Gilad Atzmon Needs Your Immediate Support!

March 16, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

Support Gilad.jpg

I am being sued for libel in the High Court in England by Campaign Against Antisemitsm’s chairman Gideon Falter. I have made the decision to fight this crucial battle for freedom of expression even though this fight poses a real risk of bankrupting me and my family.

I choose to fight their suit because I believe that the CAA and its chairman and its use of libel laws pose a danger to freedom of speech and the future of this country as an open society. Enough is enough!

Mr. Falter has sued me for comments I made on my own website.

My comments were made in the context of expressing my opinion about the situation where, last July, The British Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) attested that there had been no increase in anti-Semitism in Britain, and Gideon Falter and the CAA refused to accept the CPS’s verdict. Falter and the CAA insisted that anti Semitism was on the rise. Sky news reported on the discrepancies between the findings of CPS and the CAA.

I am being sued for libel in the High Court in England by Campaign Against Antisemitsm’s chairman Gideon Falter. I have made the decision to fight this crucial battle for freedom of expression even though this fight poses a real risk of bankrupting me and my family.

I choose to fight their suit because I believe that the CAA and its chairman and its use of libel laws pose a danger to freedom of speech and the future of this country as an open society. Enough is enough!

Mr. Falter has sued me for comments I made on my own website.

My comments were made in the context of expressing my opinion about the situation where, last July, The British Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) attested that there had been no increase in anti-Semitism in Britain, and Gideon Falter and the CAA refused to accept the CPS’s verdict. Falter and the CAA insisted that anti Semitism was on the rise. Sky news reported on the discrepancies between the findings of CPS and the CAA.

I am being sued for libel in the High Court in England by Campaign Against Antisemitsm’s chairman Gideon Falter. I have made the decision to fight this crucial battle for freedom of expression even though this fight poses a real risk of bankrupting me and my family.

I choose to fight their suit because I believe that the CAA and its chairman and its use of libel laws pose a danger to freedom of speech and the future of this country as an open society. Enough is enough!

Mr. Falter has sued me for comments I made on my own website.

My comments were made in the context of expressing my opinion about the situation where, last July, The British Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) attested that there had been no increase in anti-Semitism in Britain, and Gideon Falter and the CAA refused to accept the CPS’s verdict. Falter and the CAA insisted that anti Semitism was on the rise. Sky news reported on the discrepancies between the findings of CPS and the CAA.

My article focused on the choice examined by Sky News between two accounts, one maintained by Falter and the CAA, an NGO that is dedicated to prosecuting antisemitism with “zero tolerance”, and the judicial approach of the CPS: a public body, subject to scrutiny and committed to impartiality.

My comments about the CAA are the basis of their lawsuit. I believe that I have the right to express my opinions on my own website: freedom of political expression is at the heart of freedom of speech. Mr. Falter claims that my criticisms of him do not amount to an opinion at all, and is seeking an order that would stop me from saying anything similar about him again, as well as paying him huge sums in libel damages and legal costs.

The CAA has contacted Jazz venues, community centres, concert halls and even overseas companies demanding that my events be cancelled. They have now escalated this battle and if they win this will ruin me financially.

I can not fund my defence alone.  I am obliged to ask every peace loving human being who cares about freedom and ethics for funds to help me defend this case. Fighting  this battle may cost tens of thousands of pounds. I am going to need some four figure donations to find the ludicrous amount required. But every single penny mounts up and please do give something.

If you have ever enjoyed my writing – join the fight. If you don’t agree with me yet support freedom of speech – my fight is your fight. If you support the right to point at the truth without being labeled ant-Semitic – this lawsuit is the battle ground,   my fight is your fight.

I appreciate any help you can give.


The March to Jerusalem

March 13, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon


When I was a young Israeli I learned from our leading military leaders that Israel was not afraid of wars.

They said

“we know how to deal with tanks, infantry, airplanes. Even ballistic missiles won’t knock us down.”

But they added,

“if the Palestinians decide one day to march to Jerusalem we won’t be able to offer a military answer.”   

Ynet reported today on two ‘Palestinians Return’ marches due to take place later this March and in May.  The Israelis are in a state of panic and for good reason.

 The following is a translation of the Ynet article:  

“The Great March of Return”: is an initiative in Gaza for a mass march toward the Israeli border.,7340,L-5156864,00.html#autoplay

By Elior Levy

Civil activists in the Gaza Strip have plans for marches toward the Israeli border on Land Day at the end of this month and on Nakba Day. One of the organizers told Ynet that the “Great March of Return” has the support of Hamas (and) “there are no guarantees [on our part] not to cross the border.”

 A new initiative in Gaza is gaining momentum and is beginning to worry the Israeli defense establishment. The campaign is called the “Great March of Return,” during which they expect large crowds to march from Gaza toward the Israeli border to mark the right of the Palestinian refugees to return to their land.

The marches are scheduled to take place on the anniversaries of  two significant days: March 30, Land Day and May 15, Nakba Day. On the later date, the opening ceremony of the American embassy in Jerusalem is due to take place.

In the days before Land Day, the organizers plan to set up tens to hundreds of tents near the border to show the refugee existence. This move will also be highly visible and is expected to maximise participation. Once these tent camps are positioned, young Palestinians and organized groups will move in until the marches take place.

In previous years we have seen mass marches heading toward the borders on Nakba Day, but the difference this time may be due to the difficult conditions in the Gaza Strip which have intensified in the last year and caused serious unrest. During rising internal protests within the Strip, Hamas tends to let the demonstrators vent their anger hoping that the sword won’t turn over [on Hamas].

Hamas makes it clear – “we won’t stop the demonstration”

Hamas has announced that it supports the March. Twice last week, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh made clear their support for the campaign. “We will not be able to stop the tens of thousands of citizens who set out north and east to protest the siege imposed on the Gaza Strip,” he said, calling on the Palestinians to participate in the March.

Haniyeh’s statement was aimed primarily at Israel and other countries in the region. His intended to threaten them with the possible ramifications of such marches – it could  get out of control and spark violent confrontations or even a mass attempt to cross the border towards Israel. In any case, Hamas made it clear that it will not stop the demonstrators from reaching the Israeli border.

One of the organizers’ plans is to organize a display using the uniform of Jewish inmates in the Nazi camps during the Holocaust to compare that to the situation in the Gaza Strip. Gaza residents who could provide such clothes were asked to contact the organizers.

 Ahmed Abu Aritha, one of the organizers of the March is an activist from the Gaza Strip. He stressed that this will be a popular march and there are no plans for violence.

“This is a positive initiative not only for us, but also for Israel, because Palestinians who participate in this rally will hold peaceful protests without rockets or tunnels, they just want to cry out loudly and to call for their release from their imprisonment.”

 Regarding the Israeli fear that masses of demonstrators may  try to cross the border, Abu Aritha clarified that at the moment there is no official call, but this does not guarantee that such a scenario won’t take place.

“There is no decision by the organizers to cross the border towards Israel, but we have no guarantees that it will not happen.”

The messages conveyed by the organizers through social networks actually allude to violence, such as posting pictures of demonstrators heading to the border and trying to cross it. The march is widely covered by the Palestinian media as well as by popular Arab media such as Al-Jazeera and Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, which naturally increases its public resonance as the date approaches.

If they want to burn it , you want to read it..

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto  ,  and   here  (

How Zionist is the New World Order? and How Biblical Is Zionism?

March 13, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon


GA: If Zionism was intially all about the ‘promised land’, Neoconservatism stands for the shift towards a ‘promised planet.’ How do we bridge the gap between the nationalistic aspiration and the  globalist agenda?   From Yahweh to Zion by  Laurent Guyénot offers some interesting answers. Guyénot doesn’t attempt to tell us what Yahweh is but instead what the notion of Yahweh represents within the contexts of Judaism, jewish culture, Jewish politics and Jewish identification.  Guyénot’s offers a  very important contribution. I hope that is books are made of fire resistant materials.      

How Zionist is the New World Order? and How Biblical Is Zionism?

Laurent Guyénot

Editor’s note: In these two articles, historian Laurent Guyénot explores questions that you are not even supposed to ask…much less actually think about. Those of us who still read, and think, are grateful.  –Kevin BarrettVeterans Today Editor

How Zionist is the New World Order?

by Laurent Guyénot, first published at Vinyard of the Saker

Laurent Guyénot is the author of From Yahweh to Zion: Jealous God, Chosen People, Promised Land … Clash of Civilizations, 2018.  ($30 shipping included from Sifting and Winnowing, POB 221, Lone Rock, WI 53556).

The Zionist paradox

Jewishness is full of paradoxes. For example, remarked Nahum Goldmann, founder and longtime president of the World Jewish Congress: “Even today it is hardly possible to say whether to be a Jew consists first of belonging to a people or practicing a religion, or the two together” (The Jewish Paradox, 1976)[1]. The answer has always depended on the circumstances. Another paradox is the relationship of Jewishness to both tribalism and universalism: Israelis, “the most separatist people in the world,” in Goldmann’s words again, “have the great weakness of thinking that the whole world revolves around them.”[2]

This great weakness is, of course, a great strength, and so is the ambiguity of Jewishness. It has served Israel—a secular “Jewish state”— very well. Theodor Herzl thought of Zionism on the model of European nationalistic movements, lobbying for the right of the Jews to become a nation among nations. But everyone can see now that Israel is no ordinary nation. It never was and never will be. It is the paradoxical nation.

Part of the ambiguity comes from the very name Israel, which already had a twofold meaning before 1948: it referred to an ancient kingdom supposedly founded in the first millennium BCE, and destroyed by the Romans in the first century CE. But for the following two thousand years, Israel was also a common designation for the Jewish community worldwide, “international Jewry” as some call it. That was the meaning of “Israel”, for example, when the British Daily Express of March 24, 1933 printed on its front page: “The whole of Israel throughout the world is united in declaring an economic and financial war on Germany.”[3] The members of Israel were then called Israelites interchangeably with Jews. Although quite contradictory in terms, the two notions (national Israel and international Israel) have been conflated by the 1948 Law of Return, which made every Israelite of the globe a virtual Israeli.

Today, Zionism has shifted into a kind of meta-Zionism where the greatest number of the Israeli elite—including individuals with no stamped Israeli citizenship but a profound loyalty to the Jewish state—reside outside Israel. Some of them hold key positions in state administrations, particularly in the United States. As Gilad Atzmon remarks, “there is no geographical center to the Zionist endeavor. It is hard to determine where Zionist decisions are made”; “the Israelis colonize Palestine and the Jewish Diaspora is there to mobilize lobbies by recruiting international support.”[4] The neoconservatives—“an intellectual movement in America to whose invention Jews can lay sole claim,” as correctly assessed the Jewish Daily Forward[5] — are the most influential group of Diaspora Jews dedicated to Israel. They are no conservatives in the traditional sense, but rather crypto-Likudniks posturing as American patriots in order to align US foreign and military policies with the Greater Israel agenda—high-level sayanim, so to speak (read John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, 2008).

Their mentor Leo Strauss, in his 1962 lecture “Why We Remain Jews,” declared himself an ardent supporter of the State of Israel but rejected the idea that Israel as a nation should be contained within borders; Israel, he argued, must retain her specificity, which is to be everywhere.[6] Indeed, this paradoxical nature of Israel is vital to its existence: although its stated purpose is to welcome all the Jews of the world, the state of Israel would collapse if it achieved this goal. It is unsustainable without the support of international Jewry. Therefore, Israel needs every Jew of the world to define his/her Jewishness as loyalty to Israel. Ever since 1967, the hearts of an increasing number of American Jews began to beat secretly, and then more and more openly, for Israel. Reform Judaism, which had originally declared itself to be exclusively religious and opposed to Zionism, soon rationalized this new situation by a 1976 resolution affirming: “The State of Israel and the Diaspora, in fruitful dialogue, can show how a People transcends nationalism while affirming it, thus establishing an example for humanity.”[7]

How do they both affirm and transcend nationalism? The biblical way. The Hebrew Bible, the Tanakh, is the unalterable prototype of Jewish history: everything that follows the fall of the Hasmonean kingdom has to be biblical—the Holocaust, for example. Inevitably, Jewish nationalism, or patriotic love for Israel, resonates with the destiny of Israel as outlined in the Bible: “Yahweh your God will raise you higher than every other nation in the world” (Deuteronomy 28:1). Every nation is a narration, and Israel’s narrative pattern is cast into the Hebrew Bible. To love Israel is to love Israel’s biblical story, no matter of how mythical it is. And through biblical prophecy, the vision of the past becomes the vision the future: Solomon’s empire will come to pass.

That is why Zionism was never an ordinary form of nationalism, nor can Israel ever be a “nation like others.” The paradoxical nature of Israel is best embodied by its founding father Ben-Gurion: a secular Jew who saw himself as a new Joshua,[8] hoped for “the restoration of the kingdom of David and Solomon,”[9] and prophesized that Jerusalem will be “the seat of the Supreme Court of Mankind, to settle all controversies among the federated continents, as prophesied by Isaiah.”[10]Let us be fair and assume that Ben-Gurion was simply referring to Isaiah’s prophecy that “the Law will issue from Zion” and that Yahweh will “judge between the nations and arbitrate between many peoples” (2:3-4), not to the Second Isaiah’s prophecy that Israel “will feed on the wealth of nations” (61:6), and that nations who do not serve Israel “will be utterly destroyed” (60:12).[11] Ben-Gurion’s vision lives on: a 2003 “Jerusalem Summit” attended by three acting Israeli ministers including Benjamin Netanyahu and many American neoconservatives including Richard Perle, affirmed that “one of the objectives of Israel’s divinely-inspired rebirth is to make it the center of the new unity of the nations, which will lead to an era of peace and prosperity, foretold by the Prophets.”[12] Zionists have always been in love with the Bible.

Such are the geopolitical implications of the Jewish paradox: Zionism cannot be a mere nationalistic aspiration, as long as it claims to be Jewish, for “Jewish” means “biblical”. And more than two thousand years ago, the ancient prophets had bent over the cradle of Israel to predestine it as “a nation above other nations.” Israel carries in its biblical genes the plan for a world order headquartered in Jerusalem. I’m not talking about a secret conspiracy here: the Jewish plan to rule the world has been plainly outlined in the global bestseller for more than two thousand years. If most people in the Christian world don’t see it, it is because it is right under their nose. Christians claim that the Jews don’t read their Bible correctly, or that they got their Zionism from the Talmud or the Kabbalah. Both claims are pitiful attempts to exonerate the Old Testament from the Zionist catastrophe: the Hebrew Bible was written by Jews for the Jews, and I have never heard a Zionist quote the Talmud or the Kabbalah, whereas they quote the Bible every day.

The prophetic spirit that inspired Isaiah long ago has been very active since the beginning of the 20th century. It spoke through religious leaders like Kaufmann Kohler, a leading figure of American Reformed Judaism, who wrote in his major work on Jewish Theology (New York, 1918) that “Israel, the suffering Messiah of the centuries, shall at the end of days become the triumphant Messiah of the nations.”[13] And it spoke through secular thinkers like Alfred Nossig, a Zionist who collaborated with the Gestapo in the Warsaw ghetto for the emigration of selected Jews to Palestine, who wrote in his Integrales Judentum (Berlin, 1922):

“The Jewish community is more than a people in the modern political sense of the word. It is the repository of a historically global mission, I would say even a cosmic one, entrusted to it by its founders Noah and Abraham, Jacob and Moses. [. . .] The primordial conception of our ancestors was to found not a tribe but a world order destined to guide humanity in its development.”[14]

The Feuerbachan approach

The paradoxical nature of Jewishness (combining separatism and universalism), which is reflected in the ambiguous nature of Zionism (combining nationalism and internationalism), is ultimately linked to the Jewish conception of God. Is the biblical Yahweh the national god of Israel or the universal God of humankind? Let’s search for an answer into the Book of Ezra, the paradigmatic episode for the Jewish colonization of Palestine. It begins with an edict of the Persian king Cyrus, which says:

Yahweh, the God of Heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and has appointed me to build him a Temple in Jerusalem, in Judah. […] Let [every Jew] go up to Jerusalem, in Judah, and build the Temple of Yahweh, the God of Israel, who is the God in Jerusalem” (Ezra 1:2–3).

Here Cyrus speaks in the name of “the God of Heaven” while authorizing the Judean exiles to build a temple to “the God of Israel […] the God in Jerusalem.” We understand that both phrases refer to the same God, called Yahweh in both instances, but the duality is significant. It is repeated in the Persian edict authorizing the second wave of return. It is now Artaxerxes, “king of kings,” who switches from the “God of Heaven” to “your God” or “the God of Israel who resides in Jerusalem” when addressing Ezra (7:12–15). The phrase “God of Heaven” appears one more time in the book of Ezra, and that is again in the edict of another Persian king: Darius confirms Cyrus’s edict and recommends that the Israelites “may offer sacrifices acceptable to the God of Heaven and pray for the life of the [Persian] king and his sons” (6:10). Elsewhere the book of Ezra only refers to the “God of Israel” (four times), “Yahweh, the God of your fathers” (once), and “our God” (ten times). In other words, according to the author of the book of Ezra, only the kings of Persia see Yahweh as “the God of Heaven” (a fiction, of course: for Persians, the God of Heaven meant Ahura Mazda) while for the Jews he is primarily the “God of Israel”. That is the deepest secret of Judaism, and the key to Jews’ relationship to universalism and to the nations: success rests on their ability to make Gentiles believe that the national god of Israel residing in the Jerusalem Temple is the God of Heaven who happens to have a preference for Israel.

The misunderstanding led to a public scandal in 167 CE, when the Hellenistic emperor Antiochos IV dedicated the temple in Jerusalem to Zeus Olympios, the supreme God. He was simply expressing the idea that Yahweh and Zeus were two names for the supreme cosmic God, the Heavenly father of all mankind. But the Jewish Maccabees who led the rebellion against him knew better: Yahweh may be the Supreme God, but He is Jewish. Only Jews are intimate with Him, and any way the Pagans worship Him is an abomination.

So is Yahweh God, or just the god of Israel? Why should we care? Well, let’s call it the Feuerbachan approach to the Jewish question. In his famous work The Essence of Christianity(1841), which was to influence greatly Karl Marx, Ludwig Feuerbach sees the universal God as “the deified and objectified spiritual essence of man”: theology is anthropology in disguise, and “The consciousness of God is the self-consciousness of man.” But if we regard the biblical Yahweh as a creation of Jews alone, rather than humanity at large, then we can consider him as a personification of the national character of the Jewish people—or, more correctly, a reflexion of the mentality of the Jewish elite who invented Yahweh.

It is known to biblical scholars that, in the oldest strata of the Bible, Yahweh appears as a national, ethnic god, not the supreme God of the Universe. “For all peoples go forward, each in the name of its god, while we go forward in the name of Yahweh our god for ever and ever” (Micah 4:5)[15]. “I am the god of your ancestors,” Yahweh says to Moses (Exodus 3:6), who is then mandated to declare to his people, “Yahweh, the god of your ancestors, has appeared to me,” urging them to talk to Pharaoh in the name of “Yahweh, the god of the Hebrews” (3:16–18). The Hebrews chant after the miracle of the Red Sea engulfing Pharaoh and his army, “Yahweh, who is like you, majestic in sanctity, among the gods?” (15:11).[16] And in Canaan, a Hebrew chief declares to an enemy king: “Will you not keep as your possession whatever Chemosh, your god, has given you? And, just the same, we shall keep as ours whatever Yahweh our god has given us, to inherit from those who were before us!” (Judges 11:24).[17] In all these verses, Yahweh is an ethnic or national god among others.

What sets him apart from other tribal gods of his kind is possessive exclusivism: “You shall have no other gods to rival me” (Exodus 20:3); “I shall set you apart from all these peoples, for you to be mine” (Leviticus 20:26). This is the justification for strict endogamy: it is forbidden to marry one’s children to a non-Jew, “for your son would be seduced from following me into serving other gods” (Deuteronomy 7:4).

Yahweh is known as “the Jealous One” (Exodus 20:5 and 34:14; Deuteronomy 4:24, 5:9, and 6:15). But jealousy is an euphemism for outright sociopathy, because what Yahweh demands from his people is not just exclusivity of worship, but the destruction of their neighbors’ shrines: “Tear down their altars, smash their standing-stones, cut down their sacred poles and burn their idols” (Deuteronomy 7:5). Judean kings are judged on the unique criterion of their obedience to that precept. Hezekiah, whose disastrous policy of confrontation with Assyria led to a shrinking of the country, is praised for having done “what Yahweh regards as right,” namely abolishing the “high places” (2 Kings 18:3–4). His son Manasseh, whose 50-year reign is known to historians as a time of peace and prosperity, is blamed for having done “what is displeasing to Yahweh, copying the disgusting practices of the nations whom Yahweh had dispossessed for the Israelites” (2 Kings 21:2). Manasseh’s son Amon is no better. Josiah, on the other hand, proved worthy of his great-great-grandfather Hezekiah, by removing from the temple “all the cult objects which had been made for Baal, Asherah and the whole array of heaven. […] He exterminated the spurious priests whom the kings of Judah had appointed and who offered sacrifice on the high places, in the towns of Judah and the neighborhood of Jerusalem; also those who offered sacrifice to Baal, to the sun, the moon, the constellations and the whole array of heaven” (2 Kings 23:4–5).

It is ironic that Yahweh, originally a minor tribal god, should compete with the great Baal for the status of supreme God, as when Elijah challenges 450 prophets of Baal in a holocaust contest, which ends up with the slaughter of them all (1Kings 18). In ancient Syria, Baal Shamem, the “Heavenly Lord,” was identified as the God of Heaven and honored by all peoples except the Jews.[18] The goddess Asherah, whom Yahweh loathed even more, was the Great Divine Mother worshipped throughout the Middle East. In Mesopotamia, she went under the name of Ishtar, while in the Hellenistic era, she was assimilated to the Egyptian goddess Isis. The Hebrews themselves called her “Queen of Heaven” and turned to her in times of trouble, to the dismay of their priest and prophet Jeremiah, who threatened them with Yahweh’s exterminating wrath (Jeremiah 44).

Historians of religion tell us that Yahweh was still a national god at a time when the notion of a supreme God was widespread. When and how the Levites declared the god of Israel to be the true and only God is not entirely settled, but it is generally admitted that it happened shortly before the time of Ezra, when the Book of Genesis was composed (with much borrowing from Mesopotamian and Persian myths). The process is easy to imagine, for it follows the cognitive logic of a narcissistic sociopath among the community of gods: from the commandment of exclusive worship and the destruction of other gods’ shrines, it is a small step to the denial of the very existence of other gods; and if Yahweh is the only existing god, he must be “The God.”

A curious story about King Hezekiah can serve as an illustration of this process. The Assyrian king threatens Hezekiah in the following manner, explicitly identifying Yahweh as the national god of Israel:

“Do not let your god on whom you are relying deceive you with the promise: ‘Jerusalem will not fall into the king of Assyria’s clutches’ […] Did the gods of the nations whom my ancestors devastated save them?”

Hezekiah then goes up to the Temple and offers the following prayer:

“It is true, Yahweh, that the kings of Assyria have destroyed the nations, they have thrown their gods on the fire, for these were not gods but human artifacts—wood and stone—and hence they have destroyed them. But now, Yahweh our god, save us from his clutches, I beg you, and let all the kingdoms of the world know that you alone are God, Yahweh” (2 Kings 19:10–19).

So here we witness how Yahweh was promoted from the status of a national god to that of universal God by the prayer of a devout king. In response to that prayer, according to the biblical story, “the angel of Yahweh went out and struck down a hundred and eighty-five thousand men in the Assyrian camp,” then struck their king by the hand of his sons (19:35–37). Pure fiction: the Assyrian annals tell us that in reality, Hezekiah paid tribute to the Assyrian king. Which proves that Hezekiah’s claim was deceptive.


The exclusive monotheism demanded by Yahweh is a degraded imitation of that inclusive monotheism toward which all the wisdoms of the ancient world converged by affirming the fundamental unity of all gods. As Egyptologist Jan Assmann emphasizes, the polytheisms of the great civilizations were cosmotheisms, insofar as the gods, among other functions, form the organic body of the world. Such a conception naturally led to a form of inclusive or convergent monotheism, compatible with polytheism: all gods are one, as the cosmos is one.[19] The notion of the unity of the divine realm naturally connects with the notion of a supreme God, creator of heaven and earth, enthroned atop a hierarchy of deities emanating from him—a concept familiar to Plato, Aristotle, Seneca, and most ancient philosophers. The exclusive and revolutionary monotheism that the Yahwist priests crafted for their own benefit is of a totally different kind: it is, in fact, the exact opposite of the inclusive and evolutionary monotheism of neighboring peoples.

From the historical perspective, it is not the Creator of the Universe who decided, at some point, to become the god of Israel; rather, it is the god of Israel who, at some point, was declared the Creator of the Universe by the Levites and their scribes. The Jewish conception of Yahweh parallels that historical process: for the Jews, Yahweh is primarily the god of Jews, and secondarily the Creator of the Universe. This is what Maurice Samuel kindly tried to tell us in You Gentiles(1924): “In the heart of any pious Jew, God is a Jew.” “We [Jews] and God grew up together,” that is why “we need a world of our own, a God-world, which it is not in your nature to build.”[20]

And so the paradoxical nature of Yahweh is, in reality, a deception. The idea that the Heavenly Father of humankind, somewhere in the second millennium BCE, chose a particular people and ordered them to dispossess and slaughter other peoples is, any way we look at it, an outrageous absurdity. The fact that billions of people have believed it for thousands of years makes no difference. Or rather, that is the problem: many peoples throughout history have believed themselves to have been chosen by God, but only the Jews have managed to convince others that they have. That has turned this outrageous absurdity into the most devastating idea in world history.

The deceptive nature of biblical monotheism is the key to understanding traditional Jewish attitude to universalism. For the Jewish conception of God is reflected in the Jewish conception of Humanity. Just like their tribal god speaks of himself—through his prophets—as the God of humankind, Jewish communitarian thinkers speak of Jewishness as the essence of humanity: Judaism constitutes a “particularism that conditions universality” so that “there is an obvious equation between Israel and the Universal”; in other words, “Israel equals humanity” (Emmanuel Levinas, Difficult Freedom: Essays on Judaism, 1990).[21] It is almost always in reference to their Jewishness that such opinion makers, who are often ardent Zionists, proclaim themselves universalists: see for example how Rabbi Joachim Prinz, a German Zionist who in 1934 had applauded the Nazi state for being “built upon the principle of the purity of nation and race,” declared in 1963, as chairman of the American Jewish Congress, that he supported the African-American civil rights movement “as a Jew.”[22] “Jewish universalism” is a contradiction in terms and therefore necessarily deceptive. It is self-deception in the case of most Jews, who believe what they have been taught by their representative elites ever since the Haskalah: that there is no contradiction in being a tribalist at home and a universalist in the street—provided that, in each of their universalist stand, they do not lose sight of the important question: “Yes, but is it good for the Jews?”[23] Of course, there are many remarkable exceptions: Jews who have broken through the mental “Jewish prison” (as Jewish journalist Jean Daniel calls it)[24] to reach for some universal truths. I call it the genius of the escapee.

Ultimately, the deceptive nature of both biblical monotheism and Jewish universalism is a key to unraveling the Zionist paradox: nationalism and internationalism go hand in hand in Israel’s destiny, because Israel is, fundamentally, a biblical and therefore universal project. For the Jewish cognitive elites who determine Jewish public opinion to a large extent, the New World Order is an ancient et eternal idea. It is Israel’s destiny carved in the Bible. It is inherent to Jewishness.

  1. Nahum Goldmann, Le Paradoxe juif. Conversations en français avec Léon Abramowicz, Stock, 1976 ( 9. 
  2. Nahum Goldmann, Le Paradoxe juif, op. cit., p. 6, 31. 
  3. Alison Weir, Against Our Better Judgment: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Was Used to Create Israel, 2014, k. 3280–94. 
  4. Gilad Atzmon, The Wandering Who? A Study of Jewish Identity Politics, Zero Books, 2011, pp. 21, 70. 
  5. Gal Beckerman, Jewish Daily Forward, January 6, 2006, quoted in Stephen Sniegoski, The Transparent Cabal: The Neoconservative Agenda, War in the Middle East, and the National Interest of Israel, Enigma Edition, 2008, p. 26. 
  6. Leo Strauss, “Why We Remain Jews,” in Shadia Drury, Leo Strauss and the American Right, St. Martin’s Press, 1999, pp. 31–43. 
  7. Quoted in Kevin MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism, Praeger, 1998, kindle edition 2013k. 5463–68. 
  8. Dan Kurzman, Ben-Gurion, Prophet of Fire, Touchstone, 1983, pp. 17–22. 
  9. As he declared before the Knesset in 1956, quoted in Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, Pluto Press, 1994, p. 10. 
  10. David Ben-Gurion and Amram Duchovny, David Ben-Gurion, In His Own Words, Fleet Press Corp., 1969, p. 116 
  11. All Bible quotes are taken from the Catholic New Jerusalem Bible, which has not altered the divine name YHWH into “the Lord,” as most other English translations have done for unscholarly reasons. 
  12. Official website: 
  13. Kaufmnann Kohler, Jewish Theology, Systematically and Historically Considered, Macmillan, 1918 (, p. 290. 
  14. Alfred Nossig, Integrales Judentum, Interterritorialer Verlag, 1922, pp. 1–5 (on 
  15. Most translations use a uppercase for the “God of Israel”, and a lowercase for other national gods, but ancient Hebrew does not distinguish between uppercase and lowercase letters, so here, and in further quotes, I have used a lowercase g for all national gods, including Israel’s, and reserved the uppercase G for the One supreme God. 
  16. See also Psalms 89:7. 
  17. Jean Soler, Qui est Dieu?, Éditions de Fallois, 2012, pp. 12–17, 33–37. 
  18. Norman Habel, Yahweh Versus Baal: A Conflict of Religious Cultures, Bookman Associates, 1964, p. 41. 
  19. Jan Assmann, Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism, Harvard University Press, 1998, p. 3.  
  20. Maurice Samuel, You Gentiles, New York, 1924 (, pp. 74–75, 155. 
  21. Online on 
  22. Prinz’s pro-Nazi statements from his 1934 bookWir Juden are quoted in Israel Shahak, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, Pluto Press, 1994, p. 86. Prinz’ introduction to King’s “I have a dream” speech on August 28, 1963, beginning with “I speak to you as an American Jew,” is at 
  23. Jonny Geller made this paradigmatic question the title of his humorous book Yes, But Is It Good for the Jews? Bloomsbury, 2006. 
  24. Jean Daniel, La Prison juive. Humeurs et méditations d’un témoin, Odile Jacob, 2003

I am Back in Beirut

March 12, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

Screen Shot 2018-03-12 at 07.56.41.png

I am back in Beirut at the Fourth Global Convention of Solidarity with Palestine. Last night I,  along with  9 others thinkers, activists and warriors was honored by The Global Campaign to Return to Palestine for our contribution for the cause.

This was my short acceptance speech.

Thanks so much for inviting me to this spiritually uplifting conference. Watching you tonight reminds me what resistance is all about.

Thanks to Sukran as well for appreciating  my work.

For the last 20 years I’ve been subject to endless smear campaigns. I’ve been subject to constant slander and abuse at the hands of Zionists but also ‘anti’ Zionists.  In 2012, as I was raising funds for the March to Jerusalem, a group of 20 Palestinians called for “my disavowal.”   They probably  didn’t want to march to Jerusalem… fair enough. I’ve seen the publishing house that dared to print The Wandering Who bought by an Israeli. I’ve seen the record company that released my best selling albums bought by an Israeli. I have seen many doors closing, but my plight is really insignificantly small in comparison with the Palestinians’ suffering.

Let me tell you, if I had to relive my life, I would do-exactly the same things.

Yes, I might  have  lost some lucrative concerts, a few publishing deals, but when I wake up in the morning I recognise the person I see in the mirror.

Dear friends, Palestine is now a universal struggle.

We are all Palestinians.

Like the Palestinians, we can’t utter the name of our oppressor.

Like the Palestinians, Syrians,  Iraqis, Libyans, we in the West:  Americans, Germans,  French, Brits, are uprooted and  dispossessed. We also want to return home, to see our family values reinstated. We want to speak our minds , to say, for instance, what we think about Israel without being suspended by Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour,  we want to see a prospect of a future for our children.

I will make it short and clear. In this fight for the right of return we are one people and our enemy is also one!

If they want to burn it , you want to read it..

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto  ,  and   here  (

How Antisemitsm Became Noise

March 09, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon


The charge of ‘antisemitsm’ has become a noise — a whiny repetitive backgr

ound disturbance. We have learned to live with it, to accept that some people are just inherently upset and there is nothing we can do to change them or to help them out.

In Britain various Zionist organisations and media outlets dedicate themselves to threatening the British public. They torment the biggest political party in Europe and its leaders by tossing about their accusations  of ‘antisemitism.’ They crudely interfere with freedom of speech and the basic liberty to choose to oppose Israel and its tribal lobby.

Miraculously, it seems the Brits have become inured to the endless racket. By now they either ignore the constant moan or they are just irritated  with the producers of that perpetual noise. In any case, it is clear that despite their persistent slander of Corbyn, he is more popular than ever. At this point I suspect that it might be more damaging to Corbyn if they were to allege that actually Corbyn is Jewish, perhaps the son of a rabbi.

This week, every Jewish outlet around the world reported that Jeremy Corbyn was an active member of a ‘secret’ Facebook group made up of Holocaust deniers and anti-Semites.

They are referring to a tedious 280-page report released by David Collier, that details supposed ‘anti-Semitic’ and anti-Israel material shared by members of the group. For instance, one member of the group wrote that he had read “Mein Kampf,” and suggested that “Everybody should be forced to read it, especially Jews who have their own agenda as to why they were not liked.” I guess the so-called ‘people of the book’ want to decide what books are qualified for Goyim’s digestion. I take it that Collier & Co do not accept that outside of the Jewish ghetto people like to exchange ideas and may even agree to disagree.

Collier reports that Corbyn posted on the FB group’s wall on a number of occasions. In one comment, he praised the heroic Dr. Mads Gilbert, the Norwegian physician who treated patients in Gaza staying on even as it was subjected to a genocidal attack from Israel. Corbyn wrote  “huge respect” for “my friend” Gilbert and said he would be “delighted to invite him to Westminster.” Perhaps someone will be kind enough to explain to Collier and his brethren in the Jewish press that outside of Golders Green Dr, Gilbert’s actions are how we define humanism and Corbyn’s affectionate attitude toward such a humanist isn’t exactly a ‘crime.’

Britain’s MSM didn’t picked up the story about Corbyn and the secret FB group. It is too boring, and the Brits have had enough of this constant lament.

There is a practical side to this. Although the story tells us nothing about Corbyn and his non existent animosity to Jews, the perpetual  Zionist tantrum does serve to help us grasp Jewish culture and even Jewish history.

Let’s look for instance at Jennifer Gerber, the director of Labour Friends of Israel. She stated, “Mr. Corbyn has repeatedly failed to apologize to the Jewish community and to recognize the hurt caused by his past actions and associations. Now would be a good time for him to do so.”

What does Mrs. Gerber expect Corbyn to apologise for, his support for the oppressed and ethnically cleansed Palestinians? Or that he failed to operate as a FB inquisitor on behalf of the Lobby?  I’ll use this opportunity to point out to Mrs. Gerber that  Corbyn is doing pretty well without issuing such an ‘apology.’ Their actions might even be counterproductive, possibly the more Gerbers and Colliers castigate Corbyn as an ‘anti-Semite’ the more popular he becomes.

Joseph D. Glasman, head of political and government investigations at the ultra Zionist Campaign Against Antisemitism, accused Corbyn of failing to operate as a kosher police force.  “One of Mr. Corbyn’s slogans is ‘standing up, not standing by,’ but in this case he has not stood up but instead he actively joined in.”

In an interview published Thursday, Britain’s former Chief Rabbi, Lord Jonathan Sacks, said he would refuse to hold talks with Corbyn until the Labour party showed “clearer signs of resolute action” against anti-Semitism within its ranks.

It is painful to watch a tribe ignore its past and repeat its historical mistakes. Surprisingly, their sole voice of reason is JC editor Stephen Pollard. Writing about his “Jeremy Corbyn dilemma” Pollard states:  “The truth is that we (The JC) could have such a story (Corbyn and his FB friends)  almost weekly. But I am acutely conscious that there is a perverse side to this – that the more it’s reported, and the more we go big on it, the more it is then discounted as just par for the course.”

Somehow  Pollard has sensed Goyim fatigue. Perhaps he can see that the Jewish fascination with ‘victimhood’ has made antisemitsm into white noise. Well done Stephen.

If they want to burn it , you want to read it..

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto  ,  and   here  (

Insane Aggression on Display

March 07, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

 It is a bad idea to mount pressure on their host nations to suspend their relationships with other nations.

Reported by Gilad Atzmon

One would expect that Jews would have learned from past mistakes that it is a bad idea to mount pressure on their host nations to suspend their relationships with other nations.

The Zionist outlet Israel Hayom reported recently that The Ruderman Family Foundation, a prominent Jewish-American Foundation launched  a campaign calling for the United States to sever its ties with Poland.

As could be expected, it did not go well. The Jewish foundation produced an obscenely belligerent video in support of their campaign, which I urge you to watch.

The video is a distressing display of the aggression that is attached to contemporaryJewish nationalist identification. The fact that such a video wasn’t restrained and became viral within some Jewish and Israeli circles indicates that we are facing a collective that seems to lack the capacity to understand the consequences of its own actions. This hubris coupled with a complete lack of superego creates a very dangerous zone.

Naturally, the Polish people didn’t approve of the call for a war against their country. Michal Dworczyk, an aide to Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, described the video as an “affront to the thousands of Poles who risked their lives during the war to help Jews.”

Polish state television’s news channel, TVP Info, called the video “shocking” in the top story on its website.

Witold Jurasz, a journalist with the private Polsat broadcaster, blasted the video as “offensive and scandalous,” and said it “spits in the face of every Pole” – even those who, like him, oppose Poland’s Holocaust law.

The campaign aroused enraged responses and was widely criticized in the Polish media. One critic even remarked, “Polish Holocaust? This is as if the USA attacked Pearl Harbor.”

According to the Israeli paper

“tens of thousands of reactions to the campaign appeared on social media, including blatant anti-Semitism. Many responses were posted on the official petition site, such as: ‘The Jews don’t have a monopoly on the Holocaust;’ ‘stop lying, there were no Polish death camps;’ and “’in the name of 36 million Poles, the Polish Holocaust didn’t happen.’

The Polish Embassy in the U.S. released a statement blasting the campaign and video:

“We are shocked that the Ruderman Family Foundation has published a reprehensible video blaming Poland for the Holocaust…We condemn this historically inaccurate production and treat it as a malicious attempt to heighten emotions during a sensitive time.”

The Ruderman Family Foundation apparently ignored the Polish protest altogether, but luckily it was slightly more attentive to a lone Jewish Polish voice. Jonathan Ornstein, director of the Jewish Community Center in Krakow, confirmed to the Israeli paper that he had explained to foundation president Jay Ruderman how troubling the video was and had been assured that the video would be removed.

“The term ‘Polish Holocaust’ is not accepted by any reasonable person whether Jewish, Polish, Israeli or German,” Ornstein added. “Emotions are running high and harmful, inaccurate comments from various sides have been published, but this is indefensible.”

The Ruderman Family Foundation released a statement saying that

“after a hugely successful campaign that went viral internationally and among American Jews and Israelis who have signed the petition – the Foundation was contacted by the Polish Jewish community and because of their concerns for their safety, we decided to halt the campaign.

If they want to burn it , you want to read it..

cover bit small.jpg

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto  ,  and   here  (

The Only Jewish Ghetto in the Middle East

Filed under: AngloZionist Empire, Ethnic Cleansing, Gilad Atzmon, Jerusalem, Jewish Crimes, Jewish terror state, Judaization, Occupied W Bank, Palestine, PLO, Zionist entity | 2 Comments »

Next Page »
%d bloggers like this: