We will segue into next week's discussion of PUBLIC HEALTH POLICY tied to declining birth rates and babies------

By transitioning last week's discussion of TRANSHUMANISM and religion by remembering the difference between EUGENICS AND TRANSHUMANISM.
As REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVES who kept EUGENICISTS at bay for several centuries------the early 1800s saw a rise in EUGENICS because of DARWINISM and evolution and increasing HYBRIDIZATION of plants and animals. Social humanists were against this hybridizing of HUMANS-----so, were against EUGENICISTS.



We hinted that the movement towards ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE was tied to SUPREMACY-----whether Asian/European/Arabic. So slowly, since early 1800s this movement towards ONE WORLD embraced this ideal of EUGENICS---UTOPIA-----BUT MORPHED in the mid-1900s to TRANSHUMANISM.


This image of a very beautiful bird is NATURAL EVOLUTION which entailed cross-breeding and genetic inheritance. One would say----evolution tied to survival of most fit -----would not have worked well for RAINBOW BIRDS.



The idea of SUPREMACY for many EUGENICISTS was tied to MAN being the IMAGE OF GOD------not all eugenicists were religious ---many were. Transhumanists have no ties to GOD----they are motivated only by CORPORATE AND WEALTH NEEDS-----so SUPREMACY is tied to SUSTAINING THAT EXTREME WEALTH AND POWER of global 1% who think they are small g GODS.


The Rainbow bird. Another beautiful example of God’s creative work!

Hmmmmm, religious tenets don't even allow for GMO PLANTS OR ANIMALS.



'Ethics - Controversial Dilemma - Selective Breeding



letstalkaboutselectivebreeding.weebly.com/ethics...



Animals should not be artificially bred as it is not a natural process. People are disgraced about using animals as a means to benefit the ends of the human race which is deemed as totally immoral by some - it is seen as un-natural, therefore wrong. Religion is a significant part in ethics'.


We can segue into next week's discussion on PUBLIC HEALTH POLICY tied to CONTRACEPTION/BIRTH CONTROL/DE-POPULATION goals with the concept of all religions and that is

LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION-----NATURAL EGG MEETS NATURAL SPERM

If left to GOD'S NATURAL evolution-----multiple SPECIES of HUMANS would be nowhere in sight.  BASIC SCIENCE tells us that.

There is no capability of religious acceptance of TRANSHUMANISM creating multiple BREEDS/SPECIES of humans.

Hmmmmm, religious tenets don't even allow for GMO PLANTS OR ANIMALS. This is why global banking 1% CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA needed to KILL RELIGION to push TRANSHUMANISM.

Life Begins At Conception. That’s Not the Point


Nov 4, 2012, 8:35pm Jodi Jacobson


The development of a potential human life requires conception as a first step. But that is not the same as either pregnancy or personhood. You can't reduce complex reality to a slogan, and when you try to do so, you actually minimize the personhood of women.



“Life begins at conception.”

This is perhaps the favorite phrase of anti-choicers seeking to eliminate women’s basic right to control over their own bodies. It is, for example, the premise of policies pushed by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and fundamentalist evangelicals. It is the cornerstone of the so-called personhood laws defeated by large margins in ballot initiatives undertaken in both Colorado and Mississippi. And it is the basis for the “Sanctity of Life” bill co-sponsored by Congressmen Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Todd Akin (R-MO) in the House of Representatives. The end game in all of these efforts is a radical shift in women’s lives, including a total ban on abortion without exception, and bans on many forms of contraception, in vitro fertilization, and health care for women who are or who may be pregnant.


“Life begins at conception,” is repeated incessantly by politicians such as Richard Mourdock, as though this were a revelation, something not previously known, that should inform our thinking on whether women are people with the same fundamental rights as men, or if they are essentially incubators whose ability to participate in society and the economy, and, quite literally, whose ability to live is dependent on whether they are, might be, or might become pregnant.




But the phrase is highly—and purposefully—misleading because it confuses simple biological cell division both with actual pregnancy and with actual, legal personhood, which are all very different things.

During the October 11, 2012 vice presidential debate, for example, moderator Martha Raddatz asked Vice President Joe Biden and Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI) to discuss “the role religion has played” in their personal views on abortion.



Ryan responded by saying:


Now, you want to ask basically why I’m pro-life?


It’s not simply because of my Catholic faith. That’s a factor, of course. But it’s also because of reason and science.


You know, I think about 10 1/2 years ago, my wife Janna and I went to Mercy Hospital in Janesville where I was born, for our seven week ultrasound for our firstborn child, and we saw that heartbeat. A little baby was in the shape of a bean. And to this day, we have nicknamed our firstborn child Liza, “Bean.”


Now I believe that life begins at conception.


Here is a startling revelation: I am a mother of two and a woman who earlier in her life had an abortion. I am unapologetically pro-choice. And I know life *begins* at conception (which itself is the product of a complex process), because I kinda already knew that having a child required, as a first step, the successful integration of a sperm and an egg, or fertilization.



In other words, “life” begins at conception, if by “life,” we mean the essential starting place of a potential human being. Neither my 16-year-old daughter nor my 13-year-old son would be here if they were not first conceived, if the fertilized eggs had not gone through the process of cell division, successfully implanted in my uterus and developed into healthy embryos, and subsequently gone successfully through the many other phases of development leading to their births.


A fertilized human egg in two phases of division.



The fact that life begins at conception is why women and men use birth control to prevent it from happening and why they have been trying to prevent it from happening since time immemorial. While they may not have had high-resolution microscopes and photography to reveal biological-level activity, women do not and did not need modern “reason and science” (to which anti-choicers now love to refer) to tell them they get pregnant from sex; as Homo Sapiens they have been conceiving, carrying, and bearing babies for at least some 160,000 years, and they’ve been trying to prevent pregnancy and induce abortions for just as long.



Evidence of condom use has been found in cave drawings in France dated between 12,000 and 15,000 years old and in 3,000 year-old illustrations in Egypt. Throughout history, people have variously practiced “outer course” (encouraged even by Christian clergy at some points in history!), and used pessaries, herbs, and other objects to create barriers to fertilization when having sex, not to mention trying many other more dangerous and less effective means, such as drinking lead and mercury or wearing blood-soaked amulets in the hopes of preventing fertilization, a subsequent pregnancy, and later, the birth of a child. I understand that seeing the sonogram of a wanted child is a powerful thing and a connection to the potential person whose birth is much awaited. But if it took Paul Ryan to see a sonogram of his daughter in utero to get him to believe his wife was pregnant and that his daughter’s “life” began with conception, the state of GOP knowledge on sex and biology is even worse than I thought.



The question is not when life begins. That just obfuscates the real issues.



The fundamental issues are:

• When does pregnancy begin?
• Does personhood begin at conception? Is a fertilized egg, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus a person with rights that trump those of the woman upon whose body it depends?
• Do women need “evidence” that if they are pregnant, odds are they are going to have a baby?
• Do women have the moral agency and fundamental rights to decide whether or not to commit themselves not only to the development of a life within their own bodies, but to a lifelong tie to another human being once a child is born?

Pregnancy begins at implantation. Human life has to begin with conception, but conception is not the same thing as pregnancy, the latter of which reason, science, and medical evidence agree begins when a fertilized egg successfully implants in the uterus and develops into a healthy embryo. Fertilized eggs take between six to 12 days to implant in the uterine lining. There simply is no pregnancy until this happens, which is why any method that prevents fertilization or implantation can not cause an abortion. A large share of fertilized eggs never successfully implant to establish a pregnancy: Between 50 and 80 percent of fertilized eggs never successfully impant and end in spontaneous miscarriage (and before a woman even knows she is pregnant) because of insufficient hormone levels or an non-viable egg or for some other reason.



Hormonal contraception, including emergency contraception, works to prevent fertilization in the first place. If you were really, really worried, therefore, about abortion at any stage, you would be a strong supporter of universal access to contraception, and to universal and easy access to emergency contraception, which needs to be taken within 72 hours of unprotected intercourse to prevent fertilization from taking place.




Anti-choicers are, of course, against both birth control and emergency contraception, which they attack by confusing conception with “personhood,” and then misrepresenting the mechanisms of action of contraception and the medical definition of pregnancy to blur the lines between contraception and abortion. By endlessly repeating “life begins at conception,” anti-choicers, “egged on,” if you will, by the USCCB and fundamentalist evangelicals, are trying to simultaneously sow confusion about when pregnancy begins and how birth control works to declare a fertilized egg to be a person. This is a precursor to promoting their goals of eliminating both contraception and abortion, making abortion the equivalent of murder, and by extension, controlling women’s bodies and their economic and social choices. This is exactly the goal of so-called personhood amendments that have been the subject of several ballot initiatives and of the “Sanctity of Human Life” act co-sponsored by Ryan and Akin.



Efforts to confuse basic biology are so widespread and so trump rational thinking that they have even tripped up some influential GOP leaders. In December 2011, for example, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (who in recent years converted to Catholicism) told Jake Tapper of ABC News that he believes that human life does not begin at conception but at “implantation and successful implantation” because if you say life begins at conception “you’re going to open up an extraordinary range of very difficult questions.” What he was really trying to describe was the beginning of pregnancy, while also acknowledging that “difficult questions” arise when you ascribe personhood to a fertilized egg. Shortly thereafter, however, and after he had his hand slapped hard by anti-choicers, Gingrich “clarified” his statement. to the global Catholic network, ETWN, as reported by the National Catholic Register:




In a statement sent by the Gingrich campaign to EWTN News, the former speaker of the House reiterated his belief that “human life begins at conception” and that “every unborn life is precious, no matter how conceived.”

Hmmmm, NEWT GINGRICH AND PAUL RYAN are  great big TRANSHUMANISTS.




He vowed to support pro-life legislation aimed at the ultimate goal of legally protecting “all unborn human life.”



The issue of “personhood” is a theological and personal rather than medical or scientific question. While current teaching by the Vatican is that a fertilized egg is a “person” with full rights under the law, other religious traditions disagree. Jewish law and tradition does not recognize an egg, embryo, or fetus as a person or full human being, but rather “part and parcel of the pregnant women’s body,” the rights of which are subjugated to the health and well-being of the mother until birth. The United Methodist Church recognizes the primacy of the rights and health of women. Islamic scholars, like Jewish scholars, have debated the issues of “ensoulment” and personhood, and continue to do so with no over-riding consensus.




But the issue of “personhood,” legally speaking, really is most clearly articulated by Roe v. Wade under which restrictions on abortions performed before fetal viability, as described in detail by the Center for Reproductive Rights, were limited to those that “narrowly and precisely promoted real maternal health concerns. After the point of viability, the state was free to ban abortion or take other steps to promote its interest in protecting fetal life. Even after that point, however, the state’s interest in the viable fetus must yield to the woman’s right to have an abortion to protect her health and life.”


Intuitively and practically, women who face unintended and untenable pregnancies and choose abortion overwhelmingly prefer to terminate a pregnancy as early as possible.


Share of Abortions Performed in the United States by Length of Gestation, Courtesy of Guttmacher Institute

Nearly half of all pregnancies in the United States are unintended and about four in ten women with unintended pregnancies choose abortion. The vast majority—nearly 62 percent—of women who terminate a pregnancy do so before nine weeks of pregnancy, before any fetus is involved. Nearly 80 percent of such abortions occur before 10 weeks, and nearly 90 percent do so by the end of the first trimester, making clear that anti-choice assertions about high rates of late abortion are false. In fact, if anything, anti-choice laws and policies ranging from banning early, safe medication abortion, to mandated waiting periods and unnecessary ultrasounds all serve to push early abortions later than they otherwise would be, belying anti-choice concerns about, say, second trimester abortions, because they are in fact responsible for a large share of such abortions.



Women don’t need to listen to fetal heartbeats, see sonograms, have ultrasounds, and receive lectures on pregnancy to know what being pregnant means. They know that when they are pregnant, they will, in roughly nine months, give birth to an actual person. When considering an abortion, women weigh the responsiblities they have… to themselves and their own futures, to any born children they have or any they may plan to have at a future date.



Preventing conception or having an abortion isn’t just about getting through the “inconvenience” of a pregnancy, as the right often asserts, though in many situations pregnancy does in fact pose substantial risks to the health and lives of women (such as very high rates of maternal mortality among girls and women in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, and among women of color in the United States). It is about whether or not a woman wants to and is able to make a lifelong emotional, financial, and physical commitment—often at substantial cost to herself and/or to her family—to the person who will exist if a pregnancy is successfully brought to term. In the case of a wanted pregnancy, or an unintended pregnancy a woman decides to carry to term this can be a joyous, hoped-for, and much anticipated event. Under other circumstances, and without recourse to safe abortion care, an unintended pregnancy is a forced pregnancy and a forced birth, and amounts to reproductive slavery. Only one person—the woman in question—has the right to decide whether, when, and under what circumstances to bring a new person into the world. And the vast majority of women who have an abortion know they are ending biological life that they can not or do not want to sustain because the commitment to an actual child is a moral commitment they are not able, willing, or ready to make, or can not make for reasons of health or life.



In the end, when you hear the phrase “life begins at conception,” remember the implications. In debating the “personhood” of eggs, embryos, and fetuses prior to viability, we are also implicitly and explicity debating the personhood of women. Because if you have no choice and control over your body, you are less than an actual person in the eyes of the law. If the right is so worried about abortion the closer a pregnancy gets to viability, then anti-choicers would be making sure both contraception and early, safe abortion were widely available. That really is not their actual concern.



The development of a potential human life requires conception as a first step. But that is not the same as either pregnancy or personhood. You can’t reduce complex reality to a slogan, and when you try to do so, you actually minimize the personhood of women.
______________________________________________

As real left social progressive moral and ethic religious and humanists fought against this ideal of SUPREMACY and breeding goals of HUMANS to create a UTOPIA pushed by global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS ---NOT RELIGIOUS-----but placing this EUGENICS movement into the realm of making man in GOD'S IMAGE-------the REAL goals of EUGENICISTS showed its face in TRANSHUMANISM--------it was not GOD'S image those dastardly global 1% were looking to achieve---it was a BREEDING OF HUMANS to meet the work and pleasure needs of global 1% thinking themselves small g----gods and goddesses.




Looking at DOG BREEDS for example from WORKING DOGS to LAP DOGS ----this is TRANSHUMANISM via ANIMALS. ANIMAL BREEDING was done by natural hybridization----breeding wolves with coyotes for example to get domesticated dogs. The push toward interracial marriages was this natural breeding in humans. A PURE BLOODLINE was SUPREME------hybridized bloodlines were inferior.


'“As he went along, [Jesus] saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, ‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?’ ‘Neither this man nor his parents sinned,’ said Jesus, ‘but this happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him’” (John 9:1–3)'.




Today, TRANSHUMANISM attacks this ideal of what is HUMAN and GOD'S NATURAL CREATION at point of EGG AND SPERM and FETUS before the arrival of BABY. The global 1% are not HUMANISTS-----this movement is for the benefit of only the global 1% and any attempts to show SOCIAL BENEFIT----is FAKE DATA AND FAKE NEWS.




HUMANS AS DOG BREEDS HAVE PEOPLE WITH PHYSICAL ATTRIBUTES MUCH LIKE OUR DOGS TODAY. THE EXCEPTION OF COURSE IS THE GOALS OF HUMANS LIVING IN PLANETARY MINING SLAVE COLONIES---WHERE THE VERY INTERNAL WORKINGS OF LIVING THINGS ARE BEING GENETICALLY MANIPULATED.


Does the Bible support eugenics?


Question: "Does the Bible support eugenics?"

Answer: Eugenics is a social movement that supports the supposed improvement of the human population via selective breeding and other means. It was originally developed by Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin, and based upon Darwin’s theory of evolution. Eugenics was practiced openly in the early decades of the 20th century in many countries, including the United States. After WWII, eugenics by that name fell into disfavor when the extent of Nazi atrocities became known. Eugenicists advocate genetic screening, birth control, segregation, transhumanism, euthanasia, compulsory sterilization, forced pregnancies, and abortion.

Margaret Sanger was the founder of Planned Parenthood, America’s largest abortion provider. Sanger was also a proponent of eugenics who railed against the “reckless breeding” of the “unfit.” In her book Woman and the New Race, she wrote, “The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it” (Chapter V, “The Wickedness of Creating Large Families,” 1920). She desired “to breed a race of human thoroughbreds” and would rather a society “produce a thousand thoroughbreds than a million runts” (Radio WFAB Syracuse, February 29, 1924, transcripted in “The Meaning of Radio Birth Control,” April 1924, p. 111).

From its founding, Planned Parenthood has been involved with eugenics. In 1932 the organization received the endorsement of the American Eugenics Society. To this day, Planned Parenthood is targeting those whom Sanger and other eugenicists would call “unfit.” Their 1997 publication Plan of Action stated their “core clients” are “young women, low-income women, and women of color.”

The Bible does not specifically mention eugenics, but the idea behind eugenics--that man can better himself by ridding the world of “undesireable” people—is definitely not biblical. God told mankind to “be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28; 9:1, 7). No exception to that command is given in Scripture. In fact, King Solomon wrote in Psalm 127:3–5 that children are a heritage from the Lord and that the fruit of the womb is a reward from Him.

God gives us life and numbers our days (Job 33:4; 14:5). The sovereign Lord determines whether we live or die. For social engineers to usurp God’s authority in order to create a self-defined “master race” is evil. We are to obey God, not men (Acts 5:29).

English theologian G. K. Chesterton wrote in his 1922 book Eugenics and Other Evils, “There is no reason in Eugenics, but there is plenty of motive. Its supporters are highly vague about its theory, but they will be painfully practical about its practice” (from Chapter VIII, “A Summary of a False Theory”).

Eugenics is a meritless and immoral social engineering experiment with dubious chances for “success,” as defined by its supporters. It is a slippery slope in which Chesterton’s scientific madmen abrogate the authority of God and seek to create their own utopia on Earth. Through abortion and euthanasia, eugenics is simply murder. Job 24:14 says, “When daylight is gone, the murderer rises up, kills the poor and needy, and in the night steals forth like a thief.” This is the role of eugenicist: killing the poor and needy and those he deems “unworthy”; preventing a “poor quality of life” (in his estimation) by taking life; denying men’s liberty; and playing God.

“As he went along, [Jesus] saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, ‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?’ ‘Neither this man nor his parents sinned,’ said Jesus, ‘but this happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him’” (John 9:1–3). Who are we to decide who does or does not display the works of God? The Bible tells us to defend the weak (Matthew 25:35–36; Acts 20:35), not to kill them.


_____________________________________________



TRANSHUMANISTS are not religious---they are not tied to BIG G GOD. They are simply using genetic manipulation for their own benefit. Ergo, increasing longevity would benefit the global 1% who wants a 99% of people to return to living shorter lifespans by denying modern medicine. Any gene therapy treatment for longevity will be given to our 99% as long as that treatment is EXPERIMENTAL. If that longevity treatment is shown safe and effective----that treatment will ONLY be available for that .00014% of global 1%.




Meanwhile, goals of planetary mining slave colonies require genetic manipulation of HUMANS creating BREEDS OF HUMANS with biology to meet the harshness of SPACE. BREEDS OF HUMANS means we leave behind the GENUS SPECIES of HOMO-SAPIENS ------
GOD'S NATURAL evolution for HUMANS have led to one species ------SAPIENS------today's modern humans whether black, white, or brown are all SPECIES---SAPIENS.



TRANSHUMANISTS say----they are just hastening GOD'S natural evolution by artificially creating multiple SPECIES of HUMANS----just as breeding the SPECIES WOLVES created many species of DOGS.




TRANSHUMANISTS see themselves as small g gods------because they are interrupting big G GOD'S natural evolution of EVERYTHING LIVING-----plants, animals and now humans.

'Homo - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_(genus)
Homo ( Latin homō "human being") is the genus that encompasses the extant species Homo sapiens ( modern humans ), plus several extinct species classified as either ancestral to or closely related to modern humans (depending on a species), most notably Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis'.


Playing God?


The Pros and Cons of Gene Therapy


Although the term gene therapy was first introduced during the 1980s, the controversy about the rationality of this line of treatment still rages on. When this concept first surfaced, there were many who were vocal about their resentment, as they felt that tinkering with the genetic constitution of human beings was equivalent to playing God, and this they perceived as being sacrilegious. On the other hand, the scientific community was abuzz with excitement at the prospect of being able to wipe off certain genetic disorders in humans entirely from the human gene pool. At the center of the debate lies the aspect of the pros and cons of this therapy, which are often associated with the religious, ethical, and political beliefs.



What is Gene Therapy?


In simple words, this therapy involves the substitution of defective genes in a cell with genetically altered genes. Genes are the basis of heredity. They are made of triplets of nitrogenous bases that code for amino acids. The amino acids make up proteins, which in turn play an important role in the way our body functions. Hence, defective genes result in malfunctioning of metabolic pathways, which in turn manifests as genetic diseases. The contributing factors of these diseases are embedded deep within the genetic makeup. Till date, there is no cure for genetic disorders. These disorders can only be managed by alleviating the symptoms with the help of drugs or lifestyle-related modifications. No wonder, there is so much frenzy in the scientific community about the therapeutic effects of gene therapy.



Gene Therapy for the Treatment of Genetic Disorders


This therapy can be broadly classified into two types: somatic cell therapy and reproductive cell or germline therapy. In somatic cell therapy, the somatic cells are targeted for gene replacement, whereas in the reproductive cell therapy, the defective gene lies in the reproductive cells that are replaced by the correct gene. The alterations made in the genetic makeup of the somatic cells is corrective only for the patient. This change is not inherited by the offspring of the individual who is being treated. However, in case of germline therapy, the changes are passed on to the descendants of the treated individual. Hence, this line of treatment has the potential of altering the human gene pool for good.



The therapy depends upon vectors, which refer to the carriers of the normal genes that transfer them to the cells that have the defective gene. Viruses are one of the most popular vectors. Mostly, retroviruses have the capability of injecting their genetic material into the host cells. This viral genetic material is armed with the correct gene. Once it integrates with the host genome, all the cells resulting from cell division of the host cell will contain the copy of the correct gene in place of the defective one. The use of liposomes, adeno-viruses, and naked DNA are some other options for vectors that are being investigated to replace defective genes in organisms.



Pros of Gene Therapy


The single most factor that gives gene therapy its edge is its incredible therapeutic potential. The human race has always been under the continuous onslaught of diseases. As we find cure for some of the diseases, we are attacked by new and more virulent forms of disease-causing agents or pathogens. Although some of these diseases can be cured through medicines, genetic disorders cannot be cured unless the defective gene is replaced by the correct one. This is what this therapy aims at. By targeting the reproductive cells, such defects can be done away with. For individuals affected by genetic disorders such as Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, and Huntington's disease, this therapy could be their only hope for cure.



Cons of Gene Therapy



Scientific Issues


Although virus is the most popular choice for a vector, this method is not foolproof. There is a specific point within the host genome where the correct gene should be introduced. There is no guarantee that the viral enzyme that is responsible for this step will be able to introduce the correct gene at the specific point in the host chromosome. In case, there is an error in this process, it could result in error in the genetic makeup of the cell, which in turn can result in serious disorders.




Moreover, the body's immune system may destroy the vector as it may perceive the carrier as a foreign body. Besides that, there could be problems with the introduction of the therapeutic DNA. Also, rapidly dividing nature of certain cells could be a hurdle. Due to this, the patient may need to undergo multiple therapy treatment processes. Problems could arise, when the immune system responds to a foreign body. It may attack the foreign body more aggressively when the foreign body invades the human body next time.



Ethical Issues


Given the technology involved, it is obvious that this treatment will be expensive. It will be just the rich who would be able to afford its benefits. This gives rise to increasing disparity between the rich and the poor. The rich will become richer and the poor may become poorer.



We know the potential of reproductive gene therapy. The scope of this line of treatment triggers the fear of eugenics, which in turn denotes the creation of a superior race, the idea that media has tried to embody in the concept of designer babies. Although this definitely isn't on the minds of geneticists but it is difficult to erase the repercussions of Hitler's belief in supremacy of the Aryan race.


Religious Issues


Manipulating genetic makeup of man is absolutely unacceptable for those with strong religious beliefs. According to them, altering genes is similar to interfering with the Nature. It amounts to questioning God's will or in other words, 'playing God'.



Undoubtedly, the therapeutic advantage of this therapy is a blessing for the mankind. However, unless the techniques of this therapy are perfected, there would always be discussions on the pros and cons of gene therapy. So, should we deny mankind the blessings of a revolutionary scientific development that could help eradicate incurable diseases? Be it industrialization or its harmful effects, or the great source of power that nuclear energy is or its ugly face that we saw during the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, man has been walking the tight rope of scientific developments and its ill effects. Would gene therapy be too much for us to handle?

_____________________________________________

REVISIONIST HISTORY is painting a MARGARET SANGER who was indeed an AYN RAND LIBERTARIAN ---AKA FAR-RIGHT WING LAISSEZ FAIRE as women's rights leader when in fact she was the female face of those SOCIAL DARWINIST MEN


The REVISIONIST HISTORY of MOVING FORWARD takes these issues of EUGENICS early history to corrupt the REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE I AM MAN ----MORALS AND ETHIC HUMANIST people who were AGAINST EUGENICS----because it was against GOD'S NATURAL LAW and fought against SOCIAL DARWINISTS who were back in 1800s LAISSEZ FAIRE NEO-LIBERALS ----AKA ----ECONOMIC PROGRESSIVES----opposite of social progressives. 

Social progressives called REFORM DARWINISTS fought the use of DARWIN'S theories to promote EUGENICS which led to TRANSHUMANISM as social benefit.



'Individuals who have been labeled "social Darwinists" did not use the term to describe themselves. Reform Darwinists and other critics of laissez-faire economic policies invented the label in the early twentieth century as a derogatory term to describe their opponents' position'.

You will notice all these SOCIAL DARWINISTS are MEN-----MALE ACADEMICS and scholars created all of this science.  Somehow, white women are now being saddled as EUGENISTS/SOCIAL DARWINISTS especially if they were tied to our early US WOMEN'S MOVEMENT. 


Social Darwinism Emerges and Is Used to Justify Imperialism, Racism, and Conservative Economic and Social Policies





Science and Its Times: Understanding the Social Significance of Scientific Discovery


COPYRIGHT 2001 The Gale Group Inc.




Social Darwinism Emerges and Is Used to Justify Imperialism, Racism, and Conservative Economic and Social PoliciesOverviewSocial Darwinism was a sociological theory popular in late nineteenth-century Europe and the United States. It merged Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection and Herbert Spencer's sociological theories to justify imperialism, racism, and laissez-faire (i.e. conservative) social and economic policies. Social Darwinists argued that individuals and groups, just like plants and animals, competed with one another for success in life. They used this assertion to justify the status quo by claiming that the individuals or groups of individuals at the top of social, economic, or political hierarchies belonged there, as they had competed against others and had proven themselves best adapted. Any social or political intervention that weakened the existing hierarchy, they argued, would undermine the natural order.




Background


Darwin's theory of natural selection and the subsequent arguments by social Darwinists were based heavily on the work of Thomas Malthus (1766-1834), an early nineteenth-century British clergyman who wrote Principles of Population.


Malthus predicted that food resources increased arithmetically while human populations, unchecked by war, disease, or famine, increased geometrically. The disparity between resources and population meant a constant struggle among members of a given population for scarce resources. Darwin (1809-1882) applied the Malthusian principle to the natural world and posited his theory of natural selection. In Origin of Species (1859) he argued that the scarcity of natural resources led to competition among individuals, which he called "the struggle for survival." Through this competition, the best-adapted members of a given population were most likely to be successful, reproduce, and pass their beneficial adaptations on to their offspring. Poorly adapted members, he asserted, probably would not survive and therefore would not pass their lower quality traits to the next generation.


Social Darwinists argued on the basis of Darwin's theory of natural selection that the best adapted humans naturally rose to the top of social, political, and economic strata. Therefore, they argued, those members at the top of society, either by virtue of hard work or birth, were the best-adapted citizens. They used this rationale to argue against welfare policies that would help the poor by redistributing resources from the most fit members to the least fit, which they claimed would violate the natural order and allow the perpetuation of less fit members. Darwin himself did not promote social Darwinism and probably would have opposed many of the claims of social Darwinists.



Social Darwinism was the product of late nineteenth-century economic and political expansion. As the European and American upper class sought to extend its economic and political power, it employed scientific explanations to justify the increasingly obvious gap between rich and poor. The social Darwinists' reliance on natural laws allowed social, political, and scientific leaders to dismiss those who sought to redistribute wealth and power by claiming that reformers were violating the natural hierarchy. By extending their arguments to address entire nations, some social Darwinists justified imperialism on the basis that the imperial powers were naturally superior and their control over other nations was in the best interest of human evolution. The increasing public interest and respect for the sciences also contributed to the success of social Darwinism, as policies that had the stamp of scientific legitimacy were accepted as above political interest or influence.




Impact



While Darwin coined the term "struggle for survival," it was Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) who invented and popularized the concept of "survival of the fittest," and Spencer is widely considered the chief proponent of social Darwinism. Spencer's synthesis of evolutionary thought with sociology, psychology, and philosophy provided the stamp of scientific justification to the social and political leaders who sought to preserve the status quo and promote unrestrained competition. Originally trained as an engineer, Spencer developed an increasing interest in the natural and social sciences and proposed theories that linked them under the umbrella of evolution. He believed that biological evolution had brought about human intellect, which in turn produced society. Therefore, he argued, human intellect and social activities were products of biological evolution, and all three operated on natural laws. His work was a clear reflection of English industrialism, which was dedicated to promoting competition, exploitation, and struggle in the human social realm. He asserted that all aspects of life, be it human, plant, or animal life, were guided by the constant struggle in which the weak were subjugated by the strong. However undesirable humanitarians might find this process, he argued, it was the natural order of things and could not be altered by charity, welfare policies, or legislative actions.


Spencer was well known in Europe, but he was especially popular in the United States because his work provided Americans with a scientific justification for free competition, which was widely recognized as the most effective path to economic progress. Between the 1860s and 1900, Americans purchased more than 350,000 copies of Spencer's books, and his influence on late-nineteenth century figures such as Henry James, John Dewey, and Josiah Royce was significant. Andrew Carnegie (1835-1919) was one of America's most prominent followers of Spencer and popularized social Darwinism in America. He called Spencer his "teacher" and visited him in England. In 1882 Spencer arrived in the United States for a widely publicized tour that brought together American writers, scientists, politicians, theologians, and businessmen around the doctrines of social Darwinism.




William Graham Sumner (1840-1910), a Yale sociologist, was another prominent American social Darwinist. In What the Social Classes Owe to Each Other, Sumner argued against governmental and private charity attempts to improve the conditions of the lower classes. Like Spencer, Sumner believed that society evolved and operated in a deterministic fashion and any attempt to alter social hierarchies was doomed to failure. Using his authority as a scientist, Sumner legitimated aggressive competitive practices of American businessmen by declaring their activities to be the source of human evolutionary progress.



The best known American opponent of social Darwinism was Lester Ward (1841-1913), a paleontologist and one of the founders of sociology in America. Ward argued against the social Darwinists' natural justifications for the status quo and posited the theory of telesis, or planned social evolution. While social Darwinists focused on the role of competition in the natural and social worlds, Ward highlighted the importance of cooperation and marshaled historical evidence against Sumner to argue that human progress was the product of cooperative activities and intelligence, not merciless competition. He used this analysis to urge social and political leaders to adopt measures deliberately aimed at social improvement.


By the turn of the century social Darwinists were attacked and their credibility undermined by reform Darwinists, who used the same scientific theories about the natural world to uphold opposite conclusions about society. Reform Darwinists asserted that the scientific knowledge of evolution allowed social and political leaders to intervene in the natural order to better the human condition. Using Darwin's theory of natural selection and Gregor Mendel's recently rediscovered theories of inheritance, reform Darwinists argued that humans could control their own evolutionary destiny by adopting interventionist policies such as public sanitation and eugenics.




Individuals who have been labeled "social Darwinists" did not use the term to describe themselves. Reform Darwinists and other critics of laissez-faire economic policies invented the label in the early twentieth century as a derogatory term to describe their opponents' position. In doing so, they highlighted the influence of Darwin's theory of natural selection on social and political activities by emphasizing the social Darwinists' use of Darwin's work. More recent historians have emphasized the social influences that went into Darwin's theories, such as the nineteenth-century British tendency to emphasize competition and overlook cooperation and altruism in the natural world. Taken together, the work of early and late twentieth-century scholars illustrates the reciprocal influence between science and society, as social concerns affected the development of evolutionary theory and then that evolutionary theory influenced later social developments.
______________________________________________


REVISIONIST HISTORY is painting a MARGARET SANGER who was indeed an AYN RAND LIBERTARIAN ---AKA FAR-RIGHT WING LAISSEZ FAIRE as women's rights leader when in fact she was the female face of those SOCIAL DARWINIST MEN


'The main difference between the two schools of thought is that social Darwinists believe that however social hierarchy exists, it is solely because the "fittest" rose to the top, reform Darwinists believe that the whole of society should be given the opportunities and resources to be able to rise to the top, rather than just the wealthy being able to do so'.




 This was point of EUGENICS morphing towards TRANSHUMANISM.




Birth control leader Margaret Sanger: Darwinist, racist and eugenicist

by Jerry Bergman



Margaret Sanger was the founder of Planned Parenthood, the leading organization advocating abortion in the United States today. Darwinism had a profound influence on her thinking, including her conversion to, and active support of, eugenics. She was specifically concerned with reducing the population of the ‘less fit’, including ‘inferior races’ such as ‘Negroes’. One major result of her lifelong work was to support the sexual revolution that has radically changed our society.


1916 photograph of Sanger and two of her children, Grant and Stuart. Sanger did not like caring for her children and grossly neglected them. (From Sanger63).
Margaret Sanger (14 Sept. 1879–6 Sept. 1966) was the most prominent leader of the modern birth control and ‘free love’ movements. Sanger’s mother was a devout Irish Catholic; her father, Michael Higgins, was an unstable man unable to provide adequately for his large family. Although a skilled stonemason and tombstone carver, Mr Higgins was unable to properly care for his family because he alienated many of his customers with his radical politics. He drank heavily when he had the money while his 11 children ‘suffered bitterly from cold, privation, and hunger.’ He was so anti-Christian that when Margaret was baptized at St. Mary’s Catholic church on March 23, 1893, the event ‘had to be kept secret, as her father would have been furious.’



Sanger left her unhappy home as a teen, never to return—except briefly to study nursing at a co-educational boarding school called ‘Claverack College’. She was reportedly a poor student, skipped classes and neglected her part-time job. She dropped out of school and, after a brief stay at home to help care for her dying mother, moved in with her older sister and worked as a first grade teacher. She taught the children of immigrants but left after only two terms. This unhappy experience may have contributed to her later enthusiastic embrace of eugenics.



About this time she married William Sanger, an architect and painter, in 1902 and soon had three children. Her husband tried everything within his power to please his wife, but she turned out to be very difficult to satisfy. Margaret was also a distracted mother who did not like caring for children, including her own. She detested domestic life and grossly neglected her children to the point that neighbours had to step in to care for them. The letters her children wrote to their mother vividly reveal this neglect.



Margaret Sanger’s second husband, oil magnate and founder of the 3-in-1 Oil Company James Noah H. Slee, was also very wealthy. She wrote to her secretary, ‘I don’t want to marry anyone, particularly a stodgy churchgoer … Yet … how often am I going to meet a man with nine million dollars?’



Following her father’s footsteps, Sanger became involved in radical politics. When she was formally introduced to Marxism, anarchism, secular humanism, free love and Darwinism, she found her passion in life. Sanger used her husbands’ wealth to support her activities. Her sexual passion, though, resulted in free-love behaviour that neither of her two husbands could cope with.



Sanger’s writingsSanger wrote extensively, leaving ample documentation of her life. She founded Birth Control Review, published from 1917 until the early 1940s, and was either an editor or contributor to this publication during most of its existence. Sanger’s relationship with eugenicists was clearly expressed in the pages of Birth Control Review from its inception. Eugenics also ‘soon became a constant, even a dominant, theme at birth-control conferences’.



Sanger believed she was ‘working in accord with the universal law of evolution’. She maintained that the brains of Australian Aborigines were only one step more evolved than chimpanzees and just under blacks, Jews and Italians.Sanger believed she was ‘working in accord with the universal law of evolution’. She maintained that the brains of Australian Aborigines were only one step more evolved than chimpanzees and just under blacks, Jews and Italians. When arguing for eugenics, Sanger quoted Darwin as an authority when discussing ‘natural checks’ of the population, such as war, which helped to reduce the population. Her magazine even argued for ‘state-sponsored sterilization programs’, forcibly sterilizing the ‘less capable’. She won many academics and scientists to her cause, including Harvard University sociologists E. M. East, University of Michigan President Clarence C. Little and Johns Hopkins psychiatrist Alfred Meyer.



Sanger also made her eugenic views clear in her many publications, such as The Pivot of Civilization and Woman Rebel, stressing that birth control was not only ‘important with respect to controlling the numbers of unfit in the population’, but was the ‘only viable means to improve the human race’. For example, she wrote: ‘Birth control itself … is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives.’ She boldly proclaimed that birth control was the only viable way to improve the human race. And while in her later years Sanger redefined what she meant by the unfit, ‘she increasingly saw feeblemindedness, the bogey of all hereditarians, as antecedent to poverty and social organization in the genesis of social problems.’


She also opposed charity because it allowed the less fit to survive and propagate more unfit children. The influence of Darwin on Sanger’s racism ideas is obvious from her writings. For example she wrote,
The lower down in the scale of human development we go the less sexual control we find. It is said the aboriginal Australian, the lowest known species of the human family, just a step higher than the chimpanzee in brain development, has so little sexual control that police authority alone prevents him from obtaining sexual satisfaction on the streets.—Margaret Sanger
‘The lower down in the scale of human development we go the less sexual control we find. It is said the aboriginal Australian, the lowest known species of the human family, just a step higher than the chimpanzee in brain development, has so little sexual control that police authority alone prevents him from obtaining sexual satisfaction on the streets. According to one writer, the rapist has just enough brain development to raise him above the animal, but like the animal, when in heat, knows no law except nature, which impels him to procreate, whatever the result.’


Her conversion to eugenics


Early in her career, Sanger became a follower of Thomas Malthus, the same man that inspired Darwin. Malthus’s disciples—then called Malthusians and Neo-Malthusians—taught that ‘if Western civilization were to survive, the physically unfit, the materially poor, the spiritually diseased, the racially inferior, and the mentally incompetent had to somehow be suppressed and isolated—or perhaps even eliminated.’



As Sanger stressed in a talk given at the Fifth International Neo-Malthusian and Birth Control Conference, the end goal of her movement was to produce a superior race: ‘To-day the average reliance of civilization is based upon iron and steel, bricks and mortar, and we must change this to the construction and evolution of humanity itself  ’.


To do this she advocated euthanasia, segregation in work camps, sterilization and abortion. She was very successful in achieving this goal—more than half of the American states launched programs that sterilized their ‘unfit … with Virginia, California, and Kansas leading the way’. Sanger was also very influenced by Havelock Ellis,



‘ … the influential sociologist, “sexologist,” and eugenicist. Ellis’s position on eugenics is summed up by his own statement that appeared in the “Havelock Ellis Number” of Birth Control Review February 1919 issue: “We desire no parents who are not both competent and willing parents. Only such parents are fit to father and mother a future race worthy to rule the world.”’ Ellis frequently published articles in Birth Control Review, and Ellis had major influence on Sanger’s ideas. Chesler wrote that Ellis, who ‘always considered himself both a eugenicist and a socialist’, converted Sanger to his views. Furthermore,



‘Ellis made his most important contribution to the eugenics doctrine … when he assigned women to act as its chief enforcers. Women are critical agents of civilization’s progress … because … they alone have the power to produce and nurture … fitter babies. … Increased sex expression and wider use of birth control were thus significant tools in the eugenic program, and accordingly, he condemned eugenicists who refused to endorse birth control.’ Sanger wrote that her concern was not just that feeble-mindedness leads to criminality but



‘ … there is sufficient evidence to lead us to believe that the so-called “borderline cases” are a greater menace than the out-and-out “defective delinquents” who can be supervised, controlled and prevented from procreating their kind. … the mental defective who is glib and plausible, bright looking and attractive, but with a mental vision of seven, eight or nine years, may not merely lower the whole level of intelligence in a school or in a society, but may be encouraged by church and state to increase and multiply until he dominates … an entire community. The presence in the public schools of the mentally defective children of men and women who should never have been parents is a problem that is becoming more and more difficult.’



As early as 1917 Sanger was openly giving ‘public support to the eugenics movement’ and to ‘race betterment’ programs. The eugenicists on her board believed that ‘birth control would eliminate disease and deformity as well as empty the jails and orphanages’. Sanger ‘supported sterilization for the incarcerated and considered birth control a necessary component of racial improvement’. Her eugenics crusade, although toned down later in her life, was to consume her until she died in 1966. According to Roche, Sanger’s end goal was the same as Hitler’s: to ‘create a race of thoroughbreds’, a pure and superior race and her journal even ‘eerily’ foretold the ‘horrors of the Nazi “final solution”.’

Left, the cover of one of Sanger’s openly eugenic books. First published in 1922, it became one of the ‘text books’ of the movement for years and is still in print. Centre, one volume of papers presented at the International Neo-Malthusian and Birth Control Conference and published in 1926. The papers published in these proceedings make it clear that Sanger and many of her closest followers were foremost concerned with applying Darwinism to produce a superior race and improve the lot of humankind by eugenics. Right, the cover of one of the many books that Sanger wrote to teach sex-education to young people. This book was written to instruct mothers to teach ‘sex education’ to their young children. It was published in New York by Max N. Maisel, 1916. This set of books openly advocated immoral behaviour such as sex outside of marriages.



Racism and birth control clinicsMargaret Sanger opened her first birth control clinic in 1916 in the impoverished Brownsville section of Brooklyn to help control the problem of ‘over breeding’. The two-room storefront clinic was a great contrast to Margaret’s plush Greenwich Village home, but



‘ … since the clientele she wished to attract—“immigrant Southern Europeans, Slavs, Latins, and Jews”—could only be found “in the coarser neighborhoods and tenements,” she was forced to venture out of her comfortable confines.’



Sanger once addressed the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan in Silver Lake, New Jersey, and received a ‘dozen invitations to speak to similar groups’.As her organization grew, Sanger set up more clinics in the communities of other ‘dysgenic races’—such as Blacks and Hispanics. Sanger turned her attention to ‘Negroes’ in 1929 and opened another clinic in Harlem in 1930. Sanger, ‘in alliance with eugenicists, and through initiatives such as the Negro Project … exploited black stereotypes in order to reduce the fertility of African Americans.’



The all-white staff and the sign identifying the clinic as a ‘research bureau’ raised the suspicions of the black community. They feared that the clinic’s actual goal was to ‘experiment on and sterilize black people’. Their fears were not unfounded: Sanger once addressed the women’s branch of the Klu Klux Klan in Silver Lake, New Jersey, and received a ‘dozen invitations to speak to similar groups’. Flynn claims that she was on good terms with other racist organizations.




Sanger believed the ‘Negro district’ was the ‘headquarters for the criminal element’ and concluded that, as the title of a book by a member of her board proclaimed, The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy, was a rise that had to be stemmed.

To deal with the problem of resistance among the black population, Sanger recruited black doctors, nurses, ministers and social workers ‘in order to gain black patients’ trust’ in order ‘to limit or even erase the black presence in America’.

Margaret Sanger around 1938 (From Sanger35). All authorized published photographs, including this one, were staged in an attempt to show Mrs Sanger as a conservative, serious, middle class and very respectable lady.



Her Birth Control League board was ‘made up almost exclusively of sociologists and eugenicists’, insuring that her eugenic goals were implemented.


Margaret and the Malthusian Eugenicists she worked with did not discriminate narrowly, but targeted every ‘non-Aryan’ ethnic group, whether red, black, yellow or white. They placed clinics wherever they judged ‘feeble-minded, syphilitic, irresponsible, and defective’ persons ‘bred unhindered’. Since, by their estimation, as many as 70% of the population fell into this ‘undesirable’ category, Margaret and her cohorts had their work cut out for them. Much of the early grass-roots work in her movement was done by ‘radicals’, mostly socialists and communists. Birth control colleague, Mrs. Besant, told a court:




‘I have no doubt that if natural checks were allowed to operate right through the human as they do in the animal world, a better result would follow. Among the brutes, the weaker are driven to the wall, the diseased fall out in the race of life. The old brutes, when feeble or sickly, are killed. If men insisted that those who were sickly should be allowed to die without help of medicine or science, if those who are weak were put upon one side and crushed, if those who were old and useless were killed, if those who were not capable of providing food for themselves were allowed to starve, if all this were done, the struggle for existence among men would be as real as it is among brutes and would doubtless result in the production of a higher race of men.’Sanger eventually recognized that this solution to the problems of crime, poverty and other social problems would never happen, at least in America. She then proposed a realistic solution that would prevent bringing the ‘weak, the helpless and the unwanted children into the world. We can refuse to overcrowd families, nations and the earth.’ The solution was positive eugenics by encouraging selective population control, and a means of achieving this more realistic goal was birth control.



Sanger’s war against the Church

Many churches opposed Sanger because she championed ‘sex without consequences’, eugenics, abortion and concentration camps for the unfit—all practices that Christianity has historically opposed. She stressed that she was against especially the Catholic Church because they opposed ‘science’, evolution, eugenics and race improvement. Sanger sought out allegiances with eugenicists to help blunt the opposition to her from the religious community.

The church’s view that the handicapped, diseased and deformed were all equals in the eyes of God ‘struck Sanger as anathema to the dictates of the Brave New World’ that she wanted to create. She even argued that persons ‘whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers’ were ‘irresponsible and reckless’ and that the ‘procreation of this group should be stopped’.


Sanger ‘attributed insanity, epilepsy, criminality, prostitution, pauperism, mental defectiveness’, and ‘everything from child labor to world war’, to ‘unchecked breeding’. The church taught these were sins that could be overcome and had many success stories to support this claim—and followed up on these successes with activities like Catholic charities. Until Hitler was defeated, Sanger did little to support positive eugenics (ie: encouraging the fit to have large families), which may have been supported by the church, but rather until later in her career advocated negative eugenics, the prevention of procreation of the unfit by law and sterilization.



Exporting eugenics and sterilization


Sanger also worked hard to spread her eugenic ideas about ‘human weeds’ to the rest of the world.Sanger also worked hard to spread her eugenic ideas about ‘human weeds’ to the rest of the world. Trombley claimed that eugenics, sterilization and birth control projects on a large scale were an Anglo-American export. He notes that Sanger’s birth control movement was the most powerful in the world, and in England its head offices were based at the London Eugenics Society. Sanger’s movement became a ‘truly international organization with the bulk of its multi-million annual budget coming from the United States.’ Most of the money came from taxes; the rest was donated by large corporations such as General Motors.



Sanger’s movement had an impact in many nations, including India, Singapore, Japan, China, Korea and much of Europe. Her programs involving sterilization of the unfit were adopted by Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark and, most infamously, by Nazi Germany.


Planned Parenthood today boasts three-quarters of a billion dollars in annual revenue, most paid for by taxpayers, and is active throughout the world.


Her role as an iconMargaret Sanger is still widely admired for her work in the birth control movement. She was listed as one of the most influential persons of the twentieth century by Time-Life and was given many honours during her lifetime including an Honorary Doctorate of Law by Smith College. Paul and Anne Ehrlich wrote that



‘America’s heroine in the family planning movement was Margaret Sanger, a nurse. … Sanger and others who joined her rapidly growing birth control movement (then known as the Birth Control League) led the fight for … legal changes and for support from medical, educational, health, and religious organizations.’54Gloria Steinem wrote a laudatory chapter on Sanger in the Time volume listing the 100 most important Americans. Steinem falsely implied Sanger opposed eugenics and what it stood for and lionized her as a heroine of the women’s movement.


Rewriting historyAlthough Sanger’s involvement in eugenics and radical politics is well documented, many people today are attempting to whitewash her past eugenics involvement. Her ‘hagiographers, and her most devoted followers in the abortion rights movement, deny and gloss over the eugenicist nature of her program.’ Reasons for rewriting (or ignoring) history include the fear that ‘exposing birth control’s political history to hostile lawmakers and anti-choice lobbyists’ could affect their political goals. Other persons hid her past because they were concerned about tarnishing her ‘perceived labors on behalf of gender equity, self-determination, and redress of economic and personal privation’. Even many reprints of Sanger’s writings select sections that give a very distorted picture of her beliefs and goals.



Today Planned Parenthood stresses ‘family planning’, but the fact is ‘Sanger sold birth control as the crypto-eugenicist Marie Stopes had, as offering “freedom from fear” … which in aggregate would contribute to the wider social good. The reasoning was straightforwardly eugenic.’ To the end of her life she supported eugenics. In one of her last speeches she ‘attacked welfare programs for not eliminating the “feeble minded and unfit” and proposed “incentive sterilization”’, a program to bribe the ‘unfit’ to be sterilized.



Reasons for her enormous successA major reason for Sanger’s success was that she met a genuine need of the poor, many of whom had large families they could not adequately support. America, at that time, was changing from an agricultural to an industrial society. Large families could be supported on farms that needed the low-cost labour provided by many children, but large families could not be properly supported by most factory work. This motivated a drive to limit family size, a need that Sanger exploited to further her eugenic goals. The problem is ‘Sanger’s zeal blinded her to the reality that her actions occasionally worked against her desired purposes.’



It was only after World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust that Sanger abandoned her dream of producing a socialist, perfected eugenic society. She then played down her eugenic and socialist ideals and increasingly stressed the goals now advocated by Planned Parenthood. In Trombley’s words, ‘after the Nazi atrocities’ she clothed her movement in the words that Planned Parenthood advocates use today because the ‘Nazi’s eugenics became a word to strike fear in the hearts of ordinary people. Thus eugenics re-emerged from the doldrums of the post-Nazi period to exert an influence on a much larger scale than had ever been previously imagined.’ Partly because of her past association with known racists and a history of several decades of racist and eugenic rhetoric, the name of the American Birth Control League was changed to Planned Parenthood during World War II. Unfortunately, despite the name change, the racism of her movement lingered.


SummarySanger was openly influenced by Darwinists and various radicals in her highly successful campaign against Judeo-Christian morality and in support of eugenics. She worked hard to produce a socialist state based on eugenics, and her movement thrived because it partly fulfilled a real need in the early 1900s. Her movement played a major role in loosening sexual morality, contributing to the current high rate of illegitimacy and sexual immorality. Her goals for society may not have worked in her own life: Flynn claims Sanger died an alcoholic addicted to painkillers, a bitter woman feeling both abandoned and alone, a victim of her youthful, selfish hedonism. She lived and died by her credo published in the Woman Rebel, namely ‘The Right to be Lazy. The Right to be an Unmarried Mother. The Right to Destroy. The Right to Create. The Right to Live and the Right to Love.’
________________________________________

THIS ARTICLE IS LONG BUT PLEASE GLANCE THROUGH---THE REVISIONIST HISTORY TIED TO OUR WOMEN'S CHOICE MOVEMENT IS GLARING.

We spend this time fighting this REVISIONIST HISTORY of our REAL LEFT WOMEN'S MOVEMENT because this movement has nothing to do with EUGENIC AND TRANSHUMANISM----all SCIENCE motivated by MEN.
We simply ask people to see the obvious----WOMEN/FEMINISTS would not support a SOCIAL DARWINISM which is based upon women BEING DANGEROUS you know, all that PANDORA'S BOX thing -------
FOR GOODNESS SAKE.

'developed a scientific theory which fitted the era of industrialization and empire like a glove'

'Galton was of the opinion that “women tend in all their capacities to be inferior to men”. He viewed the woman as a “breeder”, central to the healthy development of the species. Many public figures adhered to this movement, including early feminists'....'The woman is intrinsically dangerous to the established order of things'.


The women called FEMINISTS in REVISIONIST HISTORY are women speaking the talking points of MALE SOCIAL DARWINISTS.
Our US women's movement was about WOMEN/FAMILIES/OPPORTUNITY ------

Here is the same MARGARET SANGER as far-right wing AYN RAND LIBERTARIAN LAISSEZ FAIRE called 'women's leader' returns in 21 st century=======HILLARY IS AN AYN RAND LIBERTARIAN LAISSEZ FAIRE NEO-LIBERAL ----just like MARGARET SANGER-----and yet today she is sold as a LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE women's leader-----

HILLARY IS A NASTY LADY WHO WORKS FOR THE GLOBAL 1% OLD WORLD KINGS---MOVING FORWARD EUGENICS AND TRANSHUMANISM----

This is the opposite of our REAL left social progressive I AM MAN AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT-----morals and ethics women's movement.  TRUMP may have said this---but he would correct.

'Nasty woman - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasty_woman
"Nasty woman" was a phrase used by 2016 American presidential candidate Donald Trump to refer to opponent Hillary Clinton during the third presidential debate. The phrase made worldwide news, became a viral call for some women voters, and has also launched a feminist movement by the same name'.


EUGENICS AND TRANSHUMANISM has always been theories written by the rich ----our REAL left social progressive movements including women is about empowering the 99% of people-----that is the opposite of far-right wing AYN RAND LIBERTARIAN NEO-LIBERALISM

Hmmm, the goals of TRANSHUMANISM is to GENDER BLEND the natural state of women and men------only the global banking 5% freemason/Greek women working for men would want that---THEY DON'T CARE where MOVING FORWARD TRANSHUMANISM takes us.


Eugenics and Feminism
A Brief History
28th February 2017
Mena is a SOAS graduate in History & Law.



She is currently working with young people with severe emotional and behavioural difficulties and training to become a counsellor. She writes in her spare time, as a way of trying to unpick the logic of our confused times as well as trying to find a narrative thread that can guide our society towards a kinder space.



The woman is intrinsically dangerous to the established order of things. Based on Darwinian notions of survival of the fittest, British society has inbuilt mechanisms to ensure the proliferation of its favoured elements. The woman, as mother, is at the centre of this process. From the moment she begins to engage romantically with men, the woman is controlled and monitored; this is deemed to her own benefit lest she slip up left to her own choices. As the vehicle for the next generation, who the woman frequents, who she marries, how she dresses, where she works, how much she works, how she behaves whilst pregnant, and how she raises her child, all pose a potential threat to the future of our species when we adopt a biological approach to healthy human life, based around the preservation of certain social groups.



Eugenics as a science entered the mainstream in the late 19th century. Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin, expanded on his cousin’s ideas of survival of the fittest and developed a scientific theory which fitted the era of industrialization and empire like a glove – that of superior human genetics, and the need to ensure the survival of society’s fittest. Galton had found a science to confirm 19th century social thinking, rendering colonization, the class system, and the subservience of women a scientific necessity. He and fellow eugenicists believed that, rather than let nature run its course to the detriment of humanity, human intervention was a necessary guiding force in the shaping of future generations. He coined the term ‘eugenics’ in 1883, from the Greek word “well-born”, accounting for a science that had little regard for who actually did survive, rather devoted to deciding who should survive. His theory was prompted by Darwin’s chapter on domestic animals, “The question was then forced upon me. Could not the race of men be similarly improved? Could not the undesirables be got rid of and the desirables multiplied?”. Eugenics spawned decades of scientific research on the biological inferiority of races, women and social classes that influenced government policy, economic and social thinking for the next century.




Galton was of the opinion that “women tend in all their capacities to be inferior to men”. He viewed the woman as a “breeder”, central to the healthy development of the species. Many public figures adhered to this movement, including early feminists. Caleb Saleeby was an advocate for feminists in the eugenics movement, viewing feminism without eugenics as potentially “ruinous to the race”. He expanded on Galton’s concepts in the early 20th century, discarding Galton’s notion of women as “breeders” preferring to position the woman as “nature’s supreme organ of the future”, in this Saleeby hoped that women could become agents of reproduction and would be able to develop what he termed “eugenic feminism”. Indeed his wishes were granted, and early feminists took easily to ideas of ‘rational reproduction’ that were in keeping with social and racial thinking at the time, this provided a consistent narrative around which they could begin to position themselves as citizens. For unlike other rights which could be compared and contrasted with those of men, reproductive and sexual rights were the easy argument back into the kitchen, and as such, for many early feminists it was an imperative to find a narrative that regulated women’s sexual and reproductive rights as well. In this way eugenics came to find itself entangled in women’s views on reproduction, motherhood, and the state, and narratives of strength, weakness, and worthiness came to enter the feminist sphere.



One of the most prominent figures of the early feminist movement was Marie Stopes, founder of the first birth control centre in the UK in 1921, Stopes was a fervent believer in eugenics and was opposed to contraception and abortion, preferring the avoidance of conception altogether. Marie Stopes founded the Society for Constructive Birth Control and Racial Progress as well as the magazine Birth Control News promoting a eugenic agenda. Stopes wrote in 1920, “I would legislate compulsory sterilization of the insane, feeble minded… revolutionaries… half castes”. Stopes sent love poetry to Hitler for the ‘German youth’ at the height of his campaigns, and wrote passionately on the theme of ‘racial purity’. Her views on the woman were adopted by female labour politicians who chose to sideline her more contentious ideas, in such great need of a rallying call for women’s rights they began the process of obfuscation we are still enduring today.



The progressive nature of a large part of Stopes’ views is undeniable, particularly her insistence upon the enjoyment of sex by women in equal measure to men; however given the ideological underpinning to her thinking their impact was one of social engineering. The modern offspring of her organisation in the UK empowers women to be proactive with regards to contraception and sexual education, as well as giving access to abortion. The history of the organisation does not, and cannot detract from the importance of women’s control over their reproductive health, however any attempt to downplay of the centrality of her eugenic views to her thinking means that we whitewash a large part of feminist history. If the core thinking behind birth control was to rid society of ‘undesirables’, of the children of immigrants, of the disabled and the mentally ill, then it is vital that this history is openly analysed and discussed as well as our current thinking on how we ‘manage’ our fertility and as such our population. It is clear that this remains a sorely underexplored area of feminist thought, without further exploration of which there can be no universal ‘feminist’ success.


Marie Stopes was not alone in her time, Margaret Pyke was another huge figure in family planning in the UK and another fervent eugenicist. Eugenics dominated national conversation around the development of society for the following decades, and was at the root of left and right wing thinking about the state – indeed to the early proponents of the welfare state such as Sydney and Beatrice Webb, Bertrand Russell, William Beveridge, J.M. Keynes and H.G. Wells eugenic thinking was at the heart of their theory as the meeting point between the individual and the ‘collective’. It was only when a certain Adolf Hitler took a bit too keenly to these ideas that it was no longer acceptable to speak of eugenics, and the conversation shifted to the notion of ‘population control’ that we find recurrent in discourse today.




This process was not limited to Britain, Americans took quickly to eugenic ideas and were hearty in their application; Scandinavian welfare states were rooted in eugenic theory and government sponsored mass forced sterilization programmes have been widespread the world over throughout the course of the 20th century, from Puerto Rico, to Japan, via Peru. The concerning fact of our day is that eugenic notions have found new expression with the advent of international women’s health organisations, many of which actively support sterilisation programmes aimed at the poorest in society. The woman has become a convenient vehicle for a new form of apparently benevolent imperialism through social embetterment. These organisations, by virtue of their scientific character are often favoured for their practical approach to women’s reproductive health. However these charities do not promote active sexual health via methods that are standard in western societies such as condoms, oral contraceptives, or IUDs. Rather these initiatives favour sterilisation, with bonuses for clinics that perform more than 30 in one day, as well as for doctors and NGO professionals who sign patients up. In India the treatment of women in sexual health clinics is sordid, as part of programmes sponsored by societies such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. In Kenya a court case has been brought against the government and organisations such as Marie Stopes International and Medecins sans Frontieres (MSF) for the forced sterilisation of HIV positive women, and other studies have revealed similar experiences of women in Uganda, Namibia and South Africa.



In the context of a global ideology centred around population control, a woman’s freedom over her own body forms the most dangerous part of her rights, for the woman – in constant need of supervision and guidance in the public sphere, freedom over her body awards her agency over the right to decide future generations, and thus the future of society. This is why the roots of our current thinking are in such deep need of consideration and analysis, for we must understand what is so threatening to the established order in giving women the freedom to have complete control over their bodies. Given the eugenic origins of the conversation surrounding women’s reproductive rights that persisted publicly into the 1950’s, it is imperative that we assess the impact on our current mainstream conversation around women’s bodies.


To this day there is very little real notion of female ownership over her body, marital rape was legal just over 20 years ago in the UK. The woman’s body has never been hers. Invasive, often painful reproductive choices were offered to women long before sexual choices were, making it patently clear that progress was never intended to benefit women, rather the greater good of society and science through the medium of the female body. Only now are we beginning to see the ground shift in the conversation surrounding women’s sexuality and therefore actual freedoms for the woman inside her own body. However reproductive freedoms are still at stake, forced sterilisation is in practice to this day in the US and the UK, and the fact that phenomenal amounts of money and resources are being pumped into genetic research whilst people live in appalling conditions in one of the richest countries in the world implies that not very much has changed at the root of our thinking. And this should concern women.




Provided arguments surrounding superior genetics remain, women will not be granted social freedoms over their bodies, it is anathema to the concept. Within this structural vision of gender it is impossible for a woman to be viewed for anything more than her body, as life giving is the central function to her existence, her body becomes central to her social identity. The focus on population control rather than on individual bodies gives future value to the female body which cannot be left to the disposal of the woman alone. This process ensures the parallel demonisation and fetishisation of female sexuaity and what is considered feminine, and will continue to justify the necessity of unequal treatment. By placing science as the ultimate regulator of human society we are abdicating responsibility as to the healthy functioning of our societies; where we should be looking to develop infrastructure to care for our people we are instead looking for techniques and narratives that justify the ethnic and social cleansing of our populations. This process takes place through the woman and as such the woman is agent as well as victim of oppression, dangerous in absolutely every sense.

We want to end this week's discussion of NATIVE AMERICAN public policy by returning the LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL as NATIVE AMERICANS. We think we did a good job showing this is not true---we think we did a good job showing what the MOTIVES of GLOBAL BANKING 1% would be in trying to promote this FAKE NEWS.

Global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS were getting tired of pretending they believed in these Western religions and in mid-1800s an organized effort by OLD WORLD KINGS not religious to END RELIGION was growing. Here in US we had UNITARIAN CHURCH with religious leaders being one set of people promoting this idea of LOST TRIBES ---this being ANGLO-SAXON ISRAELITES.

People wanting to END RELIGION would create the conditions for END TIMES...REVELATIONS which is tied to return of LOST TRIBES to ISRAEL.

PLEASE THINK ABOUT HOW ALL THIS ACADEMIC DISCUSSION ON LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL SEEMS TO HAVE SOARED ---ONCE VERY MARGINAL----DURING CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA.

We bring into this discussion of NATIVE AMERICANS not being LOST TRIBES----how global banking 1% brings our EUROPEAN religions into this as well.



'Anglo Saxon Celts Were Israelites - Revealing The Truth
revealingthetruth.weebly.com/anglo-saxon-celts...

Did You Know the Anglo Saxon Celts Were Israelites?

"The Celts were the first European people north of the Alps to emerge into recorded history. But the first references to them appear in the sixth and fifth centuries BC when they began to encounter the peoples of the Mediterranean cultures….” (The Celtic Empire, Peter B Ellis, 1990, Pg 9) '



'If Israel is hid from Christians, it is because they have read some human theories concerning the lost Ten Tribes instead of diligently searching the Word of God. Years ago in Mexico when I was examining the ruins of the Aztecs, near the two great pyramids, I was told that the Aztecs were the lost tribes of Israel. According to traditions, the following “peoples” have been called, the lost tribes of Israel”; the Afghans, the Japanese, the North American Indians, the Nestorians and the Irish, and many others'.


One of the families tied to early American ideas of ANGLO-SAXON ISRAELITES happen to be tied to ELIZABETH WARREN who without coincidence has been labelled POCAHONTAS------NATIVE AMERICAN ties----while obviously being ANGLO-SAXON.

Looks like the global banking BILLIONAIRE native American family ------HAALAND-----is endorsing yet another LOST TRIBE OF ISRAEL ----WARREN.


'globintel.com
Deb Haaland Biography, Wiki, Age, Husband, Net Worth, Daughter, Family, New Mexico’s 1st congressional district…'

This discussion necessarily is GENERALIZATION-----but, the point is-----all this discussion on LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL today is backed by global 1% MOVING FORWARD KILLING OUR WESTERN RELIGIONS.

• Politics

August 1, 2019



Natives Are Split Over Rep. Deb Haaland’s Endorsement of Elizabeth Warren


The Native American congresswoman endorsed Warren despite her “Cherokee” controversy.Delilah Friedler

On Tuesday, Rep. Deb Haaland, one of two Native American women in Congress, announced that she was endorsing Sen. Elizabeth Warren for President. Calling the candidate “a great friend to me and a great partner for Indian Country,” Haaland highlighted Sen. Warren’s advocacy for working families and attention to the issue of missing and murdered indigenous women. It was one of several endorsements the Warren campaign picked up ahead of Tuesday’s Democratic presidential debate. But Haaland’s endorsement was especially notable given Warren’s controversial history with Native Americans and the fact that the senator has yet to sign on to a Native-focused presidential forum happening later this month.

THOSE HILLARY NASTY GLOBAL BANKING CORPORATE WOMEN ARE REALLY ---NOT---PROTECTING OUR 99% OF WE THE WOMEN BLACK, WHITE, OR BROWN WOMEN.




“What the hell,” says one of the most liked comments on Haaland’s Instagram post announcing the endorsement. “[Warren has] made her career by trivializing who we are for her own gain.” The commenter, a Native whose sentiment is echoed by many other replies, is referring to Warren’s contentious claims of possessing indigenous heritage.


For decades, the senator touted a “family story” about having Cherokee ancestors, even going so far as to identify herself as American Indian when she registered with the State Bar of Texas in 1986. After President Trump repeatedly mocked her as “Pocahontas,” Warren tried to legitimize her claims by taking a DNA test last October. But in the eyes of many Natives, she was missing the point.



“Using a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong,” said Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin, Jr. in a statement at the time. Regardless of the small fraction of Native ancestry that her test results suggested, Warren is not an enrolled member of any tribe, and no indigenous community claims her as one of their own.



Kim Tall Bear, a Sisseton-Wahpeton academic who wrote a book on DNA and tribal belonging, voiced a concern felt by many Natives that Warren was furthering a tradition of white settlers who “donned and absorbed Indigenous images and histories even while massacring and starving actual Indigenous people.” Warren apologized to the Cherokee Nation for the DNA test earlier this year. 




Some Natives may be ready to forgive her, concurring with Haaland’s claims about Warren’s positive track record on matters related to Indian Country. “It doesn’t have to be in your blood to understand Native issues and try to make a better life for Natives,” OJ Seamans Sr., an executive director of Native voting rights group Four Directions, tells Mother Jones. “I think she as a US Senator has done everything that she could to make improvements on Indian reservations and better the lives of Natives throughout the United States.”

Warren cosponsored Savanna’s Act, which aimed to create a federal response to violence against indigenous women, and recently introduced bills concerning suicide prevention and child abuse in Native communities. A spokesperson for the Warren campaign says that the senator is currently working with Rep. Halaand on a bill that will “protect tribal sovereignty and make investments in Indian Country.” On the other hand, some Natives have criticized Warren for waiting several months to speak out in favor of Dakota Access Pipeline protestors, who faced a militarized police response on the Standing Rock Reservation in 2016. 




Seamans and Four Directions are hosting the first ever presidential candidate forum on Native American issues, which will take place August 19-20 in Sioux City, Iowa. Several Democratic presidential hopefuls have already committed to attending the forum, including Sen. Bernie Sanders, Montana Gov. Steve Bullock, author Marianne Williamson, Rep. John Delaney, and former Housing Secretary Julián Castro. Seamans, who is Sicangu Lakota, says he is “hopeful” that Sen. Warren will also sign on to participate. A spokesperson for Warren’s campaign tells Mother Jones that they “are exploring whether it will be possible for her to attend the forum.”

__________________________________________

Here is why someone like WARREN would pretend to be NATIVE AMERICAN----as too African American groups whether MOORS or BLACK HEBREW ISRAELITES---

To attain property inside NATIVE LAND TRUSTS------one would need to show some ties to being a US NATIVE AMERICAN.  So, we have black, white, and brown 5% freemason/Greek players all wanting to PRETEND they are NATIVE AMERICANS------qualified for US NATIVE LANDS.

Whether these players are WHITE ANGLO-SAXON ISRAELITES ---or BLACK/LATINO ISRAELITES----pushing LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL as NATIVE AMERICANS-----is just this.

THE GOAL IS GLOBAL BANKING 1% ENDING ALL WESTERN RELIGIONS BY PRETENDING IT IS 'END TIMES'.


Meanwhile, our US 99% of WE THE REAL NATIVE AMERICAN citizens are being marginalized and prepared to become GLOBAL LABOR POOL ----EX PATS.

REMEMBER, if your population group is PRETENDING to be a LOST TRIBE OF ISRAEL----then the next step is getting those LOST TRIBE overseas to NEAR/MIDDLE-EAST ----where FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES are awaiting new global labor pool-----as SLAVE LABOR.

Global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS TRIBE OF JUDAH KNIGHTS OF MALTA all sending in their representatives as FAKE NATIVE AMERICANS to get that NATIVE LAND TRUST.


TRUMP is simply MOVING FORWARD privatization of native land put in place by CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA.

As we say ECO-WATCH is far-right wing global banking 1% FAKE GREEN MEDIA group

'Eco-Watch was established in 1998 by Suresh Heblikar, a wellknown filmmaker and environmentalist with its key objective of spreading a message of environmental conservation through relevant, focused yet diverse programmes and activities'.



Trump Advisors Plan to Privatize Native Lands to Tap Into Oil Rich Reservations

Lorraine Chow
Dec. 05, 2016 12:47PM EST  ECO-WATCH MEDIA


The Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) is only one battle in a larger war. Following news of the Army Corps' decision to halt the pipeline's construction, Reuters reported that President-elect Donald Trump's advisors are seeking to privatize Native American reservations, which sit on an estimated 20 percent of the nation's oil and gas, along with large amounts of coal reserves. These resources are worth nearly $1.5 trillion.

"We should take tribal land away from public treatment. As long as we can do it without unintended consequences, I think we will have broad support around Indian country," said Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), a Cherokee tribe member and chair of Trump's 27-member Native American Affairs Coalition.



The formation of the coalition was announced in October with the aim of electing Trump for president.
"As a local elected official, I am outraged that Indian Country is prevented from harnessing our own energy resources by ever-increasing regulations," state Rep. Sharon Clahchischilliage (R-NM 4th District), a Navajo tribe member and coalition co-chair, said in October. "The Trump Administration will ease restrictions on American energy reserves worth trillions of dollars. Together we will block the bureaucrats holding Native American businesses back and bring new jobs into our communities."

WE ARE SURE YOU CANNOT HARVEST YOUR OWN ENERGY RESOURCES BECAUSE NATIVE LANDS WERE PRIVATIZED IN 1990S TO FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE STATUS.



As it happens, three of the four chair-level coalition members have ties to Big Energy. According to campaign finance disclosures cited by Reuters, Mullin has received about eight percent of his campaign funds from energy companies while Clahchischilliage has received about 15 percent of her campaign funds from energy companies.



Fellow co-chair and Cherokee nation ex-chief Ross Swimmer said it is possible to privatize reservations while limiting land sales to non-Indian buyers.


"It has to be done with an eye toward protecting sovereignty," said Swimmer, who is a partner at an Native American-focused investment fund that has invested in Energy Transfer Partners, the owner of the heavily contested DAPL.



However, prominent Native American leaders have spoken against privatization.



"Our spiritual leaders are opposed to the privatization of our lands, which means the commoditization of the nature, water, air we hold sacred," said Tom Goldtooth, who runs the Indigenous Environmental Network and is a member of both the Navajo and the Dakota tribes.

"Privatization has been the goal since colonization—to strip Native Nations of their sovereignty," Goldtooth added.



Thousands of Dakota Access Pipeline protestors are celebrating after the Army Corps' rejection of the DAPL project but many water protectors also recognize the fight is not yet over. As Goldtooth said, this is "check, not checkmate."



Despite the Army Corps' decision, Energy Transfer Partners said that it is still committed to seeing this "vital" pipeline "brought to completion."

Trump has holdings in Energy Transfer Partners and officially voiced support for the pipeline, even though his team said his support "had nothing to do with his personal investments and everything to do with promoting policies that benefit all Americans." The incoming president has also picked climate change deniers and pro-fossil fuel bigwigs for cabinet positions.

Not only that, many pro-drilling politicians currently sit in a GOP-controlled House of Representatives and Senate. Following the Army Corps' Sunday announcement, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) tweeted: "This is big-government decision-making at its worst. I look forward to putting this anti-energy presidency behind us."
________________________________________________

We don't get into too much conspiracy theory but we remind people that today MYDNA genetic testing global corporations are largely owned by global banking 1% TRIBE OF JUDAH.

We are sure that those REAL LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL captured and taken away around 1000BC did indeed end up all over the globe. These MEDIA/ACADEMIC STORIES are promoting ONE WORLD ONE RELIGION ----which will not be JEWISH/CATHOLIC/MUSLIM/NATIVE NATURE RELIGIONS----

It will be TRANSHUMANISM----3000BC HINDI-BRAHMIN for only the global 1%.

THIS IS A SCAM.


'However, a new genetic study has justified their claims, opening up new possibilities that one of the Lost Tribes of Israel has been found. The history of the Bnei Israel is shrouded in mystery. There are among the diverse population of India, several distinct groups of Jews'.


'The Baghdadi Jews of India | My Jewish Learningwww.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-jews-of-india The Persian Gulf port of Basra began to serve as a trading center of the British East India Company in 1760, and it was from Basra–and Baghdad–that many Jews who played an important role in English commerce in the region gradually moved on to India. At first they settled in the west coast port of Surat'.



We KNOW that JEWS migrated to INDIA among other times after the collapse of MOORISH GRANADA in Spain for example.




Hebrew Anglo-Saxons? - Medieval Conversion Tactics
•Published on Mar 12, 2018


Anglo-Saxons and Jewish people were very different!

One was a polytheistic group of Germanic warrior tribes in Northern Europe and the other was a monotheistic Semitic tribe in the Middle East. Yet, for the Anglo-Saxons to convert to Christianity, they had to accept the Hebrews of the Old Testament as the chosen people of the "one true God" and this would not have seemed like an attractive prospect to them. Therefore, clever techniques were used in Old English translations of Biblical and other Christian stories (Judith, Andreas, and Exodus) in order to make the Israelites seem more like Germanic warriors, and to make the pagans of Egypt and Assyria seem like Viking pagans.

________________________________________


The NATIVE LAND TRUSTS of MINNESOTA and DAKOTAS were part of that PRIVATIZATION back during CLINTON era when its 'leaders' chose to allow NATIVE LANDS be made FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES. Since 1990s global banking 1% have moved in all kinds of OIL, GAS, TIMBER corporations because of this designation. Those few native 'leaders' are those made BILLIONAIRES because of this.

Flash forward to OBAMA-era AND XL PIPELINE protest which we shouted back then was global banking 1% ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT FAKE left activism----these national leaders and FAKE GREEN groups KNEW this CLINTON ERA designation.

What became of that protest for XL PIPELINE------was the LEGAL PRECEDENCE of US sovereign citizens being called 'TERRORISTS' when they protested.



'Treating protest as terrorism is highly problematic



Mike German, former FBI agent'

This US court decision occurred NOW rather then uphold past US court precedence of RIGHT TO PROTEST ----because these NATIVE LAND TRUSTS-------are FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES-----as those dastardly BILLIONAIRE NATIVE leaders KNOW.

ELIZABETH WARREN----BERNIE SANDERS------GILLIBRAND-----TURNER ----ALL FAKE 'OUR REVOLUTION' FOR ONLY THE GLOBAL 1% WERE THERE.



'Treating protest as terrorism': US plans crackdown on Keystone XL activists


Documents suggest an aggressive response to possible protests against the oil pipeline amid fears of another Standing Rock


Will Parrish and Sam Levin
Thu 20 Sep 2018 04.00 EDT


Angeline Cheek is preparing for disaster. The indigenous organizer from the Fort Peck reservation in Montana fears that the proposed Keystone XL pipeline could break and spill, destroy her tribe’s water, and desecrate sacred Native American sites.



But environmental catastrophe is not the most immediate threat.

The government has characterized pipeline opponents like her as “extremists” and violent criminals and warned of potential “terrorism”, according to recently released records.



The documents suggested that police were organizing to launch an aggressive response to possible Keystone protests, echoing the actions against the Standing Rock movement in North Dakota. There, officers engaged in intense surveillance and faced widespread accusations of excessive force and brutality.



“We have to stay one step ahead at all times,” said Cheek, a Hunkpapa and Oglala Lakota activist and teacher. “History is repeating itself.”



The proposed TransCanada project would carry a daily load of 830,000 barrels of oil over 1,204 miles – from Alberta, Canada to Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska, linking to the existing Keystone pipeline and Texas refineries. The path of the project, which was revived by Donald Trump last year, would cross dozens of rivers and streams and run near a number of Native American reservations, sparking legal challenges and a judge’s recent order for a full environmental review.




If the pipeline gets final approvals and construction advances in the coming months, some are anticipating massive demonstrations similar to the fight against the Dakota Access pipeline (Dapl). That conflict galvanized a global movement, but also led to FBI monitoring and the prolonged prosecution of hundreds of activists.



Documents obtained by the ACLU of Montana and reviewed by the Guardian have renewed concerns from civil rights advocates about the government’s treatment of indigenous activists known as water protectors.


Treating protest as terrorism is highly problematic


Mike German, former FBI agent


Notably, one record revealed that authorities hosted a recent “anti-terrorism” training session in Montana. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency also organized a “field force operations” training to teach “mass-arrest procedures”, “riot-control formations” and other “crowd-control methods”.



A US justice department intelligence specialist told the Guardian the terrorism training was an annual presentation not specific to Keystone. But the ACLU noted that its records request was specifically about the pipeline protests, suggesting that authorities considered the session relevant to Keystone preparation.



The repeated mass arrests at Standing Rock led to a litany of charges, but hundreds were eventually dismissed due to lack of evidence. Police deployed water cannons, teargas grenades, bean bag rounds and a wide array of weapons in North Dakota.



“Many of our residents were in Standing Rock, and they saw the level of violence that could be visited on us,” said Remi Bald Eagle, the intergovernmental affairs coordinator of the Cheyenne River Sioux tribe, which is located along the Keystone route. “There’s a level of anxiety and fear because we don’t know what’s going to happen.”




The ACLU of Montana, which filed a lawsuit this month against the government seeking Keystone records, earlier obtained a DHS report that said pipeline protesters were engaged in “criminal disruptions and violent incidents”. The report included two past cases of alleged “environmental rights extremists” committing violence.



But the events in question – a 2012 bombing and a 2015 shootout with police – had no clear links to any environmental protests, said Mike German, a former FBI agent and fellow with the Brennan Center for Justice.



“Treating protest as terrorism is highly problematic,” said German, noting that the US government has long labeled activism as “terrorism”, once claiming that filing public records requests was an “extremist” tactic. “It’s an effective way of suppressing protest activity and creating an enormous burden for people who want to go out and express their concerns.”



The “terrorist” and “extremist” labels can be used to justify brutality and a militarized operation, said Andrea Carter, an attorney with the Water Protector Legal Collective, a group that has represented Standing Rock defendants.


They are instant experts on quashing the indigenous insurgency. It’s very, very concerning
Rachel Lederman, civil rights lawyer



“It’s a really egregious tactic,” she said, noting that the labels also lay the groundwork for prosecutors to turn low-level misdemeanor cases into federal felony trials. “A lot of it has to do with public relations.”

Before we leave the discussion of CLINTON-ERA privatization of all NATIVE LAND TRUSTS via US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE designation paying off a few native families---making them billionaires to sell out the 99% WE THE NATIVE citizens in losing ALL PROPERTY rights of tribal lands----

we want to make clear-----the only people having PROPERTY RIGHTS IN MOVING FORWARD are global 1% OLD WORLD KINGS----because global NEO-LIBERALISM killed our REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE LOCKEAN COMMON LAW.

National FAKE NEWS MEDIA is now selling more propaganda-----they are PRETENDING to DEMOCRATIZE native lands by bringing back the idea of LOCKEAN PROPERTY RIGHTS.

KOCH BROTHERS are global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS----global OIL/ENERGY and yes, they want to be LEGALLY HANDED PROPERTY RIGHTS on what WAS native lands. Ergo, pretending this LOCKEAN PROPERTY RIGHTS is about giving the 99% of WE THE NATIVE AMERICANS property rights.

LAKOTALAW.COM below having written this KNEW back in 1990s this was the goal of making TRIBAL LANDS into FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES.  But, they did get a few decades of CASINO MONEY.


Koch Industries Stealing from Tribes


February 5, 2015 lakotalaw


Millions of dollars have been stolen from Native American tribes by Koch Industries.



Koch Industries, which manufactures and distributes crude oil, has made brothers Charles and David Koch multi-billionaires. The business is the second largest private company in the United States and the largest independent buyer of oil in America and Canada.




The Koch brothers donated a large sum of money to conservative Republican and Tea Party candidates during the 2014 midterm elections, and plan to spend $889 million in the 2016 elections. These donations were made with the knowledge that these candidates supported oil companies and were not in favor of stricter environmental regulations. With more conservative politicians in the House and Senate, Koch Industries would have a higher chance of increasing its already enormous profits.



Many consider the Koch brothers’ wealth to be “dirty money.” Not only did Koch Industries break laws concerning pollution, but the business gained a large amount of money by cheating Native American tribes out of royalty fees.


Koch Industries was supposed to pay the Indian tribes for all the crude oil taken from their land. However, in 1988, it was discovered that Koch was lying about the amount of oil that was collected, thereby cheating the Indians out of millions of dollars. The full article can be read at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com.



This incident is similar to the Cobell v. Salazar case in which Native American representatives brought a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Interior and the U.S. Department of the Treasury for incorrectly accounting for the income from Indian trust assets. A settlement was reached by the government on December 8, 2009, and the tribes finally started receiving their   money in May 2014.



The amount given to the tribes was not nearly as much as they should have received. Rather than accounting the actual amount that the government owed tribes, the government simply gave them the amount which would have been used for the accounting.



The Navajo Nation rejected this proposed amount and sued the government for their neglectful accounting and mismanagement of natural resources. The Navajo Nation soon received $554 million, the largest settlement an Indian tribe has received, from the Obama administration.



America has no right to ignore the treaties that were made with tribes in order to steal money and resources from them. This unfair and unjust treatment of Native Americans is exactly what we, at the Lakota People’s Law Project (LPLP), fight against.



Our current focus is to prevent the government from stealing the most precious resource from the Lakota tribes: their children. For years, the South Dakota government has been illegally taking Lakota children away from their families, tribes, and cultures. One of the motives behind this is monetary gain, as the state receives up to $100,000 per Lakota foster child annually from the federal government.



Recently, LPLP played a major role in helping Lakota tribes receive federal funding so that these tribes may establish their own foster care systems. Our goal is to help the remaining five tribes receive their funding by 2016.



The time has come for the U.S. government to stop stealing from the Native Americans and to respect their rights. Please sign our petition to President Barack Obama demanding that the White House bring Lakota children home at http://lakotalaw.org/action.


____________________________________________


'…political theory in contemporary political discourse…'

This political media group with images of our US CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS is a FAKE UNITED NATIONS ONE WORLD taking US to colonial status group calling themselves CONTEMPORARY POLITICAL DISCOURSE when in fact they are CORRUPTING POLITICAL DISCOURSE by insinuating is goal of moving NATIVE LAND TRUSTS into the hands of GLOBAL BANKING 1% ------has anything to do with AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT I AM MAN LOCKEAN PROPERTY RIGHTS---COMMON LAW.  Remember, CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA killed our US courts just so RELIGIOUS CANON LAW tied to OLD WORLD KINGS could replace our US COURT LOCKEAN COMMON LAW.

NATIVE AMERICANS HAVE NO CONCEPT OF SELLING THE LAND.


'The greatest misunderstanding was that of land ownership. In the minds of the Algonkians selling land was like selling air. Eventually this confusion would lead to armed conflict'.




All this talk today surrounding RIGHTS OF NATIVE AMERICANS and SOCIAL JUSTICE is FAKE------global banking 1% does not do ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS-------HUMAN RIGHTS ---and certainly are doing nothing here in US regarding civil rights of owning PROPERTY.


JOHN LOCKE IS HATED BY MOVING FORWARD GLOBAL NEO-LIBERALS AND NEO-CONS------THEY KILLING OUR JOHN LOCKEAN PUBLIC SCHOOLS AFTER ALL.

So, the goal with all this talk of property rights of native lands is simply CODIFYING ownership of these tribal land to GLOBAL CORPORATIONS/GLOBAL 1%.

Those global banking 'billionaire native families' are selling to their 99% of WE THE NATIVE citizens that all this is REAL NEWS.


One Way to Help Native Americans: Property Rights


The United States' impoverished tribes cannot buy or sell reservation land. Changing federal policy could improve their fortunes.


Naomi Schaefer Riley
Jul 30, 2016

It’s May, but snow is falling in southeastern Montana as Ivan Small drives me around the Crow and Northern Cheyenne Indian reservations. Small is the principal of a local Catholic school—his mother was Crow and his father Cheyenne—and over the course of three days, he shows me the land where he grew up. “It didn’t used to be this bad,” he says. He didn’t have indoor plumbing, “but at least there wasn’t so much crime.”

Every few miles, we come upon a group of a dozen or so trailer homes. Broken-down cars and trucks are scattered outside like crushed soda cans. Many homes’ windows are broken, with only a tarp separating the residents from the weather. Children’s toys are piled up haphazardly, mixed with lawn chairs and trash. “A man’s home is his castle,” Small says as we drive.




This is the grinding poverty on some of America’s Indian reservations, many of which resemble nothing so much as small third-world countries in the middle of the wealthiest nation on earth. The 2 million Natives in the U.S. have the highest rate of poverty of any racial group—almost twice the national average. This deprivation seems to contribute not only to higher rates of crime but also to higher rates of suicide, alcoholism, gang membership, and sexual abuse. As of 2011, the suicide rate for Native American men aged 15 to 34 was 1.5 times higher than for the general population. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among Natives aged 10 to 34.



Alcohol-use disorders are more likely among American Indian youths than among any other ethnic group. Involvement in gang activity is more prevalent among Native Americans than it is among Latinos and African Americans. Native American women report being raped two-and-a-half times as often as the national average. 
The rate of child abuse among Native Americans is twice as high as the national average. And each of these problems is worse among the half of Natives who live on reservations.




Many say the federal government is not giving American Indians enough money to combat these problems. As Cecilia Fire Thunder, the former chief of the Lakota tribe on the Pine Ridge reservation, told me, “We are held back by inadequate funding.” When it comes to education, health care, and various other problems on the reservations, she said, “all Congress has to do is honor its treaties.”




Others—often researchers in the academy—argue that American culture does not give Natives enough respect, continuing to traffic in stereotypes when it comes to sports teams and mocking those who claim to have Indian heritage. The American Sociological Association, for instance, passed a resolution calling for sports teams at all levels of competition to cease using American Indian nicknames, logos, and mascots. It read, “The continued use of Native American nicknames, logos, and mascots in sport harm Native American people in psychological, educational, and social ways.”



Neither view is entirely right.


The economic devastation in American Indian communities is not simply a result of their history as victims of forced assimilation, war, and mass murder; it’s a result of the federal government’s current policies, and particularly its restrictions on Natives’ property rights.



Reservation land is held “in trust” for Indians by the federal government. The goal of this policy was originally to keep Indians contained to certain lands. Now, it has shifted to preserving these lands for indigenous peoples. But the effect is the same. Indians can’t own land, so they can’t build equity. This prevents American Indians from reaping numerous benefits.



Instead, Washington continues to send checks and micromanage these communities. The two primary agencies charged with overseeing the activities of Indians who live on reservations—the Bureau of Indian Affairs, or BIA, and the Bureau of Indian Education, or BIE, both part of the Department of the Interior—together have a total of 9,000 employees. That’s one employee for every 111 Indians on a reservation. According to a report from the Cato Institute, federal funding for these agencies’ various programs—which support education, economic development, tribal courts, road maintenance, agriculture, and social services—was almost $3 billion in 2012. About $850 million of this goes to BIE to provide for its 42,000 students, although most children on reservations don’t attend BIE schools. This amounts to about $20,000 per pupil, compared to a national average of $12,400.  


Plenty of other federal agencies also have subsidy programs for Indians. For instance, the Indian Health Service, based at the Department of Health and Human Services, had a 2015 budget of over $4.6 billion. And the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Native American Housing Block Grant Program has a 2015 budget of $650 million.



In recent years, payments from Washington have increased and the size of the Bureau of Indian Affairs has ballooned. But according to most of the people I interviewed on reservations, the problems seem to have become worse. Driving through Lame Deer, the center of the Northern Cheyenne reservation, some buildings were boarded up. Small said there used to be another market and a few other stores when he was growing up.



The development wouldn’t have been possible without a combination of federal, state, and private donations. The Crow tribe is broke, Small said, for a variety of reasons. There’s next to no economic activity on the reservation. On the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation in Montana, the unemployment rate is 78 percent. According to the BIA, unemployment on the Crow Reservation is 46.5 percent.

The tribe, according to its leadership, owes HUD about $3 million. In the 1990s, the agency built most of the homes on the reservation, and the tribal leadership promised to exact a small monthly payment from each homeowner in order to repay the debt. Conrad Stewart, who used to work in the tribal housing once and now chairs the Natural Resources Infrastructure Committee for the tribe, said that the payments were to be between $20 and $30 a month.



The tribe members refused to pay, and now the situation is getting bleaker. HUD, the tribal leaders said, refuses to build any more homes until the money is paid back. And so no homes are being constructed or repaired. Instead, more and more people are moving into each small trailer home. The result is that many tribal members between the ages of 18 and 40 “don’t have homes,” according to Stewart. 
When the tribal government attempted to pass a law that would require people to pay their debts, many legislators were voted out of office.



But what choice do Crows have?


Almost no one on the reservation can afford to build a home, because no one can get a mortgage. And no one can get a mortgage because the property on the reservation is held in trust by the federal government; most of it also is “owned” communally by the tribe. No bank could ever foreclose on a property, because the bank can’t own reservation land. The Bureau of Indian Affairs can determine what is “fair market value” for a piece of property and prevent one party from selling land to another. “We are the highest regulated race in the world,” said Stewart.

Indian reservations, Terry Anderson and Shawn Regan wrote in Louisiana State University’s Journal of Energy Law and Resources, “contain almost 30 percent of the nation’s coal reserves west of the Mississippi, 50 percent of potential uranium reserves, and 20 percent of known oil and gas reserves”—resources worth nearly $1.5 trillion, or $290,000 per tribal member. Tragically, “86 percent of Indian lands with energy or mineral potential remain undeveloped because of federal control of reservations that keeps Indians from fully capitalizing on their natural resources if they desire.”



There are Natives who worry that too much development will be harmful to their traditions. Winfield Russell, of the Northern Cheyenne tribal council, said he worries that development of the land “will undermine or destroy Native culture.” Russell said he sees a strong connection between the untouched land and the tribe’s spiritual values. Unlike many other tribes, he said, “we’re still strong here as far as our ceremonial culture and spirit on the reservation. We still have our covenant here.”



Yet, Indians have long suffered from what the Nobel Prize–winning economist Hernando de Soto has called “dead capital.” They may possess a certain amount of land on paper, but they can’t put it to use by selling it, buying more to take advantage of economies of scale, or borrowing against it.



Over the years, the federal government has carved out some ways for Indians to make money. For example: They used to be able to sell cigarettes tax-free on the reservation. But in 2010, with the passage of the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act, that came to an end.



By that point, many tribes had already started to get into the gambling business. Most Indian casinos are dinky affairs. But the Senecas have made over a billion dollars on their gaming operations. Those profits are distributed to tribe members in the form of annuities. According to Lucille Brooks, who runs the Seneca Nation of Indians Economic Development Company, “The annuities have created an entitlement attitude, and that is the downfall. The annuities have enabled people not to work.” The basic standard of living of many of these casino-owning tribes has risen slightly, but it has not spurred much improvement in a decrepit educational system or even investment in other businesses.



Now that more and more states are opening up gambling to non-Indians, tribes are facing increased competition. The Seneca Nation has offered low- or no-interest business loans to anyone who wants to try some other enterprise, but there are almost no takers. Michael A. John, the manager of the Small Business Incubator Program on the territory, said his group conducted a survey to find out which businesses residents should open. He tells people there are too many pizza places around, instead recommending “outdoor recreation, maintenance, landscaping, and professional massage.” But this kind of guidance has not yielded much result.

Federal legislators have pushed certain reforms, including a stricter ban on the development of natural resources on Indian land; more payments—perhaps even “reparations”—from the federal government to tribes; and greater sensitivity toward Indian culture, including an embrace of tribal languages and the changing of football-team names. But this is not always the primary concern of Natives. As a recent Washington Post survey concluded, most American Indians are not offended by the term “Redskins”—the name of D.C.’s football team. In interviews, I couldn’t find a single native who mentioned sports-team names as an important issue facing American Indians today. While I did read one editorial in a reservation newsletter arguing against the celebration of Columbus Day, I couldn’t find anyone who wanted to discuss the issue further.



While researchers have argued that team names such as this impair Native youths’ self-esteem, many of those young people have grown up in poverty, living with one or no parents, often exposed to adults who have problems with drugs and alcohol. When these young people have few educational options and little hope of employment ahead of them, it seems ignorant, if not offensive, to focus solely on the names of sports teams, if that distracts from addressing more serious problems.


The people I met on reservations were not suffering because others don’t understand their heritage or know their tribal language. What American Indians need are real property rights. A number of tribes in Canada are pushing legislation called the First Nations Property Ownership Act, which would create the legal framework for individual members of First Nations to access capital through secure property rights. Leaders like Manny Jules, the former chief of the Kamloops Band in British Columbia, Felix Arnouse, the chief of the Little Shuswap Band, and Michael LeBourdais, the chief of the Whispering Pines Band, all support the legislation.



They see reserve land, which is treated similarly to our reservations here, as becoming more like cities. The underlying title would be turned over to a governing entity; even if the land were sold, it would remain part of the city, just as no one can sell a part of New York City to Newark. But individuals of any race would be able to buy and sell it among themselves, without the permission or oversight of tribal or federal officials. This would allow for a true free market. First Nations members who wanted to lease their land for the development of natural resources would be able to do so without seeking permission from the national government. And those who wanted to sell their property would be able to select the highest bidder, regardless of race, take that money, and put it to use for themselves and their families. Finally, those who wanted to keep their land would be able to borrow against it to build a home or start a business.




There are some First Nations leaders in Canada who are skeptical of this plan. They worry that it will lead to greater assimilation, which they see as damaging to Native culture. They would be sorry to see a plot of land long occupied by one family sold to outsiders. Some worry that non-Natives will simply take the land illegally. But Jules has promised that even if the legislation passes, tribes would have to “opt-in.” Moreover, tribes would retain autonomous rule over the land, even if a particular plot passed into the hands of a non-Native.


Whether such a solution would work in the United States is a complicated legal question. But considering such reform is the first step toward helping these communities move forward.



For some tribal leaders, this kind of move would actually be a way to embrace their tradition. Jules, who has been leading the fight for the legislation in Canada, explained, “In my community, we have some of the oldest pit-house sites.” Pit houses were permanent structures requiring considerable time and resources to build. “They were nice and toasty warm in the winter. In the summer we went out and gathered salmon, berries, wild vegetables, and hunted game. In the winter we came back to settled villages. There is no way we would have left and come back to allow some other family to live in our pit house.” Individual ownership of land and resources is not some foreign Western tradition that will undermine the values of American Indians. As Jules said, “Property rights are part of indigenous culture.”
________________________________________________

In discussing NATIVE AMERICAN public policy as above we noted that NATIVE culture does not even have a LANGUAGE for SELLING LAND.  That is purely OLD WORLD KINGS.  This is how we know that DASTARDLY NATIVE BILLIONAIRE propaganda is pushing idea onto native citizens.  These same native billionaires are also tied to selling this idea of TRANSHUMANISM as TRANSFORMATIVE SPIRITUALITY.


'Ruling Classes


Upon arrival to the New World, the European Americans adhered to a governmental monarchy, yet the Native Americans held to a tribal form of government. These structures were ingrained into each society so that the very practice was one of deep cultural practice. The Europeans believed in an absolute commitment to the crown of England. However, the Native Americans devoted themselves to each other and had no central ruler. Nonetheless, they did have many chiefs among the tribal chiefdoms that regulated relations among the tribal members'.


ONLY A NATIVE 'TRICKSTER' WOULD SELL THAT FAKE NEWS.


'The Native Americans worshiped sun gods, corn gods and nature spirits of birds, bears and wolves'.


The point we want to make in this week's discussion on NATIVE public policy is tied to what is REAL SPIRITUALITY and this push towards 3000BC HINDI BRAHMIN tied to TRANSHUMANISM.

As well we want make clear-------LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL have absolutely nothing to do with our NATIVE culture and language.  NATIVE language was STONE AGE-----these migrating people still using language and religion from 10,000-----20,000 years ago.  So, yes, they resemble other ancient tribal cultures which have been isolated from industrialization.

VERY FEW NATIVE CULTURES HAD WRITTEN LANGUAGE----THEY USED ORAL LANGUAGE TRADITIONS.

Native American Stories: A Tradition of Storytelling



Jan 19th 2011 – by Tracey


The Native American culture is known for its rich oral tradition - instead of using a written language to document their history, these indigenous people simply relied on their verbal language to share their history, customs, rituals, and legends through vivid narratives.



These powerful tales, often told by the tribal elders to the younger generations, not only related their tribal history; these tribal stories also entertained and preserved their culture.


History comes alive

Each time a story was told, it breathed life into the culture, cultivated their verbal language, gave meaning to the tribe's history, and also taught life lessons about things like love, leadership, and honor, as well as their symbiotic connection to the earth and intimate relationships with the animals they depended on.



Making a connection with music & sound

As a way to heighten the senses and encourage a deeper feeling of interconnectedness between tribal members and their environment, when these stories were told, they were often accompanied with song, music, spoken word, and dance.


Experiencing the storytelling tradition today

Although this tradition of storytelling is less common today than was many years ago, some authors (both native and non native) have promised to preserve these stories for future generations. They have listened and learned many of these legendary tales from tribal elders.


____________________________________

WATCH OUT FOR THAT GLOBAL BANKING OLD WORLD KINGS----TRICKSTER WHETHER KNIGHTS OF MALTA OR TRIBE OF JUDAH.  Whether one believes migratory history into what was RUSSIAN STEPPE region---some say 10,000BC some say 4500 BC the migration over BERING STRAIT was during the ICE AGE being around 8000BC ----and that fits with REAL SCIENTIFIC DATA.


'According to linguistic research, at its beginnings ca 4500-4000 BC, the Indo-European language was largely confined to the Black Sea region'.




Storytelling Traditions of Native Americans



For Native Americans, the telling of stories passed down from generation to generation remained their primary form of wisdom communication even after the written word had spread across the globe. Native American oral storytelling traditions allowed tribes to transmit their mythological, spiritual and historical understandings of themselves and the worlds they inhabited to their children and their children’s children. This all but guaranteed that members of each individual Indian nation would never forget their roots or lose sight of important knowledge that would allow them to continue to exist in harmony and cooperation with the natural world. In order to make this critical information memorable, Native Americans translated practical prescriptions along with subtle and sophisticated ideas about the Great Mystery of life and existence into allegories filled with heroes and villains, comedic twists and dramatic encounters and lessons learned the hard way through suffering and eventual transcendence.



Native American stories were always intended to either explain or teach. Some of the categories they could fall into included:

• Creation myths
• Interactions with spiritual teachers
• Lessons learned about right living and behavior
• Magical tales of cultural and/or individual transformation
• Explanations for natural phenomena
• Instructional stories about the evolution of survival skills, such as hunting, farming, or building
• Wisdom teachings from animal masters

The Critical Role of the Shaman



Shamanism or out-of- body spiritual travel, is a fixture of indigenous life and this was certainly the case with many Native American peoples. Often portrayed simply as medicine men and healers by those with limited understanding of native traditions, shamans (or their North American equivalent, since “shamanism” technically refers to indigenous religious practices in Siberia) were actually prophets and teachers more than anything else, tasked with bringing back wisdom from beyond the borderlands that separated dimensions. Animals almost always feature prominently in Native American storytelling – but rather than existing only as creatures that lived in an every-day ecological world, animals were seen as embodiments of spiritual archetypes who existed in concrete form in the netherworlds explored by traveling shamans. Wisdom animals who lived in these regions could talk and think just like humans and they had much wisdom to share with the shaman who traveled to see them as a representative of his people. Because not everyone could be a spiritual traveler, however, the best way to pass on this wisdom to the people was in story form. Not surprisingly animals who could talk and reason and operate in both this world and the next in highly intentional and intelligent ways were usually major player in these stories.




Native American spiritual travelers relied on drugs such as peyote or hallucinogenic mushrooms, sensory deprivation, rhythmic drumming, frenetic dancing or fasting to achieve altered states of consciousness, and while in these states they could experience visions of past and future. Most origin myths of native peoples may have had their genesis from these transcendent experiences. In addition, prophetic visions of significant future events where common in these altered states and these visions could galvanize and inspire fellow Indians.



One famous example of this phenomenon was the vision of imminent heaven on earth that entranced Paiute spiritual teacher Jack Wilson in the 1880s. Jack Wilson’s stories of the coming changes swept across Native American lands, and a series of ceremonies designed to bring a cleansing of evil from the world soon spread among many Indian nations. Especially enraptured by these stories and ceremonies were the Sioux of the Plains region, and their performance of these rhythmic rituals, which came to be called the Ghost Dance, created fear and suspicion among whites in the west. The US Army massacred almost 300 Sioux, mostly women and children, at Wounded Knee in the Dakotas in 1890 in a confrontation fueled by this hostility to the rising Ghost Dance mythology. Apocalyptic stories and prophecies in general became more common after native contact with Europeans, as Indian mythology evolved to include Christian ideas and imagery.




What is important to realize is that Indian peoples had a different understanding of dimensional travel than western anthropologists and self-styled “Indian experts.” For Native Americans, alternate dimensions where animals had human-like qualities and the wise spirits of dead ancestors resided after leaving the earthly realm were real places. In fact they were more real than this world, which was just a shadow of these transcendent realms – a view strikingly similar to that of the founder of western philosophy, Plato. The western, scientific approach, however, was to dismiss the shamans as essentially con men, and to see Native American storytelling as always and only metaphorical and allegorical.




But Native peoples did not recognize strict boundaries between the real and the allegorical. For them, the universe was a complex and mysterious place and the stories they told used the spiritual world as a foundation and a background for putting their spiritual and metaphysical knowledge into a more personalized, orally transmittable form. While the Bible is filled with stories that can be examined and understood as literature, it is also taken as a source of true and real wisdom and revealed knowledge by Christians - and so it is as well for Native Americans and the shamanic dimensions.



The Trickster as Cultural Transformer



The most popular and omnipresent character in Native American storytelling was the trickster. The trickster was an interdimensional figure, an animal with human characteristics that would confound human beings by his clever and endlessly provocative behavior. Tricksters did indeed play tricks but they did so with a purpose. Surviving by wits alone, the trickster broke down conventional categories and violated societal restrictions with glee. But in the end, this work was designed to help create a new and better order out of the chaos the trickster caused. Tricksters lived in the borderlands between nature and culture, between this world and the next and between change and tradition. As such, they abhorred hard categories and rigid thinking. Society and culture had to learn and evolve to survive, and tricksters guided humans through this painful process by showing them how foolish and prideful they were when they tried to cling to the outmoded rules and structures of the past. Tricksters could be any animal, but the coyote was by far the most common trickster in Native American tales.




By violating the rules and upsetting the old order, tricksters helped human beings see through their limited ways of thinking. Native Americans needed to use their imagination and their creativity to survive in a world where circumstance changed and the forces of nature could turn suddenly hostile, and the trickster helped show them how to be adaptable and flexible in all situations.



Native American Storytelling Traditions, Past, Present and Future


Native American storytelling was focused on helping people understand their place in the natural world. Native American tales were - and still are - part metaphorical, part real, part spiritual, part mythological, part instructional and part transformational. Most of all, however, they were entertaining and memorable to the audiences who heard them. This guaranteed these stories would be remembered and passed down to the coming generations, who needed to understand who they were, where they had come from, and why the world is the way it is, if they were to survive and prosper in the challenging times that were – and still are - always just ahead.

_______________________________________________

As European academics REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVES have always acknowledged the bias of scholarly history ---this is especially true with linguists/etiology-----trying to translate another culture's language always falls towards using your OWN LANGUAGE.We would recognize this in these few decades of commitment to creating written language for an ORAL NATIVE AMERICAN tradition.


Below we see the few native written languages having VOWELS-----etc -----have been PHONICALLY translated.
If the scholar creating these written language for oral traditions is CHRISTIAN ----he/she will use our LATIN/GREEK etiology. If he/she is JEWISH or MUSLIM then Hebrew/Arabic language etiology will be inflected into that NATIVE AMERICAN WRITTEN language from ORAL TRADITION.



If a scholar is JEWISH then of course these written language representations will HAVE NO VOWELS.



Long held archeological and anthropological research has pin-pointed the RUSSIAN/UKRAINIAN STEPPE region as the source of Native American migration 10,000----20,000 years ago. Any language connections would likely start there.



Today, many, many Native American languages have writing systems that have been created to express their sound systems. Usually it is derived from the English or Spanish or French system and the international phonetic system. This is only because the first written language they were in contact with was in those systems. This is exactly the same reason why Greek is the way it is, borrowed and changed from the Phoenician or the reason English uses a Latin derived system (although earlier it had a system borrowed from the Nordic languages). If native American languages had encountered Sanskrit or Chinese first then they would have borrowed those ones. This is what Thai and Japanese both did, borrow from completely unrelated languages.



Cherokee is remarkable in the way Sequoia, who could not read English, created a written language by assigning sounds to symbols based on the idea of writing, not the knowledge of an actual system. What he did was closer to what was done in the 1400s in the creation of Korean hangul.



Most writing systems for native languages have to make up some new symbols to express sounds that do not occur in English. For example in Navajo, the added marks over the vowels to indicate tone- o ó oo oó óo (for each vowel) and ń . Marks underneath to indicate nasalization- ą ę į ǫ. A mark to show glottalization - k' ch' t' tl' ts' tł’ and glottal stop ' . And the consonants we don't have tl ts ł tł




As noted in another answer, if you included MesoAmerica there is: the Olmec, Zapotec, Epi-Olmec, Abaj Takalik and Kamnialjuyu (probablly Mixe) and Mayan all had wrting systems that used characters in the same way Chinese or Egyptian.



The Ojibwa (Anishinaabe) people wrote complex geometrical patterns and shapes, on birch bark scrolls called Wiigwaasabak which are considered a form of writing, as can Mi'kmaq hieroglyphics.



The Canadian First Nations Inuit, Algonquian family, and (formerly) Athabaskan language families use a syllabary known as Canadian Aboriginal syllabic writing. It is a type of abugida. It was first developed by James Evans in 1840 based on Cherokee and the Devanagari script from India and shorthand. He used it for Cree and it was adapted for other related and unrelated languages. 1856 for Inuit, 1880 for Blackfoot, and then new characters for Athabascan.

 'Native Americans alone domesticated and actually genetically modified several of the most important food crops throughout Europe and the rest of the world'.

The comment above comes from COMMONER CORE lesson making it sound as if NATIVE AMERICANS were the greatest GMO supporters.  Native Americans were HYBRIDIZERS------hybridization is a NATURAL BREEDING of plants and animals-----it is the opposite of HUMAN MANIPULATION OF GENES.


First, in discussing NATIVE AMERICAN public policy we want to segue from last week's discussion of BANKING and TRANSHUMANISM as ONE WORLD RELIGION-----by saying this:

There has been no better stewards of MOTHER EARTH then our NATIVE AMERICANS.  They managed to live for 10,000----20,000 years after migration from Asia and left the Americas with such NATURAL BEAUTY------PLANTS, ANIMALS, AND WATERWAYS-----with a religion totally based upon this NATURE.  Native Americans REVERED NATURE-----

Meanwhile, global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS came to America 600 years ago and it is now on its last legs MOVING FORWARD to total DEVASTATION.



'Shepard Krech in The Ecological Indian: Myth and History (1993) has the following to say about Native American culture:

   ' If we describe a Native American as a conservationist, we do not mean that he calculates sustainable yield into the distant future…but rather that he does not waste or despoil, exhaust or extinguish, and [he] leaves the environment and resources like animal populations in a usable state for succeeding generations.

This is another way in which Native American and Western culture radically differ. In the West we consume natural resources in an extremely short-sighted way – we are blind to the long-term consequences of our actions. Moreover, we selfishly only care about the instant gratification of ourselves or we blindly only consider the positive effects that our actions have for our generation'.



We want to be clear as our REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVES stand with the US 99% OF WE THE NATIVE AMERICANS--------while a few BILLIONAIRE NATIVE AMERICANS may work for global banking 1% in promoting TRANSHUMANISM------to replace NATIVE NATURE RELIGION-----we know better.




The Power of Native American Rituals
Posted on February 16, 2016


The lore of the Native American Indians is rich with symbolism and mysticism. They were the first people to inhabit this country and they lived in harmony for many years without distraction or discord. Their deep respect for nature shaped their culture, their faith and their morals. The beliefs and rituals of the Native American people are fascinating and full of deep meaning.


The Connection to Nature


Native American Indians believe that all things contain a power within them. This power is not limited to human beings alone. It resides in animals, trees, rocks, mountains and even the air and clouds. Called different things by different tribes, “wakanda”, “orenda”, “manitou”, this internal power is the key concept in understanding the ways that Native American mysticism works.


All animals are considered magical by Native Americans. Each type of animal is believed to manifest a different kind of magic. For example, eagles are considered a highly sacred animal by all tribes. They are thought to have healing properties and their wing and tail feathers yield powerful magic that can only be used by Medicine Men and Women. Wolves are seen as symbols of leadership and protection. They were prayed to in times of hunting and revered as courageous and loyal.



The traditional worship practices of the Native American Indians include rhythmic song, drum beating and dance. References to nature and animals are woven throughout the rituals that the tribes perform. The underlying principle in all of Native American ritual is that of connection. The connection of people to animals, of animals to nature and of all things to the Great Spirit.


Considered the creator of all things, the Great Spirit is the supreme deity of the Native American Indians. Similar to the ‘God’ referred to by many Western religions, the Great Spirit is seen as the all powerful ruler of the universe. Native American tribes believe deeply in the importance of worship and in the sanctity of the Great Spirit and his power.


When praying to the Great Spirit and all things he reins over, members of the tribe would light candles and smudge sticks and repeat a prayer similar to this:


Great Spirit gave me special wings, calling me to soar above; He adorned my heart and gave me earth
......so I can simply love.
Great Spirit gave me friends and family, calling to my heart, He showered my life and showed me love,
......so I will never part.
Great Spirit gave me compassion and patience, calling me to be, He covered my eyes with loving kindness,
......so I can always see.
Great Spirit gave me special wings, calling me to soar above, Earth is such a special place that I dearly loved.
Great Spirit says my time is done, soul calling to his light, Do not fret and cry those tears, I am with you all the time.
I will always love you, my earthly being gone; I live within the hearts of all my loved ones.
Great Spirit gave me special wings, calling me to soar above, my transformed body now complete,
......I fly on the wings of love.



Shamans and Medicine Men


Native American Indians sought spiritual advice and healing from the Medicine Man or Woman of their tribe. These spiritual healers had a deeply sacred connection to all of the elements of nature. They were seen as mystics, prophets and teachers.


Highly respected by all of their tribesmen, Medicine Men and Women performed rituals containing chants, smudging and symbolic dance. These rituals were used to resolve any imbalance between good and evil that may exist within the tribe at a given time. The Native Americans believed strongly that bad spirits were the cause of sickness, death and discourse within their people.


Medicine Men would turn to their medicine bag and its contents to treat whatever was ailing a member of their tribe. Items found in this sacred bag are still used today in rituals and spiritual ceremonies. Things like sweet grass braids, witch hazel bark, white sage, echinacea and incense were all integral parts in the healing rituals performed by the Medicine Men and Women.



Within the Native American Indian culture, some healers also had the ability to induce visions. These people were known as shamans. The most skilled of all healers, the tribal shaman was able to enter a deep trance that connected them to the underworld in search of healing. These vivid and intense dreams brought the shaman to a higher state of reality.



It was believed that in this heightened state, the barrier between humans and animals was blurred and they could communicate with one another. The spiritual journeys that shaman traveled on were thought to connect them to the spiritual guides that offered them knowledge and insight into the needs of their tribesmen. Each shaman would have a spirit animal that they connected to and that protected them on their voyage through consciousness.


The Native American Indians have a deep rooted belief in nature and spirituality that is both beautiful and profound. Their connection to all things - living and non-living, big and small, is inspiring and honorable. If you have a curiosity or interest in performing the rituals of the Native American people, these products can help you on your journey.

_______________________________________________

Just to start this discussion in the present-------Bill Clinton in 1990s wanting to end all that is US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES found a few native leaders who signed onto making US NATIVE LAND ----US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES.  This was done under the guise of creating an ECONOMY for the 99% of US native citizens at the same time opening those TRIBAL LANDS to global corporate economic and development tied to MOVING FORWARD killing all that is US NATURAL RESOURCES.

This CASINO ECONOMY was geared to making a few NATIVE families extremely rich while 99% of native citizens were left in extreme poverty.  CASINO INDUSTRY very easy to END after ROBBER BARON few decades of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA while leaving NATIVE LANDS completely occupied by global OIL, MINING, GAS, AND TIMBER.


'There are a few tribal casinos that rake in the dough. Not many, just a small amount. Usually in this case the tribe sets up a trust fund for its members'



No matter how much national FAKE NEWS media outlet try to say our US 99% of native citizens are doing OK----THEY ARE NOT.

What we see is a SELECTED group of tribal people made rich and paid money not to work.  Without coincidence that is what these few decades of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA did with out global banking 5% freemason/Greek players -----who through pay-to-play have simply been handed money to pretend they have businesses.

We do not want to start this discussion upon FAKE NEWS-----MYTH-MAKING AND PROPAGANDA.  TRIBAL LANDS outside of US NATIONAL PARKS hold the greatest NATURAL WEALTH in US and CANADA and global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS KNIGHTS OF MALTA TRIBE OF JUDAH are after it.

Of course TRUMP will be blamed for these CLINTON-ERA US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE privatization of TRIBAL LANDS------but, ROBBER BARON few decades is over and so will be that CASINO economy.



Why do we never hear about Native American casino billionaires?

Millionaires? Anyone? Nothing positive, nothing negative, nothing about where or how they live? This is a multi-billion dollar industry, more revenue than Trump and Wynn combined, where are these people?


Let me explain:



1. Not all tribes have casinos

2. Not all tribes who have casinos make enough money to go their tribal members.


3. Not all tribes who have casnions and make money give money to their members, sometimes the money just goes to the tribe in general, like to pay for housing programs.


4. Some tribes do make enough money to give money to their enrolled members. However, most of them do not make enough for this amount to be significant. It can be anywhere from a 25$ check to a couple hundred dollars a month.


5. There are a few tribal casinos that rake in the dough. Not many, just a small amount. Usually in this case the tribe sets up a trust fund for its members.

Once they turn 18 the money is available to them. It's not a billion dollars by any means or a million. Sometimes these trust funds even have stipulations, like can only be used for education or wait until older to access it. There is one tribe I know of where they allot a substantial amount of money to their members, that comes from the casino, and this is still only about 2,000 a month. That is a nice living but in no way makes them a billionaire or millionaire.

6. Remember Native people have the highest poverty rates. So this billonaire myth is just that. And tribes have expenses that their casino money pays for, that is why they have them. They pay for scholarships or tribal housing or mental health care, honorable things to offer their community.



_____________________________________


Our US 99% of WE THE NATIVE CITIZENS have faced US FAILED STATES as FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES just as here in our US cities with the same devastation of societal and family structures to include their connection to NATURAL NATIVE RELIGION.

So, CASINO as economy courtesy CLINTON NEO-LIBERALS left a few BILLIONAIRE native citizens with GHETTOS for everyone else.  MEANWHILE, NATIVE LAND TRUSTS feeling these decades of FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE designation has almost ALL of these NATIVE LAND TRUSTS occupied by global OIL, GAS, MINING, AND TIMBER corporations.  No money for those native citizens.

MOVING FORWARD will see those 99% of WE THE NATIVE CITIZENS as enslaved in global corporate MARXISM.

What is being used as MENTAL HEALTH ADDICTION rehabilition?

STANFORD TOTAL PRISON MODEL--------where surveillance is 24/7 and group speak and chatter is required all supporting TRANSHUMANISM.

When we see article written today saying NATIVE AMERICANS are TRANSHUMANISTS-----this is why.

Native land is being devastated because Clinton bought a few native people and made them WINNNER in exchange for handing over NATIVE LAND TRUSTS to global 1%.


May 12, 2016
Native Americans Facing Highest Suicide Rates


Eliza Racine


Rates of suicide among Native Americans are the highest compared to other groups, and they keep increasing over the years. This is especially true among Native American youth, who are three and a half times more likely to commit suicide compared to other groups, according to a Indian Health Service study in 2012. This crisis is long overdue for some serious aid.
Rising suicide rates led to the Oglala Sioux Pine Ridge Reservation declaring a state of emergency last year, after 14 youth suicides between August 2014 and April 2015 scarred the community.


Native Americans between the ages of 15 and 24 have the highest suicide rates compared to other groups, according to the CDC. A study of suicide rates from 1999 to 2014 revealed that Native Americans have the largest suicide rate increase among all groups, and that national suicide rates are the highest in thirty years. The study showed a 38 percent increase among Native American men, and a 89 percent increase among Native American women.


Native American youth are also twice as likely to be exposed to domestic violence, sexual abuse, substance abuse, and poverty compared to other groups. With unemployment rates at more than 70 percent, poverty rates at more than 50 percent, and high school graduation rates at 67 percent on the reservations, “[Native] children carry the outlook that things may not get better for them,” said C.J. Clifford, a tribal leader from the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, in an interview with the Huffington Post.



These factors lead youth to develop post-traumatic stress disorder which, according to Theresa M. Pouley, the chief judge of the Tulalip Tribal Court in Washington state, is at a similar level to that of soldiers who returned from service in Afghanistan.



Canada is also grappling with high rates of suicide among First Nations people, where last month the Attawapiskat First Nation community declared a state of emergency after eleven people attempted suicide in one night. The community faces major issues of poverty and violence, and is more than 300 miles from the nearest city, which limits access to mental health care.



Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau responded to the Attawapiskat community’s declaration of emergency by proposing a $8 billion dollar budget in the coming years to improve healthcare and infrastructure in the First Nation communities. The United States must follow in Canada’s footsteps. This issue will not mend itself, and it is our nation’s responsibility to address this tragedy plaguing the communities that we have time and again abused.



In 2012, the U.S federal government began a round of 23 youth-suicide prevention grants which totalled $500,000 per year for three years. However, only 43 of the 566 federally recognized tribes received these grants, and given that these suicide rates are only increasing, it’s not sufficient funding to heal more than a century’s worth of damage. Native American leaders like Clifford are still asking Congress for more aid to adequately provide health care and school counselors to help these children and prevent suicide.


It is disconcerting how little attention the high rates of suicide are receiving. This is a national crisis and must be addressed immediately, the epidemic of children taking their lives is unacceptable and must be investigated. Long-term aid fairly distributed among all the tribes is one key way to help decrease the rates of suicide. Native Americans must receive better education, healthcare and housing, otherwise, poverty, depression, and a feeling of hopelessness will continue to fester within the younger generations.

____________________________________________

Here is just the beginning of this YOUR NATIVE LAND TRUST is global banking 1% land -------we have discussed in detail how our Western parkland is being privatized to global corporations and the same is happening to TRIBAL LANDS.

This has been happening throughout CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA and it will soar under TRUMP because those 30 years of CASINO ROBBER BARON economies are over.

MOVING FORWARD always had a goal of bringing back enslavement inside US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES and global labor pool workers taking these jobs that our NATIVE citizens will have to work as they do or leave.

Native tribes frozen out of controversial plan for Bears Ears Monument

Published
August 22, 2019




By
Sarah Okeson, DCReport @ RawStory
Sarah Okeson




Federal law requires our government to consult with Native American tribes about the Bears Ears monument in southern Utah. But Trump is only giving lip service at best to attempts to the Navajo, Hopi and others about what was once the second-largest national monument in the lower 48 states, before Trump shrunk it by 85%.




Now, the general public has less than a week to file public comments on Interior Secretary David Bernhardt’s plan that could turn could add more ATV trails and approve cell phone towers and utility lines to what are now two smaller monuments. Bernhardt has appointed an advisory committee that doesn’t include anyone who supported creating the monument in the first place.


“The BLM and the Forest Service are asking people who don’t think the monument should exist for advice on how to manage it,” said Josh Ewing, executive director of Friends of Cedar Mesa.


Bears Ears, named after twin peaks that look like the ears of a bear, has about 9,000 recorded archaeological sites, including petroglyphs, woven cloth, human remains and ancient roads.


Former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke trimmed Bears Ears from 1.35 million acres to 201,876 acres, eliminating Cedar Mesa with its cliff ruins and rock art. He also took out Grand Gulch, a canyon, and other places that five native American tribes wanted protected when they urged former president Barack Obama to create the monument.

The management plan would allow “chaining,” a practice favored by Utah ranchers to clear land for cattle grazing.



“Bears Ears is not the kind of place for chaining thousands of acres of forest or stringing up utility lines,” said Heidi McIntosh of Earthjustice, one of the parties involved in the Indian tribes’ federal lawsuit against the Trump administration over shrinking Bears Ears.



Bernhardt appointed rancher Gail Johnson who holds a grazing allotment that was entirely within the original monument to a Bears Ears advisory group. Johnson and her husband, Sandy, have intervened in the lawsuits challenging Trump’s shrinking Bears Ears, arguing that a larger monument would put them out of business.


Bernhardt also appointed San Juan County Commissioner Bruce Adams and Ryan Benally,the son of former County Commissioner Rebecca Benally to the panel. San Juan County, the poorest county in Utah, paid $485,600 to a Louisiana law firm to oppose Bears Ears being named a national monument and then to lobby for reducing it.



Bernhardt did not appoint any of the seven people recommended by Rupert Steele, the chairman of the Utah Tribal Leaders Association. Steele’s picks included Navajo medicine man Jonah Yellowman and Kevin Madalena, a paleontologist from the Pueblo of Jemez, N.M.

__________________________

Now, here is something at which we would like to look more closely. Thinking about LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL as NATIVE AMERICANS and seeing this tribe officially recognized in 1969------happening to be on what is today's TAR SANDS OIL/FRACKING THE HECK OUT OF DAKOTAS AND MINNESOTA----- we see where these community leaders having names very gentrified ------and doubting if this tribe being made very rich is tied to our REAL 99% US NATIVE CITIZENS.


'Description

The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux (Dakota) Community (SMSC) is a federally recognized Indian tribe formally organized under federal reservation status in 1969'.

'America's richest Indian tribe has 99.2 per cent unemployment -- and it's all voluntary, tribal leaders boast'.


Could there be some FAKE LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL going on here in claiming native lands for NATURAL RESOURCE wealth?


From the article above we see UTAH as BEARS EARS all of which is home of MORMONS----who are claiming perhaps being LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL.


'The management plan would allow “chaining,” a practice favored by Utah ranchers to clear land for cattle grazing'.


'Whence Came They? The Mormon View of the Lost Tribeswww.associationcovenantpeople.org/2019/03/whence... Contradicting that prophecy was the Mormon Prophet Zenos who stated that the lost tribes were divided into four parts, not counting the tribe of Judah in Palestine. (Book of Jacob) Some influential Mormon scholars believe that the four branches of the House of Israel are Scandinavia, Britain, Tahiti-Polynesia, and the North and South American Indians'.



SMSC sounds exactly like our US cities community associations all tied to MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD global banking 1% TALKING POINTS.

Our Government


The SMSC is a federally recognized, sovereign Native American tribal government. As a Community, the SMSC works to preserve Dakota cultural values through philanthropy, partnerships, environmental initiatives, and cultural programming.



As a sovereign nation, our government maintains authority over our membership, lands, and government affairs. The SMSC government is responsible for providing for the well-being of Community Members with infrastructure such as roads, sewers, housing, and more. The SMSC is governed by the General Council and the Business Council.


General Council
The highest governing body of the SMSC is the General Council, which consists of all enrolled members of the tribe aged 18 and older. The General Council meets bi-monthly to discuss important issues, make decisions, and set policies. General Council members are also tasked with electing representatives to the Business Council, Gaming Commission, and Gaming Board of Directors.


Business Council


Every four years, the General Council elects three members to the Business Council: the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, and Secretary/Treasurer.


Business Council members are responsible for running the day-to-day operations of the tribe and for implementing the decisions of the General Council.



The Business Council is charged with promoting the health, education, and welfare of SMSC Members and their families now and for generations to come. They also make decisions that shape the SMSC's role as a leading employer, Native American nation, and member of the greater community. Every four years the Business Council publishes a report describing the activities of the last four years. View the reports in our Resources section.



Current members of the SMSC Business Council are:



Chairman Charles R. Vig, Vice-Chairman Keith B. Anderson, and Secretary/Treasurer Rebecca Crooks-Stratton.


Gaming Enterprise Board of Directors


The SMSC Gaming Enterprise Board of Directors is responsible for setting policy and overseeing daily operations of Mystic Lake Casino Hotel and Little Six Casino. This seven-member board includes six elected directors and one member of the SMSC Business Council.



Current members of the Gaming Enterprise Board of Directors are:

Chairman Ashley Cornforth, Vice-Chairman Todd Brooks, Secretary Natasha Coursolle, Treasurer Scott Vig, and Directors David Bryant, and Deborah Sax.




Gaming Commission


Five elected SMSC Members make up the Gaming Commission: a commissioner of gaming, an assistant commissioner of gaming, and three general members. They each serve staggered four-year terms. Gaming commissioners ensure that SMSC gaming operations are conducted fairly, honestly, and in compliance with applicable laws. The Gaming Commission licenses the SMSC's gaming facilities, gaming devices, employees, and vendors. It also oversees contracts, records, and internal controls.


Current members of the SMSC Gaming Commission are:

Commissioner of Gaming Cherie L. Crooks, Assistant Commissioner of Gaming Eric W. Kaiser, and Commissioners Elyssa N. Blaess, Peter L. Brewer, and Tony Mullenberg.

________________________________________

We just this this about HISTORY impossible to verify today---the idea of LOST TRIBE OF ISRAEL being those early American colonist settlers eventually migrating west to claim those MORMON mineral-rich lands.

SMITH being tied to NATIVE AMERICAN PRINCESS-----mirrored in SMITH as PROPHET for MORMONS.

Below we see that DISNEY created this story of SMITH and POCAHONTAS-------and it seems that was not true---FAKE NEWS from HOLLYWOOD at the same time THE BOOK OF MORMON hit BROADWAY STAGE.


'The True Story of Pocahontas as NOT told by Disneywww.ancient-origins.net/history-famous-people/... Pocahontas is remembered as the Native American Powhatan princess who saved the life of Englishman John Smith, married John Rolfe and fostered peace between English settlers and Native Americans. In 1995, Disney released an artistically beautiful animated film showing the supposed events that unfolded between John Smith and Pocahontas'.

'Pocahontas marries John Rolfe - HISTORY
www.history.com/.../pocahontas-marries-john-rolfe

On April 5, 1614, Pocahontas and John Rolfe married with the blessing of Chief Powhatan and the governor of Virginia'.


Below we see where is MYTH-MAKING AND PROPAGANDA started in early  America ---Ethan Smith in 1825 as a PASTOR with a few other claims -----just as LEWIS AND CLARKE were finishing their western exploration no doubt having identified those UTAH lands as full of mineral wealth.

WE KNOW for a fact that native citizens migrated 10,000---20,000 years ago and cannot be THE LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL.
 WE KNOW for a fact that native citizens migrated 10,000---20,000 years ago and cannot be THE LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL. This attacks not only our US history but the foundations of our NATIVE HISTORY.

Ethan Smith, for example, who was not only a pastor to a small church in Vermont but was also a self-proclaimed expert on Jewish history, hoped to prove the Jewish roots of Native Americans by appealing to the Bible. In his 1825 book, View of the Hebrews, Smith endeavors to point out what he saw as similarities between Native American religious custom and that of ancient Judaism.

As Smith states:

In all their rites which I have learned of them, there is certainly a most striking similitude to the Mosaic rituals. Their feasts of first fruits; feasts of in gathering; day of atonement; peace offerings; sacrifices. They build an altar of stone before a tent covered with blankets; within the tent they burn tobacco for incense, with fire taken from the altar of burnt offering. All who have seen a dead human body are considered unclean eight days; which time they are excluded from the congregation.........


Perhaps the most popular -- and most controversial -- interpretation on the origins of Native Americans comes from Mormon founder and prophet Joseph Smith. During his youth, Smith claimed to have received a revelation from a heavenly messenger, who related to Smith the location of a hidden record of an ancient people:

He said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang. He also said that the fullness of the everlasting Gospel was contained in it, as delivered by the Savior to the ancient inhabitants.



____________________________________________


Without going into a long dissertation over who started making claims of LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL being NATIVE AMERICANS------we want to say this KNOWING this is not true.

The reasons for promoting these ideas TODAY come from global banking 1% TRIBES OF JUDAH KNIGHTS OF MALTA MOVING FORWARD ----END TIMES.  These are people who are NOT RELIGIOUS-----freemasonry which has since 1600s had goals of ENDING ORGANIZED religion.  

The religious texts TORAH OR BIBLE tell us JEWS WILL INHERIT THE EARTH -----TRIBES OF JUDAH were tasked with just those goals of migration.  This overwhelming desire today to force this COMING OF END TIMES----is tied to the .00014% of global 1% wanting to create a NEW CREATION STORY--------TRANSHUMANISM is the sequel following END TIMES.

So, whether the world is being taken by TRIBE OF JUDAH in this INHERITING THE WORLD prophecy------the problem is this:  if we allow all our RELIGIOUS texts to be corrupted with this FAKE END TIMES just to advance the goals of .00014% of global 1%---we will be fueling this FAKE PROPHECY which will be 3000BC HINDI-BRAHMIN------TRANSHUMANS AS ADAM AND EVE.

GLOBAL 1% ARE NOT RELIGIOUS---IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER THIS JEWISH PROPHECY IS REAL------IT IS MYTH-MAKING TO MOVE FORWARD FLIPPING OF EARTH'S AXIS FROM WESTERN HEMISPHERE TO EASTERN HEMISPHERE.

'JACOB'S TROUBLE WILL BE HELL FOR BLACKS, HISPANICS, AND NATIVES!
•Published on Sep 14, 2019

ZEALOTS OF ISRAEL

9/7/2019 @White Center West Seattle Brother Yahawadah teaching on the coming trouble of the 2/3rds of Israel! ZEALOTS OF ISRAEL'



This is Seattle the northwest being a big NATURE RELIGION NATIVE CITIZEN region.

This movement back in 1600s of freemasonry getting rid of religion was tied to a DARK AGES BRUTAL AND REPRESSIVE CATHOLIC CHURCH which modern days does not hinder SCIENCE as much as then.




'youtube.com

In The Year 2525 Music Video


Hai Joli! Music video featuring the one hit wonder, "In The Year 2525", by…'



Hmmmmm, this global banking freemason STAR song started a FAD of thinking about SUPER-DUPER BIG DEAD HEADS replacing HUMANS.

This song at least predicts year 10,000 as judgement day. TRIBE OF JUDAH meets KNIGHTS OF MALTA JESUITS------wanting that NEW creation myth TRANSHUMANISM.





Will all Israel be saved in the end times?
Question: "Will all Israel be saved in the end times?"

Answer: Romans 11:26 plainly says, “All Israel will be saved.” The question that arises is: “What is meant by Israel?” Is the future “Israel” literal or figurative (i.e., referring to the ethnic Jews or referring to the Church)? Those who take a literal approach to the promises of the Old Testament believe that the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob will be restored to a right relationship with God and receive the fulfillment of the covenants. Those who advocate replacement theology basically affirm that the Church has completely replaced Israel and will inherit God’s promises to Israel; the covenants, then, will be fulfilled only in a spiritual sense. In other words, replacement theology teaches that Israel will not inherit the actual land of Israel; the Church is the “new Israel,” and ethnic Israel is forever excluded from the promises—the Jews will not inherit the Promised Land as Jews per se.

We take the literal approach. The passages that speak of future Israel are difficult to view as figurative for the Church. The classic text (Romans 11:16–24) depicts Israel as distinct from the Church: the “natural branches” are the Jews, and the “wild branches” are the Gentiles. The “olive tree” is the collective people of God. The “natural branches” (Jews) are “cut off” the tree for unbelief, and the “wild branches” (believing Gentiles) are grafted in. This has the effect of making the Jews “jealous” and then drawing them to faith in Christ, so they might be “grafted in” again and receive their promised inheritance. The “natural branches” are still distinct from the “wild branches,” so that God’s covenant with His people is literally fulfilled. Romans 11:26–29, citing Isaiah 59:20–21; 27:9; Jeremiah 31:33–34, says:

“And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: ‘The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins.’ As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.”

Here, Paul emphasizes the “irrevocable” nature of Israel’s calling as a nation (see also Romans 11:12). Isaiah predicted that a “remnant” of Israel would one day “be called the Holy People, the Redeemed of the LORD” (Isaiah 62:12). Regardless of Israel’s current state of unbelief, a future remnant will in fact repent and fulfill their calling to establish righteousness by faith (Romans 10:1–8; 11:5). This conversion will coincide with the fulfillment of Moses’ prediction of Israel’s permanent restoration to the land (Deuteronomy 30:1–10).

When Paul says Israel will be “saved” in Romans 11:26, he refers to their deliverance from sin (verse 27) as they accept the Savior, their Messiah, in the end times. Moses said, “The Lord your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants, so that you may love him with all your heart and with all your soul, and live” (Deuteronomy 30:6). Israel’s physical inheritance of the land promised to Abraham will be an integral part of God’s ultimate plan (Deuteronomy 30:3–5).

So how will “all Israel be saved”? The details of this deliverance are filled out in passages such as Zechariah 8—14 and Revelation 7—19, which speak of end-times Israel at Christ’s return. The key verse describing the coming to faith of the future remnant of Israel is Zechariah 12:10, “I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.” This occurs at the end of the tribulation prophesied in Daniel 9:24–27. The apostle John references this event in Revelation 1:7. The faithful remnant of Israel is epitomized in Revelation 7:1–8. These faithful ones the Lord will save and bring back to Jerusalem “in truth and righteousness” (Zechariah 8:7–8, NASB).

After Israel is spiritually restored, Christ will establish His millennial kingdom on earth. Israel will be regathered from the ends of the earth (Isaiah 11:12; 62:10). The symbolic “dry bones” of Ezekiel’s vision will be brought together, covered with flesh, and miraculously resuscitated (Ezekiel 37:1–14). As God promised, the salvation of Israel will involve both a spiritual awakening and a geographical home: “I will put my Spirit in you and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land” (Ezekiel 37:14).

In the Day of the Lord, God will “reclaim the surviving remnant of his people” (Isaiah 11:11). Jesus Christ will return and destroy the armies gathered against Him in rebellion (Revelation 19). Sinners will be judged, and the faithful remnant of Israel will be set apart forever as God’s holy people (Zechariah 13:8—14:21). Isaiah 12 is their song of deliverance; Zion will rule over all the nations under the banner of Messiah the King.

This is the last policy tied to BANKING PUBLIC POLICY we will discuss this week.  Next week we will use this to segue into NATIVE AMERICAN PUBLIC POLICY--------since LOST TRIBES see themselves as those NATIVE AMERICANS.

Global banking 5% freemason/Greek players started working on a BARTERING MOVEMENT a few decades ago because they KNEW the goal of global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS was to take ALL US 99% WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens OUT of the global monetary system reserved for ONLY THE GLOBAL 1% AND THEIR 2%.  Remember, we have spoken often of MOVING FORWARD 3000BC HINDI-BRAHMIN as returning to STONE AGE---where of course people BARTERED and used STONE et al as CURRENCY.

That is what far-right wing global banking CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA have been promoting this past decade---------THE SHARING ECONOMY.

Without coincidence our NATIVE AMERICANS who have a religion very, very tied to NATURE RELIGION----what we call NATURE MYSTICISM-------also had a BARTERING -----as TRADE AND BANKING system.

Those people PRETENDING to be LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL as NATIVE AMERICANS push the religion of TRANSHUMANISM-----which KILLS REAL NATIVE AMERICAN nature religion but they are embracing ancient NATIVE AMERICAN TRADE AND BANKING based upon BARTERING.


The History of the Trade
and Barter System

• Blog

Items that are used as money often have little value in and of themselves. For example, the paper used to print money is not particularly valuable. Money has value because it is an exchange medium that people understand and accept as such. When everyone accepts that a bill or a coin has value, people can use it as a form of payment to purchase goods or services. Before money existed, people used other systems to perform exchanges. Bartering involves a direct trade for goods and services. Although some aspects of this transaction are similar to the exchange of money, bartering required time as people hammered out the terms of the deal. Utilizing money as the medium for trade simplified transactions significantly. Trade and barter were precursors to the monetary system used in today's society. Although trade and barter may seem almost archaic, they were the business solutions for people who lived before the convenience of credit card processing.


Bartering is the process of trading services or goods between two parties without using money in the transaction. When people barter, everyone benefits because they receive items or services they need or want. Bartering also has an advantage because even people without money can get something they need. Bartering might involve trading a service for an item. For example, you could agree to perform yard work for someone in exchange for a bushel of apples from a tree in their yard. When people choose to barter to meet a need, they can save their money for other needs.

• Native American Trade Routes and the Barter Economy – This lesson plan is great for teaching kids at the middle school level about both the history of Native American tribes and the nature of the barter system, blending concepts into one plan.
• History of Finance – In the early days of the American colonies, foreign banks controlled the currency, and bartering was commonplace.
• American Indians of ND: Bartering – Practice a game of bartering with your students, and you'll quickly see the difficulties in negotiation that can sometimes ensue.
• Trading Post – For much younger students (in grade 4), this lesson plan combines show-and-tell with bartering.
• What Is Money? – Young students (grades 3-5) will delve into what money is, why currency developed, and how bartering worked.
• Bartering Lesson – Teachers can use this printable packet, which is full of useful terms and phrases.
• Barter and Money – This plan is for much older students (grade 10), and delves more into the nuances of bartering and trade.
• Barter Relationships – Can you create an equation and mathematically validate a trade? This article delves into that question.

Mesopotamia tribes were likely the starting point of the bartering system back in 6000 BC. Phoenicians saw the process, and they adopted it in their society. These ancient people utilized the bartering system to get the food, weapons, and spices they needed. Because of salt's great value, Roman soldiers bartered their services for the empire in exchange for salt. In Colonial America, the colonists used bartering to get the goods and services they needed. Even after the invention of money, people continued to barter.


The simplicity of bartering is one of the main advantages of this system. Issues with international trade, foreign exchange, and unbalanced economic power are virtually nonexistent with a bartering system. However, some disadvantages also exist. For a bartering transaction to occur, both parties' wants or needs must coincide to lead them to make a deal. Without a standard measure of value of goods and services, parties in the bartering transaction will need to spend time agreeing on the terms of the deal. It's common for both parties to place a higher value on their own goods or services and a lower value on the other party's items. Trust is also a component of bartering, because the representation of the goods or services offered must be accurate. If something is misrepresented in a transaction, the other party will have little recourse when a problem ensues. When bartering, people may need to store their accumulated possessions to preserve their purchasing power. Depending on the types of items, this might be difficult and inconvenient.




Because bartering does not involve the exchange of money for goods and services, it might seem like an ideal way to avoid paying taxes on transactions. However, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service informs taxpayers that the fair market value of goods or services received via bartering is considered taxable income. Parties who engage in bartering transactions must report this value as income on tax returns. The IRS requires reporting of bartering for the year it occurs. Failure to report bartering activity could lead to tax penalties.


_______________________________________

Here we see what is the ABSOLUTELY KNOWN migration history of our NATIVE AMERICANS have them leaving the Asian continent and crossing to NORTH AMERICA 10,000---14,000 years ago.  Doing this isolated them from all GEO-POLITICAL ---ECONOMIC development tied to global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS-----KNIGHTS OF MALTA TRIBE OF JUDAH. 

STONE AGE TRADE AND BANKING WAS NATIVE AMERICAN TRADE AND BANKING.




'Perfectly Preserved Footprints of 14,000-year-old Humans Reveal How Stone Age People Explored Deep Dark Caves

• By Hannah Osborne On 5/15/19 at 4:23 AM EDT '
  
  
  This migration history is SOLID AS ROCK in anthropological studies and DATA.  Only REVISIONIST HISTORY paints LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL as those NATIVE AMERICANS.
  
  THE LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL ARE SIMPLY CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE RELIGION-----TRANSHUMANISM.
  
  There is as much difference for NATURE RELIGIONS/PAGAN MYSTICISM and our major JEWISH/CATHOLIC/MUSLIM/PROTESTANT/HINDI-BUDDHIST religions-------
  
  
  TRANSHUMANISM AND GMO PLANTS AND ANIMALS ARE AN AFFRONT---ATTACK ALL THESE RELIGIONS.
  
  Global banking 1% are indeed using NATIVE AMERICAN trade and banking as BARTERING as the future for our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE and new to US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES---immigrants.
  
  
  
  
  
• Humans May Have Been Stuck on Bering Strait for 10,000 Years ...www.livescience.com/43726-bering-strait... A dominant theory suggests the ancestors of Native Americans crossed the Bering Strait about 15,000 years ago and quickly colonized North America, and then South America.
• Humans Crossed the Bering Land Bridge to People the Americas ...www.livescience.com/64786-beringia-map-during... Although it's gone now, the Bering Land Bridge persisted for thousands of years, from about 30,000 years ago to 16,000 years ago, according to global sea level estimates, said Julie Brigham-Grette ...
• Crossing The Bering Strait 14000 Years Ago - Image ResultsMore Crossing The Bering Strait 14000 Years Ago images
• The Death of the Bering Strait Theory - IndianCountryToday.comnewsmaven.io/indiancountrytoday/archive/the... Two new studies have now, finally, put an end to the long-held theory that the Americas were populated by ancient peoples who walked across the Bering Strait land-bridge from Asia approximately 15,000 years ago.
• The Bering Land Bridge and the First Americans - SAPIENSwww.sapiens.org/archaeology/bering-land-bridge... Searching for the Origins of the First Americans. Geneticists believe that the split into northern and southern branches took place about 13,000 years ago. At some point between these two splits (between 23,000 and 13,000 years ago), people on the land bridge moved into Alaska.
• The Siberian Origins of Native Americans - Teaching & Learningpandora.cii.wwu.edu/vajda/ea210/SiberianOriginsNA.htm The most likely answer to these questions is that the first people to cross the Bering Strait into Alaska did so toward the end of the last Ice Age, about 14,000 years ago. Also, there is mounting evidence that this first crossing represented only one of at least three distinct migrations from Asia into North America.
• Home [www.indigenous-americans.com]www.indigenous-americans.com/Artiacts.html The Bering Strait Crossing occurred in the third migration 3,000 to 5,000 years ago. The first migration from was Polynesia and the second migration from Africa. Upon arrival to the Americas, Europeans instigated Native American tribes to capture and enslave their own tribal members which were BEFORE the “official” African slave trade started.

We were all told they walked over a land bridge from Asia ...bigthink.com/philip-perry/how-did-the-first... No One Knows for Sure. Ancient migrants across the Bering Strait would need to have a steady food supply to make the journey. Somewhere around 10,600 years ago, the land bridge became inhabited by small mammals such as voles and jackrabbits. Then elk and mammoths arrived on the scene,...


This LOST TRIBE OF ISRAEL myth-making and propaganda even distorts REAL history surrounding those LOST TRIBES. We discussed in detail this migration of LOST TRIBE into what is to become KIEVAN KINGDOM---CRIMEA and UKRAINE today. This is what we discussed in detail the goal for the next STATE OF ISRAEL------flipping the EARTH'S ECONOMIC AXIS from Western Hemisphere to Eastern will kill today's ISRAEL as JERUSALEM to become ISRAEL as KIEVAN KINGDOM indeed tied to LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL.



So, why is JEWISH history being CORRUPTED? All this FAKE DATA AND ACADEMIC FAKE writing is being done by GLOBAL BANKING 1% ----NOT RELIGIOUS. These are the .00014% of global richest KILLING Jewish and TORAH religion.



TRIBES OF JUDAH-----NOT RELIGIOUS-----AND MOSTLY TRANSHUMANIST.



TRANSHUMANISM IS ATHEIST------IS SATANIC-----IS NIHILISTIC.
Jewish banking is morphing into 3000BC STONE AGE BARTERING ------ergo, NATIVE AMERICAN TRADE AND MONEY.


Those global 1% of TRIBES OF JUDAH still RAGING GLOBAL NEO-LIBERAL CAPITALISTS.


Native Americans and Jews: The Lost Tribes Episode


An all-too forgotten historical debate
By David Koffman


In the 8th century BCE, the Assyrians dispersed the Kingdom of Israel, giving life and legend to the Lost Tribes. The repatriation of these lost tribes eventually became an integral part of the Jewish–and Christian–messianic dream, and there have been Lost Tribe speculations about numerous “discovered” populations. One the most fascinating — and unfortunately forgotten — such discussions centered on the Native Americans. How did American Jews respond to this? Why and how did Jews credit or discredit it? What did these theories signify about American Jewish agendas and anxieties?



A Theory is Born


One of the first books to suggest the Native American Lost Tribe theory was written by a Jew, the Dutch rabbi, scholar, and diplomat Manasseh ben Israel. In The Hope of Israel (1650), Ben Israel suggested that the discovery of the Native Americans, a surviving remnant of the Assyrian exile, was a sign heralding the messianic era. Just one year later, Thomas Thorowgood published his best seller Jewes in America, Or, Probabilities that those Indians are Judaical, made more probable by some Additionals to the former Conjectures.


The Lost Tribe idea found favor among early American notables, including Cotton Mather (the influential English minister), Elias Boudinot (the New Jersey lawyer who was one of the leaders of the American Revolution), and the Quaker leader William Penn.



The notion was revived after James Adair, a 40-year veteran Indian trader and meticulous chronicler of the Israelitish features of Native American religion and social custom wrote The History of the American Indians…Containing an Account of their Origin, Language, Manners, Religion and Civil Customs in 1775. Even Epaphras Jones, an American Bible professor engaged the theory in 1831, claiming that anyone “conversant with the European Jews and the Aborigines of America… will perceive a great likeness in color, features, hair, aptness to cunning, dispositions for roving, &s.”



Religious Connotations


Some of these writers were interested in Native American history, but most of them were just interested in the Bible. Indeed, the Lost Tribe claim should be seen as part of a general 19th-century fascination with biblical history. Explorations of Holy Land flora and fauna, the geography of the Holy Land, the life of Jesus-the-man, were very much en vogue. A close identification among some 17th and 18th century Americans with the chosen people of Scripture helped Christian settlers see their colonization of New England as a reenactment of Israel’s journey into the Promised Land.



It also contributed to a more general religious myth-making scheme that helped define the national identity of the United States. To cite just one example, in a 1799 Thanksgiving Day sermon, Abiel Tabbot told his congregation in Massachusetts:



“It has often been remarked that the people of the United States come nearer to a parallel with Ancient Israel, than any other nation upon the globe.  Hence, ‘OUR AMERICAN ISRAEL,’ is a term frequently used; and common consent allows it apt and proper.”


A curious incident that drew considerable attention and “proved,” at least to some, that Native Americans had ancient Israelite origins unfolded when tefillin (phylacteries) were “discovered” in Pittsfield, Massachusetts in the early 19th century. Their discoverer wrote that this “forms another link in the evidence by which our Indians are identified with the ancient Jews, who were scattered upon the face of the globe, and to this day remain a living monument, to verify and establish the eternal truths of Scripture.”



Prominent Jews Respond


Around the time of the Pittsfield



incident, Mordecai Manuel Noah, the journalist, playwright, politician, and Jewish American statesman, began spilling ink about the subject. Noah wrote a play She Would be a Soldier; or, The Plains of Chippewa (1819), that resolved the tension between the Yankees and the British by identifying the Indian Great Spirit with the God of the Bible. Noah’s ideas about Jewish-Native affinities grew in a distinctly political manner when he invited Natives Americans to help settle “Ararat,” the separatist Jewish colony he hoped to establish on Grand Island on the Niagara River around 1825.



Noah’s writings on Jewish Natives came to their full expression with his Discourse on the Evidences of the American Indians Being the Descendants of the Lost Tribes of Israel (1837). The work documented a host of theological, linguistic, ritual, dietary, and political parallels between Jews and Native Americans. Most importantly, he identified several essential character traits shared by the two peoples, all of which were, of course, highly laudable. For Noah, the conflation of Indians and Jews sanctioned the latter as divinely ordained Americans.



Another notable Jewish-Indian incident occurred in 1860, when stones hewn with Hebrew inscriptions were found near Newark, Ohio. The story unfolded over the course of many months and was followed closely by The Israelite, The Occident, and The Jewish Messenger, whose respective editors represented the intellectual vanguard of American Jewry. Isaac Mayer Wise, the leader of the Reform movement in America, employed philological proofs to undermine the stone’s authenticity. He rejected any connections between Jews and Native Americans, though it’s notable that he bothered to engage the story at all. Isaac Leeser, a traditionalist, sided in favor of the Lost Tribes theory. Reviewing the relics in question, The Occident, Leeser’s newspaper, concluded, “The sons of Jacob were walking on the soil of Ohio many centuries before the birth of Columbus.”



Implications

From a historical and scientific point of view, the Native American Lost Tribe claim is clearly narishkeit (Yiddish for foolishness). But even a brief exploration of it — who was making it and why, who was refuting it and why, reveals important insights about American Jewry. Popular thought about who Jews were — their place in America, with whom they could or should be associated — helps us understand how Jews negotiated their place in American society. Theories about Ancient Israelite Indians should not be dismissed as mere fantasy. Rather they are important precisely because they are fantasy.




Jews responded to the Lost Tribes claim about Native Americans in sermons, plays, public statements, scholarly works, and popular writings. The critical responses are more understandable: from the perspective of Reform and science, the theory is flagrantly nonsensical. But there are other reasons some may have rejected it: so as not to be associated with that which was thought of as native, primitive, and barbarian, so as not to be thought of as atavistic or lower on the evolutionarily ladder than other Europeans, so as not to be thought of as imminently disappearing from history, and so as not to be in need of Christian civilizing (i.e. missionizing). Advocates, on the other hand, had to go against the scholarly consensus and side with religious figures who could be dismissed as fanatics.



Accepting Native Americans as ancient Israelites held several — sometimes mutually exclusive — implications for American Jews. Foremost, it meant that the Indians were, in some way, related. It could buttress the sentiment that America was the New Jerusalem. This was the destined place where the original exiles, scattered to unknown corners of the world, were ingathered to their God-chosen Promised Land. They were not “lost” at all. Rather, the near aboriginal connection of Jews to the American soil served as evidence of the end of exile, and another reason to support a new American Jewish identity.



Many of the major figures in 19th-century American Jewry weighed in–in one manner or another–on the Jewish-Indian controversy. The practical stakes were never high, but the claim — so ubiquitous and so fluid (since it was used for so many different functions by so many different people) — was taken seriously and fretted over by Jewish leaders of very different orientations. The Lost Tribe theory had significant symbolic stakes — for Jews, Christians and Native Americans. Linking America and its earliest inhabitants with the Bible and its theology, meant staking a claim on America–and championing God’s plan for the New World.
______________________________________


WHICH NATIVE AMERICANS ARE CALLING FOR REVISIONIST HISTORY VIA BERING STRAIT-----THOSE GLOBAL BANKING BILLIONAIRE NATIVE PLAYERS WORKING FOR TRANSHUMANISM.



Bill Clinton and global banking 1% NEO-LIBERALS in 1990s as part of dismantling all that is our US PUBLIC FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT------privatized NATIVE LAND MANAGEMENT from being TRIBAL to being US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE. That killed native standing and protections via TRIBAL AGREEMENTS and threw those US 99% of WE THE NATIVE AMERICANS into a global trading status----not sovereign TRIBAL.

This is why Clinton gave native tribes CASINOS as an economy-----and these neo-liberals made sure all wealth from this native economy went to creating NATIVE BILLIONAIRES while 99% of US NATIVE AMERICANS remained in DEEP POVERTY.

These CASINOS operated as hyper-neo-liberal laissez faire CAPITALISM while NATIVE TRIBAL TRADE AND MONEY as BARTERING was killed.

GLOBAL BANKING 1% OLD WORLD KINGS KNIGHTS OF MALTA TRIBES OF JUDAH KILLED NATIVE AMERICAN NATURAL TRADE AND BANKING AS BARTERING SYSTEM.


Those BILLIONAIRE NATIVE AMERICANS-----all that casino money brought when BILL CLINTON made TRIBAL LANDS ----FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES.


Here is NATIVE AMERICAN nature religion being KILLED by what will become TRANSHUMANISM.



USA
Native Americans Call For Rethink of Bering Strait Theory

By Cecily Hilleary
June 15, 2017 12:42 PM

Butch McIntosh wears traditional Native American regalia at the Pow Wow of Champions on the fairgrounds in Tulsa, Okla. Saturday Aug. 11, 2007.



It’s one of the most contentious debates in anthropology today: Where did America’s first peoples come from — and when? The general scientific consensus is that a single wave of people crossed a long-vanished land bridge from Siberia into Alaska around 13,000 years ago. But some Native Americans are irked by the theory, which they say is simplistic and culturally biased.



The first European explorers to reach the Americas looked to the Bible to explain the origins of the people they encountered and misnamed “Indians.” Biblical tradition holds that humans were created some 4,000 years ago and that all men descend from Adam — including indigenous peoples whom Europeans regarded as primitive.



Indians in Virginia. Engraving by Theodore de Bry, 1590, based on a watercolor by John White in 1585.



“Dominant science believed in a concept of superiority,” said Alexander Ewen, a member of the Purepecha Nation and author of the “Encyclopedia of the American Indian in the Twentieth Century.”



“And that created an idea that either people were genetically inferior or that there were stages of civilization, and Indians were at a lower stage,” he said.
Since “primitives” weren’t sophisticated enough to have sailed the oceans, early scientists concluded Indians had reached North America by some unknown land route. They found their answer in the Bering Strait.

Map of eastern Russian and Alaska with a light brown boarder depicting Beringia, where archaeolosits believe ancient Americans crossed from Siberia into Alaska around 13,000 years ago. Courtesy, U.S. National Park Service.



Ewen says that theory cemented into dogma and persists to this day, even in the face of new discoveries and technology that suggests Indians arrived much earlier and by different routes.


“In the first place, it’s simplistic,” said Ewen. “The people in this hemisphere were -- and are -- extremely diverse, more than any other place in the world.”



Chipping away at a theory


In the 1930s, scientists examined a pile of mammoth bones in Clovis, N.M., where they found distinctive spear points. Since then, tens of thousands of “Clovis points” have been found across North America and as far south as Venezuela. Scientists decided the Clovis people must have been America’s first peoples, arriving 13,000 years ago.



Excavations in the 1970s pushed the date even further back, to as much as 16,000 years ago. Archaeologist James Adovasio dated artifacts found at Pennsylvania’s Meadowcroft Rockshelter to be up to 16,000 years old, to harsh criticism.

The Meadowcroft Rockshelter in Washington County, Pa., where archaeologists found artifacts dating back 16,000 years.


Other branches of science have weighed in: In 1998, University of California-Berkeley linguist Johanna Nichols argued that it would have taken up to 50,000 years for a single language to diversify into the many languages spoken by modern Native American groups. That meant ancient Indians would have to have arrived 19,000 years ago.



Geologists have complicated matters by suggesting that the Bering Strait wasn’t passable until 10 or 12,000 years ago. This gave way to theories that early humans might have sailed down the Pacific coast into the New World.



Meanwhile, in 2015, Harvard University geneticist Pontus Skoglund discovered DNA links between Amazon Indians and the indigenous peoples in Australia and New Guinea.


An elderly member of Brazil's Surui Nation. Researchers found the Surui bear a genetic relationship to indigenous peoples of Australia and New Guinea.


In the past decade, Smithsonian Institution anthropologist Dennis Stanford met scathing criticism for suggesting Stone Age Europeans paddled across the Atlantic thousands of years before Columbus. In April of this year, researchers in California analyzed crushed mastodon bones they said were butchered by humans 130,000 years ago, a theory the bulk of scientists, including Adavasio, rejects – not because it’s not possible, he stipulates, but because the data isn’t conclusive.


Native American accounts


Should science consider the origin beliefs of tribes themselves?


Montana’s Blackfoot tradition holds that the first Indians lived on the other side of the ocean, but their creator decided to take them to a better place. “So he brought them over the ice to the far north,” the account reads.


The Hopi people of Arizona say their ancestors had to travel through three worlds, finally crossing the ocean eastward to a new and final new world. And Oklahoma’s Tuskagee people believe the “Great Spirit” chose them to be the first people to live on the earth.


File--This July 23, 2008, photo was taken from inside the Paisley Caves near Paisley, Ore., where archaeologists found stone tools and human DNA dating back more than 13,000 years, evidence humans settled North America earlier than previously thought.


Stories like these aren’t given much weight by science, said Joe Watkins, supervisory anthropologist at the National Park Service and a member of the Choctaw Nation.



“They are generally believed to be anecdotal,” he said. “The deep time depth and the possibility of multiple interpretations seem to make scientists uncomfortable.”


That isn’t to say Watkins believes every tribal tradition is “true.”


“But I do believe most of them carry within them kernels of truth of use to researchers. It seems imprudent to dismiss any possible line of evidence," he said.

___________________________________

While TRIBES OF JUDAH corrupt REAL JEWISH TORAH history with all this FAKE LOST TRIBES revisionist history-------so, too KNIGHTS OF MALTA CATHOLIC killing our CHRISTIAN/CATHOLIC BIBLICAL history as BOTH  OLD WORLD KINGS --------push TRANSHUMANISM.

'What if you were seeking to subvert or deconstruct the current laws of the United States, our constitution, our way of life? Our way of life in total, even down to the most fundamental of all of our human governmental hierarchies, the family. How would you do it'?

TRUMP/PENCE are being sold by national FAKE NEWS media as THEOCRACY-----you know, raging global neo-liberal billionaires always seen as DEEPLY RELIGIOUS.  TRUMP/PENCE as FAKE CHRISTIANS pushing TRANSHUMANISM AS RELIGION-------are fighting those TRANSHUMANIST LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL.

'“Our governing move is three things

— top down, bottom up, and inside out'.

This is how in Western/Eastern Europe as too THE AMERICAS is being taken to TRANSHUMANISM replacing our WESTERN RELIGIONS----Jewish/Catholic/Protestant/Muslim----and even our NATIVE AMERICAN nature religions.

THIS GROUPS IS NOT 99% POPULIST FROM THE RIGHT WING----THEY ARE THE SAME MOVING FORWARD CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA------

Deconstructing Western civil society for installing global corporate extreme wealth extreme poverty DEEP DEEP REALLY DEEP STATE------TOTALITARIAN MARXISM.

MARXISM is a global banking 1% political philosophy tied to SERFDOM------STONE AGE BARTERING as only monetary activity for 99% of US and global WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens.


This group of black HEBREWS just happened to migrate from a hyper-NEO-LIBERAL CHICAGO ----------home of TRANSHUMANISM IN DIVINITY



'Moments in U.S. Diplomatic History
American-Israeli Tensions over the Black Hebrew Community

More Moments in U.S. Diplomatic History

Ben Ammi 2The African Hebrew Israelites of Jerusalem, often referred to as the Black Hebrew Community (BHC), is a religious group that claims to be Jewish descendants of one of the “Ten Lost Tribes” of Israel. According to the group, in 1966, their founder, Ben Ammi Ben-Israel (born Ben Carter, a Chicago metallurgist), had a vision calling for African Americans to return to the “Promised Land” (Israel) and establish the “Kingdom of God.”'



The Plan To Change Everything: Top-Down, Bottom-Up, Inside-Out

Michael O'Fallon
Posted on August 21, 2019, 11:52 am


What if you were seeking to subvert or deconstruct the current laws of the United States, our constitution, our way of life? Our way of life in total, even down to the most fundamental of all of our human governmental hierarchies, the family. How would you do it?



The term for undertaking such a massive societal shift can be summed up in a word that is becoming increasingly familiar in our normal day-to-day discussions: deconstruction.


The deconstruction of our societal hierarchies is a complex undertaking with the primary concern of fracturing the cohesiveness of a society, nation, or community with the intention of taking the useful rubble of the demolition and rebuilding a new, reformed hierarchy.



So what is it that is being done to deconstruct our nation?



Van Jones, the progressive political commentator and former Green Jobs Advisor to the Obama White House, stated the following at the NOW Campaign for America’s Future back in 2010:



“Our governing move is three things — top down, bottom up, and inside out.

We need to work on the middle and the bottom. Government will handle the top down but it’s also bottom-up and inside-out — so now you’re challenged as you leave here — your challenge is to take care of that bottom part and that inside-out part — the heart part.”



 Van Jones gave a brief, truncated version of ‘what is going on.’ A more thorough understanding of the strategy for complete societal and social change is as follows:

• Top-Down: Political change through the election of – or placement of individuals into office as lawmakers or law enforcers  dedicated to societal, hierarchical and economic structural change. While “top-down” strategies are effective for short periods of time, the necessity of a multi-strata push is required for lasting change. 
• Bottom-Up: Grass roots (or more often astro-turf) mass reflexive movements that utilize fertile fallacies to gather large groups to demand immediate change – normally to appeal to the “top down” legislators for immediate change in law.
• Side-to-side: Change stemming from socio-technical disruption, characterised by systemic innovation changes. Think about changes in social media, the constraints on freedom of expression or speech.  Many times this is combined with the fourth strata of civilizational change.
• Inside-Out: The middle. Change stemming from contemplative practices, seeking transformative changes to our ends as well as our means. The psychological, spiritual and cultural, national underpinnings of all the other forms of social change; often contemplative or reflective in spirit, targeted mostly at major nationally held assumptions, immunity to change, and refusal to accept progressive or globalist change. [1]
• If imposed and allowed to flourish, this particular strategic methodology has been nearly unbeatable in spurning bloodless revolutions in every society, nation, community and faith that it has been put into action. 
  Our societies, nations, and faith systems are under attack by this purposed, ‘malware-styled,’ morphing attack by those that desire to shatter what we love into bits and then mold it into their utopian future. 
  In this episode of The Causes of Things, we explore this map of systemic change and posit the necessary question: “what are we going to do about it?”
  
  
  ______________________________________
  
  
  Here is another TRUMP PENCE TRANSHUMANIST group pretending to be POPULIST RIGHT WING CHRISTIAN -----when they are 5% freemason/Greek players pushing TRANSHUMANISM-----using terms like SOCIAL JUSTICE------FAKE ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT CIVIL UNREST CIVIL WAR------ is tied to advancing global corporate MARXISM----killing major religions while promoting TRANSHUMANIST RELIGION.
  
  TRANSHUMANIST RELIGION even corrupts HINDI-BUDDHISM upon which it is modeled. HINDI-BUDDHIST with its ENLIGHTENMENT------SELF-ACTUALIZATION ------is KILLED with TRANSHUMANISM.
  
  There is a TROJAN HORSE on the loose--------it is the graduation from hyper-neo-liberal DIVINITY SCHOOLS like University of Chicago-----Harvard----Yale people who are NOT RELIGIOUS pretending that TRANSHUMANISM is OK for CHRISTIANS/JEWS/MUSLIMS/HINDI-BUDDHISTS----and of course our NATIVE AMERICAN and NATURE/PAGAN religions.
  
  SOVEREIGN NATIONS IS TRUMP PENCE BEING TRANSHUMANIST AGAINST CHRISTIAN FAITHS---WHILE LOST TRIBES WITH BLACK HEBREWS ARE TRANSHUMANISM AIMED AT KILLING JEWISH TORAH.
  
  
  'youtube.com
  Was the Nordic religion a "nature religion"?
  In this video, I discuss the concept of "nature religion" and "nature worship"…'
  
  
  
  
  
  When we shout EMPIRE ALICE doesn't care with those global banking 5% freemason/Greek players/pols saying THEY DON'T CARE------we are identifying those dastardly TRANSHUMANISTS.
  
  
  
  
  
  Video Series:

The Trojan Horse, Episode 1: Deconstructing Communities


Grievance Scholars Expose the Trojan Horse of Social Justice in Faith & Academics


by James Lindsay & Michael O'Fallon
Administrator
Posted on August 09, 2019, 4:43 pm

In this first of five interviews conducted in New York City, Sovereign Nations Founder Michael O’Fallon and the co-founders of New Discourses, Dr. Peter Boghossian and Dr. James Lindsay, discuss the current tools of societal and institutional deconstruction being introduced throughout civilization under the banner of “Social Justice.” These, they discuss, are presented in a manner not unlike the legendary Trojan Horse.


Dr. Peter Boghossian and Dr. James Lindsay are best known for their work in exposing the impact of “Grievance Studies” in the secular university system.




The Grievance Studies affair, also referred to as the “Sokal Squared” scandal (in reference to a similar 1996 hoax by Alan Sokal), was the fourteen-month investigative whistleblowing project of a team composed of these two authors, together with Helen Pluckrose.




Its mission was to create bogus academic papers and submit them to academic journals in the areas of cultural, queer, race, gender, fat, and sexuality studies. The authors’ intent was to expose problems in “grievance studies,” a term they apply to a particular approach to studying these academic topics that proceed from a radical political agenda using means adapted from postmodern cultural analysis. Their conclusion is that under that approach “a culture has developed in which only certain conclusions are allowed,” one that “put social grievances ahead of objective truth.”



The result of their inquiry has created a crisis of confidence around all academic disciplines that fall under the umbrella of cultural studies, particularly those within the “theoretical humanities.” This crisis arises because not only were the methods and ethics applied in their bogus papers intentionally insufficient, but also the methodology they used for them was consistent. It always began with a conclusion or approach that they believed would flatter the political biases of the reviewers and editors evaluating their submissions and then bent the existing literature to reach those conclusions. This is, in a word, sophistry, and it cannot be trusted. 


Even worse, they were able to determine that the ultimate reason for their success was not a matter of luck or a failure of the peer review system, but instead of having learned to write consistently with what their reviewers consider exemplary scholarship in those fields. They have every reason to believe that the peer review system worked exactly as intended, and they credit their success to having gained legitimate expertise in the relevant fields of thought, mostly applied postmodern Critical Theory.


This effort gained significant international attention and has created awareness of a considerable vacuum of rigor and trustworthiness in the scholarship our academies produce on culturally important topics like sex, gender, race, sexuality, and other matters of identity. This vacuum, they contend, was created by the scholars and activists they sought to expose, who used the banner of Social Justice to bully more rigorous work out of the discussion and to establish their own hegemony of thought over all topics relevant to the study of identity and culture. In this sense, they have revealed a decades-long scandal that has in many ways prevented us from the kind of successful progress we should have been able to expect in the decades following the Civil Rights Movements.


This isn’t merely a problem within the secular university system, however. As many will be aware, it has gone forth from our halls of higher education and taken root in education, law, the corporate world, society at large, and even public policy. Not only that, it has also been making significant inroads into the Christian faith, even conservative Evangelical Protestant faith. In June of 2019, the largest Protestant denomination in the world, the Southern Baptist Convention, passed a resolution stating that Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality could effectively be used by Christians as “analytical tools” alongside but subordinate to Scripture. This is what Lindsay describes as “a very fine wooden horse sitting outside your gates.” 


How do they know? Beyond their expertise in how postmodern Critical Theory works, they’ve lived it, and not only once. They’ve personally watched the rise of these tools in the settings of the secular university system, which it has effectively institutionalized according to Social Justice, and they watched it tear apart the “New Atheism” movement of the early 2000s and 2010s as it was introduced there to fill the ideological vacuum felt by many atheists in the movement. One by one, Boghossian tells us, every organization he has ever loved has been infected and taken over by this parasitic ideology.


This rise of the primary tools of deconstructionism is not uncommon among other Christian denominations, secular universities, STEM fields, knitting clubs, Boy Scouts, medical fields, and corporate organizations. Social Justice’s paradigm-shifting presence is nearly everywhere. Its trajectory is also predictable. It comes in as a type of analytical tool, offered with the intention of helping to better “the oppressed” in issues of race, sex, gender, sexuality, and other identities that haven’t always had a fair shake in life, and then it does exactly what it has always claimed to do: it makes the personal political. In fact, it makes everything political, and the only politics it is interested in are identity politics.


In this in-depth discussion, Lindsay, Boghossian and O’Fallon begin by reviewing the Southern Baptist Convention’s Resolution 9 and then compare and contrast the strategic use of Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality in nearly every facet of our society. Point by point, they explain how these “analytic tools” get put into application in practice and how they undermine communities. Their stated goal is not political or to take sides. It is to help anyone who is facing the decision to adopt tools like Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality to better understand what is really being offered and how it is likely to play out if accepted.

___________________________________

As this article shows----TRANSHUMANISTS are those MOVING FORWARD far-right wing, authoritarian, militaristic extreme wealth extreme poverty global corporate LIBERTARIAN MARXISTS.

NEO-LIBERALISM was as close to LIBERTARIAN as one can get----LIBERTARIAN is the right of global .00014% to do anything they want for power and wealth.

Remember, when we allow our US economy to be completely controlled by global corporations which are consolidating into just a few multi-national global corporations-----we have CORPORATE CEOs as TRANSHUMANISTS like ELON MUSK----and AMAZON'S BEZOS.

We can believe the below ZOLTAN ISTVAN is NOT REAL JEWISH------

TRASHING JEWS----Hmmmmm, that sounds like FAKE ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT civil unrest civil war GLOBAL BANKING 5% FREEMASON/GREEK PLAYER.


'Friday, April 28, 2017

• Zoltan Istvan - Another Psychopathic Jewish Transhumanist Loser Like these people here, this psychopathic Jewish loser named Zoltan Istvan knows about classified technology and is heavily associated with the Transhumanist movement. See here for the connections between Transhumanism and Judaism. See here for some introductory videos about Transhumanism. See here for the Transhumanist category on my blog...be sure to go through all of the articles.
  
  Just like many other stalking pieces of trash Zionist Jews, he doesn't seem to think it matters when a bunch of people are getting tortured with microwave weapons and their brains are being beamed out live like a radio station. This is what is happening, it pretty much high-tech Jewish blood libel. They think they can get away with this. This is how these sick assholes get off, torturing people and watching it like a reality TVs how. They are complete psychopaths. Good thing this psycho loser was running for President under the "Transhumanist Party." To top it off --- he is actually a Transhumanist "Libertarian" --- or in other words, a Totalitarian Libertarian or a Eugenicist Libertarian. Makes perfect sense... kind of like this crazy bitch and her art. 
  
  You will often find that most of the people that are engaging in this activity, for the most part, but not always.... are Jews. Why? Well, one of the reasons is because it's literally a part of Homeland Security. See here for more about how fighting "GLOBAL anti-Semitism" is a part of American foreign policy. This is how sad countries like the United States and Canada have become, it is absolutely sickening and pathetic. This is the modern day Stasi Octopus, involving everyone from businessmen and women, real estate agents, mortgage brokers, government employees, trades personnel, (for example; like pest control or property management,) law enforcement, drug dealers, writers, doctors, lawyers, journalists, actors, sports figures, priests and religious leaders, addiction recovery groups, university professors, waiters and hotel personnel. This is exactly what it was like in East Germany. There isn't one group they didn't infiltrate. Now your society has become just as sad, our countries have turned into Stasi nightmares'. 
  
  
  

If they are the only JOB-MAKERS then people wanting JOBS become GROUP SPEAK AND CHATTERS which is MOVING FORWARD TRANSHUMANISM----GLOBAL CORPORATE MARXISM.

THE STONE AGE BARTERING AS BANKING FOR 99% OF WE THE PEOPLE.


HUFFINGTON POST went from pretending to be a left social progressive media outlet---to pretending to be a right wing media outlet now morphing to TRANSHUMANIST media outlet.



Zoltan Istvan, Contributor


Libertarian Candidate for California Governor 2018;

Creator of Immortality Bus; Author of bestselling Philosophy novel The Transhumanist Wager

A New Generation of Transhumanists Is Emerging

03/10/2014 02:43 pm ET Updated May 10, 2014


A new generation of transhumanists is emerging. You can feel it in handshakes at transhumanist meet-ups. You can see it when checking in to transhumanist groups in social media. You can read it in the hundreds of transhumanist-themed blogs. This is not the same bunch of older, mostly male academics that have slowly moved the movement forward during the last few decades. This is a dynamic group of younger people from varying backgrounds: Asians, Blacks, Middle Easterners, Caucasians, and Latinos. Many are females, some are LGBT, and others have disabilities. Many are atheist, while others are spiritual or even formally religious. Their politics run the gamut, from liberals to conservatives to anarchists. Their professions vary widely, from artists to physical laborers to programmers. Whatever their background, preferences, or professions, they have recently tripled the population of transhumanists in just the last 12 months.


“Three years ago, we had only around 400 members, but today we have over 10,000 members,” says Amanda Stoel, co-founder and chief administrator of Facebook group Singularity Network, one of the largest of hundreds of transhumanist-themed groups on the web.


Transhumanism is becoming so popular that even the comic strip Dilbert, which appears online and in 2000 newspapers, recently made jokes about it.


Despite its growing popularity, many people around the world still don’t know what “transhuman” means. Transhuman literally means beyond human. Transhumanists consist of life extensionists, techno-optimists, Singularitarians, biohackers, roboticists, AI proponents, and futurists who embrace radical science and technology to improve the human condition. The most important aim for many transhumanists is to overcome human mortality, a goal some believe is achievable by 2045.



Transhumanism has been around for nearly 30 years and was first heavily influenced by science fiction. Today, transhumanism is increasingly being influenced by actual science and technological innovation, much of it being created by people under the age of 40. It’s also become a very international movement, with many formal groups in dozens of countries.



Despite the movement’s growth, its potential is being challenged by some older transhumanists who snub the younger generation and their ideas. These old-school futurists dismiss activist philosophies and radicalism, and even prefer some younger writers and speakers not have their voices heard. Additionally, transhumanism’s Wikipedia page — the most viewed online document of the movement — is protected by a vigilant posse, deleting additions or changes that don’t support a bland academic view of transhumanism.


Inevitably, this Wikipedia page misses the vibrancy and happenings of the burgeoning movement. The real status and information of transhumanism and its philosophies can be found in public transhumanist gatherings and festivities, in popular student groups like the Stanford University Transhumanist Association, and in social media where tens of thousands of scientists and technologists hang out and discuss the transhuman future.

Jet-setting personality Maria Konovalenko, a 29-year-old Russian molecular biophysicist whose public demonstrations supporting radical life extension have made international news, is a prime example.



“We must do more for transhumanism and life extension,” says Konovalenko, who serves as vice president of Moscow-based Science for Life Extension Foundation. “This is our lives and our futures we’re talking about. To sit back and and just watch the 21st Century roll by will not accomplish our goals. We must take our message to the people in the streets and strive to make real change.”


Transhumanist celebrities like Konovalenko are changing the way the movement gets its message across to the public. Gauging by the rapidly increasing number of transhumanists, it’s working.



A primary goal of many transhumanists is to convince the public that embracing radical technology and science is in the species’ best interest. In a mostly religious world where much of society still believes in heavenly afterlives, some people are skeptical about whether significantly extending human lifespans is philosophically and morally correct. Transhumanists believe the more people that support transhumanism, the more private and government resources will end up in the hands of organizations and companies that aim to improve human lives and bring mortality to an end.