Best Search Engine for Free speech and privacy DuckDuckGo

Protecting searchers privacy and avoiding the Free Speech filter of Google's Bing's etc. personalized kosher search results.

Judaism is the only religion that have sex (thrusting their pelvis) when they pray to Goddess Shekinah.


The Elite Jews create the illness, then sell the Cure. They create Chaos & Terrorism, then sell the solution.

Problem, reaction, solution is a Jew conjuring trick within their forever wandering diaspora in order to play the victim, and influence global changes in laws to protect all their historic and contemporary lies ……Who still falls for this old Yiddish trick manipulating policy changes to hide and protect Jewish crimes, acting out Trotsky’s theory of permanent revolution against the gentile, changes which gives (((them))) immunity when hiding the truth.

If I converted to Buddhism, does that make me Chinese? If I converted to Hinduism, does that make me Indian? When Khazarians (Mongol Turks) converted to Judaism in 740 BC and stole the true Negro Hebrew identity, and turned them into slaves... did that make the counterfeit Jews Hebrew? Well, the Jew World Order seems to think so. They crucified Jesus Christ for exposing them.

The invention of the Muslim Terrorist is the latest invention by the Jews, to spread fear and dismantle governments that are not yet puppets of the Jews...or have decided to stop serving the Jews.. justifying raping the World, and slaughtering billions of innocent genuine semite and gentile families in every country for power and control... under the illusion of Freedom and Democracy.

Jewish Rabbi claims Islam is Israel's broom

"We control Islam, and we'll use it to destroy the west."

The real enemy is at home

The real enemy is at home

The Satanic Cult that rules the world

The Satanic Cult that rules the world


Why do Children go missing every year

Why do Children go missing every year

Jewish Blood Libels and Child Sacrifices to Satan, Moloch.

How the Jews swindle our Taxes and Economies

How the Jews swindle our Taxes and Economies

Jews behind every Terrorist Attack and Fake Muslim Groups

Jews behind every Terrorist Attack and Fake Muslim Groups

ISIS = Israeli Secret Intelligence Service

ISIS = Israeli Secret Intelligence Service

How the Jews mock Jesus Christians and Christmas

How the Jews mock Jesus Christians and Christmas


Confessions of a CIA economic hitman Terrorist

Confessions of a CIA economic hitman Terrorist


Are you a real Christian?

Are you a real Christian?

Or are you led by the devil himself.

Israel The Promised Land of Global Jewish Organized Crime

Absence of true ‘rules-based’ world order no prettier with liberal lipstick on it

Last weekend, I was a guest speaker as usual at the How the Light Gets In festival, which normally takes place in the village of Hay-on-Wye on the English-Welsh border but the venue this time was in the liberal lands of North London. I’m the token “noble savage” at this event, the short-sword fighter amid the better or more expensively educated cognoscenti, virtually exclusively wedded to the neo-liberal orthodoxy. I’m usually more noble than savage in the teeth of them – apart from anything, where else would I eat vegan schnitzel for lunch – but this time the savage beast broke free.

The motion was that the Trump presidency represents an “aberration” – a disruption of the “rules-based” world order. Speaking in favor was the chairwoman, Mary Ann Sieghart, an achingly liberal feminist, a first-rate intellectual herself, a fine writer and thinker, who has been a member of the Broadcasting Content Board of Ofcom. She’s therefore currently contemplating taking me off both television and radio.

Also in favor of the motion was another head-aching liberal, my debating partner, Mark Leonard, though he was not quite up the standard of the chair (it is always two against one when I’m involved, except in some years when it is three against one).

At one point (while telling me to speak more softly when talking about wars that have killed, maimed and destroyed the lives of tens of millions of people – well, we were in Hampstead after all, and it doesn’t do to frighten the horses), the chair accused me of being “passionately against the rules-based order.” In fact, I was passionately against the absence of a rules-based order and, worse, the hypocritical pretence that there was one, or had been until the vulgarian Trump showed up.

In fact, there is nothing exceptional about Donald Trump except perhaps that, so far, he’s killed far fewer people than his predecessors and way fewer than his rival Hillary Clinton would have done. Without doubt, the Hampstead classes would have rolled out the vegan schnitzel then nevertheless.

When challenged to “show us the beef” of this liberal order, its protagonists have no choice but to concede there have been “breaches” or, worse, “mistakes” made by the prevailing orthodoxy. But how many breaches or mistakes does it take to invalidate the existence of a claimed “rules-based order?” How many before it becomes clear that it is a cruel chimera?

Let’s start with the one which caused me to raise my voice: Iraq. What rules were followed in the invasion and occupation of Iraq? The UN Security Council refused to agree to the invasion, so George W. Bush and Tony Blair did it anyway. And look at the consequences, which scarcely need spelling out here or in Hampstead. Not only were no rules followed, every rule in the domestic book was broken too.

Intelligence was twisted beyond recognition, warnings by the security services were disregarded, parliament and people were lied to, the United Nations was bugged, banned weapons were used, non-belligerent allies like France were treated just as rudely by the belligerent powers as any Trumpian tweet.

Yet while they’d probably turn their noses up at Bush (though give it time), Tony Blair would slot into last weekend’s festival of ideas with ease if they could afford him.

What rules were followed in Obama’s misadventure in Libya, which has turned a dysfunctional state into a non-state with black-slave markets and multiple “governments” ceaselessly struggling for power (and money)?

What rules are being followed – long before Trump – in the Calvary of Syria, the crucifixion of a whole nation by wholesale illegal intervention by the very European and American besuited brigands who talk loudest about a “rules-based order” whilst shoveling money, weapons and propaganda blitzes into the knapsacks of the throat-cutting mass murderers of IS, Al-Qaeda and associated head-choppers, all without a scintilla of legal approval.

By what rules did the same savages – nothing noble about them, we’re talking Bill Clinton here (though he’d be a big hit at the festival) – destroy Yugoslavia?

None of these were “aberrations,” all of them were a continuum of “might is right” imperial power. From Vietnam through Cambodia and Laos, Indonesia, Chile, Central America, Iran and Suez in the 1950s. From Patrice Lumumba through Salvador Allende all the way to today’s whipping boys, Britain and the US have been rogue states, international criminals for whom rules are for the birds.

It is an ugly reality, made no prettier by the application of liberal lipstick and the industry of think-tankers cat-walking across the stage during festival season. And I will go on saying so, sometimes loudly, whether on TV, on radio, at festivals or not. As long as God gives me breath.

Follow George Galloway on

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Source Article from

Liberal threats against Donald Trump border on insanity & outright treason

In a democracy, when one talks about ‘removing’ a government official from power, it has traditionally meant waiting for the next election cycle to cast a vote at the ballot box. Today, however, it looks like the rule book has been tossed out the window.

Indeed, judging by some incendiary remarks of late, it would seem that some individuals have no desire to wait until 2020 to remove Donald Trump and his administration from the White House.

Like California Governor Jerry Brown. In a recent interview, Brown seemed to walk a very fine line between free speech and an Alex Jones rant when expressing his anger with Trump and his controversial stance on climate change.

“We never had a president who was engaged in this kind of behavior,” Brown said. “It’s unprecedented, it’s dangerous, and hopefully this election is going to send a strong message to the country; the Democrats will win…”

“Trump, well, something’s got to happen to this guy, because if we don’t get rid of him, he’s going to undermine America and even the world.”

It is possible that Brown may have simply been implying when he said “something’s got to happen to this guy” that Trump needs to be forced out of office by democratic procedure, possibly by impeachment proceedings, the ultimate Democrat wet dream.

However, semantically speaking, people do not tend to use phrases like “something’s got to happen to this guy” when discussing democratic due process. In fact, it sounds more like a line you’d hear uttered in The Sopranos – ‘Hey Tony, something needs to happen to this wise guy’ – than in the more mundane world of politics. Thus, it seems Brown crossed the invisible, but no less real, red line that separates common sense from reckless stupidity.

After all, less reliable minds may interpret Governor Brown’s remark as a call to action, a not-so-subtle hint that something dramatic – even violent – must be done to save the world from the maverick of Manhattan. There is absolutely no shortage of lunatics in America to take the California governor up on his misguided invitation and play ‘hero.’

In any case, it was a regrettable choice of words by Brown when we consider the volatile political climate now in the United States, where talk of another civil war is a trending theme among pundits.

Unfortunately, this was not the first time a stark raving Democrat lobbed a rhetorical flash grenade when discussing their favorite politician and members of his administration.

In June, Congresswoman Maxine Waters advised her constituents to harass members of the Trump administration just days after Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders were denied service in restaurants.

“Let’s make sure we show up wherever we have to show up,” Waters commanded at a rally. “And if you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.”

To reiterate, Maxine Waters is encouraging her supporters to “create a crowd” anytime they see a member of the Trump administration, in order to “push back on them” to let them know “they are not welcome anywhere.” That’s about as close to creating all of the necessary conditions for violent behavior that I can think of.

Trump – rightly in my opinion – warned Waters to “be careful.”

Now just try and imagine where US political discourse is heading when you have high-ranking politicians encouraging chaos whenever a member of Team Trump is spotted in its natural habitat.

As creepy as Waters’ off-the-wall comment was, it didn’t come close to what Senator Chuck Schumer told MSNBC host Rachel Maddow in an interview early last year.

After Trump called into question the legitimacy of the intelligence community’s investigation of so-called ‘Russian collusion’ in the 2016 presidential election, Schumer made a startling revelation.

“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday to get back at you. So, even for a practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he is being really dumb to do this.”

When Maddow inquired exactly what Schumer was suggesting the intelligence community would do, the leading Democratic Senator replied cagily: “I don’t know, but from what I am told, they are very upset with how he has treated them and talked about them.”

Needless to say, that is a deeply disturbing comment, and, at the very least, serves to foment well-known conspiracy theories, along the lines of the Kennedy assassination, that the intelligence community could somehow be involved in such activities. But since Schumer was speaking about Donald Trump, and not Barack Obama, for example, the comment was allowed to slide without much acrimony.

What is really disturbing about these loaded comments by high-ranking officials is that it sets the stage for other individuals, some very high profile, to feel they can also utter reckless comments against the president, who will not always be Donald Trump.

Today, Hollywood has become ground zero for anti-Trump tirades, as was the case with Johnny Depp’s unfortunate outburst where he compared himself to John Wilkes Booth, the assassin of Abraham Lincoln.

“When was the last time an actor assassinated a president,” Depp asked a large group of concertgoers.

The US actor later apologized for the comment. And then there was the time ‘comedian’ Kathy Griffin did a photo shoot that showed her holding aloft a severed-head effigy of the American leader. After Griffin suffered a backlash and lost her CNN job, Griffin howled through tears, “Trump broke me!”

And not to be outdone, Robert De Niro, appearing on stage at New York’s Radio City Music Hall, declared: “I’m gonna say one thing. F*ck Trump.”

As the audience rose to their feet in applause, De Niro let loose again: “It’s no longer down with Trump. It’s f*ck Trump.”

On an earlier occasion, De Niro remarked that he’d like to “punch [Trump] in the face.”

What these dauntless politicians and celebrities fail to understand is that they are creating the conditions where inciting violence against the US leader is considered to be somehow normal. The fact is it’s not. Depending on the comment, it could be a felony punishable by multiple years in prison, and simply by virtue of being a celebrity or government official does not put these people above the law.


Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Source Article from

UK spies go on the offensive with yet another costly intelligence agency

The UK Ministry of Defence announced on 21 September the establishment of yet another British spy agency, an amalgam of military and security service professionals designed to wage cyber war against terrorists, Russia and organised crime. The new agency will have upwards of 2000 staff (the size MI5 was when I worked there in the 1990s, so not inconsiderable). I have been asked for a number of interviews about this and here are my thoughts in long form.

The UK already has a plethora of spy agencies:

  • MI5 – the UK domestic Security Service, largely countering terrorism and espionage;
  • MI6 – the Secret Intelligence Service, tasked with gaining intelligence abroad;
  • GCHQ – the government electronic surveillance agency and best buds with the US NSA;
  • National Cyber Security Centre – an offshoot that protects the UK against cyber-attacks, both state and criminal;
  • NCA – the National Crime Agency, mainly investigating organized crime;
  • not to mention the police and Customs capabilities.

To provide American context, MI6 equates to the CIA, GCHQ and the NCSC equate to the NSA, and the NCA to the FBI. Which rather begs the question of where exactly MI5 fits into the modern scheme – or is it just an anachronistic and undemocratic throw-back, a typically British historical muddle, or perhaps the UK’s very own Stasi?

So why the new and expensive agency at a time of national financial uncertainty?

Of course I acknowledge the fact that the UK deserves to retain a comprehensive and impressive defence capability, provided it is used for that purpose rather than illegal, needless wars based on spurious political reasons that cost innocent lives. Every country has the right and the need to protect itself, and the cybers are the newly-defined battle lines.

Moreover, it might be overly simplistic to suggest that this is just more empire-building on the part of the thrusting and ambitious young Secretary of State for Defence, Gavin Williamson. Perhaps he really does believe that the UK military needs augmenting after years of cuts, as the former Deputy Chairman of the UK Conservative Party and well-known military expert, Lord Ashcroft, wrote in the Daily Mail. But why a whole new intelligence agency at huge cost? Surely all the existing agencies should already be able to provide adequate defence?

Additionally, by singling out Russia as the hostile, aggressor state, when for years the West has also been bewailing Chinese/Iranian/North Korean et al hacking, smacks to me of political opportunism in the wake of “Russiagate”, the Skripals, and Russia’s successful intervention in Syria. Those of a cynical bent among us might see this as politically expedient to create the eternal Emmanuel Goldstein enemy to justify the ever-metastasizing military-security complex. But, hey, that is a big tranche of the British, and potentially the post-Brexit, British economy.

The UK intelligence agencies are there to protect “national security and the economic well-being of the state”. So I do have some fundamental ethical and security concerns based on recent Western history. If the new organization is to go on the cyber offensive what, precisely does that mean – war, unforeseen blow back, or what?

If we go by what the USA has been exposed as doing over the last couple of decades, partly from NSA whistleblowers including Bill Binney, Tom Drake and Edward Snowden, and partly from CIA and NSA leaks into the public domain, a cyber-offensive capability involves stockpiling zero day hacks, back doors built into the internet monopolies, weaponized malware such as STUXNET (now out there, mutating in the wild), and the egregious breaking of national laws and international protocols.

To discuss these points in reverse order: among so many other revelations, in 2013 Edward Snowden revealed that GCHQ had cracked Belgacom, the Belgian national telecommunications network – that of an ally; he also revealed that the USA had spied on the German Chancellor’s private phone, as well as many other German officials and journalists; that GCHQ had been prostituting itself to the NSA to do dirty work on its behalf in return for $100 million; and that most big internet companies had colluded with allowing the NSA access to their networks via a program called PRISM. Only last month, the EU also accused the UK of hacking the Brexit negotiations.

Last year Wikileaks reported on the Vault 7 disclosures – a cache of CIA cyber weapons it had been stockpiling. It is worth reading what Wikileaks had to say about this, analyzing the full horror of how vulnerable such a stockpile makes “we, the people”, vulnerable to criminal hacking.

Also, two years ago a huge tranche of similarly hoarded NSA weapons was acquired by a criminal organisation called the Shadow Brokers, who initially tried to sell them on the dark web to the highest bidder but then released them into the wild. The catastrophic crash of NHS computers in the UK last year was because one of these cyber weapons, Wannacry, fell into the wrong criminals’ hands. How much more is out there, available to criminals and terrorists?

The last two examples will, I hope, expose just how vulnerable such caches of cyber weapons and vulnerabilities can be if not properly secured. And, as we have seen, even the most secret of organizations cannot guarantee this. To use the American vernacular, they can come back and bite you in the ass.

And the earlier NSA whistleblowers, including Bill Binney and Tom Drake, exposed just how easy it is for the spooks to manipulate national law to suit their own agenda, with warrantless wiretapping, breaches of the US constitution, and massive and needless overspend on predatory snooping systems such as TRAILBLAZER.

Indeed, we had the same thing in the UK when Theresa May succeeded in finally ramming through the invidious Investigatory Powers Act (IPA 2016). When she presented it to parliament as Home Secretary, she implied that it was legalizing what GCHQ has previously been doing illegally since 2001, and extend their powers to include bulk metadata hacking, bulk data set hacking and bulk hacking of all our computers and phones, all without meaningful government oversight.

The remit of the UK spooks is to protect “national security” (whatever that means, as we still await a legal definition) and the economic well-being of the state. I have said this many times over the years – the UK intelligence community is already the most legally protected and least accountable of that of  any other Western democracy. So, with all these agencies and all these draconian laws already at their disposal, I am somewhat perplexed about the perceived need for yet another costly intelligence organization to go on the offensive. What do they want? Outright war?

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Source Article from

Russia to supply S-300 to Syria within 2 weeks after Il-20 downing during Israeli raid – MoD

Sourced from RT

Within two weeks Russia will deliver to Damascus an S-300 air defense system, previously suspended on a request by Israel. It comes as part of a response to the downing of a Russian Il-20 plane during an Israeli air raid on Syria.


Moscow accused Tel Aviv of failing to inform Russia about its impending attack on targets in Syria, which resulted in a downing of the Russian electronic warfare aircraft by Syrian return fire. Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the defense ministry to take several measures in response to the incident, the ministry said in a statement on Monday.

Arguably, the most concerning thing for Israel will be the delivery to Syria of an S-300 anti-aircraft system, which will boost Syria’s capabilities to deny Israel access to its airspace. The system was purchased by Damascus several years ago, but never delivered.

“In 2013 on a request from the Israeli side we suspended the delivery to Syria of the S-300 system, which was ready to be sent with its Syrian crews trained to use it,” the statement said. “The situation has changed, and not due to our fault.”

The S-300 is a relatively modern system capable of engaging targets at the range of up to 250 km. Syria’s current anti-aircraft systems are older models that didn’t stop Israel from attacking targets on Syrian territory.

Integration with Russian systems

The Russian military will also supply better control systems to Syrian Air Defense Troops, “which are only supplied to the Russian Armed Forces,” defense chief Sergey Shoigu elaborated. This will allow integration of Syrian and Russian military assets, allowing the Syrian to have better targeting information.

“The most important thing is that it will ensure identification of Russian aircraft by the Syrian air defense forces.” Potentially it would also expose Israeli aircraft tracked by Russian radar stations to Syrian fire.

Electronic warfare over Mediterranean

The third measure announced by the Russian defense ministry is a blanket of electronic countermeasures over Syrian coastline, which would “suppress satellite navigation, onboard radar systems and communications of warplanes attacking targets on Syrian territory.”

Shoigu said the measures are meant to “cool down ‘hotheads’ and prevent misjudged actions posing a risk to our service members.” He added that if such a development fails to materialize, the Russian military “would act in accordance with the situation.”

Commenting on the development later in the day, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stressed that the Russian leadership made the decision to protect Russian aircraft in Syria from further friendly fire incidents and “is not directed against third nations.”

Last week, a Russian Il-20 plane with 15 people on board was shot down by a Syrian anti-aircraft missile over the Mediterranean Sea off the coast of Latakia governorate. The Syrians fired in response to an Israeli air raid on its soil.

Russia laid the blame for the downing on Israel, saying that the Israeli military failed to inform their Russian counterpart in time for the Il-20 to be moved to a safe area. They also said the Israelis may have deliberately used the Russian plane as a cover, expecting that the Syrians would not dare to fire at their F-16 fighter jets with the Russian plane nearby.

The Israelis denied the allegations and said they took all proper precautions and didn’t use the Il-20 as a cover. The explanations, however, failed to convince Moscow.

Source : RT

Like this? Share it now.
Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on RedditShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someonePrint this page

Source Article from

The Path to World War III

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 5,976 other followers

Source Article from

Emotional intelligence–How Moses turned to song, music, poetry, literature, and metaphor to entrench Torah in the hearts of the Israelites 

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 5,976 other followers

Source Article from

7 Israeli Jews charged with human trafficking, running brothels

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 5,976 other followers

Source Article from

Lest We Forget– Zionism is a ‘secular’ movement that has no ‘biblical’ basis

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 5,976 other followers

Source Article from

Donald Trump Thinks the Jews Aren’t Grateful Enough

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 5,976 other followers

Source Article from

September 25th is “National Panic Day” When Americans Are Encouraged To Spy On Each Other

By MassPrivateI

Today, September 25th, is Homeland Security’s “National Panic Day.”

What is “National Panic Day”?

Officially, today is known as “National Awareness Day” not “National Panic Day.” For the reasons stated below,  I am calling it “National Panic Day” which coincides with DHS reissuing their National Terrorism Bulletins this month.

DHS and law enforcement have created a national day that glorifies spying on your family, neighbors, coworkers, classmates and much more.

Across the country, in our communities, we share everyday moments with our neighbors, family, coworkers, and friends.  We go to work or school, the grocery store, or the gas station.  It’s easy to overlook these routine moments, but as you’re going about your day if you see something that doesn’t seem quite right, say something.  By being alert and reporting suspicious activity to your local law enforcement you can protect your family, neighbors, and community.

Because DHS and law enforcement don’t do enough spying, they have created a National Awareness Day that encourages domestic spying.

If you think “recognizing the signs of terrorism-related suspicious activity” ended with just an infographic you would be mistaken.

DHS has also created an entire page of suspicious young Americans doing things like bicycle jumping, eating from food trucks and sitting in a school hallway. Besides trying to appeal to X Games fans, what purpose do these videos serve?

I’ll give you a hint, DHS and law enforcement want young people to be afraid of everything.

Besides being blatantly hyperbolic, these videos play on young people’s fear of terror and encourages them to report “harmless activities.” This is what happens when you indoctrinate an entire generation of millennials who have grown up living in fear.

DHS’s “National Awareness Day” is a carbon copy of McCarthyism which turned America’s fears of Communism into a national panic that lasted for decades.

My god, what Senator Joseph McCarthy would have given to be alive today.

What better way to justify their existence [DHS] than by appealing to the younger generation and encouraging them to report harmless activities, family, friends, neighbors, etc.

Let’s call National Awareness Day what it really is: a day that law enforcement fans the flames of fear — hence “National Panic Day.”

You can read more at the MassPrivateI blog, where this article first appeared.

Source Article from

Powered by WordPress | Designed by: Premium WordPress Themes | Thanks to Themes Gallery, Bromoney and Wordpress Themes