Any Henry Makow fans here?

[thumperton]

<!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://pichold.com/Images/Smilies/wavey.gif" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--><br><br><br>Before him, I only understood the infrastructure of the NWO, in terms of the banking cartels, the fictitious 'boom and bust' cycles, the contrived wars and revolutions, etc.<br><br>I find he gives us a 'spiritual' and societal aspect of the subversiveness of the NWO as well, that is not immediately discernable, such as the effects of feminism on both men and women.<br><br>I usually supplement his writings with AJ's rantings to get an idea of what we're dealing with, and it really makes things clear for me. What about you guys? <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p></p><i></i>

[heath7]

You're a straight-up trouble maker aren't you? <p></p><i></i>

[thumperton]

what do you mean <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

There are plenty of Makow fans on this site. I'm sure you all will find each other soon enough. <p></p><i></i>

[thumperton]

are you one, DE? <!--EZCODE IMAGE START--><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v709/raichu4u/snyx.gif" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--> <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

No. <p></p><i></i>

[pugzleyca3]

It's funny this topic came up, I saw one of his articles posted somewhere just a few minutes ago. When I come across his articles on sites (eg. rense.com) I skip them. I don't care for his writing style or his portrayal of the subject matter. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=pugzleyca3>pugzleyca3</A> at: 10/17/05 12:42 pm<br></i>

[john darmy]

I like him, even though he thinks a woman's place is in the kitchen or whatever. I think he's right about feminism being a conspiracy by the elite to foment disorder, but at the same time, I think women should have the freedom to do what they want, and I think they should be paid as well as men. I think you can be women's libber without supporting the castration of men. Apparently Gloria Steinem was on the CIA payroll, but I still support some aspects of feminism. I know I'm oversimplifying to an extent, but Makow does take a dim view of women's rights, doesn't he? <p></p><i></i>

[thumperton]

I think for the most part Makow tries to show us that the so-called "women's movement" did not arise organically, and nor is it based on the goals that it claims to be about.<br><br>As a libertarian I fully support the right for groups to lobby change through persuasion and not force, but this is not the case here. What we have is the American government subsidizing single mother hood, especially in the black ghettos, and they do what they can to break up the family with many other financial incentives/penalties, such as making the cost of living beyond the means of a single breadwinner through heavy taxation, and forcing children into daycare. <p></p><i></i>

[thumperton]

Anyway, even though the majority of his articles are on feminism, I mostly like how he can tie things together so well, and through simple logic, show us what should be abundantly obvious, such as calling the War on Terror a "protection racket."<br><br>Here's a pretty good one on the London Bombings:<br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.savethemales.ca/001024.html" target="top">www.savethemales.ca/001024.html</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> <p></p><i></i>

[pugzleyca3]

The problem I have with Makow's work, is that he writes under the presumption that womanhood has always been what it is now. To me, the bigger question is this: why have women been in a subservient position for so long and how did it get that way? <br><br>And as far as what I have read about riots being backed by NWO goons and the like, I actually can agree with that and find it totally plausible. <br><br>I don't know what you all think about the DaVinci code. I am aware that it is fiction, but somehow I think Brown might be on to something (reality being something more mundane than Brown's book).<br><br>Is it not odd that when the entire world (at least in the U.S.) speaks of Mother Earth, Mother Nature... as if the female was exhalted at one time, what the hell happened? Was it just another idealism biting the dust and we moved on to the religious ideals where women were likened to chattel. Except for people like Cleopatra.<br><br>When I read the bible, I get the impression that the men overthrew the women from power at one time long, long ago. (before the Christian bible was written) But being dependent on each other to bear offspring, they always had to remain together.<br><br>I am just trying to figure out the history of things right now and that is what I don't like about Makow. It's like he drew a timeline in the sand and considers nothing other than that. Though, it may not matter to him for what he's doing. It's his thing.<br><br>Barefoot and pregnant is how I feel when reading his material. LOL! <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.savethemales.ca/000612.html">www.savethemales.ca/000612.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>ORIGIN OF ANTI SEMITISM<br>by Henry Makow<br><br>It should come as no surprise that the people who own and control the world have put their interests before the greater good of humanity.<br><br>For at least 400 years, Christian civilization has been under covert attack by a diabolical multi generational program now called the "New World Order", "globalization" or "world government."<br><br>Essentially globalization represents the consolidation of absolute economic, political and cultural power in the hands of a cabal of super rich dynastic families (bankers and their vast corporate networks) headquartered in the City of London. The UN, IMF and World Bank are some of their instruments.<br><br>These families include the Rothschilds, Warburgs and other so-called Jews who have intermarried with Anglo American and European aristocracy.<br><br>This mirrors the collaboration between the moneylenders and kings in the Middle Ages when the Jew shared the proceeds from his lucrative business with the king. The New World Order resurrects the feudal relationship between an aristocracy based on great wealth and a large serfdom.<br><br>These families have embraced Freemasonry, an occult secret society that worships Lucifer. The top rank of this cabal is called the "Illuminati."<br><br>The Illuminati uses anti Semitism to manipulate Jews and others. Jews figure prominently in Illuminati sponsored movements such as Communism, Zionism, Socialism, Liberalism, Feminism, and Neo Conservatism.<br><br>Most of these Jews are ambitious or idealistic dupes who think they are building a secular utopia based on reason and not a world police state straight out of George Orwell's "1984".<br><br>The Illuminati strategy is divide and rule, i.e. get their enemies to destroy each other. For example they set up Communism to attract opponents of private property. They set up Nazism for people who champion nation and race, and hate "Jewish" hegemony. Then they attacked each other.<br><br>As long as Jews play a disproportionate role in the New World Order, some opposition will be expressed in terms of "anti Semitism." For example, this recently appeared in a book review on Amazon. "It isn't Jews dying in Iraq. Our boys are dying for their war on their enemies. Americans are just hostages. Our government and media is hostage to Israel First Americans. " <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <p></p><i></i>

[Sweejak]

Sure I like him, don't know if I'd call myself a fan though. He's gutsy as evidenced by his "traditional" take on women and homosexuality which I think is largely misunderstood, and he's been called to task many times on it, but I think he is on to something. As I recall a pretty good expose on the hijacking of Feminism. <p></p><i></i>

[proldic]

ought to get married<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[jhhi]

he does not step back far enough. Yet I like that when I wrote him about one of his articals, he wrote me back. <p></p><i></i>