Israeli Arms Trade, The Lobby and the Meaning of Chosenness

 BY GILAD ATZMON

tehran Times .jpg

Source: https://www.tehrantimes.com/

 “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 Internationalby 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.

Donate

أدوارٌ كبيرة للسعوديّة ولبنان في الانتخابات الأميركيّة!

د. وفيق إبراهيم

كان المواطن العربي يأمل بأن تتعاون دول جامعة الدول العربية ومجلس التعاون الخليجي على مجابهة وباء كورونا القاتل، الذي وصفته منظمة الصحة العالميّة بعدوّ البشرية، لأن هذا الفيروس القابل للانتشار بسرعة صاروخيّة، يجتاح العالم بأسره فاتكاً حتى الآن بتسعة آلاف شخص من دون أي تمييز لعرق وطائفة ولون، ومهدداً أكثر من مئتين وخمسين ألفاً مصابين به بمصير مشابه وملوّحاً بقدرته على إصابة ملايين البشر.

لذلك فكان على الدول العربية أن تضع برنامجاً من طبقتين: الأولى داخلية ضمن كياناتها تنشر فيها آليات تعقيم وعنايات طبية ومعالجات، والثانية عربية إقليمية في إطار الجامعة العربية لصاحبها وأمينها العام أبو الغيظ وذلك لتنسيق عمليات عبور الناس والبضائع من الحدود المشتركة، وإغاثة الدول الأعضاء ذات الإمكانات المحدودة في الأردن وتونس ولبنان ومصر والسودان والمغرب وغيرها، فلدى «الشقيقات» من دول النفط والغاز فوائض بالإمكان استخدامها ولو لمرة واحدة، في إطار دعم الأشقاء وليس «لإذلالهم» كما يحدث دائماً لدى إرسال مساعدات مالية يتبين آنفاً أنها للاستثمار السياسي وفي طرف ثالث هو الأميركي.

لكن ما يجري اليوم أكثر خطورة من النمط القديم، فإلى جانب الكورونا المخيف، هناك ركود اقتصادي نتيجة تداعيات هذا الوباء الذي يفرض مرابطة الناس في منازلها وتوقف الأعمال وكل انواع التفاعلات الادارية الرسمية والخاصة، ما أدى الى تراجع كبير في اوضاع الدول العربية المتواضعة، وتدهور في إمكانات الدول النفطية.

ما يؤسف له هنا، أن هذه الدول العربية التي كان معتقداً ان الكورونا يدفعها لمعالجة أخطاره في أراضيها والامتداد العربي المجاور، تهتم شكلياً باقتفاء أثر هذا الفيروس الكوني في الانصياع لمرجعياتها الدولية في شؤون سياسية لا تعكس خطورة المرحلة.

هناك نموذجان سريعان يختصران ضحالة المشهد العربي وانحطاطه ويتجسّدان في تصريحات حديثة للرئيس الاميركي دونالد ترامب، وجه في إحداها شكراً حميماً للحكومة اللبنانية على مساعدتها في إطلاق سراح العميل «اللبناني» المتصهين عامر الفاخوري الذي تعاون مع المخابرات الإسرائيلية في مرحلة احتلال جنوب لبنان ونكل بالجنوبيين قتلاً وتعذيباً لاكثر من عقدين وهرب الى «اسرائيل» ومنها الى اميركا بعد تحرير لبنان من قبل المقاومة في 2000.

وقرّر بعد عشرين عاماً نال فيها الجنسية الاميركية زيارة لبنان، حيث اعتقلته الاجهزة الامنية وأحالته الى المحكمة العسكرية بتهم واضحة ومكشوفة لا يمكن التلاعب بها.

لكنّ ضغوطاً اميركية على «لبنان السياسي» هددت بعقوبات وحصار، أرغمت القضاء العسكري على تبرئته بذريعة سقوط التهم بمرور الزمن.

لذلك يحقّ لترامب شكر «لبنان السياسيّ» على تعاونه لإطلاق سراح «مواطن أميركي»، على حد تعبيره. وهو يريد بذلك توجيه رسالة الى كل مواطني بلاده بأنه حريص على سلامتهم في أي مكان، وكيف لا يكون مهتماً بهم بشكل إضافي والانتخابات الرئاسية الاميركية التي يعمل ترامب على النجاح فيها بولاية ثانية، أصبحت على بعد ثمانية اشهر فقط، فيكون لبنان السياسي «المعجزة الكونية»، قدّم لصديقه ترامب خدمة انتخابية هامة يتباهى بها امام طبقات شعبية اميركية لا تهتم عادة بالسياسة ولا تعرف إلا أن رئيسها ترامب حريص على أمن مواطنيه حتى في اقصى الارض.

هناك نقاط اكثر عمقاً تذهب الى ان اللوبيات اليهودية الاميركية النافذة هي عالمي الإعلام والمصارف هي التي ضغطت على ترامب لتحرير الفاخوري العميل لدى «اسرائيل»، وذلك لتشجيع كل العملاء بأنهم محميون من الدولة الأميركية والكيان المحتل، وبذلك تتعمّق المعادلة التالية: بأن ترامب وطد علاقته بمعادلات انتخابية اميركية قوية هي اللوبيات اليهودية وذلك في الخدمة التي أسداها له «لبنان السياسي» وتستفيد منها أيضاً «اسرائيل».

هذا هو الدور اللبناني، في دعم ترامب الذي لا يقلّ خطورة عن الكورونا، فماذا عن الدور السعودي الذي يتناسب مع الحجم الاقتصادي لبلد له امكانات السعودية النفطية؟

وبما ان العلاقة بين ترامب ومحمد بن سلمان اصبحت بنيوية وكل طرف فيها يحتاج الى الآخر، فقد ارتأى سيد البيت الابيض خفض اسعار النفط لتهبط اسعار وقود الاستخدام الشعبي في البنزين ومشتقاته لسبب وحيد يتعلق بإرضاء الناخبين الأميركيين من الفئات الشعبية لكسب اصواتهم، وذلك لمدة تنتهي بانتهاء الانتخابات الرئاسية مباشرة، وترامب يعرف ان النفط الصخري الأميركي العالي الكلفة لاستخراجه لا يستطيع تسويق منتجاته في مرحلة انتشار كورونا.

الامر الذي دفعه الى تبني سياسات خفض اسعار النفط لتنفع الاستهلاك الشعبي ولا تضر النفط الصخري شبه المتوقف حالياً.

فمَن يستطيع تنفيذ هذه الرغبات الترامبية؟

هما طرفان: الأول محمد بن سلمان ولي العهد السعودي والرأسمالية الاميركية، صاحبة شركات النفط الصخري، والتي ينتمي اليها ترامب اقتصادياً.

لذلك وافق رأس المال الاميركي على الخطة فيما ذهب ابن سلمان الى تطبيقها بمغالاة متعمدة، صحيح انها تخدم ترامب لكنها تحميه أيضاً في مشروعه لاحتكار السلطة في السعودية.

فاندفع لتفجير اتفاق معقود مع الروس منذ خمس سنوات لتأمين استقرار السوق النفطية رافعاً إنتاج بلاده من تسعة ملايين برميل الى ثلاثة عشر مليوناً متسبباً بذلك بانهيار الأسعار الى 25 دولاراً للبرميل الواحد ما انقص عائدات السعودية أكثر من عشرة في المئة دفعة واحدة. وهذا لا يهم بالنسبة اليه مقابل حماية مشروعه السياسي من قبل ترامب.

اما المثير للسخرية الذي يكشف ان مملكة آل سعود ليست أكثر من آلية أميركية، فهو اقتراح أرسله ترامب اعلامياً الى القادة الروس يعرض عليهم التفاوض مجدداً حول أسعار النفط لتهدئة الاسواق، على حد تعبيره.

لذلك لا تجوز الاستهانة بترامب الذي يريد افهام الجميع، ان السعودية و»لبنان السياسي» هما بلدان تابعان للجيوبوليتيك الاميركي وينفذان أوامره حرفياً من دون اي اعتراض.

هذه هي الأدوار العربية في الانتخابات الاميركية، التي تؤكد مجدداً ان التحرر من المستعمرين يحتاج الى مقاومات كبيرة بدأت في لبنان ولم تنتقل بعد الى أمكنة أخرى.

Why does Netanyahu keep winning?

by Gilad Atzmon

A few days ahead of the previous Israeli election, Haaretz’s lead writer Anshel Pfeffer,  authored a spectacular analysis of Israel’s current political deadlock: Israelis are going to the polls to decide whether they are ‘Jews’ or ‘Israelis.’ 

The first to point out the political  rivalry between ‘the Jew’and ‘the Israeli’ was  Shimon Peres who, after his narrow 1996 defeat,  lamented in a Haaretz interview that “the Israelis lost the election.” When Peres asked who won, he answered, “The Jews won.” Peres, who was born in Poland, saw himself as the ‘Israeli’ candidate, Netanyahu, who was born in Israel and served as a commander in the IDF’s top unit, was in Peres’ eyes, the political choice of the ‘Jews.’  Peres’s observation was spot on.  Politically astute and well imbued in early Zionist thought, Peres identified the emerging Identitarian conflict that was destined to break up Israeli society.

Pfeffer pointed out that in the 1990s Netanyahu was influenced by his American campaign guru, Arthur Finkelstein, to accept that “Jewishness” is the primary unifier for Israelis. This clearly applies to religious Jews but it is also true of those who regard themselves as secular and/or leftist.

While early Zionism can be understood as an uncompromising attempt to divorce the Jews from Jewishness, the ghetto and tribalism to make them “people like all other people,” the Israeli Right/Religious political call is openly driven by a nostalgic adherence to the myths of the shtetl and its walls, segregation and every other aspect of Jewish tribalism, chauvinism included. As bizarre as it may sound, Netanyahu’s transformation of Israel into a Jewish ghetto surrounded by walls and defined by a ‘Jewish National Bill’  makes him, by early Zionist standards, into an ardent anti Zionist.

According to Pfeffer,  when Netanyahu returned to power in 2009 and formed a right-wing/ religious coalition,  “the Jews prevailed” and have done so ever since.

On Monday, Netanyahu won a significant political and personal victory. He earned the votes of the people despite his complicated legal situation and some would even say, because of his legal complications. In this rivalry between the ‘Israeli’ and the ‘Jew,’ the ‘Israeli’ is beaten time after time and the ‘Jew’ consistently prevails.

The ‘Jews,’ as Shimon Peres referred to them,  see in Netanyahu a clear path towards a true spiritual homecoming. Being Likudnics can be realised as a true celebration of who and what they truly are. The ‘Israelis,’ on the other hand, were hoping for Gantz and Kachol Lavan to revive the early Zionist promise to be emancipated from what they are and to finally become people like all other Goyim whether this means nationalist patriots or cosmopolitan pacifist.  

The demography of the ‘Jewish’  camp and its ‘Israeli’ rival is pretty much separated.  Netanyahu is largely supported by Mizrahi Jews and the Israeli Religious sectors (the orthodox and settlers). Gantz and Kachol Lavan have managed to ignite the imagination of the old elites: the Ashkenazi and educated Israelis. The ‘Jews,’ as Peres referred to them, love Bibi because he manipulates the Goyim. He reduced America into an Israeli colony and practically a ‘side in the conflict’ (as opposed to an impartial negotiator).  They are proud of their Bibi and his ability to puppeteer world leaders. He bonds with the Diaspora and the Lobby, he also manages to keep American taxpayers’ dollars flowing. Bibi, as far as they can tell, is the best thing that happened in modern Jewish history.  

The ‘Israelis’ vote Kachol Lavan because they don’t like Netanyahu, they can’t stand the idea that his voters and they are considered ‘one people.’ The ‘Israeli’ shares little with the religious sectors, the settlers and even less with the ‘Jews’ who live in the periphery.   The ‘Israeli’ would like Netanyahu to be locked up behind bars and subliminally hope that his voters will evaporate into thin air.  Kachol Lavan is not a centre party. Its vision of the conflict is actually to the right of the Likud party and its vision of social matters is vague to non-existent.  It is more likely that its leaders, veteran IDF Generals, evoke amongst the ‘Israelis’ nostalgic memories of 1967: an Ashkenazi ruled state, committed to the Zionist mantra of the rejection of Jewishness.

But the ‘Israeli’ was defeated again on Monday.  Nostalgia for the most heroic moment in Israeli history didn’t seem to mature into the necessary revolution and Gantz may have finished his political role. It is likely that Kachol Lavan will disintegrate into its elements in the coming weeks.  

The phantasy of becoming ‘people like all other people’ has collapsed for two obvious reasons: 1. no other people want to be like all other people.  2. The ‘Israeli’ is far more Jewish than he or she is willing to admit.  

Arthur Finkelstein figured it out in the 1990s and Netanyahu continues to follow his campaign mentor, refining his political agenda in line with Judeo-centrism. In the state that calls itself the ‘Jewish State,’ the ‘Israeli’ is gradually becoming  rare, he has been supplanted by ‘the Jew.’


My battle for truth and freedom involves  some expensive legal services and security expenses. I hope that you will consider committing to a monthly donation in whatever amount you can give. Regular contributions will enable me to avoid being pushed against a wall and to stay on top of the endless harassment by Zionist operators attempting to silence me.

Donate

The Labour Partly

 BY GILAD ATZMON

by Gilad Atzmon 

Historically, a popular coup against an opposition party is rare.  In the last General Election Corbyn’s Labour provided us with just such an exceptional spectacle.

Labour managed to alienate its voters. Its leader turned his back on its strongest allies including, among others,  Ken Livingstone and Chris Williamson. For some reason Corbyn’s Labour turned itself into an Orwellian authoritarian apparatus; it even dug into its members’ social media accounts picking out ‘dirt’ (human right’s concerns) in order to appease one distinctive foreign lobby.

The Brits saw it all, how dangerous the party became. Many former ardent Labour supporters angrily rejected their political home. They may never return.

The conduct of the contenders for Labour’s leadership in the last few days reveals that the Brits were spot on in humiliating their opposition party. 

At the moment, Labour’s leadership candidates are, without exception, competing amongst themselves to see who goes the lowest in pledging allegiance to a Lobby associated with a foreign state that is currently under investigation by the International Criminal Court (ICC)  for committing crimes against humanity.

Yesterday I discussed the topic with the Great Richie Allen: Richie Allen@RichieAllenShow

Here’s Tuesdays Show. Thanks Mark Steele and @GiladAtzmon https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/richieallen/episodes/2020-01-14T11_18_16-08_00 … Podomatic ‎@podomatic

17Twitter Ads info and privacy15 people are talking about this

Leadership contender Emily Thornberry is apparently on her “hands and knees…asking  for forgiveness.” And she is not the only one. The Zionist Times of Israel’s headlines yesterday revealed that the top candidates for Labour leadership have all vowed to lead the fight against anti-Semitism. “Keir Starmer backs automatic expulsion for offenders; Rebecca Long-Bailey: Corbyn bears personal responsibility for crisis; Jess Phillips suspends aide over anti-Semitic tweets.”

On BBC Radio, front runner Keir Starmer said, “We should have done more on anti-Semitism.”  I wonder, what did Starmer mean by that? What is the next step after thought policing and spying on party members? Re-education centres? Indoctrination facilities?  Hypnosis or maybe physiological treatment or perhaps lobotomy for those who dare to tell the truth about Israel and its Lobby?

Meanwhile, the Mail on Sunday reported that leadership contender, Jess Phillips, had on Friday suspended an aide who equated the Jewish State with the Islamic one. 

Two days ago we learned that Zionist pressure on the Labour party isn’t fading away. The Board of Deputies of British Jews (BOD) published its demands of the candidates for Labour’s leadership.  The ultra Zionist Jewish Chronicle wrote “The Board of Deputies has demanded each of Labour’s candidates for leader and deputy leader sign up to its 10 ‘pledges’ in order to ‘begin healing its relationship with the Jewish community’…”

bod_10-pledges.jpg

Predictably, the demands made by the BOD do not accord with Western and Christian values of pluralism and tolerance. The BOD demands that contenders ‘pledge’ to  “prevent re-admittance of prominent offenders.” One may wonder what about forgiveness and compassion, are those fundamental Western values foreign to our Labour leadership candidates?

The BOD insists that leadership contenders pledge to “provide no platform for those who have been suspended or expelled for antisemitism.” What about freedom of speech and free debate? Are those also alien to Labour’s future leaders?

The new Labour leader is expected to support the bizarre idea that the Zionist Jewish Labour Movement will grant the kosher certificate for its “anti racism education program.” I thought to myself that if the Jewish Labour Movement is so good in ‘anti racism education,’ maybe, and before anything else, it should contribute towards the cleansing of racism in Israel.

The fact that a Jewish organisation such as the BOD is so bold as to publish such ludicrous demands from a British national party is no surprise. The bizarre development here is that Labour’s  leadership candidates are engaged in an undignified battle to gain the BOD’s support. 

I am not critical of the Jewish Lobby and its orbit of Zionist pressure groups. Those bodies clearly accomplished their mission.  But it is astonishing how dysfunctional the Labour party and its leadership are. The party can’t even draw the most elementary lesson from its recent electoral disaster.

Those who follow my work know that I have predicted the unfortunate downfall of Labour and the demise of the Left in general. The Left, as I have been arguing for a while, has failed to reinstate its relevance and authenticity. It is unfortunately dead in the water.


My battle for truth and freedom involves  some expensive legal services. I hope that you will consider committing to a monthly donation in whatever amount you can give. Regular contributions will enable me to avoid being pushed against a wall and to stay on top of the endless harassment by Zionist operators attempting to silence me.

Donate

Burg, Soros and the ‘Jew-niversal.’

JANUARY 01, 2020

BY GILAD ATZMON

By Gilad Atzmon

 While the Jewish Lobby and its squads of thought-police are geared up to frame and destroy anyone who dares to mention Soros’ ethnicity, Avraham Burg, prominent Israeli politician, former chairman of the Jewish Agency and interim Israeli president lauds George Soros as the quintessential  ‘Jew-niversalist’ icon.

In his recent Haaretz Op-ed  titled “Get Ready for the ‘Jew-niversal’ Decade of George Soros and Open Society,” the Israeli politician opines that just “a few people have the courage to stand up to the decade’s new tyrants at the head of illiberal democracies.” Apparently “one of these people with courage is Soros.” According to Burg, Soros “represents a ‘Jew-niversal’ standpoint, a Jewish alternative symbol to the simplistic Jewish one embraced by Netanyahu, Trump and their supporters.”

Within the context of the notion of this so called ‘Jew-niversal,’ the 52% of the Brits who want to split from the EU are considered a ‘noisy suicidal minority.’ It seems that the so-called ‘Jew-niversal’ is not very tolerant towards people who vote Tory, Trump or Netanyahu. This ‘Jew-niversal’ seems pretty hostile towards those who happen to have some conservative  values or who are unlucky enough to be wrapped in white skin. And, as we have discovered, the ‘Jew-niversal’ is not very tolerant of literature and freedom of speech. We have watched Soros funded bodies work tirelessly to burn books, eliminate texts and even remove historical artefacts that are meaningful to people with whom they don’t agree. 

Burg’s notion of the Jew-niversal’ bears no relationship to the Greek notions of the  ‘universal’ or ‘universalism.’

While Burg doesn’t approve of the Barbarian face of Israel and Zionism, he somehow sees Soros as the embodiment of the Jewish commitment to Tikun Olam i.e., fixing the world. “While so many Jews are doing their utmost to become ultra-nationalist and violent thugs, tough and callous, Soros represents – perhaps not consciously – the other face of Jewish civilization, the hidden and enchanted one where the main obligation is the commitment to fix the world’s wrongs not only for Jews but for everyone.” I tend to think that the world would  be a much nicer and safer place if Jews decided to be slightly less passionate about saving other people and concentrated on fixing their Jewish State.   

In his Haaretz commentary Burg references Soros’ mentor, Karl Popper, author of The Open Society and its Enemies. According to Popper no person or organization has a monopoly on the truth, so the greater the number of  diverse opinions there are among people who live in peace and tolerance with one another, the more benefits there are that accrue to all.   Unfortunately, Soros and his Open Society do not follow Popper’s philosophical mantra. Soros’ ‘Jew-niversalism’ is a divisive construct. It breaks society into a manifold of identitarian segments that are defined by biology (race, gender, sexual preference). In the realm of the ‘Jew-niversal,’ people do not identify as mere humans who seek their common human experience. Instead each identity learns to speak in the dialect of the  ‘as a’ (‘as a woman…,’ ‘as a Jew…,’ ‘as a black..,’ ‘as a gay,’ etc. ). In the ‘Jew-niversal’ sphere people adopt identifications that differentiate themselves from the rest of humanity. Exclusivity and difference are celebrated, it contradicts the search for ultimate value of human brotherhood. The ‘Jew-niversal’ ‘jurisdiction’ reduces the universe into a mere expanded version of the ‘tribes of Israel’: tribes of Identitarians who engage in sectarian, racial and gender wars.   

The fake ‘diversity’ and sham ‘tolerance’ offered by the ‘Jew-niversal’  is, in fact, authoritarian and intolerant to the masses. The so-called ‘Jew-niversal’ is an exceptionalist concept designed to ‘otherise’ those with whom they don’t agree. 

Inadvertently Burg has revealed to us that the “war between the open and the closed, between isolationists and the embracers of inclusion,” is actually an internal Jewish battle between the Netanyahus of the world (Trump, Giuliani, Orban etc.) and the Jew-niversalists whom he calls ‘Soros Jews’: those who Burg  says “fearlessly fight so that the new decade is ours.”

“Ours”?

I guess that a gentile might well ask, who is ‘ours’ and am I included? Are those who voted Trump, Johnson, Brexit, Orban or Bibi included in the ‘Jew-niversal utopia’? Certainly not!  They are the basket of deplorables as the ‘Jew-niversalist’ Clinton referred to them just before her presidential dreams evaporated into thin air. Those who buy into Soros and the notion of the ‘Jew-niversal’ shouldn’t be surprised by the tsunami of successful Right wing politics.  Within the ‘Jew-niversal’ dream the world is broken into an amalgam of cosmopolitan identities set to fight each other instead of fighting Wall Street and the City. In the ‘Jew-niversal’ reality, the Left is maintained by an arch capitalist ‘philanthropist.’

If the Left intends to sustain any relevance amongst the working people and the working classes, it may want to consider supporting the values and needs of working people rather than accepting the dirty money of a capitalist  tycoon. If the Left wants to be relevant it better figure out how to reinstate the universal and universalism. I close this commentary by noting that there is no indication that the Left wants to reinstate its political or social role. Being paid by the Jew-niversal society institute seems to be its preferred mode. 

Wandering Israelis?

 

yeridda.jpg

By Eve Mykytyn*

One of Israel’s founding myths was that it would provide a homeland to a “people without a home.”  Before and especially after World War II, Zionists claimed that the countries in which Jews lived and were citizens were not a homeland.  Jews, like others, the argument went, were entitled to a homeland populated by Jews. Even at its peak, this argument never convinced a majority of Jews to move to Israel, although especially after 1967, many supported Israel from afar. It seems that some Israelis are also not convinced that they need to live in their ‘homeland.’

A PhD thesis by Omri Shafer Raviv, reported on recently by 972, documents the ‘professors committee’  formed by the Israeli government in 1967 in response to Israel’s sovereignty over the ousted Palestinians in conquered territories.  The committee explored how to limit resistance from and encourage the out migration of Palestinians. The professors were surprised by their findings that the Palestinians, the indigenous people of the land, did not want to leave even if promised a better life in, for instance, Kuwait.  The professors, who were among the first generation of Jews to live in their newly declared ‘homeland,’ seemed not to understand what it meant to be tied to a homeland. How else could they have failed to predict that what Palestinians wanted most was to return to their homes, their land, their villages? Over fifty years on, and despite the horrendous living conditions many of them suffer, the Palestinians refuse to disappear.

Emigration has been a continuing issue in Israel, and one that undermines the notion of Israel as a homeland. Initially scorned by Israelis, outward migration was dismissed, as by former Israeli Prime Minister Rabin, as “a fallout of cowards.” But, from its inception, some immigrants chose to leave Israel, in 1942 of the 4,000 Jews who settled in mandatory Palestine, 450 left.  And even in the 1950s, when Israel had one of its greatest increases in population from immigration, outward migration was recognized as a problem. In 1953 the governor of the central bank of Israel, David Horowitz, argued that economic conditions would have to improve for the trend [of emigration] to change, implicitly recognizing that the pull of the homeland was weaker than the prospect of economic success. The discussion of emigration was and is perhaps a sign of Zionist insecurity. If Israel is truly the Jewish homeland, why do so many Jews and Israelis fail to see it that way? The Jerusalem Post notes a more practical concern, “Israelis are acutely aware that the future of Israel as both a Jewish and democratic country depends on maintaining a solid Jewish majority.”

How significant is the issue of outward migration? Despite a plethora of articles (see for ex.) trumpeting a decline in emigration, the number of Israelis who leave exceeds new immigration. The statistics  are opaque,  Israel doesn’t record or perhaps doesn’t  know the intent of those leaving. Recent analysis suggests that Israeli immigration to the UK surpassed British immigration to Israel by a ratio of three to two. Israel’s US Embassy estimates that between 750,000 and one million Israelis live in the United States.

But what is more important is that almost 40% of young  Israelis have expressed an interest in moving their lives elsewhere. They live in a Jewish homeland, and yet they want to wander.

The primary reason young Israelis give for leaving is their inability to earn a decent living. Some cite Israel’s cronyism and shady business deals, they either can’t or don’t choose to participate in a job market that is ‘fixed.’  One can hope that these young ex Israelis, having seen the corrosive effects of tribal rule, will be less inclined to treat the rules of their adopted countries with contempt.

One mother whose sons emigrated opined that it is the ‘finest’ who are leaving. “They are good, high-quality people who can contribute….who are leaving… They stand out abroad. They are considered smart and successful compared to the Canadians.” (Apparently supremacism is present in Israel.) Available statistics support her claim that more educated Israelis leave in greater numbers and this may be because they are the most able to find good jobs elsewhere. In 2017, 5.8% of Israelis with undergraduate degrees had been living abroad for at least three consecutive years. For Israelis with PhDs, it was 11%, a loss of one in nine PhDs. See for more details on the disproportionate Israeli brain drain phenomenon.

To counteract this trend, in 2011 Israel launched “The Israel Brain Gain Program” to help overseas Israelis find jobs at home. Apparently the targeted Israelis were not amenable to returning to their ‘homeland’ and the program was abandoned as a failure.

Does the lack of a Jewish identity cause young Israelis to make decisions based on economics?  Tomer Treves writes that people are leaving  “because of what became of the Zionist idea. The moment the tie with Israel is weakened, the point of remaining is measured by the quality of life, and Israel is not in a good place from that point of view…” Treves posits that the most important factor in loyalty to Israel is  “where on our scale of identity we place Jewish identity. [When the] decision to live in Israel is no longer based on values,” by which he means ‘identifying as Jewish’ “economic parameters enter the equation.” But this argument assumes that loyalty to Israel and a Jewish identity are the same. Those who leave are not renouncing their identity as Jewish, instead they are rejecting the notion that to be Jewish means living in Israel.

Do these recently departed Israelis retain their ties to Israel?  There was an interesting attempt to answer this question by the right wing organization, American Israel Council. AIC sent a questionnaire to Israeli immigrants in the United States that asked who they would support in the event of an Israeli/American rift, whether American Jews (even if they disagreed with Israel’s policies) had an obligation to defend Israel publicly and the extent to which they believed American Jews influenced America’s policies.

Haaretz noted that “two sensitive and potentially explosive” issues have “plagued” American Jews and their relationship to Israel. “The first relates to claims of  dual allegiance” to both Israel and the United States; the other “concerns the pro-Israel, American Jewish lobby.” The now widely utilized IHRA definition of anti Semitism provides that accusations of dual loyalty are anti Semitic. Yet a pro Zionist body asked about these issues  in a manner designed to elicit responses showing loyalty to Israel. Perhaps insecurity about the extent to which present day emigrants support Israel was the impetus for the AIC survey.

Israeli Professor Tamar Hermann worries that the children of Israeli emigrants will not be Israeli, instead they “become Americans, Canadians or Europeans… Israeliness is generally not sustained in the second generation.”  It is not only ‘Israeliness’ that is not sustained in the second generation. This is a hallmark of immigration in general, and in Israel itself. See, for ex. Is there something about Israel that makes it troublesome that the children of those who leave will likely identify with their new land?

Initially, Israel as a homeland was an attractive concept for Jews who felt victimized by widespread anti Semitism. Now it seems that emigrating Israelis are following in the steps of their ancestors, and not the mythical ones to whom God supposedly gave title to land. In the past, and despite the efforts of some to assimilate that were ultimately unsuccessful, the Jews maintained tribal rather than national ties. Young Israelis who move in search of better opportunities may have similarly limited loyalty to their ‘homeland’  and are simply behaving as wanderers.

* – https://www.evemykytyn.com/writing/wandering-israelis

A Window into Jewish Guilt

 

guilt _edited-1.jpg

It has become an institutional Jewish habit to examine how much Jews are hated by their host nations and how fearful Jews are of their neighbours. Jewish press outlets reported yesterday that “9 out of 10 US Jews worry about anti-Semitism.”

I, for one, can’t think of another people who invest so much energy in measuring their unpopularity. Despite the scale of Islamophobia and anti-Black racism, we are not subjected to a constant barrage of ‘statistics’ to ‘warn us’ of how hated Blacks are or how unsafe Muslims feel.

The American Jewish Committee’s (AJC) statistics suggest that  “most Jews think that the situation is getting worse.” I find their statistics unlikely but I guess any mathematically inclined person would agree that if 9 out of 10 are fearful, then the situation can’t get much ‘worse’ as 10 out of 10 would constitute only a minor increase (11%).

Assume, for a moment, that the AJC’s statistics reflect reality and that the  overwhelming majority (90%) of 1,200 Jewish respondents, from all political and religious positions, regard Jew-hatred as a serious problem with potentially disastrous consequences.

We might wonder who are the ‘naughty’ one out of ten Jews who, unlike their  brethren, are not scared of their American neighbours. I suspect these are the so-called ‘self-haters,’ that infamous bunch of horrid humanist Jews who support Palestine and are disgusted by the manifold of recent Jewish #MeToo scandals and  paedophilia/organised crime networks.  This small minority (10%) of  disobedient Jews might be disturbed by the opioid scandal that left 400.000 Americans dead, they probably know who were the prime actors in this saga of class genocide. They are likely troubled by a range of  financial crimes from Madoff to Israeli banks evading US taxes, to the Israeli binary options companies that defraud American citizens. These universalist Jewish outcasts are often vocal critics of their people, their culture and their politics. They may denounce AIPAC and the ADL, Soros and even JVP for acting as the controlled opposition. The AJC’s statistics point to the possible existence of  a comic scenario in which 9 out of 10 Jews are intimidated by the 1 out of 10 Jews who speak out.

There is a less humorous, more serious interpretation of the  AJC’s findings. It is possible that the large number of Jews who worry about anti-Semitism indicates that Jews at large are aware of the worrying traits associated with their politics, culture, identity, lobbying and Israeli criminality.

Jews may feel that they are stained as a group by problematic characters such as Weisntein, Epstein and Maxwell. They may feel polluted by Israeli politics and the intensive Zionist lobbying that plunders billions of American taxpayers dollars every year. As the White House seems to turn its back on the Neocons’ immoral interventionism, some Jews may be discomfited by the fact that the Neocon war mongering doctrine has been largely a Jewish project. As Haartez writer Ari Shavit wrote back in 2003: “The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish…” Maybe some Jews now understand that the Zionist shift from a ‘promised land’ to the Neocon ‘promised planet’ doesn’t reflect well on the Jews as a group.

I am trying to point out the possibility that the overwhelming fear of ‘anti-Semitism,’ documented however poorly by the AJC, might well be the  expression of guilt. American Jews may feel communal guilt over the disastrous politics and culture of some sections of their corrupted elite. They might even feel guilty as Americans about the brutal sacrifice of one of America’s prime values, that of  freedom of speech as guaranteed by the 1st Amendment, on the altar of  ‘antisemitsm.’ .

 Obviously, I would welcome AJC’s further investigation of this. It would be interesting to learn about the correlation between the Jewish fear of anti Semitsm and Jewish guilt. It would also be fascinating to find out how Jewish anxiety translates into self-reflection. In that regard, I suggest that instead of blaming the American people, Jews try introspection.  US Jews may want to follow the early Zionists, such as Theodor Herzl, who turned guilt into self-examination. Herzl was deeply disturbed by anti Semitism but this didn’t stop him from digging into its causes. “The wealthy Jews control the world, in their hands lies the fate of governments and nations,” Herzl wrote. He continued, “They set governments one against the other. When the wealthy Jews play, the nations and the rulers dance. One way or the other, they get rich.” Herzl, like other early Zionists, believed that Jews could be emancipated from their conditions and even be loved globally by means of a cultural, ideological and spiritual metamorphosis with the aspiration of ‘homecoming.’ Herzl and his fellow early Zionists were clearly wrong in their proposed remedy for the Jewish question, but were absolutely spot on in their adherence to self-reflection and harsh self-criticism.

American Jews have much to learn from Herzl and other early Zionists. They should  ask themselves how their American ‘Golden Medina’  their  Jewish land of opportunities, has turned into a ‘threatening’ realm. What happened, what has changed in the last few years? Was it the constant cries over  anti-Semitism and the desperate and institutional attempts to silence critics that turned their Golden Medina into a daunting space?

Israel and the West Do Not Have the Means to Counter Iranian Technology

 

iran.jpg

Introduction by GA:

The following is a translation of today’s  Israel’s News 12  headline article. The article explores the lessons delivered by the recent attack on Saudi oil facilities. Though I, like many other commentators, am not convinced that the attack had anything to do with Iran, the attack showed that Iran’s weaponry is likely superior to the West’s ability to mount an effective defence. 

Israeli writer Nir Dvori points out that the attack took place 650 km inside Saudi territory.  “It proved measured Power Utilization – Sending two types of weapons that achieved accurate hits.” It also demonstrated superb intelligence capability – “both in identifying and selecting targets and in selecting the attack route and the military.”  Apparently, neither the cruise missiles nor the drones were detected and no attempt was made to intercept them before the attack. Which really means that despite the Saudis’ multi- billion dollar investment in Western weaponry and air defense systems, their sky is far from protected.  

In the last few years Israel has prioritized its efforts to counter Iran’s ballistic and drone projects. It seems Israel knew what it had to dread. The recent attack on the Saudi oil industry proved that the West has not developed an adequate response to Iranian precision missiles, slow moving cruise missiles or drone technology. This alone explains why, despite Israel’s persistent threats to attack Iran directly, it has been reluctant to do so. Israel knows how vulnerable it is and well understands the possible dramatic consequences of such an attack.  Israel knows that although its anti missile system, which cost the American taxpayers billions of dollars, may be somewhat effective against German V2 ballistic technology, its system is ineffective against what Iran has at their disposal.

This helps explain why Israel wants America and NATO to attack Iran on its behalf. It may explain why Israel might consider doing whatever  it can to provoke such a conflict- everything from intensive Lobby pressure to possible false flag operations.

Donald Trump seems miraculously to have gathered how volatile the situation is. As a consequence, he exited his prime hawk, John Bolton. Might Trump find himself booted out of his 1600 Pennsylvania Ave  as a result of his reluctance to fight Israel’s war against Iran?

 

The character, uniqueness and success of the Iranian attack – worries Israel and the world

By Nir Dvori

https://www.mako.co.il/

The Iranian attack on Saudi oil facilities was of great significance and is of particular concern [to Israel]. The attack was [the first of its kind] and proved that the Iranians are capable and possess both the knowledge and the ability to hurt and cut [Saudi] oil production by nearly fifty percent. At the same time, the Saudis have already begun to rebuild the buildings damaged by the Iranian bombing

The attack on oil facilities in Saudi Arabia has been a warning for the West and Israel – the effects of this attack are  extremely concerning. This [technological] ability that can be used against Israel requires that [Israel] prepare its security system to respond to such a  threat. Israeli officials analyzed the outcome of the attack and reached several conclusions : The attack demonstrated both impressive design and execution, the results were painful and cut Saudi oil production by 50%, and likely affected gas production as well.

The attacks were carried out with only two weapon types :The first were 7 Quds cruise missiles driven by a Czech jet engine, 3 of which fell before they reached their target; the second weapons were 18 suicide drones, an Iranian replica of the “Rafi” – an Israeli suicide drone.

The attack was significant on a few levels:

 The attack was carried out at a relatively long range – at a distance of 650 km.????

 It proved measured Power Utilization – Sending two types of weapons that each achieved accurate hits.

Iran has also demonstrated its intelligence capability – both in identifying and selecting targets and in selecting the attack route and its execution.

Apparently neither the cruise missiles nor the drones were detected and no attempt was made to intercept them before the attack.

Iran’s ability to penetrate the Saudi air defense system, despite the billions of dollars spent and deployed to defend the area, was shown by its failure against the small, slow-moving assault weapons.

Impressive and unprecedented impact accuracy of less than 3 meters. The fragments of the Iranian cruise missiles have been  identified as among the derivatives of the 55-KH missiles that Ukraine delivered to Iran in 2001.

The nature of the Iranian attack has embarrassed the Western intelligence community. It turned out that Iran, a country with average technological capabilities, has developed  medium and long range missiles that are accurate and effective. This basically undermines the very existence of the regulatory bodies which assumes that denying access to technology can impede, or prevent such technologies being obtained.

The attack is proof of Iran’s operational potential that relies on technological capabilities, intelligence infrastructure and coordination, leading to the conclusion that the Western monopoly on precision-guided armaments has evaporated. The countries of the entire region and Israel have learned a lesson: Discovery and interception systems do not provide a proper countermeasure to new regional threats.

It is necessary to deal with cruise missiles, slow drones and hovercraft. The ranges reached by Iran this time – 650 km – would  allow damage to any point in Israel from western Iraq.


My battle for truth and freedom involves some expensive legal and security services. I hope that you will consider committing to a monthly donation in whatever amount you can give. Regular contributions will enable me to avoid being pushed against a wall and to stay on top of the endless harassment by Zionist operators attempting to silence me and others.

Donate

A Great Day for Zion

 

corbyn cartoon.png

By Gilad Atzmon

 “In A Time Of Universal Deceit, Telling The Truth Becomes A Revolutionary Act” – George Orwell

At the moment, the Jewish State is experiencing growing political instability while exploring its ability to defy Netanyahu’s alleged criminality and his racial incitements against Arabs, while at the same time, the UK has been reduced into a dutiful Israeli remote colony.

Two day ago, the Lobby scored three significant victories that are indicative of Britain’s descent into an Orwellian dystopia. It is now an unfit habitat for intellectuals, artists and humanists and their exodus has begun.

In a statement astonishing for its obsequiousness, ‘opposition’ leader Jeremy Corbyn praised the police for tearing down a poster depicting, in cartoon form, an uncanny portrayal of Corbyn himself under ‘attack’ by Benjamin Netanyahu shown piloting an Israeli air force plane named ‘The Lobby’  and dropping bombs of ‘defamation’ with the words ‘anti-Semite, anti-Semite, anti-Semite.’

Screen Shot 2019-09-24 at 10.05.37.png

By his response, Corbyn was kind enough to reveal to the Brits that he could be many things, but acting as a prime minister isn’t really among them. And not just because of his clumsy unprincipled action against a legitimate political cartoon but because the man publicly displayed that he can’t handle elementary freedoms. Somewhere, there exists a positive interpretation that would make Corbyn’s shameless groveling seem sophisticated, his response did make the cartoon into national news so that every Brit is now aware of the poster and its message.

Yesterday we also learned that Israel’s stooges managed to cancel a literature event in Brighton. Bad News for Labour- Antisemitism, the Party and Public Belief is, according to its publisher, a ground breaking study on the reality behind the headlines on antisemitism and the British Labour Party.”  I have not seen a ‘ground breaking’ text from Pluto for years, nonetheless, someone within the Hasbara army decided that the Brits are unfit to digest the book.  Waterstones Brighton ‘rapidly surrendered’ and canceled the event. One more piece of evidence that Britain doesn’t really need enemies, it became an authoritarian society voluntarily. I wonder how long it will be before Corbyn tweets that it was he and the Labour Party who begged Waterstones to cancel the event.

71142742_335200653921398_1386544987952381952_n.jpg

But Zionist tour de force did not end there. We learned yesterday that singer, songwriter and right wing enthusiast Alison Chabloz was once again sent to jail: this time for eight weeks. The Zionist Campaign Against Antisemitism’s web site reports that “District Judge Jonathan Taaffe found Ms Chabloz guilty of breaching the conditions of her suspended sentence after blog posts that she published since June 2018 were found to constitute a breach of a social media ban.”  Apparently the definition of ‘social media’* in Britain underwent a dramatic expansion this week in order to fit the Zionist call. The CAA was pleased to let us know their part in this fiasco, “the trial in Chesterfield today follows contact between Campaign Against Antisemitism’s lawyers and the National Probation Service.”

In 1917 Lord Balfour issued a declaration in the name of the British government announcing support for the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, then an Ottoman region with a tiny Jewish population. In 1917 Britain was an empire although Palestine wasn’t then a British colony. Just over one hundred years later not much is left of the empire and even less remains of British dignity. Britain has allowed itself to be reduced to an Israeli colony, even to the point that Britain willingly  sacrifices any of its most sacred values when asked to do so by  a single right wing ethnic lobby that is largely committed to foreign interests.

On the liberty to teach, pursue, and discuss knowledge without restriction

 

ac freedom.jpg

by Gilad Atzmon

It didn’t  take long for the American Administration to crudely interfere with an open society’s most sacred ethos, that of academic freedom.  We learned this weekend that the US Department of Education has ordered Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill to remake their joint Middle East studies program after concluding that they were offering students “a biased curriculum that, among other complaints, did not present enough “positive” imagery of Judaism and Christianity in the region.”

Academic freedom is a relatively simple principle. It refers to the ”liberty to teach, pursue, and discuss knowledge without restriction or interference, as by school or public officials.”

This principle seems to be under attack in America.  The American administration has openly interfered with the liberty to freely teach, pursue and discuss knowledge.

The New York Times writes:  “in a rare instance of federal intervention in college course content, the department asserted that the universities’ Middle East program violated the standards of a federal program that awards funding to international studies and foreign language programs.”

According to the NYT the focus on ‘anti Israeli bias’ “appears to reflect the views of an agency leadership that includes a civil rights chief, Kenneth L. Marcus, who has made a career of pro-Israel advocacy and has waged a years long campaign to delegitimize and defund Middle East studies programs that he has criticized as rife with anti-Israel bias.”

One may wonder why America is willing to sacrifice its liberal ethos on the pro Israel altar?  Miriam Elman provides a possible answer. Elman is an associate professor at Syracuse University and executive director of the Academic Engagement Network, which opposes BDS. Elman told the NYT that this “should be a wake-up call… what they’re (the Federal government presumably) saying is, ‘If you want to be biased and show an unbalanced view of the Middle East, you can do that, but you’re not going to get federal and taxpayer money.”

In Elman’s view academic freedom has stayed intact, it is just the dollars  that will be  withheld unless a university adheres to pro Israel politics.

Those who follow the history of Zionism, Israeli politics and Jewish nationalism find this latest development unsurprising. Zionism, once dedicated to the concept of a “promised land,” morphed decades ago into an aspiration toward a ‘promised planet.’  Zionism is a global project operating in most, if not all, Western states. Jewish pressure groups, Zionist think tanks and Pro Israel lobbies work intensively to suppress elementary freedoms and reshape the public, political and cultural discourse all to achieve Zionism’s ambitious goal. After all, Jewish power, as I define it, is the power to suppress criticism of Jewish power.

This authoritarian symptom is not at all new. It is apparently a wandering phenomenon. It has popped out in different forms at different times.  What happened in the USSR  provides a perfect illustration of this  symptom. In the early days of Soviet Russia, anti-Semitism was met with the death penalty as stated by Joseph Stalin  in answer to an inquiry made by the Jewish News Agency: “In the U.S.S.R. anti-semitism is punishable with the utmost severity of the law as a phenomenon deeply hostile to the Soviet system. Under U.S.S.R. law active anti-semites are liable to the death penalty.”

Germany saw the formation of Jewish anti defamation leagues attempted to suppress the rise in anti Jewish sentiments.* There’s no need to elaborate on the dramatic failure of these efforts in Germany. And despite Stalin’s early pro-Jewish stance, the Soviet leader turned against the so- called rootless cosmopolitans.” This campaign led to the 1950s Doctors’ plot, in which a group of doctors (mostly Jewish) were subjected to a show trial for supposedly having plotted to assassinate the Soviet leader.

In Britain and other Western nations we have seen fierce pro Israel campaigns waged to suppress criticism of Israel and Jewish politics. Different lobbies have been  utilizing different means amongst them the adoption of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism by governments and institutions. In Britain, France, Germany and other European countries, intellectuals, artists, politicians, party members and ordinary citizens are constantly harassed by a few powerful Jewish pressure groups. In dark Orwellian Britain 2019, critics of Israel have yet to face the death sentence, but they are subjected to severe reprisals ranging  from personal intimidation to police actions and criminal prosecution. People have lost their jobs for supporting Palestine, others have been expelled from Corbyn’s compromised Labour Party for making truthful statements. Some have even been jailed for satirical  content. And as you might guess, none of this has made Israel, its supporters or its stooges popular. Quite the opposite.  

I learned from the NYT that the administration “ordered” the universities’ consortium to submit a revised schedule of events it planned to support, a full list of the courses it offers and the professors working in its Middle East studies program.  I wonder who in the administration possesses the scholarly credentials to assess the academic level of university courses or professors? Professor Trump himself, or maybe Kushner & Ivanka or Kushner’s coffee boy Avi Berkovitch, or maybe recently retired ‘peace maker’ Jason Greenblatt?

 It takes years to build academic institutions, departments, libraries and research facilities. Apparently, it takes one determined lobby to ruin the future of American scholarship.

*In his book Final Solution David Cesarani brings the story of the Centralverein deutscher Staatsbürger jüdischen Glaubens (Central Association of German Citizens of Jewish Faith) that operated in Germany since the late 19th century “suing rabble rousers for defamation, funding candidates pledging to contest antisemitism…” You can read about the association and its activity here


My battle for truth and freedom involves some expensive legal and security services. I hope that you will consider committing to a monthly donation in whatever amount you can give. Regular contributions will enable me to avoid being pushed against a wall and to stay on top of the endless harassment by Zionist operators attempting to silence me and others.

Donate

حرب أم تسويات: المشهد المأزوم أم المنفرج؟

سبتمبر 16, 2019

زياد حافظ

سخونة الساحات العربية وفي عدد من بلدان المنطقة والعالم تنذر بأنّ مسار الأمور في الصراعات القائمة وصلت إلى طريق مسدود. والأزمة القائمة عند جميع الأطراف تشبه بالعقد الغوردية التي استوجبت إسكندر المقدوني على قطعها دون الاكتراث إلى حلحلتها بالطرق المعهودة أو المقبولة. فهل يوجد إسكندر مقدوني وهل هناك إمكانية من حلّ العقدة أو الأحرى العقد بتلك الطريقة؟

ما سنحاول مقاربته هو ربما محاولة صعبة ولكن غير مستحيلة، أيّ استشراف تجلّي الأمور في الوطن العربي وفي الإقليم وعلى الساحات الدولية. لقد أشرنا في مقاربات سابقة أنّ منطق الصراعات القائمة هو انعكاس لمنطق التحوّلات التي حصلت وما زالت تحصل على الصعيد الدولي والإقليمي والعربي. فمن جهة هناك تراجع واضح بل أفول لمحور الغرب بقيادة الولايات المتحدة يقابله صعود محور تقوده ما نسمّيه بالكتلة الأوراسية. لكن المسارين لا يفسّران كلّ شيء أو المحطّات التي تشكّل أزمات سواء كانت من داخل المسار القائم أو من خارجه. أيّ بمعنى آخر صعود الكتلة الأوراسية ينعكس في صراعات في عدد من الأقاليم والبلدان بسبب معارضة الغرب من جهة، وبسبب التناقض مع مصالح محليّة لا يمكن التفوّق عليها بالسهولة المتوقعة خاصة إذا ما ارتبطت تلك المصالح بالمحاور العملاقة التي تتحكّم بمسار الأمور في المنطقة. كما أنّ القدرة على فرض حلّ ما من قبل الأطراف المتصارعة غير ممكن في ظلّ الموازين القائمة دون اللجوء إلى مجابهة مفتوحة في كلّ الساحات وبكلّ الوسائل، أيّ الحرب الشاملة.

العجز في التقدم بشكل كاسح بنسبة لمحور الصاعد يقابله عجز في المحور الغربي عن القبول بتغيير الموازين. والعجز في الغرب يعود إلى حالة إنكار بالإقرار بالواقع الجديد. وبما أنّ الغرب، والولايات المتحدة بشكل خاص، ما زال يملك أوراقاً يعتقد أنها رابحة فهو يحاول عبثاً تغيير المعادلات. لذلك وصلت الأمور في الساحات الملتهبة في الوطن العربي والإقليم والعالم إلى حالة مواجهة تتراوح بين منطق الحرب ومنطق رفض الحرب. فمن يريد الحرب لا يقدر عليها ومن يقدر عليها لا يريدها. ففي الولايات المتحدة والكيان الصهيوني وبعض الدول الخليجية هناك من يسعى إلى الحرب مع محور المقاومة. وعلى الصعيد شرق آسيا هناك من يعمل على توتير الأجواء كمحاولة لردع الصين وإن أدّت الأمور إلى الحرب. لكن داخل ذلك المعسكر الغربي، وخاصة الأميركي، هناك من يعي أنّ القدرة على الحرب بالأساليب التقليدية محدودة جداً وأنّ اللجوء إلى الحرب بسلاح غير تقليدي قد يؤدّي إلى دمار العالم. ولكن هناك أيضاً داخل ذلك المعسكر أنّ الخسائر المرتقبة من حرب نووية شاملة قد تكون مقبولة معتقدين أنّ قدرة التحمّل عندهم أكبر من عند خصومهم.

مع خروج جون بولتون من أروقة الإدارة الأميركية يبدو أنّ معسكر المتشدّدين في الإدارة الأميركي تلقّى صفعة كبيرة. هذا لا يعني أبدأً أنه لا يوجد صقور بل العكس. فوجود نائب الرئيس مايك بنس ووزير الخارجية مايك بومبيو على قمة هرم الإدارة ووجود إسرائيليين صهاينة داخل البيت الأبيض كصهر الرئيس جارد كوشنر وصديقه اري بركوفيتز مضيّف القهوة في البيت الأبيض! كخلف لجاسون غرينبلاط، ووجود سيغال مندلكر الإسرائيلية المعروفة بتطرّفها لصالح المستعمرين في الضفّة الغربية كرئيسة وحدة مكافحة الإرهاب والمسؤولة عن العقوبات على الجمهورية الإسلامية في إيران وحزب الله في لبنان، فجميع هذه الشخصيات ملتزمة بسياسات بنيامين نتنياهو الدافعة نحو مجابهة مباشرة أميركية عسكرياً مع الجمهورية الإسلامية في إيران.

لكن كلّ ذلك لا يخفي حقيقة الصراعات الداخلية في عدد من الدول المعنية في المواجهة الاستراتيجية بين المحورين. فكلّ من لبنان والعراق والأردن على سبيل المثال يعاني من صراعات داخلية لها امتداداتها الإقليمية والدولية إضافة إلى حيثياتها الذاتية. والحلول لتلك الصراعات التي تصل إلى حدّ الاستعصاء مرتبطة بالحلول أو التسويات في الصراع بين المحورين. لكن الصراع بين محور المقاومة المنخرط ضمن صراع المحورين الكبيرين، محور الكتلة الأوراسية وحلفاؤها ومحور الغرب وحلفاؤه، هو صراع وجودي وليس سياسياً. من هنا تكمن الصعوبة في استشراف حلول على قاعدة التسوية. هنا تكمن أبعاد اللعبة الصفرية. فوجود الكيان يعني إلغاء وجود محور المقاومة كما أنّ جوهر المقاومة لا يقتصر على تحرير أراضي محتلّة وعودة الحقوق لأصحابها، بل يعني إلغاء الكيان الصهيوني كما نعرفه اليوم. فكيف يمكن التوفيق بين من يسعى إلى إعادة تأهيل «الشرعية الدولية» والقانون الدولي وهذا يقين الموقف الروسي الذي انتهكه كلّ من الولايات المتحدة والكيان الصهيوني مع من يعتقد أنّ القانون الدولي لا يفي بغرض الحق والعدل؟ هنا جوهر العقدة الغوردية التي تكلّمنا عنها في مطلع هذه المطالعة فكيف يمكن قطعها؟ وهل «التسوية التاريخية» للصراع في المنطقة التي يدعو إليها بعض «الواقعيين» هي تسوية بين الحق والعدل من جهة والظلم من جهة أخرى؟

لذلك نعتقد أنّ الولايات المتحدة ومن يتحالف معها أصبحت في موقف العاجز عن صنع الحروب المباشرة وغير المباشرة وبالتالي ما عليها إلاّ القبول بالتسويات. لكن هذه التسويات فوق طاقتها لأنها في المدى المنظور مكبّلة بالالتزام بأمن الكيان الصهيوني. ومنطق التسويات الذي يمكن أن يكون هو في جوهره على حساب الكيان. ففي الحدّ الأادنى ينتفي دوره كشرطي للغرب، وفي الحدّ الأقصى يلغي قواعد وجوده. لكن لا نستبعد ان يستمرّ الوضع على ما هو عليه في الولايات المتحدة. فالأصوات التي بدأت تتساءل حول منطق ثم جدوى تلازم المصلحة الأميركية والمصلحة الصهيونية وترتفع يوماً بعد يوم، وحتى داخل الجالية اليهودية من بين الشباب اليهودي الأميركي. لم تصل إلى مستوى كتلة فاعلة تستطيع قلب الموازين الداخلية لكن نفوذ اللوبي الصهيوني يتراجع رغم الادّعاءات بالعكس. فرغم احتلال اللوبي الصهيوني للكونغرس إلاّ أنّ نفوذه لا يتجاوز منطقة ما يُسمّى بـ «البلتواي» أيّ الحزام الدائري لمنطقة واشنطن الكبرى. فلا ننسى أنّ اللوبي الصهيوني خسر معارك مفصلية على صعيد الولايات المتحدة ككلّ في انتخاب باراك أوباما في الولايتين وفي إخفاق إيصال هيلاري كلنتون إلى البيت الأبيض ضدّ ترامب.

صحيح أنّ الرئيس الأميركي ترامب أعطى للكيان ما لم يعطه أحد ولكن في آخر المطاف لم يعط من رأس ماله السياسي بل من التراكمات السابقة. فقرار نقل السفارة من تل أبيب إلى القدس قرار اتخذه الكونغرس الأميركي عام 1995 وبالتالي لم يأت بجديد، بل «نفّذه» عندما بات واضحاً أنّ المفاوضات مع الطرف الفلسطيني لن تصل إلى أهدافها الصهيونية. من جهة أخرى المصادقة على سيادة الكيان على منطقة الجولان يكرّس أمراً واقعاً اتخذته حكومة الكيان عام 1982 وبالتالي ليس بالجديد. ومن مؤشرات تراجع النفوذ الصهيوني خروج بولتون من الإدارة وهو الابن المدلّل لشلدون ادلسون المموّل الصهيوني الأميركي الأكبر لحملة ترامب. وشلدون ادلسون لديه مرشح آخر أظهر فشله عبر استعداء المجتمع الدولي بأكمله وهي نيكي هالي السفيرة السابقة لدى الأمم المتحدة. لا يسعنا هنا تعداد محطّات التراجع الصهيوني في هذه المقاربة لضيق المساحة إلاّ أنّ النقطة الأساسية التي نشدّد عليها هي تكبيل الإدارة الأميركية الحالية من إقامة أيّ تسوية في المنطقة لا تكون في صالح الكيان، وخاصة طالما نفوذ الانجيليين الجدد على صنع القرار الخارجي ما زال قائماً. ولكن ملامح تراجع ذلك النفوذ بدأت بالظهور والتي تعطي الأولوية للمصلحة الأميركية العليا وليس للكيان. وقناعتنا أن هذا التكبيل لن يطول وقد يتزامن مع المزيد من التراجع الأميركي في العالم وحتى داخلياً. المسألة ليست مسألة إذا بل مسألة متى. ألا يلفت للنظر انّ في نفس الأسبوع الذي أقيل فيه بولتون تنشر وسائل الإعلام الأميركية الموالية تقليدياً للكيان الصهيوني خبراً حول تجسّس السفارة الصهيونية على البيت الأبيض؟

وإذا كانت الإدارة الأميركية عاجزة عن خوض حرب وعاجزة عن الدخول في تسوية فماذا تستطيع أن تقوم به؟ ليس هناك من حلّ إلاّ القبول بمنطق ربط النزاع في الملف الإيراني والملف السوري والملف اللبناني والملف اليمني. هذا يعني التغاضي عن سياسة فرض العقوبات وسياسة الضغوط القصوى على الجمهورية الإسلامية في إيران وعلى حلفائها دون التراجع عن مبدأ وجود العقوبات. فالتهويل بالحرب، والعقوبات الخانقة هي حرب لا تقلّ شراسة عن الحرب العسكرية التي قد تجرّ الولايات المتحدة إلى مواجهة مفتوحة هي عاجزة عن خوضها. فنحن في مرحلة لا حرب ولا تسويات ولكن مرحلة ربط نزاع إلى أن تنجلي الأمور.

لذلك في رأينا، الحليف الاستراتيجي لمحور المقاومة الذي يحمل قضية الحق والعدل يكمن في عامل الزمن. إنّ مسار الأمور منذ عدّة عقود يشير إلى تلاشي قدرة الكيان والولايات المتحدة على فرض إرادتهما على الفلسطينيين كما على جميع المقاومين. فالمقاومة في فلسطين التي بدأت مرحلة جديدة عبر انتفاضة الحجارة عام 1987 أصبحت اليوم تملك الصواريخ الدقيقة التي تطال كافة مناطق فلسطين المحتلة. والمقاومة في لبنان التي طردت المحتل الصهيوني من معظم جنوب لبنان دون قيد أو شرط استطاعت إلحاق الهزيمة به في حرب تموز استطاعت تطوير قدراتها القتالية أضعاف ما كانت عليه في تموز 2006. وسورية التي استهدفتها حرب كونية لدورها ومكانتها في الصراع العربي الصهيوني تحقّق الإنجازات تلو الإنجازات في استعادة الدولة لسيطرتها على الأراضي السورية التي خضعت لسطوة جماعات التعصّب والغلو والتوحّش المدعومة إقليمياً وعربياً ودولياً، وذلك بفضل جهود الجيش العربي السوري ومساعدة الحلفاء الإقليميين والدوليين. والعراق الذي احتلّته الولايات المتحدة وفرضت توجّهاً سياسياً معاكساً لموروثه السياسي الطبيعي المناهض للكيان الصهيوني يستعيد شيئاً فشيئاً دوره المحوري في التصدّي للكيان. هذه بعض التحوّلات التي حصلت في الدول العربية المعنية مباشرة في المواجهة. وهناك تصوّر أنّ الدول العربية التي اتصفت بـ «الاعتدالـ« تبدأ رحلة مراجعة سياساتها المنحرفة والمشينة بعد ما تبيّن لها عجز الولايات المتحدة وحتى الكيان الصهيوني في تغيير مسار الأمور في المواجهة مع معسكر المقاومة الذي أصبح جبهة واحدة متماسكة، ما يعنى أنّ استفراد أيّ من مكوّناته أصبح مستحيلاً.

إذاً التحوّلات الاستراتيجية التي حصلت خلال العقود الثلاث الماضية على الأقلّ تدلّ على أنّّ الوقت يعمل لصالح محور المقاومة. من هنا يأخذ مصطلح «الصبر الاستراتيجي» معناه الكامل. وإذا اضفنا إلى كلّ ذلك التحوّلات المتسارعة داخل الكيان التي تكلّمنا عنها في عدة مقالات ومقاربات استراتيجية والتي تكشف هشاشته وتنذر بأفوله ثم انهياره، فهذا يعني أنّ السلاح الاستراتيجي بيد المقاومة هو الوقت الذي يرافق الضغط المستمر على الكيان. فالانهيار من الداخل قد يحصل قبل الانهيار من الخارج إذا ما استمرّ الضغط العسكري على الكيان رغم ترسانته الواسعة والمتطوّرة، فتمّ تحييدها بالصواريخ الدقيقة التي جعلت فقدان العمق الجغرافي الاستراتيجي للكيان أمراً قاتلاً في أيّ مواجهة مع محور المقاومة. الحماقة الممكنة التي قد يقدم عليها الكيان لأغراض محليّة فقط سترتدّ عليه وتعجّل في انهياره ولكن هناك داخل الكيان من يعي ذلك ولن يسمح به. كما لم يُسمح لفلسفة اتفاقية أوسلو أن تثمر فكان اغتيال اسحاق رابين فهناك من لن يسمح بتكرار حماقة شارون في احتلال لبنان أو أولمرت في حرب تموز أو نتنياهو في معاركه الفاشلة في قطاع غزة.

تراجع نفوذ الولايات المتحدة والكيان في الحدّ الأدنى، وأفولهما إنْ لم نقل انهيارهما في الحدّ الأقصى، سيفسح المجال لنهضة كبيرة جدّاً في المشرق العربي وخاصة في بلاد الشام وبلاد الرافدين تمهيداً لتثبيت التشبيك التكاملي السياسي والعسكري والأمني والاقتصادي. وهذا الأمر سينجرّ على سائر الدول العربية كالأردن ودول الجزيرة العربية حيث الوصاية الأميركية والغربية ستكون خارج المعادلة ما يفرض على هذه الدول الالتحاق بما تقوم به الكتلة العربية المشرقية. كما لا نستبعد سقوط معادلة كامب دافيد في مصر، وهناك مؤشرات لذلك لا مجال للتكلّم عنها في هذه المطالعة، فهي تنذر بعودة مصر إلى دورها الطبيعي في الصراع العربي الصهيوني من جهة وفي دورها في نهضة الأمة العربية. وكذلك الأمر بالنسبة لدول الاتحاد المغربي الذي سيأخذ دوره المفصلي في نهضة الأمة ويتجاوز رواسب الاستعمار الأوروبي والوصاية الغربية على مقدّراته.

قد يعتبر البعض، وهم كثر، أنّ هذه الرؤية تفاؤلية بل ربما رغبوية وليست واقعية. نقول لهم انظروا إلى الإنجازات التي تمّ تحقيقها والتي لم تستطع كلّ مؤامرات التفتيت والتجزئة ضربها أو إجهاضها أو تغييبها. فالإنجاز الذي يحقّقه المحور المعادي ليس إلاّ إنجازاً تكتيكياً ظرفياً في مسار استراتيجي متراجع له لا يلغي ولا يعدّل في مسار التقدّم الاستراتيجي الذي يحققه بكلفة عالية محور المقاومة.

Related Articles

لا تغيير في نهج ترامب أميركا أولاً… والانسحاب سيّد الموقف!

سبتمبر 14, 2019

,

محمد صادق الحسيني

إنّ أيّ تحليل عميق لنهج الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب، ومنذ أن بدأ حملته الانتخابية التي أوصلته الى البيت الابيض، لا يمكن إلا أن يؤكد عدم ميله ترامب الى إنشاء ادارة أميركية قوية، كتلك الإدارات الأميركية السابقة والمتماسكة والتي كانت تعمل كمحرك، تنسجم جميع مكوناته، في إنجاز عمل متكامل، عبر نسق من الآليات، خدمة لمصلحة الامن القومي الأميركي في العالم، بل إنّ ما يصبو اليه هو تحقيق رؤية ترامب لمصلحة الامن القومي الأميركي والمعروفة للجميع.

إنها باختصار شديد:

1. التركيز على الوضع الداخلي الأميركي، وإعادة إحياء الاقتصاد والبنى التحتية المتهالكة، في الولايات المتحدة.

2. إعادة التركيز على ضرورة العودة الى مبدأ الرأسمالية المنتجة الصناعية والحدّ من تغوُل رأسمالية المضاربات أسواق البورصات التي يسيطر عليها اليهود .

3. تخفيض الإنفاق العام للدولة وذلك لتوفير الأموال اللازمة للاستثمارات الضرورية للنهوض بالاقتصاد وخلق فرص عمل جديدة إلى جانب تحسين قدرات الولايات المتحدة التنافسية في الأسواق الدولية، لضمان فرص أفضل لمواجهة الصين على الصعيد الاقتصادي والتجاري، حالياً ومستقبلاً.

من هنا قام الرئيس ترامب بالتخلي عن كلّ من عارض توجهاته الشخصية، لتحقيق رؤية ترامب المشار اليها أعلاه، منذ وصل البيت الأبيض حتى الآن. وكان آخر من طرد من المركب هو مستشار الأمن القومي لترامب، جون بولتون، أحد أكثر المحافظين الجدد تطرفاً والصديق اللصيق لنتنياهو، وداعية الحرب ضدّ إيران وروسيا وكوريا الشمالية وفنزويلا وكلّ من يعارض توجهاته العدوانية الخطيرة، والتي يمثلها تيار بعينه في الولايات المتحدة الأميركية.

انطلاقاً من انّ إدارة ترامب ليست إدارة أميركية كلاسيكية ذات استراتيجية واضحة، وبالتالي تعتمد في تنفيذها على أدوات محدّدة، فإننا نرى انّ الرئيس ترامب قد أعطى كلّ واحد من مراكز القوى في الولايات المتحدة ما يريد تقريباً.

فهو أعطى سماسرة الحروب والدولة العميقة، بما فيها البنتاغون، دعاة الحرب بولتون وبومبيو. كما أعطى اللوبيات اليهودية، في الولايات المتحدة، كلّ ما طلبه نتنياهو، من صفقة القرن الى كلّ الأدوار التفضيلية في كلّ المجالات.

ولكنه في الوقت نفسه انتظر موسم الحصاد. فإذا به موسماً لم ينتج شيئاً، حيث إنّ جميع مشاريع الحروب، التي كان يديرها دعاة الحرب، قد فشلت تماماً. لم تسقط الدولة السورية ولم يتمّ القضاء على حزب الله والمقاومة الفلسطينية في غزة وهزم مشروع داعش، في العراق وسورية وبمساعدة إيران قبل أيّ كان. كما هزم المشروع السعودي في اليمن على الرغم من مرور خمس سنوات على أكثر حروب البشرية وحشية وإجراماً، مورست ضدّ شعب أعزل ومسالم ودون أيّ مسوغ.

اما أمّ الهزائم فهي هزيمة دعاة الحرب في المواجهة الدائرة مع إيران، سواء على الصعيد الاقتصادي او على الصعيد العسكري، بعد إسقاط طائرة التجسّس الأميركية العملاقة وعدم قيام الرئيس الأميركي بالردّ على إسقاطها، ما جعل جون بولتون يلجأ الى مؤامرة احتجاز ناقلة النفط الإيرانية، بالتعاون مع بعض غلاة الساسة في واشنطن ولندن، على أمل ان يتمكن هؤلاء من توريط الرئيس الأميركي في حرب مع إيران.

اما في ما يتعلق بشريك بولتون في التآمر والكذب، نتنياهو، فلم تكن نتائج مؤامراتة وألاعيبة ومسرحياته أفضل حظاً من ممارسات بولتون. نفذ اعتداءات جوية على سورية ولبنان والعراق وأخذ كلّ ما أراد من الرئيس الأميركي. صفقة القرن، بما فيها من نقل السفارة الأميركية الى القدس والاعتراف بالمدينة عاصمة لـ»إسرائيل» وصولاً الى الاعتراف بسيادتها على الجولان.

ولكن الرئيس الأميركي تيقن من انّ نتيجة كلّ ذلك هو صفر. حيث أَمر نتنياهو، بصفته وزيراً للحرب، جيشه بترك الحدود مع لبنان والانسحاب مسافة سبعة كيلومترات الى الخلف. أيّ انّ جيشه ليس قادراً حتى على حماية نفسه من هجمات محدودة من قوات حزب الله.

فماذا كان قرار ترامب على ضوء كل هذه الحقائق؟

أ وقف الاتصالات الهاتفية مع نتنياهو، على الرغم من مواصلة الأخير استجداء ذلك، منذ اكثر من أسبوعين.

ب إعلان الرئيس الأميركي أنه سيبدأ مفاوضات سرية، مع أنصار الله اليمنيين، في عُمان.

ج تأكيده عشرات المرات على رغبته في التفاوض مع إيران وتعيينه الجنرال مارك إِسبر وزيراً للدفاع والذي أعلن في تصريح تلفزيوني أنه لا يريد حرباً مع إيران وإنما يريد الوصول الى حلّ دبلوماسي للخلاف.

د طرده لجون بولتون من البيت الأبيض ووضعه لمايك بومبيو على لائحة الانتظار، والذي لن يطول انتظاره اكثر من ثلاثة أشهر. ربما حتى نهاية شهر تشرين الثاني المقبل 11 / 2019 .

وهذا يعني أنّ ترامب قد قرّر العودة الى التركيز على شعارات حملته الانتخابية الاولى، بدءاً بما ذكر أعلاه اقتصادياً ومالياً ووصولاً الى:

الانسحاب العسكري الشامل، من كلّ «الشرق الأوسط» وليس فقط من افغانستان وسورية، وما يعنيه ذلك من تخلٍ كامل عن «إسرائيل» في اللحظة المناسبة… من الناحية العملية، وربما من مناطق عديدة أخرى في العالم وذلك خفضاً للنفقات العسكرية الأميركية تملك واشنطن اكثر من ألف قاعدة عسكرية خارج الولايات المتحدة .

الاستعداد لتحسين العلاقات الأميركية الروسية ومحاولة منع قيام تحالف أو حلف عسكري روسي مع الصين، ربما تنضم إليه دول اخرى.

إيجاد صيغة ما للتفاوض مع إيران وتطبيع العلاقات معها، وما يعنيه ذلك من تخلّ فعلي عن أدوات واشنطن الخليجية وسقوط لهم لاحقاً، ونعني بالتحديد ابن سلمان وابن زايد.

اذ انهم، كما نتن ياهو، فشلوا في تحقيق أيّ نجاح في المهمات التي أوكلت اليهم في طول «الشرق الاوسط» وعرضه، الأمر الذي جعلهم عبئاً لا طائل من حمله.

ولكن ترامب، رجل المال والصفقات، لن يترك ابن سلمان وابن زايد ينجون بجلودهم ويذهبون في حال سبيلهم، دون أن يعصر منهم المزيد من الاموال. اذ انه، ومن خلال الخبراء الأميركيين المختصين، يعمل على الاستيلاء على عملاق النفط العالمي، شركة أرامكو للبترول، وذلك من خلال طرحها للاكتتاب الخصخصة في بورصة نيويورك ومنع طرحها في بورصة طوكيو.

كما أنّ احتياطي النفط الهائل في محافظة الجوف اليمنية، الذي يزيد على كل احتياطيات النفط السعودية، هو السبب الرئيسي وراء رغبة ترامب عقد محادثات سرية مع أنصار الله، بهدف انهاء الحرب. فهو في حقيقة الأمر يريد التفاوض مع ممثلي الشعب اليمني ليس حفاظاً على أرواح اليمنيين وإنما من اجل ضمان إعطاء حقوق استثمار حقول النفط الموجودة في محافظة الجوف لشركات أميركية واستبعاد الشركات الروسية والصينية وحتى البريطانية من هذا المجال.

بعدنا طيبين، قولوا الله…

How Zionist Israel is Robbing America Blind! (video)

 

The fact that America is funding Israeli expansionism is not new, however, in this must watch episode Jake Morphonios delves into the scale of that broad daylight plunder of Americans’ taxpayers’ money. I highly advise Americans and everyone else to watch to this superb work of investigative journalism:

Blackstone Intelligence Network writes:

“It doesn’t matter if you are a hard-working American. YOU are not entitled to keep your own income. YOU are a cash cow for the Zionist state of Israel. America’s labor force is Israel’s Golden Goose. And I am going to show you the financial statistics to prove it.”

 

Gordon Thomas on Robert Maxwell/Mossad espionage project in the USA and beyond

 

As time goes by it seems as if Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard was just the tip of the iceberg. America has been riddled and infiltrated by Israeli spies at the highest possible level for decades. You must listen to this interview with Gordon Thomas:

Watch the extended interview:

Conspiracy Theories From the Elders of Zion to Epstein’s Youngsters

elders to younger.jpg

Following Jeffery Epstein’s alleged suicide last week we have been deluged by a tsunami of narratives that do not adhere to the shifting official reports of his death. Presumably a few of the intimate secrets of the most powerful people on this planet will be buried with Epstein. While it is rational to believe that people powerful enough to impoverish continents or launch world wars that kill tens of millions could easily arrange the death of a single registered sex criminal in a NY prison cell, anyone who advanced such a scenario, however plausible, was immediately denounced as a ‘conspiracy theorist.’ 

https://youtu.be/eQmfd-KSJSQ

‘Conspiracy theory’ is how the mainstream media characterizes any narrative that differs from their reporting of the official line.  What is a conspiracy theory? Can it be defined in categorical terms? Can a conspiracy theory be validated forensically or refuted by similar means? What criteria can be used to differentiate between a conspiracy theory and theoretical musings?

The labelling of a theory as ‘conspiratorial’ is an attempt to discredit its author/authors and deny its validity. A ‘conspiracy theory’ usually involves an explanatory thesis that points to a malevolent plot often involving a secretive interested party.  The term ‘conspiracy theory’ has a pejorative connotation: its use suggests that the theory appeals to prejudice and/or involves a farfetched, unsubstantiated narrative built on insufficient evidence.

Those who oppose conspiracy theories argue that such theories resist falsification and are reinforced by circular reasoning, that such theories are primarily based on beliefs, as opposed to academic or scientific reasoning.

But this critique is also not exactly based on valid scholarly principles. It isn’t just ‘conspiracy theories’ that resist falsification or are reinforced by circular reasoning. The philosopher Karl Popper, who defined the principle of falsifiability, would categorically maintain that Freudian psychoanalysis and Marxism fail for the same reasons. The Oedipal complex, for instance, has never been scientifically proven and can’t be scientifically falsified or validated.  Marxism also resists falsification. Despite Marx’s ‘scientific’ predictions, the proletarian revolution never occurred.  I have personally never come across anyone who refers to Marx or Freud as ‘conspiracy theorists.’  ‘Resisting falsification’ and “reinforced by circular reasoning,” are traits of non-scientific theories and do not apply only to ‘conspiracy theories.’

The Oxford English Dictionary defines conspiracy theory as “the theory that an event or phenomenon occurs as a result of a conspiracy between interested parties; spec. a belief that some covert but influential agency (typically political in motivation and oppressive in intent) is responsible for an unexplained event”.

The Oxford dictionary does not set forth the criteria that define a conspiracy theory in categorical terms. The history of mankind is saturated with references to hidden plots led by influential parties.

The problem with refuting conspiracy theories is that they are often more elegant and explanatory than the official competing narratives.  Such theories have a tendency to ascribe blame to hegemonic powers. In the past, conspiracy theories were popular mostly amongst fringe circles, they are now becoming commonplace in mass media. Alternative narratives are widely disseminated through social media. In some cases, they have been disseminated by official news outlets and even by the current American president.  It is possible that the rapid rise in popularity of alternative explanatory theories is an indication of a growing mistrust of the current ruling class, its ideals, its interests and its demography.

The response to the story of Jeffrey Epstein’s suicide is illustrative. The official narrative provoked a reaction that was a mixture of disbelief expressed in satire and inspired a plethora of theories that attempted to explain the saga that had escalated into the biggest sex scandal in the history of America and beyond.

The obvious question is what has led to the increase in popularity of so called ‘conspiracy theories’? I would push it further and ask, why is a society that claims to be ‘free’ is threatened by the rise of alternative explanatory narratives?

In truth, the question is itself misleading. No one is really afraid of ‘conspiracy theories’ per se.  You will not be arrested or lose your job for being a ‘climate change denier.’  You may speculate on and even deny the moon landing as much as you like. You are free to speculate about Kennedy’s assassination as long as you don’t mention the Mossad.  You can even survive being a 911 truther and espouse as many alternative narratives as you like, however, the suggestion that ‘Israel did 911’ will  get you into serious trouble. Examining ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ as a fictional, however prophetic, piece of literature can lead to imprisonment in some countries. Digging into the true origin of Bolshevism and the demographics of the Soviet revolution is practically a suicidal act. Telling the truth about Hitler’s agreement with the Zionist agency will definitely result in your expulsion from the British Labour party and you will be accused of being at the least, theoretically conspiratorial .

I suspect that one is allowed to deviate from the official narrative and speculate on hidden plots on any given topic except probably the Jewish related ones.

This is where things become complicated because there are no Jewish conspiracies, all is done in the open.  Israel, Zionism, Jewish institutions and individuals operate in the public eye and don’t conceal their actions.  AIPAC doesn’t attempt to hide its agenda nor do America’s elected politicians make an effort to cover their shameless capitulation at AIPAC conferences. Labour Friends of Israel is acting against  the Labour party and its democratically elected leader is mainstream news. The Israeli jets that attacked the USS Liberty on 8 June 1967 were decorated with Jewish symbols. Jeffery Epstein didn’t disguise his ‘Pedophile Island’. He operated in the open. I am afraid that there is not much evidence of Jewish conspiracies. But there is plenty of evidence of institutional suppression of any attempt to discuss any of this. AIPAC’s agenda is openly avowed, criticising its agenda is strictly forbidden. The same applies to other Israel Lobby activity, Israeli war crimes and even crimes committed by Jewish individuals. Jewish power, as I define it, is the power to suppress discussion of Jewish power.

For obvious reasons Jews are alarmed by theories that focus on their politics, culture, religion, folklore etc. It seems that Jewish bodies have been sufficiently forceful to silence most attempts to criticise Jewish and Israeli politics. That leads to the question of why Jews, Zionism, Judaism and Jewishness are so often the subject of conspiratorial theories. Is it that anti Semitic prejudice again or is there perhaps something about Jewish ideology, culture and politics that invites such theories?  It is worth consulting Jesse Walker’s The United States of Paranoia: A Conspiracy Theory. According to Walker there are five kinds of conspiracy theories:

  • The “Enemy Outside” refers to theories based on figures alleged to be scheming against a community from without.

  • The “Enemy Within” finds conspirators lurking inside the nation, indistinguishable from ordinary citizens.

  • The “Enemy Above” involves powerful people manipulating events for their own gain.

  • The “Enemy Below” features the lower classes working to overturn the social order.

  • The “Benevolent Conspiracies” are angelic forces that work behind the scenes to improve the world and help people.

It is fairly easy to figure out that each of Walker’s conspiracy types describes an openly manifested aspect of Jewish politics, culture or religion.

The  ‘Enemy Outside’ could be a legitimate American patriotic/nationalist reaction to foreign domination of American foreign policy. This kind of argument is supported by well-researched academic studies such as that of Mearshehimer and Walt as well as that of James Petras who studied the Israel Lobby and its impact.  Such hostile foreign domination has been explored by various media outlets including Al Jazeera’s exposé of the Israel Lobby in both Britain and the USA. The current American administration and its biased policy in favour of Israeli positions gives credence to those who see Israel as the ‘enemy outside.’ Yet, none of the above has ‘conspired’ behind the scenes. All is done in the open. You just can’t discuss it in the open.

The ‘Enemy Within’ could easily point at  the intensive work of Israel advocates, Jewish  Lobbies (AIPAC, J Street, etc.) and Israeli stooges within American politics  and other Western countries (Britain, France etc). Similarly, those who uphold deep Christian values may identify Jewish progressive elements  as the enemy of their conservative life style. The same applies to anti immigration advocates who see Jewish pro immigration supporters as their enemies from within. The prominent role of Kushner and his proximity to the president doesn’t help gainsay doubts about the so called ‘enemy within.’  But the Jewish Lobby in America is loud and provocative and Jewish  progressive and pro immigration supporters are at least as loud. Kushner doesn’t hide his affiliation with Chabbad or his Zionist sympathies.  There is no hidden plot, yet, you can’t discuss this openly.

The ‘Enemy Above’ is an apt description of Epstein’s close orbit and its high connectivity within the world’s ruling classes. And, as we know, Epstein didn’t bother to conceal his operation. Calling his Boeing 727 the Lolita Express was little short of titling his private fleet ‘Pedo Air’ or  ‘United PedoLines.’  Bernie Madoff falls within the same rubric. The man who was at one point NASDAQ’s Chairman, didn’t work that hard to disguise his Ponzi scheme, in fact Madoff admitted that he was surprised by law enforcement’s failure to uncover his crimes.  Some might regard George Soros as a prototype of the ‘enemy above.’ Soros is a Jewish billionaire who uses his wealth to fund identiterian causes and social changes that are not exactly welcomed by the conservative/nationalist crowd. Again, Soros doesn’t hide a thing. He does his funding through his Open Society Institute. Yet, for some reason, criticism of Soros’ agenda is frequently denounced as perpetuating ‘conspiracy theories’.

The ‘Enemy Below’ can be illustrated by Jewish involvement with revolutionary movements, human rights campaigns, the gender revolution, the feminist movement, LGBTQA  advocacy and so on. Again none of this occurs behind a curtain. Jews often boast of their prominent role in these liberal and humanitarian causes. But criticism of these movements, and especially their supporters, is pretty much forbidden.

‘Benevolent Conspiracies’ are demonstrated by Tikun Olam‘s philosophy: the idea that it is down to the Jews to ‘fix the world and reinstate its ethics.’ Those who refuse to ‘be fixed’ may well see Jewish elements at the core of a progressive cause and may see a malevolent dark force in such altruism.

Most ethnic or interest groups fit into only one or two of the types described by Walker’s  Conspiracy Theory Model, Jewish politics fit with them all. In the eyes of ardent bigoted European nationalists such as Tommy Robinson, Muslims immigrants represent an ‘Enemy Outside.’ Racists who hate Black people may see those with dark skin as the  ‘Enemy Within.’ Those who disapprove of Gays and their culture may find them to be the ‘enemy below.’ Still it is bizarre how easily Walker’s entire five conspiracy theory types can be found among Jewish politics, individuals, institutions, activist networks and campaigns.

How is it possible that one relatively small ethnic group manages to embody all the types of ‘conspiracy theories?’ In my recent book Being in Time, I argue that Jews tend to dominate the discourses that are relevant to their existence and interests. I refer to it as Jewish survival instinct. Jewish activists and intellectuals also tend to dominate the dissent to problematic symptoms associated with their group identity: Jews are often, for instance, associated with capitalism, banking and wealth in general, and Jews are also equated with Marxist and socialist opposition to capitalism, banking and wealth. Obviously, many Jews are associated with the Jewish State and the Zionist project but it is no secret that Leftist Jews also dominate the anti Zionist discourse and politics. Jews, at least in the eyes of some, are leading pro immigration advocates. But some of the most vocal anti immigration and anti Muslim campaigners are also Jewish. In Being in Time I argue that the fact that Jews dominate both polls of pretty much every topic relevant to their existence isn’t necessarily ‘conspiratorial.’ It is only natural for ethical and humanist Jews to oppose Zionism, or Wall Street. It is also natural based on their history, for Jews as a group to simultaneously oppose and support immigration. Natural as it may be, the presence of Jews in key ideological, political, cultural and financial  positions is undeniable. It is more than likely that their domination on both sides of so many crucial political debates invites conspiratorial thoughts.

Jewish economist Murray Rothbard  contrasts “deep” conspiracy theories with “shallow” ones. According to Rothbard, a shallow theorist observes an event and asks, who benefits? He or she then jumps to the conclusion that the posited beneficiary is responsible for covertly influencing events. Under this theory, Israel benefiting from the events of 9/11 made it into a prime suspect.  This is often a completely legitimate strategy and is exactly how detective and investigative researchers operate. In order to identify the culprit, they may well ask who would benefit from the crime. Of course this is only a first step towards substantiation.

According to Rothbard the “deep” conspiracy theorist begins with a hunch and then seeks out evidence.  Rothbard describes deep conspiracy theory as the result of confirming whether certain facts actual fit one’s initial ‘paranoia.’ This explanation pretty much describes a lot of how science works.  Any given scientific theory defines the realm of facts that may support or refute its validity.  Science is a deductive reasoning process, so that in science, it is the theory that defines the relevance of the evidence. Would Rothbard describe Newtonian physics as ‘deeply conspiratorial’? I doubt it. My guess is that, bearing Rothbard in mind, attributing a ‘conspiratorial nature’ to a theory is an attempt the deny the relevance of the evidence it brings to light.  If for instance, the theory that Epstein was a Mossad agent is ‘conspiratorial,’ then the facts that he was a business partner of Ehud Barak and involved in a company that uses Israeli military intelligence tactics become irrelevant. The same applies to former Federal Prosecutor Alex Acosta’s admission that Epstein belonged to intelligence  and that was why he was the beneficiary of a laughable plea deal. If, for example, the theory that it was the Jews who led the 1917 Bolshevik revolution is ‘conspiratorial,’ then the facts regarding the demography that led the revolution and its criminal nature are of no consequence. The labelling of a theory as conspiratorial is an attempt to erase uncomfortable evidence by reprioritising the relevance of certain facts.

It seems that Rothbard and others have failed to produce categorical criteria to identify or define Conspiracy Theories. We may have to accept that as of now, there is no categorical standard to define a conspiracy theory. We may have to learn to live with the fact that some theories are superior; simpler and more elegant than others. We will have to accept that some of these theories make a few people pretty uncomfortable and they will explore every avenue to discredit such theories and their authors. Attributing a conspiratorial nature to an explanatory theory is just one of these methods.


My battle for truth and freedom involves some expensive legal and security services. I hope that you will consider committing to a monthly donation in whatever amount you can give. Regular contributions will enable me to avoid being pushed against a wall and to stay on top of the endless harassment by Zionist operators attempting to silence me and others.

Donate

Paul Findley: A Man of Courage

Global Research, August 14, 2019

Paul Findley one of the most remarkable Congressmen that the US House of Representatives had produced since the Second World War passed away on the 9th of August 2019. He was 98 years old. He was first elected to Congress in 1960 from a district in Illinois once represented by Abraham Lincoln, his immortal hero.  Findley was elected 11 times from that constituency until his defeat in 1982.

As a Congressman, he played a significant role in the formulation of the War Powers Act which required the US president to notify Congress of foreign military engagements. He was also critical of wasteful pentagon spending. He was one of a handful of early legislators who opposed the Vietnam War.

But Findley’s “notoriety” is associated with something else. He was a consistent critic of the influence of the Israel Lobby over Congress. He could see how the Lobby shaped US policies especially in West Asia. He was very much aware of the tactics the Lobby employed to silence anyone who questioned even mildly the biasness of the US position in the Israel-Palestine/ Arab conflict.

Findley himself was a victim of the Lobby’s vicious targeting. Because of his concern over the conflict he had visited the late Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, who was then regarded by the US government as a “terrorist.” That visit became cannon-fodder for the Israel Lobby to mount a massive campaign against Findley which was one of the main reasons for his defeat in the 1982 Congressional election.

Following his defeat, he wrote a couple of books about the power of the Lobby in US public life and how institutions and individuals were confronting the Lobby. They Dare to Speak Out had a bigger impact outside the US than within. His next book, Deliberate Deceptions, revealed the nexus between US and Israel forged through money, corporate links and personal relationships. Findley was now perceived by the US Establishment as a staunch opponent of Israeli power over the US.

His explorations into Israeli and Zionist power in the US invariably compelled him to look into how that power determined public perceptions of Islam and Muslims in general. His tentative perspective on the issue received a boost when he was invited to participate in a workshop in Penang, Malaysia on perceptions of Islam and Muslims in the Western media organised by JUST in October 1995. That workshop, as Findley had observed many times since changed his outlook on not only Islam but also the West’s relationship with a civilization which often invoked negative sentiments especially among the ‘educated.’ He began to realise that the roots of the antagonism towards the religion and its followers were deeply embedded in the West’s history and entangled with the crusades and colonialism  and post-colonial structures of global power and dominance.

On his return he produced a Friendly Note on his Muslim Neighbour which was widely circulated and later authored a book entitled Silent No More that sought to demolish America’s false images of Islam and Muslims. The book sold 60,000 copies.

As Findley’s mission to combat ignorance about, and prejudice against, another civilisation was beginning to make some progress, it suffered a severe setback through two major events at the start of the new century. Both the destruction of the twin towers in New York on the 11th of September 2001 — the infamous 9-11 incident — which was the rationale for the US helmed ‘War on Terror’ and the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq in March 2003 made bridge-building between Christians and Muslims a monumental challenge. Nonetheless, Findley persevered. He continued to lend support to the work of the Council on American—Islamic Relations (CAIR) and other such causes.

His last correspondence with me was in January 2016. He had written an article for the JUST Commentary January 20, 2016 entitled, “Truth Seeking About Islam.”  He lamented that his eye-sight was failing — though his spirit was still high.

Findley was a man of extraordinary courage. The positions he adopted on Israeli power or on Palestinian rights or on justice for Muslims in the US incurred the wrath of many. He was often isolated and marginalised. But he never abandoned his principles.

The tenacity with which he adhered to them was what made him a man of integrity and dignity. He knew the price would be heavy.  But it was a price he was prepared to pay.

It is this — his moral conduct in the face of adversity — that will be his lasting legacy.

*

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.

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is the President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST), Malaysia. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

What Tulsi Gabbard’s caving in to the Israel Lobby really shows

The Saker

July 24, 2019

What Tulsi Gabbard’s caving in to the Israel Lobby really shows

Yes, Tulsi Gabbard’s name was not found in the list of those members of Congress which voted “no” to the resolution condemning the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign against Israel.  This is the full list as reported by The Forward: Earl Blumenauer (D-Oregon), Andre Carson (D-Indiana), Debbie Dingell (D-Michigan), Jesus “Chuy” Garcia (D-Illinois), Raul Grijalva (D-Arizona), Pramila Jayapal (D-Washington), Barbara Lee (D-California), Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky), Betty McCollum (D-Minnesota), Gwen Moore (D-Wisconsin), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York), Ilhan Omar (D-Minnesota), Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), Mark Pocan (D-Wisconsin), Bobby Rush (D-Illinois), Rashida Tlaib (D-Michigan) and Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-New Jersey).

Thank you, so-called “US free and independent media”!

Truth be told, the Israeli Lobby did a superb job focusing what is left of the mind of those who expose themselves to the corporate Ziomedia’s propaganda on nonsensical pretend-issues such as who is in the so-called “squad”  (Reps. Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez & Rashida Tlaib), on Ilhan Omar alledged anti-Semitism (what else is new?) and on Trump’s brilliant idea to send her “home” (only to disawow it later – in typical Trump style).  As a result, a major chunk of the First Amendement has now been chipped away.

I also note with interest that these 17 Democracts prove that the most pro-Zionist party is the GOP, not the Democrats.  I salute the courage of Thomas Massie (R-Kentucky)!

There were plenty of other signs that showed that for all her very real qualities and her likely sincerity, Tulsi Gabbard does not really dare to speak truth to power.  Here is a very good example of that:

I agree with the slogan she chose: the Kremlin’s darling?  Think again!

A very wise friend of mine wrote this about why Gabbard had to cave in:

I told you she is a single issue politician. It’s about wars without end. Everything else is Realpolitik and nothing is more real than Zionists controlling the politics and legislation in Washington.  She would have no hope of surviving the next round of laws. They are going to make anything “anti-Israel” equal “anti-Semitic” and that will be a crime like it is in France. She has high ideals on only a single issue. It’s a great issue. But you cannot count on a politician to be a noble warrior. Forget anyone doing the right thing all the time.  She shines bright on one issue. If she was really wise or clever, she would have abstained. So, she is neither. 

Again, I can only agree with him.

My personal conclusion from all this is that this is yet another strong indication that the US political system is completely unreformable.  And, furthermore, any political system which cannot adapt to new realities and reform itself is simply condemned to a sudden, catastrophic (and often violent) collapse.

This being said, Gabbard is still the only running candidate who wants to legalize cannabis (at least as far as I know), she wants to reform what is justly called the “US Gulag” system and she backs Medicare For All.  I still think that she is very likable and probably sincere.  But she sure does not have what it takes to tackle what is by far the worst problem of the United States: they are just a subservient and voiceless colony of the last openly racist state on the planet and that is a moral issue.  This is the type of issue in which no compromise is possible, at least for an honest person.  Gabbard chose to compromise on that, and this makes her useless to those who want to free the United States and restore in full their full sovereignty.

Too bad.

The Saker

 

The Peoples’ Will is Stronger Than the US Arrogance

ST

The Peoples’ Will is Stronger Than the US Arrogance

The game of destructive chaos in the region is the only policy pursued by the United States for years in the belief that it serves its interests without realizing that this policy which it calls “creative”, undermines security and stability in the region and the world, as well as the US’s interests.

Today, this unproductive policy dips into the depths of the maze that has placed itself in the neck of its glass. In the case of the Arab-Israeli conflict, this policy tries to impose alternative means of settlement away from the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, away from the two-state solution and the restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people, the first of which is the right of return.

As if the case in Washington is a business deal and not rights of an oppressed people. The US struggled at the Bahrain conference and then at the Bahrain workshop to accomplish what it calls the “deal of the century”, or in a clear sense the liquidation of the Palestinian cause and putting the poisons of American economy into the honey of the so-called peace. The same applies to its escalating policy in the Arab Gulf to ignite new wars that generate thousands of billions of dollars from the vast open-monarchies treasury.

In Syria, Washington is pursuing its destructive colonialist approach under the pretext of fighting the alleged terrorism and maintaining the security of its tools on the Syrian territory as (Qasad)militia that has committed the worst crimes against civilians returning from Baguoz after being destroyed by the American coalition under the pretext of bombing the extremists (Da’ish).

Washington is doing every conceivable effort to calm down the Israeli entity over its alleged security trying to legitimize its settlements and whitewash its occupation of the Arab territories, once by facilitating its direct aggression and once by granting it the alleged sovereignty over the occupied Golan and Jerusalem. The US exercises all this aggression without realizing that the peoples’ will of the region is stronger than all its arrogance.

The “deal of the century” has showed the real size of Washington, just a tool in the hands of the Zionist lobby, seeking to recruit billions to impose a “political solution” on the size of the Zionist entity. Both Trump and Netanyahu will give nothing to the Palestinian people and their bloody history and illegitimate settlement are present, recalling the occupation of Jerusalem, ignoring international laws and agreements, and the Zionist entity’s persistence in building settlements. The main objective is to swallow Palestine, erase its borders from the map, expel its people and end the file of the right of return for all Palestinians.

The current international developments against a background of the fires ignited by the policy of American arrogance indicate that many of the adverse results will return to the Trump administration whose poles are floundering between escalation once, reducing tension and begging dialogue and negotiation at other times to contain the accumulation of failures in the face of a lot of files and international issues that Washington wanted to rotate the corners in the direction that serves the agenda of domination that it wants to impose on the world.

With this American failure, the Trump administration is now making every effort to please the American interior ahead of the upcoming presidential election bazaar. Despite the counterproductive results of the Bahrain Workshop and the clear message that the policy of dictation, threats and intimidation, the “deal of the century “will not be translated into reality, even if the Arabs drowned to their ears in free normalization projects with the Zionist enemy.

Even though Trump, who implicitly admitted to the failure of the conspiracy of the era before disclosing its political side, continues striking the chord of illusion, and he himself wishes the implementation of the “deal of the century” in his presidential term, or it will never get because the wills of the axis resistance countries are much stronger than the military arsenals of Trump, and the bluster of the Arab- Zionists.

Sharif Al -Khatib
Editor-in-Chief
sharifalkh@gmail.com

 

The Goy Spouse is the New Hitler

Screen Shot 2019-07-15 at 18.20.24.png

by Gilad Atzmon

In July 2018 the three leading Jewish papers in Britain declared that Jeremy Corbyn, a man who has dedicated his life to the battle against racism, was an “existential threat” to British Jewry. As of today, Mr Corbyn is no longer the enemy  #1. The Labour leader can now chill out. The new global enemy of the Jews is apparently the Goy partner.   Earlier this month, Rafi Peretz, Israel’s education minister likened intermarriage to a  ‘second Holocaust’.

Minister Peretz said that assimilation of Jews around the world, but primarily in the US was “like a second Holocaust.” He also said that, due to intermarriages in the last 70 years, the Jewish people “lost 6 million people.” I guess that if just one more Jew falls for a ‘shikse*’’, the number of ‘lost Jews’ will climb to as many as 6.000.001.  When this happens, the Goy spouse may well have become the new Hitler.

Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, was among the American Jewish leaders critical of Peretz’s remarks.  “It’s inconceivable to use the term ‘Holocaust’ to describe Jews choosing to marry non-Jews. It trivializes the Shoah,”  Greenblatt didn’t protest the inhumane attitude to Goyim expressed by Peretz’s supremacist statement. Instead, Greenblatt confirmed what many of us learned to accept long ago: that the Holocaust is the new Jewish God.  Jews can do pretty much whatever they like,  except ‘trivialize” the (holy) Holocaust.

I hope that our  Jewish anti Zionist ‘allies’ at JVP & co now realise that “Jews for Shikzes” (JFS) will probably become their next international ‘solidarity’ move.

*Shiksa (Yiddish: שיקסע, romanized: shikse) is a horrid derogatory Yiddish term often used by European Jews to mean a non-Jewish woman or girl.

Penguin (re)Press

“Penguin Random House is proud to be a leading supporter of the American Booksellers for Free Expression and Banned Books Week, during which thousands of libraries, schools, bookstores and community centers across the nation and the world unite to celebrate the freedom to read and exercise our right to do so without interference or censorship.”

This is the position Penguin Random House publishers took in the autumn of 2018. They understood, then, the importance of freedom of literary expression and the right of readers to choose their own reading material. Yet, less than one year later, in June of 2019, we saw Penguin go the route of censorship when it announced it would no longer print or continue to ship editions of Col. Pedro Banos’s best-selling book, “How They Rule the World”.  The book, originally published in Spanish, lays out the 22 secret strategies of global power. According to Banos, war and conflict are the central strategy of geopolitics.  This sounds plausible enough, especially when you consider the author is a (reserves) Colonel of Infantry of the Spanish Army. He is also an expert in geopolitics, intelligence, terrorism, strategy, international relations, defense and security.

 I’ll preface by saying I haven’t read the book. My first order was cancelled due to the book allegedly being ‘out of stock’ and my current order isn’t due to arrive until the end of July.  I confess I have a sweet tooth for banned books, so I’m anxiously awaiting its arrival.

Penguin came under fire when UK Zionist pressure organization, Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), charged that Banos’s book was antisemitic. They accused Penguin of perpetuating antisemitic tropes by publishing the book.  It’s my understanding that there are references in a single chapter to the Rothschild banking dynasty and it is on that which the accusation is based.  The very powerful Jewish family, that according to some is known for investing in both sides of wars, is tagged as being a central player in geopolitics but according to the CAA, and others, pointing out this fact equates to condemnation of all Jews.  There has been no legitimate refutation given to counter the Rothschilds family power other than to decry antisemitism, and simply mentioning the role they played is enough to get one labeled an anti-Semite.  Is the CAA suggesting the Rothschilds represent all Jews, and if so, are they, then, guilty of antisemitism?  A more crucial question is why are Jews upset when goyim read about the Rothschilds? Is it because the current modus operandi of the Israel lobby is reminiscent of Rothschildian tactics?  Are they trying to conceal the present by suppressing the discussion of the past? Is the attempt to eradicate the discussion of the Rothschild Dynasty designed to mask a Jewish continuum?  This is indeed an interesting dilemma because the attempt to control the discussion is, in and of itself, an example of a Jewish continuum. This leads us back to what is the meaning of Jewish power so eloquently expressed by Gilad Atzmon:  Jewish power is the capacity to suppress criticism of Jewish power. In practice, we see a powerful Jewish organization stifling discussion of Jewish power.

While the book is an international best seller, there was some criticism of the Spanish text but no attempts to ban it until it was translated into English. This is when the CAA and a British author, Jeremy Duns, got involved.  Duns compared the English translation against the Spanish audible version and noticed the passages mentioning the Rothschilds family were omitted from the English translation of the text.  To Duns, this was proof positive that the book was antisemitic and the omission was some sort of a cover up.  So, now we see people not only being attacked for what is written, but also for what is not written. Duns also had a problem with the books cover, which is an image of octopus tentacles.  Apparently, octopi have been used to depict Jews negatively in the past, so it’s been tagged as an antisemitic symbol, right up there with a swastikas, rats and roaches. I’m a scuba diver and on the rare occasions I’ve been lucky enough to spot one of these lovely creatures, I solemnly swear Jews and Rothschilds did not come to mind. Possibly Duns and the CAA could provide goyim with a list of unacceptable symbols and words to avoid in the future.  Maybe everything on earth should be passed to a local synagogue for approval, first, as clearly even the most innocuous things can hit a nerve.

 Penguin, who initially defended the book but eventually succumbed to relentless pressure by Campaign Against Antisemitism, who wanted the book banned, conducted an external review, which was led by rabbi Julia Neuberger and two Spanish antisemitism experts.  I’m not quite sure how one becomes an expert on this topic. Is there a degree for this?  In any event, the findings were “echoes of Jewish conspiracy theories” but ultimately, neither the Spanish nor English versions were found to be antisemitic. So, how then, do we arrive at ceasing printing or shipping of the book?   Are we not permitted to discuss the tactics of certain dynasties, are we asked not to speak of unethical or criminal behavior if the perpetrator is Jewish?  If, for instance, a Jew is offended by a content of a book, is no one else entitled to read it? Might I suggest this is how the notion of conspiracies is born.  Keeping information in the shadows is what makes it a conspiracy.

All this begs the question, where are the voices of opposition to this book burning? Where are the Blumenthals, the racially exclusive JVL, Jeremy Corbyn? British Labour MP, Chris Williamson, defended the text. Predictably, he was accused of defending antisemites. That Penguin felt compelled to sanitize the text of Banos’s book to appease Jewish sensitivities speaks to just how powerful are these groups. Ironically, it validates the legitimacy of the very text they are working day and night to suppress.

Banning books and covering up historical fact is hardly an effective path to quash Jewish conspiracy theories. In reality, it only serves to reinforce them.  Something the CAA and its supporters may want to think about.

source: https://www.musingabout.net/blog-1/penguin-repress

%d bloggers like this: