Questioning Jewish Progressive Wisdom

November 02, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

 There is an element of truth in the above…

There is an element of truth in the above…

By Gilad Atzmon

Earlier this week the Jewish Forward reported on Monday’s counter-Trump demonstration in Pittsburgh.

“They came in their thousands, singing Jewish songs and folksy protest anthems … (they were) holding signs denouncing Donald Trump as ‘President Hate.’”

I think it is not a clever move for leftist Jewish groups to declare that Trump is to blame for the terror attack in Pittsburgh. In fact, some might see it as irresponsible, and a response that could easily provoke further harassment and violence.

Most disturbing to me about the Jewish progressives’ response to Trump’s visit was the blunt dishonesty reflected in the signs and announcements of the protestors and organisers.

According to the Forward one sign read,

“you know who else was a nationalist? Hitler.”

Hitler was indeed a nationalist but so was Churchill, Gandhi, Herzl and even the 52% of the Brits who voted for Brexit. Nationalism isn’t the problem: Racism is.  Accordingly, we tend to believe that it was racism that drove Hitler’s discriminatory ideology. But the ‘progressive’  Jewish groups who opposed Trump this week aren’t free of racism. They themselves are operating as racially exclusive political groups. I have said it many times before. I struggle to see a categorical difference between Aryans only and Jews only clubs. To me, both are equally racist.

“Speakers from Bend the Arc, the progressive Jewish group that organised the march, castigated Trump and what they saw as his complicity in the attack, allegedly perpetrated by an anti-Semite who shared Trump’s anti-refugee views.”

It is comforting to learn that  Jewish progressives support some refugees; do they also support the Palestinian refugees?

Israel has prevented the ethnically cleansed Palestinians from returning  to their land for more than 70 years.  The Jewish State’s record on refugees and asylum seekers is appalling. But it seems the progressive Jews at Bend the Arc have little to say about that. I searched Bend the Arc’s web site and didn’t find any denouncements of the Jewish State’s anti refugee policies.  Maybe in the Jewish progressive universe one rule applies to the Jewish State and another rule to the sea of Goyim.

Noticeably,  the Bend the Arc event was not the only protest in town: A previous rally event had been held nearby, organized by the leftist Jewish group IfNotNow in collaboration with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) and other groups.

“We know Trump is responsible for violence in our city,” IfNotNow and DSA organizer Arielle Cohen told the Forward. “ Trump has been the enabler-in-chief.” I fail to see the evidence that supports Cohen’s strongly worded accusations. And I wonder whether the decision makers at IfNotNow and JVP grasp the danger they may inflict on their communities by making such provocative accusations.

It is interesting to contrast this reaction to that of the members of the African American congregation that was targeted in 2015 by Dylann Roof, a self-professed racist shooter, who killed 9 people who had invited him into their bible study. After the shooting, Mr. Roof was unrepentant but the reaction of the victims and their families contrasts sharply with the progressive reaction to the Pittsburg massacre.

At Mr. Roof’s bond hearing, the victim’s relatives spoke directly to Roof. “You took something very precious from me”  Nadine Collier, the daughter of Ethel Lance said. “But I forgive you. And have mercy on your soul.”

“I acknowledge that I am very angry,” said the sister of DePayne Middleton-Doctor. “But one thing that DePayne … taught me that we are the family that love built. We have no room for hating, so we have to forgive. I pray God on your soul.”

Each speaker offered Roof forgiveness and said they were praying for his soul, even as they described the pain of their losses. Not one speaker blamed political leaders or anti Black sentiment. They correctly saw Roof as the culprit, even as they compassionately prayed for him. There is much to admire in the congregation’s reaction. It was the opposite of inflammatory, intended to calm the situation.

If the goal is to unite America, to bridge the divide and calm things down, probably equating your president with Hitler and accusing him of the hate crimes of others is the worst possible path to choose.

 

Advertisements

‘Cost-Push’ Narrative Formation in the Trump Era

October 31, 2018

‘Cost-Push’ Narrative Formation in the Trump Era

In his 1928 landmark book Propaganda, public relations pioneer and Goebbelsian trailblazer Eddie Bernays offered what amounts to a disingenuous assertion at best:

“It is important that any effort to influence or effect the American public that is not in the public interest be killed by the light of pitiless publicity and analysis.”

Immediately, the statement begs two questions:

  • What if the American public decides at the ballot box that what passes for the prevailing public interest (really a manufactured imposition) runs counter to its own version of said interest?
  • Who orchestrates the “pitiless publicity” aimed at killing competing visions of the “public interest” and by what authority do they undertake this mission?

Bernays references the ‘who’ elsewhere, albeit vaguely as, “…invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions… and shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.”

Conceivably a tug of war could ensue between two competing visions of the public interest; one vision expressed at the ballot box in the manner of direct democracy and the other emanating top-down from managed democracy’s “invisible rulers”.

For Bernays such a conflict would not represent an intractable impasse so much as a cue for redoubling the, “conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses”. After all, only intensified propagandizing efforts can correct the People’s ill-informed sense of the public interest. Undemocratic manipulation is, “an important element in democratic society” under Bernays’ weirdly circular formulation.

Of course self-determination is neither a path to infallibility nor a vaccine against public policy blunders. Direct Democracy merely makes the People the masters of their own fate, which is equally to say the captains of their own errors.

Bernays would have been better to say manipulation is a vital facet of a smoothly running Republic or Oligarchy, not so much a Democracy. His paternalistic subtext clearly reflects the former. Indeed another name for Managed Democracy is Republicanism (not to be confused with the political party of the same name).

A rough but effective analogy can be drawn from what serve normally as macroeconomic terms used to describe two varieties of inflation: Cost-Push and Demand-Pull. For an explanation of the traditional economic context of the terms, see here.

Applied to political narrative formation, Push is the bottom-up, propulsive force of the Will of the People. While Pull is the manipulative, diversionary desires of the Elite. Push is hard knocks and demonstrable scrapes. Pull is consciously engineered wishfulness harnessed to oligarchic solipsism, Empire objectives and atrophying noblesse oblige.

Popular consent should be organically derived and not subject to extrinsic manufacturing at all. Nor should its germination process be invaded by an externally fashioned agenda. The People should be the authors of their own consciousness. That’s the ideal anyway.

The Culture Industry’s mandate is steeped, from the outset, in inauthenticity and misdirection; or, as Theodor Adorno insisted, structurally inescapable insincerity. Through the endless propagation of false consciousness, Media is charged with convincing the People that the Pull is actually the Push. Sustaining this inversion has become a difficult task.

The Pull techniques are many and varied. Here are but a few:

The last chart addresses Russophobia. Anyone who’s walked past an American TV over the last two years can attest to a media obsession bordering on the manic; an intensity not shared by (nor successfully seeded within) the American public as evidenced by a July 2018 Gallup poll showing concern about Russia to be immeasurably unimportant (the issue garnered an * meaning less than 1%).

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein fed the sui generis racialist fires when he referred with casual malice to The Russians (wink-wink-nudge-nudge) in his February 16th indictment press conference for Concord Management officials who happened to be Russian nationals with no discernible state actor affiliation.

The farcical social media trolling charges relate to “spread[ing] distrust towards the candidates and the political system in general”, as if the American populace wasn’t already immersed in boatloads of domestically-inspired skepticism. Chances are slim the politically-motivated indictments (announced on a Friday in part to the get the Parkland, Florida shootings off the front page) will ever come to trial despite Concord’s heroic efforts to have their day in court (see 3:48 here).

 

Surely it surprises no one that Putin is simply too busy to plot subterfuge at every table of every Russian boardroom engaged in Stateside business. Attempting to dampen Western media’s impression of his fearsome omniscience, the Russian President had this to say at the Jul 16, 2018 Summit Joint Press Conference:

Today’s Russophobic dog whistles recall John Maynard Keynes’ 1932 assertion that Bolshevism sprang from, “some beastliness in the Russian nature”. Far from dispelling these beastly stereotypes, CNN reinforces them nightly for the ‘higher dual purpose’ of de-legitimizing the Trump Presidency and positioning Russia as the Military Industrial Complex’ Enemy of Requisite Budgetary Scale.

Attorney Alan Dershowitz has routinely decried the ACLU’s MIA status throughout the Trump Russia witch-hunt. The same can be said of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) whose charter states: “We fight anti-Semitism and all forms of hate.” We’re familiar with battles waged on behalf of the former, less so the latter. Here’s an opportune chance to engage on behalf of another besieged group.

Russian-Americans comprise 3.13 million people, a sizable population by any metric. Surely Russophobia (a dark retread of Nazism’s Anti-Slavism) warrants urgent attention. Blessed be the stoic forbearance of our Russian neighbors. One hopes it is a circumspection that will continue to go unpunished, though the Japanese and German internment camps that dotted WW2 America hardly inspire confidence.

Since at least Hillary Clinton’s Putin = Hitler equivalence-setting, the public consciousness has been in the grips of determined preparatory spadework for war with Russia. Frankly, the People are to be applauded for enduring the last two years of cognitive carpet-bombing with their disinterest and skepticism intact. Alas this failed impartation will not derail WW3. Rather it will cause the war to break out preemptively without the embedded pretext of settled consent. What cannot be consented to will occur nonetheless, leaving ‘new realities’ to compel the appropriate consent post-factum, that is, in a manner analogous to journalist Ron Suskind’s recounting of a 2004 quote attributed to Karl Rove:

“We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”

As we see in Syria and elsewhere this authorial prerogative is increasingly being shared by Russia in either a nascent reemergence of bipolarity or an interim way-station towards a multi-polar actor ensemble.

Another Pull variant is, as Nancy Pelosi so helpfully anatomized for us, the wrap-up smear. This is the technique of creating a false set of facts (the smear), “merchandising” the false fact pattern to the Media, then wrapping the smeared individual in the ensuing tar-and-feathery media glare until the former stops beating his or her spouse lately.

Of course the ensnared victim is obliged to continually reference the false facts if only to mount a self-defense. Perversely, righteous denial further reinforces the falsehoods through repetition. There is, as they say, no such thing as bad publicity if the purpose is to keep one’s name front-and-center, which in the case of a wrap-up smear, it most surely isn’t.

Again, the purpose is to pull the media consumer towards a desired narrative based on falsity and distortion. The news-maker advantages his or her podium to initiate news that only becomes news by virtue of a bully pulpit (one of the top-down trappings of power), and not by the inherent truth-value of ‘facts-on-the-ground’. Putin and Trump, the world’s most potent nationalists, are no strangers to being wrapped in deceptive, pejorative garb.

A crucial point to note is that both leaders enjoy the shared contempt of the globalists.  Putin’s favorability among Americans has been engineered down to 16%, 9% among collusion-besotted Democrats. Thus, while Russia is not a front-burner issue in US households, the Mackinder-MIC catastrophe of a US-Russia rapprochement is rendered all but verboten by these figures as detente would confirm extortioned compromise.

Viewed in this perma-war context, the establishment palpitations caused by Trump ‘being left alone’ with fellow loose cannon Putin make perfect, twisted sense. Suppose a powerful personal chemistry had erupted into a sudden outbreak of peaceful intentions between the two unchaperoned leaders? The prospects for WW3 might have lain in shards. Summit? What Summit? It’s practically been erased from the annals of geopolitics as was the proposed follow-on Summit in Washington. All that can be hoped for are dashed-off corridor meetings at future co-attended events.

Alas, this shell-game is breaking down in the Trump Era. Fake News is a more tactile, street-level term for false consciousness propagation. There’s little doubt Trump has a gift for branding.

The President is routinely accused of thinking in 220-character Twitter bytes, giving way to charges of truncated intelligence. There may be other reasons to doubt his intelligence. With Twitter, he is fulfilling the greater need of bypassing the Media filter for a communication path more consistent with the needs of direct democracy. The truncation is a non-rescindable feature of the Twitter platform itself.

The current Push-Pull narrative divergence –which has the opinion-shapers in conniptions– is on stark display in the recent Gallup vs. Media Research Center numbers (graphic at the bottom of this post). Surely 92% negative coverage evidences Bernay’s “pitiless publicity”.

Even after the desperate steps taken to shut down alt-media (and yes, desperate is the term), the divergence grows. The Media responds with ever more dislocating and lurid material. Bombs –or at least clocks resembling bombs– appear on Democrats’ doorsteps with eerie synchronicity.

A recursive self-consciousness has now infiltrated the system contributing further noise, not unlike how the pings of a too-high-octane fuel destroy the kayfabe experience (instilled by the car salesman) of a frictionless magic carpet-ride. The clunky mechanics of the process overwhelm the message itself.

The collective wisdom of the People has fully determined their passenger status in a vehicle driven by a malevolent chauffeur. Managed Democracy will be hard-pressed to recover their prior innocence.

The divergence also implodes the notion that the media is in any way reflective of the population it claims to derive its news from. Clearly the reportage has become prescriptive which is to say, not reportage at all. We’re not happy with the facts where we find them. Thus we will be moving them over here instead, beneath the canopy of our desired narrative.

The breakdown of the Pull hasn’t stopped the usual talking heads from pushing endlessly on strings deemed mission-critical by their managers. Like deer trapped in the klieg lights of an indiscernible new reality, they fumble along, in thrall to a dark comedy that takes its cues from absurd representations of untenable narratives.

Though opinions on Trump differ sharply, few can dispute his disruptive role in fomenting managed democracy’s narrative crisis, and for putting back onto its heels a myth-making prowess whose influence up until now had been considered unassailable.

Why might Trump be an authentic change agent, albeit one with a high probability of derailment or self-betrayal? Because the bifurcating narratives cannot be denied. If the divergence is real, the systemic stress must be equally real. Why, one has to ask, does the corporate press protesteth so much? Therein lies a telling litmus.

There’s a tendency to forget Trump’s formal political career is less than two years old and that he contends against a hostile, entrenched security-media complex seventy years in the making. Whether he is already capitulating to insuperable neoconservative power centers or is engaging in tactical ducks-and-feints cannot be confirmed either way. His post-midterm demeanor, and inevitable staffing changes, will reveal much. A verdict today is premature.

For the moment, we applaud small mercies and encouraging signs…

A breakaway bloc now exists in America along the lines of the red pill, blue pill demarcation. Many have been ‘dispelled’. Let us hope more can Push away from the master’s table forever.

 

Fascism, the Nazis and Israel

latuff

Are there valid comparisons to be made between Israel and Nazi Germany, or with other examples of fascist states in history? Just asking this question could get you into trouble as a British Labour Party member.

The party’s ruling national executive decided recently to do a U-turn on its code of conduct against anti-Semitism, and to embrace fully the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s discredited “working definition” of anti-Semitism. The highly criticised IHRA document includes a clause (an “example” of anti-Semitism) outlawing “drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”

This is just yet another example of why the document is useless as a definition of anti-Semitism. It was created by pro-Israel groups – in close consultation with Israel itself – purely as a weapon against the Palestine solidarity movement.

The IHRA document clause which outlaws criticism of Israel as “a racist endeavour” is intended precisely to outlaw political speech in support of Palestine. As any Palestinian will tell you, Israel as a state (not just the current “Israeli government”) is indeed structurally racist.

Its foundation as a “Jewish state” in a country whose population at the time was mostly not Jewish is the very definition of racism. This reality required violent gerrymandering by the Zionist militias who formed the nucleus of the nascent “Israel Defence Forces”. In 1948, the Haganah militia, along with the Stern Gang and Irgun terrorist groups, set about expelling 750,000 Palestinians from the country for the “crime” of not being Jewish. Their legitimate return and the return of their children has been blocked ever since using a combination of racist laws and extreme violence. That is nothing if not a “racist endeavour”.

Furthermore, Israel continues to be defined in its laws and practices as a “Jewish state” rather than a state for all of its citizens, 20 per cent of whom are Palestinian Arabs. The recent “Nation State Law” further entrenched this apartheid structure and made it even more explicit. However, this is by no means the only such law. Human rights group Adalah documents more than 65 laws which privilege Jewish citizens of Israel over Palestinian citizens of Israel, to say nothing of the millions of Palestinians the West Bank and Gaza Strip living under Israel’s regime of military dictatorship.

Comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany are usually made as an attempt to shock people into action against the violent extremism represented by the Israeli occupation. More often than not, they are a form of hyperbole. That in itself is not any form of anti-Semitism, of course, but sometimes such comparisons are made by Israel politicians, usually inadvertently. Far-right — and thus mainstream in the Israeli context — politician and then deputy speaker of the Israeli parliament Moshe Feiglin, for example, made one such comparison indirectly in 2014.

During that year ‘s murderous Israeli war against the civilian population of Gaza, Feiglin called for the “conquest” of Gaza, the “annihilation” of all resistance fighters and for “the civilian population” to be expelled and “concentrated” in “tent encampments” in Egypt’s Sinai Desert. Of course, Nazi Germany did not invent concentration camps. That was done long before by the German and British Empires in South-West Africa (later Namibia) and South Africa respectively. And a concentration camp is not the same as the death camps where Nazi Germany systematically exterminated some 6 million Jews and millions of others.

Nonetheless, it’s hard not to see the spectre of fascism in Feiglin’s blood-curdling threats. That Israeli war in 2014 resulted in the killing of 2,200 Palestinians, including almost 500 children. Deliberately invoking concentration camps seems a special kind of threat; just like graffiti used frequently by the extremist “Jewish Defence League” in the occupied Palestinian city of Hebron— “Arabs to the gas chambers” — it seems calculated precisely to invoke the Nazis.

There’s also the well-documented (but under-reported) fact that Israeli weapons and training are being given to an actual Nazi militia in Ukraine. The Avoz Battalion is an extremely racist and anti-Semitic group being aided by Western nations as well as Israel.

While such far-right fascists are never going to join the Labour Party, ironically the party’s adoption of the IHRA “working definition” into its rule book could mean the threat of expulsion for anyone drawing attention to the fact that Israeli politicians themselves have made fascism-Nazi-Israel comparisons.

A similar chilling example was seen in a recent speech by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: “There is no place for the weak. The weak crumble, are slaughtered and are erased from history while the strong, for good or for ill, survive.” There was much talk online that his speech seemed eerily reminiscent of a pre-war rant by Adolph Hitler.

If the Israeli Prime Minister seems to be making Nazi comparisons almost inevitable, why on earth should the Labour Party be banning them for being beyond the bounds of acceptable free speech?

By Asa Winstanley
Source

Reflecting on Zionism during Ashura

Hussein Samawarchi

Zionists have always been controlling the politics of European strongholds through both, economy and terror. Where the first fails to twist arms, the second ensures success. They are, by far, the masters of this pair of dark practices.

The manipulation of key economic factors in a country can bring it to its knees; depending on how they (the Zionists) assault the system, they can have the general population indulge in bloody revolutions or become so preoccupied with making ends meet that citizens ignore politics and the wrongdoings of their government – bread is more precious than gold when your children cry of hunger.

When the government is the target, the highest official is assaulted in such a grotesque fashion that he ends up serving as an example to any other leader who dares contemplate, even remotely, challenging the will of Zionists.

The royal children of Tsar Nicholas II were shot and stabbed to death before mutilating their bodies when it would have been enough to just hang him alone. This was a strong and clear message to all the other royals who weren’t under the control of the Rothschilds, telling them that safeguarding their children and dynasty meant adhering to the politics of the deep “state of Zion”.

Zionists are ruthless. There is no known ethical philosophy that they follow. As individuals, they are born into different religions but are sworn to uphold the best interest of their organization – in their doctrine, religious teachings may and shall not restrict murder where deemed necessary to further the cause of global domination. Murder has been deemed necessary by them for centuries and in some instances, murder was on a mass scale. World War II is an example of that. 50 to 80 million humans perished directly and indirectly during that war. The reader can answer the question of how do we know it was the Zionists who orchestrated that war by researching which banks and mega-financial establishments had funded it and which excessively rich European royalty lent money to the Third Reich. A good starting point of the research would be looking into the historical financial ledgers of the United States’ Federal Reserve bank; the amount of transactions in favor of Nazi Germany is stunning. There is, however, a debate among historians as to which financial institution had funded Adolf Hitler more, some say The Bank of England was the bigger investor in the Third Reich’s agenda.

Contrary to the general belief that the most powerful mafia in the US is the Italian one, the real mafia muscle is the Jewish one. The film industry in Hollywood, being yet another powerful device of Zionism, brainwashed people into thinking that the Italians made up the mafia with movies like The God Father and shows like the Sopranos introducing iconic Italian mafia figures to the world.

The Jewish mafia is the one and only superpower within the United States. It is a multi-billion dollar operation that yields trillions for the Zionist movement. It is what President Kennedy was scheming to bring down. The fathers of the American mafia, the likes of Meyer Lansky and Gurrah Shapiro were not Sicilian; they were Jewish born Zionists who employed men with Italian names to be a front for their crimes so as to divert attention from them. They were the predecessors of those who killed JFK and ran the government by means of, again, economy and terror. They threatened those they could not bribe. Bankers, CEOs, Pentagon officials, judges, police chiefs, and even presidents are among the people under the Jewish mafia umbrella.

So, who is the father of Zionism? It is thought to be Theodor Herzl. They would like for the world to think so. They chose a well versed, highly educated, and charismatic young man to bring the centuries-old terrorist movement to light. Very few know that his speeches were inspired by the words of his masters during his preparation and that one of them was actually present in the first congress held in Basle in the year 1897 to give him the necessary confidence. His masters were the Rothschilds.

The father of Zionism has always been a Rothschild; at least during the past two centuries. They own the Jewish mafia and the thrones of many kings and queens. They own the generals of the armies of many countries. They own the secret societies that recruit future Zionist leaders. They own a Christian sect of over 300 million worshippers being programmed to bring down the Vatican from within.

They have systematically hijacked the message of Moses, battled the message of Jesus, and defamed the message of Mohamed. They used the star of David on warplanes that kill children, they spread slanderous stories about Mary of Nazareth, and they picture Islam to look like the opposite of what it really is.

Theodor Herzl was nothing but a spokesman for the Rothschilds. He was a higher-level member of their terrorist secret society on whose shoulders fell the responsibility of unifying and mobilizing their European lodges (the choice of the word LODGE was chosen very carefully here.)

Theodor Herzl spoke a lot and he meant what he said. He prophesized events that had been planned for at least two decades before the first World Zionist Congress took place in 1897. That very first congress was where the declaration of the rollout of their plan was made. They wanted a country of their own so as to, finally, operate under their own institutions. It was time for Zion to become a nation out in the open. Their movement had the chance to incubate within the Jewish society and so, most of the Zionists were Jews. It should be kept in mind though, as mentioned earlier, they don’t really believe in any religion. Should Moses and David come back to defy them, they would have them beheaded.

One should stop and think for a second. If those claiming Palestine to be the one true land of the Jews were so biblically set on it, why did they try to turn Uganda into their promised land? The truth is plain and simple. They occupied Palestine as a second and perhaps a third option. And, here comes the rarely spoken of revelation.

The Arab Jews, the ones who are originally Jewish in identity and belief were aware of the Zionist plans. As in any other religious group, they have the good and the bad. Some went ahead with the demonic plans in exchange for financial gains and promises of higher positions. Others remained true to their country and religion even though they had suffered for decades at the hands of the Ottomans. Those Jews comprehended the fact that if they allowed the Zionists to hijack the Jewish faith, that their religion would lose its authenticity. Those Jews were taken care of, one way or another.

Many of them were forced to flee the land of their ancestors. They traveled mostly to Europe and some to the United States. Those who stayed and resisted were killed without remorse. In their place, Zionist families began immigrating to Palestine under the pretense of making Aliyah. So as to give their gradual theft of Palestine some kind of credibility.

The Jews of Palestine were the victims of the Zionist terror just as much as the Muslims. It was all hinted in Herzl’s speeches. He said it clearly several times; namely that those Jews not going along with the Zionist plan will be made to do so. Just as he prophesized the Holocaust decades before it occurred. Herzl stressed the importance of such a catastrophic event so as to ensure and haste the plan of creating a Zionist country. He praised Anti-Semitism publicly and repeatedly because it was the catalyst for the creation of the terror nation that Zionists needed in order to formally house their gangs. They succeeded – the Mossad became the name of the union of their gangs.

It is obvious that, had the primary Zionist supporting superpower at the time not invaded Palestine, the Zionists would have created “Israel” in another geographical location. If Uganda was the first option, then any other spot on Earth would have been the second option. It just happened that Palestine was an easier bite to swallow. They would have misinterpreted the bible they hijacked again and perhaps even modified every copy to give them the false authenticity they needed to occupy the land they could put their hands on.

The ethnic cleansing of Jews in Europe and Palestine earlier in the previous century was done exclusively by Zionists. The ethnic cleansing of Palestinians now is also done exclusively by them. They are the terrorists of our planet.

The so-called state/entity of “Israel” is not the home of the Jews, it is the home of the Zionist global movement. Zionists are thugs. Human life is worth nothing to them. They feed on human misery.

In a world where it is becoming increasingly difficult to own a house and feed your family, they offer free houses and secured job opportunities to those who would agree to leave their countries on the expense of Palestinians. The lie has become so old that some Jews actually believe that Palestine is the “Promised Land”. They believe that Palestinian children are “goyim” and that killing one of them is equal to slaying a chicken for lunch.

For those readers who doubt that European Jews were actually killed by Zionists, they can look up the names of Oppenheimer and Warberg. For those who doubt that America was and still is run by the Zionist Jewish mob, dig into the history of George Bush the father who is a known Zionist and his mafia accomplices who, by the way, were the real assassins of President Kennedy. To centralize the research though, just read the transcripts of Herzl’s speeches.

Lenin, who gave the order to stab the royal children of the Russian Tsar and then shoot them right before cutting them to pieces, made his Bolshevik revolution declaration only five days after the Belfour one. Lenin had Jewish roots. A coincidence? The manner of the killing of the Romanov’s was done in a very similar way to the current killings done by ISIS who were created by Zionists. A bigger coincidence?

There is no defeating Zionism as a macro counter movement because it is what they have prepared themselves for. The wars of ‘48, ‘67, and ‘73 prove that. The only way to end their terror is by organizing micro resistance movements that rely on values unfathomable to Zionists and hence, values they cannot prepare against. Those values would become the essence of the defense strategy.

It is no secret that the Zionist organizational body comprises highly educated terrorists – they hold doctorate degrees in one thing or another from the most prestigious and exclusive universities. After all, terror includes, but is not limited to, physical violence. They have always studied others and have succeeded, to a great extent, in developing a system of intelligently guessing reactions. They have a whole science dedicated to forecasting human character patterns. This shows through their historical skill of reeling in target victims into situations where the outcome of the fight is ensured.

Hezbollah did to “Israel” what a coalition of huge armies failed to do on several occasions. The humble Lebanese resistance depended on being small in size and more importantly, depended on the kind of love that Zionist textbooks don’t teach and, hence, can’t possibly counter – the love of the grandson of the Prophet Mohamed. The grandson who knew that he would be martyred in his campaign against corruption and immorality but still pressed ahead. Imam Hussein understood that the future of humanity needed powerful examples of selfless sacrifice. The men of the Lebanese resistance recognize Imam Hussein’s victory over the earlier version of Zionism; they walked in his steps and turned the “Israeli” army’s infamous might into a joke.

Doubting Imam Hussein’s victory or arguing against it is a sign of Zionist mental conditioning. Imam Hussein’s legacy lives to our day and his message, written with his blood almost fourteen centuries ago, is still read and memorized by those fighting global Zionism. Victory is not living in shame; it is dying with pride in defense of righteousness: a concept keeping the successors of the masters of Herzl from global domination.

The martyrdom of Imam Hussein made him live in the hearts of hundreds of millions and with him, live the desire to stand up against all forms of injustice and terrorist organizations like Zionism.

Source: Al-Ahed News

The Yom Kippur Syndrome

September 18, 2018  /  Gilad Atzmon

2ebc1130441863.56238f81103cf.png

A message to Jews from Gilad Atzmon

When the Yom Kippur War broke out 45 years ago I was ten years old.  I recall a lot of fear all around me. Israel was my home and it was about to be wiped out. This is what I believed at the time, and this is what everyone around me repeated. We were all certainly caught unprepared.

My father was called up by the Air Force in the early hours of Yom Kippur (October 6th 1973). We didn’t hear from him for a few weeks. We didn’t know whether he was alive. In fact, we had good reason to believe he wasn’t. We were very worried.  For the adults around me, the first days of the war were a reminder of the Shoah. Israeli leaders, Golda Meir and Moshe Dayan as well as the top Israeli military command appeared perplexed and hesitant on TV. Their message was: ‘the future isn’t clear, we may even witness the destruction of the 3rd temple.’

Years later, when I became an avid reader of history and military texts, it became clear to me that the collective Shoah dread into which we immersed ourselves was a manifestation of Jewish pre traumatic stress disorder (Pre TSD). We were tormented by a phantasmic fear. Neither the Syrians nor the Egyptian armies had plans to ‘destroy Israel,’ wipe out the Jewish state or ‘throw the Jews into the sea’. Their military objectives were, in fact, very limited. Neither the Egyptians nor the Syrians wished to expand their military ground operation beyond a few miles into the Sinai and the Golan Heights. Both Arab armies were dependent on Soviet ground to air missiles that severely limited Israeli air superiority above the battlefield. The Soviet missile umbrella provided about 10 miles of anti air cover and the Arab armies had no intent to proceed beyond that ‘safe’ zone.

It took me years to grasp that Israel’s panic during the first few days of the war led to some serious military blunders (such as the IDF’s disastrous counter offensive on the 8th of October). This panic was fuelled by projection.  Believing that the Arabs were ‘about to throw the Jews into the sea’, Israeli generals and cabinet members reacted irrationally and wasted their limited reserve forces in a  counter offensive that failed and cost many Israeli lives.

But why did the Israelis believe that the Arabs were about to throw them into the sea? Why did they assume the Arab armies were murderous or possibly genocidal? Why did PM Golda Meir and Defense Minister Moshe Dayan believe that the ‘3rd temple’ was about to be annihilated?  Simple, because the Israelis were and still are driven by lethal inclinations towards their neighbours. It was the Israelis who literally pushed the Palestinians into the sea in 1948 into the sea. Israelis were panicking because they were projecting their own symptoms onto the Arabs. 

In ‘The Wandering Who’ I elaborate on projection in the context of Jewish ‘pre traumatic stress.’ The principle is simple. The more murderous and sinister one is, the more fearful one becomes of others. Humans tend to attribute their own reasoning and symptoms onto others. Accordingly, the more menacing one is, the more sinister one believes the other to be.

Israelis consistently attribute their own racist and barbarian symptoms onto the Palestinians. The possibility that a Palestinian or an Arab would be as merciless as the IDF causes real and total panic for the Israeli. The thought that the Palestinians, for instance, would want to displace a quarter of Israeli citizens and massacre Israelis as the IDF has done to Gaza numerous times must evoke terror amongst Israelis and for a good reason.

But this state of collective anxiety is not unique to Israelis; it is embedded in Jewish culture. Basically, Jews are tormented by anti Semitism because they assume that their own ‘goy hatred’ is echoed by ‘Jew hatred’ from their gentile neighbours. As Martin Heidegger noted in the 1930s, the Jews opposed in the Nazis the racism which they recognized from themselves. Heidegger wrote in his Black Notebooks: the Jewish people, with their talent for calculation, were so vehemently opposed to the Nazi’s racial theories because

“they themselves have lived according to the race principle for longest.”

In 1973 Israel believed that that the Arabs were out to eradicate them because this is exactly what the Israelis would have liked to do to the Arabs.

The Syndrome

Projection is just one aspect of the Yom Kippur war. I guess that, at least from a philosophical perspective, the most interesting aspect of the 73 War was that it marked a sudden switch from Judeo centric manic ‘hubris’ to melancholia, apathy and depression.

Following their outstanding 1967 military victory, the Israelis developed an arrogant disrespectful attitude toward Arabs and their military capability. Israeli intelligence predicted that it would take years for Arab armies to recover. The Israeli military didn’t believe that the Arab soldier had the ability to fight, let alone score a victory.

But on 6 October 1973, the Israelis had a devastating surprise. This time the Arab soldier was very different. The Israeli military strategy that was built on air superiority and fast ground maneuvers supported by tanks was crushed in only a few hours. The Egyptians and Syrians helped by new Soviet antitank and ground to air missiles managed to dismantle Israeli’s might. In the first days of the war Israel suffered heavy casualties and, as mentioned above, the Israeli leadership and high command were in a state of despair. This type of crisis wasn’t new to the Jews. It is consistently symptomatic of Jewish culture to be ‘surprised’ and overwhelmed by the Goyim’s fierce resilience.

The Israeli military fiasco at the first stage of the war was a repetition of a tragic syndrome that is as old as the Jews themselves. Jewish hubris that is driven by a strong sense of choseness and that repeatedly leads to horrific consequences is what I call ‘The Yom Kippur Syndrome.’  The syndrome can be defined as a repeated chain of events that drive Jewish societies towards an extreme irrational sense of pride, arrogance, self-confidence and blindness toward others and the tragedy that inevitably follows.

On October 6th, the Israelis realised that they had grossly underestimated their enemies.  But it wasn’t the first time such a mistake occurred in Jewish history. Every Jewish disaster is, to a certain extent, a repetition of the Yom Kippur Syndrome. In 1920s Berlin the Jewish elite boasted of its power. Some rich Jews were convinced that Germany and its capital were Jewish occupied territories. At the time, a few German Jews dominated banking and influenced Germany’s politics and media. In addition, the Frankfurt School as well as other Jewish school of thoughts were openly dedicated to the cultural uprooting of Germans, all in the name of, ‘progress,’ ‘working class politics,’ phenomenology and cultural Marxism. Then, almost from nowhere, as far as German Jews were concerned, a tidal wave of resentment appeared. And the rest is known.

But was there really a sudden shift in German consciousness? Should German ‘anti Semitism’ have come as a surprise? Not at all. All necessary signs had been present for some time. In fact, Early Zionists such as Herzl and Nordau correctly predicted the inevitable rise of European anti Jewish sentiments. But Jewish hubris prevented Berlin’s Jewish elite from evaluating the growing opposition around them. The Yom Kippur Syndrome.

The same could be said of the Jewish Lobby, AIPAC, Friends of Israel clubs in Britain, the BOD, the three British Jewish papers that, in the name of British Jewry, declared war on Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party.  These Jewish lobbies and institutions that relentlessly seek influence over Western foreign affairs and the Labour Party in particular: do they grasp the level of resentment and the potential disaster they are bringing on their fellow Jews?

Can the Jew recover from the Yom Kippur Syndrome? Can the Jew somehow detect resentment as it grows and amend his or her ways?  All it takes is drifting away from choseness. But once stripped of choseness what is left of the Jew or for the Jew?

This may be the most devastating question and the true meaning of the existential Yom Kippur Syndrome; there is no Jewish collective ideological escape for the Jew. Zionism failed to provide the goods and the so called ‘anti Zionists’ have done little other than form their own racially exclusive enclaves of chosenness within the so called ‘Left over.’

The only escape route from the Yom Kippur Syndrome is personal and individual. Try leaving the tribe late in the night, crawl under the ghetto fence, dig a tunnel under the ‘separation wall’ if necessary and then once on land of the free, proceed quietly and modestly towards the humane and the universal.

Good luck

America is today’s Nazi Germany

It’s not against Jews this time; it’s against, especially, Houthis.

The U.S. and its allies — in this case mainly the Saud family who own Saudi Arabia — are systematically blocking food from reaching tens of millions of people, Houthis, who live in Yemen and are surrounded by the U.S. alliance’s engines of death. The U.S. alliance’s goal is to slaughter them all. The Sauds want the land — not the people.

The U.N. has been brought into this scheme of mass-slaughter. The responsible U.N. Agency is the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Its leadership is mainly Mark Lowcock, who keeps silent about the genocide, except for rare occasions in which he says that if something is not done, then more tragedy will somehow happen in Yemen — in other words, platitudes, in the face of what might turn out to be the biggest genocide since World War II. (And most of Hitler’s slaughtering killed even more non-Jews than Jews, because the vast majority of people everywhere didn’t want to be ruled by him and resisted his rule. The U.S. aristocracy and its allies haven’t yet matched what Germany did in that time, but they’ll surpass it if they attack Russia as Hitler did — which could happen.)

Lowcock’s official web-page says about him that “Mr. Mark Lowcock of the United Kingdom … led the United Kingdom’s humanitarian response to conflicts in Iraq, Libya and Syria, and to natural disasters in Nepal and the Philippines” or that he was a functionary of the British aristocracy during its invasion of Iraq along with the aristocracy of the United States — the billionaires and their international corporations and the ‘non-profits’ which are actually these aristocrats’ main propaganda-mills and yet are tax-exempt. With Lowcock’s “designation as a Qualified Accountant, Mr. Lowcock brings a personal and analytical approach to humanitarian challenges.” He doesn’t count the corpses; he counts the money. That’s “Humanitarian,” in this New Nazism.

OCHA’s “Advocacy” banner says:

OCHA’s public and private advocacy raises awareness of forgotten crises, promotes respect for international humanitarian law (IHL), brings the voices of crisis-affected people to the forefront, and helps people obtain access to humanitarian assistance.

OCHA’s “Mid-Year 2018” report on “People in need: now and this time last year” shows, for 2018, in Yemen, “22.2 M” as “People In Need” and “13.1 M” as “People to Receive Aid.” That’s by far the worst shown for any country in the world. The second-worst is a tie between Syria and “DRC” or Democratic Republic of Congo, both at “13.1 M” “People In Need,” and around 11 million as “People to Receive Aid.” Of course, the invasion/occupation of Syria is likewise mainly a U.S. and Saud operation, and there are already millions of refugees from that — many of them now in Europe and sparking the rise there of far-right parties.

OCHA’s “Current Emergencies” report highlights two “Emergencies,” Syria and Yemen — in both of which the main perpetrators just happen to be the Sauds and the Americans. The latest “Yemen” report shows that the biggest donors to the Yemen fund are U.S. and Germany, each at around three million dollars. The U.S. Government has a much better PR operation than the Nazi German Government did, but that doesn’t reduce the U.S. Government’s guilt. (Of course, the U.S. Government is above the law, anyway, and has nothing but contempt for international law, just like Hitler did.)

OCHA’s “Yemen Humanitarian Update Covering 27 August – 6 September 2018 | Issue 26” reports as the key issue “DEPRECIATION OF THE YEMENI RIAL” and reports that “the result of the depreciation is likely to be that an additional 3.5 million people will become food insecure, adding to the existing caseload of 8.4 million people who need emergency food assistance, and over 2 million people are likely to be at heightened risk of famine.” Supposedly, the problem is produce3d by that “depreciation” and not by the Saud-U.S. campaign to starve to death as many millions of Houthis as possible.

It says that:

Some shops and businesses have remained closed in affected areas. As of 6 September, protests continue to restrict the movement of vehicles. Who [WHO, the World Health Organization] delivered a shipment of 50,000 rapid diagnostic tests for cholera and 21 trauma kits to respond to mass causalities to Aden from Djibouti on 4 September. Following the shelling that hit a truck contracted by a humanitarian organisation in Al Tuhaytah on 29 August 2018, convoys to Khawkhah from Aden have been temporarily halted. Stocks previously dispatched remain at the three delivery points in Khawkhah as distribution has been suspended by the NGO partner on the ground. On 2 September, trucks mobilised by the Logistics Cluster to collect supplies from Aden and deliver them to Al Khawkhah were unable to reach Khawkhah warehouses delaying the movement of resupplies to the western coast.

That’s a watered-down description of the reality.

As the Iranian site, kayhan.ir/en had headlined on May 25th, “UN Urges Imports Into Yemen to Avoid Starvation”, and they reported that, “The United Nations aid chief has called on the Saudi-led coalition to loosen restrictions on imports of food and fuel through commercial ports into the war-wracked country, warning that millions more could face starvation. ‘I am particularly concerned about the recent decline of commercial food imports through the Red Sea ports. Pressure on the currency and a liquidity crisis in the Yemeni banking system make imports less viable for traders,’ Mark Lowcock, UN emergency relief coordinator, said in a statement.”

It’s all cover-up of the reality. Yemen’s currency isn’t the problem here; the invaders of Yemen are.

On 11 September 2018, Yemen Press bannered “THE TERRIBLE HUMAN COST OF THE WAR ON YEMEN” and reported the anodyne statements from U.N. officials, and, then stated:

Yemeni Human Rights Minister Alia al-Shaabi strongly condemned the brutal assault of [meaning “by”] Riyadh [Saudi Arabia] and its allies on a school children’s bus, stating that the Saudi-led coalition sees Yemeni women and children as strategic targets.

“The Saudi aggressors have made the Yemeni people, children, old men and women as military targets,” she said, adding that “we welcome the condemnations of [meaning “from”] international organizations and the United Nations for the crime and call for the formation of an impartial and independent international commission of inquiry”. …

Besides the US, the UK and France have also been providing weapons and intelligence to Saudi Arabia and the UAE over the course of the unprovoked war.

The U.S. Government front, “International Rescue Committee” is fundraising on this invasion, an invasion that’s so enormously profitable for Lockheed Martin and other U.S. ‘defense’ contractors. The IRC headlines “Make a donation”, and their appeal says:

In war-torn Yemen, nearly 21 million need humanitarian aid, a deadly famine is looming, and cholera remains a threat.

Please make a tax-deductible donation today to support the IRC. We are on the ground saving children and families from malnutrition and life-threatening diseases. We are providing clean water, medicine, nutrition services and other urgent aid to as many people as possible. Your gift will help us as we work to save lives in Yemen and in countries around the world.

As the investigative historian Eric Thomas Chester had reported in 1995 in his ground-breaking exposé, Covert Network: Progressives, the International Rescue Committee and the CIA, the IRC “evolved from a small organization of committed activists to a global operation functioning as one link in the CIA’s covert network.” The CIA is, of course, itself controlled by the same network of billionaires who own controlling shares in firms such as General Dynamics, Boeing, United Technologies, and Lockheed Martin, which make billions off of such invasions. So: donations to that ‘non-profit’ are actually doing the PR work for catastrophes that America’s aristocracy and its allied aristocracies — in this case especially the Sauds — perpetrate. Not only do the taxpayers fund these operations for the aristocracy, but the public are subjected to a constant barrage of PR from them, much of which propaganda is itself tax-deductible and the ‘charities’ are tax-write-offs for the billionaires who actually control them. The public, in the invading countries, pay the financial tab for not only the ‘defense’ operations (the foreign invasions), but they pay for the PR that convinces themselves that ‘their’ government cares about ‘doing good’ in and to foreign lands — their given aristocracy’s actual targets against which those weapons are used, not in and to the foreign markets (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc.) to which those weapons are sold. The publics are just pawns — except in the lands that constitute the targets, such as Yemen, and Syria, and Libya, and Iraq, and Afghanistan, and …

It’s just a way to do business. It’s the New Nazism.

An especially insightful reader-comment to my September 14th article, “U.S. Protects Al Qaeda in Syria, Proven” at The Saker, observed:

It is instructive that the CIA learned this tactic of manipulating and deploying Islamic fundamentalist terrorists against progressive states from the Nazis who initiated this tactic against the Soviets in World War Two. An unbroken chain of fascist terrorism which tells us the true nature of the western power structure.

By “this tactic of manipulating and deploying Islamic fundamentalist terrorists against progressive states from the Nazis who initiated this tactic against the Soviets in World War Two,” I think especially of the CIA’s use of such organizations as the Social Nationalist Party of Ukraine, in the Obama State Department’s coup that in February 2014 replaced the democratically elected Government of Ukraine by Obama’s chosen junta of racist anti-Russian fascists. The pro-Hitler Ukrainian nationalists in World War II were Christian equivalents to today’s jihadists. In this view, Hitler’s Nazis were like today’s Al Qaeda, and extremist conservatives everywhere are the boots-on-the-ground local proxy forces for the American imperial corporate state and its allies. The U.S. uses extremist conservatives of any type. Since WW II, America has been flipped, to being today’s nazi (racist-fascist) empire. The ruling American aristocracy’s overriding objective is to continue the U.S. dollar being the dominant global currency. They are obsessed by money and power, and have contempt for the public everywhere.

By Eric Zuesse
Source

Netanyahu/Hitler “The weak crumble, are slaughtered and are erased from history while the strong, for good or for ill, survive”

In 1923, Adolf Hitler talked about the “eternal victory of the strong over the weak.” In 2018, Israeli PM Netanyahu has said something eerily similar.

Israel PM Echoes Hitler: The Weak Are Slaughtered, Erased From History

by
Fatimah Mazhar

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is notorious for making over-the-top, often racist, and sometimes, downright false statements.

However, during a ceremony at the nuclear research facility in Dimona, he issued a pointed warning to Iran – but his choice of words was rather crude, for a number of reasons.

“The weak crumble, are slaughtered and are erased from history while the strong, for good or for ill, survive,” Netanyahu stated. “The strong are respected, and alliances are made with the strong, and in the end peace is made with the strong.”

For starters, the suggestion that “the weak” should be erased from history is a little disturbing coming from a leader of a country, especially one that possesses nuclear weapons.

Secondly, a historical figure said something similar in 1923:

“The whole of nature is a mighty struggle between strength and weakness, an eternal victory of the strong over the weak.”

These words were uttered by Adolf Hitler, the genocidal maniac who slaughtered nearly six million Jews during the Second World War, during a speech in Munich, Germany.

 

%d bloggers like this: