The article in full, part 1:

Scott Howard The Transgender-Industrial Complex Quakertown, Pennsylvania: Antelope Hill, 2020

“If man will strike, strike through the mask!” — Moby Dick

In March, South Dakota Republican Governor Kristi Noem vetoed House Bill 1217, an act designed to “promote continued fairness in women’s sports” by prohibiting biological men from playing in girls’ sports leagues. In April, Arkansas Republican Governor Asa Hutchinson vetoed House Bill 1570, titled the Save Adolescents From Experimentation (SAFE) Act, which prohibits gender reassignment surgeries and the use of hormone blockers for minors. [1]

Transgender ideology is unpopular, especially with Republican voters, [2] so Tucker Carlson invited Noem and Hutchinson on his show to justify their actions. In his sardonic and relentless style, Tucker accused Noem of caving to pressure from the “NCAA, Chamber of Commerce, and Amazon.” [3] And, when Hutchinson explained with a smirk on his face that he vetoed the bill because it “was overbroad, it was extreme,” Tucker insinuated that the governor was lying and brushed aside the governor’s excuses, asking him instead if he had done so at the behest of Walmart.

Tucker has earned enormous clout as one of the leading conservative opponents of “radical Left” agendas like transgender ideology, which he criticizes as a “boutique issue” pushed by “rich people” and big business. However, by telling this truth, even Tucker is slipping his audience a lie.

For example, Hutchinson justified his veto because the bill represented “a vast government overreach” that would cause “legislative interference with physicians and parents.” A far more effective use of Tucker’s airtime might have been to ask Hutchinson how preventing child genital mutilation is a “vast government overreach,” while Hutchinson’s 2017 bill prohibiting the state from contracting with and investing in companies that “boycott Israel” is not. And, rather than asking Hutchinson if he had been approached by a nebulous corporate entity like Walmart, Tucker could have asked the staunch Zionist governor if he had perhaps been contacted by his largest donors, the Jewish Jacobs family.

In his attack on trans ideology, Tucker is ultimately obscuring the key figures and sponsors of this demented social agenda behind nebulous and amorphous corporate abstractions like “Walmart” and generalizations like “the rich” (a common phenomenon in the conservative media sphere). Trans ideology is not just a rich issue; as Scott Howard shows in The Transgender-Industrial Complex, it is a Jewish issue.

In The Transgender-Industrial Complex, Howard exhaustively documents the vast and dizzying constellation of figures and organizations spearheading the transgender cause. Howard’s study shows that the movement is not at all organic, but is rather a pet project of the perverse Western ruling establishment that has been artificially manufactured and propagated from the top down during the latter portion of the 20th century, and is intricately intertwined with “other [unpopular] agendas being implemented by the Establishment such as mass migration/’diversity,’ climate change,” etc. [4]

Demonstrating how the program works, Howard demonstrates that the implementation of the transgender agenda follows a predictive model also seen in other social activist movements and color revolutions. It begins with enormous amounts of money, or “so-called philanthropy,” from a series of billionaires and corporate sponsors who “launder millions of dollars to infuse [a panoply of activist] organizations with cash to [perform] behind-the-scenes machinations,” including everything from public advocacy work and astroturfing pressure campaigns, legal activism, influencing and buying elections, etc. [5]

It is an incredibly well-oiled machine, as LGBT strategists reveal:

The LGBT movement maintains significant assets which it has been able to leverage for real progress, including engaged donors and funders; strong national organizations; and politically savvy, visible, and influential leaders across a variety of sectors, particularly the entertainment, media, and, increasingly, political arenas. Strategically, these assets have been deployed with a laser-like focus to address specific policy and legislative wins either nationally or in certain parts of the country. [6]

It is also noteworthy that the activities of LGBT activist organizations are supplemented by tremendously powerful institutional pressures from a variety of international organizations, among which are: Conditional loans from organizations like The World Bank and the IMF

These loans encourage developing nations to integrate with international legal frameworks like the Council of the European Union’s LGBT Toolkit and the Yogyakarta Principles. The Yogyakarta Principles, concerned primarily with transgender rights, are “a universal guide to human rights which affirm binding international legal standards with which all States must comply.” Affirmed as a global charter by the United Nations Human Rights Council in 2007, the Yogyakarta is essentially the “gay version” of the Magna Carta. [7] Pressure from investors and investment banks to “diversify”

For example, firms like Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase are withholding investments from companies without diverse boards, and firms like BlackRock (Larry Fink) and State Street “are voting against directors at companies” without adequate diversity. As Goldman Sachs proclaims, “If the board has all white males, that’s a big negative”; “Being diverse is not optional; it is what we must be.” [8] [9] Enormous grants from extremist transgender ideologues to educational institutes like Harvard Medical School

An excellent precis can be found here. This also coincides with generous grants and subsidies for gender reassignment “therapies” to provide very lucrative profit incentives for medical firms to offer these “services.” [10] Regarding a similar phenomenon caused by generous grants from such foundations, Howard points out that there is some $2,583 in funding available annually for individuals with HIV/AIDS, vs. a paltry $418 for individuals suffering from cancer. [11] Boycotts from corporations and national organizations

For example, Kristi Noem implied that the NCAA would “bully” her state if she passed an anti-trans bill (the NCAA pulled several championship events out of North Carolina in 2016-2017, in response to the state’s anti-trans washroom bill), and there was also the implication that Amazon and other corporations might retract business opportunities from the state if the bill were passed. Similar forces were at work in 2016, when CEOs from more than 80 major corporations descended on North Carolina to rescind the state’s prohibition on transgender “women” from using women’s restrooms. That same year, “Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff said Salesforce would impose economic sanctions on Georgia if controversial religious freedom bill passes,” demonstrating a new form of corporate tyranny in which corporations do not need to lobby legislators but can simply threaten states with economic devastation should they not comply to their demands, like some sort of cutthroat, international transexual mafia. Sanctions and regime change

If bribes from The World Bank and IMF don’t succeed, then the United States will leverage sanctions and other pressures against your country (for example, the Trump administration succeeded in pressuring Botswana to decriminalize homosexuality). As Howard notes, there is significant overlap between the military-industrial complex and the “diversity and inclusion” project, and NATO is “fully committed to spreading the gospel of tolerance at gunpoint.” [12]

So, in this regard, Tucker Carlson is right in that the transgender-industrial complex is very transparently a project of the oligarchs. However, as Howard connects the many pieces and entities comprising the vast transexual international network, a familiar pattern emerges. Just like with mass migration and a dozen other harmful, antisocial agendas being foisted on the West, the key figures of the transexual agenda — from its pseudoscientific pioneers to the private sponsors and philanthropic benefactors funding its implementation, from the activist organizations and NGOs to the judges and legal activists drafting landmark legal opinions — are Jewish.

At the top of the pyramid rests a series of charming Jewish billionaires like George Soros, Paul Singer, Dan Loeb, Seth Klarman, Jennifer Pritzker, David Gelbaum, Andrew Shechtel, Sheldon Adelson, Loren Schecter, Martine Rothblatt, David T. Rubin, and Mark Hyman, to name a few. Even Haim Saban, the infamous “I’m a one-issue guy, and my issue is Israel” donor, is connected through his Saban Research Institute of Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles, which overlaps with various “prepubescent transgender” research programs. [13]

Many of these plutocrats might already be familiar to readers as hedge fund managers and vulture capitalists. Soros, who made billions short-selling currencies and profiting from market collapses, has achieved a comical bogeyman status with the Right, though there are also charming figures like Paul Singer, who built his fortune on the misfortune of others by buying the debts of countries like Argentina and then crucifying them in international court. During the court proceedings with Argentina, Singer had Ghana seize an Argentinian navy ship to use as leverage in his extortion of the Latin American country. Singer also destroyed the small, white Nebraska town of Sydney when his hostile takeover of Cabela’s cost the thriving town more than 2000 jobs. After making billions through antisocial financial activity centered around destroying and liquidating the livelihoods of ordinary people, these entrepreneurial Jewish business geniuses inject their stolen wealth into perverse social agendas like the trans movement to help demented transsexual perverts get access to your children.

In his popular piece on vulture capitalism, Kevin MacDonald noted how many of the financial vehicles and hedge funds used by these Jewish vulture capitalists are often “blankly nondescript.” Similarly, Howard summarizes how the sponsors of the transgender movement funnel their ill-gotten wealth through “donations” to nondescript and anonymous financial vehicles, foundations, and trusts, such as:

The Open Society Foundation
The Pritzker Traubert Family Foundation
The Walter and Elise Haas Fund and Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr. Fund
The Zellerbach Family Foundation
The Klarman Family Foundation
The Adelson Family Foundation
The Shack Sackler Foundation
The Matan B’Seter Foundation (meaning “anonymous gift” in Hebrew) [14]

Additionally, note that essentially all of the foundations which were not directly founded by Jews have a significant Jewish presence. For example, the Arcus Foundation, one of the top donors to LGBTQ+ causes founded by the homosexual billionaire Jon Stryker, is managed by its Jewish Vice President of Social Justice Programs Jay Michaelson, who got his PhD in Jewish Thought from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. [15]

These funds then distribute large sums of money to hundreds of transgender activist groups, NGOs, legal funds, etc. One notable example is the abominable Drag Queen Story Hour event, which was created by RADAR Productions, a “queer literary arts organization” that is bankrolled by the Zellerbach Foundation and the Walter and Elise Haas Foundation. [16] Jews also happen to be overwhelmingly present within leading “LGBTQ-focused organizations” (which just happen to simultaneously “prioritize combatting anti-Semitism”), [17] among which are-

GlobalFaggot ate my reply. I guess it looks like spam because I had paragraphs of quotes.

Me doubt it. Quote the relevant section.

Start here "What is it with Jews and transgenderism? Howard identifies two motivations" and read the next several paragraphs.

This is where you're wrong. You can all have Charlemagne as your ancestor, even if you are black...

Due tell what they are supposed to be looking for in that DNA, if it's not a shared ancestry.

he talks about white women the way some people here talk about Jews

Again, he's not though. We say different things about Jews. And why white women? There's only one here, and she doesn't say much, if anything, about Jews. Also, ask your new best friend if he has ever had an R16 violation for attacking white people.