via Activist Post
Jun 24, 2016
By Mac Slavo
The full meaning of Britain’s decision to leave the EU will only be appreciated in due time, but already it is causing some earth-shattering side effect.
The financial markets and central banks are trying to reassure investors to keep calm and carry on, insisting that the historic drops in the British Pound are only part of temporary turbulence.
After all the highly dramatic and strange events leading up to the Brexit referendum – including the shock murder of MP Jo Cox and the bizarre heavy rains and lightning storms on the eve of the vote – it is somewhat surprising that Britain indeed voted to leave the European Union, however narrowly at 52-48%.
Figures great and small weighed in, and in many cases made dramatic pleas making the idea of leaving the EU seem like an earth-shattering prospect.
The world’s most powerful bankers threatened financial chaos, too. The likes of Soros, Rothschild and several important figures at Bilderberg all warned that a Brexit would usher in great financial pain (one only wondered if it would be at their own hands).
Jun 23, 2016
The leader of the Independence Party (UKIP), Nigel Farage, has called for June 23 to go down in history as ‘Independence Day’, adding that it’s a “victory for ordinary, decent people, a victory against the big merchant banks.”
- Brexit: What Is It About? What is at Stake?
- Brits “Appalled, Disgusted” At Brexit Postal Ballot ‘Fraud’ | Zero Hedge
- Brexit Referendum Is Non-Binding. UK Parliament Not Voters has Final Say
- NEW POLL: ‘LEAVE’ Vote Has Increased Since Last Week’s Killing of British MP
- Britons Spurn EU as Leave Camp Gets Over 16,700,000 Votes in Referendum
- VIDEO — The Debate – UK EU Referendum (June 23rd)]
May 29, 2016
Some Dutch residents are outraged after finding out that a few cities have been offering as much as €10,000 to refugees to buy furniture and other necessities, local media reported.
Asylum seekers who get allocated to certain towns in the Netherlands may get as much as €10,000 to buy furniture for their homes, according to research carried out by the daily Brabants Dagblad (BD).
Talking to the local authorities, Brabants Dagblad found the sum of money varies in different municipalities.
While Oisterwijk, South Netherlands offers as much as €10,602 for a family with two children, in other cities, such as Bernheze, Schijndel Veghel and Sint-Michielsgestel the same family may receive around €3,500. Boekel offers the smallest amount of €2,200.
BD also said that some cities require refugees to pay the sum back, while others, such as the most generous Oisterwijk consider the money “a gift.”
Jan 31, 2016
A lecture by Andreas M. Antonopoulos on bitcoin’s security as a payment mechanism, compared to credit cards. Recorded at the Melbourne Tech Center in Australia.
Jun 23, 2015
List of US based NGO organisations funded by Soros
via Anthony Antonello
Jun 18, 2015
After the church shooting in South Carolina by alleged gunman Dylann Storm Roof, The US POTUS took to the podium to give a speech about the incident. But what was happening outside from what the main stream was covering is much more important. Do you know what happened at the very same time Barry was speaking to the Nation?
The following text stems from my response to a pro-Putin commenter here on Non-Aligned Media. I’ve addressed the Putin/Russia issue many times before, having written a number of articles dedicated to my criticisms of Putin. The commenter advanced many familiar, go-to arguments for why Putin is someone to be viewed favourably and I address them below.
The commenter wrote:
he [Putin] threw out those who had already grabbed and privatised the 1) banks 2) insurance companies 3) media. By which they had gained control over the country, ready to exploit it further… the usual strategy. This they had achieved under drunkard Yeltsin. Putin returned the bank to the state, and told the Jews who put him in power to fuck off, one of them being Khodorkovsky who is the favourite candidate of the Americans for presidency in Russia. I am really not sure if your analysis is correct. What are your sources with regard to Putin? What do you think his ultimate goal is, then? From what I understand, the terrorists in Chechenya were Muslims… what if there were terrorist acts staged by Israel and CIA etc? Aren’t they the ones who are mainly after the natural resources in Russia? Who would have a reason to destabilize Russia? I mean he is ex-KGB, maybe he has some info that we don’t have?
Your thinking on this issue is indicative of a broader disconnect in the skewed outlook of many people who myopically divide the entire world into a conflict between Jews and Gentiles. Within this narrow line of reasoning, the Jew vs. Gentile dichotomy takes precedence over all other ethnic or geopolitical disputes. So in this case you prioritize Russian ‘interests’, dismissing Chechnya’s perspective whole sale, mainly because you feel Putin “stood up to the Jews” in whatever limited capacity that he did. So murdering 100,000 Chechens in a “dirty war” based on a lie is no biggie, because Putin quarrelled with a few rich Jews during his ascent to power. Doesn’t make much sense to me.
And it really gets convoluted when these supposedly pro-Muslim human rights, anti-Neocon, anti-Zionists start pontificating like neocon Zionists when it comes to Chechnya, spouting whole cloth Russian propaganda about “irrational jihadism” as the sole cause of the conflict between Russia and Chechnya, when obviously it’s a territorial dispute spurred by centuries of Russian occupation. We shouldn’t forget that even though Russia has humbled itself in recent years, it is still somewhat of an imperial power that seeks hegemony in its part of the world.
These same “anti-Zionists” would not be so keen to defend Russia and all of its geopolitical intrigues if it openly identified as Communist, even though Russia was markedly more hostile to Israel and friendlier to the Arab world during the communist years than it is today. But Putin has cleverly crafted a veneer of pro-Christian cultural conservatism which has wooed a good many conservative Christians in the West (proving that such people care more about his religious/cultural proclivities than his actions). Moreover, Putin’s luke-warm support of Syria and Iran (for venal economic reasons) has won over a good number of opportunistic Arabs/Muslims who prioritize Middle Eastern Arab/Muslim causes above that of the Chechens. However, none of Putin’s domestic policies or foreign policies in other areas exonerates him from culpability in murdering thousands of Chechens for the sake of maintaining Russian hegemony in the Caucasus.
MUST LISTEN — Debate: Clint Richardson vs. Mark Stevens – “Anarchy: A Modern Fallacy?” – #231 – Gnostic Media
via Gnostic Media
June 11, 2015
Episode 231 is a debate between Clint Richardson and Mark Stevens, titled: “Anarchy: A Modern Fallacy?”. This episode is being released Thursday, June 11, 2015, and was recorded June 9.
via Larken Rose
May 14, 2015
A response to “5 Reasons Why I’m not An Anarchist,” by Austin Petersen, which can be seen here:
If you want to know why the ONLY way to be moral and consistent is to be an anarchist (or voluntarist), read:
“The Most Dangerous Superstition”
( “No Rulers” shirts can be ordered from http://www.incitetees.com )
via Larken Rose
Jul 31, 2013
This video is for all those who imagine that there is some sort of magic that renders the United States immune to the tyranny that has plagued every other major empire in history. DVDs of this video–in normal resolution and high definition–will be available soon.
For those who wonder, this version is slightly improved (a couple typos fixed, and more time given to read quotes) compared to the version submitted to Alex Jones’ “Operation Paul Revere” video contest. (And for those who wonder, this video didn’t place in the top three in that contest.)
[hat tip: Non-Aligned Media]
Apr 6, 2015
To learn more about the “Government on Trial” project, visit:
—- THE FIVE QUESTIONS —-
1) Is there any means by which any number of individuals can delegate to someone else the moral right to do something which none of the individuals have the moral right to do themselves?
2) Do those who wield political power (presidents, legislators, etc.) have the moral right to do things which other people do not have the moral right to do? If so, from whom and how did they acquire such a right?
3) Is there any process (e.g., constitutions, elections, legislation) by which human beings can transform an immoral act into a moral act (without changing the act itself)?
4) When law-makers and law-enforcers use coercion and force in the name of law and government, do they bear the same responsibility for their actions that anyone else would who did the same thing on his own?
5) When there is a conflict between an individual’s own moral conscience, and the commands of a political authority, is the individual morally obligated to do what he personally views as wrong in order to “obey the law”?
“The Most Dangerous Superstition” can be found at:
The “No Rulers” shirt in this video can be found at: