Trump and the Age Old Western Rules of War

By David Musa Pidcock

The Rules of War

“Do you agree to abide by the Rules of War?” asked the Red Knight.
“Certainly,” answered the White Knight.

“Excellent,” retorted the Red Knight. “Now, having agreed upon that, we can begin the fight.”

“What nonsense you speak,” said Alice, “there are no rules in war. War is horrid and very unfair: that the strong overcome the weak, is the only, very unjust, rule.”
“Well, I noted that you wisely used the term overcome,” said the Red Knight, “and did not speak of a winner; this is quite correct, as the over-comer can often suffer as much devastation and poverty as the defeated.”

The ‘Winners’ from World War 1.

“Yes, the true winner is seldom one of the combatants,” enjoined the White Knight.
“You speak in riddles,” said Alice. “Whatever can you mean?”
“Why” said both of the knights together, “the winner of every war is the provider of the WAR LOANS of course ! ! ! !”

“It is they that win every time,” continued the White Knight. “It matters not which side claims victory – those that lend the money, especially to both sides, can never lose. First the devastation and then the reconstruction must be paid for.”

“It is only when you come to realize this,” said the Red Knight, “that you can grasp the real and hidden motive for all the seemingly unending, pointless and wasteful wars.”
“Great poverty is visited on all sides engaging in warfare,” said the White knight, “as every treasure must be yielded up to pay for the fighting. But this treasure does not disappear, as most assume; it just simply changes hands.”

“Indeed”, he continued “if you want to discover the true cause for any war, ‘follow the money;’ it’s the best way to solve crime – ask any policeman.”

“And now on to War Rule 1,” said the Red Knight, “this states that the first blow must always be self-inflicted.”
“I can’t see any sense at all in that,” said Alice.
“Oh! But one must always follow this rule and then claim to be innocent party, blaming your opponent for a cowardly, surprise, unprovoked attack…This will guarantee fear, self-righteous resentment, and a thirst for revenge from your followers,” explained The White Knight.

FROM ALICE & THE MONEY TREE BY J.M. WESTON BRIGGS

ISBN 978-1-9998485-0-7

Russia says Syria chemical attack was false flag by Britain and the White Helmets By Tim Hume Apr 13, 2018

White House insists the US has ‘very high confidence that Syria was responsible’

“When I use a word,” Trumpty Dumpty said, to Alice, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less”.

“But I/we don’t know what you mean by ‘great,’ ” Alice said. Because grate and great sound exactly the same but have entirely different meanings?

Trumpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. “Of course you don’t—till I tell you! I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!’ ”

Alice objected. “But ‘Make America Great Again’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument either’,” Because both you, your arguments, gesticulations Twitters and Tweets seem designed to ‘Make you and America Grate on everyone’s nerves?’ 

“When I use a word,” Trumpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

 “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

 “The question is,” said Trumpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”

Alice was too much puzzled to say anything, so after a minute Trumpty Dumpty began again. “They’ve a temper, some of them—particularly verbs, they’re the proudest—adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs—however, I can manage the whole lot! Impenetrability! That’s what I say!”

• The above passages were used in Britain by Lord Atkin in his dissenting judgement in the seminal case Liversidge v. Anderson (1942), where he protested about the distortion of a statute by the majority of the House of Lords.[24] It also became a popular citation in United States legal opinions, appearing in 250 judicial decisions in the Westlaw database as of 19 April 2008, including two Supreme Court cases (TVA v. Hill and Zschernig v. Miller).[25]
• It has been suggested by A. J. Larner that Carroll’s Humpty Dumpty had *prosopagnosia on the basis of his description of his finding faces hard to recognise. (*Prosopagnosia, also called face blindness, is a cognitive disorder of face perception in which the ability to recognize familiar faces, including one’s own face).

THE DANGEROUS CASE OF DONALD TRUMP

27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President

Bandy X. Lee, M.D., M.Div., Organizer of Yale’s “Duty to Warn” Conference

Thomas Dunne Books

The consensus view of two dozen psychiatrists and psychologists that Trump is dangerously mentally ill and that he presents a clear and present danger to the nation and our own mental health.

This is not normal.

Since the start of Donald Trump’s presidential run, one question has quietly but urgently permeated the observations of concerned citizens: What is wrong with him? Constrained by the American Psychiatric Association’s “Goldwater rule,” which inhibits mental health professionals from diagnosing public figures they have not personally examined, many of those qualified to answer this question have shied away from discussing the issue at all. The public has thus been left to wonder whether he is mad, bad, or both.

In THE DANGEROUS CASE OF DONALD TRUMP, twenty-seven psychiatrists, psychologists, and other mental health experts argue that, in Mr. Trump’s case, their moral and civic “duty to warn” America supersedes professional neutrality. They then explore Trump’s symptoms and potentially relevant diagnoses to find a complex, if also dangerously mad, man.

Philip Zimbardo and Rosemary Sword, for instance, explain Trump’s impulsivity in terms of “unbridled and extreme present hedonism.” Craig Malkin writes on pathological narcissism and politics as a lethal mix.  Gail Sheehy, on a lack of trust that exceeds paranoia. Lance Dodes, on sociopathy. Robert Jay Lifton, on the “malignant normality” that can set in everyday life if psychiatrists do not speak up.

His madness is catching, too. From the trauma people have experienced under the Trump administration to the cult-like characteristics of his followers, he has created unprecedented mental health consequences across our nation and beyond.

It’s not all in our heads. It’s in his.

 

Islam, Napoleon and The Battle for France

By Kashif Ahmed

“Muhammad declared that there is nothing but Allah, who has no father or son. I hope that the time is not far off when I shall be able to unite all the wise and educated men of all countries and establish a uniform regime based on the principles of the Holy Qu’ran which alone are true and which alone can lead people to happiness”.

Napoleon Bonaparte, Christian Cherfils, ‘Napoleon And Islam’, Paris, France, 1914, pp. 105.

There have been over a hundred Islamophobic attacks in France since August 2013: Abdallah Zekri, Secretary General of the ‘French Council of the Muslim Faith’, highlighted the “…very violent” nature of one of the assaults which was directed “…against a young woman of 18”. Mr Zekri also stated that: “…indignation and anger is rising in the Muslim community in response to these repeated, cowardly acts” and reiterated his call for the judiciary to enforce “…exemplary sanctions against the aggressors”.

But it wasn’t always this way…

Napoleon: The Saviour of France

Napoleon Bonaparte converted to Islam around about the time he pacified Austria and consolidated French holdings in Italy.

The announcement was first published in Napoleon’s newspaper ‘Le Moniteur’ in 1798. Another leading figure in the army, General Jacques Menou, also became a Muslim and chose the name Abdullah.

At first, some people thought that Napoleon had just ‘converted’ for the sake of political expediency; to ingratiate himself with the Muslims during his Egyptian campaign. And that may well have been the end of it. But Napoleon’s respect, admiration and implementation of Islamic principals, continued long after his dream of an Eastern empire had been derailed.

For its one thing to venerate Islam when you’re attempting to conquer a Muslim country, but quite another to continue to proclaim its virtues and exalt its message amongst Christians in Europe years later.

DID YOU KNOW? While he was imprisoned in St.Helena, Napoleon Bonaparte criticized Voltaire’s play ‘Mahoment’ which was mocking the Islamic Prophet Muhammad. Napoleon declared that Voltaire was worthy of the gallows for mocking Muhammad and his companions.

The Napoleonic Code is based on The Islamic Sharia, and guided France out of the chaos of a decade of revolution. Other European states that adopted Napoleonic reforms and applied the knowledge acquired from Al-Andalus, Istanbul, Athens, Egypt (Kemet), Rome and Al-Quds Jerusalem, slowly managed to drag themselves out of the dark ages.

Napoleon attempted to persuade the Ottoman and Safavid Empires to stop fighting each other and focus on their mutual enemies. He sent troops to support Tipu Sultan against the Rothschild controlled, British Empire in India, backed the United Irishman campaign and warned the Arabs about Rothschild usurers.

Much is made of Napoleon’s emancipation of French Jews, and though he acknowledged his error in legalising the Sanhedrin (i.e. Jewish courts), all Napoleon was trying to do was allow Jewry an equal opportunity to reintegrate into society. He realized too late, that some of them don’t want any part of civilisation, unless they’re standing over it with their foot on its throat.

The 12 year period commonly known as The Napoleonic Wars, was actually a world war by Jewish moneylenders and their vassals (e.g. The British Empire), against Napoleon: The Rothschilds collared, corralled and threw in every Shabbos Goy they owned, to fight Napoleon’s dangerous ideas…

“When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government, control the situation: Since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes… Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” 

Napoleon Bonaparte

Needless to say, the bankers couldn’t tolerate the bitter truth, especially not when its spoken by someone who’s actually in a position to make things right. So Napoleon essentially stood alone against the bankers, for the sake of his country and the world.

Jewish Extremists Bring War & Misery to France

It was only after the French defeat at the battle of Waterloo against the Rothschild controlled British, that Jewish moneylenders took over both countries again: In England, they crashed the economy with false rumours of Nelson’s defeat, then bought up all the stock for next to nothing; thus making England’s most celebrated military win, her biggest financial and socio-political loss.

In France, they reversed most of Napoleon’s reforms and almost managed to seize control of every country in Europe en route to imposing a Jews-only government at the congress of Vienna in 1814.

Usury (interest), banned by Napoleon, was re-imposed with a vengeance; entire nations were buried under a mountain of Rothschild owned debt and the vicious cycle of borrowing, debt and war was once again thrown around Europe’s neck like a flaming tyre. France would become a hated, puppet regime of the usurers, forced to sacrifice her sons in war upon war:

Crimean War: 100,000 dead. The pointless and bitter 135-year conflict with Rothschild’s enemies in Algeria; millions dead and wounded on both sides. Invasions of Morocco, Mali, West Africa, Tunisia and Senegal. 12,000 dead in Mexico. 2,000 dead in China.

Thousands of lives lost by meddling in the Arabian Peninsula. The murder and oppression of Chinamen for Rothschild’s drug cartel in the Opium Wars. World War I: 8,660,000 killed. 400,000 French conscripts dead in the Indochina / Vietnam War, millions of Vietnamese people slaughtered. World War II: 567,600 dead for the Rothschild central bank and France’s extremist Jew masters.

Families ripped apart around the world; for whom, to what end?

This is a man’s legacy under the evil ideology of Jewish extremism, under the moneylenders, this is Rothschild’s France: Economically enslaved, culturally blinkered and politically counterproductive. The coup de grace for French democracy came in 2006; when Israeli Mossad agent, Nicholas Sarkosy, became President.

Today, the racism and degeneracy that infects the body politic and occasionally manifests itself as violence on the streets, is symptomatic of the last 202 years of Rothschild misrule.

Islamic-Christian History Revised

The Christian versus Muslim paradigm is a useful and profitable way for Jewish fanatics to keep the Gentile majority at each other’s throats. It also ensures good business as far as usury is concerned, after all; even holy wars need to be financed by someone, and that someone almost always speaks Yiddish.

The battle of Tours-Poitiers wasn’t Christendom’s victory over Islam; it was Muslim Spain’s sacrifice to protect religious freedom in the Iberian Peninsula for another 700 years: The fact that Christians fought for Islamic rule against invading ‘Christian’ armies, is a fact that doesn’t fit the fiction of Jewry’s meticulously engineered, ‘Clash of Civilisations’ narrative.

Charles Martel didn’t defend France, he coveted Spain; which is why his son Peppin had a go in 755 AD and why his grandson Charlemange’s campaign only got as far as Saragossa before being routed by the Arabs. And when he turned his forces on Pamplona, Charlemange was trounced by the Basques at The Battle of Roncevaux Pass (778 AD). Charlemange was stopped again in the same year, this time by the Christians at Navvare.

“The Christian subjects of the Moslem emirate appeared to be quite content with their tolerant Saracen overlords.”

Winston, ‘Charlemagne’, p46

Charlemange’s second incursion in 824 AD ended in much the same way: Charles Martel, Peppin and Charlemange’s failed endeavours in Spain only served to consolidate their vice-like grip on France, and in-between his two invasions of Al-Andalus; Charlemange put countless Avars, Franks, Slavs and Saxons to the sword.

Looking to the Future

1193 years later, the government’s internal corruption, foreign and domestic failures; are still used to stoke discord and conflict. Once again, it’s an extremist Jew controlled regime attempting to rewrite history and set people against one another to prop up the corpse of Rothschild’s rancid system.

There is another Europe, hidden away behind all the racist filth and propaganda of the last few centuries; for there is nothing inherently evil about any point on the compass, no hemisphere owns the rights to decency and goodwill: The West was the East and the East was the West, when all men were equal and none were the servants of Rothschild.

France must return to the principals of the Napoleonic Code, restore all that was repealed and abide by its terms, or better yet, return to the origins of The Code, namely the principals of Islam.

France stands at a crossroads, the choices they make now will determine whether they’re resigned to live as slaves, or resolved to reclaim their freedom from the usurers by any means necessary.

“Soldiers! In my exile I have heard your voice: Called by the voice of the people and raised by your shields: Rally around the standard, claim the credit for your deeds, as the liberators of your country”.

Napoleon Bonaparte, 1815

This article was inspired by the book ‘Napoleon & Islam’ By Christian Cherfils, James Gibb-Stuart (Translator & Editor), Foreword by David Musa Pidcock–2016 Edition . ‘Napoleon & Islam’ By Christian Cherfils, James Gibb-Stuart (Translator & Editor), Brigitte Farncoise Bresson (Editor)–1999 Edition.