Skip to content

If we only removed a fraction of the W.M.D.`s from the Middle East, who`s meant to remove the rest ?

While the President`s response to Assad`s War-Crimes, was an important step that stirred a sense of relief for the millions of T.V. onlookers, desensitized by the indifference of their true savior Obama, whose response was to express his deep disappointment following the last Chemical Attack, prior to setting-off to another fund-raising dinner, we remain well immunized against reflecting on several existential policies strongly embedded in our unconscious thanks to a deft ballroom pivot by the mainstream media: Obama and Putin made a short-term good-cop/bad-cop inversion. Obama remained protected in his sanitized comfort-zone as a junior Philosophy-Tutor, handing over the role of “bad-cop” to Putin, by inviting him into the Middle-East – a free windfall, since Russia had been ousted of playing any meaningful diplomatic role as strong-man in the Middle-East since the Yom-Kippur War. But this action by default omitted acknowledging Putin as the Chess-Master in foreign-relations, a course that our Harvard Professor omitted. Crowning Russia as “Power-Broker” to ensure the complete confiscation of WMD`s from Assad – the world`s Prime War-Criminal – by his chief sponsor and partner-in-crime by Obama – the world`s greatest pacifist and enabler of crime, through Putin`s record of merit in carrying out International Law, (which he predictably vetoes in the Security Council). The collusion runs deeper: as it later emerged that Obama and Putin`s collusion was the greatest deception in modern history as the two Superpowers Crowned Iran as the newest member to Worlds Nuclear Club: their mutual support of the Shiites of Iran in attaining a Nuclear Ballistic Program immune to world inspection. What a legacy to leave: Putin and Obama ensuring Iran and Syria as Pariah States armed with W.M.D.s camouflaged by a lingering investigation of the Trump White-house being in cahoots with the enemy. The "# Never-Trump`ers”  have a huge cache of psychological “dumbing-down” methods, ranging from Chemical Warfare (Chem-trails, water saturated with Chlorine and fluoride, vaccinations tested on the Armed Forces who are subsequently never diagnosed with “Vaccine-Injury” but rather the “Gulf-Syndrome” (probably caused by Anthrax vaccinations). A generation of children who, prior to Obama`s rule were prohibited from receiving D.P.T. prior to 14 months, now being injected (while still as fetuses with living virus crossing their blood-brain barrier prior to them having their own immune-system to activate; a Monsanto-controlled, big-Pharma, domination of seeds and pesticides that constitute the corn thats fed to the chickens we eat. And used for the corn-sugar beverages we drink. These are a partial list of the mandated toxic assault on . Agencies like the “Department of Food and Agriculture” and the F.D.A. who regulate these agencies, are their main share-holders.  After being mandated to receive 35 vaccinations cultured in monkey-brain and preserved with formaldehyde, Magnesium, Thimerasol, and other neurotoxins, our children are then sent to Public Schools with Core-curriculum that ensures passing grades for regurgitation a curriculum nothing more than the language-equivalents of the food force-fed to the animals by the pigs on “Animal Farm”. What remains of the D.N.A. in their Pre-frontal Lobes are nothing more than empty-templates. The best of our High-School Graduates, no different to the chickens on the conveyor-belts that look like adults because they`re force-fed G.M.O.`s under artificial light and bloated with Growth Hormone, are then “let-loose” onto College Campuses where they`re educated by Left-Wing fanatics who belong (mostly) in psychiatric long-term facilities. There they acquire the final layer of their mental illness known as "Collective Anomie" a state of shared "identity-Loss". One may ask " why are the globalists obsessed with creating a generation of compliant brain-dead human primates devoid of psyche or soul ? The answer should be obvious: So that no one should ask questions like: "if the Middle-East is vanquished by warring tribes armed with Chemical, Biological, and Nuclear Weapons, provided by the Civilized World, to justify a humanitarian crises that can only be evaded by a soft invasion of the West". And if a Collective Caretaker Committee ensures a perfect balance between the "yea-genocide and neigh-genocide" creating a permanent stalemate: Until the arrival of an anarchist promoted to the seat of leader of the Free-World: By an establishment of Left-Wing Lunatic College Professors who teach that deporting illegal serial rapists is unconstitutional. These intellectual elitists can convince the majority that "illegal aliens",(whom they call "immigrants", without ever being called-out for it), must be released before the Federal Government discovers that they`ve returned from their country of origin – having been released after committing a similar crime – even several times. This cocktail of poisoned air, water, vaccines, corn, and pesticides, followed by a core-curriculum, built on the Sodomite model of whats really good being taught as "bad" and whats really bad being taught as "good"-produces a state - not of "moral confusion" - (because when you`re confused you tend to ask the wise); but more of a moral certainty that good is “bad” and bad is “good”. Thats why no-one is asking the question: “If we only removed a fraction of  the W.M.D. from the Middle East, who was meant to remove the rest, if members of Obama`s Administration admitted that they knew that Putin never intended to remove these lethal weapons and made sure it was kept a secret" And if you have the leader of the Opposition Party Chuck Schumer (in the world`s greatest Democracy) proudly announcing publicly: “My job is to ensure that I negate whatever the President says or does, irrespective of whether hes right or wrong, or whether or not its for the common good or bad". I guess thats the Democracy we deserve.

Why surveillance and profiling of Trump remains Obama`s secret weapon

The vigorous denial by F.B.I. and other Intelligence Agencies (including the British Secret Service) of ever having secretly eaves-dropped on Donald Trump`s Campaign Headquarters doesn`t mean much.

Firstly eaves-dropping is a clandestine activity.

With the entire nation critically scrutinizing President Trump`s now infamous tweet about being eaves-dropped by the lingering shadow of former-president Obama, there`s no disputing that his perception was not-only accurate, but possibly a cry to his voter-base for help.

It`s no co-incidence that Obama and former Attorney General Loretta Lynch were setting-up residence only a few blocks away from the White-house where they were conducting daily secret meetings with the likes of George Soros. While on the political disinformation front, Adam Schiff from the Special Congressional Investigation team was blurring the boundary between the now defunct propaganda theory of “the Russian Collusion” was narrowing the mission linguistically as the Ongoing Investigation into Trump (by none-other than the F.B.I.

Another disturbing discovery was that Obama had used his last days in office to dismantle the long-standing firewall separating electronic communications between all 19 Intelligence Agencies.

What ensued was a snowball-effect of electronic chatter enthusiastically disseminated by the hostile media recklessly spewing the highest levels of classified material in an effort to inflict pain on the young Administration at any expense.

What normally would be private and sacred, was not only being exhibited to our adversaries, (not deemed worthy of an investigation) but being used as an ongoing ambush in-waiting to complete the soft coup by members of “the Deep-State”, holdovers within the Intelligence Community and their political hacks,

Several days later, in a Special Hearing based on a fabricated hypothesis that Trump was in cahoots with our lethal enemies – the Russians, a pasty-looking F.B.I. Chief Comey would testify that the source of the leaks was the “Incidental Surveillance” ongoing on Trump and his campaign. Hence the implication of Obama, who had obtained (after 2 requests) a FISA Warrant against his rival, prior to the election upset.

Comey has been simultaneously denying Trumps claim of being under surveillance, while refusing to put this question to rest, on the basis that Trump is part of an "ongoing investigation", echoing Adam Schiff`s statement.

The Security-Leaks, Comey testified, were the byproduct of the Incidental Surveillance from the FISA Warrant, which he could no-longer control, given the dismantling of these Cyber-Security barriers by Obama during his last week in Office.

No-one has questioned the source of who had authorized the investigation of a sitting President. Were that to emerge we would be a step closer to the revelation of who`s behind the soft coup: having a Trump function under a state of continuous threat by the former Administration, who having been dealt a surprise electoral defeat, were now resorting to “plan-B”.

Nor the fact that it had already caused General Michael Flynn, Trumps new National Security Adviser, to resign. while forcing newly appointed Attorney General Jeff Sessions to recuse himself to avoid a similar fate.

Equally bewildering was that the espionage being conducted against Trump and his campaign-staff, and Cabinet Appointees had been authorized by a FISA Warrant.

While this warrant is highly intrusive, it applies to obtaining surveillance of foreign diplomats, with whom Trump`s transitional team are permitted, and expected to liaise. The origin of the term “Incidental Surveillance”, is that when tracking the activities of foreign diplomats, information obtained during discussions with American citizens are not the focus, and as a matter of procedure are erased.

When such a warrant is abused, it places any third-party defenseless, since the human mind cannot recall with accuracy the exact conversation,to be able to accurately repeat it later under scrutiny. Furthermore, in order to justify the FISA Warrant, Obama took the additional measure of expelling thirty five Russian diplomats, something he would never have to justify, nor did he find necessary, prior to setting-up the plot ensuring that all the pieces were in place.

Obama`s well-placed surrogates would fail to find anything to justify the violation of the President`s First Amendment. The plan to sabotage the newly elected president would be to create a mechanism of on-going “Incidental Surveillance” against the entire transitional team, and later use the Intelligence-gathering to ensnare the new Cabinet.

The purpose of the investigation was of course to obtain the FISA Warrant for the “Incidental Surveillance” for Obama to use against his future rivals; not any Russian mischief: that was the last thing on Obama`s mind. What threatened him was to sabotage any team Trump would assemble to begin damage-control. Flynn would be the first target of this delayed time-release, illegal, Executive Abuse of Office. Flynn constituted the greatest threat to his legacy, considering his intimate knowledge of that a nuclear-Iran would pose to global security.

The triad of the FISA Warrant,  the intended data-gathering on his prime-targets using “Incidental Surveillance”, and the subsequent change of rules conducive to widespread dissemination and  release of classified material would create the desired toxic potion while providing sufficient distance from the threat of any push-back: the instant prosecution for multiple felonies including incrimination of political rivals by cunningly bypassing privacy-rules.

Following 9/11, President George Bush signed into Law the “Patriot Act”, an Executive Action whereby for the duration of the National Emergency, the President grants himself far-reaching powers.

While the violations of the Constitution`s First Amended was far-reaching and indefinite, it lacked a compass. But it empowered the Executive Branch of government the powers to conduct sweeping surveillance of all U.S. citizens, at home or abroad.

With the arrival of Obama, the targets of this surveillance -net would evolve to include anyone perceived by the President as a threat to the central authority of the State, a basic principal of his Bolshevik mentors like Saul Alinsky, who crafted the methodology of nation take-down from within.

No-one questioned how Obama would shape his definition of who met the definition of “enemy of the State”. What we later discovered was that certain sub-groups (the likes of Muslims and all illegal aliens), would be shielded and exempt from surveillance.

In contrast, individuals whom Obama despised, such as Tea-Party members, and  patriots belonging to various Right-wing Conservative groups, were not only placed under surveillance, but were being punished through repeated I.R.S. audits, the denial of Tax-Exempt Status, and land-confiscations.

Not only was the N.S.A. routinely downloading billions of electronic conversations of ordinary American citizens, but they were performing meta-analyses that allowed them to be profile individuals and communities based on their degree of “desirability”.

Some of us who had experienced the Bolshevik Revolution or Holocaust first-hand, experienced this “selection-process” as an eerie dejavu.

Conservative intellectuals raised in academic institutions found their ranks swelling with radical members of left-wing ante-American and radically ante-Zionist agitators, many from the Middle East. While conservative bodies of students and faculty found themselves becoming an increasing minority, victims of hate-crimes, and increasingly endangered.

The simultaneous removal of words like “Muslim”, or “Jihad” from our genre of conversation was dismissed as not being relevant or pertinent to this conversation. The contradiction wasn`t even raised in the context that the terrorism that invoked passage of the “Patriot Act” was being conducted by those whom Obama was exempting.

This explains why we were unable to prevent the killing of 14 Marines at Fort Hood by the radicalized  Nidal Hasan, despite his having  sent 18 e-mails to a radical imam in Yemen before the attacks, and the Tsarnaev brothers, who were reportedly radicalized by watching Anwar Al-Awlaki lectures.

On the contrary, illegal aliens and individuals from Middle-Eastern countries were being treated like Sacred-Cows. Following their terrorist attacks, media was loathe to use language or expose nationalities, preferring to characterize them as “shooters” and “gunmen”. One cannot help notice how compliant the media have been in this denial of an obvious reality: one for which we were paying the price in terms of human life, in exchange for avoiding “racial profiling”.

While hundreds of mosques began springing-up in the U.S. (and Europe), they were enjoying exemption from State-directed surveillance, despite the accumulating anecdotal evidence showing that our prized academic institutions, together with prisons and mosques, had become the hub for radicalization.

Trump`s pro-growth, ante-immigrant, anti-globalist sentiments placed him clearly at the top of the pyramid of “undesirables”.

If anyone poses a threat to Mr. Obama`s obsession to create a New World Order, its Trump.

No wonder he would implant himself at the epicenter of the “deep state”, a term describing an assurance of a carry-over of a dark plot planted in America 24-years previously.

Comey has clearly shown himself to be willing to brazenly carry this allegiance to this dark agenda by participating in what some describe as a “soft-coup”, by continuing an illegal investigation of his new boss.



Spying on the President are you ?

Shouldn`t we all be disturbed, no matter what the issue, that a Head of the F.B.I. would align himself with a former President supported by his old spy-ring loyalists, running a treasonous shadow-government, against none-other than the current Head of State?

For Trump, as a C.E.O. he must walk down the corridor wondering which one of his employees (and their supervisors) recently listened-in on Classified conversations for using such “intellectual property” to run a coup before, during and after leaving office.

Instead of purging the ranks of those aligned with this illegal shadow-government, he remains loyal to his former-employee, who just happens to be spying on his new boss. How can one allow the Head of Intelligence to be in cahoots with an illegal shadow-government, obsessed with the efforts of a former-president-turned-traitor?

How so? By continuing to undermine, and ultimately usurp a democratically-elected leader.

Spying on the American President by wire-taps pose an existential threat to Trump`s legitimate leadership.

The removal of all boundaries protecting the autonomous self-agency of the President, and his ability to conduct daily business for the country has become shut-down by willful and obstructionism, persistent leaks, cross-chatter, and dramatic embarrassments.

Its purpose can be recognized by its corrosive-results: they extend from unnecessary firings and resignations to the creation of an environment dominated by feelings within the Executive Branch of hyper-vigilance, distrust, and diminished sense of safety against in every-day matters of conducting business.

This conflict is not just occurring in the domain of ideas, but creates an ongoing crisis of Power that can only be resolved by a highly assertive take-charge Authoritarian Persona.

Just because our side doesn`t abuse power or authority doesn`t mean that such stereotyping should stop us from “cleaning shop”.

It can be achieved painlessly: “Declare allegiance, or retire”.

Stockholm, Anomie, and the Trump Victory Melt-Down Syndrome

In the early 1960`s an American task-force was established to determine the impact of rapid Westernization or transformation to vulnerable communities whose cultural norms had experienced rapid evisceration.

For-instance, a clinical comparison was made between the two divided cultures found in Guinea. Within a very short time a rapid process of socio-cultural change was introduced to half of the population.

This process of rapid socio-cultural change created feelings of social and cultural deprivation, confusion, and absence of sense of meaning. While this occurred, there was a documented escalation of violence, vocational-failure, and heightened alcohol and substance-abuse. The term that was coined for this state of psychological and spiritual deterioration was “Anomie”.

Anomie is the result of the deletion of real relationship-templates, evolved through social learning and role-modeling in a world of real attachment, bonding, and culturally-specific guidelines for normative social-behavior that has been replaced by anonymous impersonation within a virtual world of Skype, Instant-messaging, and internet, lacking the social-bonding and attachment that occurs within the traditional community.

Anomie derives from the sudden loss of normative traditions, where the Self-Other interaction occurs within a natural multi-sensory domain which has evolved and become regulated over multiple-generations.

Rapid deconstruction of this social structure, with associated loss of normative cultural bonding, creates social and cognitive deprivation, cultural confusion, and loss of intimacy-seeking.

The failure of normal social attachment-behaviors, role-models, sense-of-meaning and acquired social and vocational skills, also imparts a sense of pessimism, as these virtual-reality victims sense the bleak chances of socio-economic success.

The experiences of loss-of traditional culture, combined with social marginalization and imposed Westernization have in many of the aboriginal First Nations of North America, including Alaska and Greenland, been reflected in relatively high levels of social-confusion, breakdown of family and community structure, anxiety, drug and alcohol abuse, and of juvenile suicide. The situation is very similar in some regions of the South Pacific.

Stockholm refers to the unique bond of loyalty established between a hostage and his or her captor occurring within the dynamic of the victim’s absolute dependence upon the predator (Dee, Graham and colleagues,” Love Thine Enemy; Hostages and the Classic Stockholm Syndrome.”  NY University Press, 1994).

This unique attachment established between the victim and captor evolves from the exclusive dependence by the former on the latter. In exchange for the restricted life granted by the captor, these victims are willing to adopt a false reality in which no harm can come to them.

In this apparent act of self-deception, victims of Stockholm syndrome believe that their irrational empathy for their captors and their ideologies will protect them.

The psychological dynamics dominating subservient bonding patterns have been previously conducted among abused children and women, victims of incest, cult members, mistreated prisoners of war, and criminal hostage situations.

On a global scale, Political Predators have could assert draconian-power over populations ranging from benevolent tyranny to outright abuse, mounting to “Crimes against Innocent Humanity”. This has recently occurred under Left-Wing Socialist Dictatorships such as the Soviet Union and North Korea, and is documented in other dictatorial regimes by Human Rights Groups.

Using a combination of threat, isolation, and propaganda, political tyranny has asserted the ideas of small elite groups over the collective consciousness of large populations-groups, who, in-turn, become inducted into the mythical ideologies of their controllers.

Recently, charismatic leaders have illustrated the power of Archetypal Caretakers (as was once seen under Monarchies) by piggy-backing off the science of imprinting and biasing content-material usurping the media, education, and the entertainment industry to indoctrinate vulnerable populations, thereby asserting control over “collective thought-patterns”, seducing them toward shared ideological goals and beliefs, imperceptibly imprinting a quasi-religious-reverence toward lofty collective narratives that produce a simple relief-effect similar to what`s been described in by studies observing closed religious cults.

Adherents are rewarded by their shared devotion to these quasi-mystical myths, devised by the idealized leader’s personal-goals, which has simultaneously masked the sinister-side of their agenda.

So, the herd can be programmed to coalesce around sinister indoctrination-slogans such as “hands-up-don’t-shoot”, (a narrative fabricated to galvanize unrest among African-Americans), or organizations like “planned-parenthood” whose euphemistic title providing credibility to killing viable full-term fetuses some of which are harvested for the sale of body-parts.

The purpose of such emotionally-charged slogans masquerade as being welfare-oriented to induct vulnerable civilians through unconscious imprinting, into a world-view consistent with their masters is like the ploys used by cult-members. Marc Galanter`s study of the techniques used by the Unification Church to induce novices showed a consistency with the methods of other religious and cult groups. Certain The use of ideological myths and rationales to rationalize and validate all the novice`s distress about regarding being disconnected, alienated, or rejected. Similarly, close religious groups and cults provide structure and order, by engaging in symbolic rituals. The greater the sense of group-cohesion, the greater the inductee feels relieved of his cognitive dissonance, relieved of his distress and isolation, and a stronger sense of self-worth.

This is not unlike the techniques being employed to lure, by the combination of false promises, to the psychologically vulnerable inductee a new-world-order, where all the rewards one could wish for are provided by the eternal wellsprings of a perfect Welfare-State, in exchange for eternal obedience.

This liturgy of myths and falsehoods has created a substrate for an entire generation of Post-Millennia, so flooded with high-intensity I-Phone and other high-tech virtual realities that have replaced higher-cortical thinking and problem-solving, now replaced by media-driven mantras filled with promises that cannot be fulfilled.

But these shallow slogans can never replace the crucial nutrients required by the cognitive templates that guide our true sense-of-identity.

The downfall of the charismatic group-leader is eventually replaced by a meaning-vacuum filled with undelivered, recycled ideologies.

Most of the belief-systems imposed on its followers by the current Democratic Party has organically run its predictable course into bankruptcy with no hope of resurrection.

Chavez was one of Obama`s Economic Gurus. It was the repetition of every Populist`s rise to power with the Will of the population: The following draconian steps were involved in creating a Socialist country with a Populous Dictator:

  • Step : Nationalize business
  • Step 2: confiscate the savings of the highest 10% of earners.
  • Step 3: Grant massively expensive Social Welfare Systems.
  • Redistribute the wealth from successful entrepreneurs to friends and the Party-Faithful.
  • Maintain the belief with the promise of Nirvana by having the media idealize the charismatic leader Championing the rights of the people who have been inducted into obedient loyalists

The herd “as they refer to us”, now lives in a vacuum of meaning.

Absent the Forums with fair referees allowing the free-exchange of ideas via group-discussion using reliable didactic information-sources that encourage the exchange of opposing-ideas, debated in open and fair forums.

Our educational format no-longer provides a forum that encourages self-directed-learning, a forum to process information that facilitates and the cross-pollination of ideas.

These were fundamental to the empirical development of evidence-supported opinions in years-gone-bye.

In an attempt to study the modern-day equivalent of the cult-experience, the American Psychiatric Association created a work-committee on “Psychiatry and Religion”, under the chairmanship under Dr. Marc Galanter.

The report culminated in a three-year effort which brought together experts in the psychological needs behind cult membership, vulnerabilities, the relief-effect provided by the closely-protected specific cult-group; as well as the psycho-dynamics of the cult-leader.

These studies examined extreme-religious cults.

When entire communities lose their power of critical thinking, there is nothing to protect them from the exploitation of their ‘anointed’ leaders.

Within this religious or political model, unquestioning dogma can explain all facets of life.

While lacking some of the other attributes of Stockholm syndrome, the replacement of autonomy and critical-thinking with a “pseudo-science” explaining the “sacred” ideology of one`s leaders is only slightly removed.

New, deceptive, high-tech field-tested systems are already in-place, applying principles of shaping social-behavior to change the essential fabric of the Collective Identity of U.S. Citizens. We are a highly regulated target-audience for the collection of Bio-psycho-social profiles.

While we still function under the assumption that what the Federal-Government, State and City Government legislate is what’s healthy and beneficial to its citizens.

Control over the information fed us, in fact creates an almost total disconnect between what we are told, taught to expect, and then subsequently fail to experience and are forced to rationalize.

The inner-circle around Obama infiltrated vital aspects of National Security with members or close-relations to members of the Islamic Brotherhood, the umbrella organization for all the other Islamic terrorist-organizations.

The dynamic of obedience between submissive-slave and political ruler, whose tyranny the victim develops an empathic bond toward his master; or the extent of “idealization” within the fabric of this abuse relationship is a symptom of a Stockholm syndrome described by Galanter, in the “psychology of the cult-experience” (Galanter, Marc: “Psychological Induction into the Large-Group.” Am J Psychiatry, 1980).”


Cults and New Religious Movements

A Report by the American Psychiatric Association

Edited by Marc Galanter, 1989


Guess who`s celebrating the dissolution of the State of Israel ? Isabella and Ferdinand II re-enacted or is there another surprise ?

The Paris conference ‘for peace in the Middle East’ held on Sunday approved a communiqué calling on Israel and the Palestinian Authority to adopt a two-state solution based on the pre-1967 borders and UN Security Council resolutions and to refrain from unilateral actions, though Britain expressed reservations and refrained from signing. Some 75 countries and international […]

via Paris summit ends with warning against unilateral measures — Behind The News

Expose extent of Executive bribes to Iran

The Obama administration has paid Iran more than $10 billion in gold, cash, and other assets since 2013, according to Iranian officials, who disclosed that the White House has been intentionally deflating the total amount paid to the Islamic Republic. Senior Iranian officials late last week confirmed reports that the total amount of money paid […]

via U.S. Surrendered More Than $10 Billion in Gold, Cash, Assets to Iran — Behind The News


Hoping that Mr. Trump wont fall prey to the Illusion known as “The Oslo Accords”


In 1994 Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat reached an agreement brokered by President Clinton, known as the “Oslo Accords”.

In Letters of Mutual Recognition, Mr. Arafat, as Chairman of the PLO, representing the “Palestinian People” acknowledged the State of Israel, while pledging to reject violence, and its previously held desire for the destruction of the Israeli state.

For their part, the Israeli representatives recognized Mr. Arafat as a legitimate representative for the Palestinians in the negotiations.

In essence, the accords called for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from parts of the Gaza Strip and West Bank, that would leave Israel with defendable borders, while affirming a Palestinian right of self-governance within those areas through the creation of a Palestinian Interim Self-Government Authority.

Palestinian rule was to last for a five-year interim period during which “permanent status negotiations” would commence…

View original post 1,297 more words

Discussion between Dr. Michoel Schulman and Dr. Baruch Trappler on Seven Noahide Laws

After reading the article, please press on the link and listen to the words actually said by the Rebbe.



Shalom Rabbi Dr. Baruch,

Thank you for your message about the response your received that:

“Regarding your idea about Sheva Mitzvos Bnei Noach … it had come up to the board of Merkos and after numerous meetings it was decided that the Rebbe did not have in mind [sic.] that the shluchim should put their koichos into that…”

Maybe instead of Merkos having numerous committee meetings to decide and dictate what the Rebbe had in mind, it would be better to look into the actual words of the Rebbe, on the safe assumption that the Rebbe actually had in mind what he said. Rabbi Yehoishophot Oliver has performed the invaluable service of translating many published records of the Rebbe’s Sichos at public Farbrengens about promoting knowledge and observance of the Sheva Mitzvos among Gentiles, and among these are Sichos in which the Rebbe told us what he had in mind in regard to Shluchim putting koichos into this. Here are some footnoted excerpts from Rabbi Oliver’s translations [this is still-unpublished intellectual property of Rabbi Oliver].

Kol Tov,

Dr. Michoel Schulman


—–Excerpts from Sichos by the Rebbe—-


The International Conference of Chabad Shluchim has the advantage and strength of a congregation. This endows every single emissary with special strength for his individual mission in his own location, and to all the emissaries as a whole, to continue their work to disseminate Torah, Judaism, and the wellsprings of Chassidic teachings outward…

Put simply, the emissaries all have common activities in which each one can learn and receive advice, encouragement, and support from another emissary who has succeeded in a particular area. This also includes seeking advice [at the conference] about activities for disseminating justice and righteousness among the Gentile nations through bringing them to adhere to the Noahide Code, and how to increase and expand this in all sorts of ways. [1]

[1] Hitva’aduyot 5747, Vol. 1, p. 544. [Editorial note: this could accurately be paraphrased as “putting koichos.”]

The unique novelty of the “Global Conference of Chabad Shluchim” – and hence the need for Divine assistance and human participation, efforts, and involvement – may also be inferred from its name. The simple meaning of the title “Global Conference” is one in which emissaries from all over the world take part. But it also contains a deeper meaning:

The word “global” implies that the conference ought to be on a global scale. This means that the conference, and primarily, the mission work of its participants – the Shluchim – must influence the entire world… In this connection there is a further matter of primary importance. In order to make a dwelling place for G-d in this world that encompasses the entire world, that it be truly global (as the Conference of Emissaries is described, on a truly global scale), it is necessary to influence the Gentile nations – especially in light of the fact that they constitute the vast majority of mankind. …

In addition to a Jew’s shlichus to observe the Torah and Mitzvot, and to influence other Jews to do likewise, he is also commanded to influence the Gentile nations to observe the Seven Noahide Commandments, as Maimonides rules, “Moses was commanded by the Al-mighty to compel all the inhabitants of the world to accept the commandments given to Noah’s descendants.”  This can be explained as follows: The general theme underlying the entire Noahide Code is that “He formed it [the world] to be settled”  – this means inhabiting and civilizing the world, to make it into a place suitable for human habitation. It then becomes fit for the Jews to make from it a dwelling place for G-d. If any place in the world lacks proper civilization, that place is not completely fit to be made a dwelling place for G-d. …

Now the reason that it is called a “Global Conference of Chabad Shluchim” is apparent. The term “Global Conference of Chabad Shluchim” implies an assembly and unity of Shluchim from various places in the world – in fact from all four corners of the globe. Each Shaliach represents the Jews and in his place, and the Gentile nations as well with whom he works, and whom he assists in their Divine service. This further underlines the principle that the task of the Shluchim is to influence the entire world and make it a dwelling place for G-d. [2]

[2] Sefer HaSichot 5750, Vol. 1, pp. 142-145. See also ibid. 5752, Vol. 2, p. 364. Cf. Hitva’aduyot 5748, Vol. 1, p. 501; ibid. 5750, Vol. 1, p. 380.

Maimonides writes: “Although Isaiah states: ‘The wolf will dwell with the lamb,’ … these [words] are a metaphor and a parable … [interpreted to mean that in the Messianic Age] the Jewish people will dwell securely together with the wicked of the nations … and they [the nations] will all return to the true faith and no longer steal rob nor destroy.” This emphasizes first and foremost the refinement of the Gentile nations.

The equivalent of this in our Divine service, which prepares the way for this prophecy, is the activity of Chabad Houses not only to influence Jewish people, but also Gentiles. [3]

[3] Hitva’aduyot 5747, Vol. 1, p. 490.

My father-in-law, the [Previous] Rebbe, whose first name is Joseph, is the “Joseph” of our generation. He has paved the way for all his students and Shluchim who follow in his ways, and through them, for all the Jewish people, to occupy themselves with disseminating Torah and Judaism, and spreading the wellsprings of Chassidic teachings in every place and circumstance – even in “Egypt,” [i.e. the paradigm for] a place that is furthermost from G-dliness.

They can accomplish this in a way that not only does their presence in the “outside” (“Egypt”) [where holiness is absent] not detract from their attachment to G-d. On the contrary, they can influence the entire “land of Egypt,” fulfilling the imperative upon Jews “to compel all the inhabitants of the world to accept the commandments given to Noah’s descendants … because the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded them in the Torah and informed us through Moses our teacher [that Noah’s descendants had been commanded to fulfill them previously],” as Maimonides rules clearly. [4]


[4] Likkutei Sichot, Vol. 30, pp. 226, 228.

The Rebbe’s words speak for themselves.

Right now, Hashem wants to send Moshiach and the Geulah Shalaima, and He wants us to prepare ourselves and the rest of the world for this. The way we do that is by doing what He told us to do – to learn and observe the obligations He gave us, which includes our G’d-given obligation to encourage Gentiles to learn and observe the obligations He gave to them. To put this very briefly because I’m pressed for time right now:

The Rebbe said that the way to approach a decent Gentile, whether secular or religious, it to say to him/her:

You are doing a lot of good things in your life. That is wonderful and you should continue to do so. But G-d also gave these 7 commandments in the Bible that are for all people, and they were never taken away or replaced, so they still apply. If you will add these on to what you are doing now, you’ll find that it will bring you into a closer, more personal relationship with G-d. What I’m giving you is just the basic description, but it has a lot of depth. If you want to look into it and learn more, here is where you can do that…

Here is how one rabbi promoted the 7 Mitzvos and their moral umbrella to decent Gentiles in a way that the Rebbe was very pleased with

Kol Tov,

Michoel Schulman


Why they call Trump the Jewish President

The American Jewish Establishment has greater resemblance to the political platform and politique of the Progressive Liberal Wing of the new Democratic Party of Obama and Clinton, than Bible-based values. Is there a Jewish political leader today espousing values crucial to survival of our people or State?

Within the circles of Jewish Intelligentsia in Israel and the U.S. one can predict support for Cities of Refuge, open borders, abortions for social convenience, and tolerance toward the unconditional march toward peace with our adversaries at any cost. They are so embedded in these “progressive” ideologies to the extent that the reality of political empirical observations has become irrelevant. In fact, many Israelis accept the reality of daily stabbings, the demand for a Palestinian State within Israel, (and empathy for one`s adversary without any reciprocal recognition of one`s own right to live).

Unconditional tolerance is embraced as an ideal surpassing consistent adversity of outcome. Jews feel vindicated by supporting every designated underdog, ranging from “Black Lives Matter”, to any front-group supporting the rights of Palestinians in Judea and Samaria: –  even when their support means living in an environment of escalating threat, widespread terrorism, and sat on its hands until this escalated to existential threat to the entire Jewish State.

Slogans that constellate Jewish support include euphemisms and totally fabricated narratives while conditions on the ground deteriorate from within the Jewish Establishment always on the ready for the exploitation of the misguided sentiments fabricated to meet the political needs of the moment. The Jewish sentiment has always been “What`s yours is yours, and what`s mine is yours”.

That’s why most Israelis refer to their Homeland as “Occupied”. In any open public debate, one would in fact discover not a shred of evidence that there was, is, or can be “a Palestinian State”.

So, if a U.S. President like Trump arrives with a policy taken from Oral Law, but foreign to the secular Jewish establishment that “what’s yours is yours” (anything east of the Jordan River) and what’s mine is mine” it would fly in the face of the Jewish-Liberal establishment.

I would also apply Trumps doctrine toward illegal aliens (anyone living in Israel advocating Jihad): Expel all Jihadists from Israel rather than providing them with “Cities of Refuge” (which we call “No-Go-Zones”).

Why: because, by believing that “what I have belongs to you”, leads to a simmering resentment upon discovery that no such recipe exists, doesn’t bide well for either side of the conflict

So, to quote the “Ethics of the Fathers” (which is Oral Law):

Any expectation that Trump will negotiate (make concessions) with an adversary whose template is that of “conquest through deception” will discover that “the art of the deal” places personal survival ahead of philanthropy, concession, and generosity at one`s own expense.

If the foundation of the Modern American Establishment is embedded in the genetic-template of empathy and political compromise to the point of self-negation, Trump is the wrong President.

This is a guilt-narrative that Trump will never support.

But nor would Torah.

The most crucial value that any leader brings to governance is his commitment to survival of the community that he serves. To this extent, Trump`s values are more Jewish than what Israel has had until now.

Its preferable to an Israeli leadership dedicated to the values espoused by the leaders of the American Reform Community, obsessed by the need to acquiesce anything, without any knowledge of Torah values or Jewish survival.


Hoping that Mr. Trump wont fall prey to the Illusion known as “The Oslo Accords”

In 1994 Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat reached an agreement brokered by President Clinton, known as the “Oslo Accords”.

In Letters of Mutual Recognition, Arafat,  representing the “Palestinian People” agreed  to  desist  from pledging violence and threat of the destruction of the Israeli state.

For their part, the Israeli representatives recognized  PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat Mr. Arafat as a legitimate representative for the Palestinians in the negotiations.

In essence, the accords called for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from parts of the Gaza Strip and West Bank, leaving Israel with defendable borders, while affirming  limited Palestinian right of self-governance within certain areas as a trial form of Palestinian Interim Self-Government.

Palestinian rule was to last for a five-year interim period during which “permanent status negotiations” would commence, contingent on the Palestinians demonstrating the capacity to govern themselves according to democratic principles, with free and general political elections.

Based on the empirical reality governing such a contingency, the Palestinians failed to meet either of these requirements: Fatah, the group that represented the Palestinians in the negotiations, accepted the accords.

But Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine objected to the accords.

The accords were accepted with a high degree of skepticism by the Israeli population. The right-wing parties, led by Likud, correctly suspected that the Palestinians were merely entering a tactical peace agreement, and were being deceptive about wanting to reach peace and coexistence with Israel.

Other Palestinian factions gave their nod to the accords, but saw it as part of a Ten Point Program calling for National Authority “over every part of Palestinian territory leading to  “the liberation of all Palestinian territory”, and attempted to justify the signing of the accords as merely the initial step to reach this final goal.

For his part, Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin remained highly ambivalent throughout the process, but succumbed to the combination of Peres`s “back-channel” private negotiations ending in a falling-out with Mr. Peres, and terminating with Rabin`s assassination (in which Peres was implicated). Rabin`s difficulties were amplified by the strong-arm tactics applied by his other reliable “ally,” President Clinton, for whom an agreement was considered as an essential component for his legacy.

(The subsequent discovery of his foundation receiving hundreds of millions of Islamic contributions, also calls into question, in hindsight, whether he was qualified as a neutral broker in an agreement that would subsequently cost thousands of lives, both Jewish and Arab.)

The Accords also created a narrative that was easily seized-upon by subsequent negotiators as the threshold from which to heap concessions upon Israel, while never applying measurable metrics for Palestinian compliance.

The Oslo I Accords were followed in 1995 by Oslo II. Neither promised Palestinian statehood.

Jerusalem’s new mayor and later Prime Minister Ehud Olmert opposed the agreement. In  particular, he called the ceding of strategic areas around East Jerusalem as a “dark cloud over the city”. Olmert, (considered as center-left in the political-spectrum) had favored the idea of developing Jewish neighborhoods to the East of Jerusalem to expand Jerusalem as the Jewish capital rather than ceding such territories to the Palestinians.

The intention of Oslo was to create a designed step-wise withdrawal of territories conquered  by Israel dating back  to 1948 concealed by a fictitious narrative. Israel would be divided into a checker-board with islands of Jewish populations separated by dozens of  rural Arab villages.  Over time, it would achieve for Israel`s enemies what six major wars couldn`t: Israel`s retreat to indefensible borders, and the restoration of  Bill Clinton`s legacy from ashes. The subsequent discovery that millions of Saudi and other Arab dollars would flow into the Clinton Foundation, was never considered as undermining  Clinton as a legitimate Peace-Broker.

The Lubavitcher Rebbe and Rabin`s own military advisers viewed “the Oslo Accords”, as  a non-starter from being the get-go.

The Oslo Accords would inflict a wound that would slowly hemorrhage the Jewish State by creating an asymmetrical formula: One in which Israel would exchange vital strategic assets for Arab “goodwill”. While ceding control over vital strategic and religious landmarks, the Arabs, for their part, were spared the application of any sort of metrics to measure concepts such as “goodwill”, “incitement”, or the ultimate existential issue for Israel: A signed letter of recognition of their right to exist.

Unlike the Iran Nuclear deal whereby the U.S. would  facilitate Iran`s acceptance into the International Nuclear club.  The deal was written behind closed doors without contingencies or  common-sense methods of verification.  Since two-thirds of Congress has to verify any Treaty, Obama simply bypassed them and it was ratified by the Security Counsel before it became a legal document since “A Treaty not inspected and edited/modified by Congress is not a Treaty”.

Here we see the role of the Government-Media Complex. In order to prevent the civilian host-population from observing the steady escalation of terrorism ushered-in  by Oslo, the threshold required to fulfill the ensuing Jihad would be held to the highest level of political correctness from which no Jewish politician  could in future -negotiations untangle himself.

The Oslo Accords required that Israel, while charged with the moral obligation of occupying only 0.5% of the land-mass in the Middle-East,  yet intended to provide safe-haven to the entire Jewish Nation, in a tiny designated neighborhood, hand-over to “the Palestinians” consecutive land-mass, without receiving anything in return  but further death, hatred, and further incitement.

Step-1 in stopping the bleeding caused by daily stabbings, vehicular terrorism, drive-by shootings, and arson, has to begin by annulling the Oslo Accords, for many of the same reasons as the need to annul the Iranian Nuclear Treaty:

Not because of the daily incitement throughout the “Palestinian” media, schools and Universities (across Israel, Europe, and the U.S.), that creates a threat-level no-longer  regarded  by Jews (even in France) as a “safe-haven” for all.  Rather because the above-mentioned treaties were never executed in good-faith, but as “victory through deception”, which is obvious to anyone familiar with Law.

“The Palestinians” are also aware that they have the unconditional approval of the U.N., E.U. and eight-years of  Obama,  combining this horrible  reality with a virtual freeze on “Jewish Settlements” (while the Arabs increased their building with a vengeance, effectively encircling the Jewish Capital – East Jerusalem (as Olmert warned), which has effectively stifled Israel`s main source of revenue – tourism, failing to foresee that most tourists are reluctant to accept Israel`s new reality (from which trauma-specialists have coined a new term in the trauma-literature – “the Continuous Trauma Paradigm”, referring to the psychological effects of having to live under a continuous threat (See Shalev, American Journal of Psychiatry).

President-Elect Mr.Donald Trump is a realist who can only help Israel once they become rehabilitated from their “Collective Stockholm syndrome” and adjust to what the  the ultimate deal-maker, will immediately recognize as being lethal: A Deal which involves the exchange of  tangible material concessions for a promise of goodwill that passed Clinton and Peres`s threshold for a contract, (like the Iranian Nuclear Treaty) without yielding any security to those in the line of fire.

Today, Oslo is very much alive in the virtual-reality of  Israeli politicians wit large off-shore holdings.  But when asking Arabs living in Israel about it, they will turn a full circle, and pointing a finger in all directions, proclaim that “Every Inch of this land belongs to us. It was given to the Jews as compensation for the Holocaust”. Knowing that the Israelis will always be found guilty by the media for Settlement development; which remains the single obstacle to peace: Explaining the repetitious mantra that “This entire land always belonged to us, and always will” (despite the fact that thousands of Jews lived in Jerusalem since the destruction of the Second Temple by Rome. And a country known as Palestine didn`t even exist during hundreds of years of Muslim rule. Neither Turkey (prior to 1918) nor Jordan (who conquered and occupied East Jerusalem and the “West Bank” from 1948 to 1967), considered it as a potential Palestinian State.

In a 2001 video Netanyahu was recorded asking (about the Oslo Accords): “How did we do it? Nobody said what `defined military zones` were!  And the defined “military zones” are actually “security zones”; as far as I’m concerned, the entire Jordan Valley should be defined as a military zone. “I ‘m going to interpret the accords in such a way that would allow me to put an end to this galloping forward to the ’67 borders”. (Wikipedia)

Perhaps  Mr. Trump  won`t be lured into the obsession of  trying to negotiate with terrorists. even while under fire !