Can You See a Difference Between These Two Women?



In an article written by Ari Simeon and Isa Abu Jamal for Counter Current News, these images have been used as an example to highlight the assumptions many Americans bring to global issues, as well as political discourse. When confronted with an image of a Muslim adorned in camo, holding a Qur’an, and bearing an assault rifle, the feeling is much different than when we see an American in a similar pose.
It’s safe to say these photos can be translated similarly. One of these women believes in defending her country with the firearm she possesses. She is devoted to her people and to her beliefs, and she believes her intentions are honorable. But, which one? Both of these women might give corresponding arguments.
Of course, as Counter Current points out, this doesn’t mean we should accept an explanation behind photos such as these uncritically, but considering both of these women might justify themselves in the same way, it should be a sobering realization for many.
While some might believe the Qur’an condones bad ideas, the same argument could be made of Christianity, which has claimed the lives of millions over the centuries—from holy wars to witch trials. According to Daniel Chirot, Professor of International Studies at the University of Washington, the biblical account of Joshua and the Battle of Jericho has been used as a means to justify genocidal Holy war. This includes war waged on one Christian sect by another.
In regards to the violence in the bible, apologists for Christianity sometimes claim “the original language [of the bible] doesn’t really say that,” however again, the same could be said as true of the Qur’an and Islam if you were to ask the average Muslim. Like Christians with the bible, the vast majority of Muslims don’t believe the Qur’an says or means what others from the outside are told to believe it says.
Simeon and Jamal bring to mind a saying, “All translations are lies.” Many pundits and self-described religious experts claim to know what each book “really says”. Unless you know Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, or Arabic, the average person is unable to make their own interpretations.



Take a good hard look at these images and tell us: is there really a difference? And if there is, is that difference really as big as we first assume when we look at these two pictures?”

More articles about double standards:
double-standard-2

Sources:
Chirot, Daniel. Why Some Wars Become Genocidal and Others Don’t. Jackson School of International Studies, University of Washington.
Simeon, Ari and Abu Jamal, Isa. Counter Current News. July 6, 2014. (http://countercurrentnews.com/2014/07/explain-the-difference-between-these-two-women/)

You want to discuss a certain topic with likeminded people or you want to organize a local protest or you have an idea for a project that can help people in need in your local community or all around the world? Join our forumwww.anonboards.com

0 comments:

Secrets Of The Elite: Why Forbes’s Rich List Doesn’t Include The Wealthiest Families On The Planet




As Oxfam warns that global wealth inequality is spiraling out of control, we ask why the Rothschilds and Rockefellers are missing from the business magazine’s definitive annual guide…with some startling revelations.

Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.

This is a House of Rothschilds maxim, widely attributed to banking tycoon Mayer AmschelRothschild in 1838 and said to be a founding principle for the highly corrupt banking and political system we have today.  Along with the Rockefellers, the Rothschild dynasty is estimated to be worth well over a trillion dollars. How are these powerful families linked to the ongoing crisis of global wealth inequality, why are so many people unaware of their existence, and why doesn’t Forbes ever mention them in their annual list of the world’s wealthiest people?

Global wealth inequality is out of control, and it’s no accident

In January 2014, Oxfam announced that the richest 85 people on the planet share a combined wealth of $110 trillion. The figure was based on Forbes’s rich list 2013, and it equates to 65 times the total wealth of the entire bottom half (3.5 billion) of the world’s population. While some deluded commentators welcomed this as “fantastic news,” the rest of us were disgusted. Winnie Byanyima, Oxfam’s executive director, said at the time: “It is staggering that in the 21st Century, half of the world’s population own no more than a tiny elite whose numbers could all fit comfortably on a double-decker bus.”
Two months later, following Oxfam’s calculation and having published the new 2014 rich list, Forbes journalist Kasia Morena did some fact-checking. She found that the number of billionaires owning the same as the poorest 3.5 billion had dropped from 85 to 67: which demonstrates an enormous widening of the global inequality gap in just one year.
Fast-forward to 2015, and another Oxfam investigation. The anti-poverty charity warned in January that if nothing is done to tackle global wealth inequality- by forcing corporations to pay their taxes and closing off-shore tax havens, for example- the richest 1% will own more than everybody else in the world combined by 2016. In a paper called Wealth: Having it all and wanting more, Oxfam outlined how the richest 1 percent have seen their share of global wealth increase from 44% in 2009 to 48% in 2014, and will likely surpass 50% in 2016. Winnie Byanyima again warned that the explosion in inequality is holding back the fight against global poverty at a time when one in nine people do not have enough to eat, and more than a billion people still live on less than $1.25 a day.
The organization also outlined how 20 percent of billionaires around the world have interests in the financial and insurance sectors, a group that saw their cash wealth increase by 11 percent in the last 12 months. Billionaires listed as having interests in the pharmaceutical and healthcare sectors saw their collective net worth increase by 47 percent, and the industry spent more than $500 millionlobbying policy makers in Washington and Brussels in 2013 alone.
“Do we really want to live in a world where the one percent own more than the rest of us combined?” Byanyima asked. “The scale of global inequality is quite simply staggering, and despite the issues shooting up the global agenda, the gap between the richest and the rest is widening fast.”

Meet the people who own 50% (and counting) of the world’s wealth

Here is Forbes’s (real-time) list of the 66 billionaires who (officially) own half of all global assets, and will soon own more than the rest of Earth’s seven billion population combined. They range from CEOs of large corporations to oil and gas tycoons and Silicon valley entrepreneurs. The list details name, net worth, percentage change since the 2015 results, their age, industry and nationality. Bill Gates is ranked first at $469 billion, and James Simons at #66 with the $14 billion he made from hedge funds.
But where are the world’s Royal families? And more to the point, where are the Rothschilds and theRockefellers? These two families have an unimaginable amount of wealth that surpasses the trillion mark- they are the only trillionaires in the world, and yet they are missing from Forbes’s list every single year, along with the handful of other men commonly believed to own ourpoliticians, ourmedia, our corporations, our scientists, and even our money supply.

While the truth of the post title cannot be verified, we do know that five of the most powerful and wealthiest men in the world belong to the Rothschild and Rockefeller dynasties. How much power do they hold, and why do we hear so little of them?

The Rothschild and Rockefeller Dynasties: With great power comes great secrecy

Forbes’s rich list doesn’t include members of Royal families or dictators who hold their wealth through a position of power, or who control the riches of their country. In this way, the real people pulling the strings are able to work in absolute secrecy without any media attention at all (unless it is carefully-constructed positive propaganda, like this article on the philanthropy of the Rothschilds, of course). Forbes’s policy to exclude heads of state from the rich list explains why the Queen of England is absent, although nobody has the slightest idea of her wealth in any case: her shareholdings remain hidden behind Bank of England Nominee accounts. As the Guardian newspaper reported in May 2002: ‘The reason for the wild variations in valuations of her private wealth can be pinned on the secrecy over her portfolio of share investments…Her subjects have no way of knowing through a public register of interests where she, as their head of state, chooses to invest her money. Unlike [British politicians and Lords], the Queen does not have to annually declare her interests and as a result her subjects cannot question her or know about potential conflicts of interests…’
The same can be said for the Rothschilds and Rockerfellers, whose European forebears were richer than any Royal family at the time. The families are believed to have set up and own the FederalReserve (G Edward Griffin’s The Creature From Jekyll Island and this research by journalist Dean Henderson are recommended reading if you want to get deeper into this topic). Could this be why the families, whose power in manipulating global affairs for the past few hundred years cannot beunderestimated, are protected by Forbes’s ‘don’t even go there’ policy? Retired management consultant Gaylon Ross Sr, author of Who’s Who of the Global Elite, was apparently told in 1998 that the combined wealth of the Rockefeller family was approx $11 trillion and the Rothschilds $100 trillion…what might that figure have reached 17 years later? One can hardly begin to imagine, but maybe money isn’t the most important thing to your average trillionaire, anyway…
“The only problem with wealth is, what do you do with it?” was a rhetorical question posed by none other than John D. Rockefeller. Well, if Aaron Russo’s testimony is to be believed, all the Rockefeller riches in the world certainly won’t be used to benefit the human race…
Russo’s Rockefeller revelations: False flags, power grabs, and an enslaved population
Russo, a film-maker and activist who directed America: From Freedom to Fascism, claimed that Nick Rockefeller told him about ‘an event that would allow us to invade Afghanistan and Iraq’ some eleven months before 9/11, and foretold the fact that the ‘War on Terror’ would be a hoax wherein soldiers would be looking in caves for non-existent enemies (see video). In the interview, Russo claims that he first met lawyer Nick Rockefeller after being introduced by a mutual attorney friend. The two men hit it off, and later down the line Rockefeller apparently confided in Russo privately what his family had planned for the world: never-ending war, global population reduction, economic collapse, widespread chaos and disorder on such a scale that people would actually welcome the ultimate ‘solution’: a one-world government. He was speaking in October 2000, and most of his predictions have now come to pass- including 9/11 and the subsequent War on Terror.
Russo claimed that Rockefeller asked him to be on the Council For Foreign Relations (CFR), but the man who spent his career fighting for freedom and exposing the Fed Reserve supposedly told Rockefeller that he couldn’t possibly go along with these sinister plans for mankind. “As much as I like you Nick, I don’t believe in enslaving people. We’re on opposite sides of the fence,” Russo told Nick. To which Rockefeller apparently replied: “Why do you care about those people? Take care of your own life; do the best you can for you and your family.” Russo concludes: “There was just a lack of caring; it was just cold.”
He goes on, “I used to say what the point, Nick? You have all the money in the world, you have all the power in the world, whats the end goal?” Rockefeller is said to have responded bluntly: “To get everyone chipped.” According to this theory, the families who own the banking system are bored of their wealth, it is no longer enough. To control society itself is the ultimate end-game. According to Russo, Rockefeller told him that a global government would slowly phase out paper money from circulation, with its eventual aim being to microchip the population, turning us all into slaves of the NWO.
These are wild claims indeed, and from a journalistic point of view, they cannot be verified one way or the other. But it’s worth noting that just before Russo died in August 2007, he filmed a moving message to all Americans. In it, he talked about how vital it is for people to continue to resist national ID cards and microchips, and fight for their individual freedoms against those who would enslave us. It’s also worth pointing out that it’s not only activists like Russo and scare-mongering patriots like Alex Jones who have tried to ‘out’ the Rothschilds and Rockefellers. The problem is, all those who do so are silenced.
Ashley Mote, a member of the European Parliament serving British independence party UKIP, asked the following question in Brussels, and retribution was swift: “Mr President, I wish to draw your attention to the Global Security Fund, set up in the early 1990s under the auspices of Jacob Rothschild. This is a Brussels-based fund and it is no ordinary fund: it does not trade, it is not listed and it has a totally different purpose. It is being used for geopolitical engineering purposes, apparently under the guidance of the intelligence services. I have previously asked about the alleged involvement of the European Union’s own intelligence resources in the management of slush funds in offshore accounts, and I still await a reply. To that question I now add another: what are the European Union’s connections to the Global Security Fund and what relationship does it have with European Union institutions?”
This is exactly the kind of question the European public would like an answer to. Yet Mote did not receive one. Instead, the 79 year old politician was sacked from his own party, and later arrestedand sent to jail for allegedly claiming false expenses during his time as an MEP. Mote claimed throughout his trial that he was ‘targeted for being anti-Europe’, and said the money he claimed was used to pay third-party whistleblowers in a quest to uncover corruption and fight for democracy and transparency in European politics.
Like everything else relating to the people who really run the show, the truth is out there…but it’s almost impossible to pin down.

0 comments:

After Being Wounded With Poison Arrows, Desperate Elephant Runs To Humans For Help



Amazingly, though the lead bull had never been to the David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust, he had an instinct the humans there would help him and his friends.
Earlier this year, True Activist relayed the saddening news that within one decade, the African elephant is likely to become extinct. Because of the illegal ivory trade, over 100,000 African elephants have been killed in just the past three years.
Thankfully, three elephant bulls’ lives were saved when, after they were shot with poisoned arrows, they made their way to a place they remembered could help them: the David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust(DSWT).
The event, which took place two months ago, is memorable for many reasons, but began when poachers attacked the three male elephants.
While the one elephant who led the others to DSWT had never been a resident at the sanctuary, he knew other elephants who had. According to The Dodo, the elephant had mated with two formerorphans who were raised at the Wildlife Trust Ithumba Reintegration Centre, who now lead their own wild herds.
In 2011, the bull fathered babies with them, who were named Mwende and Yetu by DSWT. According to the Trust, they’re certain he knew this group of humans meant help, and could offer assistance.
Credit: David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust
In an update, DSWT wrote:

“We are sure that Mwende’s father knew that if they returned to the stockades they would get the help and treatment they needed because this continuously happens with the injured bulls in the north; they all come to Ithumba when in need, understanding that there they can be helped.” 
Elephants are renowned for their spatial reasoning and memory. Able to craft detailed mental maps that help them navigate their territory, it is possible that they are also intelligent and sociable enough to communicate with each other the treatment received by DSWT.
Credit: David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust
“Every day, we are awed by Kenya’s wildlife,” DSWT wrote.
Amazingly, these elephants wound up in exactly the place they needed to be. Within several hours, the veterinary team at the Trust sedated the three bulls and treated their arrow wounds; they then cleaned out the poisoned areas and filled them with antibiotics and protective clay.
As the update shares, they’ve done well recovering from their surgeries and appear to be quite thankful.
This inspiring story deserves to go viral, don’t you think? Animals are FAR more intelligent and aware than most humans give them credit for. Unfortunately, poaching persists; but if enough action is taken to raise awareness about concerns like this and educate others on the amazing rational and beauty of these creatures, perhaps a bright future is possible for them.
Comment below and share this article!

0 comments:

Why Some Iranians Chant “Death To America”: 7 Things You Didn’t Know The U.S. Did To Iran



Many Americans( particularly the neocons in Washington) can’t seem to understand why Obama would put in so much effort to cement a nuclear deal with the nation; just invade it murder its women and children and be done with it already! I mean, those groups of Iranians who chant “death to America” CLEARLY represent the entire population of Iran, despite it being a country widely considered one of the more educated, liberal and open to the concept women’s rights in the Middle East.
Let’s be fair and consider the history of America VS Iran before we sentence yet another country to die for “WMDs” that did not exist.
You see, America has done quite a bit of harm to the nation despite its continuous bout with memory loss when it comes to history that does not fit the usual “Saving the Day” narrative.
First up, the Shah of Iran, Nasir al-Din Shah, sold what amounts to practically the entire economy of the country to Baron De Julius de Reuter( the founder of Reuters, that looming colossus of mainstream media hellbent on controlling how people perceive the world. Is it any wonder that Iran gets such bad press?). The deal included the operation of the country’s railroads abd canals, its mines and its forests… as well as ALL future industries. Thankfully the Iranian People were unwilling to sit by and let their collective futures get sold to slavery and the Shah had to backtrack from the deal.
British statesman Lord Curzon called it “the most complete and extraordinary surrender of the entire industrial resources of a kingdom into foreign hands that has probably ever been dreamed of.” I bet that the world would be MUCH different if Reuters owned its own COUNTRY with which to dominate the world… Corporate takeover indeed.
Before THAT terrible deal, the Shah was trying his best to sell the country’s tobacco industry to foreigners. The actions of this Shah will be representative of how Shahs in the future regard their own people, and this is despite these leaders being regarded as “reformists” who liberalized the country in the eyes of the West.
Second, the BBC aided the CIA in 1953 in overthrowing the DEMOCRATICALLY elected leader of Iran in 1953– Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddegh. Yet more evidence that the oligarchy of Western Mainstream media is largely working hand-in-glove with Western governments in what amounts to the destruction of a nation.
The BBC had transmitted a secret code to aid Kermit Roosevelt set up the scene for what would eventually result in the overthrow of Mosaddegh. It had also blatantly broadcast pro-coup propaganda at the behest of its government handlers.
Once the, I cannot emphasize this enough, DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED leader of Iran was ousted, he was replaced once more with a Shah, this time an overt puppet of the CIA. The US then began instructing the new dictators’s regime in the fine art of interrogating Iranian citizens… Using techniques that a CIA analyst said were “based on German torture techniques from World War II.” Yeah, TORTURE. Where have we heard that before? Oh right, the supposedly reformed liars in the CIA were recently caught out torturing detainees with full-immersion simulated DROWNING in bath tubs.
The atrocities continue
Thirdly, America had formalized plans to USE NUKES IN IRAN. I’m not kidding, America has had a bad enough track-record when it came to attacking Iraq. But the fact is, that when the Soviets seemed to be eyeing Iran, the US decided rather quickly to nuke the mountain passes from whence they might enter Iran in order to prevent them from invading the country. Thankfully, the Soviets never did show signs of wanting a piece of Iran.
If America fears Iranian nukes so much, I wonder how much of it is because US politicians remember this scenario and are fearful of retribution…Pentagon historian David Crist summed it up fairly: “No one reflected on how the Iranians might view such a scenario.”
Fourth, the US allowed Saudi Arabia to fund nuclear programs in Iraq, Iran’s greatest enemy at the time. It was bad enough that the US was helping Iraq with its chemical weapons programs, chemical weapons that would be used on Iranian soldiers when Saddam invaded Iran in 1980. Worse still, Saddam was at the time being funded by the Saudi Arabians to produce NUCLEAR weapons. TheUS knew ALL ABOUT this program, and let it happen! Are you starting to realise that the real issue is NEVER that some country has done something bad(such as build nukes) it’s that these bad things ONLY MATTER if they happen in countries the US does not like.

Nearly 1% of Iran’s ENTIRE population perished in that war against Iraq, and it would have been far worse had Saddam really had nukes to use too.
Fifth, if you think groups of random citizens chanting death to America is bad… What if you keep hearing LEADERS of Iran chanting that mantra? Well, for Iran, that’s basically what the US has been doing all along. Literally.
Feast your eyes upon the great warmonger-singer John McCain as he sings about destroying Iran. Now, when a mob of citizens chant death to America… they don’t really have the power to make that happen. In fact, their own leaders do not have the power to make it happen… America on the other hand… and to hear this rhetoric from its politicians
Admiral William Fallon, who retired as head of CENTCOM in 2008, said about Iran: “These guys are ants. When the time comes, you crush them.”
Admiral James Lyons Jr., commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet in the 1980s, has said we were prepared to “drill them back to the fourth century.”
Richard Armitage, then assistant secretary of defense, explained that we considered whether to “completely obliterate Iran.”
Billionaire and GOP kingmaker Sheldon Adelson advocates an unprovoked nuclear attack on Iran — “in the middle of the desert” at first, then possibly moving on to places with more people.
Sixth, the US shot down an Iranian CIVILIAN airplane and murdered 290 people… and 60 kids.For those of you who get all angry about “Russia” shooting down an airliner (despite there being approximately zero evidence of this), about 30 years ago the USS Vincennes shot down Iran Air Flight 655. The New York Times had written about the “Murder in the Air” in 1983 when the Soviet Union mistakenly shot down a South Korean civilian airliner in its airspace.
It had stated that“there is no conceivable excuse for any nation shooting down a harmless airliner.” How NOBLE.
After the Vincennes missile strike, a Times article announced that what happened to Flight 655 “raises stern questions for Iran.” For IRAN?!  Two years later the U.S. Navy gave the Vincennes’s commander the highly prestigious Legion of Merit commendation. Seriously, the mainstream media is regurgitated bullsh^& spun one way when it suits them and the other when it suits their masters.

Seven, an Iran armed with nukes could prevent the US from invading it, as was their intention all along. According to an Iran analyst at the American Enterprise institute:  “the prospect of a nuclear Iran is a nightmare … because of the constraining effect it threatens to impose upon U.S. strategy for the greater Middle East. … The surest deterrent to American action is a functioning nuclear arsenal.”
Let’s make sure everyone is too weak, so they can’t resist us if we decided to invade and depose their leaders whenever we feel like it.
Source: The Intercept

0 comments:

Vietnam Government Misuses Powers; Anonymous Brings Down Its Websites


Members of the online hacktivist group, Anonymous, AntiSec and HagashTeam have hacked and defaced a number of Vietnamese government websites to protest against online censorship and human rights violations in the country.
They left a deface page along with a message on 8 Vietnamese government websites against the imprisonment of thousands of political prisoners. The message claimed that on the 70th anniversary of independence, the Vietnamese government released over 18,200 prisoners, none of them were political prisoners including political activists, journalists, bloggers and human rights defenders.
image



In an exclusive conversation with one of the Anonymous handles on Twitter, HackRead was told thatAnonymous stands with the repressed citizens of Vietnam. “Anonymous is a complex idea, born with the concept of freedom of expression and has as its main pillar. We warn Vietnamese government to release all political activists, journalists, bloggers and human rights defenders from the prisons.”

0 comments: