Daily Archives: August 19, 2015

Human Genetic Engineering Cons: Why This Branch of Science …

Posted: August 19, 2015 at 8:45 am

A Slippery Slope? Ethics of Human Genetic Engineering

To say that genetic engineering has attracted some controversy would be an understatement. There are many cries that scientists are 'playing God' and that it will lead to a two-tier society - the genetically haves and the have-nots. But is this any different to the cries of horror and fears of Frankenstein's monster that greeted Louise Brown, the first child to be born by IVF treatment? There was great uproar in the late 1970's but IVF is now a common, if expensive, fertility treatment. And there aren't any monsters stalking the Earth.

Having said that, genetic engineering does hold the potential that parents could (if the technology worked) assemble their kids genetically, to be smarter, to be more athletic or have a particular hair or eye colour. Though it's rather fanciful to suggest that intelligence could be improved by the substitution of a gene, it may be found that there are several genes that are more commonly expressed in the genomes of intelligent people than those with more limited intellectual capacity. And parents might want to engineer an embryo to house a greater number of these genes. It is this genetic engineering of humans that so frightens people, that we could somehow design the human race. Though some people point out other potential benefits. What if it turned out that there were sets of genes that were commonly expressed in criminals - could we tackle crime by weeding out those genes?

The technology is nowhere near there yet, but a tiny number of parents undergoing IVF have selected their embryos to be free from genetic mutations that have blighted generations of their family. In the UK in January 2009 a mother gave birth to a girl whose embryo had been selected to be free from a genetic form of breast cancer. Some see this as a slippery slope towards a eugenic future, others view it as a valuable use of genetic engineering to prevent disease from striking someone down.

Society will decide how it uses this technology, and it is for governments to weigh up the pros and cons of genetic engineering in humans to see what may be carried out and what should be illegal. They will be prompted by public understanding, desire and concern. It therefore behoves all of us to understand what scientists are trying to accomplish and what they are not trying to do. We must all become better informed, to equip ourselves with more information and to know the difference between science fiction and science fact.

Read this article:

Human Genetic Engineering Cons: Why This Branch of Science ...

Posted in Human Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Human Genetic Engineering Cons: Why This Branch of Science …

Human Genetics Alert – Human Genetic Engineering resources

Posted: at 8:45 am

1. Is human genetic engineering safe and effective?

With present techniques it is clearly unsafe: the techniques of inserting genes can disrupt other genes, with harmful consequences for the person and all his/her descendants. We do not know enough about how gene work to ensure that an inserted gene will work as desired. Future generations cannot consent to such risks. The chance that interventions will be effective is unknown. However, the technologies are improving constantly and may make human genetic engineering (HGE) feasible within five years.

No, it is not. Advocates argue that it is a general solution to the problem of genetic diseases and is superior to somatic gene therapy, since it could permanently eliminate the risk of inherited disease within a family. However, there are only a few very rare cases where HGE is the only option for producing a healthy child. Couples can choose not to have children, to adopt a child, or to use donor eggs or sperm. If it is consistent with their values, they can also use prenatal and pre-implantation genetic testing to avoid genetic disease and have a child that is 100% genetically related. Given this, it is clear that the real market for HGE is in 'enhancement' of appearance, height, athletic ability, intelligence, etc.

No, it is not, although Lee Silver and others like him very much want you to believe that it is. In a democratic society people agree on what rules they wish to live under. By 1998 twenty-seven industrial democracies had agreed to ban human cloning and germ line manipulation. In the U.S., the state of Michigan has made all forms of human cloning illegal. There is no reason we cannot choose to forgo these technologies, both domestically and as part of a global compact. It is often said that banning the use of a technology will not prevent someone from developing it elsewhere. This may be true, although the number of people competent to develop cloning and human genetic engineering is small. But even though the technology may be developed, we do not have to permit its use to become respectable and widespread.

No, we have the right to choose the science that we want and to define our own vision of progress. We should reject science which is not in the public interest. Proscribing the most dangerous techno-eugenic applications will allow us to proceed with greater confidence in developing the many potentially beneficial uses of genetic research for human society.

People do have the right to have children if they are biologically capable, but they do not have any 'right' to use cloning, or genetic engineering. Rights don't exist in a vacuum; they are socially negotiated within a context of fundamental values. The question of access to particular technologies is a matter of public policy and depends on the social consequences of allowing that access. For example, people are not allowed access to nuclear technology, or dangerous pathogens and drugs, simply because they have the money to pay for them.

Traditionally, we see human beings as inviolable, and as endowed with rights: they must be accepted as they are. Human genetic engineering overthrows that basic conception, degrading human subjects into objects, to be designed according parents' whim. Accepting such a change would have consequences both for individual humans and for society at large which we can barely imagine. Obvious consequences would be a disruption of parents' unconditional love for children. Cloning and HGE represent an unprecedented intent to determine and control a child's life trajectory: for the child, it would undermine their sense of free will and of their achievements. These concerns are what many people mean when they say that we should not play God with our children.

The social consequences of the use of cloning and HGE in our society would be disastrous. Parents would tend to engineer children to conform to social norms, with regard to physical ability, appearance and aptitudes, even though many of those social norms are inherently oppressive. For example, disabled people have often expressed fears that free-market eugenics would reduce society's tolerance for those genetic impairments. If genes pre-disposing people to homosexuality are discovered, it is certain that many people would attempt to engineer these out of their offspring. A free-market techno-eugenics could also easily have the disastrous consequences spelled out in Lee Silver's Re-making Eden. Since access to such expensive technology would be on the basis of ability to pay, we could see the emergence of biologically as well as financially advantaged ruling elites.

The environmental movement has recognised how, in Western societies over the last few hundred years, humans have tried to control and dominate nature, with the resultant environmental crisis which we currently face. Genetic engineering of plants and animals gives us the power to dominate nature in a new and more powerful way than ever before, which is why it has caused so much concern in environmental movements. Techno-eugenics extends the drive to control nature to the nature of human beings, threatening ultimately to make the human species, like other species, the object of the manipulative control of technocratic elites. It is obvious that if we cannot prevent this, we have little chance of winning the struggle to protect the environment. The environmental movement is the main guardian of the non-exploitative vision of the relation between humans and the rest of nature. Realising that such a relationship may soon be imposed upon ourselves, and our children, the environmental movement must take the lead in alerting society to the danger that it faces.

Original post:

Human Genetics Alert - Human Genetic Engineering resources

Posted in Human Genetic Engineering | Comments Off on Human Genetics Alert – Human Genetic Engineering resources

Kenan Malik’s review of Our Posthuman Future by Francis …

Posted: at 8:44 am

Capitalism, Francis Fukuyama announced more than a decade ago, is the promised land at the End of History. The collapse of the Soviet Union confirmed that there was neither an alternative to the market, nor a possibility of transcending capitalism.

Not even the events of September 11, which have led many critics to mock the 'End of History' thesis, have given Fukuyama cause to change his mind. The end of history, Fukuyama argues, means not the termination of conflict, simply the recognition that nothing can improve upon capitalism. Why? Because, as he puts it in Our Posthuman Future, capitalist institutions 'are grounded in assumptions about human nature that are far more realistic than those of their competitors'.

Yet even Fukuyama has come to worry that the reports of History's death might have been a mite exaggerated. Capitalism, he fears, is undermining its own foundations. Not, as Marx thought, through the agency of the working class, but as a result of the unrestricted advance of science and technology. Science, and in particular biotechnology, has, Fukuyama believes, the potential to change the kinds of beings we are, and in so doing to 'recommence history', propelling us from a human to a posthuman world. From the end of history to the end of human nature as we know it.

Fukuyama's argument runs something like this. Human values are rooted in human nature. Human nature is rooted in our biological being, in particular in our genes. Messing around with human biology could alter human nature, transform our values and undermine capitalism. 'What is ultimately at stake with biotechnology', Fukuyama declares, 'is... the very grounding of the human moral sense.' We therefore need international regulation to obstruct any technological advance that might 'disrupt either the unity or the continuity of human nature, and thereby the human rights that are based upon it.'

While most worried about genetic engineering, other technologies also concern Fukuyama. Cloning is an 'unnatural form' of reproduction that might create 'unnatural urges' in a parent whose spouse has been cloned. Prozac is giving women 'more of the alpha-male feeling that comes with high serotonin levels', while Ritalin is making 'young boys... sit still' even though 'nature never designed them to behave that way.'

Even attempt to slow down the ageing process is 'unnatural' and fraught with danger. The world, Fukuyama believes, may soon be divided 'between a North whose political tone is set by elderly women' (since women tend to live longer than men) and 'a South driven by... super-empowered angry young men'. The consequence will not simply be more days like September 11, but also a disinclination on the part of the West to use force in response, since women are apparently naturally less aggressive than men.

Such fears may seem to carry all the scholarly weight of a Hollywood dystopian fantasy (Gataca meets The Invasion of the Body Snatchers, perhaps). If capitalism is as natural as Fukuyama claims, how is it that for virtually the whole of human history people abided by entirely different sets of values and beliefs? And what exactly worries Fukuyama about genetic engineering? That we will be turned into a race of beings who believe that the market may not be the best way to promote human flourishing? Or (God forbid) that we will lose our attachment to the sanctity of property?

As for the dangers of longevity, life expectancy has doubled in the past two centuries - without any evidence of social breakdown. Nor is there any evidence that the extension of the franchise to women at the beginning of the twentieth century made that century any less violent than the nineteenth.

Absurd though such arguments may seem to be, at the heart of Fukuyama's book is a discussion, not of biotechnology, but of what it is to be human. To understand his alarmism about biotechnology, we have to understand his confusions over human nature.

For Fukuyama, humans as a species possess an inner essence or nature, which he defines as 'the sum total of the behaviour and characteristics that are typical of the human species, arising from genetic rather than environmental factors.' From this perspective, humans seem little more than sophisticated animals. 'Many of the attributes that were once held to be unique to human beings - including language, culture, reason, consciousness, and the like - are', Fukuyama believes, 'characteristic of a wide variety of nonhuman animals'.

At the same time, though, Fukuyama presents humans as exceptional beings. While all animals have a nature, only humans possess 'dignity'. Dignity gives humans a 'superior... moral status that raises us all above the rest of animal creation and yet makes us equals of one another qua human beings.' Such dignity, Fukuyama believes, resides in a mysterious 'Factor X' which is the 'essential human quality' that remains after 'all of a person's contingent and accidental characteristics' have been stripped away. It is Factor X that Fukuyama wants to preserve from the clutches of biotechnologists.

And therein lies the problem. 'Factor X' appears to be both the same as human nature the 'essence' of our humanity - and also that which makes humans entirely distinct from the rest of nature. Indeed, Fukuyama suggests that somewhere along the human evolutionary journey there occurred 'a very important qualitative, if not ontological, leap', that came to separate Man and Beast.

Fukuyama is right, I think, to assert the 'dual character' of human existence, of humans as both animal and yet more-than-animal. But he seems not to recognise what this means for the concept of human nature. If humans are qualitatively distinct from the rest of the natural world, then the human 'essence' cannot be simply rooted in nature.

What sets humans apart is not some mysterious Factor X hidden somewhere in our biology but rather our ability to act as conscious agents. Uniquely among organisms, humans are both objects of nature and subjects that can, to some extent at least, shape our own fate. We are biological beings, and under the purview of biological and physical laws. But we are also conscious beings with purpose and agency, traits the possession of which allow us to design ways of breaking the constraints of biological and physical laws.

It is only because humans are conscious agents that we possess moral values. As Fukuyama himself observes, 'Only human beings can formulate, debate, and modify abstract rules of justice'. This is why we should not 'confuse human politics with the social behaviour of any other species'.

Human values, in other words, are not fixed in our nature, but emerge from our capacity to transcend that nature. To a certain degree, Fukuyama recognises this. Violence, he suggests, 'may be natural to human beings'. But so, too, is 'the propensity to control and channel violence'. Humans are capable of 'reasoning about their situation' and of 'understanding the need to create rules and institutions that constrain violence'. Humans, therefore, possess the capacity to rise above their natural inclinations and, through the use of reason, to shape their values.

But if this is so, then no amount of biotechnological intervention will transform our fundamental values. What may transform them, however, is the kind of pessimism that Fukuyama expresses in his End of Human Nature thesis.

Fukuyama rightly worries about the 'medicalisation of society' - the inclination tendency to view personal, social and political problems in biological or medical terms. In part, at least, this arises from the growing tendency of our age to view humans as weak-willed, sick or damaged, as victims lacking the capacity to transcend their situation, either individually or collectively. Biotechnology, Fukuyama believes, can only entrench such perceptions, making it easier for individuals who 'would like to absolve themselves of responsibility for their actions.'

But Fukuyama's own belief that values are embedded in our biology, and should be ring-fenced for protection, can only exacerbate this problem. If our values were simply evolved adaptations, then the notion of moral responsibility would indeed appear to be fragile. And what would then be wrong with popping a pill or performing a bit of genetic surgery to improve our moral condition?

The real debate is not about whether biotechnology will undermine our values, but about the kind of values to which we aspire. Do we want a human-centred morality rooted in concrete human needs (such as for solutions to brain disorders and genetic illnesses like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and cystic fibrosis)? Or are we happy with a moral code that undermines the promise of medical advance in the name of a mythical human nature?

For Fukuyama 'There are good prudential reasons to defer to the natural order of things and not to think that human beings can easily improve upon it through casual intervention'. But why should the 'natural order of things' be better than human creation? After all, we only need medicine because nature has left us with jerry-built bodies that tend constantly to break down with headaches and backaches, cancers and coronaries, schizophrenia and depression.

'If the artificial is not better than that natural', John Stuart Mill once asked, 'to what end are all the arts of life?' 'It's unnatural' has always been the cry of those who seek to obstruct progress and restrain 'the arts of life'. It's an argument no more valid in response to biotechnology than it was in response to vaccination, heart transplants or IVF treatment. The 'duty of man', as Mill put it, 'is the same in respect to his own nature as in respect to the nature of other things, namely not to follow but to amend it.'

More here:

Kenan Malik's review of Our Posthuman Future by Francis ...

Posted in Posthuman | Comments Off on Kenan Malik’s review of Our Posthuman Future by Francis …

Henry Makow

Posted: at 8:41 am

(left, Dalai Lama with the guru Shoko Asahara of the AUM sect of Japan,

responsible for the Tokyo sarin gas attack onMarch 20, 1995.)

A reader, Matt, senses something sinister

about the Dalai Lama and Tibetan Buddhism.

"Tibet is a stronghold of both spiritual and temporal power, connected with the highest secret orders and globalist councils in the world. The common goal is world domination through a saviour king to bring this about."

"Today, the media focuses on the crimes of Islamic fanatics, but when is the last time you heard about fanatic Buddhist monks inciting violence? Is Buddhism a sacred cow for some reason?"

Will Planned Antichrist be a Lama?

From Nov. 13, 2014 (Updated with Graph below in English)

by Matt

(henrymakow.com)

Something may be rotten in the state of Tibet. Ever suspicious of the Dalai Lama's status as being the universal "holy" friend of seemingly all political and religious leaders of the world, I decided to learn more information about this character and the institution he represents. Something about the man seemed fake and deceptive to me, as if he had been fooling the world with his perma-smile all along. Check outThe Darkness Over Tibet, an excellent, brief summary on this subject. Example:

- The Dalai Lama is only a marketing program to make Tibet look good. He and his 100 servitors could never have exiled Tibet without the agreement from the Chinese government. The Chinese government and Lamaist (Tibetan Buddhist) organization are closely linked on an occult level. The true "spiritual" leader of Lamaism is the Panchen Lama, who is almost unknown at all outside of Tibet. He's considered as the "black pope" (the Catholic pope is the "white pope").

- The Catholic Church (Jesuits) and Lamaism are closely linked. Jesuits have been traveling to Tibet and helped to setup the hierarchical lamaist organization (the first Dalai Lama was named in the 14th century), which in turn offered help to the Vatican (this confirms many theories according to which all the major world religions are secretly linked at the very top). Many spiritual leaders in Tibet are in fact Jesuits. Both hierarchies are arranged scientifically to optimize the function of black magic rituals.

- He mentions Maitreya, who is supposed to be the upcoming reincarnation of Buddha, but which will be used by those in power as a false messiah to "save the world", from problems which are mostly illusory because created by those in power.

My searches led me to the online tomeThe Shadow of the Dalai Lamaby Victor and Victoria Trimondi. Here, my suspicions of the Dalai Lama were confirmed when I read that his Holiness worked with the guru Shoko Asahara of the AUM sect of Japan, responsible for the Tokyo sarin gas attack onMarch 20, 1995. Asahara apparently was very much connected to the Tibetan religion and met with many high Tantra masters. This is just one of a myriad of examples pointing to something seriously wrong with this institution.

I found a few good articles discussing the feudal, hellish society that existed under the greedy Lamas who ruled with an iron fist and treated the masses like animals.When the Dalai Lamas Ruled - Hell On EarthandThe True Face Of The Dalai Lamaprovide a decent summary on the feudal Lamaist theocracy of Tibet.

Today, the media focuses on the crimes of Islamic fanatics, but when is the last time you heard about fanatic Buddhist monks inciting violence? Is Buddhism a sacred cow for some reason? For a brief summary on this, readThe Long and Strange History of Buddhist Violence. In the Kalachakra Tantra, war and violence is discussed as the means to cleanse the world of undesirables Read about theAggressive War Myth here.

If you've seen Twin Peaks, you may remember the strange references to Tibet. In one episode, Windom Earle uses the Tibetan word 'Dugpa':

"... these evil sorcerers, dugpas, they call them, cultivate evil for the sake of evil and nothing else. They express themselves in darkness for darkness, without leavening motive. This ardent purity has allowed them to access a secret place of great power, where the cultivation of evil proceeds in exponential fashion. And with it, the furtherance of evil's resulting power. These arenot fairy tales, or myths. This place of power is tangible, and as such, can be found, entered, and perhaps, utilized in some fashion. The dugpas have many names for it, but chief among them is the Black Lodge."

Did David Lynch place occult secrets in plain sight in Twin Peaks? Was this "Revelation of the Method"?

There is also a strong connection between Theosophy (Blavastky, et al) and Tibetan Buddhism. Theosophist Charles Webster Leadbeater wrote about an occult Buddhist hierarchy of the world and the Great White Brotherhood is an important aspect of Theosophical teachings.The Occult Hierarchy and the Mastersdiscusses this in detail.

According toThe Shadow of the Dalai Lama, German authors have written of "an occulthierarchia ordinisof the Lamaist theocracy, which invisibly influences and steers the East."

"J. Strunk's arguments (Zu Juda und Rom --Tibet, [To Juda and Rome --Tibet], 1937) are more far reaching; he tries to uncover a conspiracy of an international ecclesiastical elite (with members from all the world religions) with the living Buddha, the Dalai Lama from Lhasa as their visible head. "What there are of organizations and new spiritual currents running alongside and in all directions nearly always end up on the 'roof of the world', in a Lama temple, once one has progressed through Jewish and Christian lodges"(Strunk, 1937, p. 28)."

"General Ludendorff and his wife likewise took to the field with great vigor against the "Asian priests"and warned that the Tibetan Lamas had emplaced themselves at the head of Jewish and Jesuit secret orders (Europa den Asiatenpriestern?[Europe of the Asian priests)], 1941)."

---

On pg. 32 ofGeheime Weltmchte [Secret World Powers]by S. Ipares, possibly the most accurate chart of the world hierarchy can be found, (see above) placing the Lamas at the top with the Theosophists possibly being the liaison between the Lamas and the European leadership.

Lastly, the famous German author Gustav Meyrink (The Golem) had a very interesting mystical experience (Read the story inpart 1andpart 2) in which he saw a Dugpa (red hat Lama) in a vision. I believe anecdotal information like this can help us just as much or even more to find the truth.

More scrutiny of Tibetan Buddhism is warranted. I see a lot of deception and attempts to conceal the truth. Tibet to be a stronghold of both spiritual and temporal power, connected with the highest secret orders and globalist councils in the world. Their common goal is world domination through a saviour king to bring this about. The effort to gradually sell this agenda to the world is most seen in the carefully engineered public adulation of the Dalai Lama, which has me wondering if a planned World King will actually be a Lama.

The idea of a Lamaist theocracy being the ultimate rulers of the world will sound far-fetched to many, but there is a good reason why it can only be found in old and untranslated German books.

Related:

1. Dalai lama articles on this site:

Tibetan Buddhism- A Racket Posing as a Religion

2. Critical Links to Lamaism

Buddhists, Occultists and Secret Societies in Early Bolshevik Russia: an interview with Andrei Znamenski

'Red Shambhala': Telepathy, Mental Powers, Electronic Surveillance & Mysticism in the U.S.S.R.

Red Star Over Shambhala: Soviet, British and American Intelligence & the Search for Lost Civilisation in Central Asia

Occult Secrets of the Dalai Lama

Rudra Chakrin: King of the World, Tantric Apocolyptic Redeemer, and Dajjal

Colbert Gets Paul McCartney To Suggest Dalai Lama Cannibalism

Red Caps and Sect Worship

The Inner Government of the World

The Phantom Kingdom - The Nazi Tibet Connection

Cricket Magic by Gustav Meyrink

First Comment by Ryan, author of "In Defence of the Dalai Lama"

In short your latest bashing of Tibetan Buddhism is just another example of someone with an axe to grind who criticizes something he has no idea about, based solely upon other overly-critical, antiquated and misinformed articles. As evidenced by the numerous factual flaws in his article he obviously doesn't have the least bit of knowledge, superficial or otherwise about Tibetan Buddhism.

Just a few of many points:

-"Lamaism" is an incorrect, very antiquated term for Vajrayana Buddhism.

-To quote "Twin Peaks" - an American TV series? as an authoritative source on the Drugpas undermines any seriousness of this article. Really! Yes a Drukpa school exists, but this cannot be used as a general term.

-The Trimondis are an interesting example. The Dalai Lama has thousands of students who praise him. Why quote only the rare few who were disenchanted by the Dalai Lama and don't even publish their highly critical book under their real name.

-I am amused by his German language sources from the 1930's. Can/did the author actually read the material he is quoting. The chart only contains general Buddhist terms and seems to put Pratyeda (solitary) Buddhas at the pinnacle (Herr der Welt/Ruler of the World) . Pratyeka Buddhas are practitioners of Theravada Buddhism and are held in very low esteem by Tibetan Buddhists.

-It is worthwhile to read other parts of the original "Geheime Weltmchte" text. Reading the short last chapter "Asiatisches Geheimbundwesen" it becomes clear just how little the author knew about Buddhism in general. This being the case what validity can their conclusions in the chart have?

-As far as the visions of Gustav Meyrink: What makes them more valid than mine or yours? If the author is really looking for who might control the world shouldn't he look more into the Theosophist Illuminati connection.

Dan writes:

There's not enough room here to even begin on the topic of how we've been bamboozled about the Dalai Lama and Tibet, and why.

Tibet was the last fully intact feudal theocracy on Earth till 1951, when Mao seized the moment to occupy and incorporate it. At that time an Australian journalist wrote that the concept of human rights had been unknown in Tibet. A tiny elite of lamas and ancient aristocracy were literally worshiped by the serfs as demigods. Belief in soul evolution through reincarnation invariably produces a rigid caste system, on the logical assumption that serfs are 'born that way' because of karma and dharma. The ruling castes equally so. Got a problem with being a serf? Obey your masters, and maybe in a few hundred lifetimes your status may improve - but not in this one. The Tibetan serfs fully believed this. So did the lamas and 'nobility'. Serfs were whipped an tortured for trivial offenses. Mutilation was a standard punishment - cutting off ears, fingers, gouging out eyes, etc. These acts were carried out by an army of thugs formalized as warrior caste, or brutal order of low born monks who served as muscle for the lamas.

There are 'high and low' castes of Tibetan monks. The 'tulku lamas' are supposed to be reincarnations of historical men of renown. The vast majority of monks are from the lower castes and serve the Tulkus as slaves. Inside one of those magnificent medieval monasteries in Tibet it was discovered that the Tulka and all the elite lamas in that monastery were very active homosexuals, taking any peasant boy that struck their fancy for the 'honor' of becoming a monk-slave in that monastery. But this monastery also provided many of the especially brutal thug-monks sent out to serve as guards and enforcers at other monasteries.

Why didn't we hear any of this in school? Where were the specials on National Geographic and History Channel about the reality that the Dalai Lama is as much a feudal throwback as the Royal family?

Politics. The Dalai Lama* was important to the CIA when the State Department was against China's expansion. But the real money poured into the Dalai Lama's organization in exile through the United Nations NGO's. Between the two of these backers, there was a very real blackout on the reality of Tibetan lack of a "concept of human rights" well into the 20th century. Even right now, if you Google "Tibet human rights" you will get a pile of articles talking about modern Chinese violations of human rights. The template for this skewed history comes from Amnesty International. They're not going to tell you that the Tibetan theocrats think most of us are no better than sheep to be herded, accordingly.

The 'Elite' wet dream is a "New" World Order that is in fact a resurrection of ancient Theocratic Feudalism. That's they push Tibetan Buddhism.

There's not space left for me to recount my own experience with the Tibetan network in America. I'll just say that it was consistent with this dark mind set from the past. Just volunteer to go into one of the Tibetan ashrams out west and the pseudo-Christ candy coating melts off the Dalai Lama very quickly.

* Dalai Lama - The Worst Dictator in this Modern Day

Excerpt from:
Henry Makow

Posted in Illuminati | Comments Off on Henry Makow