The Scottish Government confirmed today that the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act will take effect on April 1, bringing with it some of the most draconian curbs on freedom of speech and expression in any free democracy on earth. It has taken 40 years longer than Orwell predicted… but we have finally arrived in the totalitarian nightmare that he feared.
If somebody breaks into your garden shed and steals your bike, for example, or if your car is vandalized, then no action will be taken unless there is a witness or other evidence such as CCTV footage. However, if you were to say that you wouldn’t want an adult transgender female with male genitalia to share a changing room at the swimming pool with your daughter, then you may risk prosecution.
The Hate Crime Act was pushed through the Scottish Parliament by the current First Minister Humza Yousaf during his stint as Justice Secretary, although much like almost everything else he has ever been involved with (barring his deeply held convictions over Israel and Gaza) it wasn’t actually his idea.
Indeed, it was the brainchild of his predecessor Nicola Sturgeon, who hoped to leave as a “legacy” the Gender Recognition Reform Act that would allow people in Scotland to legally change their gender after just three months and without any medical grounds for doing so.
The basis of these laws is totalitarian mind-control and nothing more or less. Laws like this ‘work’ by frightening people into silence and self-censorship; their absurdity is a feature not a bug as irrational controls produce stronger internal submission than rational ones. The underlying psychological mechanism of this species of legalistic mind-control is to seize control of a community’s psycholinguistic constellation of words and thought. Once major words and concepts have been commandeered, only the most thoughtful and intelligent will understand what is happening, and only if they pay attention. The other 50-90% of the population can be expected to blithely ride this ever-changing lexical conveyor belt straight to totalitarian hell. ABN
Demoralize citizens, cheapen citizenship, cause chaos, steal elections, raise crime, take money from citizens, destroy traditional civilization, undermine laws, undermine Constitution, create power vacuum which favors cabal as it moves to take over entire world. Similar game plan in Europe under EU. ABN
🚨17-Year Army Intelligence Officer Blows Whistle on Official Israeli Narrative
“We have technology that we can see exactly who’s in these locations and buildings. So they’re targeting and bombing homes, knowing exactly who, and how many children are inside.”🇵🇸🇮🇱 pic.twitter.com/SPxnsJTbdW
Musk took to his platform X early Tuesday and said the president’s administration is ‘importing voters and creating a national security threat’ for secretly allowing illegal immigrants in the country.
‘It is highly probable that the groundwork is being laid for something far worse than 9/11. Just a matter of time,’ Musk said as he reposted a story from DailyMail.com.
The Tesla‘s creators comments comment after a secret Biden program was exposed where the administration admitted to flying 320,000 migrants into the US – but officials refuse to say who was flown and to where.
Lawyers for the administration’s immigration agencies have claimed that revealing the locations of where these undocumented aliens are could create national security ‘vulnerabilities.’
Is it better that Musk says this or not? Clearly, it’s better. This headline will communicate with many millions of viewers who are far less informed than readers of this site.
Is Musk a limited-hangout ensnaring us only to misdirect us at some later date? Could be. But that is the level we need to be paying attention to, not categorical dismissal of Musk or those like him. To simply dismiss everything Musk says or does is not the right way to fight this information war. This same reasoning applies to virtually all public figures, especially those who have risen to prominence quickly (and thus are almost certainly backed by nefarious forces).
We have to accept that there is no master authority that can separate truth from falsehood or always point us in the right direction. All of life is largely a muddle and so is information warfare. We can assess information case by case, person by person, group by group. If a great many of us do this anarchically but in concert, we will succeed is creating a sea of public understanding that even a savage totalitarian elite will have trouble suppressing.
Going forward, this is our best strategy; lean in toward good information and action and people who are better than others at their level with good information and action. Example: Musk is better than Gates or Zuckerberg. He says more good stuff and does more good stuff. Everyone must be viewed with suspicion. No one is worshipped. Trump is better than Biden. Carlson is better than Maddow. X is better than FB. These are our tools—gradations of understanding always subject to change and reconsideration. We have to be pragmatic, probabilistic, broad-minded, able to assess what is better than and not just what is the ideal best. ABN
One part of Israel’s military operation in Gaza that’s been largely ignored by the mainstream media is the extremely sophisticated psychological war that’s being waged on the Palestinian people. If we look carefully at some of the more unusual elements in Israel’s strategy, we see the outline of plan that is clearly aimed at inflicting maximum psychological damage on its victims.
Take, for example, Israel’s repeated demand that civilians leave a particular city at a designated time. Every time this demand has been made it was followed shortly after by airstrikes on the fleeing civilians. We could easily dismiss this unfortunate action as an operational snafu attributable to human error, but that does not appear to be the case. After all, these airstrikes have not happened just once or twice, but over and over again. This suggests that it is official policy. The same is true of the seemingly random killing of civilians by Israeli snipers, (some of them waving white flags) or the so-called “indiscriminate bombing” of homes, hospitals and refugee camps, or the hyper-belligerent pronouncements by political leaders, or the massive slaughter of civilians peacefully gathering food at humanitarian aid trucks. What we’re saying is that none of these things have any apparent tactical value, rather their efficacy can only be measured in terms of how they help Israel achieve its overall strategic objective which is the expulsion of the entire Arab population. In that regard, the strategy appears to be working quite well because the majority of the population is now convinced that “nowhere is safe”. This, in fact, is the cornerstone upon which Israel has developed its psychological battleplan, to eradicate any sense of personal security prompting feelings of anxiety, confusion and hopelessness. Keep in mind, this mindset did not appear out of thin air. This mindset is the product of a meticulously-plotted and thoroughly-sinister plan to inflict maximum psychological damage on 2 million people so they will be easier to expel from their historic homeland. That is the underlying goal of Israel’s operation, ethnic cleansing. And the psychological aspect of the campaign may be more critical to its success than the relentless airstrikes or nascent ground war.
Not to detract from Gaza but to augment: Whoever is attacking the West is using a similar playbook, albeit one based more on clandestine violence and civilizational demoralization through infiltration and ideological capture. The West has been suffering parasitic infestation since WW2 and today we are near the climax of this takeover and obliteration. The only question mark on this relentless psyop is who are its leaders. We can see scores of toadies wherever we look but ultimately who is giving them their orders? Who is directing them? A demoralizing sign of Western ideological capture is the silence on Gaza of so many otherwise respectable alternate news personalities, to say nothing of Western MSM which day-after-day-after-day reads like a memo from a maniac, the silence and misdirection is so disgusting. ABN
I know Musk is suspicious, but so is everybody with ‘freedom of reach’. He does appear to have some concern about overdoing the mind-control and actual history. Us vague masses can do some good by liking one kind of emperor over another, possibly. ABN
Ep. 76 As they lecture us endlessly about human rights in other countries, the Biden administration is trying to kill journalist Julian Assange for the crime of embarrassing the CIA. His wife Stella joins us from his extradition hearing. pic.twitter.com/DetYUeaBFl
Valuable historic footage of the CCP’s Land Reform (1949-1953). This is how it was done:
Send out a “work team” to villages to “help” the peasants to understand that exploitation of the rich was the root of their poverty and suffering. (DEI training?)
Mobilize the poor
Coach them on how to “tell their bitterness” (诉苦 or lived experience) against the landlords
Hold “ struggle sessions” to denounce the landlords as the “enemy of the people”. Note there were a lot of women activists.
Let the people decide the punishment. In the video the people spoke: execution!
Confiscate the land from the landlords and give it to the poor
Happy ending for the poor?
Not so fast. In 1958 all the land was taken back by the state through collectivization. Between 1959-1962, up to 50 million perished during the Great Famine.
This is a story of Communist dream turned into hellish nightmare. And history rhymes, doesn’t it?
China followed a path to totalitarian control similar to the Soviet Union and other communist regimes. In Russia, Bolsheviks went into villages with the goal of killing a predetermined percentage (10-15% or more) of their populations. This was done to wipe out natural leaders in order to eliminate all viable opposition. These public murders also terrorized the people who were not killed. In Russia, the mass murderers were primarily non-Russians who hated Russians and were envious of them. In China, the mass murderers were typically Chinese from other parts of China who were filled with ideological hatred. Throughout the West, we are seeing a softer version of this playing out today. ABN
Your paper illustrates the principle that in order to properly understand Christianity one must understand what Jesus actually taught. This requires that we focus on the earliest period of Christianity.
Your paper presents no conclusions about the Arian controversy and implies that the issue remains muddled even today. In my opinion, this is incorrect.
FYI, I am going to briefly summarize the Arian controversy as I understand it. I believe the controversy arose out of the church’s “need” to declare its institutional authority over Christians.
In the first centuries, there were many varieties of Christians, everything from Jewish Christian sects that continued to stress the importance of Jewish Law to gnostic Christians who in my opinion preserved the esoteric core of what Jesus actually taught. Soon after the Council of Nicaea, many of the various iterations (including the gnostics) came under fierce attack by the Roman church.
The roots of the Arian controversy date to the second century when certain theologians deviated from Jesus’ teaching about the immortality of the soul, i.e., immanence. Tatian was one of these, and he was followed by Gregory of Nysa, St Jerome, and Augustine. Each of whom added another brick to the new artificial construct. All of them taught that the soul is created from lowly dust along with the body at conception or birth.
The controversy ignited when a Libyan priest named Arius pointed out the flaw in the church’s new teaching. At issue was the human versus divine nature of Jesus. Arius merely pointed out that by this reasoning the soul of the God-realized avatar Jesus must likewise have been made of lowly dust. This was a problem because it meant that at some point in time the soul of Jesus did not exist. It followed that Jesus, while exalted, could not be on an equal footing with God the father.
Athanasius led the orthodox contingent at Nicaea. He insisted on the absolute equivalence of Father and Son. Even though a vast majority of Christians supported Arius, the anti-Arian bishops held a majority in Council and ruled in favor of Athanasius. No surprise that Arius was condemned as a heretic.
Athanasius gets credit for the new doctrine of the Trinity that emerged from Nicaea. The Trinity idea was not based on Scripture, however, nor divine revelation, but solely on logic. Given the equivalence of Father and Son, the Holy Spirit could not be left out, so its inclusion became a logical necessity. From its inception, the Trinity doctrine was and remains a purely artificial construct.
Despite the ruling, Arianism continued to be very popular because by affirming the humanity of Jesus Arius held out hope for ordinary people. Implicit in Arianism is the gnostic belief that ordinary Christians can follow in the footsteps of the savior. The views of Arius were perfectly compatible with the teaching of immanence, the indwelling of God in all of creation.
The real issue at the heart of the controversy, as the writer Elizabeth Claire Prophet has pointed out, was not the denial of the divinity of Jesus (as the church contended at Niceae and as the Catholic Church still contends) but instead the question: “How is man to be saved? By emulating Jesus? Or by worshipping him?” Today, the Catholic Church emphasizes worship (and obedience) when it should be inspiring Christians (as Jesus did) to pursue sainthood.
The personal triumph of Athanasius at the council was a hollow victory. By scapegoating Arius, the church only magnified its original error of embracing a doctrine of the soul that repudiates the divine presence in all matter.
By asserting the equivalence of Father and Son the church was in effect declaring that the soul of Jesus was different in kind from the souls of ordinary people. This was fateful because it undermined the mystical element in Jesus’ own teachings, and opened up a vast gulf between God and humans.
The new Catholic Encyclopedia clearly states the extent of this chasm: “Between Creator and creature there is the most profound distinction possible. God is not part of this world. He is not just the peak of reality. Between God and the world there is an abyss…”
The abyss was wholly artificial, the creation of the church, yet it was also a self-serving artifice, a means for institutional Christianity to vastly increase its earthly power. Today, Catholic doctrine holds that the church is the sole bridge over the otherwise unbridgeable chasm between God and men.
I would go another step and also argue that the outcome of Niceae was a serious devolution, a step back toward Judaism and the absolute patriarchal rule of the angry jealous god Yaweh. It appears that Christianity was undermined from within by church fathers bent on maintaining control over Christians. To me this smacks of psychopathy at work, namely, the Jewish revolutionary spirit.
This material is drawn from my 2004 book Gnostic Secrets of the Naassenes. Hope it helps!
The definition or redefinition of words and concepts shows the profound importance of the human psycholinguistic complex or constellation. Changing just a few words or definitions can impact many centuries of human history. We can see many changes in our psycholinguistics today, almost all of which are imposed on our communities without our consent or understanding. Diversity is Our Greatest Strength is but one of many examples. It may seem as if nothing is happening when words and concepts change meaning or are weirdly asserted, but when those changes are imposed top-down and asserted by Big Media, you can be sure they portend a foul change is afoot and we will pay dearly for it within a short time. ABN
Last week I published an article noting that although technology industrialist Elon Musk probably ranks as the most powerful and influential individual in the Western world, he recently humbled himself, deeply apologizing for some of his casual criticism of Jewish activities and pledging to mend his ways.
Traveling to Israel, he met with that country’s president and posed for photo-ops with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, promising to combat “antisemitism” on his Twitter platform. A few weeks later he undertook a pilgrimage to Auschwitz, making even stronger commitments to Jewish leaders, denying that he harbored any antisemitism in his own heart, and publicly declaring that he regarded himself as “aspirationally Jewish.”
These remarkable events reminded me of that famous incident of the Middle Ages in which Emperor Henry IV of the Holy Roman Empire had “gone to Canossa” and prostrated himself before Pope Gregory VII, seeking forgiveness for his challenge to the supreme authority of the Catholic Church:
Musk was only the latest and most extreme example of the many wealthy and powerful Gentiles who have publicly bent their knees in submission to Jewish power. Even if totally spurious, accusations of “antisemitism” have often proven fatal to the careers of even the highest-ranking individuals, and shortly before Musk’s submission, two presidents of Ivy League universities were politically brow-beaten and then forced to resign over their unwillingness to prohibit pro-Palestinian protests on their campuses, a sudden purge that was absolutely unprecedented in the history of American academia.
American Buddhist Net 