Mishra's contemptible smear was published by the London Review of Books under the guise of a review of Ferguson's book, Civilization: The West and the Rest.
Mishra is a skilled exponent of defamation by insinuation.
Note to our readers: Donald Trump is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, birther and bully who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims -- 1.6 billion members of an entire religion -- from entering the U.S.
a person looking at a bulldozer close to a building while holding rocks. The person is shown wearing what looks like a Palestinian flag with a map of Israel without its borders. At the bottom of the mural, the words “justice” and “peace” can be seen along with other text.Paul Bronfman, a A Toronto film industry executive, has announced that his company is pulling its support for York University’s Cinema and Media Arts program because of the display of this picture, which, Mr. Bronfman said, "is anti-Israel." He then continued:
It made me sick to my stomach and very angry. “We live in an amazing city, an amazing country, and to have this happening under our noses is disgusting. It’s subtly anti-Semitic and anti-Israel. It’s anti-Canadian.But what is disgusting about being anti-Israel when the Israeli state enables the theft of Palestinian land for the construction of illegal settlements in the occupied territories?
... the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company [Uranium One] with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West.Which deal, the Times reports
... gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.And "At the heart of the tale" reports the Times:
... are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family.And, reports the Times:
Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.And the Times continues:
As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.But the US establishment, i.e., the plutocracy who only like politicians they can buy, still prefer Hillary to one of their own, Donald Trump, with a reform agenda.
And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.
One startling feature of the latest race to become the next president of the US - which begins in earnest with next week's Iowa caucuses - is the runaway success in the opinion polls of the outspoken billionaire, Donald Trump.
* Said policies are administered by governments largely owned by said criminally reckless financial institutions, for example, the great American banking firm of J.P. Morgan, which took former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair on as an "adviser" for a fee of two million pounds per year. This is in accordance with the Western tradition of political bribery, which as explained by Thomas Macaulay (The History of England (1848)), involves payments made after the bribed individual leaves office, an arrangement that is entirely legal, and one that no politician would ever think of changing.
In Europe, around 30 per cent of pregnancies end in abortion.Thus it is abortion that makes the difference between a self-perpetuating society and a society engaged in self-genocide. The fertility of European women is currently 1.55 and falling, whereas the replacement rate is 2.1. If the 30% of pregnancies terminated by non-therapeutic abortion went to term, the European fertility rate would be 2.2, which would achieve near perfect population stability. As it is, the European population is growing rapidly due to mass immigration from Asia, the Middle East and Africa, most of the immigrants being either of reproductive age or children and hence soon to be of reproductive age. These immigrants will thus contribute disproportionately to the next generation in Europe even if their fertility was no greater than that of Europeans. However, all immigrant groups have a higher fertility that indigenous European women, and in some cases their fertility is several times higher. For example, in Britain, women from Libya, a country deliberately turned into a failed state and thus a source of immigrants to Europe by NATO bombing, have a fertility rate more than three times the European rate. These numbers make it clear, Europe is engaged in self-genocide driven by puppets of the globalist money power, such as Blair and Cameron, Sarkozy and Hollande, and above all, Frau Merkel. The objective is a mongrel Europe of easily manipulated deracinated serfs among whom will be found the subservient technicians to run the global machinery of commerce, and solve the servant problem, as George H. W. Bush said many years ago with reference to illegal Mexican immigrants to the US.
In Western Europe there were 12 abortions per 1,000 women in 2008, while in Eastern Europe at the same time there were 43.
However, Northern Europe (which includes the UK and Scandinavia) fared worse than the western region with 17 abortions per 1,000 women, which is on par with North America.
They intend to create one integrated planet under a top-down, locked-down political and economic management system, backed up by coercion.Donald Trump's campaign for the US Presidency threatens the more than one-hundred-year career of the Treason Party's drive for "global governance," which is to say, a Money Power regime, fronted by pseudodemocratic puppets such as David Cameron, Angela Merkel and Barack Obama, and backed by the corporate-owned media, purveyors of pornography, and Hollywood fake history and the global corporations that export Western jobs along with the capital and technology accumulated by the sweat of generations, to the lowest wage, lowest tax, Third-World jurisdictions with minimal workplace health and safety standards, and environmental protection.
In order to achieve this goal ... the notion of separate nations must be eradicated.
The primary goal of the provoked chaos in the Middle East and parts of Africa is: redraw that whole territory and push waves of immigrants into the West, primarily Europe. [thereby drowning] traditional cultures and ethnic identities [to create] a nationless Europe, broken from its past.
Does my hon. Friend not agree that the fact that it is Martin Luther King day today makes it even more bizarre that this hate figure is preaching these ridiculous things that we should reject?Note, no evidence of hate speech by Mr. Trump is offered by the Hon. member, perhaps because she does not know of any. Or perhaps when she describes Mr. Trump as a hate figure she means that he is a figure who all politically correct members of the Treason Party must hate.
Paul Flynn (New Labor) |
He [Trump] described the people of Mexico as rapists and drug abusers.But this is a total fabrication, a lie.
I don’t see how there is any room for misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the statement I made on June 16th during my Presidential announcement speech. What can be simpler or more accurately stated? The Mexican Government is forcing their most unwanted people into the United States. They are, in many cases, criminals, drug dealers, rapists, etc.Flynn also stated:
Many fabulous people come in from Mexico and our country is better for it. But these people are here legally, and are severely hurt by those coming in illegally. I am proud to say that I know many hard working Mexicans—many of them are working for and with me…and, just like our country, my organization is better for it.
More recently he [Trump] suggested that Muslims not be allowed into his country, which is an extraordinary and extremely dangerous thing to say.Which is untrue. Trump did not "suggest," he asserted that there should be a total "shut down" in Muslim immigration to the United States pending determination of the cause of the intense anti-Western hatred among some Muslims, i.e., radical Islamic extremists, such as those who perpetrated the recent Paris massacre of 130 innocent civilians, the Muslim couple, one newly immigrating, who last month murdered 14 American workmates in San Bernadino, California, and the hundreds or thousands of Muslim "refugees" responsible for a wave of sex crimes against European women in Germany and Sweden and elsewhere.
Tulip Siddiqi, MP for Kilburn and Hamstead (majority foreign born): A pretty face, and a contempt for Britain's tradition of free speech. |
I draw the line on freedom of speech when it leads to violent ideology being imported, which is what I feel is happening.As clear an indication as one needs of the settler mentality of Britain's immigrant community, which is characterized by a contempt for Britain's tradition of free speech, and which justifies that contempt by what they "feel" is happening. No facts required folks. If we, the settler immigrants, "feel" hurt, then everyone whoever we say had better shut the fuck up and stay the fuck outta the country.
How liberalism Dies |
I suspect that the reason for the unfolding disaster is more wishy-washy leftish PC and innumerate thinking even amongst Conservatives than anything as rational and deliberate as you suppose.Much as one would like to think that this is correct, since it would mean the possibility of a change of heart among the elite that would permit the survival of the English nation, the view is entirely mistaken. The British, as with the other European nations, are as surely and deliberately targeted for destruction as were the Jews under the rule of the Nazis.
there is no intercourse and no sympathy; who are as ignorant of each other's habits, thoughts, and feelings, as if they were dwellers in different zones, or inhabitants of different planets. The rich and the poor.
The Great Chartist Meeting on Kennington Common, London in 1848 by William Edward Kilburn. Chartism was a movement for workers rights and political representation. |
Image source: Guy Verhofstadt |
Germans opposed to cultural genocide by mass immigration |
German demographics |
threaten to push xenophobia toward the "middle of the population" — which could lead to a backlash against refugees.Meaning that the furious reaction of Germans to state engineered invasion is not a manifestation of far right wingism, but is driven by the the natural and inevitable anger of the vast majority of German people and thus defeats the heretofor successful boiling frogs method of genocide by importing a new people. When virtually the entire population is aroused to anger, calling them far-right-wing extremists exposes the media hacks not only as liars but as stupid fools.
In the German case the important number here isn’t the country’s total population, currently 82 million. It’s the twentysomething population, which was less than 10 million in 2013 (and of course already included many immigrants). In that cohort and every cohort afterward, the current influx could have a transformative effect."Could have a transformative effect." LOL
How transformative depends on whether these men eventually find a way to bring brides and families to Europe as well.Which they won't. Much better, obviously, to marry a German girl or two, or three or four, who speaks the local lingo and can protect the cuckolds from the backlash of the native population.
But it could also double or treble this migration’s demographic impact, pushing Germany toward a possible future in which half the under-40 population would consist of Middle Eastern and North African immigrants and their children.Which is clearly the objective. Which is to say, the objective is European genocide.
If you believe that an aging, secularized, heretofore-mostly-homogeneous society is likely to peacefully absorb a migration of that size and scale of cultural difference, then you have a bright future as a spokesman for the current German government.
You’re also a fool.And continues:
Such a transformation promises increasing polarization among natives and new arrivals alike. It threatens not just a spike in terrorism but a rebirth of 1930s-style political violence.What to do? Our panicky NY Timeser urges:
closing Germany’s borders to new arrivals for the time being. It means beginning an orderly deportation process for able-bodied young men.And he writes:
It means giving up the fond illusion that Germany’s past sins can be absolved with a reckless humanitarianism in the present.The last sentence giving the game away: the object of the game is the destruction of the people and culture of the Germans and the rest of the Europeans all in the name of avenging the Holocaust.
David Ricardo (1772-1823) |
Ricardo was explicit ...that international free trade is beneficial to all parties only if capital is immobile, since exporting capital, one of the factors of production, will inevitably lower the productivity and hence reduce the prosperity of the population.CanSpeccy: Why even balanced trade between the West and Rest threatens your job
Consistent with these ideas, enlightened national governments endeavored to restrict capital outflow, promote workforce education and training, and in the Western World, limit mass immigration from the developing World since that diluted the capital stock of the nation on a per capita basis, reduced the per capita availability of land and infrastructure, and lowered average workforce skills and education -- aside from its potential for destroying the nation through population replacement and reproductive competition.
So why have the benefits of foreign trade that David Ricardo predicted [under the very different conditions of 200 years ago] not materialize?Related:
First, because an important assumption underlying Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage no longer applies.
Experience... shews, that the fancied or real insecurity of capital, when not under the immediate control of its owner, together with the natural disinclination which every man has to quit the country of his birth and connexions, and intrust himself with all his habits fixed, to a strange government and new laws, checks the emigration of capital. These feelings, which I should be sorry to see weakened, induce most men of property to be satisfied with a low rate of profits in their own country, rather than seek a more advantageous employment for their wealth in foreign nations.Today, there is no need for the investor or capitalist to "quit the country of his birth and connexions" in order to exploit cheap foreign labor.
The executive jet, the Internet, the enormous size and hence political clout of the multi-national corporate and financial entities and the international acceptance of a single set of rules governing world trade make it a safe and simple matter to invest almost anywhere in the world.
For this reason, if no other, foreign trade need not, as Ricardo believed, necessarily benefit all parties to the transaction.
When capital is exported from a high-wage nation to a low-wage nation, the investment per capita and hence the productivity of labor in the former declines and the investment per capita and hence productivity of labor in the latter increases, with a consequent decrease in wages in the former and an increase in wages in the latter.