Fair Tax? Ya Gotta Be Kidding!

Dear Friends,

It would seem the ONLY people paying attention to tax reform are the Fair Tax supporters and all the rest just want to get rid of the current 75,000+ pages of the current tax code and get the IRS off their back.  I will state unequivocally that the Fair Tax is the most misguided idea to come along… to the point, that I believe it has been introduced and promoted by leftists to distract from a reasonable approach via Flat Tax legislation.  I’ve copied a number of links below for you to review and to help you to come to your own conclusion.  I lived in a place (Hong Kong) where the Flat Tax worked very well at 15%.  Even at that level, there was tax evasion, but that is for another essay.  I know it works reasonably well because EVERYBODY has skin in the game… something Bobby Jindal is keen about besides myself (This keeps the takers off the makers backs).  Singapore and Russia also have flat tax systems.  I am repulsed by the idea that a person who earns more should also pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes, when some pay none and are stirred up by the puppet-masters to support more taxation of the higher wage earners.  This continues to fall on the middle class more than the persons able afford accountants to find holes in those aforementioned 75,000+ pages.

I will not argue the merits of the Flat Tax OR the Fair Tax, but will focus my vitriol on the naïveté of the Fair Tax via pointed critiques…

1.  The bureaucracy elimination and Constitutional amendment repeal are bridges too far.  To say that the IRS will be eliminated is downright stupid (I do wish it were so).  They will simply be re-purposed to administer what ever new revenue stream needs policing.  The Fair Tax people continue to “promise” this red herring.  Getting the Amendment repeal train in motion will only be accomplished in a police state from my viewpoint.  There are too many vested interests to allow that to happen.

2.  Next, what I call the “Kerry Effect” is so big a hole in the plan, one could “sail a boat” through it.  Bermuda decides to be a tax-free harbor for yachts.  The million dollar yacht is bought for $750,000 or less and the retail tax is avoided.  Of late, Fidel may even jump into this game… only 90 miles off-shore.  The same could apply for aircraft, vacation homes, you name it.  The U.S. will be “circled” with new tax havens for the ultra-rich.  Who gets clobbered?  The middle class.

3.  The old adage “If you want less of something, tax it!”  There will be new volumes of new regulations defining what is considered new and what is used in order to reduce the tax burden.  Since business wishes to move NEW product to the marketplace, this obvious tax burden of 23% will dramatically curtail sales.  We will start looking like Havana with infinitely refurbished old cars, etc.

4.  The elimination of Social Security and Medicare taxes at the payroll point will be another insurmountable barrier.  Again, too many vested interests in the status quo.

5.  I can’t even envision the new gray markets and various forms of smuggling which will rise up from this Fair Tax system.  Look at the Californians traveling to Oregon to save sales tax.

The change in the current tax system will have to be evolutionary, not revolutionary via a Fair Tax implementation.  How many state tax systems are also based on the U.S. Tax Code?  Another momentum barrier.

As far as I am concerned, the above five items are deal killers, but please read the links below and come to your own conclusions and let me know what you think.  I’ve read the Neal Boortz book “The Fair Tax Book”.  I am not moved.  I focus on the possible, not the impossible.


P.S.  If you want to get a deer-in-the-headlights look from a “Fair Tax” supporter, present Item 2 to them for a rebuttal.











My Take

Dear Friends,

When blood starts to spurt from my eyes from the continually emanating stupidity  from our Federal Government, I start to get writing fever, but then an article pops out on Town Hall which saves me a lot of time and energy.  I’ve pasted it below.  What is missing from Mr. Wilber’s critique are the essential factors or philosophy details contributing to this decline.  He focuses on the symptoms or outcomes, not the areas we need to address to set us back on course.

1.  Assuming the false narrative that humans are basically good and are taken down by environmental factors, thereby thrusting every bad person into victim-hood and ignoring the real victims.

2.  Young people need structure.  The left is doing its utmost to destroy that structure or at least twist it to their perverse ends which them can’t even clearly define… basically, bring it all down.  The trend has also been to extend the definition of young people into their late 20’s, thereby extending dependency on parents and/or government.

3.  With the left’s endless attacks on our moral fabric, people are floating around in a cesspool of moral relativism.  Many have the intellect to wade through this fog and thrive, but, I would posit, there are many more that cannot for various reasons.  The primary cause is the unforgivable destruction of our education system.  The secondary cause is the undermining of our religious institutions (Some would like to exchange this with the primary cause.  There used to be a link between the two.)

4.  Leftists and Libertarians (Libertarians are not bad people, just bloody naive on the nature of man) either undermine or eliminate societal reference points.  The devil is in the details regarding the delicate balance needed for liberty and not to devolve into anarchy and/or leftist chaos and moral turpitude.  It seems that many of the mass shootings (Roseburg et al) are under leftist watch?  Does the left EVER reflect on cause and effect?

Life goes on and the Marxist Imam bloviates on cue about gun control as in the meantime…




Obama Responsible for What Ails America, or Just Good Timing

D.W. Wilber

10/2/2015 12:01:00 AM – D.W. Wilber

Is Barack Obama responsible for all that ails the United States of America? Has his presidency brought this country to such a point that many question if America as we know it even has a future ?

Hardly. The truth is that we were already going down the toilet long before Obama came along. He has just helped hasten our trip into the sewer that the social engineers who preceded him, and who he aligns himself with now have made of our country over the last several decades.

For roughly seventy years now the anti-American teaching in our universities has helped create an environment where traditional American values have been denigrated and ridiculed. For seventy years our traditional morality has been questioned, dismissed as ‘old fashioned’, and eventually discarded.

And a couple of generations of Americans have grown up in an ‘MTV world’ where a false reality has been broadcast into millions of American homes. And into the impressionable minds of young people all over this country.

Back in the Sixties college radicals urged us all to “question authority” as they demonstrated against “the man”. They advocated the experimentation and use of hallucinogenic and psychoactive drugs of all types, and urged everyone to also discard traditional relationships for ‘free love’ and promiscuity. Communes sprang up around the country where a hedonistic lifestyle could be openly engaged in.

The reality is that the United States has been in a downward spiral for decades now brought on by liberalism and social tinkering that has weakened us morally, and changed American culture from a time when President John F. Kennedy told us to “ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country”, to the time of Barack Obama’s “fundamental transformation” of this nation.

We have done it to ourselves through greed, avarice and mendacity. Barack Obama just came along and took advantage of a country already in a severe decline. And bringing us to the point where sadly our best days may well be behind us. Are there enough Americans willing to bear the burdens required to get this country back on the right track ?

Many of us will go down swinging, but those of us willing “to pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty”, as so eloquently said by President John Kennedy during his inauguration address, are far too few. And unfortunately vastly outnumbered by those who are willing to go along, just to get along.

Americans have become soft and addicted to modern conveniences. Take away their internet, cable and satellite television, and smart phones, and few Americans could make it through a single day, much less survive and flourish over the long haul.

As a nation we simply have become spoiled and dependent on machines and devices, or having other people take care of us. Self-sufficiency simply isn’t taught in American schools anymore.

I can recall a time when “Marksmanship and Firearms Safety” were part of a school’s curriculum, teaching young people responsibility and respect for guns. Part of an overall program intended to help build our young people’s character. Neither any longer allowed in American schools.

Nowadays guns are just a small part of the arsenal used in video games by ‘make believe soldiers’ to rip apart the bodies of ‘make-believe enemies’. With gratuitous amounts of blood and gore dispersing in all directions after a direct hit, scoring countless points for the person holding the joy stick.

I too grew up playing ‘soldier’, building my own Tommy Guns from a few nails and pieces of scrap wood lying around the garage. Taking on the identity of a John Basilone I fought through the jungles of Guadalcanal on the nearby school playground. Real, historical men of courage and bravery were my role models. Part of the character-building that helped raise American generations.

Unlike the idols of today who are emulated by far too many young people simply for at the top of their lungs screaming out vulgar rhymes, supposedly the lyrics to a “quote unquote” song, that disparages females and incites violence against the police. All accompanied by mind-numbing music blasting out of huge mega-speakers with the volume maxed out.

Generations have become shackled to Welfare and other government assistance never learning the importance of hard work and self-sufficiency. Why engage in hard work when one can sit in front of a 72 inch flat screen television and watch MTV, all paid for by someone else.

No, Barack Obama alone hasn’t brought this nation to the brink of destruction. He simply has taken advantage of a country already in decline, and one that apparently doesn’t have the will to do what it takes to change our course.

The blame rests with each of us who has looked the other way, drawn in the shutters and closed the drapes to block our view to what was happening. Instead of responding as we were challenged to by President John F. Kennedy so many years ago.

Another Eyeball Roller? I Think Not. Ignore At Your Peril.

Dear Friends,


So much bottled up frustration. So little awareness of why.

It takes work in the form of reading… being informed so events DON”T control you.

Unfortunately, our society is run more and more by bumper stickers and other tacky slogans. I consider Twitter to be the massive grunts of a dumbed down society.

My old college classmate is the prototypical politics of envy sort of guy. His Facebook page is plastered with one slogan after another.

Our societal ADHD is reaching a danger point. If we DO NOT focus on certain issues and become better informed, we are at the mercy of those who are.



Cultural Marxism Takes the Offensive

April 21, 2015 William S. Lind

After a period of quiescence, cultural Marxism is again on the attack. It is advancing on at least three fronts: racial, sexual, and religious. In every case, its target is Marcuse’s hated “reality principle”, which is to say everything that enables society to function. As the cultural Marxists of the Frankfurt School repeatedly stated, their ideology’s goal is “negation”, i.e., bringing everything down. The farther society can be pushed away from reality, the greater the dimensions of its collapse.

On the racial front, the cultural Marxists are trying to make every instance in which a cop shoots a black a crime–with the police officer the criminal. Because the black rate of violent crime is twelve times the white rate, cops often finds themselves facing young black males who either are carrying a gun or, from the cop’s knowledge, are likely to have one. The cop’s life is on the line. But now, even if the black is both a criminal and armed, the cop’s job and maybe his freedom are at risk if he shoots. He is put in an impossible position, thereby bringing about the “negation” cultural Marxism seeks. The cops, who are both symbols and bringers of order, are paralyzed and disorder spreads. “Negative dialects” take another step forward.

On the sexual front, we see both on college campuses and in our military another push for “negation.” The feminists, who are now wholly subsumed in the cultural Marxists, first demand young men and young women be intimately mixed. Colleges have coed dorms and women will soon be serving on submarines. Any attempt to separate the sexes is labelled “discrimination”. Equality is falsely defined as interchangeability even as science finds more and more differences between the male and female brains. Then, having put young men and young women cheek by jowl, cultural Marxism says, “Now now, no bunga-bunga.” When hormones have their way, as they will, the man (never the woman) is guilty of “sexual assault” or even “rape”. Earlier generations know that if you want to prevent young people from having sex, you have to separate them. The cultural Marxists know that too, but if your goal is to destroy a society, you want to force actions that lead to dysfunction, i.e., “negation”.

On the religious front, a growing number of Christian business owners are being ordered to burn incense to the Emperor, on pain of death of their business. Cultural Marxism’s substitute for the Roman Emperor is gay “marriage”, which is impossible; it is simply not what the word means. But any Christian businessman or woman who refuses to sell products or services to gay “weddings” risks being hauled into court. If you are a believer and a business owner, you are now to be denied freedom of conscience. You must participate in a rite Christianity (and Judaism and Islam) say is sinful. When Indiana recently tried to offer Christians a very modest level of protection, the whole Establishment came down on it. The state’s Republican governor did what Republicans usually do and caved.
In all of this, we see cultural Marxism is the worst of all possible Puritanisms: it is Puritanism without God and without virtue. One might go so far as to call it Puritanism against God and against virtue, since its Frankfurt School founders were atheists (all good Marxists must be) and they embraced Nietzshe’s “transvaluation of all values”, which means the old virtues become sins and the old sins become virtues. Christians who follow the commands of their faith are sinners and active homosexuals are paragons of virtue. Black is white and down is up.

How can we fight this? By reveling what is behind it, the little man behind the curtain. It is a variant of Marxism, not Marxism-Leninism, nor classical economic Marxism, but Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms. Once the average American finds that out, learns about the Frankfurt School and understands its goal is “negation”, which means destroying everything, it will be in trouble. Cultural Marxism can only succeed so long as its real nature and goals are largely unknown. It’s time to turn on the light and make the roaches run.

… A Comment…
Maria-Erlinda Martinez

In essence, an excellent exposé. Now, “cultural-Marxism”, aka “western-Marxism”, and more accurately “cultural-communism”, and even much more accurately “Western-Leninism” is based on the praxes introduced and advocated by Italian Bolshevik and personal friend of Lenin’s, Antonio Gramsci. Gramsci was imprisoned in 1926 by Mussolini. Having nothing to do but navel-gazing, Gramsci realized that Bolshevism had not materialized the red firestorm that most of all in the Left truly believed would sweep the entire world after the truly amazing feat by the Russian Bolsheviks –with Lenin as their leader– of taking over Russia, destroying the Romanoff dynasty and czarism, and creating the monstrously huge Soviet Union.

Gramsci cogitated that Russian Bolshevism would not function in developed and semi-developed societies, although it would probably function in developing and underdeveloped ones. But the main target of Marx’s was the developed and semi-developed societies where the proletariat (i.e., to Marx, factory floor-plant workers) was aplenty. So, Gramsci, still believing that Lenin had been a truly a Marxist (i.e., other than government ownership of all the ways and means of the production and distribution of all goods and services in society, Leninism is antithetical to Marxism proper), went into pinpointing what in his mind were the non-physically repressive tools of societal control employed in non-socialist and non-communist societies by the dominant strata to co-opt “the masses” on their side. Gramsci called “Cultural Hegemony” such kind of way of exerting societal control.

He then proposed that the Leninists, instead of using the Russian Bolshevik praxes to achieve and retain overall power, should use their own “Cultural Hegemony”, and that to such effect, the Leninists should snatch from the right those tools of societal control, tools he identified as: a well-established conventional political power, the media, academia, the intelligentsia, the arts and entertainment, and if possible, organized religion. By then, organized labor was very much already in the hands of the Left. Organized religion started to fall in the hands of the Left after the introduction of “theology of ‘liberation’” in the 1960s.

Furthermore, to employ such “tools” efficiently and effectively, he borrowed from the democratic ways that German former-Marxist Eduard Bernstein and the English Fabians advocated to achieving and staying in power: gradualism, the use of democracy to gradually –via legislation, regulation , and reform– get there.

That’s cultural communism, or as the author calls it, cultural communism, or Western Marxism or actually Western Leninism…the latte for Gramsci left the door open to, once at the top of overall power, return to Bolshevis to remain in power, but not to the savage, bestial form of Russian Bolshevism, but to a sort of “adaptive Bolshevism”, based on the realities and idiosyncrasy of the particular society targeted for takeover.

The “cultural” comes from Gramsci’s “Cultural Hegemony”.
Obama and the rest of the ideological nucleus of the Democrat Party belong there, and that’s why they persecute active dissidents with the IRS, the SEC, the FDA, OSHA, the FBI, the DOJ, the DHS, the ATF, etc.

You see, Russians were very used to get brutalized after centuries of czarism; thus jumping from the pan into the flames, i.e., into the terror and violence of Russian Bolshevism was not too much a change. But, for Americans, not used to getting abused, let alone terrorized, czarist style, getting persecuted via those federal executive branch entities Obama and the rest of the ideological marrow of the Democrat Party employ, are more than enough to terrorize Americans.
And now they are going violent and brazen!!

Check about the outrageous police raids of the homes of grassroots-conservatives in Milwaukee that support Scott Walker.

So much for cultural communism.

English Composition 101

Dear Friends,

A few weeks back I took to task the overuse of trite words or phrases in our day-to-day conversations.  A few are listed here…
…going forward… (In lieu of “in the future” or…)
…at the end of the day… (In lieu of finally or in conclusion or…)
…have a nice one… (In lieu of a simple “Thank You”)
…like… (Largely an uncontrolled affliction of youth)
…reach out… (In lieu of calling you on the phone, etc.)
…f___… (In lieu of saying NOTHING in its place)
These are all quite harmless, if not horribly boring, but when someone states something that has a completely different or misleading meaning, then this can be dangerous.
My phrase of the day…
“All politicians lie (or are crooked)”
This is usually evoked when I or someone else slams the Marxist Imam or his ilk.
What this phrase really means is…
“I supported and voted for the Marxist Imam and now regret it, but I can’t admit I made a mistake.”
Isn’t it truly refreshing when someone states what they are really thinking even if it is painful?

Is The Fifth Article A Path To Reigning In The Federal Government?

Dear Friends,
This informative video from The Right Side (part of the Conservative Forum) talks to Jeff Utsch about how to bring control back to the states where it belongs.  Mark Levin has been a big proponent of a Convention of the States (Not to be confused by a Constitutional Convention about which the John Birch Society keeps confusing people)
I would strongly disagree with the discussion about having a Balanced Budget Amendment.  Based on the sordid history of the Federal Government, the budget WILL be balanced, but only on the backs of the taxpayers.  Across the board cuts in spending is the place to start.  Freeze hiring and keep the government at the same size with the result of a shrinking share of GDP over time (a minimum of ten years for starters)


Dear Friends,

On many of my missives, I put a caveat about the local misused word “liberal”.  The words that should be used, as appropriate, are communist, socialist, anarchist, fascist, totalitarian, leftist, progressive, etc.
The reason I am so noisy about this issue is because people outside this country are annoyed by this usage, so this is my attempt to recapture the language that the left has misappropriated.  Try as I must, I still must explain what a “classic” liberal is.
Sooooo, if I can trust that leftist Google search engine, here is what comes up…
Classical liberalism is a political ideology that advocates limited government, constitutionalism, rule of law, due process, individual liberties including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets.
WOW!  Some wish to associate this with libertarianism.  I’ve stated several times that I am a conservative libertarian.  However, I do wish to separate classical liberalism from libertarianism (as practiced by John Stossel and Ron Paul) in that pure libertarianism is naive about human nature and lacks a moral overlay.
Maybe Hillary took this definition to heart when she classified herself as a “progressive”.
Here is a short video from Dr. Nigel Ashford… no relation that I know of… which gives a nice overview:
So puleeze try to eliminate the use of the word “liberal” as applied to the lawless overlords we are currently under.
As an example of a conversion, Dennis Prager, misused the word in this link:
He has since moved to the usage of “leftist”.  Good on him.
P.S. My next crusade is to switch conservatives from red to blue as it should be.  This is another gross mislabeling, first, by chance, and next by the left relishing how they shifted the image of their heart to conservatives.

Genesis One and Two

I am writing this as the result of the lead-up to the “Genesis” movie coming out later this year (2014). I said to myself, “Great”, but then discovered that “creationists” were endorsing it. That really piqued my interest and potential invective…the latter being a very poor way to start an opinion piece.

For my purposes, there are two main opposing camps when discussing our origins (both rejected by mainstream Christianity)…

The atheists are a group that use “science” to prove there is no God.

The creationists (6 day / 6,000 years) are a group that use “science” to prove there is a God.

The rest of us lie in the muddled middle taking the Biblical account on theological faith and finding no need to take it much further. Intensive investigation, as demonstrated by these polar opposites (Ham versus Dawkins), is a demonic distraction and movement away from the central message of salvation. Someone asked me for demonic evidence. Does making my skin crawl when subjected, and I mean subjected, to expositions of both count? To put it in secular terms, when teaching a Secret Service agent how to detect counterfeit money, ALL they study are real bank notes.

The old saying goes that the “Devil is in the details” and I truly, truly believe that he is influencing both of these groups.

We’ve had a recent incident trying define what “is” is. The same holds true for science. Science has become an agenda driven item distorted by those wanting to make sketchy issues more valid or to appear more truthful.

To move quickly toward a conclusion without volumes of citations and other rabbit trails, at least from my view, I will share with you what I think/believe relative to our origins.

  1. I believe the earth is 4+ billion years old. It is not 6,000 or so years old as creationists would have you believe. I base this on geological processes and the time at which they move. The caveat to this is God has control over time and space, but I cannot put my mind around why the billions of years would be shortened and then slowed down to the current pace.
  2. I don’t believe that man “evolved” from a single cell. 4+ billion years IS NOT enough time to get everything sorted out. More concerning, it refutes that God is the Creator irrespective of time. It IS NOT statistically possible if evolution were mere chance blind processes of chemistry and physics as claimed by the “new” atheists. I do believe that there was a guiding hand in the creation process (I think “Intelligent Design” is a good term, but apparently it has already been usurped by the creationist crowd). I think it is a stretch to label it as evolution, i.e. some sort of metaphysical and/or random laboratory workshop building up things over time in a trial and error way.
  3. I don’t believe that man walked with dinosaurs even though one example is alleged to show homo erectus footprints next to a dinosaur’s in a petrified muddy flat.
  4. I don’t have enough information to emphatically claim that the six days were a literal six days or millennia. I don’t think anyone else does either.
  5. Was there a world before Adam? Yes, the geological record supports that. Does it have anything to add to the central messages of the Bible? Not really, in my opinion.
  6. I believe there is micro-evolution (adaptation) and survival of the fittest. That is probably as close as I want to get to Darwin’s theories that have “evolved” over the last 1.5 centuries to be misused for evil purposes of removing man’s hope and to promulgate all sorts of disregard for human life.

Do I dwell on this? Generally not until such events as the “Genesis” movie bring the topic to the forefront.

I simplistically look at this issue as another divisive distraction similar to class warfare, abortion, racism, etc., but only in the religious/spiritual realm.

Anytime either party tries to prove his/her position, real scientific method is thrown out the window. Both sides push their positions like an indoctrinating cult or religion and many times in hateful or threatening terms.

Back in the old days, evolution was taught as a theory and even then, proof was fabricated to push the agenda forward. The Bible was allowed in school.

Now, evolution is being pushed as scientific fact to our impressionable youth and the Freedom from Religion fanatics are trying to construct an impenetrable wall such that Christianity and the Bible are excluded.

Whether you are a believer or non-believer in God of the Bible, it is important to understand and minimize what I consider evil forces that espouse scientific fact and finality, i.e. conflating science and theology… misrepresenting scientific fact and advocating ‘God of the gaps’ theology. Over time, we have seen rejection, modification, etc. of widely accepted conventional knowledge or wisdom. Over time, I believe we have also seen a decline in the level of wisdom. This has misled our societies to jump from one hot issue to another with reckless abandon.

You can be darn sure that someone, somewhere is gaining from this at the expense of the gullible.

Additional reading which may enlighten, but also create more questions outside the scope of this essay…





A German friend sent me the following e-mail:

Dear Friends,

To have a better understanding, I would like to know your opinion about this current situation in the US, I just saw President Obama’s speech on TV.

We outside the US and everybody I talk to in Germany, Thailand, Singapore, don’t quite understand the American public on this subject.

People stating that “every school now needs a good guy with a gun to protect children”.

Are they insane or do they really believe that the next attacker will first go to the “good guy with a gun” and ask him to draw before he finishes his work?

If so, it appears they need to build more hospitals for the insane

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Sincères Salutations / with best regards


I responded with the following verbosity…


I could never stomach watching the Marxist Imam for any length of time, however, hopefully you will find some sanity in the following remarks…

1.  I fully support Americans’ right to bear arms.  The question is where to draw the line.  Fully automatic weapons, cannons, heavy artillery, grenades, etc. ARE NOT allowed.  Semiautomatic weapons have always been allowed.

2.  I see no necessity to have 100 round drums or 30 round clips. These have all been glorified in the movies and video games. Semiautomatic rifles have changed their looks to look like their military brethren.  That should make no difference in the law. Some people would disagree with my view on large clips or magazines, because they feel the tyranny of an oppressive government breathing down on them with the associated chaos of displaced and violent persons.

3.  If it takes armed guards to protect our children, so be it in the short-term, however, such a suggestion is one more march toward a military lock-down state.  We have enough of that crap every time we fly.

4.  We have to address three issues:
A. Mentally ill (usually drugged) people getting hold of weapons
B. Why guns and rifle sales are skyrocketing
C. The effect of the Hollywood sewer pipe of violence

A.  We have difficulty committing the criminally insane to the levels we should these days.  Back in the late 1950’s, the communist organization, the ACLU, created unintended consequences by raising the possibility of people being committed that really didn’t belong there.  Certainly, the McCarthy era created a situation where wrongly accused persons could have been jailed or committed to an asylum much the same as occurred in the Soviet Union or during the Woodrow Wilson era in the early 1900’s. Johnson started the ball rolling to close many State Hospitals and these persons were turned out on the streets and usually fell off their meds.  Moreover, more recently, many parents have been burdened with psychotic children with no outlet as a result.  It is said the mother in Newtown was trying to get her son committed.  We also have the feminized, politically correct school indoctrination centers trying to make uniform robots out of our children.  Boys usually don’t conform, so they are diagnosed with ADD, ADHD, Bipolar, etc. to allow them to be drugged into submission. Granted, there are some who should be committed, but we are in an over-drugged state at the moment.  These young boys are the primary perpetrators of such crimes.  This is the main area where most of our energy should be applied, but the hysteric left in this country is trying to use the chaos to implement further nanny-state controls… not just gun control.

B.  Gun sales are going crazy.  Most stores are sold out.  There are two factors at play here… The forbidden fruit similar to Prohibition in the early ’20’s which was totally ineffective… AND, most importantly, we have a government that is totally out of control spending us into oblivion.  This creates a great deal of insecurity among people who are awake and know what is going on (not low information voters).  It is our birthright to ultimately overthrow such tyranny when it becomes too oppressive.  If we are disarmed, under the present trends, we become cannon fodder for these tyrants and ruling elites.  At least 50% of this country still has an instinct for individual self-preservation in a dangerous world.  If you study history, even the U.S. can succumb to such forces and it is well on its way to do so by our feckless leadership.

C.  The ACLU and First Amendment crowd pooh-pooh any attempts at moderating the filth and violence being generated by Hollywood. One only has to ask how one feels after watching one of these blood splatter fairy tales.  It usually isn’t very good.  It has become increasingly difficult to protect our children from seeing such images as this fog permeates our civil society.  On one side, I am against censorship… on the other side, we have to be able to protect our children and mentally unstable people from this crap.  If you want to understand why such control is minimized, further study of the Fabian Socialist agenda and/or the Communist Manifesto should be taken to heart.

You’ve questioned such trends before as being exaggerated or part of a conspiracy theory.  You will say that such fears are overblown.  If one studies history of at least the last 150 years, especially Marx, Darwin, Nietzche, etc., history DOES repeat itself over and over and our children ARE NOT being taught the perils of communism and the advantages of capitalism.  They are being indoctrinated into socialism-lite via racism, sexism, class warfare, and homophobia propagated by this administration NOT by those poor berated conservatives.  The Republican elite have become the lapdogs of the left.


An Ode To Our Dear Leader

Dear Friends,


The events of the last few days have made me think of ways to expose the man for what he is…  If you can’t remember the tune to The Doors, “Light My Fire”, here is a YouTube link…





You know that it would be so true
You know I’m surely not a liar
If they were to say to you
Heh, they know that I’m a liar

Come on people, he’s a liar
Come on people, he’s a liar
Try to tell the world A LIAR

The time to hesitate is through
No time to wallow in the mire
From now will I only lose
As my lies become a funeral pyre

Come on people, he’s a liar
Come on people, he’s a liar
Try to tell the world A LIAR, yeah

The time to hesitate is through
No time to wallow in the mire
From now will I only lose
As my lies become a funeral pyre

Come on people, he’s a liar
Come on people, he’s a liar
Try to tell the world A LIAR, yeah

You know that it would be so true
You know I’m surely not a liar
If they were to say to you
Heh, they know that I’m a liar

Come on people, he’s a liar
Come on people, he’s a liar
Try to tell the world A LIAR

Try to tell the world A LIAR
Try to tell the world A LIAR
Try to tell the world A LIAR

Nazis/Marxists and Homosexuality – Historical Evils

Ref. No. A/449
Bible Theology Ministries Articles
Nazis/Marxists and Homosexuality – Historical Evils
by K B Napier

While modern homosexuals try their best to appear nice and friendly to the public, they harbor a nasty secret that will rock the nations if it is allowed total freedom. That secret is found in the wickedness of Marxism and Nazism. What secret? That homosexuals were known to be the most depraved and most violent people in Europe, tolerating no-one and nothing, and even killing their own kind.

In this article you will find proof. I know it is proof because I have been at the receiving end of homosexual intolerance and nastiness. So have many others, most of whom are not known publicly – because the media are riddled with pro-homosexual and homosexual personnel, who make very sure that the truth does not emerge, at least not before they get everything they demand in law.

Once they get it, you will see a force unleashed that is so evil you will want to hide in fear. So, this article is a dire warning, one that you must spread to as many others as possible, including those who are not Christians. Before it is too late.

Please note that not all homosexuals are this vicious. Many quietly get on with their sins, not wishing to harm others. But, these are of no consequence in the matter of power. Those with power are the activists who see their goal being reached; to reach their goal they must destroy Christians and everything godly. And this they are doing with maniacal scorn and intense hatred. All is reflective of their historical parents – Soviet Marxism and Fascism.

Scott Lively
This man speaks truth, but, as I have discovered time and again, wicked people hate truth. They cannot deny the truth, so they simply get rid of the people who speak it. Scott Lively wrote ‘The Pink Swastika’ and, though it contains actual historical material, he is being hounded by the left, atheists and homosexuals. (Material in this section comes from his book).

His thesis is simple – the Nazi party was begun by homosexuals, not just one or two, but thousands. But, cry homosexuals, Hitler killed thousands of them in concentration camps! Those he killed were the effeminate type of homosexuals.  The Nazi homosexuals hated them! Even today we find homosexuals hating other homosexuals, especially if they do not toe their official line. In my work I came across ‘macho’ homosexuals who showed open hatred and scorn for effeminate homosexuals. So, I know it goes on.

In Hitler’s day, the Nazi party was filled with the hyper-macho kind. They loved violence in all its forms, and loathed even their own kind if they did not portray Nazis as vicious and ready to kill without remorse.

Ludwig Lenz worked at the Berlin ‘Sex Research Institute’ containing thousands of records of members of the Nazi Party. He said that “not ten percent of the men who, in 1933, took the fate of Germany into their hands, were sexually normal.” Or, to put it another way, the Nazi Party was made up of at least 90% perverts. I believe ‘pervert’ is the correct word to use for men whose sexual habits are abnormal… anything that is not heterosexual is, after all, the perversion of normal.

The Nazi Party actually began in a ‘gay’ bar in Munich (http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/fischer/080515). Hitler’s right-hand man at that time was the fat but promiscuous Ernst Roehm. In common with modern  rampant homosexuals, he was known for ‘loving’ young boys. William Shirer, who wrote the masterly classic ‘Rise and Fall of the Third Reich’, confirms this, and said “like so many of the early Nazis, (he was) a homosexual”. Indeed, he was so rampant he insisted that all his henchmen were also homosexual. Though Hitler did not have him murdered in the ‘Night of the Long Knives’ for his homosexuality, the killing was mainly brought about by homosexuals.

“(Re Brown Shirts) Many of its top leaders, beginning with its chief, Roehm, were notorious homosexual perverts, Lt Edmund Heines, who led the Munich SA, was not only a homosexual but a convicted murderer. These two and dozens of others quarreled and feuded as only men of unnatural sexual inclinations, with their peculiar jealousies, can.” (‘The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich’, W Shirer, BCA, 1970).
“(Roehm was) a tough, ruthless, driving man – albeit, like so many of the early Nazis, a homosexual – he helped to organise the first Nazi strong-arm squads which grew into the SA… Storm Troopers…” (p38, above. It is acknowledged that without these thugs, Hitler could not have reached his goal. Homosexual activists are just as ruthless today).

Gerhard Rossbach, another homosexual, created the dreaded Brown Shirts, or ‘Storm Troopers’ (SA). Virtually ALL of them were homosexual, as were the Hitler Youth leadership. For this reason there were countless incidents of molestation. (‘The Gay Swastika’)

Historian, Thomas Fuchs, has this to say about the Brown Shirts: “”The principle function of this army-like organization was beating up on anyone who opposed the Nazis, and Hitler believed this was a job best undertaken by homosexuals.”

Nazi historian, Louis Snyder, said, Roehm recruited homosexuals into the SA because he felt Germany needed “a proud and arrogant lot who could brawl, carouse, smash windows, kill and slaughter for the hell of it. Straights, in (Roehm’s eyes), were not as adept in such behavior as practicing homosexuals.”

This is borne out in a statement about fascism that corresponds exactly with what homosexuals are like today:

“According to fascists, the decisions (of men) are dangerous for the survival of the species. Their range of choices therefore needs to be controlled, restricted, destroyed. They must be manipulated and dominated…you’ll note that through some strange psychotic transfer, fascists do not (think of themselves as bad), but that ‘others are bad’. Fascism starts with self-hatred, but a self-hatred that is always (projected onto) others.” (‘Men Are Good. Period.’ Translated from the French by Eric Cottes, 1997, scarabee.com.
“According to fascists, the decisions (of men) are dangerous for the survival of the species. Their range of choices therefore needs to be controlled, restricted, destroyed. They must be manipulated and dominated…you’ll note that through some strange psychotic transfer, fascists do not (think of themselves as bad), but that ‘others are bad’. Fascism starts with self-hatred, but a self-hatred that is always (projected onto) others.” (As above).
“Many of the leading European fascists of the past 30 years have been gay. Progressive gay people like me shouldn’t ignore this.” (JohannHari.com).
Followed by:
“…the idea of a gay fascist seems ridiculous. Yet, when the British National Party… (fielded) an openly gay candidate in the European elections… dedicated followers of fascism didn’t blink an eyelid. The twisted truth is that gay men have been at the heart of every major fascist movement that ever was – including the gay-gassing, homo-cidal Third Reich.” (as above).

“With the exception of Jean-Marie Le Pen, all the most high-profile fascists in Europe in the past 30 years have been gay. It is… a ‘gay thing’… and it’s time for non-fascist gay people to wake up and face the… music.” (Hari site)

“Martin Lee, author of a study of European fascism, explains: ‘…there was something super-macho about being a Nazi, as well as being an homosexual, both of which enforced his sense of living on the edge, of belonging to an elite that was destined to make an impact. He (Michael Kuhnen, Germany’s leading neo-Nazi before he died of AIDS in 1991) told a West German journalist that homosexuals were ‘especially well-suited for our task, because they do not want ties to wife, children and family’.” (As above)

Ray Hill, a writer who infiltrated the BNP, reported that

“Homosexuality is ‘extremely prevalent’ in the upper eschalons of the British far right… in the 1980’s nearly half of the movement’s organizers were gay.”

And historian, H R Knickerbocker, said

“Roehm, as the head of 2,500,000 Storm Troops, had surrounded himself with a staff of perverts. His chiefs were almost without exception homosexuals. Indeed, unless a Storm Troop officer were homosexual, he had no chance of advancement.”

Historian Louis Snyder confirms this:

“(Roehm) projected a social order in which homosexuality would be regarded as a human behavior pattern of high repute…He flaunted his homosexuality in public and insisted his cronies do the same. He believed straight people weren’t as adept at bullying and aggression as homosexuals, so homosexuality was given a high premium in the SA.” (They promoted an aggressive, hyper-masculine form of homosexuality. It is certainly true that many gay armies, such as were in ancient Greece, were amongst the most vicious). (In Martyn)

Even a gay film pornographer, Bruce LaBruce, said, “All gay porn today is implicitly fascist. Fascism is in our bones.” (As above)

The above are hotly denied by gay activists. But, who do you believe? Those intent on destroying propriety and bringing in unhealthy, dangerous and perverse sexualities… or historians and the person (Lenz) in charge of Hitler’s documentation, who had actual access to the personal details of many thousands Nazi supporters? Time and again gay activists prove themselves to be liars and deceivers, willing to say and do anything to destroy truth.

Pre-Nazi Germany
‘Homosexuality and Male Bonding in Pre-Nazi Germany’ (taken from the first ‘gay’ journal, Der Eigene). Ed. H Oosterhuis, H Kennedy. 1991. Haworth Press. NY. Note that Oosterhuis’ area of ‘study’ is homosexuality, and Kennedy appears to be both homosexual and pedophile: he is on the board of Paidika, the Journal of Paedophilia.

It appears that Germany was the first country to ‘emancipate’ homosexuality. In the first section, we have this: “Before the Second World War, homosexual emancipation was largely a German phenomenon.” (p4) This should not surprise us, given the debauched and depraved behavior in Berlin and other German nightclubs at that time! Until then, pre-War, homosexuality was rightly considered to be “sinful and criminal”, if not the symptom of mental illness. It is more apt to say that continual indulgence in such gross sin produces mental aberrations, very prevalent today. At the very least, all homosexuals display signs of neurosis, while some have far worse personality problems. These latter will increase as more freedom is given to them.

In those days prison sentences were ordered on the basis that homosexuality was a “sin against nature” (which it is). Der Eigene helped to spread the loosening of morality by allowing homosexuals to advertise for lovers in its pages. (p5).

Though we see homosexuality prevalent in Hitler’s day, it began earlier amongst senior army officers (re the Harden-Eulenburg scandal) and high-ranking men in society. Thus, Hitler’s use of these evil men came from an already existing culture of depravity. (p5). This is historical fact, not ‘mean-minded opinion’! (Please note that in our day gay activists use propaganda and lies to get their own way. They also exaggerate and invent ‘persecution’. The fairly recent case looked at by the UK’s Advertising Standards Authority, re a complaint against a police organization, proved this beyond doubt).

It is why socialists in the early 1900s brought to the Kaiser’s notice the alleged corrupt homosexuality of the industrialist, Alfred Krupp, thus “proving the moral decadence of the capitalist class”. Of course, Hitler was a national socialist, and his ‘class’ reeked of powerful homosexual corruption! A few years after this attempt, more allegations flew around, about a prince and a count.

To cut the story short, even then homosexuals organized mass demonstrations to create an environment for ‘emancipation’, using intimidation and legal processes. Interestingly, Storm Troopers (themselves homosexual) raided homes of these people, mainly because some were Jewish.  And the main homosexual ‘protagonist’, Adolph Brand, seems to have had a Nazi protector (just as they have government protectors today). Also, he was ‘covered’ by his marriage to a female nurse, so that his outward life was at least superficially in line with official Nazi requirements.

This kind of thing is not unusual in Germany. In my book ‘The Global Green Agenda’, I describe the start of ‘greenism’ and what it meant, beginning in the 190th century and culminating in being used as a tool of Nazism. It, and homosexuality, grew side by side, as means of control. (See R. Martyn, ‘Exploding the Gay Myth’, unpublished but available through BTM). This is why Brand and others fought tooth and nail, without success, to produce some kind of ‘medical’ or psychiatric evidence that homosexuality was acceptable. In over 100 years NO evidence at all has been found to give homosexuality a medical foundation/excuse.

Exactly the same methods are used in the present day, also without success, as research after research fails on scientific grounds. That is – bad research methodology and interpretations. What really matters is NOT research, even with plentiful evidences: two factors are missing from these bad researches: (a) sound interpretation and (b) an acknowledgement that evidence does not necessarily equal proof. (K B Napier, Social Psychology Master’s dissertation).

It is from these unscientific and immoral beginnings that the struggle for ‘gay rights’ began. The struggle is not particularly about what homosexuality is, but about the conceptualization of it. It is this that ‘gays’ want to change, and they are succeeding, as many people, ignorant of the truth, come to the side of this immorality. And one of the biggest errors is to promote it as ‘same-sex love’.

It is not possible for a perversion of what is natural to be ‘love’. It is lust, control and possession, but never love. If anything, it is no closer than the kind of proper love a man may have for his brother, or father – not sexual but normal-relational. As Oosterhuis says about the sexual homo-‘love’ (p9), it was ‘passionate and sensual’, and this was built around the activities of the 19th century ‘Societies of Friends’ in university towns. Today, the ‘friendships’ are not just sensual, they are outrageous and even filthy at times.

Also, p9, the author speaks of the ‘difference’ between Sodomy and homosexuality, because in the 19th century in Germany ‘Sodomy’ was a name reserved for anal sex, which was indulged in by both men and women. The same can be said today, but without regularity or widespread application.

It is pertinent to call homosexuals ‘Sodomites’, not only because they have anal sex, but because they are just like the people of Sodom, both male and female, whose sexual practices were unbounded and totally perverse. The same can be said today, which is why I often refer to the ‘homosexualization of society’.

Homosexuality wants the total freedom of sexual expression, of any kind, whether it is disease-ridden, filthy, immoral, or dangerous. And worse, it demands the submission of others to its dictates… which is why it is truly ‘Sodomy’. In the late 19th century even German psychiatrists called all this ‘unnatural lewdness’, a symptom of ‘moral insanity’.

Observation of what goes on today will readily support both descriptions, though psychiatry has stopped referring to it as insanity or even immoral. If a dog acts like a dog, then it acts like a dog, no matter what other description is given to it. It is to be noted that pederasty and sodomy were treated as equal and linked (p12). (Concerning this ridiculous and unreasonable cessation of psychiatric classification, see detailed account in ‘Exploding the Gay Myth’)

Another German-Hungarian, Karoly Maria Kertbeny, coined the word ‘homosexual’, and he tried to get the government to abolish the mental and legal penalties for homosexuality, because it was an ‘inborn inclination’. This has never, ever been proved by any research whatever! As Christians, we can say that the penchant to sin is certainly inborn and part of our nature as fallen creatures. But, this does not mean that specific behaviors or ideas are inborn. Rather, they are acquired bad habits, created by constant musing on the subject matter.

“As far as their personality was concerned, homosexuals were to be sharply distinguished from normal individuals” (p14). Yes, ‘gays’ are abnormal.

Third Reich

The Nazi Deputies in the pre-Second World War Reichstag insisted that it was the Jews who brought in homosexuality to undermine the nation’s purity, saying that it had a ‘detrimental impact on family size and population increase’. “Therefore, homosexuality was incompatible with racial purity”. It became a major argument used by Himmler… even though Ernst Roehm was himself a major aide to Hitler.

Thus, unofficial desires to have an homosexual thuggery unit was glossed-over by political statements. Even today, the fascist imposition of homosexuality on the whole nation pays no heed whatever to its wicked and dangerous nature, its diseases or its Nazi-style demands.

Being ‘gay’, Roehm was a member of the decades’-old pro-gay League for Human Rights, and it was his unashamed desire for leadership that brought him into direct conflict with Hitler’s leadership. Even in those days, homosexuals wanted supremacy and demanded obedience to their credo. The same fascism is in today’s homosexual activism, to the detriment of freedom and decency. The purge of the ‘Night of the Long Knives’ was political – but it was made against homosexuals, because of their unbounded allegiance to violence and power by homosexuals

In a speech, Himmler said:

“If you further take into account the facts that I have not yet mentioned, namely that with a static number of women, we have two million men too few on account of those who fell in the war, then you can well imagine how this imbalance of two million homosexuals and two million war dead, or in other words a lack of about four million men capable of having sex, has upset the sexual balance sheet of Germany, and will result in a catastrophe.
I would like to develop a couple of ideas for you on the question of homosexuality. There are those homosexuals who take the view: what I do is my business, a purely private matter. However, all things which take place in the sexual sphere are not the private affair of the individual, but signify the life and death of the nation, signify world power…”

This is as true today as it was then, and as it became apparent when population numbers fell so dramatically that homosexuals threatened the very existence of Russia. Himmler added:

“…In the SS, today, we still have about one case of homosexuality a month. In a whole year, about eight to ten cases occur in the entire SS. I have now decided upon the following: in each case, these people will naturally be publicly degraded, expelled, and handed over to the courts. Following completion of the punishment imposed by the court, they will be sent, by my order, to a concentration camp, and they will be shot in the concentration camp, while attempting to escape. I will make that known by order to the unit to which the person so infected belonged. Thereby, I hope finally to have done with persons of this type in the SS, and the increasingly healthy blood which we are cultivating for Germany, will be kept pure.”

As we have already noted, this legal punishment of homosexuals was against those that were effeminate, not those who were ‘butch’ and violent. Himmler and Hitler needed their SS to be utterly vicious, and, as we have already seen, homosexuals filled this bill perfectly, because it was in their nature to be so.

This is found to be the case in the New Testament, particularly Romans 1, where we find homosexuality is almost at the very end of gross sin, being unrepentant and foul, and full of godlessness. Arguments to the contrary are usually made not by genuine history, but by those who are, or were, pro-gay.

Some researchers say that wholesale persecution of homosexuals was a myth (e.g. [1997] ‘The Myth of a Nazi Extermination of Homosexuals’ by Jack Wikoff, National Socialist Policy Towards Homosexuals [translation by C.W. Porter]). Whilst some maintain that many homosexuals were killed, those like Wikoff say otherwise, and another source says Dutch homosexuals remained untouched by Nazis (Bart Funnekotter, http://www.whale.to/b/nazis.html). Was the extermination of homosexuals true, or not? There are arguments both sides, but it is odd that almost 2.5 million Storm Troopers were homosexual!

According to PhD Anna Tijsseling, who studied this period of history and official war statistics, the idea of the persecution of Dutch homosexuals is a “persistent fiction, created by the gay-emancipation movement in the 1970s”. (http://www.whale.to/b/nazis.html). She shows that only those who were pedophile were prosecuted.  Homosexuals deliberately fudge the facts to gain sympathy.

This lying by homosexual advocates does not surprise me in the least, because they do exactly the same thing today, claiming persecution where none exists. Tijsseling looked for evidence of homosexuals being sent to death-camps, but found nothing. She acknowledges that some German homosexuals were sent to the camps, but, as we have seen, these were the openly effeminate types. Even so, ‘gays’ pressed to be known as victims, to get reparation payments.

Tijsselling says, “And although no evidence had surfaced about gay persecution by then, that idea is now firmly established in people’s minds.” This is how gay activists work – constant repetition of false propaganda. That is why most who now express support for homosexuals have no idea where their support comes from – but their ‘beliefs’ are assuredly homosexual in origin, without evidence or proof. Ask ANY gay supporter if they know the REAL reason why gays should not be given more freedoms… and they cannot tell you why. They only ‘know’ what gays tell them!
Ex-Soviet Writer

The destruction of everything Christian is part and parcel of Marxist and Fascist ideology. Concerning the Marxist position, Russian author, Stanislav Mishin, wrote this about the way America is slipping quickly down the pernicious path of Marxism (though similar words apply to Fascism):

“It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American descent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the backdrop of a passive, hapless sheeple…” (‘American Capitalism Gone with a Whimper’, Stanislav Mishin, Pravda.Ru)

“The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia,” notes Mishin, “and a bloody test it was.”

“After seizing control of Orthodox Christian Russia, Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, and the Bolsheviks put into practice long-term plans to abolish on a vast cultural scale every vestige of belief in the Biblical God, family, morality, private property, and other signs of “the capitalist petite Bourgeoisie.” By way of various satanically brutal forms of behavior modification, torture, psychotropic drug experimentation, re-education, and psychological terror tactics, Russians were systematically forced into submission while Bolsheviks stole their property, confiscated and perverted their children, desecrated and blasphemed churches, crucified thousands of nuns and priests, and in general, committed monstrous crimes against humanity which took the lives of sixty-million men, women, and children. For example:

“About 200,000 clergy, many crucified, scalped and otherwise tortured, were killed during the approximately 60 years of communist rule in the former Soviet Union, a Russian commission reported this week. In addition, another 500,000 religious figures were persecuted and 40,000 churches destroyed in the period from 1922 to 1980, the report said. Half the country’s mosques and more than half the synagogues were also destroyed”. Clergymen were crucified on churches’ holy gates, shot, scalped [and] strangled,” said Alexander Yakovlev, head of the Commission for the Rehabilitation of the Victims of Political Repression. The commission prepared the report for Russian President Boris Yeltsin. “I was especially shocked by accounts of priests turned into columns of ice in winter,” Yakovlev said. “It was total cruelty.” (http://www.paulbogdanor.com/left.html)

The lessons learned from the Russian experiment says Mishin,

“were taken and used properly to prepare the American populace (Ed. The same applies also to the UK, where the Labour Party unashamedly turned the country into a Marxist state. Now, under a dual leadership, it is combining both Marxism and Fascism, for the same socialist purposes) for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.”

Mishin has no doubt who financed all this: Wall Street.

“First the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education…” then, said Mishin, “their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of (them) were for the most part little more than Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more than happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the ‘winning’ side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another.”

You will note that what we are seeing today is a continuance of the failed policies tried by Soviet Russia, and then Germany!  The same kinds of sycophantic evil men want the same kind of powers found amongst the Russian elite.

One World Aim
Who can doubt that faceless wealthy men with enormous power and money, enough to bankroll whole countries (or ruin them) rules the world and want worldwide power? One name keeps coming before us time and again, such is his complete confidence that his plans will come to fruition – Soros. But, there are many more of his kind.

In his book “The Naked Capitalist,” W. Cleon Skousen exposes the unholy alliance of Western bankers and capitalists collectively defined as “Wall Street” by Mishin. Skousen verifies his findings through the writings of Dr. Carroll Quigley, a professor of history at the Foreign Service School of Georgetown University and mentor to Bill Clinton. In his opus, “Tragedy and Hope,” Quigley deliberately reveals one of the worlds’ best kept secrets: the existence of a gigantic leviathan of political and economic power poised to seize control of the planet.

Right from the start, the gargantuan power complex says Quigley, has been financing and controlling Marxist-Communist-Socialist, progressive, anarchist, ’gay rights’ and atheist groups,

“… the power that… Left-wingers exercised was never their own power or communist power but…the power of the international financial coterie.” (p. 954, Tragedy and Hope)

Why did Quigley expose the existence of the global financial coterie? Because he says, it is now too late for the little people to turn the tide. He urges them to not fight the noose which is already around their necks, for they will only hang themselves.
“On the other hand, those who go along with the immense pressure which is beginning to be felt by all humanity will eventually find themselves in a man-made millennium of peace and prosperity.” (The Naked Capitalist, Skousen, pp. 4-6)
See funders here:

Note that this worldwide grab for universal power is already in motion and about to be completed. Note also that it is a combined Marxist/Fascist movement, and includes as a bold and prominent feature, the so-called ‘rights’ of both homosexuals and atheists. Though many think these are different groups, they are both the same, for homosexuals, by their very nature, actions and beliefs, are atheistic. That some atheists are not homosexual does not alter these facts.

The fate of those who resist this gross movement will not be allowed to remain:

“Members of the leviathan mainly consist of Luciferian Free Masons, Theosophists and neo-Buddhists. Many of them have spirit guides. Transnational Luciferian Theosophist Robert Muller, now-deceased former Assistant Secretary-General of the UN and former Chancellor of the UN University for Peace in Costa Rica spoke of the fate that will befall the politically incorrect:

“…all those who hold contrary beliefs” to politically correct thought favored for the “next phase of evolution” will “disappear.” A hellish fate awaits all who resist political and spiritual globalization, “… those who criticize the UN are anti-evolutionary, blind, self-serving people. Their souls will be parked in a special corral of the universe for having been retarding forces, true aberrations in the evolution and ascent of humanity.” (False Dawn, Lee Penn, p. 133)

Having uncritically accepted Evolutionary Theory increasing numbers of Christians no longer “hold contrary beliefs.” And they commonly rationalize their compromised faith by stating that “yes, God created the heavens and the Earth,” but then He used evolutionary processes to produce the Universe and man we see today.

The uncritical acceptance of Evolutionary Theory places theistic evolutionists in the position of having to compromise Genesis. And to compromise the Genesis account is to compromise the whole Bible, which in turn compromises the Bibles’ main theme: man’s need of redemption. (‘Theistic Evolutionism: How It Compromises and Destroys God’s Revelation’, http://patriotsandliberty.com/?p=16559 )

Unwittingly, theistic evolutionists have put themselves in league with the devil, as made clear by Luciferians such as David Spangler. Spangler openly declares that Lucifer is the very spirit of evolution. But, what is Evolutionary Theory and exactly what kind of science is it?

The respected traditionalist metaphysician Rene Guenon (1886-1951) reveals the answer in his brilliant critical analysis of Theosophy and Spiritism entitled, “The Spiritist Fallacy.”

Guenon writes that in early Theosophist and spiritist (mediums/channelers) circles use of the word ‘progress’ or ‘progressivist’ preceded the use of the word ‘evolution.’ The roots of Theosophy, hence of evolution, stretch back to the ancient Upanishads of India, said Guenon. The roots of evolution are also found in ancient Greece and Babylonia. The oldest evolutionary cosmogony discovered thus far is the Babylonian Enuma Elish.

In its modern version, evolution and/or progress describes the movement and progress (transmigration) of life and/or spirit as it inhabits and/or incarnates in succession the bodies of different beings over the course of thousands or even millions and billions of years. (Evolutionary Theory: The Science of Theosophy, Buddhism, and Spiritism.

None of this is ‘far-fetched nonsense’, for it is already in existence. See my book on environmentalism, which has a chapter on paganism and its coming pressures on Christians (’The Global Green Agenda’). It is combined with the pushing of evolution, even though the hypothesis has no actual proofs for its claims. The whole mess is meant to do one thing only – undermine and destroy Genesis and then the whole of the Bible. Throw in homosexuality and the entire thing is one hellish concoction.

“The perennially seductive Big Lie underlies Evolutionary Theory. This thought is expressed openly in the teachings of Swami Vivekananda and Dr. Beverly Galyean, leading exponent of occult spiritual New Age confluent education:

“The Buddhists and the Jains do not depend on God; but the whole force of their religion is directed to the great central truth in every religion: to evolve a God out of man.” (Inspired Talks, Ramakrishna Vivekananda Center, 1958, p. 218)

“Once we begin to see that we are all God, that we have the attributes of God, then, I think the whole purpose of human life is to reown the Godlikeness within us… So, my whole view is very much based on that idea.” (Galyean, quoted by Francis Adeney, ‘Educators Look East’, Radix 12, No. 3, Nov-Dec. 1980, p. 21)

The Devil’s ‘chosen ones’ believe they are evolving into gods, thus, to oppose the U.N. and evolution is a sin so monstrous that punishment requires your soul be parked in “a special corral of the universe for having been retarding forces, true aberrations in the evolution and ascent of humanity.”

When the noose closes and the hammer falls, it will fall first upon the most courageous, that is, all who refuse to compromise. Then, it will come for the compromisers. None will escape. Either you will bend the knee to Lucifer, the spirit of evolution, or your soul will “be parked in a special corral of the universe for having been retarding forces, true aberrations in the evolution and ascent of humanity.” (The above quotes are from http://patriotsandliberty.com/ and were written by Linda Kimball).

The homosexual entity, which is entirely demonic, is thus part of the whole worldwide movement for a one-world order. It MUST get rid of Christians and Christianity before it can comfortably carry its evil to the last degree. Yes, there will be ‘peace’ on a global scale – because all who reject the godless basis of the rule will be eliminated or subdued. The ‘peace’, then, will be artificial. But, socialists do not care about this – they only care that they are obeyed without question.

Random Statements
To quote a recent book: “Wipe out homosexuality and Fascism will disappear”.

To put it another way – socialism is upheld and made strong by homosexuality, and the existence of socialism depends on the existence of homosexuality. And yet, as we saw in the case of the Nazis, there was a superficial legal demand for homosexuality to be removed and yet an under-the-counter unofficial position, that homosexuality would make Soviet/Nazi power solid! “Homosexuality was equated with a rejection of socialism…” (as above). See this dichotomy? It allows socialists to operate fully and yet have a scapegoat if anything goes wrong.

This is found in the book ‘Elites’ (cannot remember its author), used in social theory classes in the 1980s. In it, we see local authorities deliberately using local gangs to beat-up those who resisted the authority. They did it by passing on ‘rumors’ about certain local citizens, knowing that the thugs would take matters into their own hands, thus distancing themselves from what happens while still getting their own way.

“You can’t hardly separate homosexuals from subversives. … Mind you, I don’t say that every homosexual is a subversive, and I don’t say every subversive is a homosexual. But [people] of low morality are a menace in the government, whatever [they are], and they are all tied up together.”
(Senator Kenneth Wherry of Nebraska, New York Post, December 1950, who wrote this at a time when communists were prosecuted as treasonous. There was much to his claim).

Alexander Boot, of the Daily Mail (http://bootblog.dailymail.co.uk/2012/03/from-an-important-institution-to-a-mental-one-the-times-has-moved-on.html) says this:

‘[Gay marriage] is a cause that has the firm support of The Times,’ it says, because ‘to allow same-sex couples to marry would enrich an historic institution and expand the sum of human happiness.’

This is insane twaddle. Governments have been instituted among men not to create a paradise on earth but to prevent hell on earth. Five millennia of recorded history show that this is only ever achieved by pursuing not happiness — whatever it means, which isn’t much — but justice, social cohesion and, as Edmund Burke put it, prudence, prescription and prejudice. (The last word is getting rotten press from the PC set, but to Burke it simply meant the intuitive knowledge shared by most people — effectively what makes a nation a nation.)

It has been understood from time immemorial that one man’s happiness is another man’s misery. Pursuit of happiness, enshrined in the American Declaration of Independence, is an Enlightenment construct that, in order to mean anything at all, has to be qualified in so many ways as to make any sane person question the validity of the term altogether.

Otherwise one could suggest all sorts of absurd ways in which ‘the sum of human happiness’ could be ‘expanded’. Legalized necrophilia, zoophilia, money laundering, driving without a license, shoplifting — all these would add no end to the number of happy individuals, thereby achieving the expansion so dear to the warped heart of The Times. They would also knock stones of different sizes out of the foundations of our society.

Marriage, a union of a man and a woman sanctioned by the state and, ideally, blessed by God, is a building block not just of society but indeed of the human race. It is also a natural competitor to the power of the state. That’s why all tyrannical states in history sought to undermine marriage or even to do away with it.”

One of the first acts of the Bolsheviks in Russia was to abolish marriage, and Inessa Armand, Lenin’s mistress, likened sex to ‘drinking a glass of water’ (for the sake of the Great Leader’s reputation, one hopes she didn’t mean drinking it in one quick gulp). To the same end, the Bolsheviks also legalized homosexuality. Thus the first country to make homosexuality legal was Soviet Russia between 1917 and 1934, a time and place not otherwise known for worshiping human rights. And the Nazis reduced marriage to a gruesome exercise in eugenics, augmented by SS stud farms and euthanasia.

It’s a lamentable fact that Western governments are gravitating towards totalitarianism as well, what with the individual becoming less and less powerful and the state more and more so. And though today’s governments wouldn’t dare abolish marriage altogether, they too have a burning need to take it apart piece by piece.

Ye shall know them by their fruits: statistics in this case don’t lie. Today as many people get married in Britain as did in the 1890s, when the population was half of today’s. In 1950 there were 408,000 marriages in Britain and 33,000 divorces. The corresponding numbers for 2000 are 306,000 and 155,000 — in a larger population, there were fewer marriages, and more than twice as many divorces. Almost 50 percent of all children in the UK are born outside marriage, which usually means they grow up fatherless — with all the well-documented consequences that don’t fall far short of a social, cultural and educational collapse.”

Note what the author said: “all tyrannical states in history sought to undermine marriage or even to do away with it.” Both Blair and Cameron are totalitarian. They do not listen to the people who voted for them, and doggedly carried on with their personalized policies and ideologies. And both prove to be socialist by their works. Also, note where this idea of ‘gay marriage’ comes from – Soviet Russia’s ideology. The current LibDem/Tory pact demands total obedience for a very good reason:

“Now the government strives to redefine the very concept of marriage the better to destroy it — sorry, ‘to enrich an historic institution.’ Dave wants to do it ‘because he’s a conservative’. Nick wants to do it because he’s a LibDem. Both want to do it because they sense in their statist viscera that, unless marriage is destroyed, their spivocratic power will never become absolute. A stable marriage is likely to keep the man, the woman and their children out of the clutches of the state — they are less likely to become its dependents and therefore more likely to reject its dictates. That just won’t do, will it now, Dave and Nick?”

“And why stop there in our quest for equality? Commendably, Dave and Nick aren’t sexist but they are still specist. I’m awaiting their unequivocal support of marriage between humans and other mammals. As that too would expand the sum of human happiness, they’d be able to count on The Times as a staunch ally.

‘Reforms to marital law need to be informed by a sense of history, lest they give rise to unintended and damaging consequences,’ continues The Times, as if dead set on proving that it has indeed gone bonkers. Surely any sane person would see that homo-marriage isn’t ‘informed by a sense of history’? And surely no one blessed with such a sense would dismiss as antiquated irrelevances the strong protests coming from the leaders of both principal Christian confessions in Britain? That sentence, appearing as it does amid a strident clamor for same-sex marriage, can be used for diagnostic purposes by any competent psychiatrist.

The history of Britain and her realm is inseparable from the church as the guardian and teacher of public morality. The more effectively does the church act in that capacity, the greater the moral health of the nation. An agnostic may question that this is the case. An atheist may even oppose this or that tenet of Judaeo-Christian morality. But, regardless of his faith or lack thereof, anyone with a secure grasp on historical reality will see that every attempt to replace Judaeo-Christian morality with anything else has invariably produced untold misery.”

What we have, then, is a going back to Soviet laws and ideologies, the same ones that led to the fall of the Berlin Wall! The Soviets ruined their own country, and this is now what the whole of the Western world is doing, using the very same template. Are they insane? No – just wickedly ambitious for their own ends. And at the forefront is the awful, wicked, atheistic homosexual agenda.

“Gay liberation is a key issue according to Marxism” (‘Outing’ By Warren Johansson, William A. Percy; CPUSA Election Platform 2004; Proletarian Revolution No. 71, Summer 2004). The fact that Stalin later made it illegal is beside the point. It took about 20 years for this reversal to take place… when it was realized population was declining at an alarming rate.

“The Russian Revolution of 1917 seemed to usher in a new era of freedom as the tsarist laws against homosexuality were struck off the books. By 1928 the sexual legislation of the Soviet Union was held up as a model of enlightenment by the world sexual reform movement. The official Soviet legal philosophy then was to treat homosexual acts exactly the same as heterosexual, providing for punishment only in cases that involved real injury to another person, or the use of force, or the abuse of authority.

However, by 1928 the ideals of Russian Revolution had been left far behind: a gangster bureaucracy led by Stalin was consolidating its power, the Left Opposition had been crushed, Trotsky was sent into exile, and the gains for homosexual freedom were being reversed. In 1934 homosexual acts became criminal once again in the Soviet Union, just as they had been under the tzars. Then came the Moscow Trials of the late 1930s, after which Stalin was the only member of Lenin’s Central Committee not to have been imprisoned, murdered, or exiled.” (http://paganpressbooks.com/jpl/HILLER.HTM)

You will find, today, that the world is inundated by quasi-arguments about this, as gay activists rewrite history. They oppose reasons why the Soviets and Fascists did what they did. They omit the fact that only effeminate ‘gays’ were sent to camps, and that the Storm Troopers were all homosexuals. They are, then, trying to sanitize their past and present, with pathetic calls to ‘history’ that do not wash. They are making people eat sewage, by calling it ‘food’.

Finally (because this is a very big subject), we see that there is to be a crackdown on gay propaganda in Russia, aimed at children. Good for them! (KOMMERSANT/Worldcrunch 31st March 2012). A memo explaining the proposed law proclaimed, “Homosexual propaganda has spread widely in modern Russia. This kind of propaganda is distributed both through the mass media, as well as through events that promote the homosexual lifestyle as a normal behavior.”

“The authors of the legislation also declared: “This is especially dangerous for children and youth, who are not yet capable of thinking critically about the avalanche of information they see on a daily basis.” According to its authors, the goal of the law project is to protect the younger generation from the effects of “homosexual propaganda.”

The connection between homosexuality and staunch socialism is there, in history. But, this history is being rewritten by gay advocates, to bring the world into subjection. Which is why Russia is now making gay propaganda to youth and children illegal. The West, then, is adopting the Soviet pattern concerning homosexuality, and yet ignoring the Russian pattern, which recognized its earlier errors and is now putting them right!

Russia began the modern trend to legalize homosexuality; now it is making amends by doing what is right. It is about time modern observers understood these facts, WITHOUT listening to gay activists: after all, if you wanted the truth about punishment, would you ask a criminal? Why, then, do government ask homosexuals for advice on morality, when they have always been known as immoral perverts?

Homosexuality is, without a shadow of a doubt, disease-ridden, wicked, immoral and unnatural. Anyone with sense can see these facts to be true. But, the real wickedness is the way it is being rammed down the throats of decent people, not just by homosexuals whose lives are repugnant, but by governments, who now follow the old Soviet experiment that failed. It is this Marxist-Fascism that must be resisted. People will always try to undermine and ruin their own lives by inflicting self-harm. That is up to them. But, most people only want what is decent.

© March 2012                             Bible Theology Ministries, PO Box 415, Swansea, SA5 8YH    UK