. The Central Bank need only make periodic checks on a commercial bank to ensure that the interest-free loan supply is being used specifically for the spreading of productive capacity.

Any commercial bank abusing the privilege of administering the interest-free loan supply (for the benefit of everybody in society) will lose that privilege.

In its economics aspect, binary economics is a market economics whose markets work for everybody. Furthermore, it upholds private property but private property (and the associated income) for everybody.

An alternative summary is “the use of national bank-issued interest-free loans, administered by the banking system, for the development and spreading of various forms of productive (and the associated consuming) capacity thereby creating a balance of supply and demand with producers and consumers being the same people (as required by Say’s Theorem) and forwarding social and economic justice.”

No subsidy is involved. Existing money (e.g., a bank’s capital or, with permission, the deposits of customers) may be lent in ways including interest. However, newly created money MUST be lent interest-free for developing and spreading the real economy to every individual in the population.

 

Fifty Nine False Assumptions of Mainstream Neo-classical Economics

Below are listed fifty-nine false assumptions which underlie mainstream neo-classical economics. These false assumptions are basic things believed to be true or taken for granted as inevitable or sensible, but which, in fact, are false. This is a matter of considerable importance because if only one assumption is false (or, at the most, two or three assumptions are false) then the whole structure of neo-classical economics becomes invalid.

 

The false assumptions of neo-classical economics are that:-

  1. Scarcity is an inevitable part of the human condition.
  2. High taxation is necessary.
  3. Labour physically creates all, or a large part, of the wealth.
  4. The ‘free market’ is free.
  5. The ‘free market’ is efficient and allocates resources efficiently.
  6. The outcomes of the ‘free market’ are always just.
  7. Homo economicus is an accurate description of human psychology.
  8. Conventional economics is an all-encompassing science of objective process and universal value and further improvement to economics is impossible.
  9. It is a matter of small importance that the banking system creates money out of nothing sufficient for the repayment of the principal of a loan but not of the interest.
  10. The ‘free market’ consists of states of equilibrium; when there is disequilibrium there will always be a return to equilibrium.

11 There Is No Such Thing As a Free Lunch (any improvement for the poor inevitably involves a detriment to the rich).

  1. The ‘free market’ upholds private property for all.
  2. It does not matter who owns the capital, particularly productive capital.
  3. The ‘free market’ implements Say’s market Theorem (Law) that producers and consumers should be the same people.
  4. Somebody who voluntarily looks after a sick child does no work in the economic sense.
  5. Interest is inevitable and always necessary.
  6. Ethics/morality is not part of economics.
  7. The poor are poor because of lack of effort and lack of skill (rather than lack of productive capital, lack of access to capital credit and suffering the burden of interest).
  8. Inflation is not caused by the banking system.
  9. Financial savings are necessary before there can be investment.
  10. Physical savings are necessary before there can be investment.
  11. Labour and welfare payment will always suffice.
  12. It is not necessary for every person to have an independent income.
  13. The level of interest rates is all that is necessary to manage an economy properly.
  14. Wide ownership is not necessary.
  15. Student loans should bear interest.
  16. Public capital projects should be funded by borrowing interest-bearing money.
  17. Micro-credit lending should bear interest.
  18. Environmental capital projects should bear interest.
  19. An economy requires two lots of financing – one for production and one for consumption. (NB Only one lot of financing is necessary if it is simulfinancing as in binary economics).
  20. There is no such thing as society.
  21. Personal debt is healthy for an economy; as also national debt.
  22. There is no power imbalance between actors (participants, including individuals) in an economy.
  23. Social and economic justice on the one hand and efficiency on the other are incompatible.
  24. Economic history is irrelevant.
  25. Outdated economic theory (Adam Smith, 1776), basically conceived before the industrial revolution had got under way, suffices to guide modern economic theory and practice.
  26. The important things in economics are anything except the development and spreading of productive capacity so as to make producers and consumers the same people thereby enabling a Say’s Theorem (Law) balance of supply and demand and also enabling the forwarding of social and economic justice.
  27. Banks should be able to offer mortgages (as distinct from administering national bank mortgages).
  28. Economic inequality is desirable; the greater the ratio between top earnings and bottom earnings, the better.
  29. ‘Trickle down’ economics works.
  30. Rising house and stock market prices are necessarily a sign of genuinely increased wealth.
  31. Economic cycles are inevitable.
  32. Individual greed is good and institutionalised greed is even better.
  33. Countries should raise money at interest on the international markets.
  34. Countries should not be autonomous; they should be controlled by others.
  35. A country’s assets should be owned by outsiders.
  36. A country’s money supply should originate in the banking system rather than the national bank.
  37. Employee shareholdings and involvement do not improve efficiency.
  38. Political democracy does not require economic democracy.
  39. Even though today’s banking system money is created out of nothing there is a time value to borrowed money.
  40. Environmental matters are extraneous and impose extraneous cost.
  41. Not only ethics but belief in God should be eschewed.
  42. Economics is essentially a separate subject which does not have to take account of other subjects.
  43. The creation of money out of nothing and the addition of interest does not require even more creation and even more debt.
  44. Population growth is inevitable.
  45. An understanding of technology is irrelevant to economics.
  46. Jobs can be exported.
  47. Domestic manufacturing does not matter.
  48. Education and training suffice for economic needs.

NB Binary Economics becomes easily understood if the fifty-nine false assumptions of prevailing economics are one by one, and simply, reversed. Quite soon, it becomes apparent that a different picture is emerging and then, long before all the false assumptions have been reversed, it is brightly clear that a totally new landscape – the Binary landscape – has emerged.

Binary Economics might be summarized in “a justice which creates efficiency and an efficiency which creates justice. “ It is the only opportunity for people to create real democracy, away from fake contemporary democracies and tyranny. It a real challenge and threat for the Right, Left, and Khazarians, that is why people will not be allowed to know it, despite its existence for a very long lime.

The fourth side of this economic and political global conflict is the people, and they are the least influential.

The Arab–Khazar wars


Rise of Khazaria 600 - 850 CE

Rise of Khazaria 600 – 850 CE

Shortly after the death of Mohammed in AD 632, according to Columbia University Professor, D. M. Dunlop, Arab armies began a campaign northward, sweeping “through the wreckage of two empires and carrying all before them till they reached the great mountain barrier of the Caucasus. This barrier once passed,” Dunlop observes, “the road lay open to the lands of eastern Europe.” Had the Caliphate (the armies of the Muslim Caliph) surmounted that immense geological deterrent unchallenged, the history of Europe and, indeed, the rest of the Judeo-Christian world would have been vastly different than it now is.

It was at the Caucasus, however, that the Arabs encountered the Khazars, initiating a war that lasted over a century and effectively prevented Europe from becoming Islamic. So powerful, socially and militarily, were the Khazars that, as Kevin Alan Brook relates in his work The Jews of Khazaria, “a 10th-century emperor of the Byzantines [Roman Empire], Constantine Porphyrogenitus, sent correspondence to the Khazars marked with a gold seal worth 3 solidi – more than the 2 solidi that always accompanied letters to the Pope of Rome, the Prince of the Rus, and the Prince of the Hungarians.”

The Arab–Khazar wars were a series of conflicts fought between the armies of the Khazar Khaganate and the Umayyad Caliphate (as well as its Abbasid successor) and their respective vassals.

Historians usually distinguish two major periods of conflict, the First (сa. 642–652) and Second (ca. 722–737) Arab–Khazar Wars, but the Arab–Khazar military confrontation involved several sporadic raids and isolated clashes as well, over a period from the middle of the 7th century to the end of the 8th century.

Almost all the fighters in the Umayyad armies were of Turkic origins and on the other hand the Khazar Khaganate was a Turkic colony. So the wars were actually between Turks claiming to Muslim Arabs versus Jewish Turks claiming to be Israelite.

This is reflected in the popular belief among Middle Eastern cultures that Alexander the Great had with divine assistance barred the Caucasus against the hordes of “Gog and Magog”, commonly regarded as an echo of the invasions by the Scythians and the Huns. Eventually, the Khazars would take their place, and early medieval writers came to identify the Khazars with Gog and Magog.

From that time came the concept of division of the world into the “House of Islam” (Dar al-Islam) and the “House of War” (Dar al-Harb), to which the pagan Turkic nomads were consigned.

The main significance of theses wars is in turning Islam into a Turkic version and dominance of completely different essence from the original Islam. Original Islam disappeared almost completely after Arab–Khazar wars. Instead of that appeared new traditions like salafi, Sunni, Shia and Sufi Islam.

Sons of the Conquerors: The Rise of the Turkic World, International Edition, by: Hugh Pope (Author) Paperback: 416 pages, Publisher: Overlook Books (October 31, 2006)

In his major new work, Wall Street Journal Istanbul correspondent Hugh Pope provides a vivid picture of the Turkic people, descendants of the nomadic armies that conquered the Byzantine Empire and reigned over the region for centuries. Today the Turks encompass a region much larger than the political boundaries of the nation of Turkey – from the Xinjiang province of western China, to Iran, Iraq, the Netherlands, Germany, all the way to the Appalachian Mountains of the United States.

One of the world’s foremost experts on modern Turkey – its languages, people, and history – and acclaimed co-author of Turkey Unveiled (a New York Times Notable Book), Hugh Pope has traveled the world to encounter and assimilate the many facets of this extraordinarily complex and fascinating ethnic group, distilling the essential qualities shared by all people of Turkish descent. Rich with stories and legends stretching back centuries, Sons of the Conquerors is a compellingly readable account of a profoundly neglected subject.

The Khazars of Conquest and Violence

Of the ferocity and warlike tendencies of the Khazars there is little doubt and much historical evidence, all of it pointing to a race of people so violent in their dealings with their fellow men that they were feared and abhorred above all peoples in that region of the world.

The ninth-century monk Druthmar of Aquitaine, in his commentary on Matthew 24:14 in Expositio in Matthaeum Evangelistam, stated that the Gazari, or Khazars, dwelt “in the lands of Gog and Magog.”

Leo IV the Khazar

Leo IV the Khazar (25 January 750 – 8 September 780) was Byzantine Emperor from 775 to 780 AD. Leo was the son of Emperor Constantine V by his first wife, Irene of Khazaria (Tzitzak), the daughter of a Khagan of the Khazars (thought to be Bihar). He was crowned co-emperor by his father in 751.

The Roman Emperor Heraclius, in 627, formed a military alliance with the Khazars for the purpose of a final defeat of the Persians. Upon the first meeting of the Khazar king, Ziebel, with the Roman Emperor, the Khazars displayed, in full array, their skills at diplomatic flattery — skills that would serve them well and would not disappear with their kingdom. He “with his nobles dismounted from their horses,” says Gibbon, “…and fell prostrate on the ground, to adore the purple of the Caesar.” So enamored was the Byzantine Emperor with this display of obeisance that it eventually led to the offer, along with many riches, of the Caesar’s daughter Eudocia in marriage. That union never took place due to the death of Ziebel while Eudocia was enroute to Khazaria. However, after the final defeat of Islam’s designs on the Northern Kingdom in AD 730, a marriage between a Khazar princess and the heir to the Byzantine Roman Empire resulted in an offspring who was to rule Byzantium as Leo the Khazar. Thus the “King of the North” had skilfully managed to place himself on the throne of the Roman Empire.

The Turkic blood in the Byzantine Empire resulted in many ways to the end of the Isaurian dynasty in 802.

Today’s terrorist Islam is phony.

Khazarian Terrorism, Zionism, & Migration Crisis


Khazarian Terrorism

Khazarian Terrorism

Liberal Democracy and the EU are using massive global migrations to change the demography of many regions to advance their powers and profits. They are doing these by colluding with the Khazars.  On the other hand conservative patriots and nationalists all over the world are opposing such devastating massive global migrations and degenerative cultural policies citing fierce opposition to what they describe as “Islamic” terrorism. The conflict between liberals and conservatives is putting genuine faiths and human rights under unfair attacks from both sides.

The Khazars are the king makers in this conflict between liberal democrats and conservative republicans. By shifting alliances and using their aggressive influence in Islam, Christianity, and Judaism, and their networks in many regions, the Khazars are the real winners.

The Khazars are fatal threats to national and global security, peace, and prosperity in this mad conflict between liberals and conservatives. Don’t let immorality, selfishness, greed, naivety, and illusions guide you.

Concerned people must ask: Who are those Khazars?

The conflict is not between Right and Left. It is a three sided conflict that is why it is extremely dangerous.

Who are the Khazars, and what are their relationships with fake religions, Islam, Judaism, Terrorism, extremism, Zionism, racism, wars, and migration?

The Khazars (Turkish: Hazarlar, Azerbaijani: Xəzərlər, Tatar: Xäzärlär, Hebrew: כוזרים‎‎ (Kuzarim), Arabic: خزر‎‎ (khazar), Ukrainian: Хоза́ри, Russian: Хаза́ры, Persian: خزر‎‎, Greek: Χάζαροι, Latin: Gazari/Cosri/Gasani) were a semi-nomadic Turkic people, who created what for its duration was the most powerful polity to emerge from the breakup of the Western Turkic Kaganate. Astride a major artery of commerce between northern Europe and southwestern Asia, Khazaria became one of the foremost trading emporia of the medieval world, commanding the western marches of the Silk Road and playing a key commercial role as a crossroad between China, the Middle East and Kievan Rus’. For some three centuries (c. 650–965) the Khazars dominated the vast area extending from the Volga-Don steppes to the eastern Crimea and the northern Caucasus.

“A THOUSAND YEARS before the establishment of the Modern State of Israel, there existed a Jewish kingdom in the eastern fringes of Europe, astride the Don and Volga rivers…” So begins a thesis by Jewish author Kevin Alan Brook. The kingdom of which he speaks appears at first consideration to be comprised of nearly as much disinformation, misinformation, “myth”information, and, curiously, NO-information as there is actual provable historical fact. Yet upon closer scrutiny this kingdom, known as Khazaria, or the Kingdom of the Khazars, is clearly revealed in a vast body of historical evidence, much of which has come to light only in the last three to five decades.

This mysterious kingdom, which has sculpted our modern world to an astounding (and alarming) degree, once occupied an immense land area of over a million square miles extending from western Hungary/Austria eastward to the Aural Sea, north to the Upper Volga, and its southern region extending to the Caucasus Mountains between the Black and Caspian seas. It was at that time literally the largest country on earth. It has only been in the last several decades, however, that greater documented evidence from ancient manuscripts has come to light and revealed the astonishing historical truth of this ancient kingdom and its connection to the origins of modern-day Israel.

Though little known to the West, and, for that matter, to even those currently occupying its ancestral land, the Khazar kingdom has been responsible for substantially shaping the history and political landscape of Europe and specifically Western Asia, but also to a remarkable degree the entirety of human events on this planet.

Of the ferocity and warlike tendencies of the Khazars there is little doubt and much historical evidence, all of it pointing to a race of people so violent in their dealings with their fellow men that they were feared and abhorred above all peoples in that region of the world.

This is the story of a kingdom of belligerent, warlike Caucasian nomads, having no linked ancestry with anything Israelite this side of Noah, yet adopting Talmudic Judaism and becoming the dominant — and virtually only — current force in twenty-first century international Jewry.

During the course of this work salient facts and issues will be presented without a too-extensive reliance on tedious historical documentation. However, considering the delicacy of the subject — especially in this modern age where any divergence from certain agendas for “political correctness” can result in epithets of racism or anti-Semitism — and for the obvious sake of accuracy, reasonably comprehensive documentation is necessary.

In this it will be shown that the cry of “anti-Semitism” hurled against those who do oppose the international actions of those ones calling themselves Jews, would be much like an immigrated Scotsman to America deciding to live on an Apache Indian reservation, coming to dominate its politics and economics, and then claiming that anyone disagreeing with his political and social agenda is racist and anti-Apache in their beliefs.

What under different circumstances could prove to be a dry treatise on Eastern European Jewish history is, if closely examined, actually a narrative of events that have laid a sequential pathway to, and beyond, the destruction of the New York World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. This historical time line has been fixed in its present course, which, by all appearances and in a most unexpected manner, is culminating in the fulfillment of the Biblical prophecies of Armageddon. But then, it has always been so with prophecy. The most consistent aspect in the nature of prophetic fulfillment is that it is consistently surprising. God has invariably worked to complete His desires, prophetically, in ways that have not been understood until revealed in retrospect — in the light of their actual happening.

The native religion of the Khazars is thought to have been Tengrism, like that of the North Caucasian Huns and other Turkic peoples. The polyethnic populace of the Khazar Khaganate appears to have been a multiconfessional mosaic of pagan, Tengrist, Jewish, Christian and Muslim worshippers. The ruling elite of the Khazars was said by Judah Halevi and Abraham ibn Daud to have converted to Rabbinic Judaism in the 8th century, but the scope of the conversion within the Khazar Khanate remains uncertain. Proposals of Khazar origins have been made regarding the Slavic Judaising Subbotniks, the Bukharan Jews, the Muslim Kumyks, Kazakhs, the Cossacks of the Don region, the Turkic-speaking Krymchaks and their Crimean neighbours the Karaites to the Moldavian Csángós, the Mountain Jews and others.

In the late 19th century, a theory emerged that the core of today’s Ashkenazi Jews are genetically descended from a hypothetical Khazarian Jewish diaspora who had migrated westward from modern Russia and Ukraine into modern France and Germany. This theory still finds occasional support, but most scholars view it with skepticism. The theory is sometimes associated with anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism. Connected to this thesis is the theory, expounded by Paul Wexler, that the grammar of Yiddish contains a Khazar substrate.

The rise of the Rus’ led to the collapse of the Khazarian state by the 10th century. Though the Khazar kingdom did not wholly succumb to Sviatoslav’s campaign, but lingered on until 1224, when the Mongols invaded Rus’, by most accounts, the Rus’-Oghuz campaigns left Khazaria devastated, with perhaps many Khazarian Jews in flight, and leaving behind at best a minor rump state. The Khazars disappeared among Europeans, Arabs, Levantians, Anatolians, and Africans and became extreme Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Several scholars have suggested that the Khazars did not disappear after the dissolution of their Empire, but many but not all of them migrated west to eventually form part of the core of the later Ashkenazi and Shaphardi Jewish population of Europe, and made other Muslim and Jewish new communities in Caucasus, India, Arabia, Levant, and Africa.

Leo IV the Khazar

Leo IV the Khazar (25 January 750 – 8 September 780) was Byzantine Emperor from 775 to 780 AD. Leo was the son of Emperor Constantine V by his first wife, Irene of Khazaria (Tzitzak), the daughter of a Khagan of the Khazars (thought to be Bihar). He was crowned co-emperor by his father in 751.

The Roman Emperor Heraclius, in 627, formed a military alliance with the Khazars for the purpose of a final defeat of the Persians. Upon the first meeting of the Khazar king, Ziebel, with the Roman Emperor, the Khazars displayed, in full array, their skills at diplomatic flattery — skills that would serve them well and would not disappear with their kingdom. He “with his nobles dismounted from their horses,” says Gibbon, “…and fell prostrate on the ground, to adore the purple of the Caesar.” So enamored was the Byzantine Emperor with this display of obeisance that it eventually led to the offer, along with many riches, of the Caesar’s daughter Eudocia in marriage. That union never took place due to the death of Ziebel while Eudocia was enroute to Khazaria. However, after the final defeat of Islam’s designs on the Northern Kingdom in AD 730, a marriage between a Khazar princess and the heir to the Byzantine Roman Empire resulted in an offspring who was to rule Byzantium as Leo the Khazar. Thus the “King of the North” had skilfully managed to place himself on the throne of the Roman Empire.

The new blood in the Byzantine Empire resulted in many ways to the end of the Isaurian dynasty in 802.

Arab–Khazar wars

Shortly after the death of Mohammed in AD 632, according to Columbia University Professor, D. M. Dunlop, Arab armies began a campaign northward, sweeping “through the wreckage of two empires and carrying all before them till they reached the great mountain barrier of the Caucasus. This barrier once passed,” Dunlop observes, “the road lay open to the lands of eastern Europe.” Had the Caliphate (the armies of the Muslim Caliph) surmounted that immense geological deterrent unchallenged, the history of Europe and, indeed, the rest of the Judeo-Christian world would have been vastly different than it now is.

It was at the Caucasus, however, that the Arabs encountered the Khazars, initiating a war that lasted over a century and effectively prevented Europe from becoming Islamic. So powerful, socially and militarily, were the Khazars that, as Kevin Alan Brook relates in his work The Jews of Khazaria, “a 10th-century emperor of the Byzantines [Roman Empire], Constantine Porphyrogenitus, sent correspondence to the Khazars marked with a gold seal worth 3 solidi – more than the 2 solidi that always accompanied letters to the Pope of Rome, the Prince of the Rus, and the Prince of the Hungarians.” The Arab–Khazar wars were a series of conflicts fought between the armies of the Khazar Khaganate and the Umayyad Caliphate (as well as its Abbasid successor) and their respective vassals.

Historians usually distinguish two major periods of conflict, the First (сa. 642–652) and Second (ca. 722–737) Arab–Khazar Wars, but the Arab–Khazar military confrontation involved several sporadic raids and isolated clashes as well, over a period from the middle of the 7th century to the end of the 8th century.

Almost all the fighters in the Umayyad armies were of Turkic origins and on the other hand the Khazar Khaganate was a Turkic colony. So the wars were actually between Turks claiming to Muslim Arabs versus Jewish Turks claiming to be Israelite.

This is reflected in the popular belief among Middle Eastern cultures that Alexander the Great had with divine assistance barred the Caucasus against the hordes of “Gog and Magog”, commonly regarded as an echo of the invasions by the Scythians and the Huns. Eventually, the Khazars would take their place, and early medieval writers came to identify the Khazars with Gog and Magog.

From that time came the concept of division of the world into the “House of Islam” (Dar al-Islam) and the “House of War” (Dar al-Harb), to which the pagan Turkic nomads were consigned.

The main significance of theses wars is in turning Islam into a Turkic version and dominance of completely different essence from the original Islam. Original Islam disappeared almost completely after Arab–Khazar wars. Instead of that appeared new traditions like salafi, Sunni, Shia and Sufi Islam.

Sons of the Conquerors: The Rise of the Turkic World, International Edition, by: Hugh Pope (Author) Paperback: 416 pages, Publisher: Overlook Books (October 31, 2006)

In his major new work, Wall Street Journal Istanbul correspondent Hugh Pope provides a vivid picture of the Turkic people, descendants of the nomadic armies that conquered the Byzantine Empire and reigned over the region for centuries. Today the Turks encompass a region much larger than the political boundaries of the nation of Turkey – from the Xinjiang province of western China, to Iran, Iraq, the Netherlands, Germany, all the way to the Appalachian Mountains of the United States.

One of the world’s foremost experts on modern Turkey – its languages, people, and history – and acclaimed co-author of Turkey Unveiled (a New York Times Notable Book), Hugh Pope has traveled the world to encounter and assimilate the many facets of this extraordinarily complex and fascinating ethnic group, distilling the essential qualities shared by all people of Turkish descent. Rich with stories and legends stretching back centuries, Sons of the Conquerors is a compellingly readable account of a profoundly neglected subject.

The Khazars of Conquest and Violence

Of the ferocity and warlike tendencies of the Khazars there is little doubt and much historical evidence, all of it pointing to a race of people so violent in their dealings with their fellow men that they were feared and abhorred above all peoples in that region of the world.

The ninth-century monk Druthmar of Aquitaine, in his commentary on Matthew 24:14 in Expositio in Matthaeum Evangelistam, stated that the Gazari, or Khazars, dwelt “in the lands of Gog and Magog.”

EU Refugee Policy a Tricky War Against Humanity


EU refugee policy is a tricky war against humanity

EU refugee policy is a tricky war against humanity

The rise of global migration is a strong sign of a coming global war. Statistics show that each massive waves of local or global migration were immediately followed by local or global wars. Controlling migration is not only needed for national security, but even more importantly to maintain international and global peace.

The term “West” is inaccurate and misleading better to point clearly to the warmongering states; and these include liberal democrats in European states, and previous American administrations, plus their collaborators and agents like Gulf Arab states, Turkey, and Israel.

National security and global peace could not be maintained without stopping their policies and reversing them. Fleeing conflict zones serves the policies of war in two ways. First by surrendering those countries to liberal democrats and their puppets, and by changing the demography of Europe and USA to strengthen liberal democrats there. In addition to spreading a false PR plausible image of EU.

Fleeing will not stop or challenge the wars imposed on these states. Massive global migration could only be solved by addressing the causes of conflict and poverty and not by supporting fleeing under fake deceptive humanitarian slogans.

EU refugee policy is truly a tricky war against humanity disguised in sheep’s clothing that must be stopped and reversed by all nations and states.

 

Financial Crashes from Casino Corporate Banking Practices


eurozone12-amigos

Financial Crashes from Casino Corporate Banking Practices

 

Many experts found a formula to save the Banks and cut the « evil » forces which created the current international banking mess. They advocate to separate Retail/ Personal/ or Consumer banking from bank investment arms which is called Corporate/ business/ or investment Banking.
This solution is called “ring-fence rules”. Since 2009, Britain continue to discuss to make banks run retail banking operations as independent banks, almost entirely separate from their investment banking (higher-risk investment activities (“casino banking”)) and overseas operations, as the Bank of England made it clear that there will be no relaxation of the incoming ring-fencing rules.

Former Barclays chairman says: Bank ring-fence is redundant and should be scrapped.
We have better things to do than implement the ring-fence, says HSBC
The ring-fence rules apply to HSBC, Barclays, Royal Bank of Scotland, Lloyds Banking Group, Santander UK and the Co-operative Bank.
S&P warns ring-fence could turn UK investment banks into junk.

All banks are resisting efforts to split investment and retail banking on the grounds that it would cost billions to establish and reduce their profits.
Banks are avoiding and ignoring any reforms or public discussions on “ring-fence rules” aiming for the separation of investment and retail banking.
The media and the public are kept in the dark; and politicians who support such reforms are being undermined.

Post banks are very popular, secure, reliable, accessible and affordable type of retail/personal/ consumer banking. They are considered major financial services providers in many countries around the world. Japan, Germany, China, South Africa, and India have huge post banks.
Debate over re-instituting postal banking in the USA is heating up. Postal banks started in Great Britain in 1861 and, from the outset; the primary goal was financial inclusion. But in the U.S., postal banking had other uses as well. By 1934, postal banks had $1.2 billion in assets—about 10 percent of the entire commercial banking system—as small savers fled failing banks to the safety of a government-backed institution. Deposits also reached their peak in 1947 with almost $3.4 billion and 4 million users banking at their post offices. In 1965 postal banking in USA was ended.
Retail/personal/ consumer post banking can be established as independent public banks or operate as agents for private retail/personal/ consumer banks. They can greatly assist in separating Retail Banking from Corporate Banking, and provide accessible and affordable services for wide population.

This will, also, give the public postal system revenues to advance and expand their products and services. These services were abolished and ruined with IMF and World Bank policies in most developing countries. Now if anyone wants to send a parcel or transfer money they have to pay huge costs for foreign businesses that amount to theft.

Mobile banking could be great boost for national and international postal banking by introducing universal a single cash terminal/cashier in each suburb. All cash deposits and withdrawals could be made there, and these terminals/cashiers shall deliver and receive cash daily to and from different banks and businesses without the need for visiting banks and businesses branches. In this system, the area’s post office shall perform most of the functions of all cashiers for all banks and businesses at a fee. This shall reduce banking costs, create revenues, provide better and easier services, and expand and develop postal and courier products and quality.

Transforming Post banks into fully fledged retail banks with intensive mobile banking services and integration with postal, courier and saving systems are obvious and natural development goals.
Without separating Retail/ personal/ consumer Banking from Corporate / business Banking individuals always will carry risks and pay unfair costs to compensate for losses incurred from “casino banking” of Corporate / business Banks.
Many big Corporate / business Banks in America, Europe and the world bankrupted despite being supported by unseen revenues from Retail/ personal/ consumer banking.
It became very clear that No bank is too big to fail. So, the public must be very careful and don’t assume big international corporate banks are safer or better than local small Retail/ personal/ consumer banks. Post banks must be developed and encouraged to compete and go ahead forcing the Separation of investment and retail banking for the public and national interests and for financial stability and economy.

Post banks are very important in protecting people and economies from devastating financial crashes caused by casino banking practices.

Republican Democracy to Demolish the Myth of Liberal “Democracy”


Republican Democracy

Republican Democracy

Trump Movement Leads Republican Democracy to Demolish the Myth of Liberal “Democracy”.
Ten Facts about Republicanism versus Liberalism:
1- The marriage of democracy and liberalism is not inevitable, it is an illusion.
2- Liberalism is not democracy, they are not only distinct but even conflicting.
3- Liberalism does not imply Democracy, but only indicates globalism.
4- There are serious conflict of interests between Liberalism and Democracy.
5- Liberal “Democracy” is actually a mere capitalist globalism, and against national interests and security.
6- Liberalism is not at all about freedom of the people, it is only about the freedom of capital and transnational corporations.
7- The original authentic democracies were republicans, only the fake modern democracies are liberal.
8- The rise Liberalism goes hand in hand with the erosion of sovereignty and the rule of law.
9- Liberalism is soft aggression with strong expansionism, while Republicanism is hardworking with energetic patriotism.
10- Republicanism promotes national unity and international cooperation and in direct collision with Liberalism seeking globalist alliances and conflicts.

%d bloggers like this: