This week, during an event at SXSW in Austin, a startup called ICON unveiled an amazing project, a house that could be 3-D printed for just $4,000. With the new method that the company has developed, they are able to print a 650-square-foot house out of cement in less than 24 hours. In contrast, it could take a human roughly 20 days to complete the same project.
ICON’s first project is to build 100 homes for a community in El Salvador next year. To complete this goal, ICON is teaming up with New Story, a nonprofit that focuses on finding homes for people across the world who have inadequate shelter.
“We have been building homes for communities in Haiti, El Salvador, and Bolivia,” Alexandria Lafci, co-founder of New Story, told The Verge.
New story CEO Brett Hagler said that their main goal is to help provide housing for the poorest billion people on the earth.
“We thought, okay, what if the bottom billion weren’t the last ones to get this, but the first ones to get this? It made sense for us to try to leapfrog what’s happening domestically because our homes are so simple,” Hagler said.
“Ideally we can move from thousands of people to millions of people around the world by allowing other nonprofits and governments to use this technology. That’s the big goal because our goal is impacting the most families possible,” he added.
ICON will be producing the materials with a Vulcan 3D printer and the team said that they could make houses as large as 800 square feet, which is about the size of the average apartment in New York City.
“The big difference, between a developed world and developing world context is you have a much more limited set of materials to work with. Number one, just because of access, you want to restrict your material mix to things that you could find very ubiquitously around the globe. And you also want to avoid expensive materials,” Jason Ballard of ICON said.
“There are fundamental problems with conventional stick-building that 3D printing solves, besides affordability. You get a high thermal mass, thermal envelope, which makes it far more energy-efficient. It’s far more resilient. There are a few other companies that have printed homes and structures, but they are printed in a warehouse, or they look like Yoda huts. For this venture to succeed, they have to be the best houses,” he added.
Ballard said that eventually these technologies can even be used to build housing in space.
“One of the big challenges is how are we going to create habitats in space. You’re not going to open a two by four and open screws. It’s one of the more promising potential habitat technologies,” Ballard said.
In 2015, a Chinese construction company named WinSun 3D printed a huge five-story apartment building and an 11,840 square foot mansion. Both of the new projects are located side by side in Suzhou Industrial Park. Each project was constructed with a unique type of pre-mixed concrete which is made from “construction waste” according to Cnet.
Summary: Those who feed sad or lonely appear to be better at understanding social nature, researchers report.Source: Yale.
Social psychology researchers use extensive training and complex empirical tools to explore the roots of human behavior. However, a new study by Yale psychologists found a surprising group of people are particularly good at accurately assessing truths about human’s “social nature” without formal training or tools, they report March 15 in the journal Social Psychology.
So who are the best amateur social psychologists? Introverts prone to melancholy seem to be more astute at understanding how we behave in groups than their gregarious peers, the researchers found.
“It seems to be a case of sadder but wiser,” said Anton Gollwitzer, Yale psychologist and co-author of the study. “They don’t view the world through rose-colored glasses as jovial and extroverted people do.”
Gollwitzer and co-author John Bargh asked more than 1,000 subjects questions about how people on average feel, think, and feel in social contexts — phenomena that have been extensively studied by social psychologists. Some of the questions were: Do people work harder in groups or as individuals? Do people feel more responsible for their behavior in groups or as individuals? Does catharsis work: If I am angry, will taking out my hostilities on a stuffed doll make me feel better?
Research has shown that, on average, people work harder individually than in groups, a concept known as social loafing, studies; that people feel less responsible in groups than as an individual, a phenomenon that helps explain horrors like genocide; and that, no, knocking the stuffing out of a doll is actually not cathartic.
The psychologists then did a series of experiments to try to identify traits of those who accurately answered these questions. Not surprisingly, intelligence and wanting to engage with complex problems was a key predictor, the researchers said. But they also found that introverts tended to answer more accurately than extroverts, as did people with lower self-esteem and those who reported being more lonely.
“It could be that the melancholic, introverted people are spending more time observing human nature than those who are busy interacting with others, or they are more accurate at introspection because they have fewer motivational biases,” Gollwitzer said. “Either way, though, this demonstrates an unappreciated strength of introverts.”
“These ‘natural’ social psychologists, because they better understand social phenomena, may be able to interpret and even predict social changes in our society — maybe they are exactly what is missing from our current governance and positions of power,” he said. NeuroscienceNews.com image is in the public domain.
He stressed that individuals who scored high on tests about human nature do not possess the same knowledge and skills as trained social psychologists. However, he also noted that while “natural” social psychologists will not replace actual psychologists, they could be important players in the real world.
“These ‘natural’ social psychologists, because they better understand social phenomena, may be able to interpret and even predict social changes in our society — maybe they are exactly what is missing from our current governance and positions of power,” he said.
Why do the Russians think the British government cares a hoot about law or evidence? Are the Russians really this brainwashed about the West?
Russians are having a difficult time comprehending their Western enemy or even understanding that Russia has an enemy that seeks the destruction of Russia.
Has it occurred to Russia that it is very strange that the UK, a country of no military significance, a country that could be completely destroyed forever in a few minutes by Russia, would concoct false charges against the Russian government, announce these charges publicly without providing any evidence whatsoever, bring the unsupported charges to the UN, issue an ultimatum to Russia, dispel Russian diplomats and seize Russian assets on the basis of mere allegations, all the while refusing any evidence and any cooperation with Russia, as required by law, in the investigation of the charges?
Russians, both government, media and youth brainwashed by American propaganda and the Washington-funded NGOS that the Russian government permits to operate against itself in Russia, seem to think that the many accusations and threats issued against Russia are some kind of mistake that can be rectified by recourse to evidence and law. Apparently, after all these years the Russians still do not understand that Washington and its vassals have no interest whatsoever in facts or law.
At the UN the Russian ambassador, in response to the evidence-free accusation by the UK prime minister that the Russian government had used a military-grade nerve agent to attempt to kill two people on an English park bench, went through all the legal reasons, including the requirement of collaboration with Russia in examining the evidence, to establish that the UK accusation was in violation of law and unsupported by any evidence.
Why do the Russians think the British government cares a hoot about law or evidence? Are the Russians really this brainwashed about the West?
The British government of Tony Blair cooperated with the George W. Bush regime in propagating the lie that Saddam Hussein in Iraq had “weapons of mass destruction.” This lie was used to invade and to destroy Iraq and to leave the country 15 years later in chaos.
The Russian government simply does not understand that Washington regards Russian appeals to diplomacy, law, facts, evidence, as signs of extreme weakness and lack of confidence. Washington and its puppet states do not need any facts. They have an agenda. By calling for facts, the Russians show their weakness.
The British government also supported the lies about Gaddafi in Libya and participated in overthrowing the Libyan government. The British government also supported the lie that Iran had a nuclear weapons program. There was never any evidence, but evidence was of no interest. An agenda was in motion, and the agenda was independent of evidence.
Although the British Parliament voted down British participation in Obama’s planned invasion of Syria, the current British government supports the lie that Assad is using chemical weapons “against his own people.”
By now one would think that Russians, both government, media, and public, would understand that all the West is capable of is to lie. The purpose of the lies is to demonize Russia and to set up Russia for military attack.
But somehow Russians can’t get the message. Russians think it is all some kind of mistake that facts and legal processes and diplomacy can clear up. “Please just listen to us, we can clear up all the misconceptions!” As if the West cares. Washington wants “the misconceptions.” That is why Washington creates them.
The inability of Russians to understand the West, which Russia stupidly wants to join, is the reason that World War 3 is near at hand.
What if, instead of reciting the legal process and the law governing it that the UK PM refused to follow before publicly accusing Russia without the presentation of any evidence, the Russian UN Ambassador had simply said: “If the UK exists tomorrow, it will be due entirely to the forbearance of the Russian government.”
By relying on law, about which no Western country gives a hoot, the Russian UN ambassador permitted Washington’s French puppet and other of Washington’s European puppet states to say that they supported the British charges against Russia despite the absence of evidence. Perhaps the Russians noticed that none of those European governments required any evidence that Russia was responsible. All that was required was the accusation.
In the exceptional, indispensable Western World ruled by Washington, accusation alone is proof of Russian mendacity. When British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn asked PM May if she actually had any real evidence that Russia had tried to kill the former British double-agent, Corbyn was shouted down not only by the corrupt Conservatives but also by members of the Labour Party that he heads. How much more evidence does Russia need that facts are not important to the West?
Will Russia wake up? Or will its demented desire to be part of the West leave Russians unprepared for Washington’s nuclear strike, which is coming.
What if the Russian government simply told Washington: “If you or your terrorist mercenaries attack Syrian forces, we will eliminate your presence in the Middle East and Israel as well.” This is something that Russia can do at the drop of a hat.
What would the British and Washington do, other than wet their pants? Clearly, they would get the message and decide that peace is a better idea.
The Russian government simply does not understand that Washington regards Russian appeals to diplomacy, law, facts, evidence, as signs of extreme weakness and lack of confidence. Washington and its puppet states do not need any facts. They have an agenda. By calling for facts, the Russians show their weakness.
The Russian display of weakness encourages Washington’s aggression. Does Russia’s desire to be a part of the West exceed its desire for national survival?
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) concluded its annual policy conference last week with a lobbying day on Capitol Hill. High on its legislative agenda was advocating for bills that would penalise Americans for engaging in their First Amendment-protected right to boycott for Palestinian rights.
AIPAC conference attendees pressed their elected officials to support the Israel Anti-Boycott Act, sponsored by Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD). The original, draconian version of this bill, unveiled at last year’s AIPAC conference, proposed to jail individuals for 20 years if they advanced an international organization’s call for a boycott of Israel, or even of products from its illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.
AIPAC supporters also asked their Members of Congress to back the Combating BDS Act, sponsored by Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL). This bill seeks to stifle the successful Palestinian civil society call for campaigns of boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) as a nonviolent means to attain Palestinian freedom from more than 50 years of Israeli military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, justice for Palestinian refugees denied their right of return to the homes from which they were expelled by Israel when it was established in 1948, and equality for Palestinian citizens of Israel who face dozens of discriminatory laws. Rubio’s bill encourages states to pass legislation denying contracts to individuals, associations and businesses which support BDS.
It should be a no-brainer that Americans can boycott whomever or whatever they choose without risking governmental punishment. After all, the Supreme Court ruled that states have no “right to prohibit peaceful political activity” such as a boycott, which is an “expression on public issues” that “has always rested on the highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values”. Indeed, the recent blossoming of the #BoycottNRA movement provides renewed proof of the centrality of boycott movements in effecting social change in the United States.
Although both pieces of legislation initially picked up substantial support on Capitol Hill when they were introduced last year, fortunately, these blatantly unconstitutional bills have been stymied by opposition from those engaged in BDS campaigns for Palestinian rights and civil liberties organisations defending Americans’ right to boycott.
The original version of the Israel Anti-Boycott Act lost steam after the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) wrote to Senators last July that the bill was “in direct violation of the First Amendment” because it “would impose civil and criminal punishment on individuals solely because of their political beliefs about Israel and its policies”.
Senator Cardin claims that an amended version of the bill he released to coincide with the AIPAC conference does not “diminish or infringe on any right protected under the First Amendment”. However, by fining corporations, small business owners, and even nonprofit organisations such as churches as much as $1m for supporting an international organisation’s call to boycott Israel or Israeli settlement goods, the amended bill is still fundamentally an unconstitutional act of viewpoint discrimination at odds with the First Amendment.
The ACLU agrees. Cardin’s new draft “suffers from the same fundamental flaw as the original draft by criminalising participation in constitutionally protected boycotts,” writes ACLU staff lawyer Brian Hauss.
And the types of state-level laws Senator Rubio’s bill encourages is currently facing a constitutional challenge from Esther Koontz, a middle school curriculum coach at a magnet school in Wichita, Kansas, a member of a local Mennonite church, and a plaintiff in an ACLU lawsuit against a law passed by the Kansas legislature that denies state contracts to individuals and businesses that abide by boycotts related to Israeli human rights abuses.
Last spring, Koontz was selected to participate in a programme to train other Kansas teachers. But soon afterwards, the Kansas legislature passed a law placing an unforeseen obstacle in her way. The law, similar to those passed by legislatures or promulgated by gubernatorial executive order in 24 states, requires individuals and businesses contracting with the state to certify that they do not boycott Israel or products from illegal Israeli settlements.
The newly passed Kansas law placed Koontz in a moral bind. “As a member of the Mennonite Church USA, and a person concerned with the human rights of all people – and specifically the ongoing violations of Palestinians’ human rights in Israel and Palestine – I choose to boycott consumer goods made by Israeli and international companies that profit from the violation of Palestinians’ rights,” she explained.
A month after the Kansas legislature passed its law, Koontz’s beliefs were strengthened after the Mennonite Church USA joined eight other denominations in taking economic action to promote Palestinian rights. At its convention, a whopping 98 percent of delegates voted for the church to divest its holdings from companies profiting from human rights abuses resulting from Israel’s half-century military rule of the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza Strip, and to encourage church members to boycott Israeli settlement goods.
After the Kansas State Department of Education informed Koontz that she would need to sign a certification that she does not boycott Israel in order to participate in the teacher training programme, she declined to do so as a “matter of conscience”.
In January, Judge Daniel Crabtree issued a temporary injunction prohibiting Kansas from implementing this law while the case is litigated. Crabtree wrote unequivocally: “The Supreme Court has held that the First Amendment protects the right to participate in a boycott like the one punished by the Kansas law”. He added, “Under the First Amendment, states cannot retaliate or impose conditions on an independent contractor ‘on a basis that infringes his constitutionally protected freedom of speech’.”
Kansas’s certification requirement forces the plaintiff to make a “plainly unconstitutional choice” and is “chilling plaintiff’s and other putative state contractors’ speech rights”, Crabtree explained in his justification enjoining the state from implementing the law.
This landmark ruling that boycotts of Israel or its settlement products are protected constitutional speech should give pause to state legislators who continue to recklessly propose additional bills without concern for protecting Americans’ First Amendment rights. Legislation similar to the one blocked in Kansas has been introduced or is pending currently in 11 additional state houses.
Growing numbers of Americans and the civil society institutions to which they belong are supporting economic action against Israel and corporations that profit from its human rights abuses of Palestinians as a moral and nonviolent way of showing their disapproval of Israel’s oppression. Judge Crabtree’s injunction is a clear indication that Americans are protected by the First Amendment in doing so. Politicians at the federal and state levels must stop trying to impair this right and reject AIPAC’s unconstitutional efforts to suppress boycotts for Palestinian rights.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
Nazca Peru has become famous for those who like to peer into the world of unsolved mysteries. Take for example, the Nazca Lines, a series of large ancient geoglyphs ranging in size, with the largest being 1200 feet long. The world is full of interesting unsolved mysteries that question what we think we know about human history, and new discoveries are constantly being made, many of which receive very little attention. This really goes to show just how little we know of human history, and how new discoveries show us that there are so many variables that we really need to take into consideration when contemplating our past. There are still may questions which remain unanswered.
A new discovery has been made in Nazca, Peru. If you haven’t already heard, multiple mummies have been unearthed and they’re actually real organic bodies. Their anatomy is quite strange, and differs greatly from that of a human. The beings are humanoid, and have three fingers and three toes on each hand, with a distinctly different shape of a skull compared to modern day humans, as well as those who roamed the Earth before we did.
This is also interesting because three fingered beings are depicted in ancient petroglyphic drawings that’ve been found in Peru.
Now, before we go any further, we have to address the ‘alien issue.’ When the news came out about these strange bodies being unearthed, Snopes.com instantly labelled the story as fake news, specifically because it contemplated the idea that they could be alien bodies. How does this make it fake news? They (Snopes) did not even acknowledge the fact that these were indeed real bodies, they simply ridiculed the story because it had an ‘alien’ tone to it. They also ridiculed the researchers involved, as what seemed to be an attempt to further discredit the story by ridiculing the people. As a result, many people believed that the bodies were not found at all, which is not true.
Secondly, is it really far off to contemplate that these beings could be alien? With all of the evidence and information that’s been released over the years regarding UFOs, and their potential extraterrestrial origin as well as various interpretations of ancient history, it’s really not at all that “out there” (no pun intended) to question. We will get to why later in the article.
But let’s get back to the bodies. One of them is named Maria, she’s a 5th century woman who predates the arrival of the Europeans to America. So far, scientists have shared their belief that she belonged to a race that was wiped from Earth due to some climate catastrophe, like a flood or a comet strike.
Maria isn’t the only one, scientists are also studying a nine-year old mummy called Vavita, and four other male mummies.
Who are these scientists? One of them is Dr. Konstantin Korotkov, a professor of Computer Science and Biophysics at Saint-Petersburg Federal University of Informational Technologies, Mechanics and Optics. He is also a researcher at the Russian National Research University. He said, “We have a very important mission here in Peru. I came here because of this group of scientists, professionals, [and] journalists.” When they brought out the body and “pulled it out of the box, it was a stunned silence at first.”
Another one is Natalya Zaloznaya, a radiologist and specialist in computer tomography at the International Biological Systems Institute. She was also in Peru collecting tissue samples to bring back to St. Petersburg for analysis.
Again, there are many. Below is another one pictured analyzing preliminary results which showed that “This body is a real body, that was once alive. For example, here we have the teeth from the upper arch, and here are the ones from the lower arch. The skull with the remains of brain mass, this part here shows the lungs at the side. This is the heart, with the bronchus, and the great vessels, lungs at both sides. This is still the heart, and here are the four cavities, and the bronchi that are preserved.”
They also show the intestines and abdomen, and that the placement of the internal organs is “completely harmonious.”
So far it seems that “initial examinations suggest the possibility of a species unlike anything found in the fossil record.”
Early DNA results of the mummy, named “Maria,” show that she is female, and that the other bodies found alongside her, which look to be a spouse and a couple of children, are also real, biological bodies. Some of their organs are actually still intact. Further testing was done on one of the strangest aspects of these bodies, their fingers and toes, and has shown that these parts are not fake, ruling out any possibility of a hoax. They’re the same material, the same chemical composition, and the same DNA. The samples taken from Maria’s fingers matched the date of her body, which is approximately 249-411 AD. Carbon dating, and an analysis of the structure of the body via CT scan and X-ray, proved it was real.
Researchers have now collected tissue samples in Peru and have brought them back to Russia to study. They’ve found that the mummies – with elongated heads and three fingers on each hand, actually have 23 chromosomes that appear to be human, but again, the bodies differ than that of human anatomy.
“Right now, we are making a detailed analysis to see if the shape of the position of all the chromosomes, of all the amino acids, coincides with ours,”
The professor went on to emphasize to IB Timesthat,
“Each of the little mummies has two arms, two legs, a head, pair of eyes and a mouth. Tomographic scans reveal their skeletons. The tissue has biological nature and their chemical composition indicates that they are humans…Their DNA features 23 pairs of chromosomes, just like we have. All the four of them are males, each with a Y-chromosome.”
He also made it a point to say that, “They appear human but they are not. Their anatomic structure is different. They could be extraterrestrials or bio robots.”
He also said that they could very well belong to an ancient Earth tribe, and we could be seeing a completely new species, one of many, that can be added to the mystery that is Earth’s history.
Last month, the Free Thought Project reported on the above the law tax haven established inside the United States by the Rothschilds. Before that, Baron David de Rothschild was indicted by the French government after he was accused of fraud in a scheme that allegedly embezzled large sums of money from British pensioners.
Earlier this month, the French government announced that it has launched an investigation into the entire Swiss branch of the Rothschild’s banking empire.
The world is waking up to the fact that these very powerful families operate in a legal class far separated from the one we find ourselves subject to.
Appearing on the French television show, Le Grand Journal, Jean-Claude Van Damme just showed the world that even he is “aware” of the control and power of the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers.
Van Damme was invited on the French show to speak about the US elections. However, he quickly hijacked the narrative and went on to explain how the Rothschilds and Rockefellers assert their banking influence over the world
Needless to say, the hosts were flabbergasted at the truth.
C.O: Ted Cruz, religious evangelist right, etc. And the other Marco Rubio (interrupted)
JCV: He (T.Cruz) is the individual that said Putin is a gangster.
C.O: Cruz? Yes, whereas Trump said Putin was a formidable guy.
JCV: Let’s remain political and righteous (interrupted)
C.O: Yes but it holds for both.
JCV: Well, they are not going to win, you still have the Rockefeller… people like… the Rothschild, those big families that dominate continents. S0, it’s not even France here, we’re talking continents, these are families that rise in 1827, a family with 5 sons that expands.
Anchor: You are talking about… (interrupted)
JCV: It’s above everything we’re talking tonight… so you have [there are also] lobbyists, people that are candidates to elections, and then you have people like Donald Trump, who have what? 10 billion euros?
JCV: He might have more but that’s what he declares in legal documents. In any case, if I myself have goods, and worked all my life, for my families, my friends, for my country where I pay my taxes, what he wants first in my opinion is to protect his interests, whereas someone who works for free is someone dangerous. It’s true we have problems with globalists, but what he says in a way, to get out of globalism, is to leave the world alone, it’s a different philosophy.
The hosts then attempt again to steer the conversation back to the mundane.
JCV: hang on a second, I was asked if I knew politics, I’m aware.
The hosts then take back over and the show goes on. But, for two honest minutes, this man used his celebrity to interject truth into the mainstream. Thank you Jean-Claude Van Damme. Below is that video.
After opening a trust company in Reno, Nev., Rothschild & Co. began ushering the massive fortunes of the world’s most wealthy individuals out of typical tax havens, and into the Rothschild run U.S. trusts, which are exempt from the international reporting requirements.
The Rothschild banking dynasty is a family line that has been accused of pulling the political strings of many different governments through their control of various economic systems throughout the world.
Historically, there is ample evidence to show that the family has used insider trading to bilk money from both private and public funds.
During the Battle of Waterloo in the Napoleonic wars, Nathan Rothschild was responsible for one of the oldest cases of “insider trading,” which led to the Rothschild family robbing a whole nation blind. In 1815 when the battle of Waterloo took place, there were no quick methods of communication like we have today so messengers were used for communication in times of war. The Rothschild’s took advantage of this by having spies on the front lines of the battle who would return information to the family faster than the messengers used by the military.
When the British won the war, Nathan Rothschild, was of course, the first to know, and he immediately went to the stock exchange and started selling stocks while putting out the rumor that the French had won the war. This created a panic on the floor of the stock exchange and investors all over England began frantically selling their stocks. With the price of all stocks plummeting Rothschild was able to buy out the whole English market for a fraction of its cost. When word returned that the English had actually been victorious, the value of the market soared, and overnight Nathan Rothschild expanded his family’s wealth, and cemented their position as one of the richest families in the world.
MOSCOW (Sputnik) – A decision of Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte to pull his country out of the International Criminal Court (ICC) will encourage other states to follow the suit, marking “the beginning of the end” for the ICC, the spokesman of Duterte, Harry Roque, said Thursday.
“The Philippine withdrawal, I am sure, will start an avalanche of other states leaving the court… Secondly, no other Asians would join the ICC now. Only the Philippines has taken the role of advocating that other countries in the region should become a member. This [is] the beginning of the end of the court,” Roque was quoted as saying by the ABS-CBN News.
The large-scale anti-drug campaign was launched by Duterte in June 2016 as a follow-up to his election promise to stop drug-related crimes in the country.
According to the Human Rights Watch, the so-called War on Drugs has resulted in the killing of over 12,000 drug suspects. Duterte’s campaign has been sharply criticized by the international community and human rights groups.Duterte announced the day before his country’s withdrawal of the ratification of the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC, after the court in February launched a preliminary inquiry into crimes against humanity allegedly committed by the Philippine leader. Duterte was reportedly dissatisfied with an “attempt” by the ICC to place him under the court’s jurisdiction.
The mayor of Baltimore is receiving much-deserved criticism after she allocated $100,000 to bus students to a gun control rally in Washington D.C. later this month. The reason for the criticism is founded in the fact that students froze all winter long because the mayor says they have no money to fix the slew of broken heaters.
Earlier this year, students in Baltimore schools were told to bring blankets and cold weather attire to class every day because the heating systems in over one-third of all the schools were either broken or barely working. Students, faculty, and staff were forced to bundle up inside the school in January until it became so unbearable that the schools actually closed due to unsafe temperatures.
To most people, these underperforming, outdated, and broken heating systems would be a priority to get fixed. However, at the time, Baltimore Mayor Catherine Pugh claimed that there simply wasn’t enough money to make the repairs and upgrades.
It is not just the heat either. The infrastructure in the Baltimore school system is crumbling and many students find themselves unable to even drink the water. But we see where the priorities lie.
Fast forward to March, and suddenly—in spite of claiming they have no money—the mayor has miraculously pulled $100,000 out of nowhere to bus thousands of students to a gun control rally in Washington D.C.
“America needs to hear the voices of the young people of Baltimore,” Pugh told the students before announcing the city’s plan to fund the trip to the “March for Our Lives” rally in Washington, D.C., on March 24.
The $100,000 will pay for 60 buses, free t-shirts, boxed lunches and other amenities for a few thousand students who signed up to go to the rally.
While $100,000 isn’t nearly enough to fix the heating systems, it shows that basic necessities for students are taking a backseat to political theater.
As Our Community Now reports, at the time, the mayor’s office explained that the schools’ heating systems were beyond fixing because the city simply didn’t have the money to make the repairs and upgrades. Initial estimates from the American Civil Liberties Union (it’s never good when HVAC systems in schools get the attention of the ACLU) estimated that it would cost at least $2.8 billion to modernize the heating and air conditioning in Baltimore City Public Schools.
The problem became so bad that earlier this year, citizens were forced to take action outside of the government. A concerned citizen then set up a GoFundMe account to raise money to fix the problem. It was titled, “We Need Heat in Our Public Schools,” and it raised over $84,000 to provide space heaters. The mayor’s $100,000 could’ve stretched that out to further reduce suffering in schools but this did not happen.
Parents and students alike are left wondering why the mayor would justify spending upwards of $100,000 on political activism when children are suffering every single day in school.
It is no secret that Baltimore is one of the worst places in the nation as far as gun violence is concerned. And, if students want to voice their concern over this problem, they have every single right to do so. However, when the mayor spends money they don’t have to bus a few thousand students to DC for a day to call for gun control when Baltimore is already highly regulated, this speaks to the nature of such an act.
In Baltimore, there is already an “assault weapons” ban, a “high capacity” magazine ban, and special fingerprinting and reporting requirements on handgun sales. Yet their murder rate more than doubles other cities that are much larger—like Chicago.
According to WJZ, murders occur so frequently in Baltimore that the number of murders in the city is higher than the number in Philadelphia, even though Philadelphia “has two and a half times the population.” Moreover, Baltimore sees more murders than New York City, although NYC “is almost 14 times larger.”
Yes, Baltimore has a problem but all the gun control in the world is doing very little to stop guns from coming in. Even the police admit that after all the guns were banned in 2013, criminal use of banned guns skyrocketed every year after.
Proving that if you disarm a population, only criminals and cops will have guns, Baltimore Police spokesman T.J. Smith said, “We’re dealing with absolute criminals who want as much weaponry as possible when they’re going after their targets. They’re not carrying .22s. They’re carrying the big guns that have these high capacities.”
Sadly, the mayor’s move to spend $100,000 of taxpayer money that they don’t have to send students to call for gun control that won’t work is the epitome of everything wrong with government in America.
Until politicians educate themselves on the cause of this violence, these uninformed and corrupt lawmakers will continue to focus on controlling the symptoms.
After Vladimir Putin showcased Russia’s highly advanced weaponry, Donald Trump replaced his “Russia-friendly” State Secretary Rex Tillerson with the CIA Director Mike Pompeo. Some consider this as a wise move towards a positive direction, i.e. keeping friends close and enemies closer.
Pompeo is expected to be tough on Iran, but willing to compromise with North Korea. After all, the incumbent South Korean government of Moon Jae-in got its overwhelming mandate when it promised to finally have peace with the North, whether with the blessing of the US, or not. Credit grabbing by the White House has been the rule, rather than the exception.
However, as a matter of consequence, the Agency will be led by the “Godmother of Torture” Gina Haspel. This means that the US intervention in Syria will not go quietly into the night.
Which brings us to the question: Is the Pentagon audit a mere charade?
Last December, the Pentagon announced the first ever auditing of the department. Since 2001, the DoD could not account where the US$9 trillion went.
Defense Department Comptroller David Norquist announced the start of the DOD’s first-ever audit amid concerns of an impending government shutdown.
Beyond the obvious accounting of assets—an estimated $2.4 trillion worth, including everything from infrastructure to personnel to weapon systems—an audit will create opportunities for careful consideration about the best use of military dollars. Even if the accounts show that every single penny that goes into the DOD is spent mindfully, wisely, and efficiently, there’s still cause to debate the ends that those pennies enable. The audit doesn’t obviate the need to have these discussions—it should spark them.
Hopefully its findings will also expose some of the waste, fraud, and abuse that Congress cites as problematic. The Department of Defense is a government agency and bureaucracy—a highly respected and exalted institution—but prone to the same inefficiencies that plague the EPA and Department of Interior, for example. Until now, the DOD successfully evaded opening its books, with critics citing concerns that such scrutiny could expose national-security secrets. Others warn that an audit could undermine our troops by compelling them to divert attention away from core missions.
… It’s worth bearing in mind, however, that auditors won’t likely uncover new inefficiencies of a great magnitude. Some of the Pentagon’s worst examples of wastefulness are already common knowledge. A $125 billion bureaucratic waste report (albeit with questionable methodology) made headlines this time last year. The General Accounting Office regularly reports on the Pentagon’s struggle to produce weapons systems in a timely fashion. One of the largest single line items in the budget, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, has been plagued by everything from software struggles to production delays to cost overruns. Some muse that the entire enterprise might be a $1 trillion mistake. Similarly, the Littoral Combat Ship program has long been associated with inefficiency. Its new acquisition strategy doesn’t seem to be making things better. The worst of the worst in the DOD’s gargantuan budget will likely be the things that policymakers and the public already know about…
Nobody is threatening to war with the US, yet the war industry still able to find ways to create enemies out of everyone it can’t control. They are now blaming Russia for starting a new arms race. But it was the US who pulled away from the START agreement which could have paved the way for mutual reduction of offensive and strategic arms.
START (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) was a bilateral treaty between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on the reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms. The treaty was signed on 31 July 1991 and entered into force on 5 December 1994. The treaty barred its signatories from deploying more than 6,000 nuclear warheads atop a total of 1,600 inter-continental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and bombers. START negotiated the largest and most complex arms control treaty in history, and its final implementation in late 2001 resulted in the removal of about 80 percent of all strategic nuclear weapons then in existence. Proposed by United States President Ronald Reagan, it was renamed START I after negotiations began on the second START treaty.
Today, more than a thousand of combined NATO and US military bases are encircling China, Iran and Russia. But all of the latter is considered to be the aggressor. This baseless rhetorics from the CIA-controlled mainstream media will be enhanced further now that Mike Pompeo is broadcasting directly from inside the White House.
Trump has just imposed a 25% import tariff and 10% tariff on steel and aluminum to reduce importations from China. This is supposedly in line with his “America First” doctrine. However, China could easily retaliate by releasing its more than a trillion US dollar denominated treasury bills. Couple this with the impending inauguration of a Yuan-based oil exchange market this March 26th, and the illusion of Western superiority in this department will be shattered for good.
This may be Trump’s way of pulling China to a negotiating table and extract more concessions from the former. He has also stop the free flow of high technology to China, by way of halting mergers of Chinese and US companies. It’s a bit too late for that. German companies are already collaborating with Chinese counterparts for much needed funding.
Adopting to the world of multipolarity is always hard for a former hegemon, as much as it is hard for the White Men to leave South Africa alone to its original settlers. They are still thinking that they are better stewards for the colored peoples around the world. How can they be when they are only looking out for their own interests?
There is a far better outcome when Asia’s wealth is merged with Western science, as much as all occupied lands must be returned to its rightful owners. Both must be done to institute social justice and long term peace.
Any effort towards that direction will be for naught if the Deep Swamp is still in control of the White House.
Chemical-dosing experiment to force friendship toward migrants: not science fiction
I really hope you understand this.
It is not a fantasy. It isn’t science fiction. It isn’t satire.
It is Brave New World, but not the Huxley novel. It’s happening now.
It’s a published study that appears on the website of the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.
The title of the study is, “Oxytocin-enforced norm compliance reduces xenophobic outgroup rejection.” (Reference: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Aug 29;114(35):9314-9319.)
Xenophobia is defined as: “fear or hatred of foreigners, people from different cultures, or strangers.” (Dictionary.com)
Oxytocin, the chemical used in this study, is described by Medical News Today: “Widely referred to as the love hormone, oxytocin has also been dubbed the hug hormone, cuddle chemical, moral molecule, and the bliss hormone due to its effects on behavior, including its role in love and in female reproductive biological functions in reproduction.”
“Oxytocin is a hormone that is made in the brain, in the hypothalamus. It is transported to, and secreted by, the pituitary gland, which is located at the base of the brain.”
The published study details a successful attempt at chemical mind control. The goal is making people more “happy and friendly” about mass migration, by changing their hormonal response toward migrants.
Nothing in the study cites inherent migration problems, such as increased violent crime, back-breaking financial pressure on government budgets, and the eroding of local cultures. It’s all about shifting feeling and reaction toward waves of immigrants.
Here are extensive quotes from the new study:
“Here we report the results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled experiment showing that enhanced activity of the oxytocin system paired with charitable social cues [programming] can help counter the effects of xenophobia by fostering altruism toward refugees. These findings suggest that the combination of oxytocin and peer-derived altruistic norms [social cues] reduces outgroup rejection [toward migrants] even in the most selfish and xenophobic individuals, and thereby would be expected to increase the ease by which people adapt to rapidly changing social ecosystems [mass immigration].”
“…we tested the propensity of 183 Caucasian participants to make donations to people in need, half of whom were refugees (outgroup) and half of whom were natives (ingroup). Participants scoring low on xenophobic attitudes [showing they already accept mass immigration] exhibited an altruistic preference for the outgroup, which further increased after nasal delivery of the neuropeptide oxytocin. In contrast, participants with higher levels of xenophobia generally failed to exhibit enhanced altruism toward the outgroup. This tendency was only countered by pairing oxytocin with peer-derived altruistic norms [social-programming cues], resulting in a 74% increase in refugee-directed donations. Collectively, these findings reveal the underlying sociobiological conditions associated with outgroup-directed altruism by showing that charitable social cues co-occurring with enhanced activity of the oxytocin system reduce the effects of xenophobia by facilitating prosocial behavior toward refugees.”
The truly disturbing and mind-boggling aspect of this study is: many people would accept it as a reasonable way to “solve” the migrant crisis.
Forget about the actual effects of immigration. They’re irrelevant. Instead, focus on re-shaping people’s minds, through chemical intervention combined with social programming.
The authors of the mind-control study are basically saying, “If you have a problem with mass immigration, the problem has nothing to do with facts. It only has to do with your hormone system. Basically, you have a deficit of oxytocin.”
I have written many articles about the effects of philosophic materialism, including its conclusion that humans are merely biological machines and, therefore, can be manipulated at will by “those in charge.”
Free will? A delusion. Individual choice? Unacceptable. Humans are inherently programmed in every respect, and badly programmed at that. The central flaws must be fixed. Humans must be reconfigured so they automatically respond to stimuli in new ways. ‘More humane ways.’
Lost in this study, as well, are the effects of dosing with oxytocin on a person’s overall hormone system. You don’t suddenly ramp up one hormone without changing levels of others—testosterone, for example. But who cares, when the social and political goal must be attained? If men become more passive in the process, why not?
Perhaps that notion will be the formation of the next study. “Let’s cut testosterone and see what happens. How much of it do we need to reduce before men just lie around and play with toys and dolls?”
Interestingly enough, the authors of the study never considered dosing male immigrants of military age with the oxytocin “love hormone.” Heaven forbid. That would be “interfering in their culture.”
That’s called a clue.
In Brave New World, Huxley included every kind of programming he could imagine: genetically controlled, synthetic, motherless, incubator pregnancy and birth, during which extensive mind control was applied; consequent separation of classes of humans, relative to their assigned work and social relations; elimination of the traditional family; erasure of all hostile impulses; societal norms constructed to encourage physical pleasure as the highest ideal; and a “miracle drug,” Soma, ready at hand to dispel the depression and doubt that might somehow creep through and survive the massive programming. The “inevitable outcome?” EVERYONE WILL BE HAPPY.
In one stage or another, all these strategies are now being pushed forward toward a Technocratic future.
With Utopian justice for all.
Again, the proposition on which this lunacy is based is: freedom does not exist. It was always an illusion. Humans have never been anything more than programmed bio-machines. Therefore, ANY level and degree of re-programming is justified.
Objections to this crusade are merely part of the illusion that freedom is real.
However, freedom IS real. How individuals view it and what they do with it is an entirely different matter. If they see it as nothing more than choosing between a vacation in Disney World and Las Vegas, choosing between reruns of CSI and Matlock, then Brave New World will seem like a minor change.
Conceiving, realizing, and experiencing freedom as a vast space and a vast platform for individual action—creative action, meaningful action—THAT is a prerequisite for the survival of life as we know it.
The life we hold dear.
Who defines “meaningful action?”
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.
According to reports from Sputnik International, the Syrian Army has claimed that it has uncovered a chemical weapons “workshop” in East Ghouta after having liberated the territory where the workshop was located.
After sweeping through the village of Aftris in Eastern Ghouta following the withdrawal of terrorists from the area, Syrian Army Colonel Feruz Ibrahim told reporters that, “Presumably, the equipment of these munitions could be produced as part of a false flag accusation that government troops used chemical weapons.”
In other works, Ibrahim is echoing what many independent researchers have known for some time, i.e. that Western-backed terrorists have the ability and the desire to conduct false flag attacks to be blamed on the Syrian government for the purpose of justifying military action or airstrikes against the Syrian military by the United States and NATO.
The Syrian Foreign Ministry recently stated that militants inside East Ghouta may be preparing to stage a chemical attack in order to place blame on the Syrian government. Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister, Faisal Mekdad assured the press that Damascus was ready and willing to assist in investigations related to chemical attacks in Syria, but pointed out that various “international organizations” did not want to cooperate with the Syrian government.
Only a week ago, the Russian Center for Syrian Reconciliation also reported the possibility that terrorists were planning to stage chemical weapons attacks in East Ghouta in order to blame the Syrian government.
Although impossible to determine for sure, it seems that the willingness of the Russian government to uncover and announce plans of terrorists to stage chemical attacks may be foiling many of the attempts of the U.S. to take advantage of these false flags, at least on the world stage.
The OPCW has already confirmed that the Syrian chemical weapons stockpile has been destroyed. Even U.S. officials have had to admit that there has been no evidence of use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government in East Ghouta, with Defense Secretary James Mattis admitting that there was no evidence that the Syrian used chemical weapons in Khan Sheykhoun, despite the U.S. having launched a series of airstrikes against the al-Sha’aryat airbase, killing around 80, including civilians and children.
She spent 10 years in jail after her baby was found dead and she was sentenced for murder.
Complete ban on abortions
El Salvador is one of a handful of countries in the world where abortions are completely banned and carry heavy sentences.
The punishment is up to eight years in jail but in many cases in which the foetus or newborn has died, the charge is changed to one of aggravated homicide, which carries a minimum sentence of 30 years.
While El Salvador is not alone in Latin America in having a total ban on abortions, the country is particularly strict in the way it enforces it.
Doctors have to inform the authorities if they think a woman has tried to end her pregnancy. If they fail to report such cases, they too could face long sentences in jail.
Human rights groups say this results in a criminalisation of miscarriages and medical emergencies, with more than 100 convicted of abortion-related crimes in El Salvador since 2000.
You aren’t what you eat, exactly. But over many generations, what we eat does shape our evolutionary path. “Diet,” says anthropologist John Hawks, of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, “has been a fundamental story throughout our evolutionary history. Over the last million years there have been changes in human anatomy, teeth and the skull, that we think are probably related to changes in diet.”
When mammals are young, they produce an enzyme called lactase to help digest the sugary lactose found in their mothers’ milk. But once most mammals come of age, milk disappears from the menu. That means enzymes to digest it are no longer needed, so adult mammals typically stop producing them.
Thanks to recent evolution, however, some humans defy this trend.
Around two-thirds of adult humans are lactose intolerant or have reduced lactose tolerance after infancy. But tolerance varies dramatically depending on geography. Among some East Asian communities, intolerance can reach 90 percent; people of West African, Arab, Greek, Jewish and Italian descent are also especially prone to lactose intolerance.
Northern Europeans, on the other hand, seem to love their lactose—95 percent of them are tolerant, meaning they continue to produce lactase as adults. And those numbers are increasing. “In at least different five cases, populations have tweaked the gene responsible for digesting that sugar so that it remains active in adults,” Hawks says, noting it is most common among peoples in Europe, the Middle East and East Africa.
That lightning-fast evolutionary change suggests that direct milk consumption must have provided a serious survival advantage over peoples who had to ferment dairy into yogurt or cheese. During fermentation, bacteria break down milk sugars including lactase, turning them into acids and easing digestion for those with lactose intolerance. Gone with those sugars, however, is a good chunk of the food’s caloric content.
Hawks explains why being able to digest milk would have been such a boon in the past: “You’re in a nutrition limited environment, except you have cattle, or sheep, or goats, or camels, and that gives you access to a high energy food that infants can digest but adults can’t,” he says. “What it does is allow people to get 30 percent more calories out of milk, and you don’t have the digestive issues that come from milk consumption.”
A recent genetic study found that adult lactose tolerance was less common in Roman Britain than today, meaning its evolution has continued throughout Europe’s recorded history.
These days, many humans have access to plentiful alternative foods as well as lactose-free milk or lactase pills that help them digest regular dairy. In other words, we can circumvent some impacts of natural selection. That means traits like lactose tolerance might not have the same direct impacts on survival or reproduction that they once did—at least in some parts of the world.
“As far as we know, it makes no difference to your survival and reproduction in Sweden if you can digest milk or not. If you’re eating out of a supermarket (your dairy tolerance doesn’t affect your survival). But it still makes a difference in East Africa,” Hawks says.
Wheat, Starch and Alcohol
These days, it isn’t uncommon to find an entire grocery store aisle devoted to gluten-free cookies, bread and crackers. Yet trouble digesting gluten—the main protein found in wheat—is another relatively recent snag in human evolution. Humans didn’t start storing and eating grains regularly until around 20,000 years ago, and wheat domestication didn’t begin in earnest until about 10,000 years ago.
Russia and India have been close allies for more than half a century. Yet most Russians know little about India.
This is a country with its own world view, self-sustaining civilization and a history that is remarkably similar to Russia’s. Both countries have been subjected to savage invasions over the past several centuries.
As we enter a new year, here’s an example of the Indian view of evil by an Indian who has been a friend of Russia for longer than he can remember. Don’t look for Russian villains here because Indians have a different perspective – often at odds with the Western one, which alas many Russians are still following.
However, you are unlikely to find fault with this list of nasty people who have caused untold human misery.
9. Yahya Khan
It took Adolf Hitler 12 years to round up and kill six million European Jews, but the Pakistanis, led by their President Yahya Khan, killed three million of their own Bengali citizens in less than a year. The fair-skinned Pakistanis of West Pakistan had such a racist, visceral hatred for their Muslim brethren in East Pakistan that Yahya is recorded as saying furiously: “Kill three million, and the rest will eat out of our hands.” The disruption of normal life in the region was cataclysmic: more than 30 million people – nearly half the population – fled the cities and went back to their villages, while ten million fled to India.
More than two million of those killed are believed to have been Hindus. The rest were ordinary Bengali Muslims, students and academics. Next, the Pakistanis targeted women, raping at least 200,000. Among Yahya’s executioners in East Pakistan was General A.A.K. Niazi, who let loose his (fair skinned) Punjabi and Pathan soldiers on the defenseless women, saying:
“I will transform the breed of this bastard race.
Worse, after 93,000 Pakistan soldiers surrendered to the Indians, none of the Indian military were held accountable. The victorious generals not only prevented Bengali guerrillas from taking revenge on the Pakistani soldiers, but worse, they kept them in comfortable POW camps for more than a year.
There is a special place in hell for Yahya.
8. Talat Pasha
Not many people know the name of this genocidal maniac, but his deeds are well known. Talat Pasha was the Grand Vizier of the Ottoman Empire from 1917 to 1918. In 1915 he issued an order to wipe out the Armenians, forcing the entire population of Armenia – then under Turkish rule – into concentration camps.
With their belongings, naked people were forced to trudge miles with no food and were killed if they couldn’t continue. The entire male population of Ankara was exterminated. Out of 2.5 million Armenians, 1 to 1.5 million were killed. In 1921, an Armenian assassination squad ended Talat Pasha’s miserable existence.
7. Dick Cheney
Seventeen of the 19 hijackers of 9/11 were Saudi Arabians and yet the US invaded Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with Islamic terror. US Vice President Dick Cheney lied and fabricated evidence to get the US to go to war with Iraq. This led to the destruction of a secular country, its infrastructure and its army, but more tragically the war caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and the displacement of millions.
Сheney also authorized physical and sexual abuse, torture, rape, sodomy and murder of Iraqi prisoners in the Abu Ghraib prison by US Army and CIA personnel.
Worse, he used the war to make billions for his old company Halliburton. This suggests that he destroyed an entire country with a view to making money for himself and his cronies.
Iraq was once a bulwark against Islamic fundamentalism, but America’s war is directly responsible for the emergence of Al-Qaeda and ISIS.
He is likely to be singled out for special treatment in hell.
6. Pol Pot
What’s unique about Pol Pot, the Prime Minister of Cambodia from 1976 to 1979, is that he wiped out 25 to 33 per cent of the population of his country – nearly three million.
Pol Pot represents the ultimate communist fantasy – to destroy their ‘class enemies’. He wanted to uproot Cambodian civilization, turning it into an agrarian society and the people into workers and peasants. He is the only person in history who ordered an official genocide against his country. He banned Buddhism, money, schools, markets and personal possessions. Doctors, teachers, engineers and other skilled people were systematically eliminated.
His communist government forced mass evacuations of cities, separating people from friends and families.
The torture of class enemies happened on a massive scale, with millions, including the elderly, pregnant women and children beaten to death after being forced to work insanely long hours. People were expected to work until they dropped dead.
Pol Pot was supported both by the Chinese and the Americans, because he was an enemy of the Vietnamese.
Cambodia’s nightmare finally ended in December 1985 when the highly professional Vietnamese army invaded the country and destroyed Pol Pot’s headquarters. He fled to Thailand and after a few years moved to China, where he was treated for cancer.
Pol Pot died in April 1998 of natural causes but is surely having a painful time in hell.
Murderous tyrants fill history’s pages, but Timur of Samarkand was cruel towards both man and beast. Among his favorite pastimes was pushing elephants down steep cliffs.
A former bandit, Timur conquered Persia and Mesopotamia, invaded Russia, Georgia, Syria, Turkey and India. In Baghdad he had 90,000 people beheaded so he could build towers with their skulls. In Turkey, where he promised no bloodshed in return for surrender, he had 3,000 prisoners buried alive and pointed out that he had kept to the letter of his oath. He also captured the Turkish Sultan and his wives, kept the Sultan in a cage in his parlor and had his naked wives serve visitors food and drinks.
In 1397, Timur invaded India. The entire stretch of land from the Khyber Pass to the northern plains was subjected to massacres, rape, pillage and kidnapping. He easily defeated the Muslim sultanate ruling Delhi, but strong Hindu resistance made Timur even more vengeful than usual. During the ransacking of Delhi, almost all those not killed were distributed as slaves among Timur’s nobles. In his memoirs, he claims his 15,000 Turks each “secured from 50 to 100 prisoners….there was no man with less than 20” and that “women were obtained in such quantities as to exceed all count”.
Timur declared his army had only killed Hindus and spared Muslim civilians. That’s rich, coming from someone who wiped out the city of Baghdad.
Timur is most likely being repeatedly thrown off a steep cliff into hell’s lake of lava.
There’s a reason why Canadian author Tarek Fatah danced in the wee hours in his bedroom when he received a phone call informing him that Delhi’s Aurangzeb Road had been renamed after APJ Abdul Kalam.
Aurangzeb was singularly responsible for the continuing Hindu-Muslim divide in India. The Mughal emperor came to the throne by murdering his scholarly older brother and heir apparent Dara Shikoh. He also blinded Dara’s young children.
Aurangzeb let elephants loose among the population and raided Hindu lands, destroying ancient temples. The number of stunningly beautiful temples he destroyed runs into the hundreds, if not thousands. Every Hindu in his kingdom had to pay the hated jaziya tax to be allowed to practice his religion. He claimed he was (unsuccessfully) “trying to destroy the ancient sovereignties of this country”.
According to Fatah, “Aurangzeb today would be the equivalent of the Islamic State’s Al-Baghdadi, if not Osama Bin Laden or the Taliban Mullah Omar.”
Fatah is of Pakistani origin but unlike most South Asian Muslims he realizes the great harm Aurangzeb caused India.
“As emperor, Aurangzeb banned music, dancing and alcohol in the Mughal Empire. In Sindh and Punjab where many Muslims attended Hindu Brahmin preaches, he ordered the demolition of all schools and temples where these took place, making it punishable for Muslims to dress like non-Muslims.”
Under the influence of Hinduism and the strong, sustained Hindu resistance, Islam lost its edge in India. By the late 1600s, a unique culture had formed in northern India, with Islam ready to shed its terrorist behavior towards other religions. Dara, who translated ancient Hindu texts into Persian, was symbolic of this remarkable transformation of Islam.
However, Aurangzeb not only set the clock back on this reconciliation but alienated all his Hindu allies. This led to fierce wars of resistance that weakened the country and allowed the British to slowly conquer India. The partition of India (although British-midwifed) can be attributed to the deep divide created by this terrorist emperor.
His legacy lives on in the hearts of many Indian Muslims who regard him as no less than a saint.
Hell is the right place for such a scumbag.
(NOTE: Aurangzeb Road was the second most expensive street in New Delhi. You are surely wondering who would name such a beautiful street after such an evil person. The answer is, the British. New Delhi was built by colonial Britain and several streets were named after brutal Muslim rulers and barbaric representatives of the queen of England. This is just one example of the West’s love for fundamentalist Islam.)
3. Mohandas Gandhi
Mohandas Gandhi’s pacifism caused great harm to India and Hindus. Muslims refused to listen to him and attacked Hindus who had been effectively disarmed by Gandhi’s appeals for peace. This encouraged Muslims to attack Hindus even more because they knew Hindus weren’t going to retaliate.
Had Hindus been allowed to attack Muslims, or at least be prepared to defend themselves with weapons, the cycle of Muslim violence could have been nipped in the bud. By going on hunger fasts in order to prevent Hindus from retaliating, Gandhi was the chief villain of Partition. Hundreds of thousands of Hindus were killed and thousands of women raped because of Gandhi’s imposed pacifism. He advocated a senseless surrender to murder.
According to Indologist and Belgian orientalist Koenraad Elst, “The fundamental problem with Gandhi’s pacifism, not in the initial stages but when he had become the world-famous leader of India’s freedom movement (1920-47), was his increasing extremism. All sense of proportion had vanished when he advocated non-violence not as a technique of moral pressure by a weaker on a stronger party, but as a form of masochistic surrender.”
Gandhi’s advice to the victims of communal violence was “breathtaking for its callousness in the face of human suffering”. During his prayer meeting on 1 May 1947, he prepared the Hindus and Sikhs for the anticipated massacres of their kind in the upcoming state of Pakistan with these words:
“I would tell the Hindus to face death cheerfully if the Muslims are out to kill them. I would be a real sinner if after being stabbed I wished in my last moment that my son should seek revenge. I must die without rancor. You may turn round and ask whether all Hindus and all Sikhs should die. Yes, I would say. Such martyrdom will not be in vain.”
Worse, believing he was some kind of mahatma (great soul), he tried to prove his self-control by often sleeping and bathing naked with other women. These women included his grandniece, Manu, and the wife of his grandnephew, who were both 18 when they started sleeping in the same bed as Gandhi, who was 77 years old at the time.
Graeme Donald writes in Lies, Damned Lies and History: A Catalogue of Historical Errors and Misunderstandings: “All had to sleep naked and, just to make doubly sure of his resolve, Gandhi would take them to bed in pairs. Some as young as 12, several girls later acknowledged that they did often ‘render service’ to Gandhi but refused to elaborate.”
Donald adds that the girls were selected for their “pertness” to “stiffen his resolve” for celibacy. “Very much a case of ‘damn, failed again, must try harder tomorrow night.”
Such a paedophile belongs in hell.
2. Mother Teresa
Mother Teresa took money stolen from pensioners by financial fraud artist Charles Keating. She accepted donations from the murderous Haitian dictator Jean-Claude Duvalier. She was also a friend of Enver Hoxha, the communist dictator of Albania.
Worse, Teresa’s 600 missions in 123 countries have been described as “homes for the dying” by visiting doctors. The doctors observed a significant lack of hygiene, even unfit conditions, as well as a shortage of actual care, inadequate food and no painkillers. Teresa claimed that “There is something beautiful in seeing the poor accept their lot, to suffer it like Christ’s passion. The world gains much from their suffering.’’
Her nuns were not provided with medical training, the use of mosquito repellents, or information about malaria and vaccinations, because Teresa believed “God” would look after the nuns. One of her nuns got into trouble with the order for helping a man with dysentery who was dying. Teresa quoted Peter 2:18-23, which orders slaves to obey their masters even if they are abusive and difficult, and urged her nuns to obey superiors without question.
But she was a hypocrite: seeking out the best medical care for herself. Despite the fact that medical tourists from the West travel to India for treatment, Teresa reckoned India wasn’t good enough for her. She was admitted to California’s Scripps Clinic and Research Foundation.
Teresa was stingy even during national emergencies. During Indian floods she offered prayers and medallions of the Virgin Mary but no monetary aid.
Teresa’s fundraising sermons persuaded people that Calcutta is a city of lepers and beggars. Her nuns lied to the global media that the city had 450,000 lepers, knowing that this would make rich westerners despatch their dollars.
All abandoned children who are taken into Teresa’s missions are brought up as Christians. In India Teresa was (and her mission continues to be) actively engaged in proselytizing, which is not only illegal but has a negative impact on India’s complex social hierarchy.
For her lies, stolen cash and allowing little children suffer painful deaths, she is a favorite member of hell.
1. Winston Churchill
This scumbag takes the pole position in this list.
Like No.10 Yahya Khan, Prime Minister Winston Churchill managed to outdo Hitler and his Nazi cohorts. The Germans may have taken 12 years to murder 6 million Jews, but their Teutonic cousins, the British, managed to kill almost 4 million Indians in just over a year, with Churchill cheering from the sidelines.
Australian biochemist Dr Gideon Polya has called the Bengal Famine a “manmade holocaust” because Churchill’s policies were directly responsible for the disaster. He knowingly and enthusiastically caused the famine in 1942-43 by transferring vast quantities of food grain from India to Britain.
To Churchill, the starvation of Indians was less serious than that of Greeks. When the British administrators urged him to release food stocks for India, Churchill responded with a telegram asking why Gandhi hadn’t died yet.
Churchill’s hostility toward Indians has long been documented. At a War Cabinet meeting, he blamed the Indians for the famine, saying they breed like rabbits, and are a beastly people with a beastly religion. On another occasion, he insisted they were “the beastliest people in the world next to the Germans”.
According to author Madhusree Mukerjee,
“Churchill’s attitude toward India was quite extreme, and he hated Indians, mainly because he knew India couldn’t be held for very long.”
The fact is the British Prime Minister possessed an extraordinary range of prejudices. During World War II, in a memorandum to the War Cabinet about policy towards Italy, he wrote:
“All the industrial centers should be attacked in intense fashion, every effort being made to terrorize the population.”
He also pushed for the firebombing of German population centers such as Dresden, Leipzig and Chemnitz which killed 200,000 civilians in 1945. It was the only way the British could show they were in the war.
In 1944, Churchill came up with a cataclysmic plan to convert Germany into a “country primarily agricultural and pastoral in its character”. The Morgenthau Plan if implemented would have starved 10 million Germans to death in the first year alone. US President Franklin Roosevelt admitted Churchill was “bought off” by the American offer of $6.5 billion in Lend Lease.
No human being deserves to be in hell more than Winston.
(Disclaimer: As an atheist I don’t believe in heaven or hell in the religious sense. But the universe is ruled by the laws of physics and mathematics, which imply that all actions have consequences.)
A top police officer has called on cannabis to be decriminalized in the UK amid claims it is less dangerous than alcohol. He suggested making it available at local stores.
Arfon Jones, the North Wales police and crime commissioner, said banning cannabis is “illogical.” He added it is “far less harmful” than alcohol and therefore it makes no sense for one to be banned and the other not.
“I want to see drugs controlled and sold by responsible retailers similar to off-licences [local stores] that sell alcohol,” said Jones, i news reports. “I don’t see a difference between the use of alcohol and the use of cannabis. If we went back to day one, and we were legislating this again I’m sure people would realize that alcohol causes a lot more harm than cannabis does and I think the categorization would reflect that.”
His comments come as a bill pushing for cannabis to be partially legalized was supposed to be debated in Parliament at the beginning of the month. The bill proposes to “allow the production, supply, possession and use of cannabis and cannabis resin for medicinal purposes; and for connected purposes.”
But MPs were accused of spending so much time on private members’ bills that the issues failed to be discussed. The question of decriminalization was last debated in 2015, and closed after the government responded by saying:
“Substantial scientific evidence shows cannabis is a harmful drug that can damage human health.”
Jones expressed exasperation at the government’s staunch refusal to debate the topic, stating: “We are where we are. Alcohol is legal and cannabis is illegal and it is illogical to have it like that.”
His remarks also follow recent reports of the UK being the biggest producer and exporter of medical cannabis in the world, according to the UN. That is despite the UK government refusing to allow medical cannabis in the UK on the basis that it has “no therapeutic value.”
Steve Rolles, lobby group Transform’s senior policy analyst, says it is “scandalous and untenable” for the “government to maintain that cannabis has no medical uses, at the same time as licensing the world’s biggest government approved medical cannabis production and export market.” He added that UK patients are either denied access and suffering unnecessarily or are forced to buy cannabis from the criminal market.
“In a nuclear war the “collateral damage” would be the life of all humanity.” — Fidel Castro
The Russians, in their anxiety to show the West how friendly they are, left Washington with a toe hold in Syria, which Washington is using to reopen the war. The Russians’ failure to finish the job has left Washington’s foreign mercenaries, misrepresented in the American presstitute media as “freedom fighters,” in a Syrian enclave. To get the war going again, Washington has to find a way to come to the aid of its mercenaries.
The Trump regime has found, or so it thinks, its excuse in the revival of the Obama regime’s fake charge of Syrian use of chemical weapons. This made-up lie by the Obama regime was put to rest by Russian intervention that made sure there were no Syrian chemical weapons. Indeed, if memory serves, Russia delivered the chemical weapons to the US for destruction. Little doubt Washington still has them and will use some of them with their Syrian markings for what appears to be a coming false flag attack that can be blamed on Assad. In other words, Washington will create a “situation,” blame Assad and Putin, and with or without congressional authorization introduce US intervention in behalf of Washington’s mercenaries. https://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-warns-us-against-attacking-syrian-forces/5631930
If we can believe James Mattis, the retired US Marine General who is US Secretary of Defense, Syria, a country without chemical weapons and in need of none in its mopping up operations against Washington’s mercenaries, is using chlorine gas “against its own people,” exactly the same phrase as the Obama regime used when Obama tried to orchestrate an excuse to attack Syria. Mattis said that he is receiving reports of chlorine gas use by Assad while simultaneously saying he has no evidence of gas use, much less by the Syrian Army.
The US Secretary of Defense actually accused Syria of “targeting hospitals” with chlorine gas even though he admits there is no evidence. Mattis went on to accuse Russia of complicity in killing civilians, an endeavor in which the US excels.
Of course, there has not been any chlorine gas use unless by the Washington-supplied mercenaries. But facts are not important to Washington. What is important to Washington is Israel’s demand that Washington destroy Syria and Iran in order to get rid of Hezbollah’s supporters so that Israel can seize southern Lebanon.
No doubt that other interests are in on the plot. Oil companies that want to control the location of oil and gas pipelines, the crazed neocons married to their ideology of American World Hegemony, the military/security complex that needs enemies and conflicts to justify its massive budget. But it is Israel’s determination to expand its boundaries and water resources that set all of the Middle East conflict in motion.
Does Russia understand this, or is the Russian government preoccupied with eventually winning acceptance by the West as a part of the West? If the latter, the world is heading for nuclear war.The Russian government does not seem to understand that its pusillanimous response encourages Washington’s aggression and, thereby, is driving the world to the final war.
Every time Russia fails to finish the job, as in Syria and Ukraine, Russia does not win Washington’s friendship, but extends to Washington yet another run at prevailing in the conflict that Washington initiated. Washington will not slack off until Washington is halted in its track, something that Russia does not seem willing to do. Consequently, Washington continues to drive the world to nuclear war.
When will the Russians notice that literally everyone in the Trump regime is issuing threats to Russia— Mattis, Tillerson, Nikki Haley, government spokespersons, the UK PM and UK Foreign Secretary. Yet the Russians still speak about their “partners” and how much they want to get along with the West.
Note: It appears that the military/security complex is closing its grip on the Trump regime. Secretary of State Tillerson has been fired and is being replaced by CIA Director Pompeo. Gina Haspel, the new CIA Director, is the person who oversaw the CIA’s secret torture prisons in Thailand.
After a year of delivering President Trump’s daily intelligence briefing, CIA Director Mike Pompeo is finally getting his shot at the big chair.
Assuming Pompeo’s nomination sails through the Senate (in January 2017, he was easily confirmed as CIA director in a 66-32 vote), he cold officially take over for Tillerson as soon as the first or second week in April. Back then, Pompeo faced resistence from a small but vocal contingent of Senate Democrats, and – of course – Rand Paul.
Rumors that Pompeo would replace Tillerson at the State Department have been circulating since at least October, when we published a post entitled “Will CIA Director Mike Pompeo Replace Rex Tillerson As Secretary Of State?”
As investors attempt to suss out what, exactly, Pompeo’s nomination means for markets, Citi published a note breaking down his positions on several key issues while providing a brief biography of one of the most powerful men in Washington.
Until he was selected to serve as Trump’s CIA director, Pompeo represented Kansas’ 4th district in the House, having been voted in as part of the Tea Party wave of 2010. He was then reelected in 2012, 2014 and 2016.
Before that, Pompeo graduated first in his class from West Point Military Academy, and later received a JD from Harvard.
Moving on to his views on Russia, Pompeo differs from Tillerson in two important ways. The first, according to Citi, probably made him extremely attractive to Trump: Pompeo doesn’t believe that Russia tried to interfere in the 2016 election.
“Americans should rest assured that we have a very good understanding of the Russian program and how to make sure that Americans continue to be kept safe from threats from Vladimir Putin,” Pompeo said.
Pompeo is also considerably more hawkish in his foreign policy views than Tillerson: He wants progress with North Korea, but is keeping his “eyes wide open.”
On Sunday, Pompeo made the following comment during an appearance on Fox News:
“Never before have we had the North Koreans in a position where their economy was at such risk, here their leadership was under such pressure. Make no mistake: while these negotiations are going on, there will be no concessions made.”
Pompeo also harbors the view, shared by several senior Pentagon officials, that China is a greater long-term threat to the US than Russia:
“The Chinese have a much bigger footprint upon which to execute that mission than the Russians do.. We can watch very focused efforts to steal American information, to infiltrate the United States with spies – with people who are going to work on behalf of the Chinese government against America. We see it in our schools. We see it in our hospitals and medicals systems. We see it throughout corporate America. It’s also true in other parts of the world… including Europe and the UK.”
Finally, Pompeo is a proponent of broad-based surveillance (which is what drew the opposition from Rand Paul).
“Congress should pass a law re-establishing collection of all metadata, and combining it with publicly available financial and lifestyle information into a comprehensive, searchable database. Legal and bureaucratic impediments to surveillance should be removed. That includes Presidential Policy Directive-28, which bestows privacy rights on foreigners and imposes burdensome requirements to justify data collection.”
President Trump is expected to announce a handful of other personnel changes by the end of the week – with rumors circulating that National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster could be next.
U.S. President Donald Trump, shown with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at the White House last year, told a fundraiser that after Trudeau told him the U.S. does not have a trade deficit with Canada, he replied, “Wrong, Justin, you do.” (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)
U.S. President Donald Trump boasted in a fundraising speech in Missouri on Wednesday that he made up facts about trade in a meeting with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, according to a recording of the comments obtained by The Washington Post.
The newspaper said in a report posted on its website that Trump had insisted to Trudeau that the United States runs a trade deficit with its neighbour to the north without knowing whether or not that was the case.
Trump said on the recording that after Trudeau told him the U.S. does not have a trade deficit with Canada, he replied, “Wrong, Justin, you do,” then added, “I didn’t even know…. I had no idea.”
The president said he then “sent one of our guys out” to check the prime minister’s claim.
“Our citizens should know the urgent facts…but they don’t because our media serves imperial, not popular interests. They lie, deceive, connive and suppress what everyone needs to know, substituting managed news misinformation and rubbish for hard truths…”—Oliver Stone