Take it from the AIPAC’s Mouth (video)

November 14, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

In this precious video, AIPAC delivers a devastating message to the American people. Your political system is hijacked by a foreign aggressive lobby — it doesn’t matter if you vote for the Democrats or the Republicans, if you like Clinton or prefer Trump, your political system is dominated by a Jewish lobby group that doesn’t even try to conceal its diabolical operation.

This is exactly the situation I describe in my new book Being in Time – a Post Political Manifesto. The ‘political’ has been obliterated by now. If you want to understand why America, Britain and France are fighting Zionist immoral interventionist wars, spend one minute and watch this video!

cover bit small.jpg

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

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto, Amazon.co.uk , Amazon.com and  here (gilad.co.uk).

Advertisements

King Charles

November 13, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

king Charles_edited-1.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

Yesterday the impossible happened — the ‘non existent’ Jewish Lobby attacked Prince Charles for mentioning the ‘Jewish Lobby.’

Amid the ongoing outburst of Jewish paranoia, Prince Charles has come under fire after the exposure of a private letter he penned in1986 in which he blamed the “influx of foreign Jews” for causing unrest in the Middle East and called on the US to “take on the Jewish lobby.”

The Prince’s observations are astute and accurate.  And for the Brits there is the clear message that by the 1980s the Prince was well- qualified to become their King as well as their Prime Minister and Foreign Minister.

The British Zionist league sprung into action when the news of the leaked letter broke. The farcical Campaign Against Antisemitsm (CAA) launched an immediate attack on the Royal Prince. Most outrageously, they called upon the Prince to “repudiate” his 30 year old letter. Openly and shamelessly the CAA actually falsified the meaning of Prince Charles’ words. Although Prince Charles wrote about the fact that an ”influx of European Jews” drove the Zionist settlement in Palestine, the deceitful CAA claims that Prince Charles referred to an “influx” of Holocaust survivors.”

caa.jpg

Of course, the Prince didn’t even mention the holocaust. But, as we well know, some believe that lying for the cause is kosher.

Add Prince Charles to the long list of humanists subjected to malicious Zionist campaigns. This means that now Prince Charles won’t be able to join the British Labour Party, in that telling the truth about Israel doesn’t conform to Labour Party’s ‘values.’ It is likely that within the next few days we will see a gathering of Israeli flag wavers near Buckingham palace. They will probably be led by Zionist hooligan Jonathan Hoffman and MP Wannabe Rachel Eden. They can be expected to shout slogans such as:

2,4,6,8 stop the royals, stop the hate

1,2,3,4 no to Charles in Windsor

2468.jpg

But ‘telling the truth as it is, is exactly what royals are for,’ a friend commented on my FB page this morning. ‘The royals are there to say, what the peasants are too scared to utter.’

Stephen Pollard, the scary looking ultra Zionist editor of the Jewish Chronicle, hysterically tweeted that the news about Prince Charles are “both shocking and entirely predictable.” The state of being in shock over the predictable is a unique Jewish cognitive condition, totally foreign to Goyim who have to choose between the two. What Pollard tried to say is that it is totally ‘shocking’ that despite the diabolical tyrannical atmosphere imposed on gentiles, the Prince could see through the Zionist propaganda spin, and think ethically, independently and authentically. And it is ‘predictable’, because, if there is one lesson to be learned from Jewish history, it is that somehow, and against the odds, the Goyim always rise. Prince Charles, so to say, is simply an early bird.

pollard twitt.png

 

According to The Independent, Pollard said that the “Prince’s use of the ‘Jewish lobby’ term was the most astonishing.” “To me,” he added “ the ‘Jewish lobby’ is one of the antisemitic themes that have endured for centuries. It is this myth there are these very powerful Jews who control foreign policy or the media or banks or whatever.”

Maybe Pollard should take the time to actually read the JC, the paper he supposedly edits. This is how Marcus Dysch, his Political Editor described the Conservative Jewish Lobby group just three days ago: “CFI (Conservative Friends of Israel) is the largest such [Lobby] group in Westminster with open line to almost every Tory MP, dozens of other countries’ diplomatic and political groups, and influence in Downing Street for decades.”

I hope that Prince Charles enjoys playing percussive instruments because we are about to form a first rate musical team made up of Zionists favourites: Roger Waters on bass and vocals, Alison Chabloz on guitar and vocals, yours truly, blow hard and hopefully Prince Charles on the drums or even a pair of castanets.

charles castanets .jpg
cover bit small.jpg

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

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto, Amazon.co.uk , Amazon.com and  here (gilad.co.uk).

Priti Patel and Jewish Conspiracies

November 12, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

patel.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

The British Jewish media is upset. Priti Patel, a  cabinet minister responsible for international development, had no fewer than 14 meetings with Israeli politicians and political leaders. It seems that Patel didn’t clear any or most of these meetings with the Foreign Office. So Patel had to go and but now the British Jewish media is pressing the panic button.

The ultra Zionist Jewish Chronicle’s (JC) headline warns that the Patel Affair “will set us [the Jews] back 20 years.”  The JC predicts that it will have “a devastating impact on British Jewry.” It may even “bolster antisemitic conspiracy theories and damage relationships with British politicians for a generation.”

This is the crux of the matter — Jews hate ‘Jewish conspiracy theories.’ Why? Because Jews do not conspire or operate in clandestine manner. They do it all in the open. Jews wrote the Balfour Declaration on behalf of Lord Balfour and made sure everyone knows who really wrote it. They make sure we know that it was Leó Szilárd  and Albert Einstein who initiated the Manhattan Project. AIPAC, CFI, LFI and the CRIF openly push for immoral interventionist wars in Iraq, Syria, Libya and Iran while JC writers Nick Cohen and David Aaronovitch advocate these global wars in the media. All this is not merely a ‘Zionist agenda.’ Jewish anti Zionists employ the same technique to claim that it is down to progressive Jews to define the boundaries of free speech on Israel. I reiterate -there are no Jewish conspiracies. Everything is done in the open. And this was Patel’s mistake. She foolishly attempted to conceal her loyalty to our foreign rulers.

_80352910_80352799.jpg

In a country led by Theresa Je suis Juif, there is no reason for minister Patel to hide her subservience to the Jewish Sate. In a country where the biggest lobby group in the parliament is the Conservative Friends of Israel there is no reason for a minister to be shy about what may seem to be disloyal inclinations. With 80% of the leading party listed as CFI members, treachery is the norm. Patel didn’t have to hide her allegiance to the Jewish State, she should have done it all in the open, like the PM and Sir Eric Pickles (see picture above).

The JC confirms that the “CFI is the largest group in Westminster with an open line to almost every Tory MP, dozens of other countries’ diplomatic and political groups, and influence in Downing Street for decades.” The JC doesn’t attempt to conceal how forceful the CFI is, however, it is honest enough to reveal that “one senior (Jewish) communal figure said CFI would now be regarded as ‘toxic’.”

If you are looking for light Jewish entertainment, the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism  (CAA) is the place to go. The CAA is a self-appointed Jewish thought police. It devotes its energies to the total castration of the Brits and their ability to think rationally, morally and independently. The CAA provides a spectacle of anti-ethical thought totally foreign to the Western ethos.

“The resignation of Priti Patel,”  the CAA writes, “ has unleashed some disturbing comments, including from politicians and journalists who have carelessly or deliberately evoked sinister stereotypes of powerful Jews.”

Let’s examine what the CAA considers to be a ‘disturbance’ and what is it they don’t want us to say: In an article in The Times, Policy Editor, Oliver Wright and Political Editor, Francis Elliott, cited an unnamed senior Conservative MP: “Another senior Conservative MP claimed that Ms Patel planned to use her ministerial position in DfID  (Department for International Development) to curry favour with Jewish Tory donors by supporting Israel. ‘The Israel lobby in the Party is hugely influential and this was about Priti cynically trying to win their support. She thought she could be the next leader.”

Confusing, don’t you think?  The JC admits that the CFI is the strongest body in Westminster, while the CAA insists that reference to CFI’s power and influence ‘evokes sinister Jewish stereotypes.’ The CAA openly attempts to police British journalism by stifling criticism of Israel. This shouldn’t take us by surprise. If Jewish power is the power to suppress criticism of Jewish power, here is the CAA exercising this power in broad daylight. But there is good news. This power in falling apart now, and this may explain the panic within the JC’s ranks and the tantrum thrown by the CAA and other Jewish thought police organisations (CST, ADL, Hope not Hate, et al).

The ‘rationale’ of the CAA policing strategy deserves close attention:

“Under the International Definition of Antisemitism adopted by the British Government, ‘Making mendacious, dehumanising, demonising, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions’ is antisemitic.”

This is a revolutionary legal defence strategy.  According to the CAA, X is not guilty of committing Y as long as X is stereotypically associated with committing Y. If X is guilty, for instance,  of shoving a banana into someone’s eye (Y), the  defence would be that shoving bananas into other people’s eyes (Y) is one of the stereotypes about X.

Similarly, the CAA claims it is anti-Semitic to refer to the Jewish Lobby as the strongest lobby in Westminster because the accusation is consistent with the Jewish stereotype of Jewish lobbies being influential. Likewise we should vindicate Harvey Weinstein of any wrong doing because Larry David admitted on Saturday Night Live that predatory behaviour has become a Jewish stereotype. I expect Bernie Madoff to capitalise on this line of defence and appeal for his immediate release. Alan Dershowitz can also come clean about his bad habits by blaming them on Jewish stereotypes.

The paradox here is obvious, The CAA’s circular argument has nothing to do with any consideration of ethics, truthfulness or correspondence with reality. The ‘stereotype’ redeems the sin. By this logic the CAA itself is innocent of any wrong thinking because such a Jerusalemite anti-ethical intellectual pattern is also a Jerusalemite stereotype.

The CAA practically calls upon British commentators and politicians to fib. “It is therefore incumbent upon those commenting on the Priti Patel affair to do so in a way that is proportionate and rational. It is a dangerous stretch to accuse Ms Patel of doing Israel’s bidding in order to please wealthy Jews who have the power to influence the selection of the next Conservative leader.” Neither the CAA nor any other Jewish body has offered an alternative rationale for Patel’s misconduct. The CAA  demands that British journalists set aside their intelligence and common sense. They expect British politicians and commentators to put Jewish sensitivities first.

We are touching upon the core of Jerusalemite thinking  – a tyranny of correctness that is removed from morality and Western ethos. Instead of ethics, we are told to follow Mitzvoth, regulations and commandments. For the Brits,  Priti Patel is a wake up call. It is a final reminder that for the nation to sustain its values it must  search for its Athenian roots: philosophy, science and ethics as opposed to a tyranny of correctness that is anti ethical and zero principled.

   

cover bit small.jpg

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

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto, Amazon.co.uk , Amazon.com and  here (gilad.co.uk).  

Balfour Declaration, History and Concealment (video)

November 11, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

In this talk Atzmon elaborates on that which the historicity of Balfour is set to conceal — a century of Jewish political hegemony in Britain and beyond.

Keep Talking, London 7.11.2017

Text

The Balfour Declaration – One Hundred Years Of (Goyim) Solitude

Screen Shot 2017-11-11 at 12.19.03.png

A talk given at Keep Talking gathering in London,  7 November 2017

 By Gilad Atzmon

In Heidegger and the Jews, the French philosopher Jean-Francois Lyotard points out that history claims to narrate the past but, in practice, what it does is conceal our collective shame. The Americans conceal slavery and imperial genocidal aggression, the Brits conceal their colonial blunders, the Jews turn their eyes away from anything that may have contributed to turning  Jewish history into an extended shoah. The real historian, claims Lyotard, is there to unveil the shame. This week marks 100 years since the Balfour declaration and today I will try to touch upon your shame, my shame, our shame. We will try to figure out what the history of the so-called  Balfour ‘Declaration’ is there to conceal.

Let’s first examine the document. Most noticeably the so-called ‘declaration’ is not printed on official British government letterhead. It is not signed by the British cabinet either. It is, instead, a letter from a sleazy British politician  (Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour) to a very rich Jew (Lord Walter Rothschild). As such, the Balfour ‘declaration’ is actually a statement  with somewhat limited significance.  What it does is  “declare[s] sympathy with Zionist aspirations.”

Screen Shot 2017-11-11 at 12.19.22.png

Yet, we must admit that the Jewish world has managed to squeeze quite a few drops of juice out of this watery statement. The Jewish world interprets this ‘sympathetic declaration’ as a commitment to their Zionist, racist and expansionist project namely the ‘Jewish State’. They claim to regard the vague statement as a license to ethnically cleanse the entire indigenous people of the land, i.e., the Palestinians. And, as if this is not enough, the British PM Theresa May has evidently bought into the most radical Zionist interpretation of the declaration.

May announced last week that she was “proud of our pioneering role in the creation of the state of Israel.”

Let me share some of the awkward history of the Balfour Declaration with you. The ‘declaration,’ as we now understand, was actually drafted and approved by British Jews before it was sent to Lord Rothschild.

The National Library of Israel reveals the flowing:

   “Before the declaration was officially presented to Lord Rothschild by Lord Balfour, the draft was presented to Jewish leaders of every political stripe, both Zionist and non-Zionist. One of these leaders was Sir Philip Magnus, a Reform rabbi and British politician whose opinion on the declaration was sought.” (http://web.nli.org.il/sites/NLI/English/library/reading_corner/Pages/balfour.aspx)

Herbert Samuel, the British first High Commissioner of Palestine who served between 1920 and 1925  was an avid Zionist Jew and a close acquaintance of Chaim Weizmann, the leading pragmatic Zionist, the spirit behind the ‘declaration’ and later the first Israeli president.   How did the Zionists managed to plant a Zionist Jew in such a crucial and sensitive position? The answer is devastatingly simple. They were running the show.  We are talking here about Jewish domination of the relevant British foreign affairs as early as the beginning of the 20th century.

But was it really ‘The Jews,’ Moshe, Yaakov, Sarah who dominated British  Middle East affairs? Unlikely. It is more reasonable to assume that the fate of the empire and its decisions were in the hands of just a very few powerful Jews,  people like Lord Rothschild to whom Balfour actually addressed the declaration.

This tale of Jewish political domination extends well beyond the borders of Britain. In his invaluable book, The Pity of it All, Israeli historian Amos Elon suggests that the 1917 Balfour Declaration was at least partially motivated by the British government’s desire to win the support of pro-German Jewish- American bankers so that they would help push the USA into the war.

Elon argues that at the beginning of the war,  German- American Jewish financiers sided with the Germans and rejected possible alliances between the USA and England.  “Jacob H. Schiff, head of Kuhn, Loeb—at the time the largest private bank in the United States after J. P. Morgan—declared that he could no more disavow his loyalty to Germany than he could renounce his own parents. Schiff prayed for Germany’s victory. In a statement to the New York Times on November 22, 1914, he charged the British and the French with attempting to destroy Germany for reasons of trade.” (The Pity Of It All, pg. 455)

According to Elon, the Brits had encountered a Jewish problem with  American Jews. “The British government took these developments very seriously. In a fit of paranoia, the British ambassador in Washington even suspected the existence of a veritable German Jewish conspiracy in the United States directed at Britain.” (Ibid)

Thanks to the Balfour declaration German Jewish bankers in the US flipped sides. Seems that they betrayed their fatherland, no more were they German patriots. Elon’s conclusion is that: “The 1917 Balfour Declaration, calling for the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine, was at least partly motivated by the British government’s desire to win support among pro-German American Jews.” (ibid)

The take home message is rather devastating. For some time our universe has been dominated by tribal interests that are foreign to most of us. And for some reason we cannot really explore the conditions that shape our reality and dictate our doomed future.

This is, in fact, the precise meaning of Jewish power. Jewish power is the power that suppresses criticism of Jewish power. Some of the less sophisticated critics of Israel accuse Zionism and Israel of various conspiratorial doings. I, on the other hand, have said repeatedly that there are no Jewish conspiracies. All is done in the open. The Balfour ‘declaration’ that was written to a Jewish financier was quickly made public.  America was openly pushed into WWI for the sake of Zion.  The appointment of a Zionist Jew, Herbert Samuel, as the high commissioner of Palestine wasn’t a secret either. It was actually controversial at the time.

These events were as clear at the time as are contemporary Jewish lobby groups such as AIPAC, CRIF, CFI and LFI who push, in broad daylight, for Zio-driven immoral interventionist wars against Iraq, Syria, Iran and Libya. A century of constant abuse has  left us speechless. We do not know how to deal with this menace. And this is the core of our shame. This is what our history is there to conceal. This applies to you and me, but it also applies to Theresa May. To tell the truth about the Balfour Declaration is to publicly admit to 100 hundred years of Goyim solitude.

In the last few weeks, Palestinian solidarity enthusiasts have been creative in producing numerous proactive slogans. The one that grabbed my attention this week was “Balfour Declaration -100 years of ethnic cleansing.”  This week actually marks a century of Zionist domination of the Western civilisation.  But let me tell you, the real authentic Palestinians, those who live in Gaza and the West Bank may be slightly better off than the rest of us. While we are often overwhelmed by the sophistication of our masters in Tel Aviv, the Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza and Lebanon know exactly who their enemies are; they meet them in roadblocks, they recognise the sounds of their drones.  Our enemy here, in the USA, in France and in Britain, is somehow elusive: is it Zionism, is it Israel, or maybe just the Lobby? Is it really  ‘the Jews,’ or even Judaism? Where exactly does Judaism end and Jewishness start? Let me try to open your eyes. It is none of the above, and yet it might as well be all of the above and beyond.  Zionism is a sophisticated matrix and it shifts rapidly.  Zionism like Jewish anti Zionism strives for your intellectual castration. It somehow defies your opposition even before you can utter it yourself. How is this done? It obliterates your ability to act ethically and rationally. It targets your survival skills. How? It eradicates your Athenian roots and replaces them with a rigid Jerusalemite regulatory system.

In my recent book Being in Time – a post Political Manifesto  I delve into the Straussian dichotomy between Athens and Jerusalem. Athens is where we think things through, Athens is where philosophy and essentialism are celebrated. Jerusalem is the city of revelation, where Torah, Mitzvoth and commandments are accepted blindly. Athens is where ethics is explored by means of judgment. Jerusalem, on the other hand, is where ethics is replaced by laws.

Zionism, my friends, can only operate within a Jerusalemite dominated universe. A world governed by a tyranny of correctness. Was it Herzl, Ben Gurion or Netanyahu who imposed such tyrannical conditions on us?  Not at all, this is the role of the New Left, the Identitarians, the cultural Marxists, the ‘progressives’ the people who adhere to ideological collectivism. The people who in the name of diversity silence the majority. Those who instead of uniting us around that which we all share, actually seek to divide us into infinitesimal particles of biological symptoms (skin colour, sex orientation, etc.).

I started this talk with a reference to Leyotard and his Heidegger and the Jews, I conclude with a reference to the teaching of the 20th century’s  greatest Athenian: Martin Heidegger.

In opposition to the Jerusalemites of the world who in the name of ‘correctness’ tell us what to say and what to think, Martin Heidegger, the Athenian, taught us that to educate is to teach others to think for themselves and how to refine the questions (as opposed to recycling answers).

Time is overdue for us to liberate ourselves from our shame. Time is ripe to call a spade a spade. Now is the time for Alethea ( truth – Ancient Greek) and Logos to prevail.  We must emancipate ourselves and find our true voice once again.  Emancipation is opposition to the Jerusalemite oppressive condition. It is the fight for the disclosure of human unity once again.

cover bit small.jpg

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

Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto, Amazon.co.uk , Amazon.com and  here (gilad.co.uk).  

All those Balfour Declarations (video)

A brief history of nations plotting  to send the Jews away to Palestine well ahead of the 1917 Balfour Declaration…

Atzmon Once Again

October 21, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

Being in Reading in Time - Sun 22 Oct, 7.30 PM Risc, 35-39 London Street, Reading, RG1 4PS

By Gilad Atzmon

I learned from the Jewish Chronicle  today that Berkshire Jews are “horrified” because yours truly has “challenged Holocaust denial legislation.” What caused the present outbreak of Pre Traumatic Stress? Apparently, my Sunday book launch at the Reading International Festival.

First, I am sorry to hear that my questioning of Jewish identity politics and culture have created a state of Jewish collective horror. I would be pleased if any Berkshire Jews would bravely dare to attend my talk on Sunday, they may discover that they agree with most of my observations.

But what is it in my new book Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto that inflicts ‘horror’ on Berkshire Jews and other Jewish institutions? No one knows. The book has been well-reviewed and no one has yet found any factual mistakes or a methodological flaws in the text. Ifthey want to burn it then you certainly want to own a copy.

In the last few days, British Jewish institutions have used every trick in the Hasbara book in an attempt to cancel my coming talk.  The notorious CAA and the ultra Zionist Board of Deputies of British Jews mounted pressure on the venue, they contacted the local council, they harassed local politicians; they even attempted to recruit ‘LGBT activists’ who were asked to pursue thevenue.

The Jewish Chronicle reports that Rabbi Zvi Solomons of the Jewish Community of Berkshire said that Mr Atzmon is “a notorious antisemite. He has promoted Holocaust denial, compared Israelis to the Nazis.” Other political organizations have taken the accusations against me seriously. They have carefully examined the matter and have found that the claims levelled against me are baseless, malicious and often duplicitous.

The Rabbi wrote,  “The event organisers did not seem concerned that they were going to be providing a platform to a known peddler of hatred.”  I believe that the Rabbi should accept that outside of his congregation, criticism of ID politics, and Jewish culture are considered a legitimate intellectual and ethical adventure. Further, I have been writing on Jewish and Zionist matters for 20 years, and in spite of the strict anti hate legislation in the UK and other countries, I have never been questioned by a single law enforcement body about any of my writings or public speeches, neither here in Britain nor anywhere else around the world.

The Rabbisaid, “They are giving a platform to someone who is lauded by white supremacists. Surely that is not the intention of a venue like that.”

There is an element of truth there. My work has been praised by a wide spectrum of intellectuals: Right, Left and Centre (see here and here). One explanation is that I am dealing with meta-political issues. Rather than advocating a political standpoint, I attempt to offer a method to engage in ethical discussions within a critical philosophical framework.

Jonathan Arkush, the president of the Board of Deputies, said no “reputable event should feature Gilad Atzmon.” He reiterated that the Board was “extremely concerned that the Solidarity Centre and the festival organisers appear happy to host someone with such a track record for openly racist views.”

The one thing, neither Arkush, Rabbi Solomons nor any other detractor of mine has ever managed to do is to point at a single critical reference to race or biology in my entire body of work. I do not criticise people, I dissect culture and politics and dig into their meaning.

The Jewish Chronicle reports that a small number of congregants from Rabbi Solomons’ 50-strong community plan to hold a protest vigil if the event goes ahead. Two weeks ago I encountered a similar vigil in Berkeley, California. The event organiser was able to persuade the entire Zionist group to attend the talk. At the end of the talk, some of the Zionists admitted to the organiser that they were persuaded by my argument and were impressed by my delivery. I am looking forward to meeting the Rabbi and his followers. I will, of course, invite them to join the peace lovers inside the Reading International Solidarity building.

cover bit small.jpg

If they want to burn it, you want to read it! Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto, Amazon.co.uk , mazon.com and  here (gilad.co.uk).  

To understand Gilad watch Gilad and All That Jazz:

 

Being a Goy in a Jewish State

August 31, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

Settlers from Kiryat Arba verbally abusing Palestinians in the al-Hariqah neighborhood of Hebron on loudspeaker. When they noticed a B’Tselem volunteer filming them from her window, they directed racist and obscene language at her, including threats of extreme sexual violence. Although the threats were explicit and the swearing constituted severe sexual harassment, Israeli security forces at the scene allowed the settlers to continue undisturbed, as is usually the case.

%d bloggers like this: