Why America First

<–This is why.  (Courtesy Andrei Martyanov, Reminiscence of the Future.)

While this type of Americanism is lost on liberals, leftists and Democrats, it’s time for Republicucks to pull their heads out of their a$$eS and stop funding the Warfare State.  

If that’s too emotive or isolationist of a reason for America not wasting her blood and treasure on stupid, interventionist military endeavors, let me use the present crisis in the Middle East to drive the point home.

And that is this:  the present war between Israel and the Palestinians is an intractable one.  There is no good solution that will end in a peaceful outcome.  There are however several bad ones, including ethnic cleansing, complete capitulation, and genocide.  Period.  Full stop. 

And anybody who thinks there are other peaceful outcomes needs his head examined.  There aren’t any.  Even with an Israeli military victory (however defined), all that will have been accomplished is the can being kicked down the road.  Conditions in Gaza (and the West Bank) are so intolerable that they make future uprisings inevitable.  And I say this as somebody who is by-and-large pro-Israeli.

For those who think that any future “Palestine” can be reconstituted on the West Bank, is ignorant of the facts on the ground.  Namely, that that too, is an impossibility, given the presence of Israeli settlements.  The lands that constitute the Palestinian Authority are essentially ghettos that are not contiguous with each other.  The settlements themselves are surrounded by high walls and a segregated highway system that make travel for Palestinians nearly impossible.  In other words, to make the West Bank a  Palestinian state, it would have to be ethnically cleansed of its Jewish population. 

Regardless of how this situation plays itself out, there will be significant blowback to the United States, not only in our military installations abroad, but here in our homeland.  Why?  Because Biden (or whoever pulls his strings) has left our Southern border defenseless.  Do you honestly think that there are no future terrorists crossing the Rio Grande?  If you do, I have some ocean front property in Arizona to sell you.  

We have been suffering blowback ever since 9/11.  Even the “official” report admitted as much.  I won’t go into the ramifications of our misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan, you can see them for yourself the next time to you go to Londonistan, which has become the murder capital of Europe.  (And they have strict gun control laws there; how’d that happen?)

You can see them in Paris, Munich, Athens, Rome and any other European city which have seen their crime rates skyrocket.  

The list of Islamic terror attacks perpetrated in America and Europe is a long one.  And thanks to what is happening now in Gaza, it’s going to get longer.  Especially if Nikki Neocon and Miss Lindsey get their way.

Thirty years ago, when the Soviet Union fell, Pat Buchanan said these words:  “Come home America”. 

We should have listened to him.


  1. Hmmm. All of our musings do not seem to take into account the actions of God as noted in the OT. Israel fell many times because of unfaithfulness. The present state was founded as a secular state, at least according to my reading of Golda Meir in her autobiography.

    From a Christian point of view, they have rejected the Messiah

    We cannot outguess God. But we do know that He puts up with a lot of unfaithfulness until…He doesn’t, and allows us to go our own way without Him.

    Here in this country we have seen what has happened when we kicked Him out of the public school system.

    We often don’t realize the protection He offers until we lose it.

  2. If peace was profitable, it would break out everywhere.

  3. America is tied to the Zionists. America is building a military base in Israel right now. The Balfour Agreement was signed, November 2, 1917. Lord Rothschild was deeply involved. The world banking system is tied to Zionists. We need to go back to 5he beginning to understand how we got to where we are today.

    The NEW Testament informs the Old Testament. Zionists use the Old Testament to declare themselves as God’s chosen people. God’s chosen people are not a race. God’s chosen people are those who profess Faith in Christ. The Destruction of Jerusalem is finished. Done. Over. There is no need for a Third Temple to be built. Israel is an occupier of Palestine.

    The Empire is falling faster every day. The Empire is broke. I listened to the head of Hezbollah, Nasrullah’s speech today twice. He brought up many valid points. There are other issues involved like the Belt and Road Initiative, the US stealing more oil from Syria, and the U.S. dream of dividing Russia into five regions. Lest we forget the upcoming election. We need to pray for all involved. I, for one, will not take sides. I see much suffering ahead for this world. Our borders are wide open. Americans talk a lot but do nothing. God help us in 2024.

    • And this is why I read Monomakhos! I had no idea the US was building a top secret military base in Israel, 20 miles from Gaza, until I read your comment. I’ve done a bit more digging on the subject and here are the deets for anyone else who didn’t know this: https://theintercept.com/2023/10/27/secret-military-base-israel-gaza-site-512/. We’ve been in the middle of a global Connect The Dots game for awhile now…

    • Zionist Americans (both protestant and Jewish) continue to hold the reins of power and money in America and the West, but the people are not with them.

      War is awful…. any kind of it…. but the numbers simply do not favor the Zionists long-term. As you state, the Western Empire is more broke by the day. The State of Israel cannot survive long-term without Western money and military resources/lives – but reality is that the time is soon coming when Western money and resources won’t count for much.

      As has been accurately stated on these pages many times before, those in Western power still behave as if the balances of power still reflect how things were in 1990. Either they’re wrong and they don’t know it (probably not true), or they’re wrong and they know it but they don’t know what else to do (probably more accurate).

  4. I don’t know, but two things seem fairly certain to me. One is that Israel is just going to get more conservative and religious. The Eastern Jews are a majority and they are finally coming to political power. Bibi is Ashkenazi, but he rides herd over the Easterners at present. He may go away. They will not. And whatever is going to be done has to pass muster with them in order to be stable.

    Two is that the Jewish State cannot remain Jewish unless it separates out its Arabs into a Palestinian State. The numbers of Jews and Palestinians is roughly even at about 7 million each at present. But just as Eastern Jewish birthrates are higher, so Palestinian Arab birthrates are much higher. The Israelis simply can’t have all these Arabs on reservations indefinitely and call itself a “democracy” with a straight face. That label is already facetious but will begin to sound like a sick joke over time. And you just can’t keep a majority down indefinitely.

    What these two little fundamental data points indicate to me is that Israel is going to be compelled to remain a Jewish State by its conservative majority and the only way to facilitate that is to create a sovereign Palestinian State to rid it of its occupied Arabs. I think this is only a matter of time.

    There is another thing as well.

    Someone lobbed a grenade on this battlefield in order to get a big conflagration going. We need not establish who. Maybe Hamas only, maybe in league with others. In any case, they obviously wanted to draw others into a wider war. Hezbollah opened a low-level northern front the next day after the Hamas attack. Methinks that if Israel and the US fail to give whomever started this their wider war, then provocatory attacks will only continue. The instigator believes that the only peace to be had is on the other side of a big nasty war.

    Of course, I could be wrong. We’ll just have to be patient and see.

    • Israel already had peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan.
      It was about to establish the same with Saudi Arabia.
      Once this was done the Palestinian cause was finished.
      By staging its spectacular smash and grab assault,
      Hamas provoked Israel into a spectacular over-reaction;
      which put the Palestinian cause right back on the table.
      There will be no treaty between Israel and the Saudis.
      The treaties with Egypt and Jordan are under strain.
      The very existence of Israel is now in question.
      None of this needed any intervention from Iran.

      “Hezbollah opened a low-level northern front
      the next day after the Hamas attack.”

      Yes: “the next day”.
      Hezbollah was reacting to events,
      not instigating them.

  5. What really gets me is when on mainstream media and the supposedly “conservative” networks such as Fox, Newsmax as examples you always hear them bringing up topic of “anti-semitism” and then labeling their critics as “anti-semitic.” If they really want to talk “anti-semitism” what about the surgical carpet bombing of Gaza and Gaza City reducing to rubble churches, schools, libraries, hospitals and residential apartment tower dwellings (how many babies have been ‘beheaded’ in all that rubble) are not the Palestinian people themselves, Semitic? Then what could be more “anti-semitic” for these hypocrites? This massive on-going destruction, in real truth when they hurl accusation of “anti-semitism” what they really mean is “anti-globalism/zionism” but then that wouldn’t have the same “ring” to it in fact it may have the opposite effect of sounding admirable, honorable and respectable. So they hide behind “anti-semitism” pretending persecution for just merely being Jewish these are the daily twisted lies we are having to hear whenever we watch the mainstream press which more so and more so I am finding to be mostly a waste of time.

  6. “Londonistan, which has become the murder capital of Europe.”

    I’m sorry, but I wish Americans would stop pushing this myth about London. It is not even in the top ten European cities by homicide rate. In 2022, its homicide rate was 1.38 per 100,000. The title of murder capital of Europe goes to Kaunas with a rate of 5.4 per 100,000 in 2017.

    But even the deadliest European city is far safer than many American cities. Some examples: St Louis (87.83 per 100,000 in 2021), Birmingham AL (49.6), Washington DC (31.85), Savannah (21.08), Tulsa (14.7).

    One last statistic: in 2021, 43 US states had higher murder rates than London. London. Is. Not. The. Murder. Capital. Of. Anywhere.

    • When someone says I’m going to take you to Europe, Kaunas in Lithuania, isn’t exactly what pops into your head. But good on them!

      London is considered the most dangerous city in England. They experienced 240,924 violent crimes in 2022. The overall crime rate was 100.2 per 1,000.


      In fairness to George, he was calling out the United States. London is a cautionary tale. It’s no myth.

      • In a recent list of the most dangerous areas in England and Wales
        (January 2022), ranked according to Police Authority areas,
        London (Metropolitan Police) comes in at number eleven.

        • If you throw Wales into the mix, it changes the numbers. Even the author was taken aback: “Perhaps surprisingly, London doesn’t make it into the top 10 places for crime in England and Wales, instead ranking as number 11.”

      • George stated that London is the murder capital of Europe. My point was that this is a myth.

        And did you even read the Statista link you put in your reply? It clearly shows West Midlands (i.e. Birmingham) and Greater Manchester as more dangerous. And it also shows that the Metropolitan Police area (i.e. London) is only the 10th most dangerous region in England.

        • And you were wrong. It’s not a myth. I pulled two links form the top of Google that said the same thing. What don’t you see if YOU can provide two links that support your contention London’s crime rate is no different than it was post migration.

      • George Michalopulos says

        Thank you, my dear. I may have used hyperbole but the fact remains that thanks to massive Islamic/Caribbean/Third World immigration to England, it is far more dangerous than it was when Enoch Powell gave his “Rivers of Blood” speech 50 years ago.

        As far as Greece is concerned, don’t even get me started. I can tell you tales of criminality perpetrated against my extended family that I have not heard happen in the worst cities of America. I think they are worthy of a podcast.

    • Nate Trost says


      It’s quite something isn’t it? Correlation is not causation and all that, but it isn’t *completely* facetious to suggest that the violent tableau pictured in Red State America could drop its violent crime rate 10x or greater if they had more Pakistani and Indian Muslims living there.

      We might as well be the universe of Mad Max compared to Europe. My European friends fears of visiting America and accidentally causing offense driving on unfamiliar streets only to be chased down and shot to death are sadly, not irrational, even if not likely.

      • Nate, “correlation is not [necessarily] causation” but neither can it be ignored.

        Perhaps many of our readers (including yourself) are confused, thinking that I was comparing London to, say, Baltimore and insinuating that America is Mayberry, NC in comparison. I was not. Far from it. To your argument on the other hand, if you took the homicide rates of the five American cities (NY, Detroit, Chicago, Philadelphia, Baltimore) out of the equation, America would be comparable to Mayberry.

        England, with its heavy Third World immigration (primarily Pakistani) is far from the country it once was. If you google “Rotherham” you will read horrific stories about Pakistani rape-gangs that kidnap, rape, and then prostitute out native English girls. And that’s just scratching the surface.

        • To suggest that all that stands between America being a fictional idyll is removing a handful of cities from the statistics is to completely ignore per-capita violent crime data across the country. My point is that for all the hand wringing about London, it’s far closer to some Mayberry level than America in 2023.

          If you’re going to insist England is far from the country it once was, it’s helpful to provide context of when you think that shining moment was. The late 18th-century? 2002? A particularly pleasant autumn day in October of 1964? There are pretty broad trends of decreasing levels of violent crime across the entire developed world over the past several decades, the causes are debated but the statistics are not.

          If a Russian mobster who takes his mother to Divine Liturgy is sexually trafficking native English or Eastern European girls am I supposed to be more or less outraged than the notion of it being done by a Pakistani? Or am I supposed to pretend that such a thing isn’t possible? If we’re going to tar and feather an entire group for a scandal involving a subset, should I await your essay calling for the expulsion of all Catholics from the United States for the sake of the children?

          • Good questions. First, I must ask: have you ever been to London? I have, twice. Although I was not accosted in any way, I had the pleasure of speaking to many natives. Those over 40 had fonder memories of a more idyllic time. It’s all a matter of perspective.

            Anyway, those graphs that Gail put up paint a different picture. Though not a Baltimoresque hellscape, it’s not idyllic by any stretch of the imagination.

            But why stop at London? Have you heard of the other major European cities that are crime-ridden and which have “no-go” areas, where, literally, police cannot go for fear of their lives?

            • I’d like to add to this, that the first time I visited England was in 1997. The second time was in 2011. Even in the hinterlands, the demographic changes were quite apparent.

            • Nate Trost says

              If you interrogate older Brits as to why the country seems downhill compared to their youth, not all of them are going to blame it on more black and brown people, a lot of them are going to blame Margaret Thatcher.

              I confess, back when I lived in the UK for an extended period (a fair while ago), I didn’t spend that much time in London. Although the violent and non-violent crime rate for the country then was higher then than it is now! If we’re throwing out anecdotes, I did spend some of my time there working with what you might call ‘at-risk’ youth, the equivalent of proto-gangbangers as it were. Bristly teenage boys with scars on their faces from a knife fight, you know the sort. Not a third world immigrant among them, all very very pasty white. You might think socioeconomic and social class issues are still in play.

              As for current say anecdotes, well lets just say I have occasion to talk with Londoners several times a month, and the gripes of casual conversation (other than the weather) are centered on commuting woes and housing prices. You’d think they were Californians.

              Don’t believe 98% of what you hear about ‘no-go’ zones. It’s almost all balderdash. The closest example of where reality at least somewhat approaches right-wing propaganda might be certain banlieues in France. But even there, it’s a complex narrative spanning decades of policy choices and the thorny legacy of colonialism.

              • Nate, you’re correct: a lot do blame Maggie Thatcher, mainly for her toughening up the welfare state. Still, the knifings, beheadings, female genital mutilation and honor killings cannot be laid at her feet or that of the native population for that matter. Those are the importations of Third-World immigrants, pure and simple.

                That said, I also don’t blame it on “the black and brown people”, not at all. What I blame it on is liberalism (or it’s modern, despicable incarnation). England and the rest of Europe bought into America’s degenerate standards regarding crime enforcement –there is the rub.

                As far as the no-go areas of France and Germany, I know more than what I read in the papers (which is a lot), I also have relatives in Paris and I get second hand accounts of the fact that the gendarmarie truly do, in fact, avoid those areas like the plague.

                Alas, such areas are growing in Athens as well. My own relatives have suffered in ways that are truly horrific –and this from people who suffered under the Nazi Occupation and the subsequent Greek Civil War. I will talk about those soon in a podcast.

                • “…a lot do blame Maggie Thatcher, mainly
                  for her toughening up the welfare state.”

                  No, George. She debauched the economy.
                  She destroyed the coal industry and the steel industry.
                  and set the UK on the road to de-industrialisation;
                  creating vast social wastelands in Scotland, Wales
                  and huge swathes of the North of England.
                  With her financial deregulation in the so-called Big Bang
                  she destroyed the Trustee Savings Bank and Building Societies,
                  ‘financialising’ the economy for the benefit of bankers and rentiers,
                  the gamblers in the City of London casino who finally
                  got their hands on the deposits which the people
                  had accumulated over decades of saving their pounds and pennies.
                  Where the UK used to make money from making things,
                  it now makes money from making money; which money
                  concentrates upwards rather than filters downwards.
                  In privatising the utilities of gas, electricity, phones and water
                  she set the standard which Yeltsin followed in Russia;
                  but at least Russia found a Putin to save it.
                  Thatcher was an utter unmitigated disaster.
                  Had it not been for the jingoism of the Falklands War
                  she would have been out on her ear after her first term.
                  And she caused that War by pulling out the Royal Naval
                  presence from the South Atlantic even as the Argentine
                  Junta was making bellicose preparations for invasion.

                  Did she toughen up the welfare state? Yes, but at the same time
                  she created huge populations dependent upon it.

                  One of the best stories about Maggie Thatcher is this:

                  When she died, Maggie went up to the Pearly Gates
                  and demanded entrance. St Peter said: “Who are you?”
                  “Margaret Thatcher,” she said, “Prime Mister of England”.
                  “No,” said St Peter. “You’re not on the list for us.
                  Your ticket is valid for the other place.”
                  So down she went – and when she got there,
                  there was a huge welcoming committee
                  with banners emblazoned with “Margaret, Come!”
                  So in she went and the Iron Gate closed with a clang.
                  Twenty-four hours later, up at the Pearly Gates,
                  the red hotline rang and St Peter answered and said:
                  “Hello Nick, what can I do for you?”
                  The voice on the other end shouted: “Peter!
                  You’ve got to come down here right away!
                  You’ve got to get that woman out of here?”
                  And Peter said: “But she’s only been there one day.”
                  And the desperate voice on the other end screamed:
                  “Yes! And in that time she’s shut down fourteen furnaces!”

    • George Michalopulos says

      I guess what I should have said is “among the capitals of Europe, London has the highest murder rate”.

  7. Hilber Nelson says

    Sadly, my Patriarch has sided with the Palestinians.

    Patriarch John X of Antioch and All the East, on the crisis in Gaza (Oct 10)

    “I say: enough oppression against the Palestinian people! Enough scorn against all Arabs, I would say. Anyone who thinks or believes that by starving the Palestinian people, the Syrian people, or even the Lebanese people, they can conquer, anyone who thinks that this is the way to achieve their objectives, is mistaken. I would even say that they are committing a crime against these peoples.”

    Really, John, you think Palestinians were right to have cheered Hamas for murdering Jews in their sleep, raping women so hard they broke their pelvises and roasting babies in ovens, because they suffer from oppression? Have you not read or heard from their own lips in countless news articles that Hamas has but one goal: the annihilation of Israel?


    “Peace does not come from the bodies of children, killed people, innocent people, and women. Peace comes when the decision-makers in this world realize that our people have dignity, as all the peoples of the world. We are not advocates of war; we reject violence and killing, and we are seekers of peace, but at the same time, we seek justice and have a right that we will not give up.”

    John, you want Palestinians and Arabs to be respected? Awesome! I want peace too. Start by telling them to stop acting like sadistic terrorists. And while you’re at it, you might want to point out that their religion has a really big violence and hate problem toward anyone who goes to a synagogue or church, or is gay.

    Wake up.

    • Of course they do. They live in Syria. – But what people don’t realize is that HAMAS, who takes the lion’s share of money sent to the Palestinians in aid, is a CIA operation. https://rumble.com/v3rgcz7-hamas-insider-blows-whistle-cia-created-us-to-advance-new-world-order.html

      • I watched Brian Berletic do a show on Hamas and its loyalties this morning. I’m not sure I agree with the notion that this is all a Bibi or Mossad or CIA plot with Hamas as the agent. Iran has been trying to woo Hamas into a more genuine posture of resistance (Berletic mentions this at about the 34:00 mark).

        A thing to remember about all these groups is that they hate Israel but are completely open to mercenary endeavors if they are not well sponsored by a single source. I believe that is what was behind Hamas in Syria fighting against Assad. The key thing they have to do to “keep the doors open” is to obtain financing. Gaza is not exactly a robust economic powerhouse. I’m sure they are not above working clandestinely for the CIA or Mossad or anybody with deep pockets for a price in order to further the main cause (survival). That may seem confusing to us in that we tend to think in terms of clear loyalties but the Middle East, and many other neighborhoods, are this way. “Yes, we have a cause, . . . but we can be bought for the right price. After all, we are not communists.”

        If Hamas were currently controlled by the CIA/Mossad, I doubt that Hassan Nasrullah, the head of Hezbollah in Lebanon who spoke yesterday, would wholeheartedly endorse the Al-Aqsa Flood operation while asserting that all the resistance groups act independently and not under orders. I mean, his praise was voluminous and untainted by sectarian reservations.

        The general tenor of the speech was that a new day has dawned and Israel is weak. This should be alarming to the Israelis. Repeatedly describing your enemy as “weak” is a pretty clear tell in this part of the world that you intend to exploit that weakness.

    • Mr Nelson,

      Not sure how many Palestinian/Arab Christian families and their stories that you know, but the more whom you know and how terribly they have been treated by Israel over the years, the more the western storyline of the “virtuous but always oppressed Israeli” falls through the basement.

      This obviously does not justify Hamas killings (like Israel blasting Palestinians to never-never land are not justified), but one understands why some Palestianians might throw their support behind whatever anti-Israel organization is around.

      Your presumption that Palestinians should just act like good American WASPs and quit whining about their predicament is sanctimonious at best and Western elitist at worst.

      As George says, there is no good solution to this problem. The State of Israel was set up for failure 100 years ago when the idea to create a Jewish political state as an island in an overwhelmingly Arab Muslim land was started.

      Would have been far better to set up the State of Israel in the South of France or in South Carolina…. but the Western elitist world planners who put their weight behind the Zionist idea wouldn’t dare give their own land away! Best to give someone else’s land away, and then set up the conditions for a forever war (that’s what it’s been) to keep those very people down and out.

      • Hilber Nelson says

        Good insights, FTS.
        To clarify, my post was meant a commentary on Pat. John’s speech, period, and not a presumption about how I think Palestinians should behave. I agree, there is no good solution, nor is there a glimmer of hope for a two state solution (as Pat. John proposes), so long as Hamas maintains their charter for the annihilation of Jews, as does Hezbollah, by the way. Let’s also remember that Hamas is a 1980s monstrosity of the US and Israel to counter Hezbollah. Ironically, our out-of-control Frankenstein and his sympathizers now present an existential threat to Israel.

    • Antiochene Son says

      Hilber, you’re wrong.

      Also, stop perpetuating Mossad propaganda.

    • First of all, if you want him to listen to you and you are really under his jurisdiction, you should stop addressing him as “John” unless you’re purposefully trying to be disrespectful. “Sayid John” at the very least.

      Secondly, you will have to understand that given the poor treatment the Arabs have received under occupation, Arab Christian leaders are not going to feel much sympathy for the devil, so to speak. I for one do not expect them to be neutral, given the circumstances, even in light of Hamas atrocities. There’s a history there.

      Now, I elect to remain neutral, though my sympathies are clearly with the Palestinians at this point. Russians have had our go rounds with the Ummah in Chechnya. The RF was not so polite in that war as it is being in the Ukraine. Chechens are not Slavs and they wanted to establish a caliphate on Russian territory, using terrorist tactics to attack the RF on its own soil. This was foolish and suicidal on their part. And Russians responded vigorously. You will notice the Chechens fight for Russia now.

      But the Chechens did not have a UN resolution guaranteeing them an independent state and the equities do not really favor the Israelis in this conflict. Israel stole the land in the forties, less than a hundred years ago. I dare say the SOL has not run on it yet given that the Palestinians have continuously contested Israeli sovereignty. Israel, despite all the rhetoric of being the Jewish democracy and an oasis in the desert, at the end of the day is indistinguishable to the Arabs and the Global South from a European colony.

      The age of hard colonialism is long gone and soft colonialism is also coming to an ignominious conclusion. It is increasingly likely that Israel will go the way of Rhodesia and South Africa.

    • Hilber, as an American, I too am reflexively pro-Israeli. I also reacted vehemently when I heard about the 40 decapitated babies (ask Gail). After calming down a bit, I looked for confirmation for this alleged atrocity. There was none. In other words, we in the West were played. And not for the first time.

      Sayedna John is well within his rights to speak up. Would that His Intergalactidness the Patriarch of the Whole World would stand up and speak. (After all, the third oldest Christian church was just destroyed by the IDF a few weeks ago.)

      • Hilber Nelson says

        George, you’re right about Pat John’s right to speak up. I, too, wish our shepherds would stand up and speak up, and LEAD. This morning I woke up to more news stories of pro-Hamas violence on American soil.

  8. Pfizer, FDA & Fact Checkers LIED when they said Toxic Graphene Oxide
    was not inside the COVID-19 Vaccine according to Federal Court Ordered
    Published Documents


    ‘ Several independent studies conducted by doctors and scientists have confirmed that Graphene Oxide is in fact present in these vaccines. But the manufacturers, medicine regulators and so-called Fact-Checkers have refuted these claims, most likely due to the known toxic effects it has on the body.

    For instance, Reuters, which essentially supplies the news to the entire Western world without most people realising it, stated in a fact-check article published July 23rd 2021, that it is impossible for the Covid vaccines to contain Graphene Oxide because they would be either dark brown or black in colour, instead of the clear/yellowish colour they are.

    But what Reuter’s Fact Checkers failed to mention is that when Graphene Oxide is combined with other ingredients, such as Sucrose, a listed ingredient of the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine, it’s perfectly possible to produce a clear or yellowish liquid.

    But at the time of writing, Reuters did not have access to a document published in February 2023 by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) by order of the U.S. Federal Court.

    A document that was submitted to the FDA by Pfizer to gain Emergency Use Authorization (EUA).

    A document which confirms that it is perfectly possible for toxic Graphene Oxide to end up in the Covid-19 vaccines due to the manufacturing process. … ‘

    And how carefully checked was the ‘warp-speed’ manufacturing process?

  9. Is Deagel’s 2025 Depopulation Nightmare Unfolding?
    A Startling Correlation with Shocking Quadruple
    Vaccinated Mortality Rates Certainly Suggests So…


    ‘ In April 2021, the enigmatic intelligence firm Deagel.com quietly erased its staggering 2025 global depopulation forecast, a document forecasting a dramatic decline in populations of key countries like the United Kingdom, United States, Germany etc.

    This drastic prediction, which vanished from the public eye after garnering huge attention during the alleged COVID-19 pandemic, has since been shrouded in whispers and theories, only to resurface amidst startling new health data.

    The latest official Government figures suggest an alarming pattern: significantly higher mortality rates in vaccinated individuals compared to the unvaccinated, echoing the ominous tones of Deagel’s predictions. But what’s even more concerning is that the disparity in mortality rates increased ten-fold the more Covid-19 vaccinations that an age group was given.

    This means we are now seeing quadruple vaccinated teenagers up to 318% more likely to die than unvaccinated teenagers,

    As we delve into this mysterious intersection of prediction and present reality, a question arises:

    Could the once-dismissed forecast of Deagel.com be an unfolding truth hidden in plain sight? … ‘

    The prediction for the Israeli population
    (see map) doesn’t look too good either…

  10. I strongly suggest open minded individuals listen closely what Paul Craig Roberts has to say about. Gaza in this two part interview.

    PCR on Target with Larry Sparano Part I
    US neoconservatives and Netanyahu Reopen the Middle Eastern Wars
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezgJdVhfBiw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezgJdVhfBiw)

    PCR On Target With Larry Sparano: Part II
    Would the US lose a conventional war in the Middle East?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAt0i8LfZQU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAt0i8LfZQU)

    I watched a video just now that showed the horrors of hundreds of Gazans dazed, wounded, bleeding, and taking shelter in the hospital with minimal medical supplies, brackish water, and no food . I will never forget what I just saw. 🙏Never. You may still be able to find it on Al Jazeera English.

    • PCR is very astute. He goes too far on certain things because he has a blind spot, but much of what he describes is probably accurate.

      I’ve never been persuaded by the 9/11 demolition theory, but it does make sense that they allowed it to happen. Same with 10/7. I’m sure the Israelis allowed it to happen, but that doesn’t mean that Hamas didn’t do it or that it did it at Israel’s behest. It’s more complicated than that.

      In America, we want to see things in terms of black and white, good guys and bad guys. So when we identify one side as having acted in bad faith, it taints everything else that we believe about them and somehow absolves the other side. On top of this, there is a reflexive reaction in many people on general principle to only see the scheming deceit of America and the West and ignore that of the Rest. The notion is that we alone are the Powerful Corrupt who do these types of things and everyone else is just trying to get along and survive.

      This is not an accurate picture of reality. Being the empire, often we are engaged in nefarious activities to a greater degree than others. And being ruled by ideologues, our reasons for doing these things may seem childish or paranoid. But this does not mean that other non-western powers are not highly motivated to defeat and destroy us and sometimes our “allies” like Israel.

      They are. All the more so due to our ruthlessness and perfidy.

      Whether we have made them that way is not the point. Denying them agency does not make the picture any clearer but rather less accurate. It is entirely possible that not only do the neo-cons want a war in the Middle East but that Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran also want one. In the same way, it is possible that the FBI and CIA wanted to allow a plot by al Qaida to succeed at the same time as al Qaida intended to execute a successful plot. This is using one’s enemy against himself. If I want to go slaughter Arabs or Palestinians I have to have a reason. They are all too willing to give me one. I just have to exploit it.

      That is the sick nature of the dynamic.

      I’m sure that Israeli intelligence stood down on 10/7. That’s the only plausible explanation. But that does not mean that Hamas did not plan and execute the attack. Hamas may have taken CIA money to fight Assad in Syria. But that does not mean that they didn’t turn around later and start taking Iranian money and training in order to accomplish their attack.

      After all, everybody’s got to eat.

      Both sides are working hard to destroy one another. It is not one side simply picking on the other. Both are highly motivated and active as well as being fiercely ruthless in their intent and methodology. It wouldn’t be challenging to analyze their activities were that not the case.

      • Of course, Israel is the occupier and well funded by their Vanguard team. And there is that issue of stealing the oil .

        • Certainly Jane, absent the oil in the region, the US would not have Israel there as its huge military base staffed by idealistic Jews. The Arabs are quite justified, for what it’s worth, in their resistance. All I’m saying is that, in fact, they are resisting (and aggressively so).

  11. 🆘Breaking News 🆘


    Since the war started, Israel has already awarded a dozen oil and gas exploration licenses (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/israel-awards-gas-exploration-licences-to-eni-bp-and-four-others/ar-AA1j51JG?ref=okdoomer.io)
    in Palestine to six different Big Oil companies, including BP.

  12. What you may be seeing, having had some time to ruminate on Nasrallah’s speech and current activity in Gaza, is that Hezbollah feels like it is already doing its part and will intervene more aggressively, but short of an invasion of northern Israel, unless Israel seems to be succeeding in its ethnic cleansing operation in Gaza, at least for the time being. They are continually increasing their harassment of Israel in the north.

    The reports I trust coming out of Gaza do not bode well for Tzahal. Over 300 killed already. Over ten percent of advancing forces in some instances. That will doubtless increase dramatically as they engage Hamas in Gaza City, advancing through whatever urban environment remains amidst the rubble. Recall that Hamas has fought Tzahal to a standstill in its earlier incursion several years ago, as has Hezbollah in southern Lebanon in recent times.

    What Nasrallah was calling for was an economic siege or blockade of Israel by Muslim states. That may be in the making. Attacks on US bases in the region will also doubtless continue. All of this constitutes a serious provocation to the neo-cons in the Biden Regime who will be pushing for intervention not only against Hamas and Hezbollah but against Syria and Iran.

    And that’s where the real game is. I believe Iran is stirring the pot. However, there is no doubt that the neo-cons are doing so. The carrier groups, the rhetoric, etc. The Islamic world is in no mood for any of it. Escalation by either side is almost certain absent universal restraint.

    If Turkey, Iran or Russia become involved, it will morph into a grand mess very quickly. Turkey has a massive military. Iran and Russia have hypersonic missiles which can threaten the US carrier groups.

    Israel has just reminded the world that it has a nuclear capacity. That is how I take the “unapproved” remarks of their Heritage Minister threatening to nuke Gaza. They would not be doing so if they felt confident about what is unfolding.

  13. I’m skeptical of the thesis held by some, Brian Berletic being one, that the Hamas attack was a CIA/Mossad controlled or inspired operation, counterproductive to Palestinian interests. I still believe that Mossad turned a blind eye intially, thinking it could benefit from victim status. But that did not materialize due to the actions of other players, seemingly in some sort of coordination.

    Let us play cui bono? for a moment. Who is turning out to benefit from this whole mess? If Israel expected to be enabled to conduct an ethnic cleansing campaign to evict the Palestinians from Gaza, that ship probably sailed with the opening up of a second front by Hezbollah in Israel’s north. Israel has had to deploy one-quarter to one half of key categories of its assets to northern Israel to defend against a potential invasion by Hezbollah. This detracts significantly from Tzahal’s capabilities in Gaza. But it also means that if Israel begins to succeed dramatically in its ethnic cleansing enterprise, that Hezbollah holds a trump card and can fully open up the war in northern Israel.

    Thus, even if the Mossad or Bibi or the neo-cons in DC thought that they might milk a cleansing of Gaza out of this, they were mistaken.

    But it gets deeper. Not only does Israel not benefit from this, neither does the US. Blinken is currently engaged in flitting around the Middle East trying to arrange a ceasefire and/or peacekeeping forces from neighboring countries. Everybody is giving him the finger. No sale. Not only that, but Biden has another war on his hands – a potential loser – moving into an election year. Blinken is clearly trying to play past this potential conflagration to keep it from exploding and further sinking Democrat chances next year.

    So if neither Israel nor the US benefit from this, who does?

    Well, Russia, Iran and China, namely.

    Weapons are leaving or failing to be funneled to the Ukraine because of the Israel conflict. This helps Russia directly. Iran succeeds in polarizing the Islamic world against Israel and the US and placing themselves at the top of the US/Israel hit list, thus becoming a rockstar among their fellow Muslims (Turkey as well is cashing in on this). This also scuttles the peace deal between Saudi Arabia and Israel which was developing just after Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Iran were admitted to BRICS. This cuts off Israel from the emerging block that is forming around the Eurasian Alliance. Iran can ask the Muslim world, “Who’s your daddy?” and then ask them which country the US and Israel are talking about attacking – certainly not Saudi or the UAE.

    It also benefits both China and Russia as potential neutral intermediaries – China more than Russia – in order to intervene at some appropriate time and fashion a solution to the whole mess that effectively reduces American influence in the Middle East which directly benefits both China’s BRI and Russia’s emerging position in Syria and the region. Russia is already raising the roar about America being the problem and did so from day one of the crisis. China is echoing this narrative.

    • For a well-argued and (to me) convincing analysis
      completely at variance with the views you express here,
      I suggest readers turn to Scott Ritter on Redacted News @

      [Video Timeslot – from 35:00 to 57:00 approx]

      • I like Ritter but he hates Israel real hard. Have you heard him talk about Netanyahu? It’s personal to him. He seems to believe that there was actually an intelligence failure on the part of the Mossad. But Syriana Analysis had two IDF intelligence veterans on about a day or two after the incident who asserted that it was simply not believable that Israeli intelligence didn’t know about the breach the second it happened. Others have echoed that assessment since.

        I’m not sure at what point he suggests evidence that contradicts what I asserted above. I saw most of the interview earlier but I didn’t notice anything I hadn’t heard before. I’ve heard everything about Hamas’ changing loyalties. No argument there.

        I guess the thing that I would need to hear is that Hezbollah in fact did not open up a low level second front and threaten to invade northern Israel on October 8th.

        Yeah, that might convince me.

        • Misha,

          I don’t think they were a low level second front to invade Israel.

          The biggest reason Hezbollah would not want to be a second front in someone else’s conflict is because of their precision missiles. If they got into a war with Israel they would have to use them.

          Iran has been engaged in an extensive project to fit GPS guidance systems onto ‘dumb’ missiles already in Lebanon, as an alternative to transferring entire missiles from Iran. https://www.bicom.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Precision-Project-Paper-Oct-2019.pdf

          The threat of using these weapons is far more important to them than actually using them. Once they do, they’re gone. Precision missiles are the only weapons that can really hurt Israel. It would take a lot of time and effort for Iran to replenish them.

          Why would they use them to benefit Hamas or the Palestinians who are not their problem?

          They’re protecting Lebanon’s border.

          • “I don’t think they were a low level second front to invade Israel.”

            You misunderstand me. They have opened up a low level second front already. They did so on Oct. 8th. Since then, there has been a constant exchange of fire between Hezbollah and Tzahal which is getting greater by the day but will not erupt into a Hezbollah invasion unless it becomes clear that Hamas needs them to do so.

            What they are trying to do is draw the surrounding Muslim countries into the fray. Nasrallah stopped short of calling for all the other Muslim countries to attack Israel physically. But what he did say is that they should cut off all trade with Israel, essentially blockading them or laying siege. He wants the Israelis to go in hard enough to draw in other Muslim armies. He doesn’t want the war to be between just Iran and the US.

            But you are correct in that what they are threatening or holding over Israel’s head is a full invasion of northern Israel, which they might actually be able to take if they saturated many northern towns with missiles. They have 120-150,000. They can spare 50-75,000 or so for such an operation if the reward is northern Israel.

            It is not that they will do it. It is that they have threatened to do it and can do it if Israel has too much success in Gaza. That is why I believe that in opening up this second front that they spoiled Israel’s plan to ethnically cleanse the Gazans into the Sinai.

            Everybody but Hezbollah is underestimating Hamas at this point. That is a mistake. Hamas has held off Tzahal before and caused them to retreat from Gaza during an earlier incursion several years ago.

            Israel is convinced Hezbollah’s threat to invade is serious. Otherwise they would not have moved such a large percentage of their military forces to the northern front away from the Gaza operation, which was Hezbollah’s clear intention as elaborated by Nasrallah in his speech the other day.

            Iran was behind this. If you put together their funding of both Hamas and Hezbollah and the fact that, as if on cue, Hezbollah opened up a northern front to aid Hamas in its operation, there is no other explanation. Especially if you factor in the mysterious training for Hamas’ little excellent adventure which someone had to have provided and for which Iran is the most likely source – actually, the only plausible source.

            Look, my sympathies are with Iran in this matter (as allies of Russia). But what is becoming clear is that the Biden Regime does not want a war with Iran. That is the only explanation for their actions. After the WSJ did a story days after the Hamas attack stating that Iran gave a green light to the Hamas operation the week before it happened at a meeting in Lebanon, both Israeli intelligence and American intelligence quickly came out with an opinion (there was no time for a real assessment) that Iran was not “directly involved in the planning or execution” of the Hamas operation. Translation: Iran cooked this up but we don’t want a war with them. We want to contain this if we can. We’ve got an election to try to win, or at least not lose too badly.

            If the neo-lib, Obama holdovers that are the loudest voice in the Biden Regime actually wanted war with Iran like the neo-cons do, they would have used the WSJ story and made up whatever intelligence they needed to, regardless if it were true or not, in pursuit of attacking Iran. They did not. Moreover, Blinken is preaching peace to deaf ears in his Middle East tour. The Israelis want no part of his ceasefire or “humanitarian pause” and the Arabs want no part of planning any post-war Gaza or peacekeeping force until there’s a ceasefire.

            The two carrier groups may well be more than are needed to handle Hezbollah, to the extent that they can have any effect on it. However, what they are there to do is not to prepare for an invasion of Iran but to send a message to Iran not to directly intervene in the conflict. And why is that? Because it is clear to them that Iran was behind the Hamas/Hezbollah operation.

        • “Ritter…hates Israel real hard.”
          He hates what it has become.
          He used to support it – as did I.

          “[Netanyahu]’s personal to him”.
          …and honest Scott doesn’t try to hide it
          by using impersonal language.
          He gives his reasons for disliking the man,
          which rest on direct personal knowledge.

          “…it was simply not believable that Israeli intelligence
          didn’t know about the breach the second it happened.”
          By then it’s too late. They are in…

          “He seems to believe that there was actually an
          intelligence failure on the part of the Mossad.”
          It’s not that they didn’t know Hamas was coming.
          It’s that they didn’t take that knowledge seriously.
          That was the intelligence failure, which Ritter notes.

          “…the thing that I would need to hear is that Hezbollah
          in fact did not open up a low level second front”
          They didn’t, but they used the threat of a second front
          to restrain Israel from an all-out attack on Gaza.

          “…and threaten to invade northern Israel on October 8th. ”
          Had they done so, the world would very likely
          still be on Israel’s side after Hamas’ attack.
          But they didn’t and it isn’t…

          • RE: “They didn’t, but they used the threat of a second front to restrain Israel from an all-out attack on Gaza.”

            They do it well.

        • ‘Had they done so, the world…’
          should read:
          ‘Had they invaded, the world…’

        • George Michalopulos says

          Yeah, Ritter’s a smart cookie but he gets too emotional. Makes me question him at times.

          • He does. I don’t necessarily question what he is saying but if he worked for me, I’d tell him to take an extended vacation. When he starts yelling I turn him off.

          • That’s my point. I’m not saying he’s wrong regarding his distrust and dislike of Israel or Bibi. I’m saying the excess emotion clouds his judgment.

            As to a “second front”, we are talking semantics. There are clearly violent exchanges of fire going on on the northern Israeli border which were not going on October 7th. Tit for tat exchanges, not a full scale battle or invasion of course, but certainly enough to cause Israel to deploy large amounts of military equipment and personnel to the area. If you don’t consider that a second front, so be it. But Hezbollah does. Both its leader and its deputy leader has said they are in the war repeatedly.

            The rest of it I don’t even want to deal with. I’m not sure why anybody is arguing about it. Opinions vary.

      • Here’s another interview with Scott Ritter, echoing much of what I have said about the effect of Hezbollah’s intervention. You just need to wait a few days from the time I make an observation until the reality settles in with other commentators .

      • Here’s another interview with Scott Ritter, echoing much of what I have said about the effect of Hezbollah’s intervention. You just need to wait a few days from the time I make an observation until the reality settles in with other commentators. [insert smiley face]

  14. As I said, Iran is gradually ramping up its attacks:


    And this from the WSJ’s Walter Russell Mead is hilarious. The title of the article is:

    Iran Might Have Miscalculated in Gaza
    “It had an interest in dividing Israel from Arab states. So far that hasn’t happened.”

    Has he been following this at all? Obviously a child could see that this has divided the Arab/Muslim world sharply from Israel. What happened to the Saudi-Israel treaty? What about the massive demonstrations in Muslim countries (not to mention the Muslims in the West)? What about Jordan desperately trying to keep Iraqis back from the conflict? What about Israeli attacks on Syria? What about Egypt amassing its army at its northern border with Israel? What about the disrespect shown to Blinken?

    They simply can’t believe what they are seeing is really happening.

    The only thing the surrounding states haven’t done yet is declare war and invade.


  15. Joseph Lipper says

    So extreme was the Zionism of televangelist Pat Robertson, he proclaimed the massive stroke the Israeli Prime Minister suffered in 2006 as God’s punishment against him for pulling Israeli forces out of Gaza:


    Of course Pat Robertson would later apologize for the insensitivity of his remark.

    Perhaps it is Jerry Falwell who is really the founding father of the political movement of “Christian Zionism” in the U.S. His creation of the “Moral Majority” galvanized Evangelical Christians as a political movement at the ballot box to be reckoned with. His support of Zionism was such that the Israeli government, in 1979, gave him a private jet in order to make frequent trips to the Nation-state of Israel. It is said that, “Jewish-evangelical relations had become so close by the early ’80s that, immediately after Israel bombed Iraq’s nuclear reactor in 1981, Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin telephoned Moral Majority leader Rev. Jerry Falwell before calling President Ronald Reagan to ask Falwell to ‘explain to the Christian public the reasons for the bombing’.”


    The U.S. support for Zionism was the primary reason that Osama Bin Laden provided for his 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade centers. Yet quite ironically, when news first hit about the 9/11 attacks, Jerry Falwell shifted blame for the terrorist attacks as God’s retribution against U.S. government policy regarding abortion and homosexuality.

    Of course, Jerry Falwell would also later apologize for the insensitivity of his remarks.

    • Like Lawrence Welk, with his “An’ a one, an’ a two …,” Televangelists appealed to old people who never left their living rooms.

      When those towers came crumbling down, “Falwell” was not on the lips of anyone. It was Bush who put a name on the event and back then we actually trusted our president.

      The discussion of Zionism in the U.S. began in earnest with the Jesus Freaks and all the Bible study they encouraged us to do in home churches.

      When you read the following in the Bible, you actually believe that, “On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram and said, “To your descendants I give this land, from the Wadi of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates – the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites.” – Genesis 15:18–21. Ezekiel 36:24 I will take you from the nations and gather you from all the countries and bring you into your own land.

      • Joseph Lipper says

        Gail, the “Jesus Freaks” were gullible, but they weren’t selling “Christian Zionism”. Jerry Falwell was.

        However, by the time that Jerry Falwell was making his sweaty television sales pitches in the 1980’s, the “Jesus Freak” movement of the late 1960’s and 70’s was already well over. Anyone who considered himself a “hippie” or “Jesus Freak” in the 1980’s was something of an anachronism who might as well have been watching Lawrence Welk (an excellent television show, by the way.)

        Osama bin Laden’s 2002 “Letter to America” specifically points to U.S. supported aggression against Palestinians as the reason for the 9/11 attacks:

        “Q1) Why are we fighting and opposing you?
        Q2)What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?

        “As for the first question: Why are we fighting and opposing you? The answer is very simple:

        “(1) Because you attacked us and continue to attack us.

        a) You attacked us in Palestine”


        • The “Jesus Freak” stuff was over but Calvary was/is still alive and well. Recently, George and I went to see a movie called the Jesus Revolution. As I was watching it, I became increasingly unsettled but I couldn’t put my finger on why. Laguna Beach was familiar, the going barefoot was familiar, loving God was familiar. . . I finally blurted out, “George, that’s my life up there! Church Smith was my pastor!”

          And you’re right. Falwell was over and no one was listening to him.

          Not sure what this has to do with 9/11 or OBL.

          • Joseph Lipper says

            Jerry Falwell, who died in 2007, made a profound influence on American Evangelicals that still remains. Before his creation of the Moral Majority in 1979, there was no overt correlation between being an “Evangelical” Christian and actively lobbying for the political causes we still see happening today. Past political causes of American Christians were things like opposing a women’s right to vote, opposing the liberation of slavery, and opposing the sale and consumption of alcohol. It was Jerry Falwell who created a new three-point political platform for Evangelicals: first of all, making a theo-political alliance with the Israeli government based on a false hermeneutic of “Christian Zionism”, secondly, lobbying to outlaw abortion, and thirdly, lobbying against homosexual rights. It didn’t matter that the Israeli government had nothing to do with Christianity, or that the U.S. government’s permissiveness on abortion and homosexuality was not in any way a persecution of American Evangelicals, as Christians simply rejected both options as inapplicable to their Christian lifestyle. Jerry Falwell changed all that, creating a “moral responsibility” for Evangelical Christians to outlaw abortion, outlaw homosexual rights, and to support the Israeli government’s program of eliminating Palestinians, and including the crushing of enemy nations that oppose Israeli statehood.

            President Jimmy Carter, who served from 1976 to 1980, was an Evangelical Christian, but he didn’t fit the Jimmy Falwell political model, and this probably cost him re-election when Falwell created the “Moral Majority” in 1979. It’s remarkable that Americans in the Bible Belt were persuaded to vote for a Californian movie-star, rather than the incumbent Evangelical Christian peanut-farmer from Georgia. Yet that Californian movie-star, Ronald Reagan, was converted to Jerry Falwell’s political platform and won the presidency for the next two terms. Carter, on the other hand, while personally opposing abortion was not against legalized abortion. Carter also didn’t condone homosexuality, but he was also not against having government rights for homosexual persons. Perhaps more importantly though, Carter defended Palestinian statehood.

            It was really this later viewpoint that was a major concern for the new Israeli Prime Minister, Menachem Begin. It was Begin who forged a political alliance with Falwell in order to get American support for his government’s objectives of ridding itself of Palestinians.

            This strange alliance between the Israeli government and Evangelical Christians was on full display even in 1998, when the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flew to America to meet with Bill Clinton to gain support for the Israeli government’s objectives. However, his first stop was not to meet with Bill Clinton, but rather to meet with Jerry Falwell and over a thousand Evangelical Christians who hailed Netanyahu as the “Ronald Reagan of Israel”:


            At this meeting, Jerry Falwell pledged to contact 200,000 Evangelical ministers, asking them to “tell President Clinton to refrain from putting pressure on Israel.”

            Falwell’s “Moral Majority”, as a political institution, perhaps in some ways peaked with Ronald Reagan’s conversion to that political platform and his subsequent election. In 1989, Falwell would disband it, saying that it had run its course. However, the political ideas and activism of the “Moral Majority” didn’t go away. They are still alive and well, as evident by Donald Trump’s past election and active role in American politics:

            “Recent scholarship argues that the white Christian America upon which the religious right remains dependent is in decline. Yet, as exemplified by the over 80 percent of white evangelicals who voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 election, the legacy of Falwell Sr. lives on – at least for the near term – making him a figure as important as Reagan for the Republican Party.”


            One might ask how it was possible that Bible Belt Americans voted for a hedonistic Manhattan billionaire as U.S. president. The answer is really simple though, because that former president converted to Jerry Falwell’s political legacy.

            • I’m guessing you weren’t a budding Evangelical back in the day like I was. Baptist televangelists appealed to old people who stayed at home and watched TV.

              The Evangelical movement was a worldwide interdenominational movement replete with rock music and megaphones. You’d find us in parks, beaches, and tents and later huge sport arenas. No TV. No Baptists allowed.

              About Trump:

              People who give up their cushy life to serve the country are not what I would call “hedonists.” Trump is a normal guy (as opposed to the more feminine variety) who is, as you say, a Manhattan billionaire. Manhattan billionaires can’t be bought.

              What’s not to love?

              • Joseph Lipper says

                Gail, you didn’t have to watch Falwell on television to be influenced by him as an Evangelical Christian. The essence of Falwellism was simply that Evangelical Christians must vote, and they must vote for the “Pro-Life” candidate, who would also take a stand against rights for homosexual persons and support the objectives of the Israeli government. This ideology began to permeate Evangelical Christian culture in the 1980’s.

                In contrast, the original Jesus Movement of the ’60’s and 70’s, while being against abortion, was largely apolitical, being more interested in Bible studies and Christian rock concerts rather than signing government petitions. The shift towards political activism occured after Jerry Falwell created his “Moral Majority” in 1979.

                You really didn’t even have to know who Jerry Falwell was to be influenced by his ideology, though, because it became entirely pervasive as politicians adopted it after Ronald Reagan’s landslide victory in 1979. People remember Reagan and Bush and Trump, not Falwell. Yet those later politicians who adopted Falwell’s ideology, like Reagan, Bush, and Donald Trump, sought election to office by the formidable “Evangelical vote” created by Falwell.

                • We were completely non-political except about the war. Abortion was illegal. We didn’t know who politicians were beyond the president, whom we hated (Nixon). Very simple time back then. We were not “church” people. Jerry Falwell was Baptist and over the age of 40. Not our cup of tea but this was on the West Coast.

      • American Evangelicals have been duped about a number of things and are basically unwitting tools of the Liberal Borg.

        Disclaimer: I am not now, nor have I ever been, an “Evangelical Christian”.

        On moral issues, I have some respect for them in a very guarded way. But they are profoundly naive and that is exploited by the American political elite. Evangelical Christians are routinely quite patriotic about the United States. This translates into support for America’s foreign policy of spreading “human rights” (read: feminism, LGBT, multiculturalism, green-ness, etc.) and engaging in forever wars. What they do not understand is that the machine has coopted them. It tolerates their morality so long as they aren’t too successful in legislating it while at the same time harnessing them as a primary source of manpower for the MIC’s foreign presence and adventures. In short, they may actually believe in some sort of Christianity, but they aggressively export Western Liberalism which is diametrically opposed to Christianity.

        Liberalism is an ideology mutually exclusive with Christianity. One can’t be both a liberal and a Christian. Those who claim to be so are just liberals (perhaps with a spiritual ambience) who actually believe in liberal ideology covered by a veneer of Christian terminology. They have completely gutted Christianity of any substance and replaced it with liberal convictions (their “baptismal covenant”). They see real Christianity as having been debunked by science and outdated as medieval and simply not consonant with “our values”. So liberal Christianity is an oxymoron.

        This seemed to be all the rage and the prevailing spirit in the sixties and seventies, but God will not long be mocked.

        However, Evangelical Christianity actually obtains a similar political result abroad by military domination and economic colonialism. That this is pathological seems never to occur to them. In serving, defending and touting the Reich, they make the world safe for Liberalism and aggressively impose it on the rest of the world, all the while purporting to engage in a battle for “family values” at home. They may even carry Bibles into battle with them in their struggle to impose secular humanism on the rest of humanity. The irony is palpable. It is a problem of parochialism, in part.

        No wonder the Muslims hate America like the devil himself.

        The other major problem with Evangelical Christianity is the McChrist/McChurch problem. They make it up as they go along. “Faith partners” and “servant leaders” and all sorts of warm fuzzy pablum availing nothing and saving no one from anything, let alone into union with God.

        “The Bible”, seemingly as a fait accompli descending from heaven like the Qur’an since they do not seem at all curious as to where it came from or who compiled and canonized it, serves as their guide but, in effect, they all embrace to one degree or another the Baptist concept of “soul competence”; i.e., that a reasonable, rational soul when reading the Bible can discern correct doctrine from it apart from the Church. Thus they are very eclectic and have thousands of denominations and are utterly susceptible to the zeitgeist which they rely on as a rudder for their nebulous faith. Being a conservative Liberal is still being a Liberal. Man is the measure of all things and the voice of the people is the voice of God.

        So, yes, relatively speaking Evangelicals are somewhat easier to deal with than centrist or progressive Liberals. But they cause much mischief, as the current follies with Israel reveal. Also, within their ranks, feminism and multiculturalism have taken their toll. LGBT seems to be seeping in to some extent as well. America is like an acid bath of Liberalism in which all the Christian confessions extant here are immersed and which permeates them by osmosis, Orthodox Christianity not excepted.

        As I have remarked before, their natural allies, to the extent they actually are Christians, are the Russians, the Serbs and the Eurasian Alliance (and the Poles and Hungarians, etc. to some extent). But they are blinded by the MSM and bad leadership. There was some effort several years ago of Franklin Graham on the one hand and V. Putin and Patriarch Kirill on the other hand to come to some meeting of the minds. But waves of propaganda and Orthodox rebuffing of the efforts of Evangelicals in Russia to proselytize seem to have put that on the back burner.

        It’s a pity because Americans are going to have a very rude awakening when it dawns on them that Russia won in the Ukraine, that Israel will lose power in the present conflict and that China owns Taiwan, regardless of what the US does or thinks about it. And that’s just the beginning. Russia need not set a wet boot in Europe farther than the Ukraine in order to obtain the objective of economically domesticating it via energy export once they come to their senses and governments fall as a result of the sanctions, war and crazy green policies.

        At some point the walls will seem like they are closing in on Americans, Evangelicals not excepted, and it would be better for them if they could see through the obfuscations that what is emerging is not malevolent, but rather, of God.

        • Most of our converts come from the Evangelical world. A lot of good priests, too.

          • And they are more than welcome! The McChurch problem gets solved thereby immediately through participation and catechism. As to the enablement of Liberal Imperialism, most of them get an education by osmosis if they join an ethnic parish. Nothing will open your eyes to the folly of American foreign policy like coffee hour with Syrian or Russian believers.

          • George Michalopulos says

            Indeed, a few good bishops as well (Venerable Dmitri of thrice-blessed memory)! That said, I believe that the present iteration of Evangelicals is waking up to the morass that is American “Christianity”, including the Ziochristianity of Ayatollah Hagee. When they do, then Orthodoxy (as properly understood, i.e. not the EP’s version) will explode.

            We must never give up hope.

  16. Orthodox Christianity front and center in tonight’s Republican debate! Highly encouraged y’all to watch it back and applaud Vivek Ramaswamy for laying the smack down on Ukraine and their outlawing of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church!

    • Lets pray that the persecution of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and how it has been highlighted on a global scale by Tucker Carlson (over 40 million views and counting) & during the Republican debate (if anyone watches those), brings people to Orthodoxy. God brings good out of bad and persecution has a way of bringing people to the Church. Lets pray that is the case here.

      it’s unfortunate that it is happening but a positive is that it has led to the downfall of Bartholomew and has almost certainly ruined his plans for 2025.

      Glory to God for all things.

  17. Anonymous II says

    And here I thought Javier Milei was not controlled by foreign interests…darn.

    See: https://www.breitbart.com/faith/2023/11/21/watch-world-renowned-rabbi-reveals-incredible-meeting-argentinas-javier-milei/

    • My take on Milei is that he’s on the eccentric side of things. (Yesterday he used several four-letter words that rhyme with “hit” describing people on the left). As for meeting with this Chabad rabbi, I wouldn’t read too much into it, as a rightist/populist/nationalist, he’s trying to insulate himself from charges of antisemitism.

      Regardless, I intend to write more about Chabad anthropology when I discuss Zionism in a future video.

  18. BTW, several of you asked for a video of my speech which I gave last September. Here it is:


    Thank you for your interest!

Speak Your Mind