The founder of political Zionism, Theodore Herzl. (Photo: E.M. Lilien, via Wikimedia Commons)
– Jamal Kanj is the author of “Children of Catastrophe,” Journey from a Palestinian Refugee Camp to America, and other books. He writes frequently on Arab world issues for various national and international commentaries. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle
The phrase “fairytale” belongs to the founder of political Zionism, Theodore Herzl, when he used it to urge his fellow Zionists in 1897 to pursue their “dreams” in Palestine, stating “If you really want it, then it is no fairytale. “
It can be argued that much of what political Zionism professes about “Jewish” history and culture in Palestine is a “fairytale”?
The phrase “fairytale” belongs to the founder of political Zionism, Theodore Herzl, when he used it to urge his fellow Zionists in 1897 to pursue their “dreams” in Palestine, stating “If you really want it, then it is no fairytale. ”
Undeniably, Judaism has strong spiritual ties to the Holy Land, but that does not exculpate Herzl’s malicious “fairytale” dreams. Similarly, recognizing the Christian divine connection to the land of birth and the crucifixion of Christ does not excuse the crusades’ invasions. Likewise, the Islamic attachment to the land where the Prophet ascended to the heavens, does not make Palestine exclusively Muslim.
Throughout history, the land of Palestine experienced untold numbers of invaders, religious conversions, rise and fall of emperors and empires. To name but a few, not in any order: Akkadians, Egyptians, Hebrews, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Muslims, European Crusades, Ottomans, British etc. Withal, the indefatigable Palestinians have endured as steadfast witnesses to battles, carnages, victories, defeats, and retreats.
Within the context of national history, transient conquerors morphed like seasonal yellow leaves, while the original people of Palestine have remained the only historical constant deeply rooted next to their olive trees. Through it all, the indigenous Palestinians could have taken a new religion or converted to another, adopted new customs, or learned a new language, some of the invaders could’ve assumed local traditions or assimilated in their new home. Eventually, creating a unique collective national identity while staying true to their proven Philistines, Canaanites, and Jebusites genetic ancestors.
In 1948, a political movement predominantly comprised of descendants from East European Khazar Jewish converts claimed lineage to the ancient Hebrew Kingdom―which was one among more than a dozen historical invaders of Palestine. The European political Zionist movement sought an alliance with the British colonists to displace the original inhabitants, for the first time in their long history, by transplanting a racialist group of persecuted European refugees. The West absolved its sin against European Jews by inflicting the crime of uprooting the non-European Palestinians of their homes.
Historians hold differing opinions regarding the duration of the Hebrew Kingdom’s reign in the land of Canaan. However, there is some consensus that the United Hebrew Kingdom lasted approximately 80 years before splitting into two separate entities. Nevertheless, there is no disagreement that the original Hebrews were not indigenous to the land. In the book of Genesis 17:8 God addressed Abraham regarding the land of Canaan “where you now live a as a foreigner . . .”
Presumably, and according to the book of Genesis, God promised the “foreigner” the possession of the land of Canaan. While I prefer to steer away from discussing abstract or entertaining metaphysical powers, there is a convincing hypothesis told by Jewish, Christian, and Muslim religious authorities alike, that God’s promise was fulfilled in the united Hebrew Kingdom and ended by disobeying God when it split into two hostile “God’s chosen” people.
Until the late 19th century, when political Zionism emerged in response to Western Jewish hate, spiritual Zionists held to their beliefs that the “Jewish Kingdom” would be re-established by the Messiah. Christians and Muslims share with Judaism varying nuanced versions regarding the signs of the apocalypse.
Setting aside the theological aspects, there is no genetic relation between the original Hebrews who immigrated to Palestine from Mesopotamia, present-day Iraq roughly 4000 years ago, and the children of the East European Khazar converts. To allege lineage to a land basis religion, is similar to an Indonesian Muslim claiming a right to Saudi Arabia because it’s the birthplace of their religion. Nationality is determined not by a spiritual affinity to a place, but by people who possess a distinct cultural identity and have a continuous historical presence in a defined region.
Unfortunately, whenever “God” ostensibly communicates with Homo sapiens, it often leads to death and destruction. Examples such as Jim Jones and David Koresh come to mind in our lifetime. On a larger scale, many might remember when the 43rd US president, George W. Bush, told televangelist James Robison he had a “premonition” that led him to seek the presidency because God wanted him “to do it.” Whatever or whoever influenced Bush “to do it,” was neither omnipotent nor omniscient, as the false “premonition” resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis and more than 4,000 Americans. Such is the continued suffering of Palestinians.
Lastly, even if today’s Jewish European converts were indeed the descendants of the ancient Hebrews from 3000 years ago, under accepted international law, they would have no admissible claim to an earlier unlawful occupation. Inasmuch as Arabs today have no right to inherit the past occupation of Spain, which lasted for 700 years, more than three times the overall Hebrew reign in Palestine.
In addition to the supernatural connection, political Zionism presents a seemingly benign assertion by arguing that there is only “one” Jewish state in the world, attempting to imply that it is comparable to other countries. This, however, is akin to defending apartheid South Africa because it was the only white nation in Africa, or advocating for only “one” Aryan state in Europe. Furthermore, there is no “one” Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, Baháʼí, Zoroastrianism, Rastafari, Yazidi, etc., state either. Even in countries with an absolute religious majority, affinity to a faith does not transcend the national identity of citizens, where nationhood is not a spiritual trait, but shared cultural values within demarcated national boundaries.
If anything, the 8th-century East European converts might have a stronger legal case, based on their proven genetics, to reclaim the Khazar Jewish empire that lasted for 500 years, significantly longer than the “fairytale” connection to the non-indigenous Hebrew Kingdom in the land of Canaan.
This is the second of a series of articles that will explore Zionist myths, artificial history, and made-up culture. For the first article, click here.
Bibi is by nature cautious – even timid. His radical ministers, however, are not, Alastair Crooke writes.
Michael Omer-Man writes: Almost exactly 10 years ago, a young star rising in the Likud party, spoke to an audience committed to the outright annexation of the occupied Palestinian territories, laying out his blueprint. A year later, this same speaker set out certain prerequisites to full annexation: Firstly, a shift in the way the Israeli public thinks about a ‘two-state solution’ for Palestine; and secondly, a radical recast of the legal system “that will allow us to take those steps on the ground … that advance sovereignty”.
What was reflected in this statement is the structural dichotomy inherent within the ‘idea’ of ‘Israel’: What then is ‘Israel’? One side holds that Israel was founded as a ‘balance’ between Jewishness and Democracy. The other says ‘nonsense’; it was always the establishment of Israel on the “Land of Israel”.
Ami Pedahzur, a political scientist studying the Israeli Right, explains that the religious Right “has always considered the Israeli Supreme Court to be an abomination”. He points out that the extremist Meir Kahane “once wrote extensively about the tension between Judaism and democracy and the need for a Sanhedrin [a biblical system of judges] instead of the extant Israeli judicial system”.
In Israel’s attempt to balance these opposing visions and interpretations of history, the Israeli Right sees the judiciary as deliberately having been tilted toward democracy (by one part of the Israeli élite). This simmering tension finally exploded with the 1995 Supreme Court claim that it possessed power of judicial review over Knesset (parliamentary) legislation deemed to be in conflict with Israel’s quasi-constitutional Basic Laws. (An Israeli constitution has been considered since 1949, but never actuated.)
Well, that ‘young star’ of 10 years ago – who asserted so forcefully “We cannot accept … a judicial system that is controlled by a radical leftist, post-Zionist minority that elects itself behind closed doors – dictating to us its own values – today is Israel’s Justice Minister, Yariv Levin.
And with time, Netanyahu has indeed already brought about that first prerequisite (outlined by Levin almost a decade ago): The Israeli public perspective on the two-state Olso formula is radically changed. Political support for that project hovers close to zero in the political sphere.
More than that, today’s Prime Minister, Netanyahu, explicitly shares the same ideology as Levin and his colleagues – namely that Jews have a right to settle in any, and all, parts of the ‘Land of Israel’; he also believes that the very survival of the Jewish people is dependent on the actuation of that divine obligation into practice.
Many on the Israeli Right, Omer-Man suggests, therefore see the Supreme Court as “the central impediment to their ability to fulfil their annexationist dreams, which for them are a combination of messianic and ideological commandments”.
They saw the 1995 Supreme Court ruling as ‘a coup’ that ushered in the judiciary’s supremacy over law and politics. This is a view that is hotly contested – to the point of near civil war – by those who advocate for democracy versus a strict Judaic vision of religious law.
From the perspective of the Right, Ariel Kahana notes that although
“they have continued to win time and again – but they have never held power in the true sense of the word. Through the judiciary, the bureaucracy, the defence establishment, academia, cultural elites, the media, and some of the economic wheelers and dealers, the Left’s doctrine continued to dominate Israel’s power foci. In fact, regardless of who the cabinet ministers were, the old guard has continued with its obstructionist insurgency”.
Today, however, the numbers are with the Right – and we are witnessing the Israeli Right’s counter-coup: a judicial ‘reform’ which would centralize power in the Knesset – precisely by dismantling the legal system’s current checks and balances.
Ostensibly this schism constitutes the crisis bringing hundreds of thousand Israelis on to the street. Prima Facie, in much of the media, at issue is who has the final word: the Knesset or the Supreme Court.
Or, is it? For, beneath the surface, unacknowledged and mostly unsaid, is something deeper: It is the conflict between Realpolitik versus Completion of the Zionist project. Put starkly, the Right says it’s clear: Without Judaism we have no identity; and no reason to be in this land.
The ‘less said’ fact is that much of the electorate actually agrees with the Right in principle, yet opposes the full annexation of the West Bank on pragmatic grounds: “They believe that the status quo of a “temporary” 55-plus-year military occupation is the more strategically prudent”.
“Formally [annexing West Bank] would make it too difficult to convince the world that Israel is not an apartheid regime in which half of the population — Palestinians — are denied basic democratic, civil, and human rights”.
That other unresolved contradiction (that of continuing occupation within ‘democracy’) is also submerged by the prevalent mantra of ‘Right wing Orbánism versus democracy’. Ahmad Tibi, an Palestinian member of the Knesset earlier has wryly noted: “Israel indeed is ‘Jewish and democratic’: It is democratic toward Jews – and Jewish toward Arabs”.
The mass of protestors gathered in Tel Aviv carefully choose to avoid this oxymoron (other than around the kitchen table) – as a Haaretz editorial a few days ago made clear: “Israel’s opposition is for Jews only”.
Thus, the crisis that some are warning could lead to civil war at its crux is that between one group – which is no longer content to wait for the right conditions to arrive to fulfil the Zionist dream of Jewish sovereignty over the entire Land of Israel – versus an outraged opposition that prefers sticking to the political tradition of buying time by “deciding not to decide”, Omer-Man underlines.
And although there are ‘moderates’ amongst the Likud lawmakers, their concerns are eclipsed by the exultant mood at their party’s base:
“Senior Likud officials, led by Netanyahu, have incited Likud voters against the legal system for years, and now the tiger is out of control. It has its trainer in its jaws and threatens to crush him if he makes concessions”.
The flames lick around Netanyahu’s feet. The U.S. wants quiet; It does not want a war with Iran. It does not want a new Palestinian Intifada – and will hold Netanyahu’s feet to the flames until he ‘controls’ his coalition allies and returns to an Hebraic ‘quietism’.
But he can’t. It’s not possible. Netanyahu is held limp in the tiger’s jaws. Events are out of his control.
A prominent member of Likud’s central committee told Haaretz this week:
“I don’t care if I have nothing to eat, if the army falls apart, if everything here is destroyed … The main thing is that they not humiliate us once again, and appoint Ashkenazi judges over us”.
The ‘second Israel’ genres have wailed against ‘the ten Ashkenazai judges’ who discredited their leader (Arye Dery), whilst breaking into a song of praise for the ‘only Sephardic judge’ who was sympathetic to Dery. Yes, the ethnic and tribal schisms form a further part of this crisis. (A bill that effectively would reverse the Supreme Court decision barring Dery from his ministerial position over previous corruption charges is currently making its way through the Knesset).
The appeal of Religious Zionism is often attributed to its growing strength amongst the young – particularly ultra-Orthodox men and traditional Mizrahi voters. What became abundantly clear and unexpected in recent weeks, however, is that the appeal of a racist such as Ben-Gvir, is spreading to the young secular left in Israel. Among young Israelis (ages 18 – 24), more than 70% identify today as Right.
Just to be clear: The Mizrahi ‘underclass’, together with the Settler Right, have ousted the ‘old’ Ashkenazi élite from their hold on power. They have waited many years for this moment; their numbers are there. Power has been rotated. The fuse to today’s particular crisis was lit long ago, not by Netanyahu, but by Ariel Sharon in 2001, with his entry to the Temple Mount (Haram al-Sharif).
Sharon had earlier perceived that a moment would arrive – with a weakened U.S. – when it might prove propitious for Israel to complete the Zionist project and seize all the ‘Land of Israel’. The plans for this venture have been incubating over two decades. Sharon lit the fuse – and Netanyahu duly took on the task of curating a constituency towards despising Oslo and the judicial system.
The project’s content is explicitly acknowledged: To annex the West Bank and to transfer any political rights of Palestinians remaining there to a new national state to the east of the River Jordan, on the site of what now is the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. In the confusion and violence which would accompany such a move, Palestinians would be ‘persuaded’ to migrate to the ‘other bank’. As Hussein Ibish warned two weeks ago:
“We’re getting awfully close to the point where the Israeli government, and even Israeli society, could countenance a big annexation – and even expulsion [of Palestinians] – done in the middle of an outbreak of violence, and it would be framed as a painful necessity,” Ibish said. Such a move, he added, would be justified “as the government saying ‘We’ve got to protect Israeli settlers – they are citizens too – and we can’t let this go on anymore. Therefore we have to annex and even expel Palestinians.’”
To be fair, the unspoken fear of many secular protesters in Israel today, is not just that of being politically deposed, and their secular lifestyle circumscribed by religious zealots (though that is a major driver to sentiment), but rather, by the unspoken fear that to implement such a radical project against the Palestinians would lead to Regional war.
And ‘that’ is far from an unreasonable fear.
So there are two existential fears: One, that survival of the Jewish people is contingent on fulfilling the obligation to establish ‘Israel’ as ordained; and two, that to implement the consequent exodus of the Palestinians would likely result in the demise of the Israeli State (through war).
Suddenly and unexpectedly, into this fraught situation – with Netanyahu buffeted by a whirlwind of external and internal pressures – arrived a bombshell: Netanyahu was stripped of his ace card – Iran. In Beijing, China had secretly orchestrated not just the resumption of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, but laid down the framework for a regional security architecture.
This represents a nightmare for Washington and Netanyahu – particularly for the latter, however.
Since the early 1990s, Iran has served both these parties as the ‘bogey man’, by which to divert attention from Israel and the situation of the Palestinians. It has worked well, with the Europeans acting as enthusiastic collaborators in facilitating (or ‘mitigating’ – as they would see it), Israel’s ‘temporary’, 55-year occupation of the West Bank. The EU even financed it.
But now, that is blown away. Netanyahu may ‘huff and puff’ about Iran, but absent a Saudi and Gulf willingness to lend Arab legitimacy to any military action against Iran (with all the risks that entails), Netanyahu’ s ability to distract from the domestic crisis is severely limited. Any call to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities is an obvious non-starter in the light of the Iranian-Saudi rapprochement.
Netanyahu may not want a show-down with Team Biden, but that’s what is coming. Bibi is by nature cautious – even timid. His radical Ministers, however, are not.
They need a crisis (but only when the ‘prerequisites’ are all lined up). It is clear that the wholesale stripping of Palestinian rights, in tandem with the emasculation of the Supreme Court, is not a project that can be expected to quietly proceed in normal circumstances – especially in the present emotive state across the global sphere.
No doubt, the Israeli Right has been watching how the Lockdown ‘Emergency-crisis fear’ in Europe was used to mobilise a people to accept a compulsion and restrictions to life that in any other circumstance they would never rationally accept.
It won’t be a new pandemic emergency, of course, in the Israeli case. But the new Palestinian Authority-led ‘SWAT-squads’ arresting Palestinian resistance fighters in broad daylight is bringing the West Bank ‘pressure-cooker’ close to blow-out.
Ben Gvir may simply decide to follow in Sharon’s footsteps – to allow and participate in the Passover ceremony of sacrificing a lamb on Al-Aqsa (the Temple Mount) – as a symbol of the commitment to rebuild the ‘Third Temple’, permission for which, hitherto has always been denied.
So what happens next? It is impossible to predict. Will the Israeli military intervene? Will the U.S. intervene? Will one side back-down (unlikely says ex-Head of Israel’s National Security Council, Giora Eiland)? Yet even if the ‘Judicial reform’ is somehow halted, as one exasperated Israeli forecast, “Even if this time the attempt does not succeed, it’s likely that they [the Right] will try again in another two years, another five years, another 10 years. The struggle will be long and difficult, and no one can guarantee what the result will be.”
Professor David Miller is a non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Centre for Islam and Global Affairs at Istanbul Zaim University and a former Professor of Political Sociology at the University of Bristol. He is a broadcaster, writer and investigative researcher; the producer of the weekly show Palestine Declassified on PressTV; and the co-director of Public Interest Investigations, of which spinwatch.org and powerbase.info are projects. He tweets @Tracking_Power – though he has been shadow-banned by Twitter.
The Israel lobby is working directly with the Canadian government and with Silicon Valley corporations to quash the voices of those critical of its expansionist policies and systematic oppression of its indigenous population.
One clear example of this came last September when an international parliamentary committee met in Congress in Washington, DC, to demand that Twitter remove the account of Palestinian-Canadian Laith Marouf. Marouf is a multimedia producer who currently serves as a senior consultant at the Community Media Advocacy Centre and the coordinator of ICTV, a project to secure a national multi-ethnic news television station in Canada. He also has a long record of active support for Palestinian rights.
As such, Marouf – whose Community Media Advocacy Centre is funded by the Canadian government – faced official consequences for comments he made critiquing Israel. But the Trudeau administration went further to secure his erasure from social media, which should concern all those who believe in free speech.
Marouf’s case is just one in an endless stream of such acts happening all over social media and beyond. Marouf, in other words, was not the first and certainly will not be the last. Furthermore, his case opens the floodgates for the stream of suspensions to become a torrent.
As a major human rights abuser engaged in apartheid and military occupation of Palestinian land, Israel’s working relationship with big tech and the Canadian government is showcasing how antisemitism is being weaponized to target, flag and now vanish accounts critical of the apartheid state.
Marouf’s case also highlights the existence of a nearly fifty-year alliance between a Canadian national and a former Soviet dissident – a relationship that began as part of an Israeli intelligence operation. This history directly ties what happened to Marouf to Israel’s foreign policy strategies developed between 2000 and 2016.
A BIASED GROUP
The Interparliamentary Task Force To Combat Online Antisemitism is, as the name suggests, an international grouping of parliamentarians. Launched in September 2020, the task force is focused on increasing awareness of and developing responses and solutions to allegedly growing online antisemitism. Its first hearing was held on September 16, and the committee called executives from Twitter, YouTube, Meta, and TikTok to testify and explain how and why accounts like those of Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, were still in existence. Khamenei’s English Twitter account has nearly a million followers. At the time of writing, it and its Russian, Spanish, Arabic and Farsi alternative accounts remain live.
Former Canadian member of parliament (MP) Michael Levitt went over his five allotted minutes in his enthusiasm to denounce Marouf’s tweets. Another member of the task force devoted some of her time to arguing that “Zionism as an identity” should be included as a “protected characteristic.” She elaborated, “Zionist is an integral part of the identity of the majority of Jews and many non-Jews who self-define as Zionists.”
But who is on this committee, and why would they make such an argument? Answering this question accurately involves peeling back several layers of the onion and tracing back the origin story of this latest assault on online Palestinian speech.
An exhausted Laith Marouf and his CUTV crew report live from the ground in Montreal, May 20, 2012. Alexis Gravel | Flickr
It is claimed that the committee consists of “bipartisan legislators” and parliamentarians from Israel, the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and the United Kingdom. Yet this claim of “bipartisanship” is quickly scotched. The task force’s four South African members identify as Zionists and are part of the controversial Democratic Alliance, the party for whom most White South Africans vote. No African National Congress (ANC) members are involved in the group. At the hearing, one MP denounced the ANC, reportedly claiming, “The greatest proponents of antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment comes from our government.”
Members of the Task Force from the US include Democratic Congresspersons Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who has visited Israel on an AIPAC-sponsored tour, and Ted Deutch, the newly-appointed CEO of the Zionist lobby group, the American Jewish Committee.
Among the British representatives is Andrew Percy, the Conservative MP who converted to Judaism in 2017 partly because of “a wholehearted commitment to support of Israel.” The other British representative is Alex Sobel, a longtime supporter of the Zionist affiliate of the Labor Party, the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM). The Canadian representatives included the former MP Michael Levitt, who is now President-CEO of the Zionist Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. Also from Canada was Anthony Housefather, who in 2019 wrote, “I have always been and will continue to be a huge supporter of Israel.”
Along with two Members of the Israeli Knesset (MK) was the former MK Michal Cotler-Wunsh. Widely respected journalist Gideon Levy has described Cotler-Wunsh as both “an expert on human rights, an enlightened intellectual” and “nationalist, racist, cruel.”
At the hearing itself, three more Zionists were present. The first was the Israeli special representative for antisemitism, Noa Tishby. Recently Tishby denounced Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Bella Hadid – all Muslim women – as anti-Semites for condemning the killing of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh by Israeli soldiers. Tishby reportedly “singled out only criticism of Israel from Muslim Americans,” showing an apparent “effort to cast their anger as the product of ethnic or religious bigotry.” Another Zionist at the hearing was Ambassador Deborah Lipstadt, the State Department’s Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism, appointed in March 2022. According to Ismail Allison of CAIR, Lipstadt has a “history of using bigoted rhetoric, including Islamophobic … talking points.”
Well-known Canadian politician and jurist Irwin Cotler was also in attendance. He is Canada’s Special Envoy on Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combatting Antisemitism, a position receiving CA$ 5.6 million over five years beginning in 2022. He is also the stepfather of Michal Cotler-Wunsh MK, mentioned above. As it turns out, Cotler is the most significant actor in this story, being deeply embedded in Zionist lobby networks.
Unsurprisingly, no representative of Arab or Palestinian origin is involved in the task force.
20 YEARS OF CLASHES
Marouf claims that “in 2021, I began to be stalked and harassed online by Zionists in the Broadcasting sector in Canada.” These efforts led to his Twitter account being shut down for “hateful conduct” and promoting “violence against or directly attacking” people with protected characteristics like race, ethnicity or national origin.
In fact, Marouf has spent much of the past two decades years combatting Zionist efforts to censor him. The first such instance happened at Concordia University in 2001 when he was the first Arab candidate to be elected to a student union executive in Canada. Within months of his appointment, he was “expelled summarily … for writing that ‘Zionism is Jewish Supremacy’”. He won an ensuing six-month court battle with the university. After that, however, the attacks continued; the next was from the Chair of the Department of History, who, as Marouf noted, was also the chair of a Zionist lobby group.
Among the interlocutors back in 2002 was then-MP Irwin Cotler. Cotler’s reputation was at that stage not nearly as great as it is now. Perhaps this is why Marouf’s comrades were able to occupy his office, following which the police were called. Marouf has confirmed to Mintpress that he was “part of the organizing of the occupation” but was not present in the office.
At the time of Marouf’s clashes with Cotler, Cotler’s wife, Ariela, was also involved in the events. She was President of the board of Montreal Hillel in 2001 during the most heated period at Concordia. Hillel is the Zionist student organization on campus in Canada and the US. She “played a major role in the pro-Israeli activity” at that time, according to the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, an Israeli think tank.
Before that, Ariela had been parliamentary secretary for Menachem Begin. As can be imagined from this, Ariela is a hardline Zionist and claims to have been involved “at the cradle” with the creation of the so-called Birthright program, which takes young Jews to “Israel” despite there being no “birthright” for Jews in Canada or elsewhere to colonize Palestine.
Ariela Cotler has also been involved in a wide range of other Zionist lobby groups, including the Canada Israel Committee and the Federation Combined Jewish Appeal, the largest Zionist fundraiser in Canada. The Federation CJA, as it is known, has promoted Canadians joining the Israeli army.
IRWIN COTLER – ZIONIST REGIME ASSET
Cotler’s public persona is that he has some sympathy for the underdog. At the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights, he notes he has been described as “Counsel for the Oppressed” and as “Freedom’s Counsel.” His 600-word profile does not use the words “Israel,” “Zionism,” “Jewish,” or “antisemitism”; his decades-long advocacy for the crimes of the State of Israel are not even hinted at.
Born in 1940, he took degrees at McGill University and then secured a Law postgraduate degree at Yale in 1966. In 1968 he was hired as a speechwriter for the then Justice Minister for four years. In 1970 he was appointed as an associate professor at Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto before being appointed Professor at McGill in 1973. That same year he helped found and became President of the pro-Israel Canadian Professors for Peace in the Middle East, and he then “spent his summers travelling the Middle East.”
By the late 1970s, he was already heavily involved in Zionist advocacy, being the lawyer for Anatoli Shcharansky. A Ukrainian Zionist activist, Shcharansky was active in agitation as part of an operation run by a secret Israeli intelligence organization, Nativ, to access new settlers from the Soviet Union. Was Cotler aware that he was involved in an intelligence operation?
Cotler is welcomed by Benjamin Netanyahu during a 2014 visit to Israel. Photo | Israeli GPO
In 1978 while working with Shcharansky, he was living in the Jewish quarter of Damascus and, not surprisingly – given his Zionist contacts – drew the attention of Syrian officials. He also spent time in Egypt in 1975, 1976 and 1977, making contact with the political elite, including the foreign minister, and was introduced to President Anwar Sadat. Knowing that Cotler would later visit Israel, Sadat “asked him to deliver a message to … prime minister Menachem Begin.”
Cotler claims he said “he didn’t know” Begin “particularly well.” But when he arrived in Israel, he was “invited to lunch with members of the Knesset.” There he met a Begin staffer named Ariela Zeevi, who took him to meet her boss. The message was, “Egypt was prepared to enter into peace negotiations with Israel.” Cotler later married the staffer in 1979 and became a “close personal friend” of Begin.
ZIONIST LOBBY STALWART
In 1980, Irwin Cotler was appointed President of the Canadian Jewish Congress. Four years later, he participated in a Jerusalem conference entitled “Hasbara: Israel’s Public Image.” (Hasbara is a Hebrew word meaning “explanation,” which is used as a synonym for “propaganda” in English). The American Jewish Congress ran the event, a group with a history of working directly with the Israeli intelligence agency Nativ, a campaign to recruit new settlers from the Soviet Union. Though referred to only as a professor of law at McGill, Cotler made it clear that he was a committed partisan of Israeli hasbara, complaining that “hasbara efforts are discriminated against” and that “Israel itself has become some kind of illegitimate entity.”
Since this public declaration of commitment to the cause of Zionism, he has taken up a dizzying number of appointments in Zionist organizations. He is or has been affiliated with a wide range of Zionist groups on three continents, including,
All of these groups are closely related to the State of Israel, some with intelligence connections, some in receipt of funds, or created by Tel Aviv. None of these roles are listed in his biography at the Wallenberg Center, to which he is currently attached. Nor are Cotler’s interesting links with the far right in Ukraine; he is reportedly on the advisory board of “Ukrainian-Jewish Encounter,” which honored Ukrainian Nazis who collaborated with Nazi Germany and massacred Jews in the 1940s.
ENTER THE MOSSAD
But it is in the policy planning process of the state of Israel that Cotler seems to have made the most significant impact. Cotler has been, as British writer Antony Lerman puts it, “probably the most significant and influential international figure in the propagation of the concept of the ‘new antisemitism.’” As codified and finally published in its current form in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Association, the “working definition” of antisemitism is the weapon of choice of the Zionist movement to intimidate and bully supporters of the Palestinians.
While the idea of the new antisemitism has roots back to the 1940s and was a subject of renewed interest from the early 1970s, the administrative infrastructure to redefine antisemitism flourished from the late 1980s when Mossad was given the lead in the coordination of the strategy. As Lerman has noted, the Monitoring Forum on Antisemitism, established in 1988, “aimed at establishing Israeli hegemony over the monitoring and combating of antisemitism by Jewish groups worldwide.” It “was coordinated and mostly implemented by Mossad representatives” working in Israeli embassies.
A key step in the process was the first Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust in January 2000. The resulting Stockholm Declaration “became the founding document” of the International Holocaust Remembrance Association. Cotler headed the Canadian delegation to that event. He was also a key figure in responding to the 2001 Durban World Conference Against Racism, which concluded that Zionism is racism. In a hyperbolic reply for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, he denounced “what was supposed to be a conference against racism” [emphasis in original], saying it “turned into a conference of racism against Israel and the Jewish people.” He also decried what he called a new “genocidal antisemitism – the public call for the destruction of Israel and the Jewish people.
Cotler was engaged directly with the state of Israel’s response to Durban in co-founding the Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA) in 2002 “in collaboration with Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister Rabbi Michael Melchior.” This venture, however, collapsed, its main problem being that it was obviously an instrument of Israeli foreign policy. Even an arch-Zionist like Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League observed: “If a lot of its strategy and implementation is coming from Israel, I won’t be supportive of it.”
In 2003 a new body, the Global Forum for Combatting Antisemitism, was created by Melchior and Cotler’s friend and former “client” Natan Sharansky (formerly known as Anatoli Shcharansky, he changed his name to Zionise it, as do many incoming settlers). Sharansky was also – as an Israeli government minister in charge of antisemitism —chair of the Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism, which had been set up in the 1990s. “The State of Israel has decided to take the gloves off and implement a coordinated counteroffensive against antisemitism,” Sharansky said.
Scharansky, right, holds the Congressional Gold Medal presented to him by President Reagan, center, as President-elect Bush looks on, Jan. 11, 1989. Barry Thumma | AP
In his “3D test of antisemitism,” Sharansky took up the idea of discrimination against a nation-state, trialed by Cotler. It focused only on the occasions where it was claimed that criticism of Israel became antisemitism:
“demonization” is “when Israel’s actions are blown out of all sensible proportion”;
“double standards,” when criticism of Israel is “applied selectively”;
“delegitimization” when Israel’s “fundamental right to exist” is denied.
These are tendentious arguments. Who is to judge what is “sensible” or “selective”? No regime or even state has a “fundamental” right to exist.
Cotler and Sharansky would frequently connect again over the course of the ensuing decade. For example, they both attended the February 2008 Global Forum for Combating Antisemitism. It was here that the plan to extend the event around the globe was announced. Though it has been claimed that the subsequent London event was independent, the 2008 event it was seen as simply another GFCA (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) event. Minister Tzipi Livni personally thanked British MOP John Mann for ‘volunteering to host the Global Forum next year.’
Tellingly, the new body used the identical name to the previous 2002 effort: the Inter-parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA). Sharansky was an advisor.
In 2009, Cotler was on the steering committee of the ICCA. Also, there was Fiamma Nirenstein, an Italian writer and politician who has lived in an illegal settlement in East Jerusalem since 1998. Cotler led a delegation of 11 Canadian MPs to the event. Together, they decided to form a Canadian coalition. Thus was the Israeli network extended to Canada: the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism. It met in November 2010 and produced a final report the following year. Canadian groups which were critical of the redefinition of antisemitism to equate it with anti-Zionism responded to the consultation, but their submissions were “excluded from the hearings.”
The ICCA would host conferences in London in February 2009, Ottawa in November 2010, Brussels in June 2012 and Berlin in March 2016. A “task force” report on “internet hate” was published in 2013. In addition, an Italian parliamentary report was published in 2011, having reportedly taken “inspiration” from the ICCA. Similar German parliamentary reports came out in 2011 and 2017. These reports, commissions and groupings laid the groundwork for the American hearing late last year that removed Marouf from social media.
ZIONIST INFLUENCES EMBEDDED IN TWITTER
As the State of Israel developed its strategy to redefine antisemitism as opposition to Israeli government policy, it embedded a number of Zionist lobby groups in the process. For example, advisors on the Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism included the following: The U.S.-based Anti-Defamation League (ADL), B’nai B’rith International (BBI), the World Jewish Congress (WJC), and the U.K.-based Community Security Trust (CST). Some of these advisors to the state of Israel were carried over as advisors to the European Union Monitoring Center, which first introduced the “working definition” of antisemitism in 2005. Both the ADL and BBI were there, as was the EU branch of the WJC, the European Jewish Congress and the UK-based CST.
When Twitter started to appoint advisors on content, these same groups were again in the frame, with no indication that they were essentially assets of the Israeli government. In 2015, Twitter launched a safety center and listed a number of ‘trusted partners’ in the US, Australia, and Europe.
In the area of offensive speech, it listed both the ADL and CST as concerned with antisemitism. Twitter executives have referred to the CST as “empowering” Twitter to “take action.” The big tech platform takes advice from precisely zero Palestinian organizations or grassroots Muslim groups on how to regulate its content.
From 2018, the list of groups working with Twitter evolved. In addition to the ADL, two new European groups were added: the Board of Deputies of British Jews in the UK and the Centre Européen Juif d’Information [European Jewish Information Center] (CEJI) in Brussels. Both these groups are strongly pro-Israel. The Board of Deputies unblushingly admits in its 2020 Trustees report that it enjoys a “[C]lose working relationship with the Embassy of Israel in the UK, including with the Ambassador, diplomats, and professional staff, and strengthened links to the Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs and the IDF Spokesperson Department.”
The CEJI is a Zionist organization that advertises working closely with a range of other Zionist groups as “partners,” including B’nai B’rith Europe and the CST. Scandalously, amongst its funders are a host of social media firms, including Twitter itself. So Twitter funds a Zionist lobby group to lobby Twitter on issues relating to the question of Palestine. It is not surprising, therefore, that when pressure is brought to bear from apparently bipartisan lawmakers, and Twitter turns to its trusted advisors, pro-Israel decisions are routinely made. The whole process of both pressure and response is entirely corrupted by Zionist influence.
Israel’s government is also heavily involved in censoring pro-Palestinian content online. According to 7amleh – The Arab Center for the Advancement of Social Media, the Israeli Ministry of Justice Cyber Unit sends requests to remove Palestinian content to tech giants. Through Israel’s access to information law, the government said requests to social media companies led to the deletion of 27,000 posts from Facebook, Twitter, and Google from 2017-2018.
CONCLUSIONS
After all these years, Cotler continues to spearhead illegitimate attempts to subvert solidarity with Palestine under the guise of fighting antisemitism. Shored up by a constantly evolving Zionist movement with its front groups, lobby initiatives and covert operatives (many of whom are embedded in Twitter’s own editorial structures), it is not a surprise that Twitter censored Laith Marouf’s account.
The Israel lobby’s cancel culture depends on the decades of work done by Cotler as an Israeli asset and by his close co-conspirator, the former Soviet prisoner and Israeli government minister Sharansky. Both have been central to forging the “criticism of Israel is antisemitism” weapon which is put to daily use by the lobby through their operatives on the ground, via inter-parliamentary front groups or via the editorial structures of Twitter itself, to do the bidding of a foreign state.
he Israel lobby is working directly with the Canadian government and with Silicon Valley corporations to quash the voices of those critical of its expansionist policies and systematic oppression of its indigenous population.
One clear example of this came last September when an international parliamentary committee met in Congress in Washington, DC, to demand that Twitter remove the account of Palestinian-Canadian Laith Marouf. Marouf is a multimedia producer who currently serves as a senior consultant at the Community Media Advocacy Centre and the coordinator of ICTV, a project to secure a national multi-ethnic news television station in Canada. He also has a long record of active support for Palestinian rights.
As such, Marouf – whose Community Media Advocacy Centre is funded by the Canadian government – faced official consequences for comments he made critiquing Israel. But the Trudeau administration went further to secure his erasure from social media, which should concern all those who believe in free speech.
Marouf’s case is just one in an endless stream of such acts happening all over social media and beyond. Marouf, in other words, was not the first and certainly will not be the last. Furthermore, his case opens the floodgates for the stream of suspensions to become a torrent.
As a major human rights abuser engaged in apartheid and military occupation of Palestinian land, Israel’s working relationship with big tech and the Canadian government is showcasing how antisemitism is being weaponized to target, flag and now vanish accounts critical of the apartheid state.
Marouf’s case also highlights the existence of a nearly fifty-year alliance between a Canadian national and a former Soviet dissident – a relationship that began as part of an Israeli intelligence operation. This history directly ties what happened to Marouf to Israel’s foreign policy strategies developed between 2000 and 2016.
A BIASED GROUP
The Interparliamentary Task Force To Combat Online Antisemitism is, as the name suggests, an international grouping of parliamentarians. Launched in September 2020, the task force is focused on increasing awareness of and developing responses and solutions to allegedly growing online antisemitism. Its first hearing was held on September 16, and the committee called executives from Twitter, YouTube, Meta, and TikTok to testify and explain how and why accounts like those of Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, were still in existence. Khamenei’s English Twitter account has nearly a million followers. At the time of writing, it and its Russian, Spanish, Arabic and Farsi alternative accounts remain live.
Former Canadian member of parliament (MP) Michael Levitt went over his five allotted minutes in his enthusiasm to denounce Marouf’s tweets. Another member of the task force devoted some of her time to arguing that “Zionism as an identity” should be included as a “protected characteristic.” She elaborated, “Zionist is an integral part of the identity of the majority of Jews and many non-Jews who self-define as Zionists.”
But who is on this committee, and why would they make such an argument? Answering this question accurately involves peeling back several layers of the onion and tracing back the origin story of this latest assault on online Palestinian speech.
An exhausted Laith Marouf and his CUTV crew report live from the ground in Montreal, May 20, 2012. Alexis Gravel | Flickr
It is claimed that the committee consists of “bipartisan legislators” and parliamentarians from Israel, the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and the United Kingdom. Yet this claim of “bipartisanship” is quickly scotched. The task force’s four South African members identify as Zionists and are part of the controversial Democratic Alliance, the party for whom most White South Africans vote. No African National Congress (ANC) members are involved in the group. At the hearing, one MP denounced the ANC, reportedly claiming, “The greatest proponents of antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment comes from our government.”
Members of the Task Force from the US include Democratic Congresspersons Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who has visited Israel on an AIPAC-sponsored tour, and Ted Deutch, the newly-appointed CEO of the Zionist lobby group, the American Jewish Committee.
Among the British representatives is Andrew Percy, the Conservative MP who converted to Judaism in 2017 partly because of “a wholehearted commitment to support of Israel.” The other British representative is Alex Sobel, a longtime supporter of the Zionist affiliate of the Labor Party, the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM). The Canadian representatives included the former MP Michael Levitt, who is now President-CEO of the Zionist Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. Also from Canada was Anthony Housefather, who in 2019 wrote, “I have always been and will continue to be a huge supporter of Israel.”
Along with two Members of the Israeli Knesset (MK) was the former MK Michal Cotler-Wunsh. Widely respected journalist Gideon Levy has described Cotler-Wunsh as both “an expert on human rights, an enlightened intellectual” and “nationalist, racist, cruel.”
At the hearing itself, three more Zionists were present. The first was the Israeli special representative for antisemitism, Noa Tishby. Recently Tishby denounced Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib and Bella Hadid – all Muslim women – as anti-Semites for condemning the killing of Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh by Israeli soldiers. Tishby reportedly “singled out only criticism of Israel from Muslim Americans,” showing an apparent “effort to cast their anger as the product of ethnic or religious bigotry.” Another Zionist at the hearing was Ambassador Deborah Lipstadt, the State Department’s Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism, appointed in March 2022. According to Ismail Allison of CAIR, Lipstadt has a “history of using bigoted rhetoric, including Islamophobic … talking points.”
Well-known Canadian politician and jurist Irwin Cotler was also in attendance. He is Canada’s Special Envoy on Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combatting Antisemitism, a position receiving CA$ 5.6 million over five years beginning in 2022. He is also the stepfather of Michal Cotler-Wunsh MK, mentioned above. As it turns out, Cotler is the most significant actor in this story, being deeply embedded in Zionist lobby networks.
Unsurprisingly, no representative of Arab or Palestinian origin is involved in the task force.
20 YEARS OF CLASHES
Marouf claims that “in 2021, I began to be stalked and harassed online by Zionists in the Broadcasting sector in Canada.” These efforts led to his Twitter account being shut down for “hateful conduct” and promoting “violence against or directly attacking” people with protected characteristics like race, ethnicity or national origin.
In fact, Marouf has spent much of the past two decades years combatting Zionist efforts to censor him. The first such instance happened at Concordia University in 2001 when he was the first Arab candidate to be elected to a student union executive in Canada. Within months of his appointment, he was “expelled summarily … for writing that ‘Zionism is Jewish Supremacy’”. He won an ensuing six-month court battle with the university. After that, however, the attacks continued; the next was from the Chair of the Department of History, who, as Marouf noted, was also the chair of a Zionist lobby group.
Among the interlocutors back in 2002 was then-MP Irwin Cotler. Cotler’s reputation was at that stage not nearly as great as it is now. Perhaps this is why Marouf’s comrades were able to occupy his office, following which the police were called. Marouf has confirmed to Mintpress that he was “part of the organizing of the occupation” but was not present in the office.
At the time of Marouf’s clashes with Cotler, Cotler’s wife, Ariela, was also involved in the events. She was President of the board of Montreal Hillel in 2001 during the most heated period at Concordia. Hillel is the Zionist student organization on campus in Canada and the US. She “played a major role in the pro-Israeli activity” at that time, according to the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, an Israeli think tank.
Before that, Ariela had been parliamentary secretary for Menachem Begin. As can be imagined from this, Ariela is a hardline Zionist and claims to have been involved “at the cradle” with the creation of the so-called Birthright program, which takes young Jews to “Israel” despite there being no “birthright” for Jews in Canada or elsewhere to colonize Palestine.
Ariela Cotler has also been involved in a wide range of other Zionist lobby groups, including the Canada Israel Committee and the Federation Combined Jewish Appeal, the largest Zionist fundraiser in Canada. The Federation CJA, as it is known, has promoted Canadians joining the Israeli army.
IRWIN COTLER – ZIONIST REGIME ASSET
Cotler’s public persona is that he has some sympathy for the underdog. At the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights, he notes he has been described as “Counsel for the Oppressed” and as “Freedom’s Counsel.” His 600-word profile does not use the words “Israel,” “Zionism,” “Jewish,” or “antisemitism”; his decades-long advocacy for the crimes of the State of Israel are not even hinted at.
Born in 1940, he took degrees at McGill University and then secured a Law postgraduate degree at Yale in 1966. In 1968 he was hired as a speechwriter for the then Justice Minister for four years. In 1970 he was appointed as an associate professor at Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto before being appointed Professor at McGill in 1973. That same year he helped found and became President of the pro-Israel Canadian Professors for Peace in the Middle East, and he then “spent his summers travelling the Middle East.”
By the late 1970s, he was already heavily involved in Zionist advocacy, being the lawyer for Anatoli Shcharansky. A Ukrainian Zionist activist, Shcharansky was active in agitation as part of an operation run by a secret Israeli intelligence organization, Nativ, to access new settlers from the Soviet Union. Was Cotler aware that he was involved in an intelligence operation?
Cotler is welcomed by Benjamin Netanyahu during a 2014 visit to Israel. Photo | Israeli GPO
In 1978 while working with Shcharansky, he was living in the Jewish quarter of Damascus and, not surprisingly – given his Zionist contacts – drew the attention of Syrian officials. He also spent time in Egypt in 1975, 1976 and 1977, making contact with the political elite, including the foreign minister, and was introduced to President Anwar Sadat. Knowing that Cotler would later visit Israel, Sadat “asked him to deliver a message to … prime minister Menachem Begin.”
Cotler claims he said “he didn’t know” Begin “particularly well.” But when he arrived in Israel, he was “invited to lunch with members of the Knesset.” There he met a Begin staffer named Ariela Zeevi, who took him to meet her boss. The message was, “Egypt was prepared to enter into peace negotiations with Israel.” Cotler later married the staffer in 1979 and became a “close personal friend” of Begin.
ZIONIST LOBBY STALWART
In 1980, Irwin Cotler was appointed President of the Canadian Jewish Congress. Four years later, he participated in a Jerusalem conference entitled “Hasbara: Israel’s Public Image.” (Hasbara is a Hebrew word meaning “explanation,” which is used as a synonym for “propaganda” in English). The American Jewish Congress ran the event, a group with a history of working directly with the Israeli intelligence agency Nativ, a campaign to recruit new settlers from the Soviet Union. Though referred to only as a professor of law at McGill, Cotler made it clear that he was a committed partisan of Israeli hasbara, complaining that “hasbara efforts are discriminated against” and that “Israel itself has become some kind of illegitimate entity.”
Since this public declaration of commitment to the cause of Zionism, he has taken up a dizzying number of appointments in Zionist organizations. He is or has been affiliated with a wide range of Zionist groups on three continents, including,
All of these groups are closely related to the State of Israel, some with intelligence connections, some in receipt of funds, or created by Tel Aviv. None of these roles are listed in his biography at the Wallenberg Center, to which he is currently attached. Nor are Cotler’s interesting links with the far right in Ukraine; he is reportedly on the advisory board of “Ukrainian-Jewish Encounter,” which honored Ukrainian Nazis who collaborated with Nazi Germany and massacred Jews in the 1940s.
ENTER THE MOSSAD
But it is in the policy planning process of the state of Israel that Cotler seems to have made the most significant impact. Cotler has been, as British writer Antony Lerman puts it, “probably the most significant and influential international figure in the propagation of the concept of the ‘new antisemitism.’” As codified and finally published in its current form in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Association, the “working definition” of antisemitism is the weapon of choice of the Zionist movement to intimidate and bully supporters of the Palestinians.
While the idea of the new antisemitism has roots back to the 1940s and was a subject of renewed interest from the early 1970s, the administrative infrastructure to redefine antisemitism flourished from the late 1980s when Mossad was given the lead in the coordination of the strategy. As Lerman has noted, the Monitoring Forum on Antisemitism, established in 1988, “aimed at establishing Israeli hegemony over the monitoring and combating of antisemitism by Jewish groups worldwide.” It “was coordinated and mostly implemented by Mossad representatives” working in Israeli embassies.
A key step in the process was the first Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust in January 2000. The resulting Stockholm Declaration “became the founding document” of the International Holocaust Remembrance Association. Cotler headed the Canadian delegation to that event. He was also a key figure in responding to the 2001 Durban World Conference Against Racism, which concluded that Zionism is racism. In a hyperbolic reply for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, he denounced “what was supposed to be a conference against racism” [emphasis in original], saying it “turned into a conference of racism against Israel and the Jewish people.” He also decried what he called a new “genocidal antisemitism – the public call for the destruction of Israel and the Jewish people.
Cotler was engaged directly with the state of Israel’s response to Durban in co-founding the Inter-Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA) in 2002 “in collaboration with Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister Rabbi Michael Melchior.” This venture, however, collapsed, its main problem being that it was obviously an instrument of Israeli foreign policy. Even an arch-Zionist like Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League observed: “If a lot of its strategy and implementation is coming from Israel, I won’t be supportive of it.”
In 2003 a new body, the Global Forum for Combatting Antisemitism, was created by Melchior and Cotler’s friend and former “client” Natan Sharansky (formerly known as Anatoli Shcharansky, he changed his name to Zionise it, as do many incoming settlers). Sharansky was also – as an Israeli government minister in charge of antisemitism —chair of the Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism, which had been set up in the 1990s. “The State of Israel has decided to take the gloves off and implement a coordinated counteroffensive against antisemitism,” Sharansky said.
Sharansky right, holds the Congressional Gold Medal presented to him by President Reagan, center, as President-elect Bush looks on, Jan. 11, 1989. Barry Thumma | AP
In his “3D test of antisemitism,” Sharansky took up the idea of discrimination against a nation-state, trialed by Cotler. It focused only on the occasions where it was claimed that criticism of Israel became antisemitism:
“demonization” is “when Israel’s actions are blown out of all sensible proportion”;
“double standards,” when criticism of Israel is “applied selectively”;
“delegitimization” when Israel’s “fundamental right to exist” is denied.
These are tendentious arguments. Who is to judge what is “sensible” or “selective”? No regime or even state has a “fundamental” right to exist.
Cotler and Sharansky would frequently connect again over the course of the ensuing decade. For example, they both attended the February 2008 Global Forum for Combating Antisemitism. It was here that the plan to extend the event around the globe was announced. Though it has been claimed that the subsequent London event was independent, the 2008 event it was seen as simply another GFCA (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) event. Minister Tzipi Livni personally thanked British MOP John Mann for ‘volunteering to host the Global Forum next year.’
Tellingly, the new body used the identical name to the previous 2002 effort: the Inter-parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism (ICCA). Sharansky was an advisor.
In 2009, Cotler was on the steering committee of the ICCA. Also, there was Fiamma Nirenstein, an Italian writer and politician who has lived in an illegal settlement in East Jerusalem since 1998. Cotler led a delegation of 11 Canadian MPs to the event. Together, they decided to form a Canadian coalition. Thus was the Israeli network extended to Canada: the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition for Combating Antisemitism. It met in November 2010 and produced a final report the following year. Canadian groups which were critical of the redefinition of antisemitism to equate it with anti-Zionism responded to the consultation, but their submissions were “excluded from the hearings.”
The ICCA would host conferences in London in February 2009, Ottawa in November 2010, Brussels in June 2012 and Berlin in March 2016. A “task force” report on “internet hate” was published in 2013. In addition, an Italian parliamentary report was published in 2011, having reportedly taken “inspiration” from the ICCA. Similar German parliamentary reports came out in 2011 and 2017. These reports, commissions and groupings laid the groundwork for the American hearing late last year that removed Marouf from social media.
ZIONIST INFLUENCES EMBEDDED IN TWITTER
As the State of Israel developed its strategy to redefine antisemitism as opposition to Israeli government policy, it embedded a number of Zionist lobby groups in the process. For example, advisors on the Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism included the following: The U.S.-based Anti-Defamation League (ADL), B’nai B’rith International (BBI), the World Jewish Congress (WJC), and the U.K.-based Community Security Trust (CST). Some of these advisors to the state of Israel were carried over as advisors to the European Union Monitoring Center, which first introduced the “working definition” of antisemitism in 2005. Both the ADL and BBI were there, as was the EU branch of the WJC, the European Jewish Congress and the UK-based CST.
When Twitter started to appoint advisors on content, these same groups were again in the frame, with no indication that they were essentially assets of the Israeli government. In 2015, Twitter launched a safety center and listed a number of ‘trusted partners’ in the US, Australia, and Europe.
In the area of offensive speech, it listed both the ADL and CST as concerned with antisemitism. Twitter executives have referred to the CST as “empowering” Twitter to “take action.” The big tech platform takes advice from precisely zero Palestinian organizations or grassroots Muslim groups on how to regulate its content.
From 2018, the list of groups working with Twitter evolved. In addition to the ADL, two new European groups were added: the Board of Deputies of British Jews in the UK and the Centre Européen Juif d’Information [European Jewish Information Center] (CEJI) in Brussels. Both these groups are strongly pro-Israel. The Board of Deputies unblushingly admits in its 2020 Trustees report that it enjoys a “[C]lose working relationship with the Embassy of Israel in the UK, including with the Ambassador, diplomats, and professional staff, and strengthened links to the Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs and the IDF Spokesperson Department.”
The CEJI is a Zionist organization that advertises working closely with a range of other Zionist groups as “partners,” including B’nai B’rith Europe and the CST. Scandalously, amongst its funders are a host of social media firms, including Twitter itself. So Twitter funds a Zionist lobby group to lobby Twitter on issues relating to the question of Palestine. It is not surprising, therefore, that when pressure is brought to bear from apparently bipartisan lawmakers, and Twitter turns to its trusted advisors, pro-Israel decisions are routinely made. The whole process of both pressure and response is entirely corrupted by Zionist influence.
Israel’s government is also heavily involved in censoring pro-Palestinian content online. According to 7amleh – The Arab Center for the Advancement of Social Media, the Israeli Ministry of Justice Cyber Unit sends requests to remove Palestinian content to tech giants. Through Israel’s access to information law, the government said requests to social media companies led to the deletion of 27,000 posts from Facebook, Twitter, and Google from 2017-2018.
CONCLUSIONS
After all these years, Cotler continues to spearhead illegitimate attempts to subvert solidarity with Palestine under the guise of fighting antisemitism. Shored up by a constantly evolving Zionist movement with its front groups, lobby initiatives and covert operatives (many of whom are embedded in Twitter’s own editorial structures), it is not a surprise that Twitter censored Laith Marouf’s account.
The Israel lobby’s cancel culture depends on the decades of work done by Cotler as an Israeli asset and by his close co-conspirator, the former Soviet prisoner and Israeli government minister Sharansky. Both have been central to forging the “criticism of Israel is antisemitism” weapon which is put to daily use by the lobby through their operatives on the ground, via inter-parliamentary front groups or via the editorial structures of Twitter itself, to do the bidding of a foreign state.
Thou shalt not be a victim. Thou shalt not be a perpetrator. And above all, Thou shalt not be a bystander. Yehuda Bauer
Globalize the Intifada! Lowkey
Intro – were do we really live?
Each society, each country has at least two foundational bases: an official ideology and a number of foundational myths (and these myths can be very close to the historical truth or not). In the case of the West (roughly Zone A), the official ideology is “western liberal democracy” (itself based on a lionization of capitalism and “free market values”). However, once we look “under the hood”, so to speak, we see that since its birth in the Middle-Ages the foundational myth of the West has been exceptionalism and its inevitable by-product, imperialism. And it does not matter one bit what verbiage this myth has been wrapped it. It can be the demented claims of universal authority the Papacy, or the so-called “universal values” (aka human rights) of Freemasonry, the racial superiority of the Nazis or globalist agenda of the transnational financiers. The past two decades or so have, however, seen a very interesting phenomenon: the wholesale abandonment of any “pious” ideology other than the minimal lip-service needed to show a (totally non-existing) loyalty to any values. That is, however, not to say that no ideology currently exists. It does, very much so, but it is one *openly* based on hatred of the “other”. I am talking, of course, of the Woke ideology which is so powerfully expressed by the actions of the “Biden” Administration.
The Woke ideology is not different from its predecessors by its underlying hatred of the “other” (all the previous western ideologies were also based on that hatred of the “other”), but by its unapologetic proclamation of this hatred. You could say that the Woke ideology is following Dubya’s “you are either with us or with the terrorists“, but on steroids. And like all western ideologies, the Woke ideology demands that you not only accept a lie (many lies, in fact), but that you also loudly proclaim it. And, of course, the bigger the lie, the more vociferously it is proclaimed urbi et orbi.
Again, this is hardly anything new but, as Hegelian dialectics affirms, quantity can have a quality of its own. We clearly see this today in the post-Christian society all of Zone A lives in: not only are falsehoods proclaimed as “secular dogma”, but the very notion of “truth” has lost any meaning. To repeat, while in the past the rulers of the West did proclaim and even impose ideologies based on lies, today these same rulers have basically retired the very *concept* of “truth” in any other meaning than “in agreement with the official party line/narrative”.
Furthermore, while in the past violence had to be justified in various ways (be it the White Man’s burden, or Trotsky’s apology of Red Terror, or Roosevelt‘s “day of infamy” or Dubya’s GWOT), now violence has become accepted simply under the heading “because we can” and “what are you going to do about it?”. The genocidal wars in Iraq or the terrorist attack on North Stream 2 are good examples of the “kuz we can” ideology.
In other words, we are now living in a society openly based on:
Lies or even the repudiation of the concept of “truth” and
Violence/terrorism
The first corollary of this is that facts simply don’t matter anymore. Neither does logical analysis.
Second, in a way very reminiscent of Trotsky’s apology for Red Terror (if you have not, read his absolutely brilliant, if profoundly demonic, defense of Red Terror in this article!), the current ideology openly proclaims that “it’s okay if we do it, and it is not okay if you do it“. That, of course, implies a qualitative superiority of the “we” over the “you”. This type of “situational ethics” has some rather interesting characteristics and implications including:
It is profoundly narcissistic in its mindset (hence why the “we” has “rights” that the “other” does not).
It measures loyalty by how big a lie a person is willing to loudly proclaim and affirm
You could say that the bigger the lie you affirm and proclaim (virtue signaling) the “better” a person you are, at least by modern standards. And if the lie is truly self-evidently ridiculous and counter-factual (Srebrenica, 9/11, MH-17, Skripals, etc. etc. etc.) then you are a loyal and enlightened member of society. Conversely, if you reject a lie because it is simply obviously counter-factual, then you are not “just” wrong, you are the enemy.
This western infatuation with lies, ideology and violence has its roots in the heresies of the Papacy, but it has since long metastasized into every and all facets of our society and now it has openly become the main ideological pillar upon which everything else is built.
[Sidebar: in my personal observation, the northern European countries are, in that sense, far worse than the southern European ones. That is also where, predictably, where you will find the most rabid russophobes. The southern European countries, having more complex and stronger historical roots, seem to be less gullible and hateful than their northern counterparts. The UK, of course, stands alone and above all others in terms of racist hatred for the “other”; as for the rest of the Anglosphere, it is run by Neocons and Globalists whose hatred for the other is based on centuries of racist mythologizing, to the degree that this type of racism (externally; internally they proclaim to be categorically opposed to any racist notions which is, of course, yet another lie, except that in this case their – internal and external – racism is directed at any group upholding traditional values) has become a core pillar of their worldview, even if most brainwashed subjects are utterly unaware of it (or don’t even care anymore)].
The above is crucial to the understanding of the world we now all live in. But before we continue, we need to address another issue: what is Zionism?
Let’s take the (hyper politically correct) Wikipedia definition of what the word “Zionism” means: it is “a nationalist movement of Jews and Jewish culture that supports the creation of a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the Land of Israel“. Apparently, no link to the US, the Ukraine or Timbuktu, right? But think again. Why would Jews – whether defined as a religion or an ethnicity – need a homeland anyway? Why can’t they just live wherever they are born, just like Buddhist (a religion) or the African Bushmen (ethnicity) who live in many different countries? The canonical answer is that Jews have been persecuted everywhere and that therefore they need their own homeland to serve as a safe haven in case of persecutions. Without going into the issue of why Jews were persecuted everywhere and, apparently, in all times, this rationale clearly implies if not the inevitability of more persecutions or, at the very least, a high risk thereof. Let’s accept that for demonstration sake and see what this, in turn, implies. First, that implies that Jews are inherently threatened by non-Jews who are all at least potential anti-Semites. The threat is so severe that a separate Gentile-free homeland must be created as the only, best and last way to protect Jews worldwide. This, in turn, implies that the continued existence of this homeland should become an vital and irreplaceable priority of all Jews worldwide lest a persecution suddenly breaks out and they have nowhere to go. Furthermore, until all Jews finally “move up” to Israel, they better be very, very careful as all the goyim around them could literally come down with a sudden case of genocidal anti-Semitism at any moment. Hence all the anti-anti-Semitic organizations a la ADL or UEJF, the Betar clubs, the network of sayanim, etc. In other words, far from being a local “dealing with Israel only” phenomenon, Zionism is a worldwide movement whose aim is to protect Jews from the apparently incurable anti-Semitism of the rest of the planet. As Israel Shahak correctly identified it, Zionism postulates that Jews should “think locally and act globally” and when given a choice of policies always ask THE crucial question: “But is it good for Jews?“. So far from being only focused on Israel, Zionism is really a global, planetary, ideology which unequivocally split up all of mankind into two groups (Jews and Gentiles), which assumes that the latter are all potential genocidal maniacs (which is racist) and believes that saving Jewish lives is qualitatively different and more important than saving Gentile lives (which is racist again). Anyone doubting the ferocity of this determination should either ask a Palestinian or study the holiday of Purim, or both. Even better, read Gilad Atzmon and look up his definition of what is brilliantly called “pre-traumatic stress disorder”
Now let’s be clear: while Zionism itself is based or the ideology and worldview of rabbinical (Pharisaic) “Judaism”, it is not an ethnicity, but an ideology. This is why I wrote the following in that same article:
By the way, there are non-Jewish Zionists (Biden, in his own words) and there are (plenty of) anti-Zionist Jews. Likewise, there are non-Anglo imperialists and there are (plenty of) anti-imperialists Anglos. To speak of “Nazi Germany” or “Soviet Russia” does in now way imply that all Germans were Nazis or all Russian s Communists. All this means it that the predominant ideology of these nations at that specific moment in time was National-Socialism and Marxism, that’s all.
[Sidebar: I want to add one more thing here, especially for those who hate Jews: every time a Jew is unfairly denounced as the perpetrator of some evil deed, it is not only one innocent person which is unfairly condemned, but there is some non-Jewish SOB who is happily slipping away. Is that something which you really want? Just think about this, carefully, and understand the consequences of such a worldview! I suggest that you don’t have to like Jews, or approve of what some of them do, to not want an outcome where any real investigation into the fact of the matter becomes impossible. Finally, please realize that blaming “the Jews” for something require no knowledge, no expertise of any kind and no brains. This is therefore something which the dumbest members of our society will be very strongly drawn towards. Again, just think about it carefully. ]
By the way, while (Pharisaic) “Judaism” is clearly religious and while most original Zionist were not religious, over time Zionism adopted all the man-hating assumptions of (Pharisaic) “Judaism” while, at the same time, secularizing them. You could say that (Pharisaic) “Judaism” is “God ordained racism” while Zionism is “secular racism”. More fundamentally, both (Pharisaic) “Judaism” and secular Zionism are virulently anti-Christian and want to eradicate even the tiny remnants of a completely defeated Christianity in the West. Finally, in the modern state of “Israel”, we now see a new phenomenon becoming very important: religious Zionism, that is a bland of Haredi (Pharisaic) “Judaism” with the type of secular Fascism cum Apetheid modern “Israel” embodies.
If you want to see the kind of freaks which this ideology produces, just see my articles “A crash course on the true causes of “antisemitism”” and “A Crash Course on the True Causes of “Anti-Semitism”, part II: the hunt for anti-Semites“. If you read those (please do!) you will discover what I can only call “God ordained racism” which is quite unique as most religions are, by their very nature, universalist, including, of course, both Christianity and Islam (after returning from his trip to Mecca, Malcolm X totally dropped his “blue eyed white devils” nonsense; Islam cured him from Elijah Muhammad’s crude racism!).
What happened after WWII?
Simply put, the end of WWII saw an ideological alliance between Anglos and Zionists. Why? Mainly for two very different reasons:
Their common hatred and fear of Stalin (who is always and *wrongly* accused of hostility towards Jews)
A recognition of very similar worldviews (exceptionalism, supremacism)
Basically, the racist worldview of (Pharisaic) “Judaism” blended with the historical racist worldview of the leaders of the Anglosphere to create the modern Anglo-Zionism.
Do I even need to mention that both worldviews are not only based on lies, they use lies as their primary, go-to, “weapon” against anybody dares who oppose them. You could say that the following verse by Saint John the Apostle, Evangelist and Theologian are the best description of the ideological cornerstone of both wordviews: “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it” (John 8:44). Notice how closely Saint John connects lies and homicidal violence – these always go hand in hand!
During the Cold War, most of that hatred was directed at Communism, at least officially (after 1991 it became pretty clear that even without Communism the leaders of the West hated the Russian people). After the 9/11 false flag, that hatred was directed at any state which would defy the West and Israel, and at any form of real, traditional, Islam.
I often smile when I hear the endless discussion about whether the dog is wagging its tail or the tail wag the dog. In reality, this does not matter because the dog and the tail are one and the same organism, fully united in their purposes and goals. And the point is, therefore, not who wags whom, but what the entire animal wants to achieve.
Originally, of course, the Anglos had mostly disdain for their up and coming Jewish counterparts, but money is much more powerful than any other consideration (at least in the West) and soon the part of the Anglo elites which was willing to adopt Zionism’s core values/reflexes easily out-competed the Anglo “old guard” which did not want to yield any real power to what they saw as their Jewish competitors. And that is how AngloZionism was born.
What about “Israel” in all this?
The USA is probably the first and only country on the planet created by members of a demonic secret cult, that is Freemasonry (the fact that this Freemasonry had some external features of pseudo-Christianity does not change this). “Israel” might well be the only country in history built purely on lies, also a sure sign of the “father of all lies”. From the infamous “country without people for a people without country” to a complete ban on honest investigation into WWII or into the other founding myths of the state of Israel, to the endless “right” of this country to exist – “Israel’s” entire existence is predicated on the usual demonic pair: lies and violence. In fact, while there were, and still are, plenty of states out there ruled by racists, Israeli is the only OPENLY racist state on the planet. And this is why, for example, any Jew on the planet has the “right” to “return” to the state of “Israel” while a refugee born in Palestine has no right to return to his own home. In “Israel” some are simply more equal than others! Officially.
Is “Israel” unique in its systematic use of lies and violence? No, not at all. But it is unique in its unapologetic use of lies and violence to not only to achieve some specific geopolitical goals, but also to feed its cult of self-worship and sense of racial superiority above the “goyim” who, as we all know, “only understand violence”.
Yes, “Israel” is an abomination which no civilized person or society can accept, nevermind endorse. But “Israel” is far more than that – it is also the litmus test of obedience to ruling classes of the West. You can think of it as an Asch Conformity Experiment, but on a planetary scale, and one which you are asked not to only reject what your senses tell you, but one which shows how much you are willing to suppress you own conscience and embrace pure evil.
Those who embrace this lie become bound not only by a common worldview, but they become accomplices in something unspeakably evil and false. Such people are much more than just bystanders to a slow-motion genocide, but they are also experts at Orwell’s doublethink: when told to, they will gladly proclaim that right is wrong, white is black and reality whatever the ruling elites decree it to be.
For these people, neither “truth” nor “reality” make any difference. None!
Such people are authoritarians not only because they love to give orders and impose their lies upon others, they are also authoritarians because they love to get orders and execute them (see here for an interesting discussion of this type of person).
Having said all that, we can we observe today?
Simply put, what we observe is a shameful and disgraceful attitude by almost every country out there. And I will begin my denunciation of this state of affairs with Russia.
No, Russia is not “in cahoots” with “Israel” or Netanyahu! This kind of crap is spread by infantiles who don’t understand how true complexity of the competition between states and by people who are paid (in money or recognition) to spread FUD (fear uncertainty and doubt) about Putin and Russia.
However, Russian leaders are showing an ice-cold indifference to the plight of the Palestinian people. Oh sure, Russia officially supports all the relevant UNSC Resolutions about “Israel” and the Palestinians, but other than paying them lip-service, Russia does absolutely nothing against the “Israelis” as long as Russian interests are not directly affected or threatened. I guess you can call it “Realpolitik” but I call it immoral and criminal indifference and I find is shameful. Russia will never be come a truly Orthodox country again until it renounces such ugly forms of “pragmatism” and until moral/ethics return to the center state of the core values of Russian society and Russian policies.
In sharp contrast, and in spite of being much weaker than Russia while living its entire existence under the threat of attack by the AngloZionist, the Iranians have steadfastly placed morals over so-called “pragmatism” when dealing with the issue of “Israel” and the Palestinian people. Of sure, of course, not all Iranians are that pure and noble, enough to see how Rafsanjani’s “Gucci Revolution” was backed to the hilt by Zionists to see that not everything is perfect in Iran. But humans are the same everywhere. What makes Iran so dramatically different is not that Iranians are “better” people, but that Iran officially places moral, ethical and even religious values at the cornerstone of its worldview and policies! That is quite remarkable, and unique, and puts the shame the rest of the planet.
What about the current war in the Ukraine?
Today we are all fixated on the war between NATO and Russia in the Ukraine, and this is quite logical. After all there is a fair chance that the freaks who run the Empire will prefer the destruction of the entire northern hemisphere to a (now quite inevitable) Russian victory. However, we should not kid ourselves, this war is not, repeat, NOT about the Ukraine or even the future of the EU. This is a war which will decide whether the AngloZionist will take full control of our planet or whether the last empire in history will be replaced by a multi-polar, multi-ethnic, multi-religious, multi-cultural, multi-political international order regulated by the rule of law. Thus “Israel” has a HUGE stake in it, and no, *not* because the “(((Khazarians)))” wand to create a new state in the Ukraine or Crimea, but because if the AngloZionist Empire falls, the Zionist regime in “Israel” will have to either renounce its worldview of “God given racism” or, indeed, face its demise as predicted by Imam Khomeini when he said: “this regime that is occupying Qods [Jerusalem] must be eliminated from the pages of history“.
In the case of the Nazi run Banderastan, we saw the Ukrainian Nazis and the Israeli Nazis work hand in hand, while at the same time the Israelis pretended to maintain equidistance between the two belligerents. Yes, the Ukronazis and the Israelis do hate each other too, but much less than they hate Russia and everything Russian. What better example of the Zionist moral flexibility then to see “Israelis” sending weapons and “volunteer” instructors to the Bandera-worshipping Nazis in Kiev and against the people who liberated Jew from the Nazi camps! Ditto for the so-called (and much misrepresented, see here, here or here) “pogroms” which were all located in what is today’s Ukraine and not in Russia. As for the infamous (and also much misrepresented, see here, here or here) Pale of Settlement, how is is different from the wall the “Israelis” built to prevent Palestinians from freely loving across their own land? In fact, any serious comparison of the two would immediately show that the latter is infinitely worse than the former.
And yet.
The truth is that the rabbinical/Pharisaic hatred of Russia is not based on history or any past wrongs, but on purely religious reasons: rabbinical/Pharisaic “Judaism” is an anti-Christianity just in the same was as the Latin Papacy is an anti-Orthodoxy! Why? Because Christians claim to the the “real Jews” (in spiritual terms) and Orthodox Christians claim to be the “true Church”. In other words, Orthodox Christianity challenges and debunks both the Judaic claim to the Old Testament and the Latin claim to the New Testament.
Does it really surprise anyone to see the Latins working hand in hand with their “elder brothers in the faith” who “await the same messiah”?
There is also the fact that the Russian society today, while not truly Christian by a long stretch, is yet unwilling to give up the moral/ethical values of true Christianity. Even “worse” is the real possibility that Russia might return to her true Christian roots, especially after the conclusion of the NATO war against Russia (assuming it does not end in a nuclear apocalypse, which it well might).
And no, it is no coincidence at all that the key actors (Nuland, Kagan, Blinken, etc.) are all Zionist Jews. There are objective reasons for that. Yet, we must always remember the words of Saint Paul who wrote “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places” (Eph 6:12). We must remember these words not only because innocent people have no nationality, including innocent victims, or because there is no such thing as “collective guilt”, but because we – unlike the Latins – cannot defend true Christianity while ignoring its key teachings! It is as wrong to deny the nature of this warfare as it is wrong to deny its spiritual, and not ethnic, nature. At the very core, we are dealing with a stark choice:
Do we accept the common humanity of all people or
Do we reject it
If the latter, than your place with with the Nazis, be them German or Israelis. If accept that common humanity – then act on it and never allow yourself to be brought down by the fact that our enemies do not share this key value. It is really that simple!
Conclusion
Ever since the 2014 coup in Kiev I have been almost exclusively focused on the Ukrainian civil war and, after 2022, on the US/NATO war against Russia. Only rarely did I mention Zionism or Israel. Primarily because I simply did not have the time. And this is why today, in what shall be my last posted analysis on the Saker blog I wanted to revisit that topic again. At over 4000 words, the above is not indented as an exhaustive discussion of the topic. My hope is that what I wrote above my seen enticing enough for you, the reader, to pursue your own research into this immense and complex topic. I think you could do worse than reading the various texts I have mentioned above. But the choice is yours.
I want to conclude this post with the words of Alexander Solzhenitsyn in his famous text “Live not by the lie“. I hope that they will inspire you.
When violence bursts onto the peaceful human condition, its face is flush with self-assurance, it displays on its banner and proclaims: “I am Violence! Make way, step aside, I will crush you!” But violence ages swiftly, a few years pass—and it is no longer sure of itself. To prop itself up, to appear decent, it will without fail call forth its ally—Lies. For violence has nothing to cover itself with but lies, and lies can only persist through violence. And it is not every day and not on every shoulder that violence brings down its heavy hand: It demands of us only a submission to lies, a daily participation in deceit—and this suffices as our fealty. And therein we find, neglected by us, the simplest, the most accessible key to our liberation: a personal nonparticipation in lies! Even if all is covered by lies, even if all is under their rule, let us resist in the smallest way: Let their rule hold through me! We are not called upon to step out onto the square and shout out the truth, to say out loud what we think—this is scary, we are not ready. But let us at least refuse to say what we do not think! This is the way, then, the easiest and most accessible for us given our deep-seated organic cowardice, much easier than (it’s scary even to utter the words) civil disobedience à la Gandhi. Our way must be: Never knowingly support lies! Having understood where the lies begin (and many see this line differently)—step back from that gangrenous edge! Let us not glue back the flaking scales of the Ideology, not gather back its crumbling bones, nor patch together its decomposing garb, and we will be amazed how swiftly and helplessly the lies will fall away, and that which is destined to be naked will be exposed as such to the world. And thus, overcoming our temerity, let each man choose: Will he remain a witting servant of the lies (needless to say, not due to natural predisposition, but in order to provide a living for the family, to rear the children in the spirit of lies!), or has the time come for him to stand straight as an honest man, worthy of the respect of his children and contemporaries?
Xi‘s China To Be The First Civilization In The Galaxy To Dispense Confidence By Decree
By Thorsten J. Pattberg
Why The Renewed Urgency?
Before we explain Mr. Xi Jinping’s much underreported but now revived ‘Confidence Doctrine’, a word about this week’s anti-lockdown demonstrations in China:
IMAGE 1 White Paper Revolution in China But Probably Not
East Asians declared Corona a state religion. They have a genetic streak for submission and agreeableness. Much like females in the West. They are also lighter than Western females. Then, there is an environmental factor, for East-Asians are trained to be less aggressive, confrontational, and meek in character. There is no threat to the West coming from China. If you check your sources, you will see that all the alleged threats coming from China were in fact written by Western agitators.
IMAGE 2 Western China Experts swarm to Twitter and LinkedIn
We Western people speak for the Asians. It is our duty. Read about the first missions to China. Read George Hegel or Edward Said. Read Immanuel Kant on the End of History, or Bertrand Russell on the Problem of China. It is just a fact that Asians cannot create. God said: Not you, sorry! God then chose the Iews, then said Christians… also good. There are no Chinese in the Bible. Read the American Constitution. It says America, not China.
In Japan, everyone is walking around with their C-membership retard badges. In Taiwan… well… these people have an authoritarian streak and are the descendants of traitors, war criminals, and the triads, so they love cult and fascist masquerading. All this is not reported in the West, because Taiwan and Japan are useful anal toys.
IMAGE 3 Double-Standard Taiwan and Japan are as insane but are not demonized at all
China central of course gets all the hate. Did you see the German President praising the brave demonstrators? Well, he called demonstrators in Germany Nazi-scum and terrorists and destroyed their livelihood. Or did you see the Canadian Premier warning the Chinese government against taking actions against peaceful demonstrators? Well, he prosecuted EVERYONE in Canada for peacefully protesting his tyranny. British unelected Prime Minister, a brown person from India or Pakistan, I forgot, said China was doing genocide. This, while London is genociding white Englishmen and killing their culture.
IMAGE 4 Unbelievable Double Standards Of Our Unelected Leaders
China, like Russia, has no agency in the world any more. It became… autistic? It wants to be left alone from the Western bullies. Had Beijing not declared its Zero-Covid policy and now had 6 million Covid-deaths to mourn (the USA has 1.2 million deaths), the Western hate press would have called Mr. Xi the bloodiest despot since Mr. Mao.
While ugly anti-Western nations cocoon themselves in, hoping enslavement will pass, hoping to transform into new creatures of beauty, Western powers are making all the decisions for them about air, space, water, food, energy, rights, education… that will affect all beings on this planet. So, while the West starts wars in Ukraine and Taiwan, Western planners already make decisions about the cutting up of Russian and China.
No Conquest, No Confidence?
If the Asians do not unite and reign into the Western psychopaths who currently torture the world with bio-weapons and mind-control, above all the puppet regimes in London, Berlin, and Washington, then your funny cocoons will be trampled on and squashed.
Anyway, now to the main thread. Largely ignored by the Western media because it didn’t involve racism, violence, and boobs, China mandated the Chinese to build a giant cocoon of confidence, crawl inside and reform itself as a strong terracotta pot plant army that no criticism can defeat.
Confidence is just a new old discourse that every five years or so concerns Chinese President Xi Jinping and the Communist Party of China (CPC). And just as anticipated, the theme emerged again, in this fall of 2022 in fact, when the 20th National Party Congress revived the discourse about “the ebbs and tides” of what global historians describe as the “Cultural Confidence” of Great nations.
What’s a “Great nation”? Most people don’t care about Great nations because they do not live in one and never belonged to any. They have no idea what it means or what advantages it can give to their lives. For example, the people in the Philippines, also an ex-US-colony, could all just die and the world would probably be better off [because of over-population, food scarcity, and pollution, etc.]. Or, they could apply for a job at MacDonald’s, buy an iPhone with the Google app, watch Elon Musk videos on Youtube, learn American English, get an US college degree, and work for a Western multinational. That is their only way to become useful and participate in World History.
China is obviously more ambitious. It still has…well… City Wok fast food… I guess, Xiaomi phones, Youku, a powerful Mandarin script with 40,000 letters, and excellent schools. It also has plenty of global companies. So, in a way, China hopes to keep its state economy and not be privatized by Western powers like it was in the 17th Century, and then again in the 19th Century, and again in the 20th Century, and is now threatened with regime change again… and it isn’t even a quarter into the 21st Century.
Prove It That You Met Your Maker!
Earlier this year, in May 2022, during the 39th group study session of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, the government allocated scholarly efforts to the tracing of the origins of the Chinese civilization. The underlying idea is to desperately show the world and prove to the Chinese that they are in fact a pre-Biblical super civilization that was just forgotten to be mentioned in the Bible and during Science.
IMAGE 5 More or Less 5000 Years Trust the Science Or dig for It
Catalysts for the Cultural movement were, among other research findings: the discovery of hundreds of archaeological excavation sites, the human genome project on the origins of the Chinese civilization, and the catalogization of Ancient relics, for example pottery and stone tools from the Zhou Dynasty (770 BC) unearthed in China‘s Guangxi Zhuang autonomous region.
There were no mummies or that kind of reminiscences, just pots and stones. But mass hypnosis shall suffice if you throw in fancy DNA terminology, also a Western invention, that the Chinese, against all negative Western stereotyping, did indeed create and were creators.
The Cultural Confidence discourse [Wenhua Zixin] is a continuation of the ‘Confidence Doctrine’ [Zixin Lun] formulated during the 18th Party Congress in November 2012. President Xi Jinping marked the doctrine of “Confidence in Chinese Culture” as the natural continuation of the doctrines of “Chinese Dream” and the “Rejuvenation of China.”
Now you could argue, what’s left of the “Chinese Dream” when the world is told to hate China, but that is beside the point. What’s there to rejuvenate? Feudalism? The Manchu queue? Pillow girls?
Another tide of Cultural Confidence came in in 2017, during the 19th Party Congress. The doctrine was to expand into “globally recognizable cultural images of China,” “Chinese language teaching through the Confucius Institutes,” the “Key Concepts of Chinese Thought and Culture” program, and “rapid economic and technological development” as the Four Characteristics of Confidence to build, quote: “a multidimensional China for the world.”
Again, not much enthusiasm left from that period either. The West has rejected the Confucius Institutes. Chinese names and concepts are still banned in Europe. Telecom giant Huawei, Social media TikTok, e-commerce Alibaba, super-application WeChat, shipping firm Cosco, drone supplier DJI,… Chinese banks, electric cars, airplanes, newspapers… all blocked.
The Ebbs and Flows of Confidence
China during the last two centuries has experienced both extreme humiliations and extreme successes. Humiliations at the hands of Western Imperialist powers and Japan, which led to chauvinism—a sense of moral superiority even after physical defeat. And Successes under the Leadership of the CPC when China overtook all those Western Imperialist powers and Japan, and became the biggest trading nation in the world, which led to an inferiority complex—a sense of doubt and feeling like an impostor.
The range of Chinese emotions between callousness and grandstanding, between inferiority and hubris, has been matter of Western ‘China Studies’ since its conception as an academic discipline in the 18th Century. Generally speaking, Western missionaries were Western spies who reported back to Rome, Paris, and London that China was backward and needed Christianity and a strong Western Leadership. Did you know that the most famous book that was ever written on China is Mr. Arthur Smith’s Chinese Characteristics? Well, it is pretty much like the Protocol of the Elders of Zion, just from the dip shit end of world conspiracy.
What followed was the coordinated invasion of China and the semi-colonization of several parts and ports, notably Shanghai by the French, Macau by the Portuguese, Formosa by the Japanese, Tsingtau by the Germans, the Canton by the British and so on and so forth. I spare you the details of “a hundred years of humiliation,” as every Asian learns about it. However, few people in the West are taught this history.
Naturally, a strong introspection of the Chinese psyche took place since the fall of the last Chinese Dynasty, the Qing, in 1911. Even in defeat, Chinese sages imagined a spiritual victory. Wrote the poet Gu Hongming: “It is a well-known fact that the liking – you may call it the taste for the Chinese – grows upon the foreigner the longer he lives in this country.” That was in 1922.
In other words, even when their armies were clearly defeated and their nation conquered, their poets turned “a disastrous beating” into some form of spiritual victory and moral triumph. Almost like the biblical “Turning the other cheek…”
An East-West dichotomy reemerged. The ebb must follow the tide, the unjust brings forth the just, and so on. Said the chairman Mao Zedong: “I believe that the international situation has now reached a new turning point. There are two Winds in the world, the East Wind and the West Wind.” That was in 1957.
Without Confidence, a civilization, a nation, a family and even an individual will succumb to the hostile forces of nature and man, and will fall victim to cruelty and conquest.
It is therefore of essence to our survival, that we must combine forces, serve the people, and be assertive and vigilant against outside invaders.
Evolutionary Sciences seems to support this claim. A recent study in ‘Current Biology’ in July 2022 suggests that the now extinct Native Americans had Chinese DNA traces in their bones.
This was 14,000 years ago in North America. The Europeans wiped out the Native Americans as soon as they “discovered” them in 1492. China lost contact with North America, and could not help. The core Chinese Civilization today traces its origins back “only” 5,000 years. But still, it has survived the Ancient Greeks, the Romans, the Egyptians, lived in peaceful coexistence with the Indians and Japanese, and, for the longest time, regarded itself—erroneously—as Zhong Guo, the Center of Nations.
As a Nation Thinks
Today, China’s Cultural Confidence is again caught in between two extremes. The pro-Western forces say China cannot achieve a multipolar world and must accept total Westernization [or suffer US embargo, containment, and military intervention like Europe, Japan, the Middle East, and Russia]. The pro-China forces say China must revive Confucianism, groom its own economic champions, and become a center of the world again.
IMAGE 6 Confidence and The Xin-Civilization
Governments do well by carefully weighing in and listening to the traditionalists as well as the progressives, but ideally, they should never again become push-overs to foreign dictate.
Did you read how the American President’s favorite propaganda media like New York Times or Wall Street Journal reported on China’s “censorship on information about the Covid demonstrations”? Well, America owns or dictates all global media, owns global big tech, and controls the world wide web commonly known as the Internet. It is Americans who control and censor all of us. And if China objects to the American world dictatorship, it will be called a terrorist, a rogue state, and a censorship regime.
Some commentators have argued that Xi Jinping and the CPC still should not subsidize “writers and artists.” They say things like “Art should be for art’s sake” or “Don’t draw a moon, build a spaceship.” In other words, the government in Beijing is believed to focus too much on technology and infrastructure, hard power, not on arts and culture and the mighty word, soft power. To which we reply that all nations in the world want to improve their material circumstances, yet it is only those who seem to stride effortlessly and possess a magnificent Culture who succeed.
Upon his arrival at Ben Gurion Airport, which sits on the lands of the occupied Palestinian city of El-Lyd, President Joe Biden repeated his age-old mantra, “You don’t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist.” Indeed you do not. To be a Zionist, you only need to be a racist, a supporter of the hate-filled, violent, intolerant apartheid regime that has been occupying Palestine since 1948. You need to believe that people who are not Palestinians have a right to Palestine and to its resources. To be a Zionist, you don’t need to be Jewish, you just need to repeat the absurd claim that the Bible gives all Jewish people around the world the right to kill people because they are Palestinians who want to return to their homes and their land.
In a nauseating show of hypocrisy, President Biden, Israeli President Yitzhak Hertzog, and Prime Minister Lapid spoke of peace, justice, and human rights as the shared values of the United States and the State of Israel. This was less than twenty-four hours after John Bolton admitted to orchestrating coup d’états in countries around the world. This is also after Israeli military, and political figures openly talked about assassinating Iranian scientists and officials.
The values shared by Israel and the United States are clearly represented in the fact that President Biden is visiting a country that only recently assassinated the American-Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu-Akleh and is keeping silent about it. The president of the United States is in Israel, meeting with heads of the Israeli state, and yet rather than using the full force of his position – which is considerable – to demand accountability, he says and does nothing.
American journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The murders of Khashoggi and that of Shireen Abu Akleh are not the only crimes committed by the two regimes for which Biden is showing love, but these two were well publicized and involve U.S. nationals, so one would think he would act or at least speak out.
A BAD DEAL
U.S. support for Israel is a bad deal for the American taxpayers. $3.8 billion dollars of American taxpayers’ money gets sent to Israel at the beginning of each year. And with the exception of the military-industrial complex, Americans get little out of this.
American citizens who wish to travel to Palestine, particularly if they have an Arab name or family there, are subjected to harassment by the Israeli authorities. This harassment takes place at Tel-Aviv airport, where the authorities are notoriously racist, anti-Arab and anti-Muslim. The harassment can last for many hours and often results in refusal of entry into the country. U.S. citizens are not protected from the inhumane interrogation process that takes place at the airport on the way in, and they are not protected by their U.S. citizenship when they leave the country.
A U.S. passport does not even protect Americans from being shot and killed by Israeli forces. Rachel Corrie and Shireen Abu-Akleh, both citizens of the United States, were killed in broad daylight. They were wearing safety equipment, they were well identified as non-combatant civilians, and they were both butchered in plain sight. Washington made no effort to bring the criminals to justice.
Another U.S. citizen who died at the hand of IDF soldiers is Omar Abdalmajeed As’ad. He died on January 12 after he was arrested by IDF troops. According to a report in The Jerusalem Post, the seventy-eight-year-old As’ad “was arrested, handcuffed, blindfolded and gagged,” after which the soldiers left. Also, according to the Post report, “the soldiers did not call for medical assistance and left him there believing that he had fallen asleep.” Although several members of congress did issue statements, no real action was taken to hold Israel accountable.
Where was the U.S. government to protect him? Where was the demand to investigate and bring the culprits to justice? and where are the sanctions against the State of Israel, which shows no regard for the lives of Palestinians?
The Israeli human-rights organization B’Tselem commented that: “The army’s announcement regarding the death of Omar Assad is adorned with empty words about ‘moral failure’ – concluding, as expected, with the faintest of rebukes…In fact, the fundamental moral failure is that of Israel’s senior echelons, leading a regime of Jewish supremacy, one in which the human life of Palestinians has no value.”
NO DEMOCRACY, NO STABILITY
Contrary to what is said about Israel, it is neither a democracy nor an island of stability. It has been several years since Israel has been able to function as a state. This is due to the fact that there has not been a government with a stable majority in place. Elections are held over and over again, and even though the results are predictably the same, no stable government is formed. The election results have been consistent, clearly showing what Israeli voters want, namely, they are in favor of a strong, ultra-right-wing government led by racists like Benjamin Netanyahu, who was indicted for corruption, and war criminal generals like Benny Gantz.
Neither the corruption nor the war crimes seem to have any impact on the voters, and these people are elected over and over again. The only thing that changes are the partnerships between the politicians who rarely last very long and the new generals that join the political arena. The one thing that remains constant in Israeli politics is Benjamin Netanyahu. He and his loyal Likud Party followers are the only stable, consistent element in Israeli politics.
WHO IS JOE BIDEN WORKING FOR?
Judging by his performance, Joe Biden is working for AIPAC and not for the American people. He hit every note, shook every hand and repeated his mantras, clearly trying to please his donors back home. According to reports, he even made sure to tell Benjamin Netanyahu that he likes him. His interview on Israeli television included a commitment to keep the Iranian Revolutionary Guard on the list of terrorist organizations and even to attack Iran if that was what it took to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons. That is not what his constituents in the U.S. want, but it is what Israel and AIPAC expect of him.
هذه هي الأسطورة الغائبة التي أغفلها غارودي والعالم، ولم ينتبها إلى دورها وأهميتها البالغة في تضليل الرأي العام الغربي.
ربما كان مهدي عامل أوّل من أضفى بُعداً معرفياً على الطائفية، بوصفها أيديولوجيا ما قبل الرأسمالية، في خدمة الرأسمالية، مميّزاً بينها وبين الدين، كمرجعية إيمانية خالصة.
في ذكرى النكبة… الأسطورة التي أغفلها غارودي
ولم تجد مقولة عامل هذه صداها، كما وجدته في الأيديولوجيا الصهيونية.
فبالرغم من كل ما قيل عن الصهيونية كتعبير عن البورجوازية اليهودية الكبيرة (اليسار العربي الكلاسيكي) أو عن البورجوازية الصغيرة (أبراهام ليون)، فإنّ الوقائع والمعطيات وبنية الخطاب الصهيوني لا تغادر هذه المقولة، وتجعلها ملائمة وقابلة للاستنتاج أن الصهيونية هي أيديولوجيا ما قبل رأسمالية، سواء في مفاهيمها النظرية الأولى، كما كرّستها كتابات الصهاينة الأوائل ومؤتمر بال، أم في مشروعها السياسي، الذي رافق الإعلام الصهيوني عن قيام الدولة العبرية على الأرض العربية في فلسطين.
هذه هي الأسطورة الغائبة التي أغفلها غارودي والعالم، ولم ينتبهوا إلى دورها وأهميتها البالغة في تضليل الرأي العام الغربي، وإعادة إنتاجه في كل مرة، وفق المقاييس السرية لتقارير وملفات وزارة المستعمرات البريطانية، وهي تصمّم محميّة رأسمالية شرق المتوسط، بأيديولوجيا ما قبل رأسمالية.
لقد قدّمت الصهيونية نفسها كأفضل ممثل للغرب في الشرق، وكخطوة أولى في رحلة الألف ميل، من أجل شرق ديمقراطي معاصر! وتمكّنت أيضاً من اختراق العديد من الأوساط الثقافية العربية، المثقلة بالتخلّف، والتي لم تدرك بعد أن هذا التخلف يعود في واحد من أهم أسبابه إلى دور الصهيونية في احتجاز مشروع الاندماج القومي، وإعاقة هذا المشروع بالهويات الجهوية القطرية البدائية، التي يجري تسويقها كهويات وطنية مستقلة جداً.
فهل تعبّر الصهيونية عن الأيديولوجيا الرأسمالية حقاً، أم هي صورة كاريكاتورية لهذه الأيديولوجيا في مضامينها ودلالاتها ما قبل الرأسمالية؟ وماذا عن القراءات والملاحظات التالية:
أولاً: لم تتأسّس “إسرائيل” كدولة قومية بورجوازية خارج الدين الذي كان فصله عن الدولة شرطاً أساسياً من شروط النمط الأوروبي لهذه الدولة. بل تأسّست كداعشية توراتية لليهود، الذين ينتسبون إلى عشرات القوميات والأعراق والأجناس.
والدين اليهودي كما سجّله عزرا في السبي البابلي، ليس مثل أي دين آخر. ففي التلمود تتساوى النفس اليهودية مع العزة الإلهية، ويصبح اليهود شعباً مقدّساً مكتفياً بذاته. ولذلك لم يحاول اليهود التبشير بدينهم، لأنهم لا يقبلون خفض مستوى واجبهم نحو تجسيد النموذج الأرقى بجعله واجباً لكل البشر.
ولا تزال بنية الخطاب الصهيوني، الذي ينتج العقل اليهودي الجمعي كل صباح، بنية محكومة أو مسكونة بهذه الحالة، التي لا تعتبر دم اليهود ودم الأغيار من القوميات والأديان الأخرى دماً متساوياً، والتي لا تسمح لغير اليهودي بتسلّم أيّ منصب مهم في الدولة، ولا تسمح ببيع الأرض والبيوت والحقول للأغيار، ولا تسمح بإنقاذ غير اليهودي يوم السبت.
وهناك عشرات الأمثلة التي يعرضها إسرائيل شاحاك في أعماله المنشورة، التي تكذّب كل ما يقال عن الطابع العلماني للدولة العبرية.
ثانياً: لم تتأسّس “إسرائيل”، بصورة طبيعية، كما كل البلدان الأخرى، ولم تعبّر عن مصلحة بورجوازية معينة في بناء دولة سوق خاص بها.
وإضافة إلى التأكيدات المعروفة في التاريخ الصهيوني بشأن الدور العام الذي يمكن لليهود أن يلعبوه بين السويس وطريق الهند الشرقية، وأن يمنعوا عودة روح محمد علي إلى مصر ثانية (وفق تحذيرات البارون روتشيلد، وناحوم سوكولوف، وجابوتنسكي…).
إضافة إلى كل ذلك، وبالاشتقاق من الوظيفة غير الطبيعية للصهيونية السياسية المذكورة، اشتقت الصهيونية من هذه الوظيفة أيديولوجيا غير طبيعية في ملامحها ما قبل الرأسمالية، من جهة، ومن قدرتها على الاستمرار كذلك، كواحدة من مظاهر الرأسمالية نفسها. ومن ذلك:
· فكرة التطويب المقدّس للأرض، بوصفها حالة خلق جديدة، مماثلة للخلق الأول، وصورة عن الفعل النموذجي، الذي قامت به السماء وجسّدته في هبوط نوح على البرية وبناء مملكة الله الأرضية وسط عالم من الخطايا، فتكون “إسرائيل” معادلاً لنوح، وتكون الكوارث التي سبقت قيام “إسرائيل” معادلاً للعماء الكوني الأول، والوحش المائي الذي يرمز إلى ذلك. ويكون مصرع هتلر، والإخفاق العربي في حرب 1948، معادلين لهزيمة الوحش المائي، وما تستدعيه من قرابين بشرية ضرورية للتطويب المقدس الجديد.
· فكرة الألفية أو العود الدوري، والتي لا يمكن تصور الأيديولوجيا الصهيونية من دونها. فهي الفكرة التي تضفي على الهزائم والكوارث طابعاً مقدساً، بوصفها المسوّغ التاريخي للانبعاث مرة أخرى. وهي الفكرة التي توفّر جسراً أو صلة ما بين أيديولوجيا ما قبل رأسمالية كالأيديولوجيا الصهيونية، وبين الأيديولوجيا الرأسمالية في حقبتها الإمبريالية، كما عبّر عنها “فوكوياما” في نهاية التاريخ.
· فكرة الأمة المزعومة أو الشعب المقدّس، التي تتعالى على التاريخ والسيرورة، وتلغيها بإحالة المعرفة البشرية كلها إلى حدوس صوفية، وما عداها ضرباً من الخطيئة.
ومن المفهوم أن الحدوس المقصودة في البنية التوراتية للخطاب الصهيوني، هي حدوس محسومة بصورة ربانية للشعب المختار: (روح الله عند أبراهام كوك، والقدرة العليا عند آحاد هعام، والأسطورة الحية عند هرتزل).
ثالثاً: لم تتأسّس “إسرائيل” على أسس ديمقراطية بورجوازية، بل وفق ديمقراطية أخرى، هي الديمقراطية الجرمانية، وما تستدعيه من عرقية خالصة (مفبركة) لتسوّغ علاقة السيد اليهودي (الأنا) بالعبد العربي (الآخر).
فالدولة هنا ليست مؤسّسة قائمة على الحق، بل مؤسّسة قائمة على تصوّر أيديولوجي مرتكز على العرقية.
والحرية والديمقراطية شرط داخلي لإنتاج فاشية خارجية، وليستا نموذجاً إسرائيلياً لديمقراطية فريدة في الشرق الأوسط.
رابعاً: لم تؤسّس الصهيونية دولة مدنية حديثة، بل أسّست نموذجاً لدولة قديمة ما قبل رأسمالية، هي الدولة-القلعة. وكانت في كل ذلك تعبيراً عن نموذج الدولة الحامية والجغرافيا السياسية التقليدية القديمة، القائمة على التخادم السياسي.
وبالارتباط بذلك، لم تؤسّس الصهيونية لمجتمع حديث مؤهّل لإنتاج دولة معاصرة، بل إنّ الدولة هي التي أنتجت المجتمع، وكان بالضرورة وجهها الآخر.
فكما ولدت وعاشت الدولة العبرية على الريع الخارجي والعائدات الإقليمية للوظيفة التاريخية، ولد المجتمع اليهودي على شاكلة دولته. واتّسم بطابع ريعي مماثل، وظلّ يعيد إنتاج بنيته وآلياته الداخلية على إيقاع الوظيفة السياسية الخارجية، واستعاد صورة المجتمع الذي شهدته إسبارطة وروما، وكان ينقسم، كما هو معروف، إلى سادة ونبلاء وبيروقراط من جهة، وعبيد منتجين، من جهة ثانية.
فمقابل النبلاء والسادة في أثينا، يتولى الأشكينازيم في الكيان الصهيوني المناصب الرفيعة في الجيش والاقتصاد والمجتمع. ومقابل العبيد، يقوم الأغيار من العرب والعمال الآسيويين بالأعمال اليدوية.
خامساً: وبالارتباط بالدولة الحامية ومجتمع الدولة الريعي، ظل الاقتصاد الإسرائيلي، بالرغم من عمليات الضخ الخارجي الكبيرة، اقتصاداً شديد الارتباط بالموقع الإقليمي لـ”إسرائيل” داخل لعبة الأمم بين أحواض النفط والطرق والممرات الكبرى، وخطوط التصدّع العالمية.
وأعاد إلى الأذهان اقتصادات الدول-القلاع القديمة، التي كانت تعيش وتتغذّى على طرق التجارة وحماية القوافل والغارات المأجورة.
فبخلاف الطابع المستقل للعسكرة عن البنية الاقتصادية – الاجتماعية في بلدان الديمقراطية الرأسمالية، تمثّل العسكرة في “إسرائيل” جزءاً لا يتجزأ من بنية الدولة والاقتصاد والمجتمع.
وبخلاف الاقتصاد المفتوح في بلدان الرأسمالية الكبرى، التي ترعى الدولة العبرية، تحتفظ هذه الدولة باقتصاد مركزي، ليس له ما يبرّره سوى اعتبارات الوظيفة الخارجية، وما تستدعيه هذه الاعتبارات من شروط اجتماعية داخلية لتعزيزها والتقاطع معها باستمرار.
سادساً: لم تؤسّس “إسرائيل” تقاليد أو مناخات وحدة وصراع طبيعية مع أحد، لا مع الأصدقاء وخاصة الولايات المتحدة، ولا مع العرب.
فعلاقاتها الخاصة مع واشنطن ليست علاقة قائمة على قانون الوحدة والصراع في إطار الوحدة، كما هي حال العلاقات التي تميّز الدول والقوى الصديقة أو المتحالفة، بل علاقة قائمة على اعتبارات أخرى، تحيل “إسرائيل” برمّتها إلى حالة أميركية داخلية، تجعل أيديولوجيا الأنظمة اليهودية، ما قبل الرأسمالية، مجرد تنويعة خاصة على أيديولوجيا نهاية التاريخ الإمبريالية.
وعلاقاتها مع العرب لم تقم، في المقابل، على قانون الوحدة والصراع في إطار الصراع، بل أخذت، وبالضرورة، شكلاً صراعياً من نوع مختلف، لا يستهدف الإخضاع وتقاسم النفوذ الإقليمي، داخل منطقة عربية أصلاً، بل يستهدف الإقصاء والنفي في مستويين مترابطين: نفي الشعب الفلسطيني لا إخضاعه، وتفتيت البنى العربية، وتحويلها إلى كانتونات وجزر معزولة، على غرار دولة البانتوستانات القبلية التي صنعتها جنوب أفريقيا في ما مضى، كأحزمة وأشرطة حدودية حولها.
ولدينا هنا أكثر من مفارقة: الأولى أن “إسرائيل” لا تسعى من وراء الاتفاقيات التي وقّعتها مع غير طرف عربي إلى تكريس أيّ من هؤلاء الأطراف والتعايش معهم، بل إلى تحويل التسوية معهم إلى مناخات موضوعية لتفكيك هؤلاء الأطراف أنفسِهم وتحويلهم إلى مكعبات متناثرة وظواهر إسرائيلية داخلية يتحمّلون في الوقت نفسه الأعباء الأمنية والاجتماعية المباشرة في دوائرهم الخاصة، ويعيدون إنتاج هذه الظواهر في المدار الإسرائيلي بأقل التكاليف الممكنة.
والمفارقة الثانية أن السياسات الإسرائيلية المذكورة لا تتّسم بالطابع الرأسمالي التقليدي المعروف لدى المتروبولات الدولية والإقليمية، بل بطابع أقرب إلى النمط الإقطاعي، وذلك بفضل الموقع الحاسم للأيديولوجيا الصهيونية التوراتية، داخل الوظيفة السياسية الخاصة للدولة-القلعة، والشعب-الطبقة.
صحيح أن مشروع التفتيت الصهيوني للمحيط العربي يقوم على فلسفة السوق وإملاءات البنك الدولي، مقابل مشروع المركزة الإسرائيلية، الذي يقوم على رأسمالية الدولة وقانون الكتل الانتخابية، إلا أن هذه الآليات الرأسمالية تتحرك عملياً ضمن تصورات وبنى اجتماعية ما قبل رأسمالية أو متماهية معها.
فالمعادلة السابقة هي التي تجعل دولة اليهود هذه أقلية طائفية كبرى، وسط أقليات عربية صغيرة، متطاحنة.
أخيراً…
كان متّى يقول: كل ما يؤخذ بالسيف، بالسيف يهلك.
وكان البيتار ينشدون: بالدم قامت يهوذا، وبالدم سقطت، وبالدم ستبعث من جديد.
فكان السؤال: لماذا لا تزول ثانية، فكل ما ينبعث، بحسب غوته، جدير بالزوال.
إلى ذلك، وإضافة إلى مصالح بريطانيا الاستعمارية في إقامة قاعدة عسكرية شرق المتوسط لحماية طريقين مهمّين وتأمينهما، طريق شركة الهند الشرقية، وطريق السويس، فإن الذي نفّذ المشروع الصهيوني فريق بريطاني كامل مرتبط بالصهيوني وايزمان، ويتألف هذا الفريق من كل من:
1. كامبل بنرمان
2. ونستون تشرشل
3. اللورد سايكس
4. الجنرال اللنبي
5. اللورد بلفور
6. شبكة سارة التجسّسية
7. لورنس العرب وشبكة الجواسيس المرتبطة به
8. هربرت صموئيل
9. إيلياهو ساسون.
وقد لعب بنرمان دوراً مهماً في التنبيه إلى أهميّة عزل مصر عن مشرق الوطن العربي عبر إقامة كيان يهودي في فلسطين، وكانت تجربة محمد علي الذي وحّد مصر وبلاد الشام ماثلة في ذهنه.
وأخذ سايكس على عاتقه تمزيق سوريا الطبيعية إلى أربعة أقاليم، سوريا الحالية، ولبنان، وشرق الأردن وفلسطين، مقدمة لوضع فلسطين بتصرّف الحركة الصهيونية. وجاء بلفور بوعده المعروف تتويجاً لاتفاقية سايكس-بيكو، واستكمل ذلك كل من تشرشل والجنرال اللنبي، الأول بتأسيسه للفيلق اليهودي في القوات البريطانية، والثاني باحتلال فلسطين وطرد الأتراك منها وتسليمها للبريطاني الصهيوني هربرت صموئيل، الذي كان ابنه ضابطاً في الفيلق اليهودي.
كما عهد إلى شبكتين للتجسّس وتجنيد المرتزقة توفير الظروف المواتية لإطلاق المشروع الصهيوني كما أداره الصهيوني وايزمان بالتنسيق مع هرتزل وروتشيلد (الصندوق المالي). فإضافة إلى شبكة لورنس المعروفة، لعبت اليهودية سارة وشبكة التجسّس والدعارة التي تديرها دوراً كبيراً في اختراق أوساط عربية عديدة واستمالتها، أما إيلياهو ساسون أو إيلياهو إيلات، فقد عهد إليه بتقديم نفسه كمستشرق بريطاني مهمته دراسة الأحوال العربية المحيطة بفلسطين، حيث أمضى، فعلاً، سنوات عديدة بين الأهالي في مصر وسوريا وشرق الأردن ولبنان، تمكن خلالها من إقامة علاقات واسعة مع زعامات وشيوخ في هذه المناطق، وفّرت له الاطلاع عن كثب على أحوالهم وطرق تفكيرهم ومصالحهم من جهة، كما لعب دوراً في إشاعة ثقافات كيانية تدعو إلى الاستقلال عن سوريا والتخلص من نفوذ أكبر حزب كان يدعو إلى استقلال ووحدة سوريا الطبيعية آنذاك، وهو حزب الاستقلال السوري. وبحسب مذكّراته (إسرائيل وجاراتها) التي تقع في ألف صفحة تقريباً، فقد قدّمت الحركة الصهيونية دعماً مالياً للعديد من الزعامات والقوى (الجديدة) المعادية لوحدة سوريا الطبيعية، وكان يرى أن سيطرة اليهود على فلسطين لا يمكن أن تحدث وتستمر بوجود سوريا الواحدة الموحّدة.
إن الآراء المذكورة في هذه المقالة لا تعبّر بالضرورة عن رأي الميادين وإنما تعبّر عن رأي صاحبها حصراً
Many observers and organizations make parallels between the apartheid segregated Society of South Africa, the Jim Crow racial segregation laws of North America, and “Israel”.
Apartheid (/əˈpɑːrt(h)aɪt/, especially South African English: /əˈpɑːrt(h)eɪt/, Afrikaans: [aˈpartɦɛit]; transl. “separateness”, lit. “aparthood”) was a system of institutionalized racial segregation that existed in South Africa and South-West Africa (now Namibia) from 1948 until the early 1990s.
20 years on from the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance, in conjunction with the International Decade of the World’s Indigenous People, held in Durban South Africa, where are we now?
The use of the law, in this case, an unjust and immoral law in South Africa by the minority white Dutch Afrikaans and the minority white British colonial invaders, was designed to keep white Europeans, in the ascendancy in South Africa.
Thirteen percent of the population who were white-ruled sixty-eight percent of the population who were black with an Asian community representing the remaining nineteen percent.
First, they ruled through a brutal military occupation, using the gun.
Then they ruled through a brutal racist government using repression and separation laws.
It was the use of apartheid laws that legalized and enforced a system of ‘separateness’. A system of dual apartness which left the races unable to socialize, congregate or work together as brothers and sisters, equal and indivisible under the constitution.
In South Africa, they legalized colonial white supremism through parliamentary statute, police enforcement, and judicial sentencing.
The first apartheid law passed in 1949 was the Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act. This was followed by the Immorality Act of 1950 which made it illegal for many South Africans to marry or have sexual relations across racial lines.
The Pass laws were designed to force black people to live in designated areas, corralled as it were, like animals in a pen, thereby making them available as cheap labor for white farmers.
It was the coming to power of the African National Party in 1948 who created the apartheid laws and system of governing South African society, that reinforced the racial discrimination already self-evident in the country. A series of Land Acts gave more than 80% of the land to whites and banned Black crop sharers from working the land.
A series of discriminatory, racially biased laws, saw the permanent separation of the races, alongside a parallel system of separate transport systems, public lavatories, and housing districts.
In effect, the National Party which won the 1948 parliamentary elections on the slogan of Apartheid meaning ‘separateness’ created a privileged white minority class that used the indigenous black South Africans as a labor pool to work on the farms, clean their homes, as a subjugated underclass, kept in perpetual poverty, in appalling substandard housing units in shantytowns with poor education, poor health, and poor social provision.
Like all colonialists, they strove to keep the people apart by fomenting sectarian tensions between the regional ethnic groups in order to prevent a unified opposition to their racist endeavor. They encouraged black-on-black violence in the townships and in the countryside.
A land of milk and honey for the white supremacist colonial invaders beside a land of despair, oppression, and governmental indifference for the natives.
Apartheid lasted for 50 years in South Africa and only officially ended when the ANC, African National Conference which had historically opposed the apartheid system and fought a legitimate war against the unjust white only parliamentary system, finally came to power in 1993, when the majority of citizens were given the right to vote and they elected Nelson Mandela as the first Black President of the Republic of South Africa,
It can be claimed that not much has changed for the indigenous peoples of South Africa, While it is true they have a majority black representative government, the whites still own the land. White farmers still get rich while employing cheap black labor.
The captains of industry are still white although a new elite cadre of black politicians and civil servants may now live in gated (separate) communities, much of the pain of being poor, disenfranchised, and black has changed very little for so many.
A new black capitalist class also rides high above the black dispossessed workers and those who go to bed hungry.
Many observers and organizations make parallels between the apartheid segregated Society of South Africa, the Jim Crow racial segregation laws of North America, and “Israel”. The use of Israeli-only roads and Jewish-only settlements in the West Bank are prime examples of Israeli separation laws.
The discrimination against black African Americans is again reflective of the white European racism that underpins white American society. It is mirrored in the majority of the white legislator, judiciary, police, and army aficionados in power in American civil society and in the corporate, business, and banking sectors.
White Americans control the levers of power and influence, in the media as well as on Capitol Hill.
The continued destruction of black Afro American society through the widespread use of drugs, criminal gangs, poverty, underinvestment, governmental neglect, police brutality, judicial repression, are continued proof if it were needed, that a white European colonial mindset underpins discrimination and racial prejudice in societies where white Europeans want to maintain an internal hegemonic position of superiority which is then reflected in their foreign policies of exploitation and subjugation, in order to maintain white economic privilege in the countries of the EU, North America, Canada, and Australia.
All the countries I have mentioned above are guilty of genocide, racial intolerance, oppression, military adventurism, and ethnic cleansing.
Is “Israel” any different?
“Israel” is a white European colonial settler state.
It has followed all the steps taken by previous white European settler-colonial states such as South Africa, North America, Canada, and Australia,
It has colonized, subjugated, ethnically cleansed, and marginalized the indigenous populations of the country they have militarily conquered and supplanted.
“Israel” has its Nations state Law which many international observers see as a template for a Jewish only Israeli state that separates non-Jews and others from playing an active role in the state.
“Israel” now has usurped 85% of historic Palestine.
To me, apartheid is an abhorrent manifestation of a supremacist ideology that seeks to separate one from the other, to create disharmony, bitterness, hatred, and a divided dysfunctional broken society based on racial or religious purity.
“Israel” fulfills all these roles but it does so much more.
An apartheid state might use the law to discriminate. It may use the law to repress and isolate those it seeks to subdue but it doesn’t bomb kindergartens, schools, hospitals, and bakeries, does it?
It may have separate roads and separate housing areas but it doesn’t shoot countless children in the legs for throwing stones or bringing water to the kids resisting an illegal occupation, creating crippled boys, does it?
It does not shoot paramedics and leave the wounded to bleed out on the street to die, does it?
It does not murder physicists in another jurisdiction, indiscriminately bomb bridges and civil infrastructure in neighboring countries, does it?
It does not count the calorific intake of those it is legally responsible for, to break their will to resist, to withhold food, medicine, vaccines, fuel in order to impoverish and emasculate an entire population of 1.8 million people, does it?
It does not bomb neighboring countries that are not at war with it, deny building permits to the indigenous population while simultaneously dismantling their homes in a land you are illegally occupying, and forcing homes owners to destroy their properties. To detain citizens under Administrative detention, internment without trial. To murder, maim, imprison, torture, and kill at will with impunity, is this Apartheid? I think not. Yet these are the everyday actions of a rogue unaccountable state immune to international law and international sanctions, actively supported protected, and facilitated by the other white European ethnic colonies that Israel aspires to be.
“Israel” is Beyond Apartheid.
We must find a new way to describe “Israel” based on its everyday practices of Ethnic cleansing, murder, colonization, dispossession, and expansion.
We must call “Israel”, not an Apartheid State which it is, but an Ethno cleansing pariah genocidal rogue state, because that it was, it does? That is what it is. That is what we must call it.The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Al mayadeen, but rather express the opinion of its writer exclusively.
What do the following people have in common? George Soros, Elon Musk, Jeffery Epstein, Larry Page, Sergei Brin, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Sanger, Jimmy Wales.
Two things. One, they are Jewish. Two, they condensed from a spiritual mist to almost suddenly become household names, men of immense wealth whose companies exert huge influence on Western society – but men who apparently achieved these enviable heights without the usual necessities of intelligence, education, experience or native talent or, for the most part, good judgment. Have you ever wondered how these men quietly rose to such eminence in spite of their lack of credentials? Let’s see what we know to be true.
Jeffrey Epstein
Let’s begin with Jeffrey Epstein, who is perhaps more representative of this group than you might imagine. Epstein’s credentials consist of his being a psychopath, sociopath, and oversexed pedophile with a bit of charm. Little else. By all accounts, Epstein had never held a real job because he was unqualified for any. He did at one point hold a teaching position – for which he possessed no qualifications whatever, but that seems to be the list. Yet he progressed from that to being a quasi-billionaire director of one of the greatest sexual-entrapment schemes in the history of the world, replete with private aircraft, very expensive mansions, a private “pedophile island” in the Caribbean and much more. A man who kept company with the world’s rich and famous (and especially British royalty), to whom he treated with his underage treasures.
How did such a thing happen? Epstein promulgated a myth that he was an investment manager, accepting clients with available cash of a minimum of one billion dollars. It was a good story, but there is no evidence – no evidence – that Epstein ever made a stock trade. As one market expert said with perfect understatement, “It’s unusual for an animal that big to not leave footprints in the snow”. And Epstein left no footprints. In fact, there was no plausible source of his apparent wealth, no source of income to support his “Lolita Express” flying underage girls all over the world to entrap politicians and royalty from most Western nations, nor to support the immense expense of his mansions and the construction of his pedophile island in the Caribbean.
The public naturally became curious about Epstein’s funding sources and, right on cue, the NYT and WSJ informed us that Les Wexner (also Jewish), the principal of Victoria’s Secret, had been defrauded by Epstein to the extent of $400 or $500 million dollars. So now we know the source of his money. Jeffrey was not only a pedophile running a massive sexual entrapment enterprise, but was also a con-man and thief. Interestingly, Victoria’s Secret seems to not have been harmed financially by this massive loss, its revenues and profits continuing happily. And how did Wexner deal with this enormous fraud? Apparently by simply ignoring it. Many people have filed lawsuits against Epstein’s estate to obtain compensation for damages, but Wexner doesn’t appear to be one of them. We can legitimately wonder why not.
How to explain all of this? As in all the examples we will study, easier than you might imagine. Jeffrey Epstein did indeed have a job, that of creating and managing the most far-reaching sexual entrapment scheme in history. He was recruited for that job because he possessed all the natural qualifications as listed above. The persons who recruited him were the same group of Jewish European bankers and industrialists – our International Cabal of Gangsters (ICG), and they financed him to the tune of at least several hundred millions of dollars, a pittance when compared to the rewards to be vacuumed from captive politicians.
Epstein was simply a ‘front man’ doing the bidding of his masters who, as always, hide in the shadows and cannot easily be connected to the execution of their plans. The job paid well. Epstein enjoyed the life of a billionaire and all its trappings, enormous perquisites for performing a service of almost infinite value to his masters.
Larry Page and Sergei Brin (Google)
This one reads like a fairy tale: two young Jewish kids, raised in Russia, polluted with Communism and a corrupted form of democracy, unthinking robots of a dictatorial state, emigrated to the US and, in only six weeks more or less, created a behemoth corporation with a market value of nearly $2 trillion and with a search engine that provides 80% of all internet searches worldwide. Either the Jews really are God’s Chosen People, or there is something very wrong with this story.
In fact, Page and Brin were ‘front men’ in a way similar to Jeffrey Epstein, but with far less influence on execution. All you need to do is think. Before the appearance of Google, we had multiple search engines each with its own algorithms and all useful. But a search engine contains enormous potential for the control of information. By amending the algorithm, I can decide which items or articles appear on a search and which are consigned to the dustbin. I can literally control the information you see, and I can ensure there is much that you will never see. I can make all the negative articles about China or Russia appear in the first page of a search, and I can ensure you will never see information about the Jewish atrocities in Palestine. My search engine has the power to almost single-handedly control the available information for the great majority of populations. And thus the attraction.
But in fact, Google was a child of the CIA, funded, planned and financed initially through In-Q-tel, a brainchild of our European Jewish ICG always searching for more and total information control. Eric Schmidt was mostly in charge from the outset; our two students being irrelevant. Again, all we need to do is think. How could two young kids create a search engine – entirely on their own – that would be so perfect, so efficient, as to virtually exterminate all competition in a short time while milking billions from advertisers.
Like Jeffrey Epstein, Larry Page and Sergei Brin were hired for a job, in this case to serve as the front men for a massive (and so far very successful) effort at total information control. They are held up publicly as the stars, are gratuitously made very wealthy, all as part of the plan to disguise the purpose and intent.
Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook)
Once again, how does a young Jewish kid steal a group networking idea from his friends and, again within six weeks more or less, create a world-leading communication platform? The power behind Facebook that propelled it to its present position, did not come from him. As with Google, Twitter, and other such platforms, an enormous amount of knowledge, influence and financing are necessary for such a result, far beyond the capacity of any one person.
As with the others, Zuckerberg is merely a figurehead, a ‘front man’, deflecting attention from the originators of the project. He was offered a job with excellent pay, the opportunity to appear very wealthy, to further the impression of Jews being geniuses, but has done nothing of import or consequence. All this was financed and stage-managed behind the scenes by his masters, Zuckerberg merely along for the ride. But it works; this little shit is so heavily promoted that he rated a personal audience with Xi Jinping. Confucius must be screaming in his grave.
Elon Musk
If Google was a fairy tale, Tesla motors is a Cinderella delusion. Looking through the man’s record – and blowing away all the smoke – Musk went from sleeping in his car and eating leaves from trees to (again within six weeks more or less) being the CEO of “the world’s most valuable car company” and sending spacecraft to the moon. How do you suppose that happened?
Almost everyone in the last century attempting to design and market a new brand of automobile has failed miserably. Except for China and Russia, everyone – most especially including the USA and NASA – has failed in space missions or haven’t the money to do it. But along comes Elon Musk who can do all of these and more. Tesla’s aim is to sell more electric cars than all other manufacturers combined, and to become America’s default space agency.
There is no evidence that Musk has any executive or management abilities of consequence; his staff hate him, his Board of Directors despises him, the SEC believe he is a menace, and shareholders panic at his presence. The available information states freely that Musk plays no active part in the management of Tesla, nor in anything to do with outer space. I do not deny that the man may have some abilities; I claim only that they are not yet evident. Why is he there, with his apparent $200 billion bank account? As with all the others, Elon Musk is a figurehead, a ‘front’, someone hired for a job with great pay, much publicity, and perfect obedience.
George Soros
By one measure, Soros is unique among the subjects of this essay since there exists a huge international movement to have him burned at the stake as a witch. Other than this, nothing separates him from the other members of this clan. One need speak to Soros for only a few minutes to realise he hasn’t the knowledge to “bankrupt the Bank of England” or perform the other financial crimes attributed to him. Once again, Soros was hired for a job with good pay, lots of publicity, and a totally undeserved reputation for ability. Once again, a front man, given an opportunity to accumulate wealth which is then used to further the agenda of the ICG, primarily by funding seditious organisations all around the world, helping to destroy nations and economies according to the current agenda.
I do not know the selection process for people such as these. Perhaps they simply come to the attention of the right persons at the right time. Perhaps their mothers are mistresses of various members of the ICG and can give their offspring an unfair advantage. I see no pattern in the selection, which means the process is ad hoc and perhaps capricious, but it exists nonetheless. There is no other explanation, because these current heroes are typically mediocre at best, none exhibiting management ability beyond that of a 7-11, and none being exceptional in any identifiable way. Yet they appear from nowhere and are instantly propelled to galactic stardom, and that occurs only when a very wealthy and experienced puppet-master is pulling the strings.
*
Mr. Romanoff’s writing has been translated into 32 languages and his articles posted on more than 150 foreign-language news and politics websites in more than 30 countries, as well as more than 100 English language platforms. Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He is one of the contributing authors to Cynthia McKinney’s new anthology ‘When China Sneezes’. (Chapt. 2 — Dealing with Demons). His full archive can be seen at https://www.moonofshanghai.com/ and http://www.bluemoonofshanghai.com/
In the Name of All- beneficent, All-merciful God (Allah).
God has kept his promise to Jesus ( peace be upon him) that his followers will have the upperhand over his enemies until the day of judgment.
Today the Christian population of the world is 2.3 billion and the Jews, who refused to recognize the Holiness of Jesus and his Holy mother Mary and showed enmity towards them, are only 14.7 million (in pure form) and including their sub categories they are 20 million or so, and the Idol worshippers of then Rome, who wanted to kill Jesus and killed many of his followers, are extinct now.
If a person is told, “God has sent a message that you will never enter paradise and you are definitely going to hell” How do you think he is going to act?
I think he is going to be enraged and he is going to commit every possible sins and crimes against others and try to destroy others’ lives out of envy, just like what has happened to Satan, when Allah cursed him and drove him away from the Garden, as he refused to obey Allah’s order.
Also, if someone is told that he is going to heaven no matter what, then nothing will stop him from committing crimes against others, since he is assured of heaven. This is the case with the Zionist Jews; they think they are chosen by God. It should be asked: “Chosen” for what, heaven or hell?
Had God really made this promise to any one, He would have first removed the evil intentions from his soul completely, so that he is preserved from all sins and not commit crimes against others, to get what he desires. This is the logical path.
Then, when we see the Zionist Jews are committing great sins and crimes against other human beings, then we have no doubt they have fabricated this saying: “We are not going to be punished for this.”
This very sentence of them, “We are the chosen people” is the root cause of their transgressions in their private and social lives, which had begun long before Jesus arrived, almost two thousand years ago. God says in the Holy Quran:
“The faithless among the children ( descendants) of Israel were cursed on the tongue of David and Jesus son of Mary. That, because they would disobey and they used to commit transgression.’ (5:78)
A strange looking transgression by Israeli Occupation forces need to be looked at and be given much attention to. Every time Israel attacked Lebanon, it did not forget to shell Cana, a south Lebanon town bordering northern Galilee. They have killed many innocent civilians there intentionally, even though there were no Hezbollah positions there during those incidents . Much was written about it in Lebanese media at that time and in subsequent anniversaries. The famous and distinguished journalist, late Robert Fisk, covered these stories at length.
Lebanese town of Cana is not like any other town, it is famous for pilgrimage for the Christians and the Muslims. It is said, Jesus( peace be upon him) showed his first miracle there, changing water into a Heavenly wine or drink for his disciples. Some say, he also cured a woman there, his first time, with his miraculous power.
WHY do Israeli Occupation Forces shell this place every time they attack Lebanon?
Questions must be asked to the Christian world, specially to the US politicians:
1. Which is more financially beneficial for the USA, friendship with 20 million Jews or 1.8 billion Muslims?
2. Why are the Jews so dear to you who think Jesus was a fraud?
3. And why are the Muslims so detestable to you, while the Quran is full of beautiful praises for Jesus and his Holy Mother ?
3. Was not Hitler a Christian who killed Jews in Europe? Why have you implanted European Jews in Palestine? Does Jesus agree with this kind of justice?
4. Why should Muslim be killed and evicted from Palestine to make space for European Jews, whom you Christians have killed in hundreds of thousands? Why not create a safe heaven for them in Europe or in the USA, if you are so concerned about their plight? What kind of atonement and upholding human rights is that?
5. Is it socially and securitywise an advantage for the USA to support Israel in inhumane crimes against Palestinians and their neighbors and thereby antagonize the 1.8 billion Muslims? (Thanks to American internet, that brings news and footage of American and Israeli crimes against the Muslim world, to every Muslim home everyday)
6. Are you afraid that, if you don’t support Israel, you are going to lose all the Jewish business people’s money?
In that case, where are they going to go with their money?
7. Why don’t you tell your Jewish friends “Stop whispering venoms in my ears against Muslims, they have the same rights as you have! They are not hurting you, it is us who have hurt you many times!”
If you do not have the courage to tell it to the Jews, then borrow courage from these verses of the Holy Quran, where God speaks to the faithful through Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him and his infallible family):
” O you who have faith ( faith in God an His messengers and the Judgment Day)! Be maintainers of justice and witness for the sake of Allah, even if it should be against yourselves or [your] parents and near relatives, and whether it be [someone] rich or poor, for Allah has a greater right over them. So do not follow [your] desires, lest you should be unfair, and if you distort [the testimony] or disregard [it], Allah is indeed well aware of what you do.” (Quran, 4:135)
And here is another instruction from God which blows away any racism, religious bigotry and other reasons that unfairly treat people, be they Jews, Christians and Muslims:
“O you who have faith! Be maintainers of justice, for the sake of Allah, and ill feeling for a people should never lead you to be unfair. Be fair; that is Godwariness, and be wary of Allah. Allah is indeed well aware of what you do.
Allah has promised those who have faith and do righteous deeds, forgiveness and a great reward.” (Quran,5:8-9)
And He praises the upright people:
” So give good news to my servants who listen to the word and follow the best of it. They are the ones whom Allah has guided, and it is they who possess intellect.” (Quran, 39:17-18)
More than 1400 hundred years ago, Allah revealed to Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him and his infallible family) that he was going to defeat the big forces of the idol worshippers and take back the control of Holy Kaba, which was built by his forefather prophet Abraham (pubh), known as The idol smasher. These were the verses:
“When Nasrallah ( Allah’s help) comes with victory, and you see the people entering Allah’s religion in throngs, then celebrate the praise of your Lord, and plead to Him for forgiveness. Indeed He is all-clement.” (Quran, 110-:1-3)
And it happened exactly so. The idol worshippers all fled from Macca before putting up a fight due to great fear. That fear in the hearts of the pagans was the help from Allah.
This time we have a person named Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah (Allah’s help), the Leader of the Lebanese Hezbollah, promising the same, that his forces, along with his friends from the region, will liberate entire Palestine from the Zionists with the help from the oppressed Palestinians. Thereby also liberate Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem on behalf of the Muslim world.
Is Nasrallah name just a coincidental similarity? Or is it divinely ordained for the liberation of Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem?
In last 22 years he has always made good on his pledges. In the year 2000, he promised to his country men that they would drive out the Israeli forces from south Lebanon, and they did. After the victory he declared to his nation that “There will be no more defeats for Lebanon against Israel.”
In 2006, on the first day of the war, which was imposed on Lebanon by Israel, he warned the Israeli people on a televised speech that their war was not only against Lebanon, but their war was also against Prophet Mohammad and his family (peace be upon him and his family). He declared that his forces were given a divine pledge, that they were surely going to win the war and they will humiliate the Israelis, and it happened exactly so.
After 4 weeks of fighting Israel realised that it was not going win the war and actually was losing, it requested the USA to arrange a cease-fire with Lebanese PM. Before the cease-fire, for a face saving result, Israel pressed hard with a very big number of their best tanks against Hezbollah . I remember, three days before the cease-fire, Israel lost 34 tanks, two days before the cease-fire it lost 55 tanks and on the last day it lost 74 tanks. A real face saver huh?
With his mentioning of the divine guarantee and the great victory, Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah proved he has divine connections with Prophet Mohammad and his family ( pubh& his family).
Before Hezbollah entered the Syrian war against the Al Qaeda and the ISIS terrorists, at the invitation of the Syrian government, Sayyed Nasrallah again pledged victory, and he made good on his pledge again. By this, he once again proved he is spiritually connected to the higher world, from where he gets his clues.
My conclusion is, Israel will give up fighting due to extreme fear of death. All of their officers and soldiers know that Sayyed Nasrallah never lies; when he says something, it happiness. We are going to see what used to happen during the days of the prophets and for that, there is no better arena than Palestine.
A few days ago presstv.ir reported that Sayyed Nasrallah has said, while meeting the Hamas Leader Ismail Hanyeh:
“The resistance front has always stood by its words, and fulfilled it’s pledges. The obliteration of Israel and liberation of al-Quds are now within reach and can happen closer than ever. When the resistance front vows to obliterate Israel, it relies on established facts and not illusions.”
Israeli settlers have announced that they are going to enter the Al Aqsa Mosque on 18th of July with the demand that the Dome of the Mosque structure be demolished for building the Temple of Solomon. According to the Jews, their Messiah will appear any time after that.
Allah has a notice for the Zionists though:
” And when your Lord proclaimed that He would surely send against them, until the Day of Resurrection, those who will inflict on them a terrible punishment. Indeed your Lord is swift in retribution, and indeed He is all- seeing, all-merciful.” ( Quran, 7:167)
Editors is a General Posting account managed by Jim W. Dean and Gordon Duff. All content herein is owned and copyrighted by Jim W. Dean and Gordon Duff
One of the most interesting aspects of the Yom Kippur War (1973) was that it marked a sudden switch from Israeli manic ‘hubris’ to melancholia, apathy and depression.
Following their outstanding military victory in 1967, the Israelis developed an arrogant disrespectful attitude towards Arabs and their military capabilities. 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 faced a devastating surprise. This time the Arab soldier was very different. Israeli military strategy, built on air superiority and fast ground manoeuvres supported by tanks, proved ineffective within hours. Egypt and Syria, helped by new Soviet antitank and ground-to air-missiles, managed to dismantle Israel’s might. In the first days of the war Israel suffered heavy casualties. It’s leadership and high military command were in a state of despair. Yet, this type of crisis wasn’t exactly a rare event in Jewish history.
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. These repetitive scenarios involve Jewish collective hubris driven by a strong sense of exceptionalism (choseness), and lead to horrific consequences. I call this ‘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 their playground. 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 thought) were openly dedicated to the cultural uprooting of Germans, all in the name of, ‘progress,’ ‘psychoanalysis,’ eroticism,’ ’phenomenology and ‘cultural Marxism.’ Then, almost ‘from nowhere,’ a tidal wave of resentment appeared, and the rest is known.
But was there really a sudden shift in German consciousness? Should 1930s German ‘anti-Semitism’ have come as a surprise? Not at all. All the 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 at the end of the 19th century. It was the Yom Kippur Syndrome, that same hubris that prevented Berlin’s Jewish elite from evaluating the growing opposition around them.
What we see in Israel at the moment is obviously a tragic manifestation of the same syndrome. Once again, the Israelis have been caught unprepared. Once again mania of omnipotence is replaced by melancholia. Once again the Israelis failed to estimate Hamas’ military capabilities. They failed to recognise the growing frustration of Israeli Arabs and acknowledge the possibility that their frustrations could escalate into street fights or even civil war.
The Israelis have succumbed to the delusional thought that the Palestinian cause had evaporated. They were convinced that cracking the BDS and starving Gazans had dismantled the Palestinian aspiration. Yet it is Hamas that has managed to win the most crucial victory uniting the Palestinians in Palestine, in the camps and in the Diaspora, alongside Muslims from around the world. This unity is significant especially in the light of Israel being politically divided heading towards a fifth election.
Once again, Israeli arrogance is replaced by deep sadness. Israel could ask itself some necessary questions: What is it that we do wrong? Why is our history repeating itself? Is there something we could do to change our destiny? Rather than this necessary introspection, Israel is actually doing the opposite. Instead of dissecting the present crisis in the light of similar events in the past, Israel repeats the same mistakes. It refers to the current crisis as just another ‘round of violence. It delves into the strategic and tactical possibilities that will ‘enforce a ceasefire on Hamas’. Israel basically speculates over the level of carnage that will bring the ‘Arabs on their knees’ once again.
Israel defines itself as the Jewish State and its tragic mistakes are naturally determined by that fact. If Yom Kippur is a Jewish day of introspection, the Yom Kippur Syndrome is the direct outcome of a total incapacity to self-reflect. Yet one may wonder whether the Jew can be emancipated from the Jewish destiny and the Yom Kippur Syndrome in particular? Like early Zionist Bernard Lazare, I believe that all it takes is drifting away from exceptionalism. But once stripped of exceptionalism, not much is left of contemporary Jewish identiterianism.
I guess that we are touching upon the most devastating existential aspect of the Yom Kippur Syndrome; there is no Jewish collective ideological escape for the Jew. We are basically dealing with a cultural and spiritual limbo.
I tend to believe that the only escape route from the Yom Kippur Syndrome is individual: self-imposed exile. Leave the ghetto late in the night, crawl under the fence, dig a tunnel under the ‘separation wall’. Once out on the land of the free, proceed quietly and modestly in search of the humane and the universal.
It now seems certain that we have a Jon Bidet for president. For if a rose by any other name would smell as sweet, a Biden, metaphorically speaking, by any other name still smells like a poorly maintained sanitary device, however many euphemisms the imagination may body forth out of the forms of things unknown.
The American election campaign with its arcane modalities, along with the contemporary pandemic narrative, and somehow functional to it, have revealed the progress of an inextricable confusion. Statistics, medicine, health, illness, science, opinion, belief, critique, criticism, freedom, law, crime, punishment, openness, censorship, liberty, compulsion, have lost their original meanings. And the amazed world by such amazing changes, no longer knows which is which.
There are ethical bombings, therapeutic missiles, democratic assassinations and humanitarian imperialism. Even the most perspicacious reasoner may be easily bewildered, while the mythical average citizen, lost in the mental labyrinth of Newspeak, feels as if he had stumbled into the utter darkness of a starless universe.
Still, looking at the whole as impartially as we can, it cannot be denied that confusion is the raw material of power.
The general conception of power describes it as a regime of asymmetric transactions involving a strong dealing with a weaker contractor. Disrespect for the laws means jail, failure to pay bills leads to extinction of service, non-payment for ‘protection’ results in the store being burned, etc. The basis of power is then a concrete threat with the consequent fear of the threatened.
If the relationship of meanings were so straightforward, the nature of power would not require further investigation. However, reality shows that he who doesn’t comply with the laws can incur penalties, but power may and can treat much worse him who tries to comply with them.
That power is based on fear is patently clear, but fear creates assuefaction and can also be rationalized. However, a rational analysis of power does not imply the acceptance that power is rational. On the contrary, nonsense and self-censorship represent a constant of its behavior and communications, leading to the conclusion that power is schizogenic and schizocratic, as a European philosopher has determined.
Examples. Ever since Reagan and Thatcher the operating economic concept has been the oxymoronic concept of expansion with austerity, meaning, in practice, gluttony at the top and hunger at the bottom. For capitalism likes deflation along with the pauperization of the unworthy crowd. But in a regime of constant stagnation who will pay the taxes?
Inter-imperialist and inter-capitalist conflicts may explain some inconsistencies we are witnessing – e.g. demonizing and threatening China while buying all that China can sell. But there is no such conflict when considering economic policies. If Trump really wanted to defend the most national capitalistic entities against transnational ones, what was the point of indiscriminately reducing taxes to all corporations, domestic and transnational?
The Supreme Court refused to examine the charges of massive fraud in the presidential elections, brought forth and demonstrated by the plaintiff. The reasoning, in layman’s terms, is that fraud was none of the Court’s business, even when it involves the actual future of the country – of whose laws, and therefore civilized existence the Supreme Court is the supreme arbiter. One reasonable conclusion is that the majority of the Supreme Court does not feel as powerful or secure as the supremacy implied in its appellation would suggest. In laymen’s terms some of the ‘supremes’ fear for their ass. The confused citizen wonders what is ‘supreme’ about the Supreme Court.
On the other hand power does not live by planning but by power, as if in a kind of blissful irresponsibility. Where power, for maximum effectiveness, includes confusion and nonsense. During my corporate days, I remember passing by rows of cubicles in a large office hall, one cubicle for each individual, veritable monuments to the unknown employee. In some of them the dweller had hanged a poster with the script, “If you cannot dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.”
And in terms of pure domination, nonsense pays off; for nonsense is more seductive than fear. US President Harry Truman is credited with the sentence summing up the principle of psycho-war, “if you cannot convince them, confuse them”. In reality power prefers to confuse rather than convince, since beliefs can change. Both fear-based domination and conviction-based consensus are uncertain and transient, while a confusional state can perpetuate itself indefinitely over time, establishing a sense of permanent loss and fragility and thus a lasting dependence. Covid-19 docet.
Another classical example. Communism in Russia died 30 years ago. And yet the US cabal sees Russia as the same threatening power of yonder years. The proverbial average citizen, more interested in the sexuality of royals and of show-people than in the actual world around him, will depend on the televisual ministry of truth for actual news, the shorter the better, leading to the average citizen’s assured and lasting dependence on lies.
Some psychopaths, though not being in a position of strength, can establish dominant relations over other people; this is achieved through a behavioral pattern where an attitude of giving an exaggerated importance to the other is alternated with an exactly opposite attitude, contempt and ridicule. By so dong the victim is persuaded that he lost the benevolence of the other because of some personal mistake. While fear can be rationalized, this confusional state, instead, leads to an uncritical identification with one’s aggressor.
The development of the Covid emergency demonstrates the principle. Power has alternated an exaggerated attention to the health and lives of citizens with callous disregard for their economic survival. Even the most sordid business connected to the emergency is presented to public opinion with a communications technique already described in literature. Power can be angry at you for harboring suspicion while, at the same time, it makes you feel that what you suspect is certain.
Hence the ordinary citizen today does not know what power wants from him. He strives to literally follow the most absurd rules, at times nonsensical, at times draconian, at times falsely permissive. Yet, the more he strives to comply, the more he is threatened with imminent new dangers (e.g. new strains of the same virus requiring more coercion and (?) new vaccines). In the end the situation dampens the desire for rebellion, while it reinforces, in the most part, the feeling of having something wrong within oneself. For a confusional state, therefore, creates more dependence than fear or consent.
Equally, a confusional state blocks the individual’s mind from perceiving the massive buffoonery of which he is the target. In this sense, and from the point of view of power, buffoons are a godsend – because they don’t understand what they are doing, believe everything which is in the domain of personal interest, know how to lie because their whole life is a dissimulation, and create enough confusion to disorient people and prevent the birth of a coordinated and widened opposition.
The instrumental use of the virus has been contradicted and exposed by many. Who are competent, illustrious people, credible on paper at least as the ensigns of the virus, and have provided mountains of evidence for an operation with horrible or at least questionable ends. Just to quote an example, during the last 30 years, the US government had to indemnify people damaged by vaccines for a total amount of 4.4 billion $. A proportionate indemnity applied for people equally damaged by vaccines in the UK. Yet, as it is widely known, Pfizer is legally exempted from compensating patients damaged by the vaccine.
As for the highly paid, highly visible and highly wrong ‘scientists’ pontificating on sundry viruses, they are living proof that no estimates are more in danger of erroneous calculations then those by which a man computes the force of his own genius.
Regarding the concurrent goals of the pandemic, the operation is not even hidden, so much so that the term ‘The Great Reset” (attributed to the Caliban-looking Karl Schwab, mastermind of the World Economic Forum) has almost become part of the common parlance. Yet, such is the mental and moral armor that confusion, conformism and fear have instilled into most, that the extraordinary conjuncture (virus-great reset) is either overlooked at large or mostly relegated to the limbo of so-called conspiracy theories.
From such a perspective, the parallels between the American elections and the Covid phenomenon are more meaningful than random. Can there actually be a straight connection? As long as the inquirer is not asked to resort to crude generalizations and vulgar simplifications such as a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ he may be allowed to proceed. For history (and indeed life) can be compared to a Byzantine mosaic, composed of an apparently endless number of tiles. A single independent tile could not possibly suggest or enable to imagine the whole. Yet the mosaic would lose its completeness if that tile were missing.
I will therefore collect some ‘tiles’ of the “Great Reset,” which encompasses events intrinsically connected, namely the fraudulent recent presidential elections, the pandemic as a means for crowd and mass control, the practical elimination of the middle class, the fight against Western Christian civilization, the ethnic replacement in Europe and America of the white race via mass third-world in-migration, corresponding to the final stage of the Kalergi plan.
Known to many, I will just repeat here the end goal of the plan, the substitution of the white Western ethnicity with a Negroid race via miscegenation. Images of men on the walls of ancient Egyptian tombs will give the idea of how the “new European” will look, writes Kalergi. And ruling over this new inferior race will be the Jews, the best of whom will have, in the meantime, intermarried with the best and most successful whites, to amend some racial characteristics among the chosen people, produced by millennial intertribal marriages.
The previous paragraph may sound anti-Semitic were it not an actual quote from the book “Praktischer Idealismus” published by Kalergy, the recognized founder of the European Union, whose work was massively supported by Jewish bankers both in Europe and America.
Still, all this could be thought of as a bold hypothesis, were it not confirmed by palpable evidence that only willful mental blindness could ignore or contradict.
Just one example among many, concurrent with the elections and the pandemic, the New York Times, under ownership of the chosen people since 1895, carrier of the ‘official’ political American opinion, and best known newspaper in the world, published an article by Roger Cohen titled, “Trump’s Last Stand for White America.” (Oct 16, 2020) https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/16/opinion/trump-2020.html
Yet, historically, we are approaching the end of a project whose roots sink into what for us is a bare faint remembrance of things past. Still, there is no shortness of evidence. For example, thus writes Emperor Claudius, in 41 AD, “I command the Jews not to agitate for anything beyond that which they have hitherto enjoyed, and not from henceforth, as if they lived in two cities, to send two embassies — a thing which never occurred before now – nor to intrude themselves into games and elections, but to profit by what they possess and to enjoy in a city, not their own, an abundance of all good things, and not to introduce or invite others of their race who make voyages to Alexandria from Syria or Egypt, thus compelling me to conceive the worst suspicions; otherwise I will by all means take vengeance upon them, as fomenting a general plague upon the whole world.”
Claudius made this proclamation, in response to riots between Greeks and Jews in Alexandria. He thought that peace in the city would be restored if the Jews ceased certain negative behaviors. Meaning agitating for heightened and special privileges (“to agitate for anything beyond that which they have hitherto enjoyed”); attempting to circumvent established practices of representative politics (“to send two embassies — a thing which never occurred before now”); attempting to intrude into, and disrupt, the cultural life of the Alexandrians (“to intrude themselves into games and elections”); attempting to manipulate the demographic balance of the city (“to introduce or invite Jews who make voyages to Alexandria from Syria or Egypt”); and finally, abusing and exploiting the advantage of their diaspora condition to cause problems internationally (“fomenting a general plague upon the whole world”).
Next, it may be instructive to compare the pronouncement of Emperor Claudius with the following very recent speech by the good Rabbi Yosef Mizrachi, which some have titled, “God will bury America.” It is a transcription but the original can be found here, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkuofEh-5c8&feature=youtu.be
“The Jews run the show in the world. Not because they want to but because that’s what God wants. And it’s written in the Torah that the non-Jew admit that this is the word of God. And if they did not admit what is the proof?
But in the Torah it says that in every nation you, the Jews, will be always the highlight of the place. Even though we are only a small part of the community compared to America, 300 million Americans, 5 million Jews, no comparison. But the Jews are everywhere. All the systems of Trump, Jews. All of the system of the Sleepy Joe, Jews. Obama? Jews. Everyone around them Jews, conservative Jews, “Habat knit (?)” Jews. All somehow, same thing was in Spain, same thing was in many different countries. When a country hosts the Jews, and the Jews live in that country with freedom, God blesses this place thanks to the Jews. As soon as they torture them, or kill them, or throw them out of the country, the end of the empire shortly comes to them one by one.
The Roman empire, when it started with (messing with) the Jews that was the end. After the Jews no more Roman Empire. The Greeks? Same story. Babylonia disappeared. Persia (inaudible) in Iran modern days.
The Iranian Shah was very good to the Jews. Iran was the fourth powerful country in the world, in his time. After Russia, America, I think Germany. Iran, who was selling oil, controlling the market. Iran was an empire several years ago. The Jews ran away when Khamenei came and Iran went back in time 1000 years. The end of Iran came. Germany, they killed the Jews. It used to be a massive empire – they are now one more country, nothing special. Spain, same thing. the Jews were in power, then they did the Spanish Inquisition. Spain and Portugal? There is nothing left from them. Russia… there were many hundreds of thousands of Jews there. Russia was a powerful empire. The Jews left Russia, the USSR collapsed. the Jews in America have assimilated and have nothing to worry. But the Jews that are religious will have to get away within a year or two or five – all have to run away from here. Once we would leave this place Hashem (God) will bury America. That’s what is going to happen. Not because I am some kind of a prophet. I am not giving you any prophecy, I am just describing to you a divine formula. The chosen people when they (the locals) are going to be good and nice to them I (God) will bless you from that place.”
Many have described but relatively few have given logical explanations for the overwhelming power that Zionists hold in the countries they are hosts of. Recently I heard one that, in my view, merits consideration. It goes as follows. Like any other group or people or nation, Jews contain a criminal element. But their criminal element is exceptional and uniquely different from any other criminal entity, because of their historicity as a global travelling group. This always gives the criminal element an advantage as long as they operate in the criminal ground, and that’s why they occupy positions of power and control. As the good rabbi said, “All the systems of Trump, Jews. All of the system of the Sleepy Joe, Jews. Obama? Jews. Everyone around them Jews, conservative Jews, “Habat knit (?)” Jews. All somehow, same thing was in Spain, same thing was in many different countries.”
It’s not because of just skill, it’s because of coercion, bribery, blackmail, corruption and deceit that many of these people end up in positions of power. The host nation is not capable of resisting them once they are brought into the pen, when the wolf has been allowed among the sheep.
Joe Bidet is a ‘Catholic’ sheep who excels at applying his tongue with gusto to the buttocks of his masters. Besides, 30 pieces of silver will buy more than one Judas. In various occasions he has defined himself an ardent Zionist. There is no depth of flattery he did not resort to. As when he told one of the many Zionist organizations in the country that, “The Jews have been major contributors to the success of America.”
In this context, it may be interesting to examine an extract from one of his very recent declarations to an audience of African Americans.
Biden said he wants to appeal to Trump’s 75 million voters but not by “giving them anything.” He repeatedly drew parallels between white Trump supporters and the Ku Klux Klan, and further suggested he was planning to use the bully pulpit to harass white Trump supporters for their “racism” as though they’re KKK members.
He also said he got a call from the Pope to congratulate him on his victory and the Pope told him that “the most important thing you have to do is to deal with racism.”
As a side note, Pope Bergoglio said that migrants are ‘God’, that European must miscegenate because the Madonna was a mulatto. And as a symbolic sign of a more-than-symbolic subservience of the Catholic church to the New World Order, the most recent Nativity Scene in St. Peter’s square was made up of Startrek characters. And in the Nativity Scenes of some Italian churches Joseph and Mary wear anti-Covid masks. It may be more colorful than meaningful but many Catholics openly call Bergoglio the “Antichrist.”
Biden talked about the deluge of biracial couples in commercials as evidence of progress and an indicator of where society is heading, “Fifteen years ago could you turn on the television and see few commercials being biracial.”
“You want to know where society’s going?” Biden said. “Watch entertainment, watch the profit motive.”
“Why are these commercials, so many of them biracial? The young generation is changing, they’re demanding more, they don’t come with the baggage — maybe 10, 20, 25 percent of them are pure racists, who knows — but the vast majority, the vast majority, are not at all (as) when I was coming up.”
It was interesting to hear Biden talking so forthrightly. Unlike Trump, he’s coming with plans (read, those of his masters). Unfortunately, they are disgusting and, as he said, “This country is doomed” (meaning, unless it opens the border to the third world and whites miscegenate).
Trump did much to promote Zionist objectives, including the recognition of Jerusalem as capital of the Jewish state and of the occupied Golan Heights as Israeli territory, the assassination of eminent and respected Iranian leaders, the acquiescence in considering ISIS a ‘terrorist’ organization – whereas it is/was but a Saudi setup with strong Israeli participation. Yet it is astonishing that Zion did not find it sufficient – maybe short of a public circumcision, possibly performed by the aforementioned Rabbi Mizrachi.
Given Biden’s plans, the pandemic is a perfect tool of confusion and a tile in the mosaic of the Kalergi plan. As well as a perfect test of how much and how far elites can go in (effectively) emasculating entire populations, preventing or eliminating the risk of upheavals – in the style of the now-all-but-forgotten Gilets Jaunes. For the pandemic has brought the threat – no matter whether real or narrated – to the biological level of pure existence. A state to which attempts are made to reduce us, so as to erase the resistance and the consciousness that were beginning to emerge.
In summary, if multinational, pharmaceutical and banking cartels make up the laws, if America accepts the verdict of falsified elections (which means accepting the death of representation), if Europe and America are driven by lobbies and cartels still seeking all sorts of hegemonies, then we live in a perfect tyranny, because it is a tyranny that successfully hides itself.
Finally, the present is a fleeting moment, the past is no more and our prospect of futurity is dark and doubtful. But we think, therefore we are, and thought is still free from the extant censorship, unthinkable just a few decades ago.
We can take the view that so long as Heaven has condemned us to suffer, patience is a virtue. On the other hand, we can hope and work at creating the anger required to destroy tyranny. For, as Thomas Aquinas said, “The absence of anger is a sign of the absence of reason.”
America is divided and the rupture is so deep that Americans can’t even see across that which splits them in the middle. If there was a hope at one point that someone could unite the nation, this hope has faded away. In fact, the American mainstream media works relentlessly to sustain that cultural and even metaphysical separation. It is reasonable to determine that rather than delivering something that resembles news, the American media operates as propaganda outlets. Like in the Soviet Union, American mainstream media manufactures stories that sustain premeditated narratives. The commitment to impartiality, truthfulness, honesty or any journalistic standard has been replaced with blind adherence to a ‘party line,’ an ‘ideology,’ a ‘worldview.’
On one side of that dividing line we find the so-called ‘progressives’: ‘liberals’ and Identitarians who are largely associated with cities and the urban lifestyle. On the other side we find people who are conservative, nationalist and patriotic. More than often, they are slightly removed and even repulsed by urban culture.
It doesn’t take a genius to gather that the progressive worldview is, in fact a celebration of choseness (exceptionalism). To be ‘progressive’ is to believe that someone else must be ‘reactionary.’ To be progressive is practically a severe form of self-love. As such, progressives and liberals do believe themselves to be on the right side of history and this belief legitimises their conduct, which often verges on hardcore authoritarianism. After all, ‘reason,’ progressives believe, is embedded in the core of their liberal perception.
‘Ordinary’ people, on the other hand, do not deny or refute reason. They just accept that reason is merely one aspect of the human existence. To be ‘ordinary’ is to acknowledge that ‘Being’ is prior to reason. Unlike the liberal and the progressive who adheres to the Cartesian Cogito, Ergo Sum; ‘I think therefore I am,’ the ‘ordinary’ accepts that you actually ‘think because you are’ (Heidegger). But it goes further: to be ‘ordinary’ is to accept that you actually ‘are where you do not think’ (Lacan). To be ‘ordinary’ is to let the unconscious guide you to safety. To be ‘ordinary’, as such, is to accept that ‘Being’ proceeds rationality, to acknowledge that ‘Being in the World,’ transcends beyond reason and rationality. Thus, true existential understanding is when rationality comes to terms with its boundaries. And ecstasies, as the ultimate form of existential celebration is the instant in which the reason lets off its guards and the soul is finally free to explore its true nature.
While the ‘chosen’ sees oneself as the shiniest product of enlightenment, the ‘ordinary’ is often unimpressed by the enlightenment and its ‘achievements.’ For the ‘ordinary’, family values, the church, the commitment to the soil and even ‘love’ as a thing in itself do not beg for rational ‘explanations’ or analytical explorations. The ‘ordinary’ does not see oneself as the ruler of the universe. The ‘ordinary’ is instead a humble visitor: he or she embraces the climate and accepts its changes. The ordinary people also seem slightly less fearful of ‘global pandemics.’ They are often made of combatant fabric and like soldiers they accept that temporality is inherent to existence.
People may oppose and mock Donald Trump for understandable reasons, but no one can deny the fact that Trump contributed more than anyone else to emphasise this sharp and unbridgeable divide between the ‘chosen’ and the ‘ordinary.’
Trump appeared on the world’s political stage when it seemed as if the liberal agenda had prevailed. Trump’s presidential victory in 2016 revealed that half of the American people weren’t sure about the plan to ‘revise’ the ‘World Order’. Four years later, the battle zone is fully transparent. On November 3, 2020 Trump and the Republican Party were destined to disappear electorally. Many pollsters promised us a Biden/Democratic ‘landslide victory.’ This didn’t happen. The Democratic party lost seats in the house. The Republicans gained them. And if this is not bad enough, Trump increased his raw vote tally considerably, growing stronger within diverse community segments that are traditionally associated with the Democratic party. Judging by the election results, many people actually prefer to be ‘ordinary.’
A legal battle is taking place at the moment over issues to do with the integrity of the November election. The American Progressive media pretends that this battle isn’t taking place. While Trump’s legal team fights in the swing states not one American liberal mainstream outlet is brave enough to admit that half of America has drifted away to alternative outlets. In just a matter of days those outlets increased their ratings significantly. The ‘ordinary’ doesn’t buy into the ‘chosen’ narrative. He and she actually prefer an ordinary tale.
And yet, it is important to grasp the role of Trump in all of this. How did this real estate tycoon emerge to become the voice of America’s Working Class? How is it possible that the Democratic Party, once upon a time the voice of working America, has become the mercenary force of Wall Street and Silicon Valley while the Republicans are now the voice of the Ordinary people and working Americans? Trump provides an answer.
Peculiarly enough, Trump is that which Bernie and Corbyn pretended to be but never were. Trump, himself, an exemplary ‘chosen’ character has become the favorite of the ‘ordinary.’ Trump’s communication is existentially driven. The man has managed to excite tens of millions of voters shaking his behindto the music of YMCA. As opposed to the rationalist enlightened ‘chosen’ who searches for the reasoning that connects words to meanings, the ‘ordinary’, reacts to the deafening silence between the words. Trump is a master of that deafening silence. He knows how to articulate his massage in between words. I assume Trump has never read Lacan, but he understands very well the role of the unconscious: you ARE where you do not think. You are your guts.
That which progressives and liberals hate about Trump is exactly what more than 74 million American voters love about the man. Liberals and progressives see Trump as a reckless, failed businessman with a trail of bankruptcies and (pandemic) deaths behind him. Yet, for his admirers, these facts make Trump into an Übermensch, a resilient human hero who prevails against all odds. Like some military figures such as MacArthur, Patton, Sharon and historical state leaders such as Hitler, Stalin and Churchill, Trump, throughout his entire adult life, has been willing to risk everything to win a battle or fulfil a dream. Like the above historical figures, Trump manages to drive his troops into ecstasy yet, unlike many of them, Trump didn’t start a single war. ‘Ordinary’ people appreciate this fact as it is often them who send their sons and daughters to fight and die in the so-called ‘American wars.’
If you are upset by the undeniable fact that our greatest scientific minds are failing in their battle against Covid-19, you should be relieved to learn that the West’s greatest minds are momentarily occupied with a way more important battle: the war against antisemitism.
The Jewish News Syndicate (JNS) reported a few days ago that the Alfred Landecker Foundation (Berlin) launched a new international ‘Decoding Antisemitism’ project to stop hate online using ‘Artificial Intelligence. ’Apparently, the multi-national team comprised of ‘discourse analysts, computational linguists and historians,’ will develop a highly complex, AI-driven approach to identifying online antisemitism.
The Jewish news outlet reports that studies have shown that the majority of anti-Semitic defamation is expressed in implicit ways – for example through the use of creative codes such as ‘juice’ instead of ‘Jews. ’The highly sophisticated algorithm is, presumably, designed to scan the net continuously and attribute security alerts to every possible reference to ‘juice.’ However, if you see law enforcement agents surrounding your local grocery shop you should assume that its owner may have issued a complaint to the manufacturer about the integrity of his last orange juice delivery.
The genius AI application will also spot certain conspiracy narratives or the reproduction of stereotypes, especially through unusual images. I guess that we are referring here to images of an un-named orange who kept his underwear on. It may as well be that the AI application will be sophisticated enough to trace the exact favourite fruit extract that drives the Open Society Institute.
Issues to do with COVID-19 are particularly important as far as the new AI application is concerned due to “the rise in conspiracy myths accusing Jews of creating and spreading COVID-19.” This is no doubt a demanding task for the state of art application, as most Jewish outlets actually openly admit a unique and concerning level of intimacy between Jews/Israel and the virus. Back on 1st April, Zionist outlets were the first to admit that Jews were as much as 8 times over-represented amongst Covid 19 death in Britain, at least in the first days of the epidemic. As early as the 3rd of March, an Israeli company named Migal was quick to announce that it has the vaccine for Covid-19. The new AI system will have to learn to turn a blind eye to the fact that Jewish outlets openly admit that Orthodox Jews in New York and in Israel consciously and strategically let the virus spread in their communities as they truly believed (and for a good reason) in herd immunity.
Dr. Andreas Eberhardt, CEO of the Alfred Landecker Foundation told the Jewish outlet that “Antisemitism and hatred directed against minorities are putting the future of our open society in jeopardy. And the problem is only getting worse in the digital sphere. It’s essential that we use innovative approaches – such as using AI – to tackle these issues head on.” I guess that Dr. Eberhardt is correct and the next obvious question is why are the German academic and his institute fighting antisemitism in particular rather than fighting hatred in general and universally?
On my part, I could save the Alfred Landecker Foundation a lot of energy and resources. Instead of adopting a Stasi doctrine, scanning the net, spying on our profiles for poetic expressions and ‘juicy images,’ just ask a few basic elementary questions: why is antisemitism back on the rise? What is it that Israel and its Lobby are doing that is so upsetting to a growing number of people? What is it that we cannot talk about and why?
I actually believe that one old Zionist text from the late 19th century answers all those questions. Bernard Lazare’s Antisemitism: Its History and Causes attempted to figure out why Jewish history is an endless chain of tragedies and expulsions.
Lazare believed that if Jews want to dominate their fate they must emancipate themselves from their choseness, that unique racially oriented sense of privilege and exceptionalism. Zionism in its early version, was for Lazare the way forward. Zionism at the time was distinguished by its total rejection and negation of the Diaspora Jewish culture and identity (Shlilat Ha-galut). When Zionism was a spiritual metamorphic aspiration, the Jews were loved and admired, their Jewish state was even ‘forgiven’ for its colossal crimes against the indigenous people of Palestine (The Nakaba). But when Israel drifted away from its idealistic roots, when it gradually became the ‘Jewish State’, the tolerance towards Israel’s actions and its lobby also started to fade away.
The Alfred Landecker Foundation may do better using their historians, linguists and computer scientists identifying this shift in the Jewish universe rather than treating the rest of us as suspected bigots.
“America is willing to sacrifice its young soldiers and national interests and even its economy for Israel,” Gilad Atzmon, who was born in a Jewish family in Israel and grew up in Jerusalem al-Quds, tells the Tehran Times. * Atzmon, who now lives in Britain, also says, “Israeli pressure groups seem to believe that they are actually more powerful and certainly more important than the American constitution.” The following is the text of the interview:
Tehran Times: Numerous rights bodies have slammed Western countries’ arms trade with Israel. What is your comment?
Gilad Atzmon: For decades, Israel has been selling killing machines to the most oppressive regimes around the world and this shouldn’t be surprising, as Israel itself is at the forefront of the list of oppressive regimes.
Embarrassed by the Israeli government’s current arming of Azerbaijan in its war with Armenia, Holocaust scholar Israel W. Charny penned an article for The Times of Israel titled: Would Israel sell a used drone to a Hitler? Charny admits in his piece that Israel’s conduct is fundamentally unethical. He ends his commentary writing, “to my Armenian colleagues and friends, I can only say that as a Jew and as an Israeli, I am mortified – and angry.”
I would think that if Israel’s leading genocide historian allows himself to admit in an Israeli nationalist outlet that the Jewish State is profiting from non-ethical arms trade, the rest of us should be entitled to engage with this topic freely and to use every possible platform to denounce Israel or anyone else from profiting from non- ethical practices.
The issues go well beyond Israel’s arms trade. A few days ago we learned from the Jewish Press about a Bipartisan bill in America that would give Israel a say on Middle East arms sales. The bill “would require the President to consult with the Israeli government to ensure concerns are settled.” If the bill passes, the USA military industrial complex trade would be dependent on Israeli consent.
Tehran Times: How great is the influence of the Zionist and Jewish lobbies in the United States and how can this status quo change?
GA: The facts regarding the immense influence of Israel and the Jewish Lobby in the USA and other Western countries have been established for a while. One can refer to The Israeli Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, a detailed study by two of the most influential American social scientists (Prof. John Mersheimer & Prof. Stephen Walt). Another leading American political scientist admired by a generation of academics who also covered the topic is, of course, Prof James Petras in his book The Power of Israel in the United States.
What can be done about the well documented domination of AIPAC? I would like to believe that the most effective method to approach this topic would be to point squarely at The Lobby and its corrosive impact: this entails pointing the finger at the wars the USA fights on behalf of Israel, the sanctions that the USA mounts for Israel, the fact that America is willing to sacrifice its young soldiers and national interests and even its economy for Israel. Theoretically speaking, American citizens are entitled to voice such criticisms as freedom of speech is enshrined in the first amendment of their constitution. Israeli pressure groups seem to believe that they are actually more powerful and certainly more important than the American constitution. A few months ago we learned that Right wing activists attempted to spread new laws across Republican controlled states that would suppress criticism on public university campuses of Israel and its occupation of Palestinian territory.
By now, the USA is practically functioning as a remote and subservient Israeli satellite. I am unable to identify any genuine political force in the USA that can change this anytime soon. I do not see anyone within American politics who is willing to tackle the matter. But the American people, like the Brits and the French are no fools, they see it all.
Tehran Times: Though Israel is violating and defying international law on a daily basis, its Western supporters and allies continue to support these actions or at least turn a blind eye to what is taking place. How do you assess this double standard?
GA: In general, it’s a good practice not to overestimate people’s intelligence. But Israel and its Lobby make the opposite mistake; they tend to believe that people are far stupider than they are.
People do see what is going on and the general discomfort with Israel and its lobby is growing rapidly. People do notice Israeli criminality, they also notice their politicians on all levels operating as foreign agents for a criminal state. Israel and The Lobby interpret this rise of awareness as ‘growing anti-Semitism,’ but this is hyperbole. A general mass awareness has surfaced. The Israelis and The Lobby know that once you see the full picture, you can’t just un-see it. In that respect, Israel is facing a wall of silent resistance and the consequences of this reality are unpredictable.
It is fascinating to observe the tsunami of mass protests that we see within Israel against Netanyahu and institutional corruption. The Israelis, or at least many of them, are also tired of themselves being themselves. It is very possible that in line with Jewish history, it will actually be the Jews who bring their current empire down. As far as I can tell they are better at that battle than anyone else.
Tehran Times: How do the Western countries exploit Human Rights as a tool to apply their policies and how do they politicize Human Rights?
GA: Human rights issues are close to our hearts. We don’t like to see abuse of others, we hate discrimination, we are appalled by racism of any kind. Seemingly, some were clever enough to attach barcodes to these genuine universal and ethical feelings. As things stand, human rights matters have morphed into a profitable industry. Many human rights campaigns are funded by elements who are themselves dedicated human rights abusers.
Since the Palestinian struggle is close to my heart it took me little time to find out that while the BDS movement was receiving money from George Soros’ Open Society Institute, BDS changed its goal statement and practically gave up on the Palestinian Right of Return.
In 2012 the BDS National Committee in Ramallah made a crucial change to its goal statement. It changed the wording of its original (June 2005) mission statement from “demanding that Israel end its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands” to demanding that Israel end “its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967*” My attempt to find out who introduced this change revealed that this new wording first appeared in Omar Barghouti’s 2011 book, ‘BDS: Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions: the Global Struggle for Palestinian Rights’ (page 6).
It seems that since 2011, The BDS National Committee basically abandoned the most precious Palestinian right—it drifted away from the commitment to land occupied since 1948 and limited its struggle to the liberation of lands occupied in 1967. Further attempts to clarify who made the change and by what process revealed that this significant change was made in a clandestine manner—it appeared only in English. It has never appeared in Arabic or any other language. It is evident that the change took place behind the backs of the Palestinian people. Despite BDS’ claim to be a ‘civil society’ representing more than 170 Palestinian organizations, Palestinians were totally unaware of the BDS National Committee’s compromise of their mission.
Further investigation revealed that BDS—like most Palestinian NGOs—was funded by George Soros’ Open Society Institute. In 2013 I was asked to review a book titled Israel/Palestine and the Queer International,by Sarah Schulman. It was Schulman who resolved the mysterious change in the BDS goal statement. In her search for funding for a young Palestinian Queer USA tour in support of BDS, Schulman wrote that she was advised to approach George Soros’ Open Society institute. The following account may leave you flabbergasted, as it did me:
“A former ACT UP staffer who worked for the Open Society Institute, George Soros’ foundation, suggested that I file an application there for funding for the tour. When I did so it turned out that the person on the other end had known me from when we both attended Hunter [College] High School in New York in the 1970s. He forwarded the application to the institutes’s office in Amman, Jordan, and I had an amazing one-hour conversation with Hanan Rabani, its director of the Women’s and Gender program for the Middle East region. Hanan told me that this tour would give great visibility to autonomous queer organizations in the region. That it would inspire queer Arabs—especially in Egypt and Iran…for that reason, she said, funding for the tour should come from the Amman office” (Israel/Palestine and the Queer International, by Sarah Schulman p. 108).
Here is clear and embarrassing evidence of a crude intervention made by George Soros’ institute in an attempt to shape Arab and Islamic culture and political life. We also learn about the manner in which Soros’ Open Society Institute introduces gay and queer politics to the region. Apparently money for a tour promoting Palestine and BDS is traveling from Soros’ Open Society to Jordan and then back to the USA with the hope that such a manoeuvre would “inspire” gays in Iran.
This makes it clear why BDS had “good reason” to remain silent regarding its funding sources. After all, being funded directly or indirectly by a liberal Zionist philanthropist, a man who also funds the openly Zionist JStreet and was invested in Israeli companies in the West Bank, is indeed embarrassing. But the meaning of it is rather devastating. The discourse of the solidarity of the oppressed is shaped by the sensitivities of the oppressor who funds the movement of the oppressed. We see this in the Palestine solidarity movement, we saw the same thing in Occupy Wall Street and currently in some segments of BLM activity. Instead of genuinely caring for the oppressed, Human rights and solidarity movements often morph into policing forces that dedicate themselves to controlling the so-called opposition.
The case of the language of BDS has a good ending. Though Omar Barghouti didn’t change the words printed in his book where he bluntly compromised on occupied land demands on behalf of the Palestinian people. The BDS movement eventually changed its goal statement once again. It now resembles the original 2005 statement opposing occupation of ALL Arab Land.
Tehran Times: Why doesn’t Israel accept the idea of a nuclear-free zone in the region?
GA: The real meaning of thinking yourself chosen is in attributing a unique sense of impunity to yourself and to no one else. In real politics this means that your Jewish State is the only nuclear power in the region, your Air Force is the only one to fly F-35s, your army is not committed to any recognized ethical standards, your military industry trades with the darkest regimes around. Try to imagine a world where everyone believes themselves to be chosen.
In the Interview the Iranian outlet refers to me as “a Jewish political activist.” I wrote to the Tehran Times and pointed out that I am neither an activist nor I am a Jew. However, by the time I posted this article, my request is yet to make any impact.
Palestine under siege for 72 years. A UK-prompted UN decision in 1947 allowed David Ben-Gurion, then the head of the Jewish Agency, to proclaim on May 14, 1948, the establishment of the State of Israel.
The United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine, a UN proposal, recommended a partition of “Mandatory Palestine” at the end of the British Mandate. “Mandatory Palestine” (picture to the left depicting Mandatory Palestine in 1946 – source: Wikipedia) was a geopolitical entity established between 1920–1948 in the region of Palestine, under the terms of the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine. On 29 November 1947, the UN General Assembly adopted the Plan as Resolution 181 (II).
This fastidious date and controversial decision in 1948 brought about misery for generations of people – Palestinians – on their own land, inflicted by a tiny country implanted on Palestine – but supported by a super-power to the point that this tiny country, called Israel, has itself become a super-power – on the verge of expanding herself not only over Palestinian territory, but over the entire Middle-East.
It shall not happen.
This tiny country, ruled by a minority of power-greedy Zionists, linked to a worldwide Zionist-dominated network over the western financial system, and hellbent to rule the world – as the Chosen People, has violated countless UN Resolutions calling for a halt of her deadly aggression on the Palestinian people. And not only on Palestine, but to stop her interference all over the Middle-East, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Iran – to mention just a few. To no avail.
The tragic and murderous photo series depicts the 20th Anniversary of just one indescribable crime. But it is also symbolic for Israeli-perpetrated atrocities that have been slaughtering Palestinians for the last 72 years – indiscriminately, children, women, men – and no end is in sight, because the west looks on and tolerates. It tolerates one outrageous brutality after another.
Tolerance with financial gain.
Weapons sales to Israel flourish – and trade with Israel is unaffected – as the Jewish people, victims of the Holocaust – that, indeed, shall never be forgotten! – are being used by their Zionist masters to continue instilling guilt on Europe, the world. It’s a strategy that works wonders. The victims cum guilt have become an alibi for today’s Israel getting literally away not just with murder, but with an ongoing genocide.
As things stand today, Israel is about to take over and absorb the Palestinian West Bank without serious opposition from its western NATO allies, the very hypocritical west that is officially propagating peace talks after peace talks – no end. Indeed, no end. Because Peace is not wanted. The United States of America wants full domination of the Middle-East. Its one of the planet’s most energy rich areas, but also one of the most strategic gateways between Eurasia and Africa. So, the symbiotic relationship of the tail wagging the dog, between Israel and the US of A will go on.
Should that take-over by Israel of the Westbank happen, then the entire once “Mandatory Palestine” would become Israel. This may be the “geopolitical” strategy, but are the people at large – all over the globe – aware of this diabolical plan?
When the legendary “Crack” – “There is a Crack in Everything, that’s how the Light Gets In” (“Anthem”, Leonard Cohen, London 2008 – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wRYjtvIYK0&feature=emb_rel_pause) – will open our minds to the reality of what we humans are doing to ourselves, to humanity – to our fellow sentient beings – we may finally act and choose Justice over Greed, Love over Hate and Peace over War.
Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a water resources and environmental specialist. He worked for over 30 years with the World Bank and the World Health Organization around the world in the fields of environment and water. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals such as Global Research; ICH; New Eastern Outlook (NEO) and more. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. He is also a co-author of The World Order and Revolution! – Essays from the Resistance.
Peter Koenig is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
Studies of Orthodox Judaic believers (followers of the post-Second Temple Judaism faithful to the Mishnah, Gemara and derivative sacred texts representative of the theology of the ancient Pharisees), have almost always been marked by two extremes: giddy approbation, or its antipode, atavistic contempt. Both views are predicated on fallacious judgments. In the former case, credulous acceptance of pious sloganeering and lachrymose self-righteousness, and in the other, a callous dismissal of the humanity of those who are captives to Talmudism, along with a failure to discern in our own behavior and beliefs those sins for which we censure the rabbis.
Nothing in this study is to be construed as giving aid and comfort to Jew-haters, anti-Semites or pseudo-Christians who direct detestation toward or advocate the oppression of Judaic persons. Our work entails the analysis of iniquitous ideas and texts; not people. Like the goyim (gentiles), Judaic persons are fully human beings deserving of dignity, respect, compassionate understanding and love, having been made in the image and likeness of God. Christians are enjoined by our Savior to “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” (Matthew 5:44). These are among the most profound, counter-intuitive words of wisdom ever spoken, exemplifying the crux of the theology of the believers who make up the true Klal Yisroel (people of Biblical Israel).
There are some worldly ones who, upon discovering the extent to which they or others may have been cursed, hated or spitefully used by certain adherents of Orthodox Judaism, proceed to disobey or at the least, derogate the command of Jesus in Matthew 5:44. By this act of disobedience they are engaging in the mockery of becoming what they oppose: a Talmudist in spirit and a Christian in name only.
Historically, the counterfeit of Christ’s ecclesia has sometimes been termed “Churchianity,” and it was this impostor institution bearing the name of Christ that mirrored the revenge and contempt which it denounced as the apex of evil when practiced by rabbis. This bipolar approach to Judaism severely undercut Christendom’s evangelical mission, and served demonic spirits in so doing. Jesus defined our love for Him very sharply and clearly. If we love Him, then we will keep His commandments. Matthew 5:44 is one of Our Savior’s commands which we must place uppermost in our minds as we proceed to explore the theology of the Talmud.
Furthermore, believers in rabbinic Judaism are urgently in need of our concern and missionary effort. In addition to the obvious reason that they have refused a saving faith in their Messiah Jesus, the negative consequences of institutionalizing that rejection are enormous: oppression by Talmudic and cognate theological dictates, including the suffocating, tyrannical micro-management of their lives. The misnamed “Laws of Family Purity” (Halakhos of Niddah) for instance, are among the most reprehensible forms of oppression of women ever devised (cf. this writer’s Judaism Discovered, pp. 729-747).
Another illustration is the requirement that Jewish women remove from their homes every speck of chametz —leavened grain of any type (wheat, oats etc.). This dictate is a source of neurosis and misery. Not even a crumb may be present in her home during the eight days of Pesach (Passover). Her “failure” to totally eradicate every particle is believed to invite a curse on the family due to the “negligence” of the wife. In the Kabbalistic texts, chametz represents a Jew’s individuality, something which, the Orthodox rabbis assert, “must be eliminated at all costs.”
Another wretched factor is Talmudism’s incitement to unethical conduct. Among the dense thicket of heinous halakhic injunctions, is the command for Jewish males to become completely drunk on alcohol every year on the holy day of Purim (BT Megillah 7b). Then there is the admonition to Jews in BT Moed Katan 17a, to perpetrate evil in secret:
“If one sees his yetzer hara (evil inclination) gaining sway over him, let him go where he is not known, put on sordid clothes and do the evil that his heart desires.”
The lives of their own unborn babies are also forfeit in Orthodox Judaism. It was the ruling of the famed rabbinic law-giver “Rashi” (Shlomo Yitzchaki), that a Jewish baby, before being born, is not a human being with a soul (nefesh).
According to rabbinic law, it is permitted to kill the dehumanized child with abortion in situations where the unborn infant is considered a “pursuer” (rodef) who represents a danger to the mother (cf. BT Sanhedrin 72b, and Moses Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Sefer Nezikim, Rotzeach u’Shmirat Nefesh 1:9).
The exposition in this study of radical truths concerning the theology and praxis of Orthodox Judaism is imperative for the advancement of both the Gospel and human reason, as well as for the protection of innocent human beings, particularly in Palestine and Lebanon. It is intended equally for the enlightenment and liberation of Jews and non-Jews, and it is toward those ends and in that spirit alone, that we have undertaken this work.
Under Threat of Death
It is worth noting that on the authority of the law of the rabbis in the Babylonian Talmud, in Berakhot 58a, the publication of this study renders its author a rodef (רודף, homicidal “pursuer”). According to the law of din rodef, a person designated a rodef is liable to be killed on sight.
In BT Berakhot 58a, an interlocutor is asking a rabbi residing in Persia about the racist denigration of non-Jews. The religious authority being questioned, Rabbi Sheila, responds to the questioner by stating that gentiles are beasts of burden (“donkeys”). Rabbi Sheila then deduces that the man who is the questioner is going to report this denigration of non-Jews to the rulers of Persia. At that point the Talmud states, “This man has the legal status of a rodef.” This section of Berakhot 58a concludes with the rabbi righteously killing the would-be reporter.
The Talmudic permission for the murder of reporters and scholars who testify to the factual content of rabbinic law has never been rescinded.
The rodef is also found among those who seek to return land stolen from the Palestinians. As recently as November 4, 1995 a dramatic murder of an individual classified as a rodef took place in Tel Aviv, when no less an eminent personage than the Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who sought a land-for-peace treaty with the Palestinians, was gunned down by Yigal Amir, a zealous Israeli Talmud student. An alumnus of Bar Ilan University, Mr. Amir specifically cited the Talmud as his justification for murdering the Israeli Prime Minister.
In endeavoring to answer the question:
“What Does Rabbinic Judaism Say About What Makes Jews and Gentiles Different?”
Our Response is Rooted in Halakha (Rabbinic law)
The founding legal texts of rabbinic Judaism are the Mishnah and the Gemara. They are collectively termed the “Torah she-be’al peh” (תורה שבעל פה), i.e. the oral law committed to writing as the Talmud Bavli (i.e. Babylonian Talmud, abbreviated as “BT”).
According to the Babylonian Talmud, God himself is subservient to the rabbis: “Since God already gave the Torah to the Jewish people on Mt. Sinai we no longer pay attention to heavenly voices. God must submit to the decisions of a majority vote of the rabbis.” (BT Bava Metzia 59b).
Consequently, the Word of God (Scripture) is subordinate to the traditions of the rabbis. These traditions were previously oral. They were committed to writing, first as the Mishnah, in the early centuries (Tannaitic era), after the crucifixion of Israel’s Messiah. The subsequent portion of the Talmudic canon (the Gemara) produced mainly during the Amoraim era (circa 300-450 A.D.) was written in the Aramaic language.
The Babylonian Talmud (as distinct from the Jerusalem Talmud which is not authoritative), is the holiest text of the religion of Judaism. The revered Pharisaic “sages of blessed memory” decree this themselves in the Talmud. In BT Shabbat 15c and Baba Metzia 33A, we see the Three Declarations of the much-honored, goyim-despising Rabbi Shimon ben Yohai, one of the most adored of all the “sages.” Yohai wrote: A. “He who occupies himself with Scripture gains merit that is no merit. B. “He who occupies himself with Mishnah gains merit for which people receive a reward. C. “He who occupies himself with Talmud — there is no source of merit greater than this.”
What part of the preceding unimpeachable statement from the supreme sacred book of Orthodox Judaism do gentiles and Christians not understand? Old Testament law is a distant second in Orthodox Judaism. It is studied, misapplied and nullified by being read through the distorting prism of the Talmud.
The non-Biblical basis of Orthodox Judaism is acknowledged in the Mishnah: “The laws concerning the Sabbath, Festal-offerings and acts of trespass are as mountains hanging by a hair, for they have scant Scriptural basis but many laws” (Mishnah Hagiga i, 8).
“Torah-True” Jews?
“Torah” is Orthodox Judaism’s spurious badge of authority. The rabbis proclaim that they have the Torah, have mastered the Torah, base their laws on the Torah and that they are “Torah-true.” Yet these rabbinic claims are a deceptive play on words, for the “Torah” upon which they base their laws is not the Old Testament, but the counterfeit Torah SheBeal Peh. Hence, when the rabbis are acclaiming their relationship with the “Torah,” Christians are deceived into imagining that the rabbis are harkening to their allegiance to the Old Testament (Torah SheBichtav), when Orthodox Judaism’s laws emanate from the man-made Talmud Bavli, which is the “Torah” they regard as supreme.
In 2010 something of a confession concerning this fact came to the fore in the Judaic media. In an article at Ynetnews.com of Feb. 10, 2010 titled, “Time to Face Haredi Secret,” Efrat Shapira-Rosenberg reported a remarkable admission about the ultra-Orthodox “Haredi” (Hasidic) Judaics:
“Not too long ago I happened to speak with a young man who studies at one of the ‘flagships’ of the Haredi yeshiva (Talmudic academy) world; a yeshiva which is no doubt among the most important and elitist ones. We spoke about various issues, and at one point I referred to a certain Biblical character I’m especially fond of. This figure was not one of the Bible’s leading actors like Abraham or Moses, but it was not a particularly marginal character either, but rather, an interesting and significant one in my view; one that conveys an important message to biblical scholars.
“So why am I telling you all this? Because the guy had no idea what I was talking about. He never heard about this figure, he was unfamiliar with it, and he was certainly unfamiliar with the important messages it teaches us.
“…the time has come to shatter the myth and explicitly address the most open secret which we all have known for a while now – Haredi education in its various yeshivas only focuses on one thing, while creating ignorant students on every other front. An important clarification: I am not referring, like secular critics, to the Haredi disregard for subjects such as math, science, English literature, etc…This is a different problem.
“The issue I have is with the fact that the vast majority of yeshivas only teach Talmud and related questions and answers. That’s it.
“What about the Bible? I am not disparaging, Heaven forbid, the importance of the Talmud. Yet for once let’s talk about the religious people who strictly adhere to the mitzvahs (blessed deeds), yet are unfamiliar with the Bible…And this is not an anomaly – this is the norm. The only Biblical verses familiar to yeshiva students are those quoted by Talmud sages, and that’s that. The Bible is seen as a sort of inferior genre that is appropriate for young children (or for women)…” (End quote)
Jews who reject the Talmudic traditions of men and regard as supreme law only the Old Testament Word of God, are known as “Karaites” (“Scripturalists”). Karaism arose in reaction to the growing influence of the Talmud emanating from the Babylonian Talmudic academies in Pumbedita and Sura (in present day Iraq), among Jews of the late 7th and early 8th centuries. The Jewish patriarch of Karaism was an 8th century rabbinic convert from Talmudism, Anan ben David. His book of precepts, Sefer ha-Mizvot, undercut the authority of the Mishnah and Gemara. He famously stated, “Search diligently in the Scriptures and do not rely on my opinion.”
Due to their Bible-only devotion, throughout their history Karaite Jews have been persecuted and even killed by Talmudic zealots. The existence of the Karaites is largely unknown to the Vatican II Catholics and fundamentalist Protestants who imagine that Talmudic rabbis are faithful Scripturalists.
The Talmud of Babylon and its successor texts:
Authoritative Halakha or mere Commentary and Debates?
In order to answer the question about what makes Jews different, it is necessary that we refute a familiar defense against charges that the Babylonian Talmud is the basis of the laws of Orthodox Judaism. Apologists assert that the more blatantly horrible passages in the Babylonian Talmud do not constitute the law of Judaism (halakha), but only commentary and debate. The truth is very different, however. Halakha is comprised of the traditions found in the non-Biblical, sacred rabbinic texts. Those texts as a whole comprise the Oral Law, what Josephus termed, paradôsis (“tradition”).
The oral traditions of the Pharisees is the foundation of the Talmud, as Jesus declared (cf. Mark 7; Matthew 15). Those traditions consist of extra-Biblical superstitions and occultism, self-worship, racist hatred for non-Jews and sheer nonsense. BT Ketubot 60b-61a: “If a woman copulates in a grain mill she will have epileptic children. One who copulates on the ground will have children with long necks.” BT Berakoth 55a: “A certain matron said to Rabbi Judah b. Ila’i: ‘Your face is [red] like that that of pig-breeders and goyim!’ The rabbi replied, ‘On my faith both are forbidden me, but there are 24 toilets between my house and the Beth Midrash (house of study), and when I go there I test myself in all of them.”
Apologists assert that the Talmud is only a record of debates (mahloket) between tanna’im and amora’im (the authors of the Talmud Bavli known collectively as Chazal who lived in the early centuries A.D.), and that by focusing on one portion of the controversy and upholding that passage as authoritative, the critic errs, for no legal sanction is given to either side of the “debates in the Talmud.” This is demonstrably false. The Mishnah and subsequent rabbinic amplifications of it comprise the halakha, by which every believing Orthodox Judaic person is bound, down to the most minute and intimate particulars of his or her daily life.
How Talmudic law is deduced and adjudicated is often an enigma to outsiders, but that it constitutes halakha is certain. The key point is that the appearance of Talmudic indeterminacy does not preclude law-making by majority rabbinic consensus — which is the process by which Talmudic halakha is determined in a given time and particular situation, both in terms of a decision on what constitutes the oral law of the elders as presented in the Mishnah (halakha lemosheh misinai), as well as the subsequent Mitzvot derabanan (rabbinical commandments) found in the Gemara, arising from the deductive process known as Middot shehatorah nidreshet bahen.
As a public relations ploy, many rabbis and Zionist leaders pretend otherwise, revealing the low opinion they have of the public, who they believe will swallow the line about the Talmud being a mere book of discourses and disputes, where no definitive teaching or authoritative law-making emerges. The intent behind the deliberate sowing of this deception rests in the stratagem that by promoting the idea that the Talmud is a collection of debates and commentary without force of law, no indictment of it is possible, since another text can always be cited to contradict the offending one. However, the investigator who examines the historic discipline and practice of Orthodox Judaism can ascertain that a body of law codified in the Babylonian Talmud exerts the most profound command over individual Judaics and governs their conduct.
What is disputed in the Talmud is often the Yud Gimmel Midot, not the Halakha l’Moshe M’Sinai. In presenting the Talmud to the public this distinction is often not made. There are thousands of discourses in authoritative rabbinic texts about minutiae, such as which dishes can be washed on Shabbos (the Sabbath), and how they may be washed. Disagreements along those lines are not disagreements concerning the non-negotiable, core Talmudic dogma that forms the halakha itself.
Let’s look at a dispute involving situation ethics: the ban on a Jewish man shaving his beard, the hair-splitting dimensions of which would try the patience of most sane people. Rabbi Maimonides (also referred to as the “Rambam”), asserted that the rationale behind the ban was the fact that the goyim, as personified by the chukos ho’akum (customs) of Catholic priests, were clean-shaven. To distinguish goyim from Jews therefore, Maimonides decreed that beards on Jewish males were obligatory. A point in this dissertation on this particular situation ethic was raised centuries later by the learned posek (determiner of halakha), Rabbi Yosef Babad, in his Minchas Chinuch, a 19th century disquisition on the 13th century Sefer ha-Chinuch, itself a treatise on the halakha codified by Maimonides in the 12th century. Rabbi Babad in his ruling followed the clarification proffered by a 17th century halakhist, Rabbi ha-Levi Segal (“the Taz”), stating that there were extenuating circumstances and dispensations in connection with shaving, in that when it becomes the general practice of Catholic priests to grow beards, Jews would no longer be obliged not to shave.
To say that there are tens of thousands of other cases like the preceding would be a low estimate. Gedolim,poskim and the other prodigiously erudite legal authorities of Orthodox Judaism, clarify, modify, squabble and split hairs over puerile trivia, such as whether a Jew may go to sleep while wearing shoes. (No, because it is “a taste of death,” according to BT Yoma 78b. However, if the shoes are to be worn during a brief nap, it could be allowed, as specified in Lekutei Maharich Tefillas Rav NB’H p. 107; Pe’as Sadecha 37, and Shemiras Haguf V’hanefesh [115, footnote 2]). What happens if during his supposedly short nap the Jewish person oversleeps? The response to that requisite question is found in another dozen rabbinic sources.
Then there are the pages of responsum concerning the permissibility of using colored toilet deodorizer on Shabbos (Sabbath): “Some poskim say it is considered dyeing (coloring) on Shabbos,” which is forbidden (cf. Minchas Shlomo, 2:14 and Rav Y.A. Silber: Oz Nidberu 13:14). “Harav Yisrael Belsky maintains that if the deodorizer hangs from the rim of the toilet then one may use it on Shabbos, while if it is in the toilet itself then it is considered coloring on Shabbos,” and is not allowed (cf. Moishe Dovid Lebovitz [2010], p. 89). Orthodox Judaism consists of a universe of lawyers who bear the name rabbi. It is the domain of a theocratic bureaucracy so overgrown with laws, regulations, stipulations and minutiae — as well as innumerable derivatives thereof — that it makes Charles Dickens’ Circumlocution Office look like a libertarian utopia by comparison.
Rules of derivation and procedure (Yud Gimmel Midot) cannot compare with the oral law, which rabbinic dogma fantasizes that Yahweh gave to Moses. To the am ha’aretz (ignorant bumpkins) it is insinuated that the Talmud is a debating society where everything is on the table. This insinuation reveals contempt for the person, whether Judaic or non-Judaic, who dares to check into the matter. Using the record of Talmudic disputes on issues pertaining to situation ethics to maintain that in the Talmud the dogmas of rabbinic Judaism are merely batted back and forth in debates which do not have a significant function in forming halakha, is almost too asinine to merit comment. Nonetheless, numerous persons troubled by candid documentation of the uncensored contents of the Talmud, when given a line of malarkey about it being a series of legally non-authoritative debates, too often swallow it — accepting the legend that rabbinic Judaism is the religion of the Old Testament prophets from which was born western civilization’s concepts of free will, freedom of conscience and reasoning for one’s self.
In truth, the creed founded upon the Talmud is wholly alien in relation to that noble western ethic. The Agudath Israel Orthodox rabbinic organization publishes Hamodia newspaper, in which we find the following representative statement in the 19 Adar 5763 (Feb. 21, 2003) issue, p. 14: “From time immemorial, every G-d-fearing Jew subjected his personal and communal affairs to the guidance of his Rav (rabbi), understanding the folly of following the dictates of his own heart or mind.”
The laws of the Mishnah and Gemara as decided by the consensus of Chazal through their supposed supernatural power of siyata dishmaya, as stated in authoritative law codes derived from the Talmud Bavli, such as the Mishneh Torah, Shulchan Aruch,Mishnah Berurah etc., are binding legal precedents. Opinions inconsistent with the Talmudic canon are void.
Because the principle of situation ethics is central to Orthodox Judaism, halakha is applied and enforced according to stringencies and leniencies geared to a particular period of time. These distinctions date to the “zuggot pairs” of the Tannaitic era.
“Show no Mercy to a non-Jew”
In the Middle Ages (the Rishonim era), Moses Maimonides devoted twelve years to extracting every decision and law from the Talmud of Babylon, and arranging them into fourteen systematic volumes. The work was completed in 1180 as the Mishneh Torah.
In the Mishneh Torah, Moses Maimonides taught in “Avodat Kochavim” chapter 10, “Show no mercy to a non-Jew.”
He gave the following example: “If we see a non-Jew being swept away or drowning in the river, we should not help him. If we see that his life is in danger, we should not save him.”
Situation Ethics in the Killing of Christians
Maimonides also taught that Christians should, under the proper circumstances, be killed. The “proper circumstances” are predicated on Rabbi Maimonides’ situation ethics: when Talmudists are powerfully dominant over goyim then worshippers of Jesus can be executed.
This is the foundation of Rabbi Maimonides’ ruling on when Jewish doctors may refuse to treat non-Jewish patients: when Jews are sufficiently supreme in a nation that the refusal to treat will not result in repercussions and reprisals from goyim, who would be too cowed to retaliate in a nation where Jewish supremacy was nearly total. It is instructive to observe that Maimonides in Mishneh Torah, Sefer Ha-Mada, Aodah Zara 10:1-2, ruled that goyim not currently at war with Israel should neither be actively killed, nor saved from death: “It is prohibited both to save them from dying and to kill them.”
This is not a simple open-and-closed finding. Many more rabbinic texts have been generated, setting out the situation ethics entailed by this injunction. Cf. for example Rabbi Nahmanides, Hidushei HaRambam, Makot 9a. The key law giver Rabbi Joseph Karo, compiler of the highly credited legal volumes of the Shulchan Aruch, looks upon Maimonides’ ruling not as a ban on the killing of goyim, but a means for temporarily dispensing a Jew from the obligation to kill them, while doing nothing to save them from death.
With this in mind, we observe how halakha is applied and enforced subject to contingencies such as the ones that Maimonides stipulated: the legal, political and social position of Jews in the nation in which they reside, and the goyim with whom they are dealing.
So for example, in contemporary occupied Palestine (“Israel”) most Christians, Muslims and Arabs in general may be killed with relative impunity, as the situation demands. There may be a temporary uproar in the western world in protest, but historically these protests have subsided, with no lasting detrimental effect on the Israeli state. In times past however, in nations where Christian or Muslim governments were vigilant concerning crimes against non-Jewish persons, the field of action against Christians and Muslims as promulgated by law-giver Rabbi Moses Maimonides in his Mishneh Torah, was restricted by the circumstances. Maimonides himself served for a time as the personal physician to the family of the sultan of Egypt, ostensibly dispensing with the Talmudic dictum of showing no mercy to goyim. The situation demanded however, that the Talmudic ethic be suspended for the time being for a more paramount objective — to allow Maimonides to gain influence with the nation-state’s ruling family.
During the administration of President Barack Obama, the Wall Street Journal reported that Israeli physicians and hospitals were giving medical treatment to the Nusra Front’s injured al Qaeda fighters, so as to hasten their return to the Syrian battlefield, where they were waging war against the government of Bashar al-Assad (cf. “Al Qaeda a Lesser Evil?” Wall Street Journal online, March 12, 2015; and Wall Street Journal, March 13, 2015, p. A6). This is another instance of how rabbinic injunctions can be temporarily suspended under certain circumstances, in line with Orthodox Judaism’s situation ethics.
Hence, there is certainly debate within the rabbinate over how, when and to what degree to apply the Talmudically-derived halakha.
To extrapolate from the situation wherein questions of timing and tactical application arise within the rabbinate, to a nullification of the existence and compelling force of law which the Talmudic Mishnah and Gemara exert, is without foundation.
For example, there is no authentic debate about gentiles having lesser souls (or in the case of Chabad-Lubavitch theology, no souls whatsoever).
That goyim are nefesh-deficient is the fixed sacred law of Orthodox Judaism. How the law that goyim are less than fully human is applied is indeed subject to discussion and contestation in the Mishneh Torah, Kesef Mishneh and hundreds of cognate legal texts derived from the Talmud. But the halakha comprising the Talmud of Babylon itself is incontestable. When putative defenders of the Talmud engage in absurdity and point to debates about how Talmudic halakha is to be interpreted, as evidence that the source of the Torah she-be’al peh—the Talmudic texts themselves—comprise only an admired collection of debates and discussions, they are playing a prank on their goyische dupes.
In addition to the Mishnah and Gemara of the Talmud Bavli, the laws of rabbinic Judaism are also derived from successor legal texts emanating from the Talmud. These include, but are not limited to, the Mishneh Torah, the Shulchan Aruch, the Mishnah Berurah, the Shulchan Aruch Harav, the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, the Igros Moshe, and many dozens of additional post-Talmudic sacred volumes having the force of law in Ashkenazic Orthodox Judaism.
Where is the Word of God, you ask, amid the miasma of anthropocentric laws which constitute these rabbinic traditions? It’s a good question and one that sola Scriptura Protestants—who excoriate Catholicism over its belief in a Bible-plus-Tradition theology—have generally either conspicuously ignored, or unconscionably neglected.
The Inherent Moral Turpitude of the Goyim
We intended to demonstrate that rabbinic law imputes an inherent moral turpitude to non-Jews and classes them as innately malevolent.
The goyim are grouped together with categories of criminals and transgressors who cannot act as a witness in a Beis din (rabbinic court; cf. Shulchan Arukh: Hoshen Mishpat 34).
Goyim are detested and feared in part because it is taught that they are congenitally predisposed to commit murder:
“A Jew should not be alone with a goy, because the goy is suspect to commit homicide.” (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 168:17).
In the laws governing kashrut (kosher food and drink) victuals may not be consumed by a Jew if their preparation was entirely by a goy. A goy handling Jewish food must be supervised by a frum (Talmud-observant) Jew, because a goy cannot be trusted not to render the food or drink impure, or poisonous. Even this supervised food preparation may not be permissible in situations where a stringency, known as the rabbinic prohibition of bishul akum is enforced. (Cf. Pischei Teshuvah Y.D. 113:1, Aruch ha-Shulchan 113:50; Y.D. 113:16; Chochmas Adam 66:11). Under certain circumstances wine that has even been touched by a non-Jew “has been defiled and is unfit for use by Jews” (BT Avodah Zarah 72b).
When the opportunity to save a Judaic human life (pikuah nefesh) conflicts with the observance of the Sabbath, saving the Judaic life takes precedence. Rabbinic legal authorities also distinguish between the obligation to save a Judaic life on the Sabbath and the life of a goy.
Israel Meir Kagan (1838–1933), the halachic authority known as the Chofetz Chaim (a.k.a. the Hafetz Hayyim), condemned the behavior of any Judaic physician who did not discriminate between Jews and non-Jews. Concerning Judaic physicians, Rabbi Kagan wrote in Mishnah Berurah: O.H. 330, “…to treat a non-Jew…there is no authority for them to do so.” (The halakhic status of Rabbi Kagan’s Mishnah Berurah, was assessed by Simcha Fishbane in The Encyclopedia of Judaism, as follows, “His greatest work, which remains the strongest influence on Orthodox practice today and whose authority is considered final, is Mishnah Berurah [1884-1907], in six volumes”).
It is a minhag (a custom without the force of law) to refer to goyim using racial slurs. Non-Jewish men are termed a “male abomination” (shegetz; plural: shkotzim). With regard to non-Jewish women the racist term of derision is shiksa, denoting a female abomination.
“Only Jews are Human”
The Babylonian Talmud states, “Only Jews are human. Non-Jews are not human.” (Bava Metzia 114b. Also: BT Kerithoth 6b and 58a).
One of the earliest laws distinguishing between Jews and goyim is found in the Babylonian Talmud, in Sanhedrin 57a:
“Regarding bloodshed, the following distinction applies, if a non-Jew killed another non-Jew, or a non-Jew killed a Jew, the killer is liable for execution; if a Jew killed a non-Jew, he is exempt from punishment.”
“Regarding a Jew stealing from a non-Jew, the act is permitted.” (BT Sanhedrin 57a).
It is commanded in the Talmud’s Kiddushin 66c: “The best of the gentiles: kill him; the best of snakes: smash its skull; the best of women: is filled with witchcraft.” (The uncensored version of this text appears in Tractate Soferim [New York, M. Higer, 1937], 15:7, p. 282).
The Talmud decrees in Sanhedrin 81b-82a: “All gentile women without exception are: ‘Niddah, Shifchah, Goyyah and Zonah’ (menstrual filth, slaves, heathens and prostitutes).
The Talmud rules that black people are cursed: “The sages taught: Three violated that directive and engaged in intercourse while in the ark, and all of them punished for doing so. They are: the dog and the raven, and Ham, son of Noah. The dog was punished in that it is bound; the raven was punished in that it spits, and Ham was afflicted in that his skin turned black.” (BT Sanhedrin 108b).
The preceding Talmudic legal text has directly contributed to the suffering and misery of black Africans enslaved on the basis that they were accursed descendants of Ham and their enslavement was foreordained by God. Nowhere is this bigoted lie found in the Bible. It is entirely the invention of the Talmudic and Midrashic theology of men.
Moreover, a declaration by the supreme arbiter of rabbinic law in the Ashkenazic world, Rabbi Moses Maimonides, created a justification for white slave-holders and slave-traders (both Judaic and Christian) to enslave black people for life and treat them as chattel (animals). Maimonides performed this service for the slave trade in his seminal text, The Guide of the Perplexed, which is celebrated throughout the western world (his image hangs in a place of honor in the halls of Congress and numerous buildings in the United States are named for him). In The Guide of the Perplexed, this “illustrious” rabbi taught that black people are “irrational animals” who are situated midway between the ape and the human (cf. University of Chicago Press, Shlomo Pines translation, vol. II, [1963], p. 618).
The leading disciple of Maimonides in American 20th century politics and statecraft was Leo Strauss, Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago. The Neoconservative (“Neocon”) intellectuals he influenced were a significant force in George W. Bush’s decision to needlessly invade and make war upon the nation of Iraq. President Bush filled many key command and advisory positions with Neocons, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Elliott Abrams, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Bill Kristol, Douglas Feith, John Bolton and Ari Fleischer.
The founding sacred book of the theologically influential and, in the United States, politically powerful, Orthodox Chabad-Lubavitch Judaism, is the Tanya, which was written by Chabad’s founder, Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Lyady. This foundational Chabad volume decrees that:
“Gentile souls are of a completely different and inferior order. They are totally evil, with no redeeming qualifies whatsoever. Their material abundance derives from supernal refuse. Indeed, they themselves derive from refuse, which is why they are more numerous than the Jews.”
(Cf. Habad: The Hasidism of Shneur Zalman of Lyady [Jacob Aronson, 1993], pp. 108-109). Apparently Rabbi Zalman never read or credited Genesis 22:17 in which God informs Abraham that his descendants will be “more numerous than the stars in the sky.”
Shneur Zalman: “The souls of the goyim emanate from the unclean kelipot (husks) which contain no good whatsoever.” (Cf. Opening the Tanya, p. 43).
The Kabbalah in the volume “Book of Splendor” (Zohar), defines kelipot as “husks of evil…waste matter…bad blood…dross…dregs…the root of evil” (Gershom Scholem, Kabbalah, pp. 125, 139, 156-157).
Israeli “settler” rabbis such as the late Moshe Levenger and Meir Kahane took Rabbi Zalman’s dogma to heart and encouraged terrorism against Palestinian civilians. Levenger shot to death an unarmed Palestinian store keeper and served less than a year in an Israeli jail for the murder. Today, tens of thousands of rabbis from Brooklyn to Moscow and Jerusalem, preach and teach the soul-searing dehumanization of goyim promulgated by the revered founder of Chabad-Lubavitch Judaism. Palestinians are oppressed, robbed, beaten and killed based upon the theological determination that they, like goyim in general, are not human; indeed, garbage (“supernal refuse”).
In Orthodox Judaism goyim are not to be trusted: “…a gentile’s word is totally discounted regarding ritual prohibitions…In a situation where a gentile’s word is not relied upon, his conversion to Judaism will not influence our acceptance of his testimony.” —Rabbi Ezra Basri, Chief Justice, District Court, Jerusalem, “The Testimony of a Gentile Regarding Ritual Matters,” in Ethics of Business Finance & Charity, vol. 2, chapter 13.
In Orthodox Judaism there is no obligation to be fair to goyim:“The laws (of fairness) mentioned above only apply between two Jewish neighbors. Gentiles do not necessarily respect these principles and, hence, there is no obligation to show them such consideration in return.” —Rabbi Ezra Basri, Chief Justice, vol. 4, chapter 2.
Raping Goyim
In 2014 Dr. Mordechai Kedar, a professor at the elite Israeli Bar-Ilan University stated that the only action that can successfully deter armed resistance by Arabs, is to rape their sisters or their mothers. Prof. Kedar’s words were not an aberration or a misinterpretation. They were consistent with rabbinic law.
Though it will be claimed by the usual public relations hacks that the Bar Illan University professor’s monstrous rape-deterrent observation is “condemned by the Jewish tradition” (citing, for example, BT Kiddushin 22), there are rabbinic escape clauses which justify rape. First, the rape target must be classified as a zonah (prostitute) or a nokri (hostile alien). The supreme Ashkenazic halachic authority, Rabbi Moses Maimonides, rules that a Judaic soldier may rape this type of female “Yefas To’ar” (prisoner of war), when he is not actively fighting a battle (Hilchos Melachim 8:3).
A text in the Meorot theology journal of Yeshivat Chovevei Torah Rabbinic School, gives permission to Judaic soldiers to rape a female goy battle captive one time:
“It is the consensus of many halachic decisors (judges of rabbinic law) that the yefat to’ar (female goy battle captive) can be subject to involuntary intercourse, though only once, after which she must undergo a specific regimen described in the Torah (Torah sheBeal peh i.e. the Mishnah and Gemara), conversion and marriage, before her captor is permitted further sexual relations with her…”
Source: Dov. S. Zakheim, Meorot vol. 6: no. 1 (2006), p. 5. (Mr. Zakheim was Under Secretary of Defense in the administration of George W. Bush, 2001-2004).
Advocates of raping non-Jews can be found at the highest levels of the Israel ruling class. Here is the permission to commit rape given by Eyal Karim, the Chief Rabbi of the Israeli Army:
“The wars of Israel […] are mitzvah (divinely blessed) wars, in which they differ from the rest of the wars the nations (goyim) wage among themselves. Since, essentially, a war is not an individual matter, but rather nations wage war as a whole, there are cases in which the personality of the individual is ‘erased’ for the benefit of the whole. And vice versa: sometimes you risk a large unit for the saving of an individual, when it is essential for purposes of morale. One of the important and critical values during war is maintaining the army’s fighting ability […]
“As in war the prohibition against risking your life is broken for the benefit of others, so are the prohibitions against immorality and of kashrut (kosher). Wine touched by gentiles, consumption of which is prohibited in peacetime, is allowed at war, to maintain the good spirit of the warriors. Consumption of prohibited foods is permitted at war (and some say, even when kosher food is available), to maintain the fitness of the warriors, even though they are prohibited during peacetime.
“Just so, war removes some of the prohibitions on sexual relations (gilui arayot), and even though fraternizing with a gentile woman is a very serious matter, it was permitted during wartime (under the specific terms) out of understanding for the hardship endured by the warriors. And since the success of the whole at war is our goal, the Torah permitted the individual to satisfy the evil urge (yetzer ha’ra), under the conditions mentioned, for the purpose of the success of the whole.” (End quote).
Rabbi Karim’s words would be despicable even if he were not the chief spiritual teacher and counselor of the Israeli army which holds in its iron fist the nearly helpless captive population of Palestine.
Weaponizing the Babylonian Talmud’s Racism and Bigotry Toward Non-Jews
Racist and hateful Talmudic doctrine about non-Jews has been weaponized by the halakhic injunctions of rabbis in “Israel” and the United States, and the expulsion, subjugation and mass murder of Palestinians and the Israeli slaughter of Arabs in Lebanon, can only be fully comprehended within the context of the anti-gentile halakha derived from the Talmud, which was formerly concealed, obscured and denied, and which is increasingly being published in the Hebrew language press, and in the case of the Steinsaltz Talmud, in English.
“Jewish Superiority and the Question of Exile”
Rabbi Saadya Grama is one of the intellectual stars of the Beth Medrash Govoha, otherwise known as the “Lakewood yeshiva,” an internationally renowned center for Talmud study located in New Jersey. In 2003 Grama published the book, Romemut Yisrael Ufarashat Hagalut (“Jewish Superiority and the Question of Exile”). In it he declaimed:
“The Jew by his source and in his essence is entirely good. The gentile, by his source and in his very essence, is completely evil. This is not simply a matter of religious distinction, but rather of two different species…
“Jewish success in the world is completely contingent upon the failure of other peoples. Jews experience good fortune only when gentiles experience catastrophe…The difference between Jews and gentiles is not historical or cultural, but rather genetic and unalterable.”
Rabbi Grama further stated that the “Torah” mandates that Jews, while in exile, should employ such means as “…deception, duplicity and bribery in their dealing with gentiles.”
Romemut Yisrael Ufarashat Hagalut was endorsed by eminent rabbinic authorities, including the distinguished Rabbi Aryeh Malkiel Kotler, the Rosh yeshiva (Dean of the seminary) at Lakewood. He lauded Grama for his teaching on: “…the subjects of Exile, the Election of Israel, and her exaltation above and superiority to all other nations, all in accordance with the viewpoint of the Torah, based on the solid instruction he has received from his teachers.” (A year after the publication of Grama’s supremacist volume was published, Congress awarded the Lakewood yeshiva a federal grant of $500,000).
Murder Manuals: Baruch Hagever and Torat Hamelech
“Jewish life has infinite value. There is something infinitely more holy and unique about Jewish life than non-Jewish life”
Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh (born in 1944 in St. Louis, Missouri), is considered one of Chabad-Lubavitch’s leading experts on the Kabbalah. He is a celebrated educator and influencer in the USA and the Israeli state. Like Rabbi Grama, Ginsburgh also teaches the dogma that Jews possess a genetically-based superiority over non-Jews.
“If you have two people drowning, a Jew and a non-Jew, the Torah says you save the Jewish life first,” Rabbi Ginsburgh asserts.
He teaches: “If every single cell in a Jewish body entails divinity, is a part of God, then every strand of DNA is a part of God. Therefore, something is special about Jewish DNA.”
Rabbi Ginsburgh stated further, “If a Jew needs a liver, can you take the liver of an innocent non-Jew passing by to save him? The Torah would probably permit that. Jewish life has infinite value. There is something infinitely more holy and unique about Jewish life than non-Jewish life.”
Rabbi Ginsburgh is the author of Baruch Hagever, a book praising the example of mass murderer Baruch Goldstein, who massacred 40 Palestinians as they prayed in a mosque in Hebron on Purim, February 1994. In Baruch Hagever the rabbi termed the slaughter, “…an act of bravery whose source was divine grace.”
Baruch Hagever is a summary provided by one of Ginsburgh’s students, of a class Rabbi Ginsburgh taught in 1994 during which he identified positive aspects of Baruch Goldstein’s massacre of Muslim worshippers at the Cave of the Patriarchs as:
“The sanctification of the name of God…The life of Israel is worth more than the life of the goy and even if the goy does not intend to hurt Israel, it is permissible to hurt him in order to save Israel.”
“Legally,” Ginsburg asserts, “if a Jew kills a non-Jew, he’s not called a murderer. He didn’t transgress the Sixth Commandment: ‘Thou shalt not murder.’ This applies only to Jews killing Jews.” (This is a nearly verbatim reference to BT Sanhedrin 57a).
Ginsburgh’s teachings have incited a new generation of Israeli murderers who rely upon his Talmudic theology to justify the killing of goyim.
This homicidal rabbinic theology is imparted in a book co-authored in 2009 by the Rosh yeshiva (Dean) of Ginsburgh’s seminary, Od Yosef Chai in the West Bank settlement of Yitzhar. It is titled Torat Ha-Melekh: Berure Halakha Be’-inyene Malkhut U-Milhamot (“The King’s Torah: Halakhic Clarifications Regarding Matters of Kingdom and Wars”). The title has been abbreviated as Torat Hamelech. It was written by the Rosh yeshiva, Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira, in collaboration with Rabbi Yosef Elitzur. It explicitly claims that the life of a Jew is worth more than the life of a non-Jew, and permits the killing of innocent non-Jews, including children.
One section of the volume teaches that it is permitted to kill non-Jewish infants on the enemy side during warfare “if there is a good chance they will grow up to be like their evil parents.”
Other reasons the rabbis furnish for the permission to kill non-Jewish children include if they “block the rescue of Jews…Little children are often situated in this way…it is permitted to kill them because their very presence facilitates the killing (of Jews)…(p. 215).
“It is also permitted to kill the children of the leader (of the enemy) in order to put pressure on him…” (p. 215).
In another instance, Rabbis Shapira and Elitzur write, “Every citizen of our kingdom who opposes us and who encourages [our enemies’] fighters, or expresses satisfaction with their deeds, is considered an assailant and may be killed….”
On p. 185 the rabbinic authors state that whoever uses freedom of speech to weaken the Jews is considered to be a rodef and can be killed. They base this on the ruling by the Maharal of Prague, Rabbi Judah Loew, who determined that whoever causes Jews to be reluctant to kill (“faint-hearted while at war”) deserves death (cf. Gur Aryeh on Parashat Mattot).
In chapter four of Torat Hamelech, Rabbis Shapira and Elitzur state that because the life of the Jew is superior to that of the non-Jew, “…there is a consensus among the halakhic sources that it is permitted to kill non-Jews to save the lives of Jews…It is permitted as well in cases in which we exploit the presence of innocent young children (and harm them) in order to harm their parents” (p. 199).
The rabbis further state, “There is a svara (a compelling reason founded on intuition) for hurting young, non-Jewish children if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us, and in such cases, we should aim our destruction specifically towards them. Young children will benefit from this killing since they would have grown up in an unrepaired way (be-tzurah lo metukenet), that would require their killing anyway. Therefore, it would be better to kill them now” (pp. 205-207).
The final chapter of this rabbinic law book urges the employment of merciless vengeance against the goyim (pp. 217-224). Torat Hamelech concludes with an indirect call for vigilante killings of Palestinians, many of which have occurred since the volume appeared, to little publicity in the West, such as the burning to death in 2015 of a Palestinian baby, Ali Dawabsheh, and his mother and father, by a youthful Talmudist, Amiram Ben Uliel.
Two dozen Orthodox rabbis have signed an open letter calling on the government to free Amiram Ben Uliel. The adult son of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Yair Netanyahu, has raised money for the child-killer’s legal costs.
Rabbi Shapira and Rabbi Elitzur declare that individual Jews can make the decision to kill goyim extra-judicially: “One does not need a decision by the nation to permit the spilling of blood…sometimes one must commit ruthless acts that are designed to create the correct element of fear.” (End quote from Torat Hamelech).
In addition to Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh, prominent rabbis Dov Lior and Ya’acov Yosef gave Torat Hamelech their blessing. This book has been circulated among Israeli military and police forces.
Rabbi Ishay Berg also wrote in approval of Rabbis Shapira and Elitzur’s teaching: “The Jewish soul is, in fact, the thrusting of the world into the absolute, into an entity with a validity of existence which cannot be compared with the fragile reality which we see before our eyes. This perception lies behind the ruling that the life of a Jew and the fulfillment of the commandments are superior to the life of a non-Jew in any situation” (M’aneh Le-Derekh Ha-Melekh).
In 1989 a mob of Zionists led by Rabbi Ginsburgh rampaged through a village in the West Bank region of Palestine, engaging in arson and murdering a 13-year-old Palestinian girl. A Talmud (“yeshiva”) student was arrested and put on trial in an Israeli court. Ginsburgh spoke for the defense, pointing out the lower value of the life of the Palestinian child: “The people of Israel must rise and declare in public that a Jew and goy are not, God forbid, the same. Any trial that assumes that Jews and goyim are equal is a travesty of justice.”
In March, 1996 Rabbi Ginsburgh delivered a Purim lecture claiming to quote Chabad-Lubavitch Grand Rabbi Schneerson on the subject of “the mitzvahs of war for the sake of revenge and war for the sake of conquering the Land of Israel.” According to Rabbi Ginsburgh, Grand Rabbi Schneerson taught “that war for the sake of revenge was a much higher mitzvah” (blessed act). Ginsburg asserts that criticism of him is equivalent to criticism of “the Lubavitcher rebbe” (Schneerson) and of the תורה שבעל פה — the Torah sheBeal peh itself. (Cf. Lawrence Cohler, “Hero or Racist? Are Jewish lives really more valuable than non-Jewish ones?” The Jewish Week, April 26, 1996, pp. 12 and 31).
Yitzchak Ginsburg was a 2019 recipient of an award from the Israeli Ministry of Education honoring him for his “Torah wisdom.”
According to Judaic scholars Norton Mezvinsky and Israel Shahak in their book, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, “One of the basic tenets of the Lurianic Kabbalah is the absolute superiority of the Jewish soul and body over the non-Jewish soul and body. According to the Lurianic Kabalah the world was created solely for the sake of Jews; the existence of non-Jews was subsidiary.”
The largest funeral for any Israeli dignitary in the history of the Israeli state was conducted in honor of the memory and teachings of an advocate of the genocide of Palestinians, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, in Jerusalem in October, 2013. His funeral was attended by an estimated 700,000 to 800,000 Israeli mourners. The New York Times described Rabbi Yosef as “the spiritual leader of the ultra-Orthodox Shas Party…”
The Associated Press reported, “Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, the religious scholar and spiritual leader of Israel’s Sephardic Jews who transformed his downtrodden community of immigrants from North Africa and Arab nations and their descendants into a powerful force in Israeli politics, died on Monday…Yosef was often called the outstanding Sephardic rabbinical authority of the century.”
Prime Minister Netanyahu declared that Rabbi Yosef was “one of the great halachic authorities of our generation. Rav Ovadia was a giant in Torah and halakha…He worked hard to glorify the heritage of Israel.”
These are the teachings of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, the object of media and Israeli veneration:
Arab people should be exterminated: “May the Holy Name visit retribution on the Arab heads, and cause their seed to be lost, and annihilate them. It is forbidden to have pity on them. We must give them missiles with relish, annihilate them. Evil ones, damnable ones.” (2001 Passover sermon. Cf. Haaretz [Israeli newspaper], April 12, 2001).
Gentiles likened to donkeys who exist only to serve the Jews: “Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel…With gentiles, it will be like any person – they need to die, but [God] will give them longevity. Why? Imagine that one’s donkey would die, they’d lose their money. This is his servant… That’s why he gets a long life, to work well for this Jew. Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat. That is why gentiles were created.” Jerusalem Post, October 18, 2010. (Concerning this identification of goyim with donkeys, Yosef was repeating the teaching of the Talmud in the aforementioned BT Berakhot 58a, as well as BT Kiddushin 68b).
The Talmudic theology that produced Ovadia Yosef, also produced the prominent Israeli Rabbi Bentzi Gopstein, who advocates the burning of Christian churches on Israeli territory (cf. The Telelgraph [UK] Aug. 6, 2015). He has declared that Christian “Missionary work must not be given a foothold… Let’s throw the vampires out of our land before they drink our blood again.” (Forward, [New York Judaic newspaper], Dec. 24, 2015).
Gopstein is a leader in Lehava (ץ הקודש LiMniat Hitbolelut B’eretz HaKodesh: “The Prevention of Assimilation in the Holy Land,” which attacks Palestinians who date or marry Judaic women. In 2010, “Multiple rebbetzins, (wives of rabbis), acting on behalf of Lehava, issued an open letter urging Israeli women not to associate with ‘non-Jews.” It advised, “Don’t date non-Jews, don’t work at places that non-Jews frequent, and don’t do national service with non-Jews.” The letter implied that if the women did so, they would be cut off from their ‘holy race.” (Cf. “Rabbis’ Wives Urge Israeli Women: Stay Away from Arab men” Haaretz December 28, 2010; also: Jerusalem Post, December 28, 2010).
The leading Israeli settler-Rabbi Shlomo Aviner declared that the devastating fire at Notre Dame cathedral in April, 2019 was God’s curse—divine retribution for medieval Catholics putting the Babylonian Talmud on trial: “Aviner said it was a result of the Paris trial, ‘In which Jewish sages in France of that generation were forced into confrontation with the Christian sages. The result was the burning of the Talmud. The Talmud books were brought to the Notre Dame square in 20 wagons…and were burned there, meaning, 1,200 Talmud books… Aviner, now the rabbi of the West Bank settlement Beit El, said it is a mitzvah — a deed done from religious duty — to set fire to churches in Israel…” (Cf. Yotam Berger, Haaretz, April 17, 2019).
“The great Christian Church in Paris is on fire. Should we feel sorry for that, or should we rejoice, as it [the cathedral] is idolatry, which it is a mitzvah to burn?…Several immensely important rabbinic rulers, most prominent among them Maimonides, ruled that churches are places of idolatry and ought to be destroyed. The rulings are very clear.”—Rabbi Shlomo Aviner.
Hasbara (Israeli propaganda) is so intense and widely repeated in the western media that it has managed to convince the non-Talmudic world that these Orthodox rabbis and their declarations are “an exception, a marginal extremist phenomenon condemned by the mainstream.” It is true that sophisticated public relations experts can be depended upon to parade a long line of Orthodox rabbis who will offer lip service-denunciation of the openly hateful Talmudists. But these protests are mainly for public consumption, targeted at naive gentiles. The racism and bigotry toward Palestinians, Christians and goyim in general is a direct transmission from the Babylonian Talmud and the later rabbinic legal texts that are the heirs of its didactic hermeneutic.
The Talmudic dictum to show no mercy to a non-Jew is taught at yeshivas in Jerusalem and the occupied West Bank, where settler institutes of higher education in places such as Petach Tikvah turn out recruits for service in “elite combat units” of the Israeli army and air force. Regiments and squadrons composed of these Talmudic-Zionist troops are among the most brutal in the Israeli military.
Objection: Problematic Talmud Citations are taken “Out of Context”
Context is everything for the defenders of the Talmudic rabbinic theology. Fair enough. But by “context” they do not mean taking into account the surrounding text, but rather submitting to Judaism’s own narrative about itself, which includes how it chooses to present the malevolent contents of the Talmud to non-Judaic audiences. In their eyes, “misuse” of knowledge of rabbinic texts is defined as employing those texts for “polemical” purposes. In their view, no polemic contra Talmudic Judaism is permissible, however authentically contextual it may be.
In considering the low value which the Talmudic religious system places on nefesh-deficient (lesser-souled) non-Jews, we can find no substantial body of exculpatory halakhic texts that radically contradict this racist-supremacist (and potentially homicidal) theology. The quotations we have furnished above are grounded in rabbinic law. This is a tragedy of course, but the facts speak for themselves and no amount of pressure or intimidation alters this truth or causes us to withdraw that which advances human knowledge and serves to prevent racism, hatred and violence.
We are aware that Jew-haters throughout history have attempted to exploit the lamentable facts about the rabbinic tradition as a means of engaging in the reverse of what the Talmudic rabbis do to goyim: oppress and subjugate them. The perverse irony of Jew-hatred rests in the fact that it is often a mirror image of goyim-hatred.
There is nothing in the teachings of Jesus Christ and His apostles which directs or condones hatred of Jews. Jesus taught, “Salvation is of the Jews.” He first came “only unto “he lost sheep of the House of Israel,” and all of his initial followers, as well as His Blessed Mother, were Jews. When so-called “Christians” crusade to oppress or violently suppress Jews they are doing so without a Biblical foundation; contrary to the teachings of the Moshiach (Messiah) of Israel.
Whereas hatred, violence and bigotry are in accord with the holiest texts of Judaism: the Mishnah, Gemara, Mishneh Torah, Shulchan Aruch, Mishanh Berurah, to which the Old Testament is subordinated.
Until the founding of the Israeli state, violence toward goyim was less widespread and the idea of building a Judaic military force or to propose a mission of conquest or capture of land designated as “Israel,” was abhorrent to Orthodox Judaism and opposed to Talmudic theology. It is important to note that theologically-motivated murderers have risen commensurate with the ascendance of the Zionist ideology.
The Satmar Grand Rabbi Zalman Teitelbaum has written Maamar Shalosh Shevuos, a treatise on the history and theology of pre-Zionist Orthodox Judaism, extending back centuries. During that time he demonstrates that the Talmudic theology taught that “Jews” were forbidden to found a nation-state of any kind until the Messiah appears, and forbidden to engage in military warfare against the goyim. Prior to the introduction of the heresy of Zionism in the 19th century, and Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook’s theology in the 20th, the religion predicated on the Talmud strictly proscribed founding any so-called “state of Israel” on any land anywhere on earth, and least of all in the God-forsaken sandbox misnamed the “Holy Land.” The dogma was and remains that only Moshiach could found Israel on earth and no one else was allowed to do so, not even the provocateur whose alias was Ben-Gurion, and his clique of atheists, socialists and Stalinists.
(The principal anti-Zionist texts of Hasidic Judaism are I. Domb’s classic, The Transformation, and Yaakov Shapiro’s massive, The Empty Wagon: Zionism’s Journey from Identity Crisis to Identity Theft).
Among the minority of non-Zionist Talmudic Judaics (they are a substantial minority in Hasidic ranks), who have adhered to this doctrine that no Jewish state may be founded prior to the coming of Moshiach, they typically bear no blood guilt for the countless murders of the Arabs of Lebanon and Palestine, which the Zionists have falsely perpetrated in the name of the “Jewish people.” Occupied Palestine is a counterfeit Israel and Zionists do not represent or speak for all Judaic persons.
This is not to say that Talmudism, in its original form prior to the late 19th century and the rise of Zionism, was benevolently disposed toward goyim. Far from it. Israeli scholar Rami Rosen’s study, “History of a Denial,” which appeared in the Israeli magazine Haaretz in 1996, wrote, “A check of main facts of the (rabbinic) historiography of the last 1500 years shows that the picture is different from the one previously shown to us. It includes massacres of Christians; mock repetitions of the crucifixion of Jesus that usually took place on Purim; cruel murders within the family; liquidation of informers, often done for religious reasons by secret rabbinical courts, which issued a sentence of rodef (‘pursuer’), and appointed secret executioners; assassinations of adulterous women in synagogues and/or the cutting of their noses by command of the rabbis.”
Plausible Denial and Institutionalized Deception
Secrecy concerning what Judaism actually teaches and represents is not as necessary in these days of rabbinic supremacy as it once was, for the reason expressed in Shakespeare’s Macbeth, “What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our power to account?” (Act 5:1)
Nonetheless, the propaganda continues and on the Internet there are Zionist rabbinic statements decrying the “commentary” and “interpretations” which Rabbi Ginsburgh and his like-minded fellow haters, such as Rabbi Shlomo Aviner, Rabbi Dov Lior, Bentzi Gopstein, Michael Ben-Ari, Rabbi Saadya Grama, Rabbi Meir Kahane, Rabbis Yitzhak Shapira and Yosef Elitzur, and others have supposedly falsely “imposed” on a blamelessly benign Talmud and ancillary halakhic texts.
These condemnations are not worth the paper they were written on. They are often put forth in the form of the standard disinformation which only am ha’aretz would believe, to wit, that the Mishnah and Gemara do not constitute rabbinic law, being merely various back-and-forth debates. As we have shown, this claim is retailed without stating that the zuggot pairs in Talmudic hermeneutics, such as the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel, each have the force of law at different times under given circumstances, due to the fact that a primary rabbinic exegetical principle is situation ethics.
Moreover, and this point is key, a principled Judaic protest contra racist rabbis, in order to have a reforming impact on Orthodox Judaism itself, would have to entail a repudiation of the iniquitous sacred texts upon which the bigotry and incitement to violence are predicated. Yet, there is no such repudiation in any of the signed declarations by supposed “enlightened” Orthodox rabbis allegedly attempting to distance their theology from that of a Meir Kahane or a Yitzchak Ginsburgh. Hence, it is not difficult to determine that the quintessence of the iniquitous Talmudic theology is upheld by these alleged rabbinic opponents of violence-prone, hate-spewing rabbis. What the supposed dissenters are doing is giving a deceitful public relations spin to Zionist-Talmudic theology, in the expectation that this will suffice to disarm critics and quiet any indignation or alarm that manifests among the public at large in the face of the awful truth about the Babylonian Talmud and its adherents.
The famed Rabbi Yosef Hayim of Baghdad, in Torah Lishmah, section 364, put forth the grounds for deception: “Behold, I set for you a table full of many aspects of permissibility in the matter of lying and deceit which are mentioned in the words of the Sages. Carefully examine each case and extract conclusions from each of them.”
In response to this study, Talmudists may attempt to deny everything, based on the invocation of their considerable clout and prestige: “The author is lying about Judaism because we say he is lying about Judaism.” That’s one simple tactic that has succeeded in terminating further investigation.
The recently deceased Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, translator of the Talmud Bavli, was an illustrious pillar of Chabad-Lubavitch Zionist Hasidism. So elevated was his position in Orthodox Judaism that in Tiberias he was named the Nasi (leader) of the reconstituted Sanhedrin. Rabbi Steinsaltz wrote:
“Rabbis are liable to alter their words, and the accuracy of their statements is not to be relied upon.” (The Talmud: The Steinsaltz Edition, Vol. II, pp. 48-49 [Random House]).
In attempting to explain Talmudism’s penchant for lying, Judaic scholar Ari Zivotofsky states that truthfulness is not an absolute imperative in Orthodox Judaism, and that while the “value of truth permeates the fabric of Judaism…there are other ethical imperatives which are, in fact, often side by side with truth…The problems arise when two or more of these principles come into conflict…As is often the case with a legal/ philosophical issue, the black and white answer is not to be found…” According to Zivotofsky, “avoiding great embarrassment or financial loss at the hands of the unscrupulous may be legitimate motives for lying. The Talmudic sages were serious about lying in order to recover (or keep) property from illegitimate hands.” (BT Yoma 83b).
We note with considerable dismay the dissimulation employed to assert (as Steven Spielberg’s movie Schindler’s List does) that, “The Talmud teaches that to save one life is to save the entire world.”
This preposterous humanitarian gloss applied to the rabidly ethnocentric Talmud, was given credibility, both as dialogue in Spielberg’s movie and as the film’s motto, reproduced on countless posters that probably adorn school rooms to this day. The motto, dramatized in the film, is a purported to be a quote from BT Sanhedrin 37a, but the Talmud contains no such humanistic, universalist statement.
The uncensored Babylonian Talmud in Sanhedrin 37a is concerned only with the welfare of fully human beings, i.e. those described in its text as “Jews.” The actual Talmud tractate reads: “Whoever saves a single life in Israel, Scripture regards him as if he had saved the entire world” (emphasis supplied).
This reflects the ruling of Maimonides in his Mishneh Torah, Sefer Nezikin, Rotzeach u’Shmirat Nefesh, 1:1: “Whenever a person kills the soul of another person from Israel, he transgresses a negative commandment, as it says, “thou shalt not murder.” With his narrow definition of who should not be killed, Maimonides nullified the Word of God in Genesis 9:6, Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17.
Mr. Spielberg’s fraud was peddled throughout American culture and educational institutions. What is instructive about this faking is the extent to which the corporate media have been sublimely complicit in circulating it, while their “fact-checking” departments failed to detect the cheat, if indeed they bothered to undertake the obligation to do so.
Righteous “Noahide” Goyim?
Another gateway to making nice about the non-Jews is the much publicized “Noahide” (also spelled “Noachide”) status that it is said goyim can obtain to become “righteous.” However, one would do well to read the “fine print” of the misnamed Noahide laws (they have nothing to do with the Biblical Noah). Under these rabbinic laws, “idol worshippers” are liable to the death penalty. (BT Sanhedrin 57a). This should not be a source of anxiety, correct? After all, true Christians don’t worship idols.
Again, consult the fine print: the rabbinic legal authorities of Orthodox Judaism decree that the worship of Jesus Christ is “avodah zarah” (idol worship; cf. Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 9:4; Teshuvos Pri ha-Sadeh 2:4. Also Igros Moshe, Y.D. 3:129-6).
Any non-Jew classed as a “Noahide” and who worships Jesus Christ as the Son of God is in for a lethal surprise: he or she is liable for the death penalty.
Moreover, Maimonides ruled that acceptance of Noahide status on the part of the goyim is not a choice, it is an obligation: “All of the inhabitants of the world are compelled to accept the Noahide laws. If any non-Jew does not accept these laws he should be killed.” —Maimonides, Mishneh Torah: Hilchot Melachim U’Milchamoteihem (“Laws of Kings and Wars”), Section 8, Halakha 10.
This passage from Hilchot Melachim deals with battle captives, but in the course of elucidating those laws pertaining to captives, Maimonides is drawing on the larger corpus of laws having to do with non-Jews; i.e. the Seven Laws of the Noahide. (Maimonides is specifically cited in this regard in Tosefot Yom Tov, Avot 3:14). The call to execute all those “among the nations” (goyim) who do not accept the Noahide laws (not just those who are prisoners of war), is indubitably present in Hilchot Melachim 8:10.
In the twenty-first century that killing can occur in Palestine, where the Israelis are supreme. In Europe and America Judaic executions of those who worship Jesus Christ as God, or refuse to submit to the Noahide laws, cannot as of this writing, take place overtly. This is due to Judaism’s previously noted situation ethics. Maimonides decreed that killings of obstreperous non-Jews can only occur overtly in those places and situations where “the hand of Israel is powerful over them.” In other words, where Judaic supremacy is complete, or nearly so. (Hilchot Melachim 8:9).
For Christians, the belief that adhering to Noahide laws renders them “righteous gentiles” in the eyes of the Orthodox rabbis, is a perilous fiction.
Conclusion
It has been our regrettable duty in these pages to bear witness to the appalling truth that Orthodox rabbinic Judaism constitutes a virulent and brutally racist dehumanization and detestation of gentiles, and a concomitant idolization of persons who are Jewish; this being the predominant difference between the two.
The denial of the full humanity of non-Jewish persons is the axis upon which the theology of Talmudism is founded and sustained.
Jesus Christ took a different path. It was He who declared of the Roman soldier, “Greater faith than this I have not seen in all Israel” (Matthew 8:5-10).
Michael Hoffman is a former reporter for the New York bureau of the Associated Press, the author of nine books of history and literature and the editor of the periodical, Revisionist History®.
Basri, Ezra, Ethics of Business Finance & Charity, six volumes, (Jerusalem: Haktav Press, 1987-1993)
Biale, David, et al., Hasidism: A New History (Princeton University Press, 2018)
Domb, I. (Rabbi Yerachmiel), The Transformation: The Case of the Neturei Karta (1958)
Clifton, Tony, and Leroy, Catherine, God Cried (Quartet Books, 1983). The only comprehensive book in English documenting the Israeli air force terror bombing of the city of Beirut, Lebanon during the summer of 1982.
Eaford, Witness of War Crimes in Lebanon: Testimony Given to the Nordic Commission, Oslo, October 1982 (Ithaca Press, 1983)
Eisenmenger, Johann Andreas, Entdecktes Judenthum, two volumes (1700). Unsurpassed inaugural scientific study of the Babylonian Talmud and related rabbinic texts by the Heidelberg University Professor of Hebrew and Aramaic. In German in the old 17th century typeface. Digitally reprinted in 2007 by Independent History and Research. Over 2,000 pages scanned in a pdf. text file; a facsimile of the rare first edition, which was almost entirely destroyed by the Holy Roman Emperor at the request of his financiers.
Finkelstein, Norman G., Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History (University of California, 2006)
Finkelstein, Norman G., This Time We Went Too Far (OR Press, 2011). One of the most important of all chronicles of the Israeli massacres of Arab civilians.
Foxbrunner, Roman A., Habad: The Hasidism of Shneur Zalman of Lyady (Jacob Aronson, 1993)
Friedman, Robert I., The False Prophet Rabbi Meir Kahane: From FBI Informant To Knesset Member. (Lawrence Hill & Co., 1990)
Friedman, Robert I., Zealots for Zion: Inside Israel’s West Bank Settlement Movement. (Random House, New York, 1992)
Ganzfried, Shlomo, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch, two volumes, trans. by Avrohom Davis (1996)
Maciejko, Pawel, The Mixed Multitude: Jacob Frank and the Frankist Movement, 1755-1816 (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011)
Martin, Tony, The Jewish Onslaught: Despatches from the Wellesley Battlefront (1993)
Matt, Daniel, The Zohar, nine volumes (Stanford University Press, 2003-2016). This is the uncensored English translation of one of the principal texts of the Kabbalistic canon.
McCaul, Alexander, The Talmud Tested: A Comparison of the Religion of Judaism with the Religion of Moses (Independent History and Research, 2006). McCaul was Professor of Hebrew at King’s College, London. He converted thousands of Judaics to Christ, including rabbis. This is a reprint of his classic work, first published in 1837, with an introduction by Hoffman.
Nation of Islam, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, three volumes (1991, 2010 and 2016). An indispensable revisionist history of black enslavement in America and its aftermath.
Neusner, Jacob, The Mishnah: A New Translation (Yale University Press, 1988)
Pappe, Ilan, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine (2007)
Sand, Shlomo, The Invention of the Jewish People (Verso, 2009)
Shahak, Israel, and Mezvinsky, Norton, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel (Pluto Press, 2004)
Shapira, Yitzhak, and Elitzur, Yosef, Torat Ha-Melekh: Berure Halakha Be’-inyene Malkhut U-Milhamot (Yeshivat Od Yosef Chai, 2009)
Shapiro, Marc B., Changing the Immutable: How Orthodox Judaism Rewrites Its History (Littman, 2015)
Shapiro, Yaakov, The Empty Wagon: Zionism’s Journey from Identity Crisis to Identity Theft (Bais Medrash Society, 2018)
Sprinzak, Ehud, Brother Against Brother: Violence and Extremism in Israeli Politics from Altalena to the Rabin Assassination (1999).
Steinsaltz, Adin, Opening the Tanya (2003)
Steinsaltz, Adin, The Koren Talmud Bavli, 42 volumes (Koren Publishing Jerusalem, 2012-2019). A mostly uncensored English-language Babylonian Talmud. Various “explanatory” margin notes have been added seemingly to lessen the shock of the reader’s encounter with the corpus of the Judaism’s holiest books, such as Sanhedrin 54b (cf. vol. 30, p. 41), where the reader confronts one of the most startling expositions extant of Talmudic permission for criminal conduct.
Steinsaltz, Adin, The Talmud: The Steinsaltz Edition, 22 volumes (1989). A little more than one-half of Rabbi Steinsaltz’s uncensored Talmud of Babylon in English, the printing of which was abruptly halted by Random House midway through publication. The Talmud: The Steinsaltz Edition is particularly valuable for the inclusion of Steinsaltz’s candid בָּרַיְיתָא (baraitot).
Wolf, Arnold Jacob, “Habad’s Dead Messiah,” in Judaism: A Quarterly Journal of Life and Thought (Winter, 2002), pp. 109-115.
Yarden, Ophir, “Recent Halakhic Discourse in Israel Encouraging Racism and Violence,” in Svartvik J., and Wirén J. (eds.) Religious Stereotyping and Interreligious Relations (2013), pp. 221-231.
On reading the enduring horrific daily news coming out of Palestine/Israel relating to the ongoing Jewish-state Nakba, I invariably feel a strong desire to discuss what is often the elephant in the room. It’s an issue constantly on the minds of Israelis and Palestinians alike, while at the same time being difficult to discuss frankly and directly in polite society.
The issue is Jewish supremacy as it manifests itself in the Zionist settler-colonial state of Israel and beyond. (See my blog post, What is Jewish supremacy and how is it different from White supremacy?). I say “beyond”, because there is a strong existing connection to Israel by ‘ordinary’ Jews outside of Israel/Palestine, whose Jewish communities, in Europe and America, feed Israel. Even at a mature age they go there, either to visit or to stay (which is a support and confirmation for the state), but more often to serve in the military which is the most militant of brainwashing in Jewish supremacy.
Most activists skirt the issue of Jewish supremacy and some deny it outright in a way they would not dream of doing with White supremacy. The only safe place to discuss the issue of Jewish supremacy, it sometimes appears, is within the confines of Mondoweiss.
But even there, we are more likely to read forceful critiques debunking the Zionist idea of a ‘Jewish nation’ as sold to the world by the world Zionist movement. A necessary exercise. Nevertheless, I often wonder, what about the concomitant fact of the religious Jewish character of the state as expressed in its Basic Law? What about the self-professed Jewish identity of millions of Jews, in Israel and outside Israel — not to mention Palestinian perceptions of them — as Jews first, and Zionist second?
It therefore seems at times that, in order to liberate Palestine from the Zionist settler-colonial regime, Palestinians must first undertake the impossible task of convincing the world that those who espouse the Zionist settler-colonial regime are less Jewish than Zionist, which of course strips them of their self-identified Jewish identity and is unacceptable to them.
More and more Jews worldwide today are saying “not in our name”, in reference to Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people. However, they too, don’t have the power to rename Israeli Jews as something else. This brings to mind Israel’s chief rabbi’s statement that “some Jews are more Jewish than others.”
When we talk about Israel, we can discuss apartheid, demographics, settler-colonialism, but we are often silenced when the issue is Jewish supremacy and the Jewish nature of the state — issues that are central to Israeli society as well as to the current and future dynamics of Palestinian-Israeli relations.
If the goal of all the analysis about Israel is to find realistic solutions for an impossible status quo, we ought not to dismiss this very real and troubling issue. It doesn’t make sense to do so.
In a 2015 article published online and titled ‘Palestine‒Israel: Decolonization Now, Peace Later’, Alaa Tartir (researcher at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva, Switzerland and a policy advisor at Al-Shabaka) lists a number of basic but fundamental obstacles to any future lasting peace in Israel/Palestine. Among them is the following characterization of Israeli society:
Another dominant observation that I noticed in my small, random and unrepresentative sample is the sense of superiority [among Israeli Jews]. liberal, leftist, fundamentalists, secular, religious and progressive voices, from different generations living in different cities, shared the feature of superiority, which is problematic at the very personal and human level, before it extends to politics. Statements like ‘we are God’s chosen nation’, ‘we don’t care about international law’, ‘we help those poor Palestinians to end the occupation’, ‘we offer Palestinians jobs and they work for us’, ‘Gaza is irrelevant’, ‘I have Palestinian friends but would never trust them’ characterized the discussions. Therefore, unless ‘ordinary’ Israelis perceive themselves as ordinary people and not superior to other nations it is impossible to imagine how a one-state or two-state solution could work.
Tartir goes on to say,
Just as the Palestinian people and leadership need to engage in a serious process of reforming their strategies, so do the Israelis. The Israelis need to reconcile internally a number of issues mainly related to the apartheid structures, Jewish supremacy, the Jewish nature of the state, the demographic phobia and the return of the Palestinian refugees from exile.
When we are forced to ignore the perceptions of Israelis and their set of values and beliefs (which are the root manifestation of the Zionist Jewish state in Palestine), when we are unable to confront them candidly, we Palestinians will never be able to achieve justice and equality.
Lena, a former Israeli, writes:
Many Jews, even if not overtly Zionist, share this basic belief that in order to prevent another extermination, they must become DOMINANT and exercise superiority, because “this is how the world works, either you dominate or be exterminated”. Although nobody ever has persecuted or offended these young Jews, they share the view of Goyim as a bunch of people who inherently want to erase Jews from this planet. I honestly do not know how to combat a basic belief that the world is based on domination, that whoever does not dominate will be subjugated or killed, that Jews must forever fight against an inherent existential threat, therefore not letting them dominate is the same as wanting them all dead.
Lena describes the mindset of any group of people who have been conditioned to see the world through us vs. them.
“Confronting the occupier, colonizer or oppressor is the main lesson from the history of liberation movements across the world,” writes Tartir. We must confront Israelis on the issue of Jewish supremacy, as on all others.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
I was planning to write a long article comparing the accountability of the various possible Covid-19 culprits. I thought I would delve into a hypothetical question: who is more guilty of a mass murder – a young scientist who forgot to seal the safety latch of a laboratory coronavirus refrigerator and by failing to do so, exposed humanity to the risk of a viral pandemic, or an epidemiologist and professor who distributes a phantasmic unsubstantiated study that is not fact-based and proved to be grossly incorrect and by so doing, inflicted financial chaos leading to the destruction of the Western economy, contributed to world famine and the possible deaths of millions?
But as soon as I started to delve into it, I gathered that the topic was not as interesting as I hoped. The young scientist was negligent, a relatively minor offence in comparison with the epidemiologist who committed a conscious, wilful act following a process of so-called methodical ‘deliberation.’ The young scientist is guilty of negligence that led to many deaths, the epidemiology professor is, basically, complicit in a crime against humanity.
I realized a more interesting question is why most Western countries failed to take the right decision. Britain is particularly interesting as it initially took what seems now to be the right policy, then made a 180 after it was subject to a media blitz fuelled by the embarrassingly exaggerated ‘predictions’ from a ‘scientific study’ delivered by London Imperial College.
If we want to live in a better world, we may have to delve into the systematic failure of our media, government, dysfunctional political class, and the scientific political technocrats. Considering the crimes that are now committed by our so-called elite, a criminal investigation is likely the only way forward and may be our only hope to survive.
Other intriguing questions have surfaced amidst the Corona crisis. While it is clear why many people supported severe lockdown measures back in February and March, it is far from clear why liberals and progressives are still supporting the ludicrous surrender of our most essential rights to operate freely and make a living? Why do the tech companies stick with a narrative that is becoming increasingly shaky? Why does Facebook deploy its robots to silence anyone who doesn’t agree with the World Health Organization? Why, in the most blatant violation of freedom of speech, has Youtube been removing content and alternative views presented by frontline scientists and medical doctors such as Dr. Erickson’s Covid19 Briefing? For those who don’t remember, just two months ago the same American press, that is now rallying against dissenting American doctors, was criticizing China for silencing its own medical professionals who insisted upon telling the truth. What is it about David Icke’s message that brings to light the true authoritarian nature of Google, Facebook and Twitter? Why are the tech corporations united against those who see 5G as a global menace? Whether the 5G dissenters are right or wrong, there is no health risk to any of us from people who express their thoughts and are upset by radiation.
It may be too depressing to admit that in the West, it is the tech companies, rather than the state, that display the most authoritarian tactics. But they are not alone in this battle. What we see is a broad alliance among the so-called progressives, the liberals and the bitterest Orwellian enemies of freedom and speech rights.
The division we see in contemporary society is not of a socio-economic nature, it is not rich vs. poor, it is not political, it has nothing to do with Left or Right, it is not even cognitive, it is all about Athens and Jerusalem. Athens teaches us how to think for ourselves, while Jerusalem dictates what to think, what to say and who not to listen to. Athens pushes for an Agora: an open marketplace of ideas dominated by tolerance and pluralism while Jerusalem adheres to a set of beliefs, and as is typical with beliefs, the more they are removed from factuality and rationality the stronger the belief happens to be.
It does not come as a surprise to many of us that some progressives and liberals are still very pessimistic, as if they try to save the ridiculously farfetched predictions made by our state ‘scientists’ two months ago. They cling to predictions that have proven to be grossly wrong and by unheard of proportions. I guess that the progressive worldview is not a political position, it is a mental state and it is actually of a very problematic supremacist nature. Progressives are those who believe that those who do not agree with them are somehow inferior: ‘reactionaries’ so to say. To be a progressive is to believe that your view isn’t just right, it is actually superior, scientifically and analytically even if the facts and the rules of logic suggest the opposite.
In my latest book, ‘Being in Time,’ I reached the conclusion that the progressive worldview is probably choseness’ final stage. I guess that my old insight has now materialized into a public awareness. I can only thank Covid-19 for that.
UPROOTED PALESTINIANS: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM 