J.E. Gardiner – J.S. Bach – BWV 248 WO Kantaten 4 bis 6 vom 27.12.1999 Herderkirche


J.E. Gardiner – J.S. Bach – BWV 248 WO Kantaten 4 bis 6 eine Aufzeichnung vom 27.12.1999 aus der Herderkirche in Weimar.

Monteverdi Choir
English Baroque Soloists

Claron McFadden – Sopran
Christoph Genz – Tenor
Barnarda Fink – Alt
Dietrich Henschel – Bass
Leitung: Sir John Eliot Gardiner


Gardiner J.S. Bach BWV 248 WO Kantaten 1-3 vom 23. Dez.1999 Weimar, Herderkirche


Sir J.E. Gardiner – J.S. Bach BWV 248 WO Kantaten 1-3 vom 23. Dez.1999 aus der Herderkirche in Weimar.

English Baroque Soloists
Monteverdi Choir
Claron McFadden – Sopran
Christoph Genz – Tenor
Barnarda Fink – Alt
Dietrich Henschel – Bass
Leitung: Sir John Eliot Gardiner

Who is Pope Francis I? By Prof Michel Chossudovsky

“Washington’s Pope”? Who is Pope Francis I?
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, May 28, 2014
Global Research 14 March 2013
Url of this article:
This article was first published in March 2013 following the election by the Vatican Conclave of Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio. 
In the course of the last year, Pope Francis has been portrayed in chorus by the Western media as a left leaning champion of “Liberation Theology” committed to global poverty alleviation. According to London’s Telegraph, Pope Francis “is bringing Liberation Theology into the Vatican”.  in the footsteps of Francis of Assisi, the ‘preferential option for the poor’ has so to speak been reintegrated into the Catholic mainstream under the helm of Pope Francis I.
Liberation Theology according to Ambrose Evans Pritchard writing in the Telegraph:  
“now has a Papal imprimatur. It is close to becoming official doctrine for the world’s 1.2bn Roman Catholics under ‘Evangelii Gaudium’, the Pope’s first apostolic exhortation. This will have consequences.”. (emphasis added)
What the Western media fail to mention is that Jorge Mario Bergoglio (Pope Francis I) was one of the main supporters –within the Catholic hierarchy– of Argentina’s military dictatorship which came to power in a CIA supported coup in 1976. 
Jorge Mario Bergoglio not only supported the dictatorship, he also played a direct and complicit role in the “Dirty War” (la guerra sucia”) in liaison with the military Junta headed by General Jorge Videla, leading to the arrest, imprisonment, torture and disappearance of progressive Catholic priests and laymen who were opposed to Argentina’s military rule. “While the two priests Francisco Jalics y Orlando Yorio, kidnapped by the death squads in May 1976 were released five months later. after having been tortured, six other people associated with their parish kidnapped as part of the same operation were “disappeared” (desaparecidos).”
Liberation Theology has become a convenient tool of media propaganda: the protagonists of oppression are portrayed as liberators. Pope Francis I, heralded as the champion of Liberation in Latin America is now bringing his message to Palestine: According to Naim Ateek, the founder of Liberation Theology in Palestine, quoted in TIME, “We feel he has been able to speak about the poor in Latin America,… Now we would like to see him speak about the oppressed in Palestine.”
At a historic meeting at the Vatican in early May 2014 with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, Pope Francis I  urged world leaders to challenge “all forms of injustice” and resist the “economy of exclusion… the throwaway culture, … and the “culture of death,” [which] … sadly risk becoming passively accepted.” (National Catholic Reporter, May 26, 2014.
Careful choice of words by Pope Francis: The “dirty war” in Latin America under Operation Condor in which he participated was predicated on the “Culture of Death”. The 1976 military coup was supported by Wall Street precisely with a view to imposing “the economy of exclusion”, conducive to the impoverishment of the Argentinian population.  
Michel Chossudovsky, May 28, 2013

“Washington’s Pope”? Who is Pope Francis I? Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Argentina’s “Dirty War”

by Michel Chossudovsky
March 13, 2013
[see update on the Secret Memorandum]
The Vatican conclave has elected Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio as Pope Francis I
Who is Jorge Mario Bergoglio? 
In 1973, he had been appointed “Provincial” of Argentina for the Society of Jesus.
In this capacity, Bergoglio was the highest ranking Jesuit in Argentina during the military dictatorship led by General Jorge Videla (1976-1983).
He later became bishop and archbishop of Buenos Aires. Pope John Paul II elevated him to the title of cardinal in 2001
When the military junta relinquished power in 1983, the duly elected president Raúl Alfonsín set up a Truth Commission pertaining to the crimes underlying the “Dirty War” (La Guerra Sucia).
The military junta had been supported covertly by Washington.
US. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger played a behind the scenes role in the 1976 military coup.
Kissinger’s top deputy on Latin America, William Rogers, told him two days after the coup that “we’ve got to expect a fair amount of repression, probably a good deal of blood, in Argentina before too long.” … (National Security Archive, March 23, 2006)
“Operation Condor”
Ironically, a major trial opened up in Buenos Aires on March 5, 2013 a week prior to Cardinal Bergoglio’s investiture as Pontiff. The ongoing trial in Buenos Aires is: “to consider the totality of crimes carried out under Operation Condor, a coordinated campaign by various US-backed Latin American dictatorships in the 1970s and 1980s to hunt down, torture and murder tens of thousands of opponents of those regimes.”
(Photo above: Henry Kissinger and General Jorge Videla (1970s)
The military junta led by General Jorge Videla (left) was responsible for countless assassinations, including priests and nuns who opposed military rule following the CIA sponsored March 24, 1976 coup which overthrew the government of Isabel Peron:
 ”Videla was among the generals convicted of human rights crimes, including “disappearances”, torture, murders and kidnappings. In 1985, Videla was sentenced to life imprisonment at the military prison of Magdalena.”
Wall Street and the Neoliberal Economic Agenda
One of the key appointments of the military junta (on the instructions of Wall Street) was the Minister of Economy, Jose Alfredo Martinez de Hoz, a member of Argentina’s business establishment and a close friend of David Rockefeller.
The neoliberal macro-economic policy package adopted under Martinez de Hoz was a “carbon copy” of that imposed in October 1973 in Chile by the Pinochet dictatorship under advice from the  “Chicago Boys”, following the September 11, 1973 coup d’Etat and the assassination of president Salvador Allende.
Wages were immediately frozen by decree. Real purchasing power collapsed by more than 30 percent in the 3 months following the March 24, 1976 military coup. (Author’s estimates, Cordoba, Argentina, July 1976). The Argentinean population was impoverished.
Under the helm of Minister of Economy Jose Alfredo Martinez de Hoz, central bank monetary policy was largely determined by Wall Street and the IMF. The currency market was manipulated. The Peso was deliberately overvalued leading to an insurmountable external debt. The entire national economy was precipitated into bankruptcy.
(See Image right: From left to right: Jose Alfredo Martinez de Hoz, David Rockefeller and General Jorge Videla)
Wall Street and the Catholic Church Hierarchy
Wall Street was firmly behind the military Junta which waged “The Dirty War” on its behalf. In turn, the Catholic Church hierarchy played a central role in sustaining the legitimacy of the military Junta.
The Order of Jesus –which represented the Conservative yet most influential faction within the Catholic Church, closely associated with Argentina’s economic elites– was firmly behind the military Junta, against so-called “Leftists” in the Peronista movement.
“The Dirty War”: Allegations directed Against Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio
Condemning the military dictatorship (including its human rights violations) was a taboo within the Catholic Church.  While the upper echelons of the Church were supportive of the military Junta, the grassroots of the Church was firmly opposed to the imposition of military rule.
In 2005, human rights lawyer Myriam Bregman filed a criminal suit against Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, accusing him of conspiring with the military junta in the 1976 kidnapping of two Jesuit priests.
Several years later, the survivors of the “Dirty War” openly accused Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio of complicity in the kidnapping of  priests Francisco Jalics y Orlando Yorio as well six members of their parish,  (El Mundo, 8 November 2010) 
(Image Left: Jorge Mario Bergoglio and General Jorge Videla)
Bergoglio, who at the time was “Provincial” for the Society of Jesus, had ordered the two “Leftist” Jesuit priests and opponents of military rule  “to leave their pastoral work” (i.e. they were fired) following divisions within the Society of Jesus regarding the role of the Catholic Church and its relations to the military Junta.
While the two priests Francisco Jalics y Orlando Yorio, kidnapped by the death squads in May 1976 were released five months later. after having been tortured, six other people associated with their parish kidnapped as part of the same operation were “disappeared” (desaparecidos). These included four teachers associated with the parish and two of their husbands.
Upon his release, Priest Orlando Yorio “accused Bergoglio of effectively handing them over [including six other people] to the death squads … Jalics refused to discuss the complaint after moving into seclusion in a German monastery.” (Associated Press, March 13, 2013, emphasis added),
“During the first trial of leaders of the military junta in 1985, Yorio declared, “I am sure that he himself gave over the list with our names to the Navy.” The two were taken to the notorious Navy School of Mechanics (ESMA) torture center and held for over five months before being drugged and dumped in a town outside the city. (See Bill van Auken, “The Dirty War” Pope, World Socialist Website and Global Research, March 14, 2013
Among those “disappeared” by the death squads were Mónica Candelaria Mignone and María Marta Vázquez Ocampo, respectively daughter of the founder of of the CELS (Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales) Emilio Mignone and daughter of the president of Madres de Plaza de Mayo, Martha Ocampo de Vázquez. (El Periodista Online, March 2013).
María Marta Vásquez, her husband César Lugones (see picture right) and Mónica Candelaria Mignone allegedly “handed over to the death squads” by Jesuit “Provincial” Jorge Mario Bergoglio are among the thousands of “desaparecidos” (disappeared) of Argentina’s “Dirty War”, which was supported covertly by Washington under “Operation Condor”. (See memorialmagro.com.ar)
In the course of the trial initiated in 2005:
“Bergoglio [Pope Francis I] twice invoked his right under Argentine law to refuse to appear in open court, and when he eventually did testify in 2010, his answers were evasive”: “At least two cases directly involved Bergoglio. One examined the torture of two of his Jesuit priests — Orlando Yorio and Francisco Jalics — who were kidnapped in 1976 from the slums where they advocated liberation theology. Yorio accused Bergoglio of effectively handing them over to the death squads… by declining to tell the regime that he endorsed their work. Jalics refused to discuss it after moving into seclusion in a German monastery.” (Los Angeles Times, April 1, 2005)
The Secret Memorandum
[This section was added on March 19, 2013]
The military government acknowledged in a Secret Memo (see below) that Father Bergoglio had accused the two priests of having established contacts with the guerilleros, and for having disobeyed the orders of the Church hierarchy (Conflictos de obedecencia). It also states that the Jesuit order had demanded the dissolution of  their group and that they had refused to abide by Bergoglio’s instructions.
The document acknowledges that the “arrest” of the two priests, who were taken to the torture and detention center at the Naval School of Mechanics, ESMA, was based on information transmitted by Father Bergoglio to the military authorities. (signed by Mr. Orcoyen)
(see below).
While a former member of  the priests group had joined the insurgency, there was no evidence of the priests having contacts with the guerrilla movement.
“Holy Communion for the Dictators”  
The accusations directed against Bergoglio regarding the two kidnapped Jesuit priests and six members of their parish are but the tip of the iceberg. While Bergoglio was an important figure in the Catholic Church,  he was certainly not alone in supporting the Military Junta.
According to lawyer Myriam Bregman:  “Bergoglio’s own statements proved church officials knew from early on that the junta was torturing and killing its citizens”, and yet publicly endorsed the dictators. “The dictatorship could not have operated this way without this key support,” (Los Angeles Times, April 1, 2005 emphasis added)
(Image right: General Jorge Videla takes communion. Date and name of priest unconfirmed)
The entire Catholic hierarchy was behind the US sponsored military dictatorship.  It is worth recalling that on March 23, 1976, on the eve of the military coup:
Videla and other plotters received the blessing of the Archbishop of Paraná, Adolfo Tortolo,who also served as vicar of the armed forces. The day of the takeover itself, the military leaders had a lengthy meeting with the leaders of the bishop’s conference. As he emerged from that meeting, Archbishop Tortolo stated that although “the church has its own specific mission . . . there are circumstances in which it cannot refrain from participating even when it is a matter of problems related to the specific order of the state.” He urged Argentinians to “cooperate in a positive way” with the new government.” (The Humanist.org, January 2011, emphasis added)
In an interview conducted with El Sur, General Jorge Videla, who is now serving a life sentence for crimes against humanity confirmed that:
He kept the country’s Catholic hierarchy informed about his regime’s policy of “disappearing” political opponents, and that Catholic leaders offered advice on how to “manage” the policy. 
Jorge Videla said he had “many conversations” with Argentina’s primate, Cardinal Raúl Francisco Primatesta, about his regime’s dirty war against left-wing activists. He said there were also conversations with other leading bishops from Argentina’s episcopal conference as well as with the country’s papal nuncio at the time, Pio Laghi.
“They advised us about the manner in which to deal with the situation,” said Videla” (Tom Henningan, Former Argentinian dictator says he told Catholic Church of disappeared Irish Times, July 24, 2012, emphasis added)
It is worth noting that according to a 1976 statement by Archbishop Adolfo Tortolo, the military would always consult with a member of the Catholic hierarchy in the case of the “arrest” of a grassroots member of  the clergy. This statement was made specifically in relation to the two kidnapped Jesuit priests, whose pastoral activities were under the authority of Society of Jesus “provincial” Jorge Mario Bergoglio. (El Periodista Online, March 2013).
In endorsing the military Junta, the Catholic hierarchy was complicit in torture and mass killings, an estimated “22,000 dead and disappeared, from 1976 to  1978  … Thousands of additional victims were killed between 1978 and 1983 when the military was forced from power.” (National Security Archive, March 23, 2006).
The Role of the Vatican
The Vatican under Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II played a central  role in supporting the Argentinian military Junta.
Pio Laghi, the Vatican’s apostolic nuncio to Argentina admitted “turning a blind eye” to the torture and massacres.
Laghi had personal ties to members of the ruling military junta including  General Jorge Videla and Admiral Emilio Eduardo Massera.
(See image left. Vatican’s Nuncio Pio Laghi and General Jorge Videla)
Admiral Emilio Massera in close liaison with his US handlers, was the mastermind of “La Guerra Sucia” (The Dirty War). Under the auspices of the military regime, he established:
“an interrogation and torture centre in the Naval School of Mechanics, ESMA [close to Buenos Aires], … It was a sophisticated, multi-purpose establishment, vital in the military plan to assassinate an estimated 30,000 “enemies of the state”. …  Many thousands of ESMA’s inmates, including, for instance, two French nuns, were routinely tortured mercilessly before being killed or dropped from aircraft into the River Plata.
Massera, the most forceful member of the triumvirate, did his best to maintain his links with Washington. He assisted in the development of Plan Cóndor, a collaborative scheme to co-ordinate the terrorism being practised by South American military régimes. (Hugh O’Shaughnessy, Admiral Emilio Massera: Naval officer who took part in the 1976 coup in Argentina and was later jailed for his part in the junta’s crimes, The Independent, November 10, 2010, emphasis added)
Reports confirm that the Vatican’s representative Pio Laghi and Admiral Emilio Massera were friends.
(right: Admiral Emilio Massera, architect of “The Dirty War” received by Pope Paul VI at the Vatican)
The Catholic Church: Chile versus Argentina
It is worth noting that  in the wake of the military coup in Chile on September 11,1973, the Cardinal of Santiago de Chile, Raul Silva Henriquez openly condemned the military junta led by General Augusto Pinochet. In marked contrast to Argentina, this stance of the Catholic hierarchy in Chile was instrumental in curbing the tide of political assassinations and human rights violations directed against supporters of Salvador Allende  and opponents of the military regime.
The man behind the interfaith Comité Pro-Paz was Cardinal Raúl Silva Henríquez. Shortly after the coup, Silva, … stepped into the role of “upstander,”a term the author and activist Samantha Power coined to distinguish people who stand up to injustice—often at great personal risk—from “bystanders.”
… Soon after the coup, Silva and other church leaders published a declaration condemning and expressing sorrow for the bloodshed. This was a fundamental turning point for many members of the Chilean clergy… The cardinal visited the National Stadium and, shocked by the scale of the government crackdown, instructed his aides to begin collecting information from the thousands flocking to the church for refuge.
Silva’s actions led to an open conflict with Pinochet, who did not hesitate to threaten the church and the Comité  Pro-Paz. (Taking a Stand Against Pinochet: The Catholic Church and the Disappeared pdf)
Had the Catholic hierarchy in Argentina  and Jorge Mario Bergoglio taken a similar stance to that of Cardinal Raul Silva Henriquez, thousands of lives would have been saved.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio was not, in the words of Samantha Power, a “bystander”. He was complicit in extensive crimes against humanity.
Neither is Pope Francis “a Man of the People” committed to “helping the poor” in the footsteps of Saint Francis of Assisi, as portrayed in chorus by the Western media mantra. Quite the opposite: his endeavors under the military Junta, consistently targeted progressive members of the Catholic clergy as well as committed human rights activists involved in grassroots anti-poverty programs.
In supporting Argentina’s “Dirty War”, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has blatantly violated the very tenets of Christian morality which cherish  the value of human life.  Author’s message to Pope Francis: “Thou shalt not kill”
“Operation Condor” and the Catholic Church
The election of Cardinal Bergoglio by the Vatican conclave to serve as Pope Francis I will have immediate repercussions regarding the ongoing “Operation Condor” Trial in Buenos Aires.
The Church was involved in supporting the military Junta.  This is something which will emerge in the course of the trial proceedings.  No doubt, there will be attempts to obfuscate the role of the Catholic hierarchy and the newly appointed Pope Francis I,  who served as head of Argentina’s Jesuit order during the military dictatorship.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio:  “Washington’s Pope in the Vatican”?  
The election of Pope Francis I has broad geopolitical implications for the entire Latin American  region.
In the 1970s, Jorge Mario Bergoglio was supportive of a US sponsored military dictatorship.
The Catholic hierarchy in Argentina supported the military government. The Junta’s program of torture, assassinations and ‘disappearances” of thousands of political opponents was coordinated and supported by Washington under the CIA’s “Operation Condor”.
Wall Street’s interests were sustained through Jose Alfredo Martinez de Hoz’ office at the Ministry of Economy.
The Catholic Church in Latin America is politically influential. It also has a grip on public opinion. This is known and understood by the architects of US foreign policy as well as US intelligence.
In Latin America, where a number of governments are now challenging US hegemony, one would expect –given Bergoglio’s track record–  that the new Pontiff Francis I as leader of the Catholic Church, will play de facto, a discrete “undercover” political role on behalf of Washington.
With Jorge Bergoglio, Pope Francis I  in the Vatican –who faithfully served US interests in the heyday of General Jorge Videla and Admiral Emilio Massera–  the hierarchy of the Catholic Church in Latin America can once again be effectively manipulated to undermine “progressive” (Leftist) governments, not only in Argentina (in relation to the government of Cristina Kirschner) but throughout the entire region, including Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia.
The instatement of  “a pro-US pope” occurred a week following the death of  president Hugo Chavez.
“Regime Change” at the Vatican
The US State Department routinely pressures members of the United Security Council with a view to influencing the vote pertaining to Security Council resolutions.
US covert operations and propaganda campaigns are routinely applied with a view to influencing national elections in different countries around the World.
Similarly, the CIA has a longstanding covert relationship with the Vatican.
Did the US government attempt to influence the outcome of the election of the new pontiff?
Firmly committed to serving US foreign policy interests in Latin America, Jorge Mario Bergoglio was Washington’s preferred candidate.
Were undercover pressures discretely exerted by Washington, within the Catholic Church, directly or indirectly, on the 115 cardinals who are members of the Vatican conclave?
Global Research TV (GRTV) Interview with Michel Chossudovsky
Author’s Note
From the outset of the military regime in 1976, I was Visiting Professor at the Social Policy Institute of the Universidad Nacional de Cordoba, Argentina. My major research focus at the time was to investigate the social impacts of the deadly macroeconomic reforms adopted by the military Junta.  
I was teaching at the University of Cordoba during the initial wave of assassinations which also targeted progressive grassroots members of the Catholic clergy. 
The Northern industrial city of Cordoba was the center of the resistance movement. I witnessed how the Catholic hierarchy actively and routinely supported the military junta, creating an atmosphere of  intimidation and fear throughout the country. The general feeling at the time was that Argentinians had been betrayed by the upper echelons of the Catholic Church.
Three years earlier, at the time of Chile’s September 11, 1973 military coup, leading to the overthrow of the Popular Unity government of Salvador Allende,  I was Visiting Professor at the Institute of Economics, Catholic University of Chile, Santiago de Chile.
In the immediate wake of the coup in Chile,  I witnessed how the Cardinal of Santiago, Raul Silva Henriquez –acting on behalf of the Catholic Church– confronted the military dictatorship.
Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article.

Europe turns into cesspool of the world – Um Artigo Louco?

A Europa tem criado, junto com os EUA, muito problemas no mundo – guerras, miséria, golpes-de-Estado, revoluções primaveris e coloridas. Mas não se resolvem problemas atendendo aos efeitos e não às causas. Quando há uma ruptura de canalização em casa, o problema não se resolve com baldes de água mas com a reparação da ruptura. A Europa tem que mudar a sua atitude belicosa e economicista imperialista (com os EUA) face ao resto do mundo. A Europa também não deve estar refém de um sentimento de culpa pelo seu passado imperialista e colonialista, mas deve acabar com o seu presente imperialista e neocolonialista, ao lado dos EUA. Não se faz política com sentimentos mas com práticas de justiça. A Europa já tem excesso de população, não há trabalho para milhões de cidadãos europeus. O que é há é uma injusta distribuição da riqueza e destruição financeira da produção, que daria para a segurança social, saúde, educação e investimento, além de para a colaboração com os países mais pobres. Não é degradando a Europa – crescimento excessivo das cidades, caos no campo, miséria, descida dos salários, descaracterização e desenraizamento culturais – que o mundo melhora.


Prabhat Patnaik, economista indiano, a propósito, escreve acerca do processo de mundialização (ou globalização), de que este fenómeno é um aspecto que vai provocar o enfraquecimento das lutas internas e não vai alimentar a solidariedade internacional dos trabalhadores: “Não pretendo entrar na discussão das possíveis alternativas para o desligamento. Uma vez que os próprios oponentes do desligamento não explicam tais alternativas, muito menos argumentam explicitamente a favor delas, não precisamos entrar nesse território. Além disso, é lógico que não havendo movimentos internacionais de camponeses e nem realmente movimentos internacionais eficazes de trabalhadores, para resistir aos efeitos da globalização, isto é, uma vez que a nação permanece como a arena primária da resistência de classe contra os efeitos da globalização, se tal resistência tiver êxito em chegar ao poder ela não tem alternativa senão desligar-se da globalização. No entanto, o que pretendo fazer não é repetir estes pontos óbvios mas ao invés disso chamar a atenção para um “paradoxo aparente” que implica toda esta questão. E este consiste no facto de que não é o desligamento da globalização mas sim a própria globalização que conduz aos fortalecimento de forças reaccionárias em países como o nosso; de que não é o “nacionalismo” dirigido contra a globalização, o qual é uma expressão da hegemonia do capital financeiro internacional, que promove a reacção por “olhar de dentro”, mas ao invés disso é o próprio capital financeiro internacional que promove a reacção como meio de reter sua hegemonia”. 



Europe turns into cesspool of the world. Migration in Europe



The American propaganda machine never stops trumpeting about the imminent Russian threat. The American political elite portrays Russia as a state that threatens Europe in the first place. With this pretext in mind, the USA and NATO continue to militarize Europe. European populations do not show any protests, let along governments. Few people in Europe realize that it is not Russia that they should fear. Let’s imagine the future of Europe in two or three decades.

Could you imagine 20 years ago that all modern cities would be equipped with CCTV cameras that would be following you everywhere – in buildings, in trains, in buses and cars and everywhere else?  Nowadays, no one raises the question of violation of human rights and privacy. These issues have been skillfully replaced with concerns for personal safety and struggle against the terrorist threat.

Edward Snowden told the world that US secret services control nearly all of the world wide web. It would not be a surprise to know that NSA’s secret laboratories continue the research for establishing control over mankind, and it goes about not only humans.

Every person will have chips implanted underneath their skin

For example, almost all pets in the West have chips underneath their skin. Chipped livestock is common practice in several countries of the West as well. In the US, this technology has been developing rapidly. People already volunteer to have chips implanted in their bodies so that police could find them in case of emergency. All US passports have integrated chips, like credit cards.

In fact, it is not Russian aggression that threatens Europe. Europe is facing the danger of Washington-generated Islamization that will deprive Europe of cultural and Christian identity. Why not throw good old Europe into the melting pot of nationalities and religions so that it is easier to control it?

There was a shocking news report last week about more than 70 dead bodies  of Syrian refugees in an abandoned truck in the east of Austria. Clearly, the flow of migrants from Muslim countries is larger than official statistics says.

For instance, Bulgaria, according to quotas, must accept about 3,000 workers. In real life, there will be 60-70 thousand of them this year, Bulgarian bloggers write. Many national governments of the EU warn that key provisions of the migration policy of Brussels are not working. However, Brussels continues to repeat the mantra of tolerance and multiculturalism. Is Brussels independent in making such decisions?

One may also wonder why refugees from Iraq, Syria and Africa do not go to Australia, the USA and Canada. Why don’t they escape to neighboring well-to-do countries, such as Turkey, Lebanon and  Jordan? The answer is simple. In the United States and Canada, there is tough immigration legislation. Australia turns boats full of migrants to the “concentration camp’ on the island of Nauru.  Turkey and neighboring Arab countries do not allocate public funds to maintain refugees.

Europe was chosen as a cesspool for those who flee from US-instigated destruction and wars for democracy.

All Orthodox nations are dying out, and Sunni Muslims are coming to replace them. Germany receives 800,000 inquiries for refugee status from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan.

The United States of Europe: A few decades to go

Having been brainwashed with the concept of the Russian threat, the Europeans do not realize how the US is militarizing their countries. Washington has been building NATO command points and increasing its contingent throughout Europe. By the middle of the current century, European capitals may become Muslim-dominated cities.

Social explosions may lead to the creation of, for example, “the Party of Islamic Justice” that will win parliamentary elections in the United States of Europe thus giving birth to a new, 1-billion-strong country, with 600 million originating from Africa, the Middle East and Asia.

This Sunni state will leave traces of “traditional beliefs” in the face of Christians somewhere in the north. The army of this mega state will be based on American principles. The army will consist of the people, who will be ready to wage war against anyone. They will not have the European genetic memory of the two world wars. The model for the establishment of such a state has already been used in the creation of the Taliban and the Islamic State. There is even a small range ground in the center of Europe – Kosovo.

After 2030, financial oligarchy will initiate the collapse of China, start a conflict with Japan and launch the operation to conquer Russia. A Maidan-like revolution in Russia will be possible, as Russia’s current education system will prepare a new generation of slaves that would be addicted to gadgets. If you take away the Internet from such people (the Internet is controlled by the USA), the crowd will crush the culprit. The war against Russia will reduce the global population and will give the Americans an opportunity to colonize Russia. The European part of the country will be annexed to the United States of Europe, while Russia’s Asian part will become another state of the USA.

After the war, the world will be adjusted to America’s standards. Under the slogan of developing  healthcare and anti-terrorist struggle, chips will be implanted under the skin of every human being. World’s elites will start cloning themselves, while common people will work for the evolution of the human body.

The article may sound like a script for an apocalyptical motion picture, a fruit of someone’s imagination. If so, think of the war in Ukraine that seemed to be unreal to all two years ago.

Lyuba Lulko

Read article on the Russian version of Pravda.Ru

– See more at: http://english.pravda.ru/world/europe/31-08-2015/131764-europe-0/#sthash.0qA1zT4p.dpuf

The Bible and Soviet Constitution: Stalin’s Reinterpretation of 2 Thessalonians and Acts 4 – by stalinsmoustache

“The 1936 Constitution of the USSR contains two biblical verses:
He who does not work, neither shall he eat.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his work.
The first is clear enough, being drawn from 2 Thessalonians 3:10. But the second is a little more obscure, although it comes originally from Acts 4:35. Clearly, the appearance of such texts in the Constitution is not by chance. So how did they end up there?
A hint may be found in the slight obscurity of the origins of the second text, for it is not exactly the same as that of Acts 4:35. That hint suggests a unique exegetical path that winds its way from the Bible, through Lenin and the slogans of the early Bolshevik government in the USSR, to none other than Joseph Stalin. Let me trace that path.
I begin with the text from 2 Thessalonians: ‘He who does not work, neither shall he eat’. Among the Bolsheviks, Lenin was the first to use it. It was 1918, during the famine brought about by the shortage of grain through the disruption to rail transport by the First World War and the White Armies of the Civil War. With the grain shortage came massive speculation by the profiteers – kulaks in the countryside and business owners in the cities. In that context, Lenin addressed a group of workers in Petrograd:
‘He who does not work, neither shall he eat’. ‘He who does not work, neither shall he eat’ – every toiler understands that. Every worker, every poor and even middle peasant, everybody who has suffered need in his lifetime, everybody who has ever lived by his own labour, is in agreement with this. Nine-tenths of the population of Russia are in agreement with this truth. In this simple, elementary and perfectly obvious truth lies the basis of socialism, the indefeasible source of its strength, the indestructible pledge of its final victory (Collected Works, volume 27, pp. 391-2).
As the Civil War raged on and shortages continued, the text from 2 Thessalonians became a major feature of Agitprop. It featured on posters plastered throughout town and country. And it led to the Metropolitan of Moscow, Aleksandr Vvedensky, to observe:
When you say you are for the principle of work, I remind you of the slogan, ‘he who does not work shall not eat.’ I have seen this in a number of different cities on revolutionary posters. I am just upset that there was no reference to the Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Thessalonians, from where the slogan is taken (Vvedensky in Lunacharsky, Religia i prosveshchenie, 1985, p. 193).
So it should be no surprise that Stalin should make much use of this text – with Lenin’s blessing – and that it should appear in the Soviet Constitution of 1936.
What about the second text from the Constitution: ‘From each according to his ability, to each according to his work’.
I suggest that it is a reinterpretation of Acts 4:35 in light of 2 Thessalonians 3:10. This reinterpretation was undertaken by the erstwhile theological scholar and avid student of the Bible, Joseph Stalin. Let us begin with Acts itself:
They laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.
The context is the brief account of early Christian communism, in which everything was held in common and no-one had private possessions (see also Acts 2). Everyone would put whatever wealth they had into the common property and then it was distributed according to need. I do not wish to go into the long history of the various interpretations of this passage, save to point out that Acts 4:35 eventually became a socialist slogan, ‘from each according to ability, to each according to need’. The influence of Engel’s argument for revolutionary Christianity had an influence here, as did Marx’s use of the slogan.
Yet, the Soviet Constitution of 1936 does not use this version of the slogan. Instead, it has ‘to each according to his work’. The exegetical work of Stalin is responsible. In texts leading up to the constitution (a revision of the one from 1924), Stalin interprets the text in light of what was by then a well-established distinction between socialism and communism. Socialism became the first stage of communism, which would eventually – albeit without a specified time farm – become fully fledged communism. Indeed, after the frenetic and profoundly disrupting drives for industrialisation, collectivisation and socialisation of economic and social life in the late 1920s and 1930s, the government announced that socialism had been achieved in the Soviet Union. But communism was still to come.
So Stalin distinguished between two slogans, one appropriate for socialism and the other for communism. Under socialism, the appropriate slogan was ‘From each according to his ability, to each according to his work’. Under communism, it would be ‘From each according to his ability, to each according to his need’. The first slogan was clearly a combination of the texts from 2 Thessalonians and Acts 4. Not only does one need to work in order to live (targeted at capitalists and the idle rich), but one also works according to ability and is recompensed in light of the work done.
But what does this mean in practice? It means people will be paid according to the labour they have provided. It means different pay scales (within reason) in terms of skills, type of labour, and contribution to the overall good of the socialist project. It also means that one should take responsibility for one’s labour and stay in the same job for a while. This is far from the idea of ‘equalitarianism’, under which ‘everybody would get the same pay, an equal quantity of meat and an equal quantity of bread, would wear the same clothes and receive the same goods in the same quantities—such a socialism is unknown to Marxism’ (Stalin, Works, volume 13, p. 120).
Is communism different? In one respect it is, for this is the time when ‘labour has been transformed from a means of subsistence into the prime want of man, into voluntary labour for society’ (p. 121). Yet, communism is like socialism in that it does not fall into the trap of individualist equalitarianism in relation to labour. One provides labour according to ability and is given what one needs. Obviously, the abilities differ, as do the needs – depending on one stage in life, whether one has children or not, whether one is sick or healthy.
Until then, the socialist version of the two biblical texts remained in force:
From each according to his ability, to each according to his work.”

Pop culture is soft-power


A Marxist-Leninist Blog

John Riddell


The Espresso Stalinist

Wake Up to the Smell of Class Struggle ☭

Viajar na História

Ontem, Hoje, Amanhã

Irresistível Mistura por Daiane Lopes

Receitas criativas, temperos e amor pela cozinha. A mistura irresistível do nosso dia-a-dia.

Philosophers for Change

Ideas for a new age


Roland Boer's Blog: Marxism, Philosophy, Religion, Politics, whatever ...

communists in situ

leberwurst proletariat

Proletarian Center for Research, Education and Culture

...in the new exuberant aggressiveness of world capitalism we see what communists and their allies held at bay. - Richard Levins

Les Orwelliens

Collectif de journalistes souverainistes présidé par Natacha Polony


Espaço dedicado a memórias desta cidade


Livros Raros & Curiosos

Sabores com História

São os Sabores que nos Definem. Fazem parte da nossa Herança familiar e cultural. Contam muito de Nós, e dos Outros. São, a par de Outros, dos melhores Contadores de Histórias que conheço. Até já.


Dos Eventos à história das Confrarias... gastronómicas e báquicas, passando pelos produtos endógenos e as iniciativas que acentuam o que é diferente, único, genuíno, tradicional e que importa preservar e defender, num mundo global.

Fotoclube f/508


Oscar en Fotos

Reflexiones e ideas en torno a la fotografía

%d bloggers like this: