RE: “Guillaume le Bâtard” — Ha! I didn't know that William the Conqueror was actually Billy the Bastard.
Aaron of Lincoln comes across as quite the pre-Rothschilds Rothschild.
Skinner: “We can only speculate as to the sincerity of their change of faith” — I suspect one would be correct to suspect conversions of convenience.
Hunt: “A major factor in a population’s exploitation is a foreign ruling class. A foreign invader is not influenced by any kinship ties and can be far more ruthless”. — How perfectly reflective of the current state of ZIM's globalist crusade.
This is another excellently written and informative article from you, Paul, for which I would like to thank you very much. The last quote (alien rulers with no emotional connection to the people) describes the fate of Germany since 1918 (read: https://stefanhheuer.substack.com/p/at-the-un-when-the-script-contains) at best.
Thanks for covering this deep history. You wrote: Hillaby says that in Norman England the demand for money for warfare, castle-building and monastic foundation was very high but there were considerable risks involved, since the occupied indigenous population was not fully under control.
*** the indigenous population were gradually fully controlled after hundreds of acts that privatized common land, the Enclosure. John Mohawk says that is when the problem in the Western world began. Jews were not allowed to own land, Christians were not allowed to charge interest. So Jews became the bankers that funded the wars of the barons, a natural niche for them. But to repay the loans the barons kicked of more commoners from the land who then became impoverished. To pay off accumulating loans the elites taxed the people on their production as described in your article. And then the people turned against the Jews.
This is an old old pattern. The big picture is that money should be treated as a public infrastructure to facilitate trade, not for the profit of a few. The Bank of North Dakota is a model as put forth by the Pubic Banking Institute. The land also should not be bought and sold for profit but all the earth be viewed as a commons, to be fairly shared by landholders paying a "commons rent (aka land value tax) to benefit of the community as a whole, see Common Ground USA and the International Union for Land Value Taxation (theIU.org) and be sure to familiarize yourself with the work and writings of Henry George the great American political economist who rose to great popularity but whose ideas were corrupted when elites established our current system of neoliberal economics.
Jews have always been an important part of Venice's mercantile and financial activity. In history, the first city district entirely inhabited by Jews was created in Venice in 1516, and it was called the "Ghetto." Jews have always claimed that the creation of the Ghetto was imposed on them by force. The reality is that they received an entire district of a very rich and powerful city at the time. Interestingly, the Jews who received the privilege of an entire Venetian district were of German origin, namely Ashkenazi....
It becomes even more intriguing when you take the theory of cathedrals and churches being originally built for free energy purposes rather than as places of Christian worship into account.
Love listening to your articles (you do have the most excellent speaking voice - ever thought of doing audio books?), and usually through your blog but it is the most appalling faff to log in there (I have just given up again) and growing age restrictions here. The machine is trundling on. One of the comments on blog wanted to know if there were any intitiatives happening well there is a group Wild Minds Community (in UK ) getting people connected to land, def worth a look. I know this is all a bit random but so tired of the system.
Thanks for reminding me of stuff I didn't know. From.Grokepedia on Statute of Jewry in England;
"While some Jews engaged in trade, medicine, or crafts, moneylending dominated, with prominent families like the Aaronids of Lincoln amassing fortunes by extending loans at compound rates up to 43% annually, foreclosing on defaulted estates including manors and ecclesiastical lands.[7]
Now, why would Christians in England that followed Christian values and never loaned at interest have "anti-semetic" feelings?
Nobody ever asks the question, Why? That is the basis of justice. It applies to Racism, Nazis, Etal. Nothing happens in a vacuum and doesn't follow cause and effect. The blank check on evil behavior given to Jews under protection of "antisemitism" has to stop at some point. It has all through the ages.
It's not up to them, but up to us, to learn that the Jews are the ennemies of humanity and that the Bible that they have imposed on the Goyim is, in fact, the theological version of their agenda of destroying and enslaving humanity.
It will only stop when Christianity and Islam are understood as an extension of Iudaizm and as slave religions, with the rabbi banker mafia being the masters.
Excellent article Paul. Fills in more details for me and demonstrates how far back the infiltration by the ‘Zionists’ into Europe and Britain actually was?
"I also had a “lightbulb” dot-connecting moment when reading about an earlier period of England’s history, when it was not an exploitative core country but part of the exploited periphery."
I guess it's OK to admit this now that those who call themselves "Jews" are expanding and consolidating their power across the world.
Tell me where I'm wrong but it's funny how we don't notice how almost exclusively history is about men and the nastiness that men have wrought. I notice it all the time. It's like women and children don't exist. The litany of wars, of cheating and taking others down is continuous. Yet we don't notice this most pronounced and consistent pattern.
With all the lunatic, illiterate, emontionally unstable 'women' in politics and economy now, this will change. Be optimistic that your kids will read in the history books about Madeline Albright, Hillary, Clinton, Annalena Baerbock, Kaja Kallas, Ursula von der Leyen.
This is nowhere near comparable I hope you know. I hear it all the time. Yes of course, all those women working in the patriarchal system, a woman would have to be mad to attempt it. But there is no equivalence and this happens a lot. You're simply naming a few compared to the number of men, it is minuscule. And add to that the numbers of men who maim, rape, kill. The figures are very starkly different. I'm not saying women are angels but men are something else. Our entire history is littered with wars, destruction, slavery, plunder, invasion and wanton violence.
I have the impression that "they"/ZIM use women now as "soft leaders" as a tactic. There are so many female ygl occyping warmonger roles. Think about Greta Thunberg, it is almost impossible to make critics without getting attacked for critisising a young woman. A perfect distract and way to change the subject.
Yes! Spot on. Women need to held up to critiques as much as men. To go forward healthfully, we need to notice the ratios of men to women in decision-making. A glut of men talking means things are going to come out crooked. There are reasons for this and I can explain if requested. But you got it, women are being used to further the patriarchy and that means a continuation of wars, environmental destruction, poisoning, distortion, lies, trickery, etc.
The Family, Manson's acolytes that were convicted of the murders of Sharon Tate and others, were sent down alongside Manson himself who was never so much as accused of even being present.
The responsibility for the carnage was nevertheless assigned to him despite this.
How many women have been the Svengalis behind horrendous crimes and slaughter yet never even had their collars felt? Lucretia Borgia, Elizabeth Bathory,
Marina Abramovich to name but three.
No, demons care not for the gender of their host. People are people, some good some bad.
You cite a few which can be done in a little paragraph. Imagine citing all the male tyrants and despots throughout history and today. There wouldn't be enough pages. Notice ratios not instances. We notice instances and cite them as though they are equivalent but they most definitely are not. Citing ten or one hundred women despots comes nowhere near the number of men who have been and still are despots. Politics is all male-designed so women who go into politics are already totally brainwashed into patriarchy. Have you ever heard a woman politician trying to bring breastfeeding into popularity? No. That's the most female thing imaginable but it is considered obscene and it's not shown in movies or in public areas. Please do not confuse me with feminism because feminism is a patriarchal construct just like memorials to wars (take note of the number of monuments to women and compare to the number of monuments to men which are usually by a vast majority, about war) That is what satanists do, they keep thoughts of death front and center in our minds. That means they know how powerful our minds are. And most people almost all people, keep death front and center, from praying to a god who's "out there" to flashing of the symbols of crucifixes glorified everywhere, on necklaces, churches, walls, you name it. This keeps death front and center. There is so much talk about the afterlife but not much in comparison about life itself so we are essentially generating death. That is the nature of metaphysics. The money system is designed to keep death in our minds front and center by making it artificially scarce which causes existential threat every single day. The money system is how they can get people to build their bunkers, steal children, spray poisons, get doctors and scientists to say vaccines are safe, etc. The money system is their medium of control. People will do anything for money, they know it, and that is why it is designed in this way. However people can shift to using an alternative money system for some things (not crypto as that also leads to the banks and doesn't fit the criteria for a money system that confers prosperity for all) I can tell you that criteria if requested.
The reason we don't read much about women throughout history is because most cultures didn't permit women in positions of leadership until relatively recently. But when they did, we more often than not proved that we were just as ruthless and bloodthirsty. Last time I read one of your related comments on a post, I replied with a rather lengthy list of female queens and leaders who had committed horrendous crimes including mass murder and fratricide throughout history. So you already know this. I can't help but wonder what facts would need to be presented to you in order for you to be willing to open your mind to the possibility that the narrative you've subscribed to isn't entirely accurate.
I appreciate your input however if I answered which I always aim to do but sometimes it slips my attention, I would have said you are mentioning instances rather than ratios. Yes of course women can be as ruthless as males but they are not as violent and that is blazingly clear (imagine going down a dark alley at night and seeing three men coming out of a bar. Now imagine seeing three women coming out of a bar, or on a hike or in a parking lot, etc) There is nowhere near a comparison to make out there is equivalence. Just because you can cite some women is like citing exceptions to prove a rule. I am talking about the "vajority" the vast majority. And it is vast by far that men outnumber women in violence and bullying. But it is not saying that women are not capable of it in some instances. Just that the instances are so low that it doesn't bear mentioning because it isn't looking at the big picture and thus doing so means we don't get to understand what is really going on in our society. And if we can't see what is really going on, you can bet it will continue to go on. Please note too that patriarchy is male rule and male designed and hierarchy is what males seem to think is the only way but it is definitely not. Because we have males dominating decision-making, we get only one perspective and that keeps us off finding the truth. The truth would be more arrived at if we had decision making done by a system that enabled everyone to have equal voice, including children. And a vast majority (not just a piddling 51% which is 1% above randomness) coming to the final decision. But everyone needs to be heard. That is the kind of society that would thrive beyond imagination. Simple but this way of doing things is all wrong and so all our actions built upon it will go towards death not regeneration or life.
I have to agree with Stefan here. What we are seeing now is that women are just as up for being used for agendas as men, when it suits the times we are living in. And men have been just as exploited by other men as women have. The system just uses who it needs when it needs them. And loves to engage in a bit of divide and rule whenever possible.
Agreed. It seems that when women were inveigled into the franchise they were so on the unvoiced understanding that they would forego feminine instincts and behave like men. Here in the UK Margaret Thatcher epitomised that notion.
So right! Yes indeed, women now have no clue how to do womanly things. It irks me so much. Women are choosing not to have children, not to cook, not to breastfeed their babies, and to lose their empathy. It's so sad and it actually is a lowering of women which is almost as bad as it was before women were "allowed" to get an education. Imagine if we cracked this nonsense and saw everyone as equally important because everyone's life at least to them is just as important as anyone else's.
I agree that the system is using women. But it always did. Women were prohibited from getting an education or being involved in public life until fairly recently on the timeline. So women are starting off way behind men who had eons of a head start. I have read in books going back before time recording, that women discovered how to make fire. Can you imagine where that put humans in terms of catapulting forward? The ability to make fire changed everything. Men and women have different functions, men have muscle, women have empathy. Because men have muscle they are suited to building. Building requires detailed thought. Women nurture the next generation, that requires a different kind of thinking. It requires empathy. Empathy is important for furthering the species because without it we'll just kill ourselves off. While men are the builders women are the designers. If we combined the two attributes we would soar in progress. I'm not saying ALL men or ALL women so please be reasonable. It shouldn't have to be explained that I am speaking in terms of a VAST majority like 80% or more. I think we will not get a clear picture if we look at the exceptions but we will get a good picture if we look at the VAST majority. There needs to be another word for the vast majority, I call it "vajority" to differentiate between a piddling 51% to something in the order of say 70 or 80 or 90%
We need a return to matriarchal society with women in charge of the children and affairs of the village and men free to roam, impregnate, hunt, build, philosophise, and guard the territory!!
Also, it would be interesting to know how many of these Jews who converted to Christianity ended up eventually as Ignatians. Plus I am now wondering if there was any connection between the expulsion of the Jews from England and other countries with the similar treatment of the Templars only 20 or so years later?
Just because women were not in the limelight of history does not mean that they had no influence, see Lady Macbeth (though a literary figure) or royal mistresses such as the Pompadour. The unspoken assumption behind your comment is that women are more moral humans. Whilst they are less violent than men, anybody who has any life experience knows what utter snakes women can be.
I think they are snakes because they "grok" things much quicker and more expansively than males and to have to live in a patriarchal society actually drives them insane. I notice lots of women who are nutty today. Imaging having to live your life against your grain since forever. Women have to be something they're not, then they degrade other women who are behaving as women. But women's behavior is not like patriarchy posed. Women don't have to be all frilly and superficial (although many are) Women are actually staunch protectors of life, fiercely just and vociferous when someone is being treated unfairly. Women are losing that and just bottling it up like men do. That breeds insanity. The healthiest people are the ones who share their thoughts easily.
Reply on the subject bot not to anyone special. I find the work of Marija Gimbutas, at least stimulating the fantasy of how we could live. Not in matriarchy nor patriarchy. https://www.opusarchives.org/marija-gimbutas-collection/
Surely the chosen ones of Europe and most faithful servants of Greater Izrahell and The Rothshields!
They gave them Palestine with a typically non-comittal, meaningless but meaningful letter!
The British State wrote a friendly letter to Lord Rotshield saying they wouldn't mind if he took Palestine for his clan , provided they were not nasty to the Palestinians, of course!!
The yahudin have their own police force in London, using cars dressed up to look like police cars (shomrim).
I wonder if anyone else is allowed to put stickers on a car to make it look like police? And drive around like vigilantes? Can someone who is not certified kosher try this and video the results please?
Maybe Armenians and Palestinians (since they too were genocided) can be allowed?
Another edifying, dot-connecting beaut!
RE: “Guillaume le Bâtard” — Ha! I didn't know that William the Conqueror was actually Billy the Bastard.
Aaron of Lincoln comes across as quite the pre-Rothschilds Rothschild.
Skinner: “We can only speculate as to the sincerity of their change of faith” — I suspect one would be correct to suspect conversions of convenience.
Hunt: “A major factor in a population’s exploitation is a foreign ruling class. A foreign invader is not influenced by any kinship ties and can be far more ruthless”. — How perfectly reflective of the current state of ZIM's globalist crusade.
This is another excellently written and informative article from you, Paul, for which I would like to thank you very much. The last quote (alien rulers with no emotional connection to the people) describes the fate of Germany since 1918 (read: https://stefanhheuer.substack.com/p/at-the-un-when-the-script-contains) at best.
Thanks for covering this deep history. You wrote: Hillaby says that in Norman England the demand for money for warfare, castle-building and monastic foundation was very high but there were considerable risks involved, since the occupied indigenous population was not fully under control.
*** the indigenous population were gradually fully controlled after hundreds of acts that privatized common land, the Enclosure. John Mohawk says that is when the problem in the Western world began. Jews were not allowed to own land, Christians were not allowed to charge interest. So Jews became the bankers that funded the wars of the barons, a natural niche for them. But to repay the loans the barons kicked of more commoners from the land who then became impoverished. To pay off accumulating loans the elites taxed the people on their production as described in your article. And then the people turned against the Jews.
This is an old old pattern. The big picture is that money should be treated as a public infrastructure to facilitate trade, not for the profit of a few. The Bank of North Dakota is a model as put forth by the Pubic Banking Institute. The land also should not be bought and sold for profit but all the earth be viewed as a commons, to be fairly shared by landholders paying a "commons rent (aka land value tax) to benefit of the community as a whole, see Common Ground USA and the International Union for Land Value Taxation (theIU.org) and be sure to familiarize yourself with the work and writings of Henry George the great American political economist who rose to great popularity but whose ideas were corrupted when elites established our current system of neoliberal economics.
Jews have always been an important part of Venice's mercantile and financial activity. In history, the first city district entirely inhabited by Jews was created in Venice in 1516, and it was called the "Ghetto." Jews have always claimed that the creation of the Ghetto was imposed on them by force. The reality is that they received an entire district of a very rich and powerful city at the time. Interestingly, the Jews who received the privilege of an entire Venetian district were of German origin, namely Ashkenazi....
The ghettos were created by Talmudic Rabbis, like Izrael. The need to isolate from the goys so as to go full autistic and inbred.
Really interesting, thanks Paul.
It becomes even more intriguing when you take the theory of cathedrals and churches being originally built for free energy purposes rather than as places of Christian worship into account.
Cheers. I hadn't heard that theory.
certainly the sacred geometry is a factor?
Love listening to your articles (you do have the most excellent speaking voice - ever thought of doing audio books?), and usually through your blog but it is the most appalling faff to log in there (I have just given up again) and growing age restrictions here. The machine is trundling on. One of the comments on blog wanted to know if there were any intitiatives happening well there is a group Wild Minds Community (in UK ) getting people connected to land, def worth a look. I know this is all a bit random but so tired of the system.
Thanks. I did make an audio version of my latest book, in fact. It's nearly 12 hours long.
https://winteroak.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/welcome-to-the-new-resistance-audio.mp3
All my work can also be found on the winteroak.org.uk site, including the audio links. You can subscribe to emails there as well.
colonization is commerce, and jews are the masters of commerce.
Thanks for reminding me of stuff I didn't know. From.Grokepedia on Statute of Jewry in England;
"While some Jews engaged in trade, medicine, or crafts, moneylending dominated, with prominent families like the Aaronids of Lincoln amassing fortunes by extending loans at compound rates up to 43% annually, foreclosing on defaulted estates including manors and ecclesiastical lands.[7]
Now, why would Christians in England that followed Christian values and never loaned at interest have "anti-semetic" feelings?
Nobody ever asks the question, Why? That is the basis of justice. It applies to Racism, Nazis, Etal. Nothing happens in a vacuum and doesn't follow cause and effect. The blank check on evil behavior given to Jews under protection of "antisemitism" has to stop at some point. It has all through the ages.
They (Jews) will never learn.
"They (Jews) will never learn."
It's not up to them, but up to us, to learn that the Jews are the ennemies of humanity and that the Bible that they have imposed on the Goyim is, in fact, the theological version of their agenda of destroying and enslaving humanity.
It will only stop when Christianity and Islam are understood as an extension of Iudaizm and as slave religions, with the rabbi banker mafia being the masters.
Good piece - thank you !
Great piece Paul, very informative.
Cheers Martin.
Excellent article Paul. Fills in more details for me and demonstrates how far back the infiltration by the ‘Zionists’ into Europe and Britain actually was?
"I also had a “lightbulb” dot-connecting moment when reading about an earlier period of England’s history, when it was not an exploitative core country but part of the exploited periphery."
I guess it's OK to admit this now that those who call themselves "Jews" are expanding and consolidating their power across the world.
Tell me where I'm wrong but it's funny how we don't notice how almost exclusively history is about men and the nastiness that men have wrought. I notice it all the time. It's like women and children don't exist. The litany of wars, of cheating and taking others down is continuous. Yet we don't notice this most pronounced and consistent pattern.
With all the lunatic, illiterate, emontionally unstable 'women' in politics and economy now, this will change. Be optimistic that your kids will read in the history books about Madeline Albright, Hillary, Clinton, Annalena Baerbock, Kaja Kallas, Ursula von der Leyen.
Surely (just off the top of my head), I would think that Victoria Nuland, Samantha Power, Susan Rice and Avril Haines also deserve a mention.
This is nowhere near comparable I hope you know. I hear it all the time. Yes of course, all those women working in the patriarchal system, a woman would have to be mad to attempt it. But there is no equivalence and this happens a lot. You're simply naming a few compared to the number of men, it is minuscule. And add to that the numbers of men who maim, rape, kill. The figures are very starkly different. I'm not saying women are angels but men are something else. Our entire history is littered with wars, destruction, slavery, plunder, invasion and wanton violence.
I completly agree to your last sentence. This MATRIX is deeply satanic, evil to the core. Chapeau.
And now, please just think of Hillary Clinton, Madleine Albright, and you may understand it is not necessarily the gender but the charactre.
I have the impression that "they"/ZIM use women now as "soft leaders" as a tactic. There are so many female ygl occyping warmonger roles. Think about Greta Thunberg, it is almost impossible to make critics without getting attacked for critisising a young woman. A perfect distract and way to change the subject.
Yes! Spot on. Women need to held up to critiques as much as men. To go forward healthfully, we need to notice the ratios of men to women in decision-making. A glut of men talking means things are going to come out crooked. There are reasons for this and I can explain if requested. But you got it, women are being used to further the patriarchy and that means a continuation of wars, environmental destruction, poisoning, distortion, lies, trickery, etc.
Hmmm
Sounds suspiciously like feminism.
The Family, Manson's acolytes that were convicted of the murders of Sharon Tate and others, were sent down alongside Manson himself who was never so much as accused of even being present.
The responsibility for the carnage was nevertheless assigned to him despite this.
How many women have been the Svengalis behind horrendous crimes and slaughter yet never even had their collars felt? Lucretia Borgia, Elizabeth Bathory,
Marina Abramovich to name but three.
No, demons care not for the gender of their host. People are people, some good some bad.
The "male bad" schtick is so last century
You cite a few which can be done in a little paragraph. Imagine citing all the male tyrants and despots throughout history and today. There wouldn't be enough pages. Notice ratios not instances. We notice instances and cite them as though they are equivalent but they most definitely are not. Citing ten or one hundred women despots comes nowhere near the number of men who have been and still are despots. Politics is all male-designed so women who go into politics are already totally brainwashed into patriarchy. Have you ever heard a woman politician trying to bring breastfeeding into popularity? No. That's the most female thing imaginable but it is considered obscene and it's not shown in movies or in public areas. Please do not confuse me with feminism because feminism is a patriarchal construct just like memorials to wars (take note of the number of monuments to women and compare to the number of monuments to men which are usually by a vast majority, about war) That is what satanists do, they keep thoughts of death front and center in our minds. That means they know how powerful our minds are. And most people almost all people, keep death front and center, from praying to a god who's "out there" to flashing of the symbols of crucifixes glorified everywhere, on necklaces, churches, walls, you name it. This keeps death front and center. There is so much talk about the afterlife but not much in comparison about life itself so we are essentially generating death. That is the nature of metaphysics. The money system is designed to keep death in our minds front and center by making it artificially scarce which causes existential threat every single day. The money system is how they can get people to build their bunkers, steal children, spray poisons, get doctors and scientists to say vaccines are safe, etc. The money system is their medium of control. People will do anything for money, they know it, and that is why it is designed in this way. However people can shift to using an alternative money system for some things (not crypto as that also leads to the banks and doesn't fit the criteria for a money system that confers prosperity for all) I can tell you that criteria if requested.
yahudin
The reason we don't read much about women throughout history is because most cultures didn't permit women in positions of leadership until relatively recently. But when they did, we more often than not proved that we were just as ruthless and bloodthirsty. Last time I read one of your related comments on a post, I replied with a rather lengthy list of female queens and leaders who had committed horrendous crimes including mass murder and fratricide throughout history. So you already know this. I can't help but wonder what facts would need to be presented to you in order for you to be willing to open your mind to the possibility that the narrative you've subscribed to isn't entirely accurate.
I appreciate your input however if I answered which I always aim to do but sometimes it slips my attention, I would have said you are mentioning instances rather than ratios. Yes of course women can be as ruthless as males but they are not as violent and that is blazingly clear (imagine going down a dark alley at night and seeing three men coming out of a bar. Now imagine seeing three women coming out of a bar, or on a hike or in a parking lot, etc) There is nowhere near a comparison to make out there is equivalence. Just because you can cite some women is like citing exceptions to prove a rule. I am talking about the "vajority" the vast majority. And it is vast by far that men outnumber women in violence and bullying. But it is not saying that women are not capable of it in some instances. Just that the instances are so low that it doesn't bear mentioning because it isn't looking at the big picture and thus doing so means we don't get to understand what is really going on in our society. And if we can't see what is really going on, you can bet it will continue to go on. Please note too that patriarchy is male rule and male designed and hierarchy is what males seem to think is the only way but it is definitely not. Because we have males dominating decision-making, we get only one perspective and that keeps us off finding the truth. The truth would be more arrived at if we had decision making done by a system that enabled everyone to have equal voice, including children. And a vast majority (not just a piddling 51% which is 1% above randomness) coming to the final decision. But everyone needs to be heard. That is the kind of society that would thrive beyond imagination. Simple but this way of doing things is all wrong and so all our actions built upon it will go towards death not regeneration or life.
The men followed the orders. The queens did not kill all those people themselves.
I have to agree with Stefan here. What we are seeing now is that women are just as up for being used for agendas as men, when it suits the times we are living in. And men have been just as exploited by other men as women have. The system just uses who it needs when it needs them. And loves to engage in a bit of divide and rule whenever possible.
Agreed. It seems that when women were inveigled into the franchise they were so on the unvoiced understanding that they would forego feminine instincts and behave like men. Here in the UK Margaret Thatcher epitomised that notion.
So right! Yes indeed, women now have no clue how to do womanly things. It irks me so much. Women are choosing not to have children, not to cook, not to breastfeed their babies, and to lose their empathy. It's so sad and it actually is a lowering of women which is almost as bad as it was before women were "allowed" to get an education. Imagine if we cracked this nonsense and saw everyone as equally important because everyone's life at least to them is just as important as anyone else's.
I agree that the system is using women. But it always did. Women were prohibited from getting an education or being involved in public life until fairly recently on the timeline. So women are starting off way behind men who had eons of a head start. I have read in books going back before time recording, that women discovered how to make fire. Can you imagine where that put humans in terms of catapulting forward? The ability to make fire changed everything. Men and women have different functions, men have muscle, women have empathy. Because men have muscle they are suited to building. Building requires detailed thought. Women nurture the next generation, that requires a different kind of thinking. It requires empathy. Empathy is important for furthering the species because without it we'll just kill ourselves off. While men are the builders women are the designers. If we combined the two attributes we would soar in progress. I'm not saying ALL men or ALL women so please be reasonable. It shouldn't have to be explained that I am speaking in terms of a VAST majority like 80% or more. I think we will not get a clear picture if we look at the exceptions but we will get a good picture if we look at the VAST majority. There needs to be another word for the vast majority, I call it "vajority" to differentiate between a piddling 51% to something in the order of say 70 or 80 or 90%
We need a return to matriarchal society with women in charge of the children and affairs of the village and men free to roam, impregnate, hunt, build, philosophise, and guard the territory!!
Also, it would be interesting to know how many of these Jews who converted to Christianity ended up eventually as Ignatians. Plus I am now wondering if there was any connection between the expulsion of the Jews from England and other countries with the similar treatment of the Templars only 20 or so years later?
Just because women were not in the limelight of history does not mean that they had no influence, see Lady Macbeth (though a literary figure) or royal mistresses such as the Pompadour. The unspoken assumption behind your comment is that women are more moral humans. Whilst they are less violent than men, anybody who has any life experience knows what utter snakes women can be.
I think they are snakes because they "grok" things much quicker and more expansively than males and to have to live in a patriarchal society actually drives them insane. I notice lots of women who are nutty today. Imaging having to live your life against your grain since forever. Women have to be something they're not, then they degrade other women who are behaving as women. But women's behavior is not like patriarchy posed. Women don't have to be all frilly and superficial (although many are) Women are actually staunch protectors of life, fiercely just and vociferous when someone is being treated unfairly. Women are losing that and just bottling it up like men do. That breeds insanity. The healthiest people are the ones who share their thoughts easily.
I too notice lots of women who are nutty today!
Reply on the subject bot not to anyone special. I find the work of Marija Gimbutas, at least stimulating the fantasy of how we could live. Not in matriarchy nor patriarchy. https://www.opusarchives.org/marija-gimbutas-collection/
The Ancients used "Priests" to do black magic for sorcery, which reminds me that they morphed into monks. You always need a worker, a greedy one.
“…the book reveals that it was Cecil Rhodes – a Rothschild puppet,…”
I’ve never read this book, but that always seemed like a given.
Just through the circumstantial evidence around him.
South Afrika's entire existence is problematic.
WHY would the rothschilds wage a war against him later?
The jew will do that, after a stooge outlives its usefulness.
Thats pretty much what happened to kennedy, or charlie kirk.
The jew does that all the time.
B'rith - Brit..
Surely the chosen ones of Europe and most faithful servants of Greater Izrahell and The Rothshields!
They gave them Palestine with a typically non-comittal, meaningless but meaningful letter!
The British State wrote a friendly letter to Lord Rotshield saying they wouldn't mind if he took Palestine for his clan , provided they were not nasty to the Palestinians, of course!!
The yahudin have their own police force in London, using cars dressed up to look like police cars (shomrim).
I wonder if anyone else is allowed to put stickers on a car to make it look like police? And drive around like vigilantes? Can someone who is not certified kosher try this and video the results please?
Maybe Armenians and Palestinians (since they too were genocided) can be allowed?
Repel "anti- semitism" laws protecting Izrahell from criticism! Protest !!! NOW!