Forbidden History Lost in the Phony Narrative of Charlottesville

h/t Charles Burris

Black History that Democrats refuse to teach today.  This truly is the real narrative that has gotten lost in the phony narrative of Charlottesville, Virginia.

It starts off with James Armistead, a black patriot during the American revolution who helped make possible the 1781 Yorktown victory that established America as an independent nation.

Or Peter Salem, a black patriot, who was a hero of the 1775 Battle of Bunkerhill.  He also fought as one of the legendary Minute Men and was a soldier at the battles of Saratoga and Stoney Point.

Washigton Crossing Delaware a26714-20150521-marinemuseum03

And the famous picture of Washington’s crossing of the Delaware on Christmas night, two men, Prince Whimple and Oliver Cromwell, two black patriots who served with George Washington and American generals during the Revolution.  Many American soldiers in the Revolution were  black.

And this . . .

“As [Chicagoans] leave, there are fewer people . . . left to shoulder the state’s . . . financial burdens”

h/t RonPaulLibertyReport

by Nick Giambruno, Senior Editor at International Man

Over 3,000 millionaires have fled Chicago in recent months.

This is the largest outflow of wealthy people from any US city right now. It’s also one of the largest outflows of wealthy people in the world.

But it’s not just millionaires… Every five minutes someone leaves Illinois.

In a recent poll, 47% of people in Illinois said they want to leave the state. Over the last decade, more than half a million people have done just that.

This is the largest outflow of people from any state in the country.

The people who leave are generally better educated, more skilled, and earn more money than those who stay. Entire towns of affluent Illinois refugees have sprouted up in Florida, Arizona, and other states.

Illinois is bleeding productive people.

Wealthy people are often the first to leave a bad situation. They have the means to simply get up and go. And when they do, they take their money and their businesses with them.

This hurts the local property market and the rest of the local economy.

Many of Illinois’ millionaires own businesses that employ large numbers of people. As they leave, there are fewer people and businesses left to shoulder the state’s enormous and growing financial burdens.

Many of these people are leaving for one simple reason: rising taxes.

Illinois’ leftist tax-and-spend politicians are continuing to increase all sorts of taxes, which were already high in the first place.

The state just passed a 32% income tax hike.

Rising taxes are pushing more and more productive people to make the chicken run… and at the worst possible moment for the state’s coffers.

Illinois is the most financially distressed state in the US. Every month, it spends $600 million more than it takes in. It’s now $15 billion behind on its bills and counting.

Illinois is about to become America’s first failed state.

Even its governor has described it as a “banana republic.”

Today, Illinois can’t pay contractors to fix the roads. It doesn’t have enough cash to pay lottery winners. (What happened to the money it collected selling lottery tickets?)

The state can’t even afford food for its prisoners.

Here are the sad facts. Illinois has:

  • Nearly $15 billion in overdue bills (including $800 million in interest).
  • A $7 billion budget deficit.
  • And an eye-watering $250 billion bottomless pit of unfunded pension obligations.

For perspective, $250 billion is more than the combined market value of Allstate, Boeing, United Continental, and Caterpillar, four large Illinois companies.

Keep reading . . . 

In 1956, U.S. Broke Korean Armistice Agreement of 1953

from Michael S. Rozeff, originally appeared at

The Korean Armistice Agreement of 1953 brought the hostilities to a close with a cease fire. The U.S. broke the agreement in 1956:

“Paragraph 13(d) of the Armistice Agreement mandated that neither side introduce new weapons into Korea, other than piece-for-piece replacement of equipment. In September 1956 the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Radford indicated that the U.S. military intention was to introduce atomic weapons into Korea, which was agreed to by the U.S. National Security Council and President Eisenhower.[34] However paragraph 13(d) prevented the introduction of nuclear weapons and missiles.[35] The U.S. unilaterally abrogated paragraph 13(d), breaking the Armistice Agreement, despite concerns by United Nations allies.[36][37][38] At a meeting of the Military Armistice Commission on June 21, 1957, the U.S. informed the North Korean representatives that the United Nations Command no longer considered itself bound by paragraph 13(d) of the armistice.[39][40] In January 1958 nuclear armed Honest John missiles and 280mm atomic cannons were deployed to South Korea,[41] a year later adding nuclear armed Matador cruise missiles with the range to reach China and the Soviet Union.[37][42]”

UPDATE:  August 10, 2017

US Foreign Policy puts its own people at risk.  Foreign policy is not a policy of a national security.  That concept is a joke.  Read Rozeff’s follow-up:

The 1953 Armistice in Korea was followed two months later by the “Mutual Defense Treaty Between the United States and the Republic of Korea“. This commitment on the part of the U.S. was a mistake. It was an entangling alliance with far-reaching consequences. This brought S. Korea under the nuclear bomb protection umbrella of the U.S., and this gave N. Korea an incentive to develop nuclear weapons. It lent permanence to the U.S. as an enemy of N. Korea. It gave the S. Koreans a negative incentive to negotiate a permanent peace with N. Korea.

The two Koreas on 19 February 1992 committed themselves to a treaty ban on nuclear weapons. However, they could not agree on inspections. Joint military exercises of S. Korea and the U.S. were a sticking point, again being negative fallout from the U.S. defense treaty with S. Korea.

When and if, or even before, N. Korea has the capability to launch a nuclear-tipped missile aimed at Washington or Los Angeles or a city in between, there arises a strategic problem that stems from that 1953 defense treaty but was entirely unforeseen at that time: Why should Washington be willing to defend S. Korea and open itself to such a nuclear threat? Why should Washington be willing to exchange Washington for Seoul?

Since Washington is not willing to face such an exchange, there exists now a hair-trigger situation. The more that N. Korea’s nuclear and missile capabilities mature and the more that its leader threatens the U.S., the closer the U.S. gets to a pre-emptive attack on N. Korea. Furthermore, the U.S. is getting closer to an attack triggered by some military movements or preparations in N. Korea that can be construed as precursors to an attack of some sort.  

Learn more . . . .

Father of Frankfurt School: a CIA Agent

by Bionic Mosquito

Repressive Tolerance, by Herbert Marcuse….prompted by an email request from Stephen W. Carson which has finally moved me to action on this aspect of our current state.

Who is Herbert Marcuse?

Herbert Marcuse (German: [maʀˈkuːzə]; July 19, 1898 – July 29, 1979) was a German-American philosopher, sociologist, and political theorist, associated with the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory. Born in Berlin, Marcuse studied at the universities of Berlin and then at Freiburg, where he received his Ph.D. …In his written works, he criticized capitalism, modern technology, historical materialism and entertainment culture, arguing that they represent new forms of social control.

Between 1943 and 1950, Marcuse worked in U.S. Government service for the Office of Strategic Services (predecessor of the Central Intelligence Agency)….His Marxist scholarship inspired many radical intellectuals and political activists in the 1960s and 1970s, both in the United States and internationally.

What is the Frankfurt School?

The Frankfurt School (German: Frankfurter Schule) is a school of social theory and philosophy associated in part with the Institute for Social Research at the Goethe University Frankfurt. Founded during the interwar period, the School consisted of dissidents who felt at home in none of the existent capitalist, fascist, or communist systems of the time.

Although sometimes only loosely affiliated, Frankfurt School theorists spoke with a common paradigm in mind; they shared the Marxist Hegelian premises and were preoccupied with similar questions….Following Marx, they were concerned with the conditions that allow for social change and the establishment of rational institutions. (Emphasis added)

What is meant by “Critical Theory”?

Critical theory (or “social critical theory”) is a school of thought that stresses the reflective assessment and critique of society and culture by applying knowledge from the social sciences and the humanities. (Emphasis added)

The culmination of the Enlightenment.

In sociology and political philosophy, the term critical theory describes the neo-Marxist philosophy of the Frankfurt School, which was developed in Germany in the 1930s. Frankfurt theorists drew on the critical methods of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud. Critical theory maintains that ideology is the principal obstacle to human liberation.

Critical Theory teaches one to be critical of every prevailing norm, attitude, and cultural attribute in society.  Herbert Marcuse being one of the important founders of the Frankfurt School, Antonio Gramsci being one of the important influences.

With this background out of the way, I turn to the aforementioned essay written by Marcuse. What does he mean by “Repressive Tolerance”?  His opening paragraph packs it all in; I will dissect it, one sentence at a time:

THIS essay examines the idea of tolerance in our advanced industrial society. The conclusion reached is that the realization of the objective of tolerance would call for intolerance toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed.

Prevailing tolerance is repressive; it is tolerance within limited bounds.  This is not tolerant; it is repressive and controlling.  In order to generate true and complete tolerance, intolerance must be practiced against prevailing culture and those who support it; those being repressed must repress in order to gain and hold tolerance.

In other words, today tolerance appears again as what it was in its origins, at the beginning of the modern period–a partisan goal, a subversive liberating notion and practice.

By intolerantly breaking the prevailing culture, true tolerance will be achieved – subversive against the prevailing order.

Conversely, what is proclaimed and practiced as tolerance today, is in many of its most effective manifestations serving the cause of oppression.

Because as tolerance is practiced today (he wrote the original essay in 1965, according to the link), it only serves to allow tolerance within acceptable bounds.  This oppresses those who do not live within these bounds.

It is a long essay.  I will take some time and write one or more further posts to cover it in some detail.  I only here intend to introduce the subject and offer a few initial thoughts.

I begin with a paragraph that I wrote the other day:

Many years ago, well before bionic was even a twinkle in my eye and well before I was able to maturely consider anything associated with this idea of libertarians and culture, I tried explaining libertarian theory to my father.  He asked, very directly: “What are you?  A communist?”  I thought he was crazy, but I have come to learn that he understood this stuff far better than I did.

I first began to understand what he meant only recently…a hint of it came when reading about the Spanish Civil War: what were communists and anarchists doing fighting on the same side? Yet, each knew that if they were victorious, they would next have to fight each other.

But the light really began to shine brightly when I first began to dig into what is commonly known as left-libertarian.  The interconnectedness of the founders of what is understood today as “left” and what is understood today as “libertarian” runs pretty deep.  As I recall, both Murray Rothbard and Kevin Carson (perhaps as “left” a left-libertarian as I have found) point to some of the same earlier thinkers, yet…obviously…ended up with drastically different conclusions regarding the term “libertarian.”

It really jumped out at me especially when seeing Antonio Gramsci and his method cited positively as an influence by Carson.  Even at my age, the older I get the smarter my dad becomes.

When I read this essay by Marcuse, I find myself nodding in agreement with many of his complaints and criticisms regarding the current order; hence, the enemy of my enemy.  Yet, I cringe while reading his prescription.

He is, in some ways, the enemy of my enemy; yet, in no way, shape or form is he my friend.  The solution he describes – which, in many ways, we are seeing unfold around us – will lead to and is leading to a physical hell on earth for many people – ultimately, even for those he pretends to want to save.

Marcuse, like Gramsci before him, offers a prescription for destroying the social order different than the one offered by Marx.  But the means is really irrelevant; it is the same end.  Destroying the social order will not bring utopia; it will bring a hell for those who live to see it.  We have seen it – the twentieth century is full of the bodies of its victims.

I will examine the common enemies and I will examine the uncommon prescriptions for remedy. Once complete, a sharp distinction will be drawn between those libertarians who see as foundational to liberty the building blocks of traditional family and culture and those libertarians who advocate that liberty demands escape from all prevailing norms of culture and hierarchy.

The enemy of my enemy is an even more deplorable enemy.  But I guess this just makes me one of those who must be repressed.


This is why Trump was elected.  He symbolizes a pushback against the revolution that has its roots in the Renaissance and has been carried on through the Enlightenment and, inevitably, the Progressive Era.  The fruits of this we now find in the destruction of the West – made manifest in all mainstream news, college campuses and prevailing thought.  Call them social justice warriors.

They aren’t after Trump because of Russia; they are using Russia as a stick, only because Trump represents the anti-progressive movement – the culmination of which we see in the manifestation of the ideas of Gramsci and Marcuse.

They are willing to risk war with Russia to get what they want – a continuation of their culture-destroying ideology.  Some people may finally have decided it is time to push back.  Note what they are fighting for: culture, family, tradition.  Note what they are not fighting for: the non-aggression principle.

Reprinted with permission from Bionic Mosquito.

Is that hypnotic, undulating red, white, and blue behind the anchors designed to turn off your critical filter?

This is not new either . . . that is, if you’ve been paying attention . . . .  Melissa Dykes over at ActivePost takes us through the matrix if you will.

Television is where people get their news and get their information of the world. Imagine that if people are hypnotized by digital media during news hours what that does to their thinking in general, their thinking on other aspects of life, on internal life, on our individual past life, on how we think as we cultivate friendships.  Or how we think in a job interview or a financial decision.

When every conservative in the world was enamored by Glenn Beck, I was appalled, appalled by his narrative mode and delivery combined with the red, white, and blue undulating behind him so that his viewers saw it.  It is at least distracting, if not manipulative.  And if it is manipulative, it is designed to turn off his viewer’s critical filter.  What did I say in that previous post?  Repetition reduces vigilance, and it’s true; it does.  Yes, personally, we want repetition in our lives so that we can be productive day in and day out, but when repetition is used to reduce vigilance that should come as an anomaly–and should be seen for what they are: games of military intelligence who serve the deep state.  Oh, and with what end in mind?  To game you.  That is all. And it’s that simple.  Military intelligence, indeed.

I don’t know about you, but that undulating flag behind Joe Scorborough gives me a bloomin’ headache.

There are others, plenty of others, but YouTube likes to keep certain topics down, deep in the memory hole.  Those waving flags give me a headache because I prefer, one, to resist mind-control efforts by those trying to hijack your soul the way the announcer did with Al Rocher.  Two, I don’t like the foreign or domestic policies of the U.S. federal government.  I think it is a morally bankrupt institution.  I love this country.  That is different.  Any government that treats its own citizens as enemy combatants and begins to execute psychological lobotomies on them without their consent can only be described as sinister and deserving of our contempt not our admiration.

2 Months of Mandated Tests Destroys Love of Learning?

I don’t feel particularly virtuous, nor do I want to be outraged, morally or otherwise, and it certainly does seem that public education is such an easy target, which it is, but when someone pens a complaint at the schools or the system, it had better be a good one and offer some real solutions to redress that complaint.  Well, Samuel Postell gets half credit for that score.  His essay does an excellent job of drawing a condemning light on the amount of time devoted to mandatory tests, the taking of them, and the preparation of them.  By no means unique, he still brings to bear a serioius problem: mandated tests as substitutes for valuable information.  Writing for Scott Horton’s The Libertarian Institute, Postell nails it:

In the marketplace, companies that don’t satisfy customer needs don’t survive. Unfortunately, this principle does not apply to the school system. As the workforce is becoming more efficient, the classroom is becoming less efficient. A 2016 survey by the Center for Education Policy shows that 81 percent of teachers believe that their students spend too much time taking tests. The same study shows that throughout the school year, students spend 10 days taking district-mandated tests and nine days taking state-mandated tests on average. In addition to the nineteen days spent taking standardized tests, 36 percent of teachers report spending at least a month on test prep for state-mandated exams. Given the short duration of the school year, this leaves teachers little time to tailor the school experience to the wants and needs of the individual students. What is lost is what is most important: cultivating a love of learning.

Whoa!  19 days of taking tests.

30 days of preparing for tests.  That’s 2 months, folks, dedicated to mandated tests.

Postell wonders if this structure of 2 months’ worth of time devoted to mandated tests isn’t one of those things that’s leeching on the kids’ souls and effectively putting kids in a kind of emotional and psychological holding tank that only serves to extend adolescence.”However, I can’t help but wonder if teachers like myself are contributing to the rearing of Peter Pans.”

One definitive effect of this mandated testing is that it for sure destroys a love of learning . . .

What is lost is what is most important: cultivating a love of learning.

That is plausibly true.  But it’s not just a love of learning that is jeopardized: it’s love of life.  There are lots of other things outside of the classroom that is available to kids that can be equally destructive.  Certainly, mandated tests can have a disastrous effect on one’s dreams if one puts his dreams and ambitions in the tax-funded school system.

Before I offer a solution, here is one more criticism:

The headlines speak for themselves.  Student-teacher sex scandals, student-student sex, immodesty, foul language, drugs, alcohol, radical homosexual agendas, teachers taking students for abortions, “sexting” leading to suicide, sexually transmitted diseases, brutal beatings, and school shootings.  These are just some of the headlines that have become the norm.  And that does not include things like cheating, disrespect for authority, impropriety towards the opposite sex, and other moral behaviors children learn regularly and repeatedly in school.

Van Til said it better than I ever could: “Non-Christian education puts the child in a vacuum…. The result is that child dies. Christian education alone really nurtures personality because it alone gives the child air and food…. Modern educational philosophy gruesomely insults our God and our Christ. How, then, do you expect to build anything positively Christian or theistic upon a foundation which is the negation of Christianity and theism?…. No teaching of any sort is possible except in Christian schools.”

Moreover, the system itself is funded by virtual theft.  Homeowners are forced under threat of the loss of their property to pay for the education of other people’s children.  How is that appropriate?  The government tells everyone that they have to send their children to school, then tells homeowners that they are going to be the ones to foot the bill whether they like it or not.  Not only is this a form of welfare, it is also a form of theft.

So, what are your options?  Maybe there’s only one: opt out.  Why not try homeschooling?  Why not preserve a child’s dreams for happiness and success?  If they want to go to college, they still can.  In fact, there are lots of ways to get to college while you’re completing your high-school curriculum.  Spend the time to watch this:

Then read this.

Postel then adds that school destroys individual dignity.  No truer words were ever spoken.  So why put your child in a tax-funded school?  To be sure it’s not just the students who suffer.  From the State and its ADA tax-funding system to the school board to the superintendent to the school’s administration, teachers and students like endure a loss of dignity.  For teachers with decades’ long careers, it may be even worse.

Students are not treated with the dignity of individuals. The result: the consumers––the students––are the ones who suffer the consequences. They’re unhappy as the school day lacks either true substantive challenge or the one-on-one attention students need to flourish. Some students are bored with school while others are frustrated. To the child, this either manifests into a looming feeling that time is being wasted, or in a feeling of helplessness and loneliness. Due to arbitrary districting laws as well as regulations making the establishment of independent schools difficult, school choice is severely limited and parents are forced to settle for mediocrity.

Regrettably, Postel’s call to action will fall on deaf ears.

We must recognize that the end of school is education, not vice versa. It is time that we begin to put the needs of our kids at the forefront of education. We can begin by thinking of innovative solutions to our education problem that are not one-size-fits-all. We can then understand the urgency of educational reform and turn the several solutions to education into a national conversation. We must loosen state regulations that prohibit educational solutions from playing out. If we do so, we will empower teachers and free them to teach so that they can excite students into exploring the goodness, the truth, and the beauty that is to be found in the world and within themselves.

His first mistake is the use of his pronoun “we.”  By “we,” he’s including the state. He’s fine with a cooperative partnership with the state.  He is not advocating homeschooling.  On the contrary, he wants to revise the national conversation on education.  And that is his second mistake.  The nation, state, and counties are too big.  National norms or standards do not have to be in place to have a cohesive national identity.  We don’t all have to read Jane Eyre to be part of the national discussion.  Think local.  Act local.  Funding should also be local.  Don’t take the state’s money.  Take Satan’s money, and you do Satan’s bidding.

Repetition reduces vigilance. Slow-drip Snowden leaks conditioned folks to accept spying as the natural order of things

This information will probably not surprise anyone, though stunning as it is.  The article that Melissa Dykes reviews is from the Intercept, titled “The Art of Deception: Training for a New Generation of Online Covert Operation,” February 24, 2014.  It’s a slideshow, a PowerPoint if you will.  Author’s name is not given.  It’s categorized under “Documents,” so it is a 2014 document file.  It is an excellent review.  Remember, too, that the new military policy views American citizens as enemy combatants, which means that the military gladly applies their psychological war operations on its own.

h/t Charles Burris

I like the name of Melissa (Melton) Dykes’ website, TruthStreamMedia.

I took a few notes, but June 18, 2013 Snowden,

repetition reduces vigilance and creates expectancies: drip out a story and people don’t care any more.  They know it.

Here are some other gems:

1. Attention drops at the perceived end
2. The target looks where you look.
3. The big move covers the little move.
4. Control attention: conspicuity and expectancies.
5. Haversack Ruse: the piece of bad luck.
6. Swap the real for the false, and vice versa.

Then come the 10 Principles for Influence.  Penned by whom, I cannot tell:

The Time Principle.
The Need & Greed Principle.
The Deception Principle.
The Social Compliance/authority Principle.
The Herd Principle.
The Consistency Principle.
The Reciprocity Principle.
The Flattery Principle.
The Dishonesty Principle.
The Distraction Principle.

People make decisions for emotional reasons, not rationale ones.

Social creativity:  Seed  >  Convert  >  Share.

All of this is based on game theory: Can I game this?

All stable processes we shall predict.  All unstable processes, we shall control.     ~~John Von Neumann

Person’s brain as a computer, a cog in the wheel.  It all has to do with programming you.

Strand 4: Distruption & Computer Network Attack.  Online Covert Action Accreditation (OCAA)

DISRUPTION Operational Playbook
Infiltration Operation.
Ruse Operation
Set Piece Operation
False Flag Operation
False Rescue Operation (Jessica Lynch)
Disruption Operation
Sting Operation

Identifying & Exploiting Fracture Points

Things that push a group together Shared Opposition Personal power
Shared Ideology TENSION Pre-empting cleavages Things that  pull a group apart.
Common beliefs Competition
Ideological differences


Full roll out complete by early 2013.

150+ JTRIG and Ops staff fully trained.

Mainstreaming work—push reduced “Level 1” Tradecraft to 500+ GCHQ.

“Relentlessly Optimise Training and Tradecraft.”

Drills like Jade Helm, they’ve got AI doing some of this stuff.  Master the Human Domain, meaning that they don’t even need an actual person to do some of this stuff.  It’s all online.  Yikes.

It’s literally the Matrix.

Bank of America: 50% Chance We’re in the Matrix . . . Liteally.  Truth

Conjuring with information.  Head of Human Science JTRIG-HSOC NSTS.  Because they’re magicians.  Because they’re Batman.


If what she’s reporting on wasn’t valid, there would be no need for trolls.

CIA Chief: We’ll Spy on your through your dishwasher, Spencer Ackerman, March 15, 2012, Wired.

Slow-drip Snowden Leaks Just Conditioning to Accept Big Brother.