Exactly who is it that is in ‘Denial’?

February 16, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

A somewhat biased film review

By Gilad Atzmon

In her book Denying the Holocaust (1993), Deborah Lipstadt confessed that it was David Irving’s considerable reputation as an historian that made him “one of the most dangerous spokespersons for Holocaust denial.” “Familiar with historical evidence,” she wrote, “he bends it until it conforms with his ideological leanings and political agenda.” Irving responded by claiming that Lipstadt’s words were libellous and filed a legal case against her and her publisher Penguin Books.

Was Irving brave or naïve in putting the Holocaust on trial? Probably both. Back in 1996, was Irving a hero or just grossly miscalculating in believing he stood a chance in taking on the Holocaust, still the most popular Jewish religion? Again, probably both.

The other day, I watched Mick Jackson’s ‘Denial’. The film tells the story of Irving’s 2000 defeat in court – a disaster he voluntarily brought upon himself and indeed, Irving has clearly made some mistakes in his life. Yet, in 2017 it is impossible to deny that, back in 2000, Irving was well ahead of most of us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYcx43AmAyY

Watching the film in the aftermath of Brexit, the Trump victory and the surge of Right Wing consciousness in the West in general, it is clear that Irving, undoubtedly one of the greatest living biographer of Hitler, understood human nature better than the British judge, Lipstadt’s legal team, the BBC and probably the rest of us altogether.

Back in 2000, the Holocaust narrative was as solid as a rock. The Jews were perceived as the ultimate victims and their plight at the time of World War II was unquestionable.  No one dared ask how is it is possible that, three years after the liberation of Auschwitz, the newly-born Jewish state ethnically cleansed Palestine of its indigenous population? At the time of the trial, no one dared ask why is the Jewish past just a chain of holocausts – that is, no one except David Irving (and a few others).

At the time of the trial, I read an interview with David Irving that opened my eyes to the idea that history is a revisionist adventure, an attempt to narrate the past as we move along. I realised then that the past is subject to changes. It morphs along with humanity.

In that interview, Irving was quoted as‘ blaming the victims.’

“If I were a Jew,” he said, “I would ask myself why it always happens to us?”

At the time, I was a still Jew but I took up Irving’s challenge. I looked in the mirror and didn’t like what I saw so I decided to leave the tribe and I stopped being a Jew.

But Irving is no longer a lone voice. Two weeks ago, on Holocaust Memorial Day, it was actually the American president himself who managed to universalize the Holocaust by omitting to mention the Jews or their shoah. As we Westerns obliterate country after country with our immoral interventionism, the Holocaust is no longer a Jews-only domain and all the time more and more people grasp that it is actually Israel and its affiliated Jewish lobbies that are pushing us into more and more unnecessary global conflicts.

‘Denial’ was made to sustain a ‘progressive’ vision of the past. In this progressive but misguided universe, people ‘move forward’ but their past remains fixed, often sacred and always untouched. Nationalists, on the other hand, often see the past as a dynamic, vibrant reality. For them, nostalgia, is the way forward.

But some Jews are tormented by this nostalgia. They want their own past to be compartmentalized and sealed, otherwise, they are fearful that some people may decide to examine Jewish history in the light of Israeli crimes.

In the film, Irving is an old style British gent who sticks to his guns and refuses to change his narrative just to fit in with any notions of correctness. Irving states what he believes in and stands firmly behind it.

For Irving, one of the most damaging pieces of evidenced presented to the court was a little ditty he wrote to his daughter when she was just a few months old, and conceived by the court as the ultimate in crude misanthropy.

 

“I am a Baby Aryan,

Not Jewish or Sectarian.

I have no plans to marry-an

Ape or Rastafarian.”

 

On the day of the verdict, Irving visited the BBC Newsnight studio to be grilled by Jeremy Paxman who read the little ditty to Irving.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Anx4ZRgpQbY&t=23m7s

“What’s racist about that?” Irving wondered. “You are not being serious,” was Paxman’s  reply. Paxman, one of Britain’s best TV journalists, was, like the rest of us, trained to react to soundbites. “Aryan is a racial categorisation” he insisted.

Back in 2000, Paxman probably failed to see that,

if Jews are entitled to identify politically as a race, as a biology or as set of cultural symptoms then Whites, Muslims and everyone else must surely be entitled to do the same.

Back in 2000, Irving understood this potential Identitarian shift. Sixteen years later, Donald Trump and Nigel Farage translated this Identitarian shift into a victory. The Clintons, the Soros’ and the Deborah Lipstadts of this world are still struggling to make sense of it.

‘Denial’, is actually a film about righteousness, exceptionalism and victimhood.  It is about the condition of being consumed by self-love, that blind belief that justice is always on your side, that you are the eternal victim and the other, namely the ‘Goy’ is always the murderous aggressor.

But this type of ‘denial’ can be dealt with easily and here is just one example: The Jewish press in Britain  complains constantly that antisemitism is soaring. The more funds the British government dedicates to fighting antisemitsm, the more antisemitic incidents are recorded. I guess the time is ripe for Jews to listen to David Irving and ask themselves why?

If Jews want anti-Semitism to come to an end once and for all, all they need do is to self-reflect. However, my personal experience suggests that once you do that, you may stop being a Jew.

Note: It is worth mentioning that, since the 2000 trial, Irving is on record on numerous occasions as revising his views on the Holocaust and on the destruction of European Jews. Certainly, as he moves along, David Irving at least is able to revise the past.

 

The more Juif becomes Theresa, the more antisemitic becomes Britain.

February 02, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

Today, the Jewish Chronicle (JC) reported that the number of antisemitic incidents in Britain in 2016 were the highest on record. The CST’s statistics show that there were 1,309 incidents of ‘Jew hatred’ last year — a 36 per cent increase on the previous 12 months.

Of course, the CST is not a reliable source and its‘antisemitism figures’ have been debunked numerous times before. However, if these statistics are accurate, they suggest only that the more the British government invests in fighting anti-Semitism…. the more antisemitic Britain becomes.

This is easy enough to explain. The fight against antisemitism is now a profitable industry.  Every day, we learn of some new Jewish organisation dedicated to fighting antisemitism and to hunt down the Jew haters, and all at the expense of the British tax payer*.

And, as always in the case of Israel and Zionism, these organisation are financially sustained by the very Jewish hatred they seek to oppose. And, when there is no Jew hatred to be found, they will either induce, or even invent some.

For instance, we learned in the last few weeks that Stephen Silverman of the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) launched a war against popular cult figure David Icke. The same Stephen Silverman who launched this war also launched a war against musician Alison Chabloz for expressing her thoughts on Holocaust religion by means of a cabaret performance.

These ugly campaigns against British truth-seekers are unlikely to make UK Jewry popular. Quite the opposite. Both these campaigns immediately backfired – Alison’s work went viral and the campaign against Icke proved only that Icke’s investigation into Rothschild Zionism is not only legitimate, it is actually essential.  These campaigns clearly are not going to silence Icke or Chabloz but they will confirm  that Jewish institutions here in Britain do not subscribe to the notion of freedom of thought and elementary human rights.

Dave Rich, Deputy Director of Communications at the CST told the JC: “I think there is an overall climate rather than one specific thing that is responsible for the rise in (antisemitic) incidents.”

Rich is wrong. There is one crucial factor in the rise in opposition to Jews and their politics: Jewish power has lost all its subtlety. It is now crude and vulgar and manifested right out in the open: whether it is the campaign against Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour party or theIsraeli embassy crudely interfering with British party politics or the constant hunting of critics of Israel or even the impunity of suspected child molester Lord Janner – more and more Brits are now reading between the lines. They have had enough.

If the British government is really concerned about antisemitism, it could eliminate it in no time at all. It must immediately strip Jewish organisations of any special treatment and funds and  must stop spending millions on the CST and all the other Jews-only paramilitary organisations operating in the kingdom.

We all agree that racism is a bad thing, so let’s fight it in a universal manner rather than following the whims of one particular tribe.

* Theresa May vowed recently to allocate more than 13.4 million pounds annually to Jewish security matters.

Israeli Police Prepare for the Coming of the ‘Messiah’

 photo roninetanh_zpsgnuw9zfs.jpg

By Richard Edmondson

In the photo above we see Israeli Police Commissioner Roni Alsheikh along with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It is reported that Alsheikh is anticipating the coming of the Jewish messiah in the not-terribly-distant future and that he and his police forces are preparing for large crowds expected to converge upon the Jewish state when the glorious arrival takes place.

“When the Messiah comes, everyone will want to [approach] him so it will get very crowded,” he said. “That will be a time when we will have to be very strong in respecting our fellow.”

The police commissioner added: “Soon, God willing, we will need to start preparing for the security operation necessary upon the arrival of the Messiah.”

The story was initially reported January 2 by the Jewish website Breaking Israel News, (H/T Ariadna) and has since been picked up on a number of Christian Zionist sites, including the obnoxious World Net Daily (the WND is not exclusively Christian Zionist, but it does take that slant in a number of its articles).

“No one knows the day or the hour, but the Israeli police seem to believe the Messiah is coming soon,” the WND titillates in an article published January 8.

So are the Israelis planning to stage an “event” of some sort? Will the top rabbis in Israel hold a press conference at some point and designate a hired actor as the “messiah”?

asandrabbis

Israeli Police Commissioner Roni Alsheikh is shown here along with Rabbi Shmuel Rabinovich (immediately to Alsheikh’s left), who holds the official title of “Rabbi of the Western Wall,” and Israeli Chief Rabbi Itzhak Yosef (to Rabinovich’s left). The occasion for the group photo, taken on December 28, 2016, was the lighting of a large menorah at the Western Wall in observance of Hanukkah.

Or alternately–and let your imagination wander here–is a “messiah” of one description or another on the horizon?  Will it be a real messiah, a false messiah, or, possibly, an “antichrist”…or maybe even the antichrist?

Perhaps worth mentioning is that a long-standing tradition in Church history holds that the antichrist will be a Jew. This was discussed in a treatise entitled “Against Heresies,” written by one of the early Church fathers, Irenaeus, who served as bishop of Lyons in the latter part of the second century. And in Irenaeus’ view, not only would the antichrist be a Jew, but he would be a Jew specifically from the tribe of Dan:

[Let them learn] to acknowledge that he who shall come claiming the kingdom for himself, and shall terrify those men of whom we have been speaking, having a name containing the aforesaid number [666], is truly the abomination of desolation. This, too, the apostle [Paul] affirms: “When they shall say, Peace and safety, then sudden destruction shall come upon them.” And Jeremiah does not merely point out his sudden coming, but he even indicates the tribe from which he shall come, where he says, “We shall hear the voice of his swift horses from Dan; the whole earth shall be moved by the voice of the neighing of his galloping horses: he shall also come and devour the earth, and the fulness thereof, the city also, and they that dwell therein.” This, too, is the reason that this tribe is not reckoned in the Apocalypse along with those which are saved.

In the above, Irenaeus mentions three scriptural passages—I Thessalonians 5:3, Jeremiah 8:16, and Revelation 7:5-8. The first passage, from Thessalonians, does not specifically point to Dan, however, the latter two do. The passage from Revelation lists the tribes of Israel which would have the “seal of God” on their foreheads at the end of days. Curiously, Dan is omitted from the list.

The passage from Jeremiah 8, though singling out Dan in particular, also discusses the sins of the Israelite nation as a whole. For instance, verses 9-12 read as follows:

The wise shall be put to shame, they shall be dismayed and taken; since they have rejected the word of the Lord, what wisdom is in them?  Therefore I will give their wives to others and their fields to conquerors, because from the least to the greatest everyone is greedy for unjust gain; from prophet to priest everyone deals falsely. They have treated the wound of my people carelessly, saying, “Peace, peace,” when there is no peace.  They acted shamefully, they committed abomination; yet they were not at all ashamed, they did not know how to blush. Therefore they shall fall among those who fall; at the time when I punish them, they shall be overthrown, says the Lord.

Dan is fingered in other biblical passages as well. Let’s have a look at Genesis 49:1, 16-17:

And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, ‘Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days…Dan shall judge his people, as one of the tribes of Israel. Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward.

I often wonder why Christian Zionists don’t take biblical passages like these into consideration. In their blind support for Israel, Christian Zionists seem to have utterly cast aside the entire body of Jesus’ teachings. What happened to love? Where is compassion for “the least of these”? How is it possible, if you’re a Christian, to declare your allegiance to a country like Israel and to those “greedy for unjust gain” who so lavishly support it?

How also is it possible the human mind cannot reflect upon the sacking and burning of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Jewish temple in 70 AD…and wonder if it might not have been God’s punishment, God’s retribution, for the event which occurred in that very same city a mere 40 years earlier, an event which is observed today on the Christian calendar as “Good Friday”? But of course we live in a world of strictly-enforced political correctness, wherein pointing out things like this can get you branded an “anti-Semite” with significant repercussions. The early Church fathers were under no such constraints.

Another such father, though one who came along some 200 years after Irenaeus, was John Chrysostom, archbishop of Constantinople. In a homily entitled “Adversus Judaeos,” John referred to Jews as “the enemies of the truth,” and he warned especially against “Judaizers” within the Christian Church, i.e. those Christians with a predilection for observing Jewish festivals, attending synagogue services, etc. The views of such people were “an illness which has become implanted in the body of the Church,” he said, and he urged the members of his diocese, “When you observe someone Judaizing, take hold of him, show him what he is doing, so that you may not yourself be an accessory to the risk he runs.”

John Chrysostom would today be viewed as an “anti-Semite,” though as we look around at the current state of Christianity in the West, one might surmise it’s a pity the Church did not pay closer heed to some of his warnings.

All of this is not to say that what may be (or may not be) about to show up in Israel will be the antichrist or anything other than a hired actor. Certainly we should not dismiss the Zionist state’s proclivities for “waging war by way of deception.” Worth noting also is that there is very strong support in Israel now, including from Knessett members, to build a new Jewish Temple, and you can imagine how the two issues–the arrival of the “messiah” and the rebuilding of the Temple–would tie in and lend a synergistic effect to each other. Also, it doesn’t take much imagination to figure out as well what the impact upon, say, the BDS movement might be if millions of Christians around the world were to become convinced that their messiah had arrived.

“Religious Jews are more excited about Messiah’s return than Christians are,” says Jan Markell, a Christian Zionist author quoted in the WND story.

“Muslims are more anticipatory about their Mahdi’s return than are Christians about Jesus’s return,” she adds. “This shows the deplorable state of the church today that is ‘majoring in minors.’ They have their finance seminars and marriage conferences but have shoved the idea of the Lord’s imminent return not just to the back burner, perhaps to the back yard.”

That of course could change were the mass media to start hinting that something “strange” was happening in Israel, with thousands of people, including Christian Zionists like Markell, crowding excitedly around a new religious figure on the scene. Imagine CNN covering the story, or the treatment it might get from news anchors like Jake Tapper. Lots of grist for the fake news mill.

A bit more here from the WND story:

As a “pre-Tribulation” believer, Markell believes the rapture could occur at any moment. She calls for both increased attention by Christians to the subject of the end times and dedication to the Jewish state of Israel.

“In my lifetime, the biggest change in the church is the switch of church loyalty from Israel to the Palestinians,” Markell said. “This is called ‘Christian Palestinianism.’ Before the state of Israel was born in 1948, most evangelical churches embraced ‘Christian Zionism.’ They were loyal to the state of Israel even before it was formed.

“Today the religious left and others have swung support away from Israel to an ‘invented people,’ the Palestinians. Yasser Arafat was a superb salesman and sold the world on the idea that the Palestinians had their land stolen. Arafat was an Egyptian and there was no Palestinian people. Yet today much of the world believes the Jews live in ‘occupied territory’ rather than God-given land. This is the biggest change in my lifetime. I cannot believe what I am seeing.

“If the church were functioning properly, this confusion would never have happened, but the church shredded maps of Israel 25 years ago when it decided to be politically correct rather than biblically correct.”

I’m not sure what maps Markell is referring to, but I doubt she means these:

 photo disappearingpalesitine_zpsekdyuzb6.jpg

It would be enormously helpful to modern day Christians if they understood that Jewish antipathy to Christianity did not arise as a result of the “anti-Semitism” of church fathers like John Chrysostom, and that it was present in Christianity’s earliest, most formative years, before the gospels were even written. A few passages from the Book of Acts help to underscore this. One of them is Acts 18:12:

While Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews made a united attack on Paul and brought him into court. “This man,” they charged, “is persuading people to worship God in ways contrary to the law.”

Another is Acts 20:18-19:

When they arrived, he said to them: “You know how I lived the whole time I was with you from the first day I came into the province of Asia. I served the Lord with great humility and with tears, although I was severely tested by the plots of the Jews.”

Acts 21:30-32:

The whole city was aroused, and people came running from all directions. Seizing Paul, they dragged him from the temple, and immediately the gates were shut. While they were trying to kill him, news reached the commander of the Roman troops that the whole city of Jerusalem was in an uproar. He at once took some officers and soldiers and ran down to the crowd. When the rioters saw the commanders and soldiers, they stopped beating Paul.

Acts 22:21-22:

Then the Lord said to me, “Go, I will send you far away to the Gentiles.

The crowd listened to Paul until he said this. Then they raised their voices and shouted, “Rid the earth of him! He’s not fit to live!”

Acts 23:12-14:

The next morning the Jews formed a conspiracy and bound themselves with an oath not to eat or drink until they had killed Paul. More than forty men were involved in this plot. They went to the chief priests and elders and said, “We have taken a solemn oath not to eat anything until we have killed Paul.”

In the passages above, the one in Acts 18 takes place in Corinth; Acts 20 is a reference to events in the province of Asia Minor (the conversation specifically takes place in the coastal town of Miletus); the final three passages, in Acts 21-23, take place in Jerusalem. Thus it would appear that just about everywhere Paul went he encountered Jews who were hostile to him and his message. Perhaps not surprisingly then do we hear Jesus say, in John 15:18, “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first.” And yet Christians today blame themselves for the rift that occurred between Christianity and Judaism and hold themselves responsible for “Christian anti-Semitism.”

Hatred for Christ–it does seem to peer “through a glass darkly” from time to time as we look about at the world these days–which brings us in a roundabout manner back to the topic of an antichrist/messiah/hired actor. Whatever it is the Israeli police commissioner may be anticipating, clearly there exists at least the potential for deception. Recently I published an article entitled Reality Reversal wherein I discussed the mainstream media’s tendency to invert reality into its mirror opposite. This it does in reporting on the Palestine-Israel conflict, as well as in a number of other areas–the war on Syria, for instance, or the mendacious inventions of “Russian aggression” churned out to no end. The article discusses in particular the comments of Caroline Glick, an editor at the Jerusalem post, who in a speech portrayed Palestinians as racists while casting Talmudic Jewish settlers as the embodiment of liberal tolerance. It also talks about the book, The Jewish Century, by Yuri Slezkine, who describes Jews as “Mercurian,” a reference to the Roman god Mercury who was thought of as the god of financial gain and whose attributes included trickery and eloquence. Mercury was also deemed the patron of thieves and travelers, and it’s interesting that Slezkine would advance a theory endowing Jews with the “Mercurian” denominator, for in doing so he seems to be at least tacitly admitting that anti-Semitism is given rise to by certain behaviors and practices of Jews–something we don’t commonly see from Jewish writers.

Maybe at some point the Palestine-Israel conflict will be resolved. But the world has been trying to do that for close onto 70 years–and with people now relentlessly devoting themselves to standing reality on its head, the prospects for the future don’t look too good. In any event, we must become “watchers” and be alert, and in so doing dedicate ourselves to following Christ–at all times and to the best of our ability. Only by following Him do we gradually learn to see through all of the deceptions.

Hasbara is Desperate to stop David Icke (video)

January 30, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

But with Goldman Sachs and Soros destroying one country after another, they do not stand a chance. By now we are all Palestinians.  David Icke knows it and he is not alone!!!

The following pathetic video was produced by the Campaign Against Antisemitism, an Israeli Hasbara unit operating in Britain. This video won’t hurt David Icke. Instead, it proves once again that Jewish power is the ability to silence discussion on Jewish power.  This power is proving less effective by the day.

Related

Lobby: Trump’s ‘America First’ slogan is antisemitic!

Posted on

doublespeak[1]Pro-Israel lobby and mainstream media have condemned US president Donald Trump for using America First slogan. For example, MSNBC’s Rachel Anne Maddow (Jewish) emotionally proclaimed Trump’s “America’s First” slogan has “very dark echoes in American history.” ABC’s Terry Moran said: “It carries with it overtones from the 1930s when an antisemitic movement saying, ‘We don’t want to get involved in Europe’s war. It’s the Jews fault in Germany!‘”

On April 28, 2016, Jonathan Greenblatt, the top gun at Israel lobby ADL, asked candidate Donald Trump to stop using the ‘America First’ as it had antisemitic tone. “It’s used by pro-Nazi prominent Americans before the Pearl Harbor – seeking to keep America out of WWII.” It sounds like Greenblatt agrees with William Anderson that Jews did force America into WWII.

The AIPAC requires all American politicians to sign an Israel loyalty pledge to survive as country’s lawmaker (watch video below). On March 29, 2016, Israel’s newspaper Ha’aretz reported that Israel’s interior ministry asked Shuki Weiss, producer of British rock star Sir Elton John (gay) to sign declaration of loyalty to Israel on behalf of John in order to perform in Israel.

According to Jewish Wall Street Journal, Donald Trump’s inauguration speech in which he attacked Muslims, was written by two of Trump’s senior pro-Israel advisers, Stephen Bannon (Catholic), and Stephen Miller (Jewish). So if they inserted the so-called ‘America First’ – it confirms that the slogan is not antisemitic.

Donald Trump while signing presidential order to ban visas to Muslims from seven countries – did not bann Israeli Jews entering the US, who were behind the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks or even stripping American Jews of their Israel dual citizenship.

‘America First’ slogan reminds the Organized Jewry of president Andrew Jackson (1829-37) who waged crusade against Jewish bankers.

Instead of agitating for war, the Jewish groups in this country should be opposing it in every possible way for they will be among the first to feel its consequences. Tolerance is a virtue that depends upon peace and strength. History shows that it cannot survive war and devastations. A few far-sighted Jewish people realize this and stand opposed to intervention. But the majority still do not. Their greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio and our government,” Charles Linderbergh said in a speech on September 11, 1941.

David Icke and the meaning of Jewish power.

January 24, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

Jewish power is the power to suppress discussion on Jewish power.

Seemingly this power is waning these days.

Jewish media outlets have reported today that campaigners are calling for a Manchester venue to be fined after it hosted “notorious anti-Semite” David Icke in front of a sold-out crowd this weekend.

But what is it that makes Icke into a “notorious anti-Semite?”

He reckons that Jews control the world and started WWI. Icke also believes that Jews dominated the Versailles Peace Conference and created the circumstances which made the Second World War inevitable.

It is rather obvious to every reasonable human being that in a free society, Icke is entitled to his thoughts and should be free to share them with the rest of us.

Apparently, Stephen Silverman, the director of Campaign against Anti-Semitism (CAA) doesn’t agree at all. Jewish history, he believes, can’t be discussed freely. But can you think of any other people who attempt to block the rest of us from looking into their past? Can Muslims, for instance,  stop us from looking into their history? As things stand, even the British ruling class doesn’t attempt to prevent us from looking into the crimes of British imperialism.

In Britain, some Jewish organisations attempt to stifle the discussion of the Jewish past.  They probably know that they have a lot to hide. The truth of the matter is that Jews are often ashamed of their history. Early Zionism was, in fact, a promise to wipe out the Jewish past and introduce a new Jewish beginning on someone’s else land…. 

I learned today that Stephen Silverman isn’t just concerned with Icke’s take on Jewish history, he is also disturbed by the fact that some gentiles have managed to profit from Icke’s popularity. “Not only did the O2 Apollo allow him to address their packed venue for twelve hours, they profited from it.”

Silverman knows that looking at the current international blunders (inflicted on us by the likes of Soros, Goldman Sachs, Israel, neocons and others) in historical perspectives can’t be ignored anymore.

David Icke’s is on the road at the moment. Israel and its Sayanim are desperately trying to stop him for a reason…he is, obviously,  a truth teller.

Traitors In Britain’s Leadership

Traitors In Britain’s Leadership

EDITOR’S CHOICE | 18.01.2017

Traitors In Britain’s Leadership

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity

When a UK Prime Minister, such as the Conservative David Cameron, does the work of a foreign power, working for that foreign power and against UK’s democratic ideals, and also against the interests and values (such as equal-rights, and UK’s sovereign independence) which are held by the UK public, then that UK Prime Minister is perpetrating treason, whatever else it might also be called. This has happened, and yet no one pays attention to it: no one is even pointing out that it is treason. (Whether it is, in every sense of the word, we’ll get to, after the story here has been told, but that story must come first; only afterward can it be discussed.)

Following are highlights from the shocking and uncontested (though confusingly written) original Al Jazeera investigative news report published on January 8th, which had mentioned this treachery only in passing (but without calling it that). These excerpts will make clear the severity of what has actually been happening here — and of what is continuing to happen.

I shall add [in brackets] clarificatory adjectives etc., so as to help make instantly clear who is who, in this confusingly written story, and thus speed and ease a reader’s comprehension of the stunning narrative that’s being told here:

8 January 2017, Al Jazeera Investigative Unit

Israel apology after plot against UK politicians

Al Jazeera reveals discussions of Israeli diplomat and UK civil servant to ‘take down’ anti-settlement politicians.

The Israeli embassy has apologised to UK deputy foreign secretary [Conservative] Sir Alan Duncan for comments made by one of its staff members [Mr. Shai Masot] on plans “to take [him [Duncan]] down” due to his [Duncan’s] criticism of Israel’s settlement activity in the occupied [Palestinian] West Bank.

The comments, made by a senior political officer at the Israeli embassy [Mr.] Shai Masot, were secretly captured on film during a six-month undercover operation by Al Jazeera’s Investigative Unit, which reveals plots by the Israeli diplomat [Masot] and a British civil servant [Duncan] to destroy the careers of senior politicians [whom Israel wanted to be downed].

In a conversation with Maria Strizzolo, who was then chief of staff to MP [Member of Parliament] Robert Halfon, the deputy chairman of the ruling Conservative Party, [Israel’s Mr.] Masot asked her [the Conservative Strizzolo] if he [Masot] could give her some names of MPs [whom] he [Masot] would suggest she “take down” [on behalf of Israel].

[See it at 2:14 in this video, where his actual phrase was “Can I give you some MPs that I would suggest you take down?”]

Masot named [recommended to Strizzolo] Duncan, who in 2014 said that while he fully supports Israel’s right to exist, he believes [Jewish] settlements on occupied Palestinian land represent an “ever-deepening stain on the face of the globe”. He [Duncan] also likened the situation in Hebron in the occupied West Bank to apartheid…

Strizzolo… revealed that she had a strategy of manipulation to ensure Israel remains at the top of the UK’s foreign policy agenda.

“If at least you can get a small group of MPs that you know you can always rely on, when there is something coming to parliament and you know you brief them, you say: ‘You don’t have to do anything, we are going to give you the speech, we are going to give you all the information, we [the office of MP Robert Halfon] are going to do everything for you’,” she said.

She also advised trying to infiltrate Prime Minister’s Questions, a weekly session in which the leader of the country answers questions from MPs. The debate is televised live.

“If they already have the question to table for PMQs [Prime Minister’s Questions], it’s harder to say: ‘No, no, no, I won’t do it’,” she said.

Strizzolo then boasted how her own efforts once made an immediate effect on the national debate. …

In 2014, she [had] persuaded MP Halfon to question the prime minister in public over three missing teenagers believed to have been kidnapped and murdered “to get a response from the government”, Strizzolo said.

Halfon took the request and called on former prime minister David Cameron to support the Israeli government. …

In response, Cameron promised that Britain would “stand by Israel”.

Cameron there was a pushover for Halfon, who clearly was an agent for Israel. But was this treason only by Halfon, and not also by his boss and fellow-Conservative, Cameron?

To say that Cameron, as the principal decision-maker, who was a pushover for a foreign power’s stooge — the traitor who was acting on behalf of a foreign power — wasn’t himself acting treasonously here, would be to say that, for example, there is no such thing as criminal negligence, which is a criminal liability for failure to have done due diligence in carrying out one’s duties to the public as the nation’s chief of state.

Cameron, not Halfon, was the actual decision-maker here, the responsible party in the matter: as Harry Truman had said of the U.S. Presidency, “The buck stops here.”

This is comparable to the Inspector General of the TARP bailout of the megabanks, Christy Goldsmith Romero, recommending (and the U.S. government ignoring):

A PROPOSAL TO BRING ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE “INSULATED CEO”

I propose that Congress remove the insulation around Wall Street CEOs and other high-level officials by requiring the CEO, CFO and certain other senior executives to sign an annual certification that they have conducted due diligence within their organization and can certify that that there is no criminal conduct or civil fraud in their organization.

But, in the case of a head-of-state — a nation’s CEO — the obligation to do due diligence and to take full responsibility, for everything that one does and says that actually affects the public, and responsibility for the nation’s relationships with other nations: this due-diligence obligation for a head-of-state, is even more severe than it is for a private CEO.

A country that tolerates such negligence or worse (evil intent) from its rulers, cannot be a democracy, because that country’s international relations are being manipulated by a foreign power — placing another nation’s leadership above one’s own. That’s subversion, of the given nation. It is treason, for any public official.

In the United States, the aristocracy are trying to fool the public into believing that the incoming President Donald Trump is such a traitor (‘Russian agent’) (and no evidence has been presented to the public for that, except ‘evidence’ concocted by a former British spy); but in this case involving Israel and the Prime Minister of UK, there is even video of the Israeli agent Masot communicating to Strizzolo, who then communicates to MP Halfon, and who brags that she had formerly communicated to Halfon who then communicated to the Prime Minister, who then acted in accord with the Israeli government’s back-channel instruction. Was it really an “instruction,” though — or was it instead some type of international deal, a trading-of-favors between allied countries? Precisely what favors are being performed by Israel, to UK? Really? And would that secret international agreement — without any democratic approval by the domestic public — be something that a democracy would allow?

In any case, even if there was some secret deal that induced Cameron to fulfill upon Israel’s instruction, that secret treaty (the deal) had not been entered into by the Constitutionally authorized process. This alone would be violation of oath-of-office — on behalf of a foreign power. It would be treason.

Secret deals, unauthorized treaties (in effect), ended up producing World War I. They are exceedingly dangerous. Doing international relations this way is inconsistent with democracy.

But that’s what happened here in UK’s Party on the ‘right’, the Conservatives. However, Israeli attempts at subversion of the UK government happen also in UK’s Party of the ‘left’, Labour; and, the video that was linked-to is devoted primarily to that — to the Labour Party.

Like happens in the United States, the main Party on the ‘left’ is being torn between viewing things mainly in terms of tribal conflicts (‘Palestinians’ versus ‘Jews’), or else viewing things mainly in terms of conflicts between the government and the public — the rulers versus the ruled (irrespective of their ‘tribe’). In Israel, the rulers are, essentially, only the Jews who hold power; and the ruled include many people (the “Palestinians”) who are excluded from many rights that all “Jews” in Israel enjoy. The current leader of Britain’s Labour Party, Jeremy Corben, rejects the Jewish state’s tribal values; and, consequently, he is being called ‘anti-Semitic’ by his opponents, both within and outside his Party. In today’s Israel, to oppose racism is to be ‘anti-Semitic’. A certain type of racism is policy in today’s Israel. Adolf Hitler, a supreme European tribalist, is thus now retrospectively a paragon of Israeli values: tribalism (racism). The current Israeli government is in Hitler’s image, only less consistently, and choosing a different tribe to reward, and a different tribe to punish (and, of course, far less certain than he was of the ultimate morality of their cause, and thus also far less intense about their application of the resulting punishment than he was, in his blinding hatred; but, after all, he was the paragon of bigotry) — differing with him, on those things. The current Israeli government equates nazism (the ideology, not Germany’s particular nazi party) with good, and equality with bad: they say that to be opposed to the current state of Israel is to be an ‘anti-Semite’. And this type of value-system is being worked secretly upon the UK’s government, in Britain’s back rooms, with alien (in particular, Israeli) lobbyists.

That video, which I linked to at its 2:14, continues on for a full 26 minutes, and mainly presents there the conflict within UK’s Labour Party, over these two mutually incompatible views of Israel and the Palestinians: one view, championed by the anti-Tony-Blair and anti-Iraq-War, progressive, new leader of the Labour Party, Corben, is a view which refuses to take sides with Israel against its Palestinians; and the other view, the one which is championed by Israel’s apartheid government, identifies that equalitarian position with “anti-Zionism,” and then promptly identifies ‘anti-Zionism = anti-Semitism’, meaning that every Jew (or at least ones who aren’t themselves ‘anti-Semitic’) endorses the current apartheid Israeli government. This ridiculous lie, equating equalitarianism with ‘anti-Semitism’, assumes that any Israeli who rejects Israel’s current, apartheid, government, hates Jews, instead of hates racists. It’s “Big Brother” thinking: a conviction that bad is good, white is black, up is down, peace is war, etc.

Israel works secretly in America’s back rooms, too. Some people worry that President Trump will be a Russian agent. Some people worry more realistically that he will be an Israeli agent. And some people worry that he will be a Saudi agent (because the royal Saud family hate Iran, and Trump seems to believe that the Saudi royal family, who are Saudi Arabia’s government, are allies not enemies of America, and that Iran is America’s eternal enemy). Others worry whether Trump will be intelligent enough, or even honorable enough, to avoid being any foreign agent at all. But whereas there is strong reason to consider Britain’s David Cameron to have been an Israeli agent, there is no reason, yet, to think that Trump is any foreign agent at all. Only time will tell.

In UK, time already has told the reality on this; and another and much briefer al-Jazeera video, which was posted on January 7th by UK’s Guardian, presents a conversation between Masot and Strizollo, in which Masot tells Strizollo that the Israeli government isn’t satisfied with the extent to which UK’s Conservative Party has silenced the Conservative Foreign Minister Boris Johnson’s insistence upon a “two-state solution”: his insistence upon a situation in which Palestinians will be freed from domination by Israel’s ‘Jews’ — freed from the aristocrats (many of whom live in America, actually) who, in reality, control and determine Israel’s apartheid government.

Yet another brief al-Jazeera video shows that Strizzolo’s immediate response when Masot asked her “Can I give you some MPs that I would suggest you take down?” might have been to think of that assertion — the question he posed — as being an attractive invitation by Israel to, perhaps, help her boss by blackmailing some of his opponents: she said, “Well, I know that if you look hard enough, I’m sure that there is something that they’re trying to hide.” But, whether she was thinking there, of that question as representing Israel’s Mossad, intelligence agency, and what help it might be able to offer to the Conservative cause, isn’t entirely clear. However, this video opened with Masot’s telling Strizzolo that his career-aspiration “is to be the head of the Foreign Affairs Department of the Intelligence Department in Israel — I’m not a career diplomat.” So, maybe it’s in the context of his being an aspiring spy, that she was considering the ways in which she might be able to be of help to both her boss, and also the young and rising Israeli agent who was, perhaps, propositioning her.

Such statecraft, in the seedy real world, was repeatedly condemned by the people who wrote America’s Constitution. They thought of it as being the type of international relations that the nation they were starting should avoid, at all costs. They could hardly imagine that “it comes with the territory” (as the vernacular might phrase the matter).

It’s dangerous to democracy in any country.

countercurrents.org

%d bloggers like this: