Excellent article! I had once been a big time reader of your "Historical and Investigative Research" and then it seemed to have disappeared for a while, but is now back up again. And I'm glad to have found you again. I really like your method of analysis and arriving at conclusions.
Question: What do you think of Lyndon LaRouche Jr and that broad base of writers, thinkers, and columnists surrounding EIR (Executive Intelligence Review)? I am also a reader and follower of some thinkers in the LaRouche circle, particularly Matthew Ehret at Rising Tide Foundation and Canadian Patriot. In some ways, your material reminds me of them in that you debunked the Climate Change Doom Porn narrative at HIR, as well as critiquing the Modern Attack on Blacks and dissecting the resurgence of Eugenics. But there are paths of divergence as well. For example, Matthew Ehret thinks the Oslo Accords were a good thing, whereas you didn't. I think it is because he approaches it from the point of view of what will work to improve infrastructure projects between Israel and West Asian nations (the LaRouche circles are BIG into Energy Infrastructure improvement and are big admirers of Plato-Leibnitz-Hamilton-List). Whereas you are approaching it more from the historical roots of the Palestinian movement's founding in Nazism and Hajj Amin. Although, Matthew Ehret discusses Hajj Amin as well, and brings up Hamas' connection to British Intelligence I, myself, am not sure what to make of all this. So I was wondering if you were familiar with EIR and the LaRouche circles. And if so, what was your take on their methodology and ideology?
Just curious...Would you say you tend more towards Plato? or Aristotle?
I tend more towards Aristotle, because Plato is more mystical and Aristotle is more empirical. But they were both extreme fascists, so on the political dimension I reject them both.
On the question of EIR, I think their judgment of the Oslo Process is diagnostic. It is impossible to support the Oslo Process if you already know about Hajj Amin al Husseini **unless** your purpose is to destroy the Israeli Jews.
Support for the Oslo Process (bringing PLO/Fatah into Israel) is support for bringing the organization created by the Nazi exterminator of the European Jews (Hajj Amin al Husseini), created to exterminate the Israeli Jews, into Israel. Obviously, that is an attack on the Jews, and of the most extreme kind.
And that makes it an attack on the West -- indeed, on the entire world. For the survival and prosperity of the Jews is absolutely fundamental to everybody's liberty, as I demonstrate in my series SEMITISM vs. ANTISEMITISM.
One hypothesis (I am speculating on the fly, here) would be that EIR was set up to suck many conspiracy theorists into a position that is effectively anti-Israel. That's the Machiavellian hypothesis.
The more innocent hypothesis is incompetence: these EIR authors don't know enough about Husseini.
One way to find out: send them my article on Husseini and see how they react!
I see where you're coming from also, (about both of them being Fascists), after reading your articles on Mesopotamia (Semitism vs Antisemitism and the Structure of History.) After reading that, (whoa...what a thought provoker!) But well said, and well backed! It seems the Plato vs Aristotle thing might be a limited hangout/controlled opposition/ false dichotomy whereas Semitism is really where it's at as far as a liberating ideology and theology of ideas. I'm really looking forward to Part III of that too, where you do your breakdown of Christianity in the West. If I can offer my thoughts: It seems to me that Judaism was in a Nation-Builder phase of development, hence, good works to advance the Nation State in the time of David and Solomon, et al. Whereas Christianity was developed during a terrible emergency and occupation where the destruction of Israel at the hands of Rome was imminent. This seems to lead toward what I call an "Anti-Works-ism" argument, where it is pointless and useless to build bridges, roads, and work for the future because "this world's coming to an End anyway...just save your own skin (as an individual) by accepting Jesus." Hence, those who think they are saved are the ones who are not really saved ("Lord, didn't I feed the hungry? Didn't I help the sick?" etc etc "I never knew you, away from me, you Evil-Doers." Whereas those who think they are NOT saved are, in fact, the ones that really are: "Lord, when did we see you hungry and help you?" "Whatever you did for these brothers of mine you did for me." ) So that means if you did 9 things out of 10 good for Jesus' brothers, that one thing you DIDN'T do counts against you, whereas, for the others, that one thing out of ten you DID do counts FOR you...bottom line: were you a member of Jesus' VIP Club, chosen by Calvin at the beginning of time? The most vicious attacks in the New Testament are against what is called "Judaizers" (a different gospel).
It is in our Human nature to want to toot our own horn and be rewarded for good works. So, the more good works you do, the more likely you are to have the mindset, when you come up to that Judgment Seat, to be one of the ones to say "But, Lord, didn't I in your name do thus and so?" Only to be dismayed to hear Jesus say "I never knew you." There's a whole heck of a lot of people that Jesus doesn't know! (I'd say about 99.9% Lord is the road to eternal life narrow?)
What does this tell me? That Christianity is an Emergency Religion. That it was designed for people in an Emergency, concerned more with getting out of a burning building and saving their own skins, individually, on an Amway type Salvation Plan, than about building a nation. Worksism is shunned, in favor of sitting back, claiming Jesus' name and wearing a Jesus Saves T shirt, and eating popcorn as you watch Judgment Day movie from your survival bunker underground, with your storable foods and guns. It is much more akin to current day America with it's Millenarian Doomsday Cult. And, that real Christianity hasn't existed until the Atomic Bomb made real the possibility that life on Earth could indeed end. That, everything from Constantine up until 1945 you can pretty much throw out as not true Christianity but some other gospel of nation building.
The only justification for the autonomy argument is the Judeo-Christian ethic, or, more precisely, the spread of freedom authored by Jesus Christ. Without borrowing against the moral capital Christianity generated, there is not value of autonomy.
Our struggle today is ignorance of morality and justification of violence. Submerging Mohammad in urine would result in anticipated and accepted violence, although the same Christian version did not.
We’ve lost our way because our schools have divorced the Autonomous from the Moral, casting it (and our society) adrift in a sea of confusion. To compound the injury, schools have stolen the family from the culture, squandering our precious moral capital and generational knowledge. The only true solution to recapturing our phenomenal, powerful, prosperity-fuel traditions is home education.
Excellent article! I had once been a big time reader of your "Historical and Investigative Research" and then it seemed to have disappeared for a while, but is now back up again. And I'm glad to have found you again. I really like your method of analysis and arriving at conclusions.
Question: What do you think of Lyndon LaRouche Jr and that broad base of writers, thinkers, and columnists surrounding EIR (Executive Intelligence Review)? I am also a reader and follower of some thinkers in the LaRouche circle, particularly Matthew Ehret at Rising Tide Foundation and Canadian Patriot. In some ways, your material reminds me of them in that you debunked the Climate Change Doom Porn narrative at HIR, as well as critiquing the Modern Attack on Blacks and dissecting the resurgence of Eugenics. But there are paths of divergence as well. For example, Matthew Ehret thinks the Oslo Accords were a good thing, whereas you didn't. I think it is because he approaches it from the point of view of what will work to improve infrastructure projects between Israel and West Asian nations (the LaRouche circles are BIG into Energy Infrastructure improvement and are big admirers of Plato-Leibnitz-Hamilton-List). Whereas you are approaching it more from the historical roots of the Palestinian movement's founding in Nazism and Hajj Amin. Although, Matthew Ehret discusses Hajj Amin as well, and brings up Hamas' connection to British Intelligence I, myself, am not sure what to make of all this. So I was wondering if you were familiar with EIR and the LaRouche circles. And if so, what was your take on their methodology and ideology?
Just curious...Would you say you tend more towards Plato? or Aristotle?
I tend more towards Aristotle, because Plato is more mystical and Aristotle is more empirical. But they were both extreme fascists, so on the political dimension I reject them both.
On the question of EIR, I think their judgment of the Oslo Process is diagnostic. It is impossible to support the Oslo Process if you already know about Hajj Amin al Husseini **unless** your purpose is to destroy the Israeli Jews.
Support for the Oslo Process (bringing PLO/Fatah into Israel) is support for bringing the organization created by the Nazi exterminator of the European Jews (Hajj Amin al Husseini), created to exterminate the Israeli Jews, into Israel. Obviously, that is an attack on the Jews, and of the most extreme kind.
http://www.hirhome.com/israel/talon-de-aquiles_intro_eng.htm
And that makes it an attack on the West -- indeed, on the entire world. For the survival and prosperity of the Jews is absolutely fundamental to everybody's liberty, as I demonstrate in my series SEMITISM vs. ANTISEMITISM.
https://franciscogilwhite.substack.com/p/semitism-vs-antisemitism-structure-of-history
One hypothesis (I am speculating on the fly, here) would be that EIR was set up to suck many conspiracy theorists into a position that is effectively anti-Israel. That's the Machiavellian hypothesis.
The more innocent hypothesis is incompetence: these EIR authors don't know enough about Husseini.
One way to find out: send them my article on Husseini and see how they react!
Thank you for your reply!
I see where you're coming from also, (about both of them being Fascists), after reading your articles on Mesopotamia (Semitism vs Antisemitism and the Structure of History.) After reading that, (whoa...what a thought provoker!) But well said, and well backed! It seems the Plato vs Aristotle thing might be a limited hangout/controlled opposition/ false dichotomy whereas Semitism is really where it's at as far as a liberating ideology and theology of ideas. I'm really looking forward to Part III of that too, where you do your breakdown of Christianity in the West. If I can offer my thoughts: It seems to me that Judaism was in a Nation-Builder phase of development, hence, good works to advance the Nation State in the time of David and Solomon, et al. Whereas Christianity was developed during a terrible emergency and occupation where the destruction of Israel at the hands of Rome was imminent. This seems to lead toward what I call an "Anti-Works-ism" argument, where it is pointless and useless to build bridges, roads, and work for the future because "this world's coming to an End anyway...just save your own skin (as an individual) by accepting Jesus." Hence, those who think they are saved are the ones who are not really saved ("Lord, didn't I feed the hungry? Didn't I help the sick?" etc etc "I never knew you, away from me, you Evil-Doers." Whereas those who think they are NOT saved are, in fact, the ones that really are: "Lord, when did we see you hungry and help you?" "Whatever you did for these brothers of mine you did for me." ) So that means if you did 9 things out of 10 good for Jesus' brothers, that one thing you DIDN'T do counts against you, whereas, for the others, that one thing out of ten you DID do counts FOR you...bottom line: were you a member of Jesus' VIP Club, chosen by Calvin at the beginning of time? The most vicious attacks in the New Testament are against what is called "Judaizers" (a different gospel).
It is in our Human nature to want to toot our own horn and be rewarded for good works. So, the more good works you do, the more likely you are to have the mindset, when you come up to that Judgment Seat, to be one of the ones to say "But, Lord, didn't I in your name do thus and so?" Only to be dismayed to hear Jesus say "I never knew you." There's a whole heck of a lot of people that Jesus doesn't know! (I'd say about 99.9% Lord is the road to eternal life narrow?)
What does this tell me? That Christianity is an Emergency Religion. That it was designed for people in an Emergency, concerned more with getting out of a burning building and saving their own skins, individually, on an Amway type Salvation Plan, than about building a nation. Worksism is shunned, in favor of sitting back, claiming Jesus' name and wearing a Jesus Saves T shirt, and eating popcorn as you watch Judgment Day movie from your survival bunker underground, with your storable foods and guns. It is much more akin to current day America with it's Millenarian Doomsday Cult. And, that real Christianity hasn't existed until the Atomic Bomb made real the possibility that life on Earth could indeed end. That, everything from Constantine up until 1945 you can pretty much throw out as not true Christianity but some other gospel of nation building.
The only justification for the autonomy argument is the Judeo-Christian ethic, or, more precisely, the spread of freedom authored by Jesus Christ. Without borrowing against the moral capital Christianity generated, there is not value of autonomy.
Our struggle today is ignorance of morality and justification of violence. Submerging Mohammad in urine would result in anticipated and accepted violence, although the same Christian version did not.
We’ve lost our way because our schools have divorced the Autonomous from the Moral, casting it (and our society) adrift in a sea of confusion. To compound the injury, schools have stolen the family from the culture, squandering our precious moral capital and generational knowledge. The only true solution to recapturing our phenomenal, powerful, prosperity-fuel traditions is home education.