Marx laid down a number of important hypotheses. Some of them were correct, others were incorrect, but at least he paved the way for more thought. Marx should not be viewed as “perfect” but in the same way that Plato or Socrates is viewed. To make an analogy, one does not have to be a Christian to praise the human being named Jesus of Nazareth that supposedly existed. One does not have to be a Buddhist to learn from reading philosophy of Buddhists.

Marx’s role in raising awareness of important issues should be appreciated by any self-respecting, enlightened and pragmatic person. He may have not scored on every shot, but at least someone got the rebound. Juche (North Korea’s ideology) may not be Marxism, but it owes some of its influence to Marx. Benito Mussolini was a Marxist before he developed into a fascist. Mao may have modified Marx to be more agrarian and idealistic, and adapted to Chinese characteristics, but still was influenced by Marx. The Ba’athists with which I converse see Marx as an influence but not the “seal of the prophets.”

It’s implicit that Marx is of German Jewish ancestry, and that praising Marx as a hero is part of my campaign against retarded people on the internet. Karl Marx is the dagger which I will use to stab the heart of WN scum. Karl Marx for fuhrer! Anton Lavey is another Jewish hero (I think Russian Jewish) but this dagger is sharper and more painful towards the target!

Marx also hated oppressive religious fanatics (of any religion) and considered religion to opiate. I salute him on that stance too!

The link
Just to play Devil’s advocate, as many of our “Communists” think that Islamic Fundamentalism is inherently more compatible with Marxism than Zionism, it should be pointed out that the Taliban and Iranian regime curse the Red Army whereas Israel praises it. Now you can say the material conditions make ideology unimportant, but it is still ironic.

It should be noted that the SECULAR Ba’athists were pro-USSR in their original conception, whereas the counterpart regime in Afghanistan was not. And that regime was a fundamentalist regime, but not the Taliban.

Israel will erect a memorial commemorating the Red Army’s crucial role in the victory over the Nazis, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told Russian Prime Minster Vladimir Putin at a photo opportunity before their meeting Tuesday.

Netanyahu said the gesture, which he intends to move forward, is in honor of the 65th anniversary of the victory over the Nazis later this year. This move comes amid growing concern in Russia that their role and sacrifice in the victory over Nazism is increasingly being underplayed.

Putin, saying that it was forbidden to forget the Nazi victims and that the Jews and the people of the former Soviet Union suffered more than anyone else at the hands of the Nazis, said he was currently in discussion with Moscow’s chief rabbi about the possibility of establishing a Holocaust museum in Moscow.

Netanyahu said he hoped the memorial would be erected before Putin’s next visit to Israel, expected with the year, and that at the same time the Russian prime minister could also take part in the ceremony in which Russia would formally take over control of the Sergei courtyard in central Jerusalem.

After saying that Israel and Russia would increase cooperation in a number of spheres, including technology, security and agriculture, Putin joked that he hoped the agricultural cooperation would add funds to Israel’s Agriculture Ministry so that it could quickly move out of its offices in the Sergei courtyard.

The link
I find this to be interesting that Christianity is a driving force behind international altruism, good or bad. It is just interesting. The shift in the activity of evangelicals is interesting.

It is interesting that nuns are handing out condoms. How about just realizing that people who cannot control themselves are not human beings?

For most of the last century, save-the-worlders were primarily Democrats and liberals. In contrast, many Republicans and religious conservatives denounced government aid programs, with Senator Jesse Helms calling them “money down a rat hole.”

Over the last decade, however, that divide has dissolved, in ways that many Americans haven’t noticed or appreciated. Evangelicals have become the new internationalists, pushing successfully for new American programs against AIDS and malaria, and doing superb work on issues from human trafficking in India to mass rape in Congo.

A pop quiz: What’s the largest U.S.-based international relief and development organization?

It’s not Save the Children, and it’s not CARE — both terrific secular organizations. Rather, it’s World Vision, a Seattle-based Christian organization (with strong evangelical roots) whose budget has roughly tripled over the last decade.

World Vision now has 40,000 staff members in nearly 100 countries. That’s more staff members than CARE, Save the Children and the worldwide operations of the United States Agency for International Development — combined.

A growing number of conservative Christians are explicitly and self-critically acknowledging that to be “pro-life” must mean more than opposing abortion. The head of World Vision in the United States, Richard Stearns, begins his fascinating book, “The Hole in Our Gospel,” with an account of a visit a decade ago to Uganda, where he met a 13-year-old AIDS orphan who was raising his younger brothers by himself.

“What sickened me most was this question: where was the Church?” he writes. “Where were the followers of Jesus Christ in the midst of perhaps the greatest humanitarian crisis of our time? Surely the Church should have been caring for these ‘orphans and widows in their distress.’ (James 1:27). Shouldn’t the pulpits across America have flamed with exhortations to rush to the front lines of compassion?

“How have we missed it so tragically, when even rock stars and Hollywood actors seem to understand?”

Mr. Stearns argues that evangelicals were often so focused on sexual morality and a personal relationship with God that they ignored the needy. He writes laceratingly about “a Church that had the wealth to build great sanctuaries but lacked the will to build schools, hospitals, and clinics.”

In one striking passage, Mr. Stearns quotes the prophet Ezekiel as saying that the great sin of the people of Sodom wasn’t so much that they were promiscuous or gay as that they were “arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.” (Ezekiel 16:49.)

Hmm. Imagine if sodomy laws could be used to punish the stingy, unconcerned rich!

The American view of evangelicals is still shaped by preening television blowhards and hypocrites who seem obsessed with gays and fetuses. One study cited in the book found that even among churchgoers ages 16 to 29, the descriptions most associated with Christianity were “antihomosexual,” “judgmental,” “too involved in politics,” and “hypocritical.”

Some conservative Christians reinforced the worst view of themselves by inspiring Ugandan homophobes who backed a bill that would punish gays with life imprisonment or execution. Ditto for the Vatican, whose hostility to condoms contributes to the AIDS epidemic. But there’s more to the picture: I’ve also seen many Catholic nuns and priests heroically caring for AIDS patients — even quietly handing out condoms.

One of the most inspiring figures I’ve met while covering Congo’s brutal civil war is a determined Polish nun in the terrifying hinterland, feeding orphans, standing up to drunken soldiers and comforting survivors — all in a war zone. I came back and decided: I want to grow up and become a Polish nun.

Some Americans assume that religious groups offer aid to entice converts. That’s incorrect. Today, groups like World Vision ban the use of aid to lure anyone into a religious conversation.

Some liberals are pushing to end the longtime practice (it’s a myth that this started with President George W. Bush) of channeling American aid through faith-based organizations. That change would be a catastrophe. In Haiti, more than half of food distributions go through religious groups like World Vision that have indispensable networks on the ground. We mustn’t make Haitians the casualties in our cultural wars.

A root problem is a liberal snobbishness toward faith-based organizations. Those doing the sneering typically give away far less money than evangelicals. They’re also less likely to spend vacations volunteering at, say, a school or a clinic in Rwanda.

If secular liberals can give up some of their snootiness, and if evangelicals can retire some of their sanctimony, then we all might succeed together in making greater progress against common enemies of humanity, like illiteracy, human trafficking and maternal mortality.

The link
The reason America never fixes its problems is that it believes they will auto-correct. This article is the ideological foundation of authoritarianism. If you prefer to smear it, I guess you could call it “emergency dictatorship,” “capitalism in decay” or “fascism.” It is the idea that freedom and liberty “don’t work,” but the logical conclusion is that authority is needed to patch society. It is not really stressing class conflict or the need for the complete elimination of private property, and thus not really addressing the issue from a Marxist-Leninist standpoint but a corrective authoritarian standpoint.

It requires a religious belief in capitalism in order to keep trying to succeed against all odds, because otherwise it is easier to give up. After all, to succeed requires many failed attempts and/or a special networking connection, especially in this global economic meltdown. I can attest to the fact that most hardcore entrepreneurs truly believe these values.

WASHINGTON — The most popular religion in America isn’t Christianity, as most of us have been taught to believe. The most cherished belief system celebrates the principles of unfettered capitalism.

That misplaced faith in free markets was on display in this past Thursday’s health care summit, when — between sound bites and talking points — Republicans argued that “choice and competition” would largely resolve the country’s health care problems. That belief — that the arbitrary, confusing and consumer-unfriendly policies and practices that we euphemistically call a health care “system” can be transformed by relying on free market principles — is confounding.

Except for beneficiaries of Medicare, Medicaid and the Veterans Affairs system — all government-run insurance programs — those of us who have insurance are utterly reliant on the private market. That’s what got us into the mess we’re in.

The health care market simply doesn’t operate like the market for cars or computers or flat-screen TVs. Sony and Samsung make their profits by selling as many of their products as they can. Health insurance companies make their profits by selling as many of their products as they can and then trying very hard not to actually deliver them.

Try to imagine that you’re awaiting delivery of your brand-new 50-inch TV, for which you’ve already made a hefty down payment. But the company calls to tell you that you violated some obscure clause in your contract, so they’re not going to bring it! In the health insurance world, it’s called “rescission.” Insurers decide they won’t honor the contract because of some alleged violation by the policy-holder.

They do that to keep their fat profit margins. Health care giant Wellpoint has proposed substantial rate increases in the individual market (policies for individuals who don’t have employer-based insurance), not just in California but in several other states. In congressional testimony last week, WellPoint president Angela Braly said the company had to raise premiums because of soaring health care costs. But Wellpoint hardly seems to be hurting; it reported a profit last year of $4.7 billion.

California’s Wellpoint subsidiary, Anthem Blue Cross, is not only proposing stunning rate hikes. The state’s insurance commissioner has announced that the company has also repeatedly violated state law by failing to pay medical claims on time and by misrepresenting policy provisions to consumers, according to the Los Angeles Times.

So, it seems, the company tells you that a policy offers broad coverage when they’re trying to get you to buy insurance. But when you need the coverage, you find out that the policy doesn’t offer broad coverage, after all. That helps explain why so many people, even with health insurance, go bankrupt after a costly illness.

Without stricter government oversight and regulation — which is the essence of the health care reform proposed by President Obama — health care costs will continue to soar while consumers get less and less. Obama’s proposals don’t represent a “government takeover,” as critics contend. The vast majority of Americans would still get their insurance in the private marketplace. But insurers would have to live by a different set of rules.

Vice President Joe Biden said it best at the summit: If Republicans agree that insurance reform is necessary, that health insurance companies should be prohibited from turning away consumers because of pre-existing conditions, that they should be prevented from enforcing lifetime caps on benefits, then the GOP must see the need for strict government regulation. You don’t get those changes in the “free market.”

And, unlike the choice of buying a computer or a car, you’d don’t really get to walk away from health insurance. If you do, you take your life into your hands. Having health insurance increases your chances of longevity.

Once upon a time, political leaders realized that all Americans needed access to electricity, and they stepped in to ensure that all households got that small miracle at reasonable rates — something that the “free market” could not provide. Americans need a similar intervention in health care now.

I’ve bashed a lot of people but I’ve never really targeted Protestants. I view them as pseudo-revolutionaries. What Protestants do is basically copy Catholic dogma but rebel against the hand that feeds them.

You would expect rebels against the Catholic Church to turn into atheists instead of Protestants. Protestants are “half Catholic.” They are like a women who is beaten by a husband, but won’t divorce the husband. They outwardly reject Catholicism but inherit all their ideas from Catholicism.

When I learn more about Orthodox Christianity, I’ll probably send a few verbal missiles in that direction too.

One would expect that the Slavic peoples would develop a form of rebellion against Catholicism and Orthodoxy. After all, Orthodoxy is a Greek religion and Catholicism a Roman religion. Against bureaucratic Christianity, the Germanic peoples rebelled with Protestantism and then Nazism, but only Russians (with the help of Jews) countered with Bolshevism, while other Slavs act like slaves!

The Link (2007)
This is not the first Sephardic Jew I have been made aware of who advocates this, believe it or not!

I do not believe the best way to improve relations between Ashkenazi Jews and the rest of the world is to deceive oneself. At some point the harsh reality has to be faced. Ever since the Bolshevik revolution was on the verge of taking power in Eastern Europe, these people have been despised. And when Jews quit Bolshevism for Zionism, it only increased hatred from Arabs. Even in America, the Ku Klux Klan officially adopted an anti-Semitic line – which it previously had not taken – in 1915, as the Bolsheviks rose and finally took power in 1917. These are the people who competed with Stalin for control over the Bolshevik movement and collaborated throughout Europe, resulting in both Hitler’s rise and their ejection from the Bolshevik party. Even Gypsies contributed to 1940’s Romanian pogroms against Ashkenazi Jews with the assistance of the Iron Guard (which was then banned), while Winston Churchill carefully chose his words to separate between “good and bad” Jews. Even Northeastern Slavs (subhumans to Hitler) such as Poles and Ukrainians disposed of some of these people.

Ashkenazi Jews are going to have to stop crying about persecution and start being more friendly to their neighbors. This hate does not come out of thin air. The only place Ashkenazi Jews are not hated is America, but that’s because Americans are generally well off and rich people and the means of communication are controlled by Jews.

A right-wing Jewish extremist has been disseminating calls for the assassination of leftists and Ashkenazim on Internet sites in Israel and abroad.

One film clip posted on YouTube, for instance, declares: “You are about to view a handful of leftist Ashkenazim that Hitler and Eichmann did not manage to incinerate. Before we begin, please remember: 90 percent of the moderate left are Ashkenazim!! 100 percent of the extreme left are Ashkenazim!!”

Next comes a picture of President Shimon Peres with the caption: “The murderer!” It is followed by pictures of Benjamin Netanyahu, Yossi Beilin and other politicians.

The clip concludes: “Now, after you have seen these unclean Ashkenazim, how degraded the Ashkenazi race is, and what a pity it is that Hitler and Eichmann did not finish off the Ashkenazim, I ask of you: Search for information on Google about Stiven Malik; there ‘the document’ awaits you.”

The document in question is also full of incitement to violence: “If only we, too, could finish what Hitler began by destroying all the Ashkenazim, the descendants of the Jews who betrayed Germany.”

Supportive comments have been posted on the Stiven Malik forum on the Israeli portal 2all; the forum has received thousands of visitors in recent month. Malik’s anti-Ashkenazi incitement can also be found on the Israeli portals Tapuz and goop.co.il and on sites such as fresh.co.il.

A Haaretz investigation has concluded that “Malik” is a fictitious name used by a right-wing extremist who was once affiliated with Baruch Marzel’s Jewish Front party, but was later expelled from it.

After Haaretz approached the relevant Israeli portals, some of Malik’s writings were removed. Tapuz said it had given the material to the police, and Peres’s office said it had given it to the Shin Bet security service. YouTube had not responded by press time.

These points made by Nick Griffin, and quoted by Lawrence Auster, are really quite relevant. It is an error to turn against Israel just because a crowd of crazy people who are rejected both by the JDL and Israel display paranoid personality disorder, DSM IV. “The nazis are out to get me.” The Marx quotations are valid, as are the points about Monarchs employing Jews so they can hide behind the title wave of dissent from the masses. I suspect similar tactics may be used by modern capitalist rulers.

It would be pleasurable to purge paranoids like Chaim Ben Pesach from the Zionist movement, but I just realized it’s not necessary. It has already occurred. The JDL has rejected him and Israel has banned him. Perhaps the JDL and Israel are neo-nazi organizations, and Rick Rubin was the Fuhrer. Allen-T was the SS Stormtrooper and EagleEye the Polish-Ukrainian collaborator.

I wonder if Kahanists would consider Lawrence Auster to be a neo-nazi. After all, his conversion to Christianity must be an attempt to genocide the Jewish people spiritually.

The better move is not to turn against Zionism, but to purge the Zionist movement of its undesirable mental defectives. The Zionist movement should move towards national bolshevism and integral corporatist nationalism, and away from Taliban style religiosity.

This is just a “theory” and not a call to action!

A dictatorship modeled off of Pol Pot’s khmer rouge could really rewrite the religious culture of the middle east, and then allow it to progress technologically after its original period of purification.

And don’t forget that pol pot was a nationalist!

The Translated Link from Arabic

Agencies – Media sources said that former Prime Minister Tony Blair lied to the investigation committee on the Iraq war when he claimed that attention to topple former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein began after the attacks atheist ten of September. And removed the newspaper “The Independent” British unveiling of the document did not receive the Commission of Inquiry into the Iraq war, confirms that the government of Tony Blair made secret plans to drum up support for the establishment of an internal coup against Saddam Hussein two years before the invasion of Iraq. The newspaper “The Independent” The British Foreign Office officials drafted a plan called “contract with the people,” suggested to the dissidents in Iraq that toppling Saddam would receive support from Britain, also pledged to provide aid and debt cancellation of oil contracts and the provision of commercial transactions as soon as the ouster The newspaper “has been the completion of the plan, titled” Confidential – for the eyes of the British and U.S. “in the June 11, 2001, and approved by the cabinet of ministers.” The document said Britain would “want to deal with Iraq that respects the rights of its people and live in peace with its neighbors and abide by international law and the right of the Iraqi people to live in a society based on rule of law, free from repression, torture and arbitrary arrest, and that respects human rights, freedom and prosperity the economy. The document said “those who wish to be published a call for change in Iraq deserve our support. We look forward to the day when Iraq who is due to join the international community, will receive a new system to reschedule debt and aid from the World Bank and International Monetary Fund aid package and trade of the European Union.” Mr Blair said during his testimony before the commission last week that serious attention to the overthrow of Saddam breed only after ten atheist attacks of September, which changed from “a risk”. For his part, “said Ed Duffy, spokesman for the Liberal Democrats in foreign affairs, said the document questioned the validity of the certificate made by Blair should have been published before hearing his testimony on Friday. “The plan to support the Iraqis who seek to topple Saddam may be less harmful, and that was without a doubt the most legitimate what happened. However, it appears that Blair had always intended to change the system since the early and before the atheist of September.” “It seems, however, that veil of secrecy was lifted from the documents is crucial, which stop an obstacle to question Blair and other people.” In addition, newspaper “The Guardian” The Commission of Inquiry Celkot Blair will call again to make further submissions before it. She said Blair would be questioned in public and in secret after the committee expressed concern that his testimony on the legality of the invasion are contrary to those made by the former British Attorney General Lord Goldsmith.

This article focuses on Blair, but it is clear that Bush was trying to downplay the Afghanistan war, and switch to Iraq, even though a stronger case can be made against Afghanistan than against Iraq. Iraq is secular and never attacked USA. It was back stabbed. Afghanistan is theocratic and could be accused of Al-Qaeda collaboration. Yet Bush wanted to get the focus off of Afghanistan and onto Iraq.

The motives are ulterior! Profit and gain!