Thursday, January 18, 2007
Oppressors R us
Somewhere out there is a man, excuse me, he likes to be called Doctor - no, not that sort of doctor - who in his own little way is trying to stop the world and set it in reverse. As far as he's concerned the world's evils can all be attributed to - in varying degrees - feminism, along with the usual communism and satanism, all three of which are the brainchilds of... BANKERS.
Okay okay, I know most of you expected me to say The Bilderberg Group, but no... the BG, Masons, Communists, liberals, feminists, democrats, Pagans, Roscrucians and SPCA are all run by BANKERS.
The man's entitled, like all fundamentalists, to pick his own group of oppressors, but what is fascinating about this phenomenon is that Henry Makow has a website, savethemales.org.ca on which men congregate to whine how women did them wrong. If only them bitches would just git back inna house and make more babies, life would be wonderful again.
Wonderful for whom?
He posts items from girls who are ashamed of their "slutty" pasts, and regret sleeping around. Oddly enough he never has anything of the like from boys. The only inference to be drawn from this is that men can't control themselves.
I had a very similar conversation with a number of Muslim men, about the strict dress codes of Islam, and they admitted that the religion - like most montheistic cultures - puts the onus of sexual control on the woman. Once a woman does not fit into that role, all bets are off. Men have no responsibility whatsoever.
Another thing I find quite strange about this group's musings is that they believe women are to blame for the high divorce rate, and the ruthless goverment helped them do it. The fact that they can get alimony and state help raising children means that they can just toss their mates aside and go it alone.
They don't take into consideration the philandering, the abuse, and utter unfairness of the system they propose. No, women should rejoice in the fact that they will have a man to take care of everything, and all they have to do is worry about keeping HIM happy.
And he's not wrong. If a woman wants nothing else than to raise children and make her husband into a success, she would be truly happy to find a man to protect and care for her and their brood. My grandmother was one such woman, constantly upbeat, whose only major decision of the day was what to make her beloved husband for his dinner. But then he was a Mason, so maybe she doesn't count.
All in all there is a feeling of redundancy about the men - one hates to openly use the word "Losers" who wistfully hearken back to the days when a woman was owned by her father and then by her husband.
Yet none of them see fit to examine men's behaviour over the past ohhhh three or four thousand years, and discover why it is that women feel it unwise to place their faith in a man. Rather they see this from the other side of the one-way mirror - you don't trust me so what chance do we have?
The world is a constantly changing place, and no one doubts that when systems we are comfortable with change radically we go through some stress. Makow is not the only one to blame it all on some huge organised evil, and he won't be the last.
Okay okay, I know most of you expected me to say The Bilderberg Group, but no... the BG, Masons, Communists, liberals, feminists, democrats, Pagans, Roscrucians and SPCA are all run by BANKERS.
The man's entitled, like all fundamentalists, to pick his own group of oppressors, but what is fascinating about this phenomenon is that Henry Makow has a website, savethemales.org.ca on which men congregate to whine how women did them wrong. If only them bitches would just git back inna house and make more babies, life would be wonderful again.
Wonderful for whom?
He posts items from girls who are ashamed of their "slutty" pasts, and regret sleeping around. Oddly enough he never has anything of the like from boys. The only inference to be drawn from this is that men can't control themselves.
I had a very similar conversation with a number of Muslim men, about the strict dress codes of Islam, and they admitted that the religion - like most montheistic cultures - puts the onus of sexual control on the woman. Once a woman does not fit into that role, all bets are off. Men have no responsibility whatsoever.
Another thing I find quite strange about this group's musings is that they believe women are to blame for the high divorce rate, and the ruthless goverment helped them do it. The fact that they can get alimony and state help raising children means that they can just toss their mates aside and go it alone.
They don't take into consideration the philandering, the abuse, and utter unfairness of the system they propose. No, women should rejoice in the fact that they will have a man to take care of everything, and all they have to do is worry about keeping HIM happy.
And he's not wrong. If a woman wants nothing else than to raise children and make her husband into a success, she would be truly happy to find a man to protect and care for her and their brood. My grandmother was one such woman, constantly upbeat, whose only major decision of the day was what to make her beloved husband for his dinner. But then he was a Mason, so maybe she doesn't count.
All in all there is a feeling of redundancy about the men - one hates to openly use the word "Losers" who wistfully hearken back to the days when a woman was owned by her father and then by her husband.
Yet none of them see fit to examine men's behaviour over the past ohhhh three or four thousand years, and discover why it is that women feel it unwise to place their faith in a man. Rather they see this from the other side of the one-way mirror - you don't trust me so what chance do we have?
The world is a constantly changing place, and no one doubts that when systems we are comfortable with change radically we go through some stress. Makow is not the only one to blame it all on some huge organised evil, and he won't be the last.
# posted by Inkonkoni @ 11:29 PM 
Comments:
<< Home
Hello again Noiks. I have read some of this man's rubbish, two pages to make me sleep. He has no idea of the struggle of communism and its roots in humanity. All the great things communism did is not spoken of anymore. Just the bad. We will see what happens with Chavez. My English is poor again now... no one to write to me.
# posted by 
: January 31, 2007
: January 31, 2007 
It has been observed that there was a very good reason for the much-publicized comment by US Secretary of War Donald Rumsfeld that France and Germany are "old Europe", and that the "center of gravity is shifting to the east". The reason is that the United States is already winning the battle for influence in the “new
Europe”.
Since the demise of the Soviet Union, the United States has laid claim to Moscow's former republics and satellites. Apart from its 1999 bombings and other military operations in the former Yugoslavia, Washington has used the weapons of political and economic subversion for its interventions into Eastern Europe.
The standard operating procedure in a particular country has been to send in teams of specialists from US government agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), American labor unions, or private organizations funded by American corporations and foundations; leading examples are the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), Agency for International Development (AID), and the Open Society organizations of George Soros, American citizen and billionaire. These teams go in with as much financial resources as needed and numerous carrots and sticks to wield; they hold conferences and seminars, hand out tons of papers, manuals and CDs, and fund new NGOs, newspapers and other media, all to educate government employees and other selected portions of the population on the advantages and joys of privatizing and deregulating the economy, teaching them how to run a capitalist society, how to remake the country so that it’s appealing to foreign investors.
The American teams have been creating a new class of managers to manage a new market economy, as well as providing the capital and good ol' American know-how for winning elections against the non-believers. In the process, they pass information and experience from one country to another; thus the Soros organization -- which has offices throughout the former Soviet Union -- had people from Serbia, who had been involved in the successful campaign to oust Slobodan Milosevic in 2000, share their experiences with people in Georgia who were seeking to oust Eduard Shevardnadze in 2003, and were likewise successful. This transfer of techniques, including an acclaimed video shown on Georgian independent television, was cited by participants in Georgia as playing a vital role in their toppling of Shevardnadze.
In Russia and in the other countries, the “success” of such globalization programs has typically resulted in the mass of the population being left in great want, much worse off than they were under communism, while a wealthy elite class is created and the country is gradually thrown open to foreign investment and control.
The reduction in the standard of living of the people in the region since 1990 can scarcely be exaggerated. The European Children's Trust reported in October 2000 that based on key indicators -- such as infant mortality, life expectancy, tuberculosis, and Gross Domestic Product per capita -- conditions in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union were worse or no better than those in many so-called developing countries. From Bulgaria to Poland, from Slovenia to Lithuania, the citizens have left their homes to become the guest workers, the illegal workers, the migrants, the refugees, and the prostitutes of Western Europe.
However, those countries are now honored members of NATO, proud possessors of a couple of billion dollars worth of useless military hardware they were obliged to buy from multinationals, they have the right to send their youth to the killing fields of Iraq and Afghanistan to support US wars, the American flag flies over American military bases in their lands, globalized free enterprise is king, and the wealthy elite have a lot more in common with the likes of Dick Cheney than with the great majority of their countrymen. Some prominent ex-communist apparatchiks across the region repeat oaths of fealty to America as once they parroted the Brezhnev line. Poland's president, Aleksander Kwasniewski, who was a Communist minister in the 1980s, now declares: "If it is President Bush's vision, it is mine."
The Eastern European mentality implied by the above was burgeoning even before the end of the Soviet Union and the Cold War. The intellectual equation that was arrived at, consciously or unconsciously, was that if the Soviet Union was “bad”, it must be “all bad”. And therefore, the Soviet's principal foe must be “all good”. Thus, if the Soviet command economy had multiple shortcomings, the market economy is guaranteed to bring prosperity and justice. How many Eastern Europeans, to this day, know that most of what they may see as Western benefits flowing automatically from the market's “invisible hand”, in actuality had to be wrested from capitalism by social movements and labor unions with much attendant suffering?
All in all, NATO-occupied Eastern Europe, until recently the home of “socialist republics”, has become a much more congenial place for royalty. Bulgaria's King Simeon (now prime minister), came back to reclaim his domain, as did Romania's King Michael, Yugoslavia's King Presumptive Alexander, and Albania's King Leka (son of Hitler's and Mussolini's ally, King Zog).
Post a Comment
Europe”.
Since the demise of the Soviet Union, the United States has laid claim to Moscow's former republics and satellites. Apart from its 1999 bombings and other military operations in the former Yugoslavia, Washington has used the weapons of political and economic subversion for its interventions into Eastern Europe.
The standard operating procedure in a particular country has been to send in teams of specialists from US government agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), American labor unions, or private organizations funded by American corporations and foundations; leading examples are the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), Agency for International Development (AID), and the Open Society organizations of George Soros, American citizen and billionaire. These teams go in with as much financial resources as needed and numerous carrots and sticks to wield; they hold conferences and seminars, hand out tons of papers, manuals and CDs, and fund new NGOs, newspapers and other media, all to educate government employees and other selected portions of the population on the advantages and joys of privatizing and deregulating the economy, teaching them how to run a capitalist society, how to remake the country so that it’s appealing to foreign investors.
The American teams have been creating a new class of managers to manage a new market economy, as well as providing the capital and good ol' American know-how for winning elections against the non-believers. In the process, they pass information and experience from one country to another; thus the Soros organization -- which has offices throughout the former Soviet Union -- had people from Serbia, who had been involved in the successful campaign to oust Slobodan Milosevic in 2000, share their experiences with people in Georgia who were seeking to oust Eduard Shevardnadze in 2003, and were likewise successful. This transfer of techniques, including an acclaimed video shown on Georgian independent television, was cited by participants in Georgia as playing a vital role in their toppling of Shevardnadze.
In Russia and in the other countries, the “success” of such globalization programs has typically resulted in the mass of the population being left in great want, much worse off than they were under communism, while a wealthy elite class is created and the country is gradually thrown open to foreign investment and control.
The reduction in the standard of living of the people in the region since 1990 can scarcely be exaggerated. The European Children's Trust reported in October 2000 that based on key indicators -- such as infant mortality, life expectancy, tuberculosis, and Gross Domestic Product per capita -- conditions in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union were worse or no better than those in many so-called developing countries. From Bulgaria to Poland, from Slovenia to Lithuania, the citizens have left their homes to become the guest workers, the illegal workers, the migrants, the refugees, and the prostitutes of Western Europe.
However, those countries are now honored members of NATO, proud possessors of a couple of billion dollars worth of useless military hardware they were obliged to buy from multinationals, they have the right to send their youth to the killing fields of Iraq and Afghanistan to support US wars, the American flag flies over American military bases in their lands, globalized free enterprise is king, and the wealthy elite have a lot more in common with the likes of Dick Cheney than with the great majority of their countrymen. Some prominent ex-communist apparatchiks across the region repeat oaths of fealty to America as once they parroted the Brezhnev line. Poland's president, Aleksander Kwasniewski, who was a Communist minister in the 1980s, now declares: "If it is President Bush's vision, it is mine."
The Eastern European mentality implied by the above was burgeoning even before the end of the Soviet Union and the Cold War. The intellectual equation that was arrived at, consciously or unconsciously, was that if the Soviet Union was “bad”, it must be “all bad”. And therefore, the Soviet's principal foe must be “all good”. Thus, if the Soviet command economy had multiple shortcomings, the market economy is guaranteed to bring prosperity and justice. How many Eastern Europeans, to this day, know that most of what they may see as Western benefits flowing automatically from the market's “invisible hand”, in actuality had to be wrested from capitalism by social movements and labor unions with much attendant suffering?
All in all, NATO-occupied Eastern Europe, until recently the home of “socialist republics”, has become a much more congenial place for royalty. Bulgaria's King Simeon (now prime minister), came back to reclaim his domain, as did Romania's King Michael, Yugoslavia's King Presumptive Alexander, and Albania's King Leka (son of Hitler's and Mussolini's ally, King Zog).
# posted by : February 19, 2007
: February 19, 2007 << Home
