American Society isn’t a Zoo and White People Aren’t Monkeys

August 24, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

bienart in the zoo.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon  

How to make well-meaning Americans into antisemites?

Make sure they read Peter Beinart’s Forward article,  The One Thing Jews Should Be Doing To Combat White Supremacy.

Beinart, a light Zionist ‘intellectual’  has kindly revealed how American Jews reacted when they heard the “neo-Nazis” chant, “Jews will not replace us.”  Some were fearful,  but, Beinart asserts, many others were somehow amused by it. “Replace you? Where, behind the counter at Wendy’s? We’re successful, industrious, upper-middle class. You’re the dregs of society. Replace you? Don’t kid yourselves. When it comes to America’s class hierarchy, we replaced you and your kind long ago.”

One might advise Beinart that looking down on Goyim and calling them ‘neo Nazis’ and ‘supremacists’ while simultaneously engaging in his own tribal self-love, supremacist exercise is a very dangerous game. 

Beinart claims that ‘white nationalists’ are largely a dysfunctional group of economy victims. “Studies show that in purely economic terms, white supremacists don’t differ much from the population as a whole. But they do differ from Jews, who are America’s wealthiest religious group.”

But “they [the ‘neo Nazis’] don’t just differ financially,” Beinart continues,  “they differ culturally, too. They are far less likely to have been raised in stable homes.” Beinart then quotes a study by the Southern Poverty Law Center that points out that“one of the most common background characteristics [of ‘neo nazis’] is some kind of family disruption, whether that be divorce or parental abandonment, a parent becoming incarcerated, or substance abuse by one or both of the parents.”

Beinart apparently doesn’t know that Right wing thinkers blame the Jewish intelligentsia, largely the cultural Marxists, the Frankfurt School and Wilhelm Reich for the destruction of the Church, the eradication of family values, the obliteration of the patriarchal family and so on. Rightly or wrongly,  the white nationalists see the Jewish elite as at the core of their plight. One would expect Beinart to make a minimal effort to learn the white nationalists’ argument before he writes about the topic.

In the most supremacist and stereotypical manner, Beinart counsels his fellow Jews to fool the goyim.

“For synagogues, countering the conditions that produce neo-Nazism might involve assisting a church in a troubled area. Why? Because …white working-class Americans who attend church are less likely to experience divorce, addiction and financial distress.”

Beinart advises Jews to throw dollars at churches not because religion bonds the nation, but because it is good for the Jews. The church maintains the Goyim’s tranquillity and stops their kids from drifting toward “neo-Nazism.”

Beinart’s recipe for fixing  American society is throwing money at white goyim. I really believe that someone should explain to Beinart that American society isn’t a zoo and white people aren’t monkeys.

Beinart ends his article recycling the usual Jewish Tikun Olam  (fixing the world) mantra. “We (the Jews) answer hate by repairing the country in which we live.” This might be the time for Beinart, The Forward and their followers to stop trying to repair countries and the world. They would do better to self reflect. Probably a good place to start is by asking  why all of that animosity has happened again, just 70 years after the liberation of Auschwitz.

cover bit small.jpg

Gilad Atzmon’s Being In Time: A Post Political Manifesto is available now on: Amazon.co.ukAmazon.com and gilad.co.uk.   

Palestine, Syria, ID Politics and the West

July 30, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

Interview by Dina Y. Sulaeman – Indonesia Center for Middle East Studies

http://ic-mes.org/politics/interview-with-gilad-atzmon/

Dina: In your book, “The Wandering Who”, you wrote extensively  about Jewish identity politics. Is ‘identity politics’ special for Jews?

Gilad: No, not at all. In my new book, ‘Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto,’ I present a universal approach to identity politics.

Jewish identity politics is a model for identity politics in general. In the west, we have witnessed the evolution of gay ID politics, black ID politics and so on. ID politics operates to teach people to speak and think ‘as a’;  ‘as a black’, ‘as a lesbian’, ‘as a feminist’, ‘as a Muslim’, etc. It is an attempt to break apart all the established and traditional social structures. Why? Because, the Jewish elite is fearful of the old structures, they tend to believe that anti-Semitism is rooted in the established edifice and in working people being united. The Frankfurt School and thinkers like Wilhelm Reich managed to revolutionise society– in the name of ‘progress,’ we are now divided and detached from our ‘reactionary’ roots.  But it is devastating that the left has been united against working people forging a cohesive identity… this is very strange because the left is supposed to look after the working people and unite and inspire them to action. The left in the west is disturbed by the fact that the working people always vote for the flag, for the right, for the nationalist, for Trump, for Hitler and so on. Accordingly, modern ID politics is a project that developed out of this unique intellectual and political bond between the left and Jewish intelligencia. The Jews are better at ID politics than any other group for an obvious reason. For the  gay, the black, the Muslim, the feminist or the lesbian, ID politicsis a new thing.  Jews have been doing itfor 3000 years — Jewish culture is identity politics.

It would be reasonable to argue that ID politics is an attempt to Jewify (as opposed to Judify)  the entire social order. It has been a project that has caused some devastating cultural, social and political impacts.

Dina: So, there are differences between the  ‘Jew’ and ‘Judaic’ thing.  In your book, you said that the problem, in Palestine for instance,  isJewishness rather than  Zionism. Can you explain it?

Gilad: It is confusing. Jewishness is the belief that the Jews are somehow special, chosen, privileged and should enjoy and celebrate their privilege. Not all Jews subscribe to this idea, but many of them do. Even the Jewish anti-Zionist will say, ‘listen to us, we can say something that you (goyim, gentiles) can’t, we as the Jews in the movement,  give you a ‘kosher stamp.’ They are  basically claiming that ‘we are privileged’.  Even Jewish anti-Zionists subscribe to hard corechoseness. Norman Finkelstein, whom I admire intellectually, used  to say, I can say it because my mother was in a concentration camp.  What about you Dina? Your mother wasn’t in Auschwitz, can you still think or express your thoughts ? Or support Palestine? Or do you have to send your mother to Auschwitz before you make a judgment on Israel or other aspects of Jewish power? Choseness is, unfortunately, embedded in Jewish thinking.

Zionism is just one symptom of Jewish choseness. Interestingly enough, and this is my first time I have said this in an interview, some people, including some of my best friends, say that ‘Judaism was hijacked by Zionism.’  I say NO.  It is the other way around — Zionism was hijacked by Jewishness and eventually Judaism.

Zionism was initially an anti-Jewish movement. Zionism started in  the late 19th century. It proclaimed that Diaspora Jews were an ugly parasitic identity; they didn’twork, they didn’tfarm, they were traders and bankers, capitalists, usurers, exploiters and so on, ..but this wasn’t entirely their fault. It had happened because Jews  didn’t  have a land of their own. “Once we settle in Palestine, all of that will change.”  And, indeed, they went to Palestine and for two weeks they worked on the land and built factories.  But then they found out that the Palestinians were cheaper [labour] and they all became Jews again.   It is amazing that Zionism was a secular movement that promised to ‘civilise’ the Jew. But then ideological Zionism was hijacked by Jewish exceptionalism and later by Judaic choseness. While early Zionism operated to defeat choseness, Israel and Zionism have little to offer but chosenism.

There is a problem with certain interpretations of Judaism. I do accept that some  orthodox  interpretations of Judaism may defy supremacy. But I’ve yet to come across any Judaic perception that I can accept as ethicalor universal. Judaism is not a universal precept:

  1. It’s tribal. It does not refer to  “us” as humanity, it is, instead, all about  “us” the Jews.
  2. There are no ethics in Judaism. In Islam or Christianity, you are expected to  take action based upon belief such as’ jihad,’ you purify yourself. In Judaism‘ethics’ is replaced by ‘commandments’ and ‘mitzvoth’, you follow rules to do this and that, and rules not to do that and this. You are not supposed to make an independent judgement. They tell you, “don’t kill, don’t steal.” Human beings do not need to to be told not to kill, theyknow it’s ethically wrong. In Jerusalem, regulations replace ethics!

Dina: but then when we say that the root of the Palestinian problem is Jewishness (not Zionism), they will call us anti-Jew or anti Semites.

Gilad: It is not nice, but this is a tactic that has been used to silence the discussion. However, we are not talking here about individual  people, we are referring to ideology and we are supposed to be able to criticize ideology. But, as we can see, some Jews don’t want us to do that, and for an obvious reason!

Do you have identity politics here in Indonesia?

Dina: well..yes… We have some Muslim groups that keep saying that the muslims are oppressed by the Chinese and the Christians; they accused the government of being pro-Chinese/Christian.

Gilad: I’m not familiar with Indonesian society and politics, but you just confirmedwhat I have been saying –identity politics is always used as an attempt to weaken the hegemonical structure.

As a nation, we enjoy  the ability to mobilise  as one people. It doesn’t matter if you are Muslim, Christian, or Hindu, we are together, caring for each other, because we share the same land, and our most important values as a country are health, education, and work (production, manufacturing). If I speak instead ‘as a Muslim,’  ‘as a Christian,’  ‘as a woman,’  ‘as a lesbian,’ I contribute to the breaking of society into sectors. The most interesting thing about the sectorial break is that each sector is a cosmopolitan one. If I define myself as a Muslim identitarian then the border of my identity is not the physical border of Indonesia, it extends to Malaysia, the Middle East, the Balkans and even Europe and the United States. If I define myself as a gay, the border also transcends  beyond my country. This is exactly how Jewish identity operates. Jews, as we know,  are not attached to any piece of geography, it is a cosmopolitan  identity.  Zionism initially attempted to defy Jewish cosmopolitanism.

In America, for instance, I speak about the patriots vs. the identitarians, the patriots who see themselves primarily as Americans. So you can be black, you can be gay, you can be a Jew, but you say: I’m an American who happens to be black, I’m an American who happens to be a Jew, I’m an American who happens to be gay. But the identitarians  see themselves primarily as sectarians:   I’m a gay who lives in America, I’m a Muslim who lives in America.  And it’s a very big difference. Because if you are primarily gay, your primary interest is in promoting gay rights and gay interests, for example, to have a dedicated hospital for AIDS. If you are black, you want to see special budget allocations for black people and their needs. But for patriots, whoever they are, the most important thing is a new factory so that we, as a collective (gays, black, Jews, women etc) , have a good reason to wake up in the morning and go to work.

Dina: So in your view, nationalism is very important, right?

Gilad: If global capitalism is a problem, and I thinkit is, then, national socialism may be the answer. What I mean by national socialism is localism combined with equality. I don’t mean racism, I’m anti racist. I am also opposed to tyranny. I would say that my vision of national socialism is similar to that of George Orwell. It is patriotic yet humanitarian: anti racist and anti tyrannical.

Dina: Now I want to talk about Syria with you. Do you think the Syrian conflict distracted public opinion towards Palestine?

Gilad: It did, this is a very clear observation. The crisis in Syria is a hideousdisaster and it has definitely distracted attention from Palestine, and who benefits from that? Israel, of course. This is why it shouldn’t surprise us that the major players in the creation of this crisis were Israel and its supportive Jewish Lobbies. And it shouldn’t surprise us that Israel and the Jewish Lobby are now changing sides. In the beginning they supported Al Nusra, now they seem to be with the Russians. Turkey has switched sides too, they still don’t like Assad but they prefer Assad to having a Kurdish State on their eastern border . So we are dealing with a level of deadly global opportunism. Many within the the pro-Palestinian activist network  are also changing sides, they were anti Assad initially and are now pro Assad.

The Palestinian leaderswere not very politic here. The Assad regime was very supportive of Palestine. Hafez, Bashar’s father, fully supported Hamas. It was devastating  to see how quickly Hamas decided to oppose Assad. I understand why it happened… Qatar, the Saudis, the Sunni alliance, the Muslim Brotherhood. I don’t like to criticize Palestinians and their politics  but they were not very clever here.

Dina: ok last question, what is the future of Palestine?

Gilad: I don’t think that we are moving toward a peace negotiation, a peace plan or an orchestrated reconciliation. When people talk about two states, what they really mean is two Jewish states. But I believe that within the next 20-30 years we will see a Palestinian majority on the land. It’s a just a matter of time. Here I agree with Abbas. Everybody likes to hate Abbas. But Abbas understands that time is on the side of the Palestinians. For Abbas demography is the one and only Palestinian bomb.

Dina: So you don’t agree with jihad?

Gilad: I didn’t say I am against jihad. If Palestinians resist, they will always get my support. They live in hell and I will always support them. This is my role. But I’m not in position to advocate a solution or push a political or military mantra. I see myself as a (Hebrew speaking) Palestinian,  but I don’t live there. I cannot urge people to get themselves killed while I live comfortably in London. I cannot tell them to sit and wait either. It is not my role. My job as an intellectual is to try to explain what is happening. Abbas says that if we engage in active war, they [the Israelis] will throw us all out, they will kill us, they have no mercy, and he is absolutely right. So, we just have to sit and wait;  this land will be Palestine from river to the sea.

Dina: do you refer to  demography?

Gilad:  Absolutely!

From the Heart to the Mouth: Jesus’ Views on the Talmud

Perversity, Stupidity and Blind Guides

As Al-Aqsa descends into chaos…

By Richard Edmondson

I came across the above picture several days ago. It is of Nur Hamdan, a 13-year-old Palestinian boy who lost his eye earlier this month after being shot by Israeli police. According to news reports, Nur was standing on the balcony of his East Jerusalem home along with his mother and a cousin when he was hit by a “sponge-tipped bullet.”

Reportedly he suffered eye socket fractures and other facial injuries. According to Israeli authorities, clashes were occurring in the area, but Nur’s family says he was not involved in any of this. When his mom saw the Israeli police presence in the street below, she ordered the children to come inside from the balcony, and reportedly it was just as Nur stood up that he was hit by the projectile.

You can go here and here to access news articles on the incident. (All of this took place just a few days before the shooting of two Israeli police officers and subsequent outbreak of violence at the Temple Mount.) One of the reports says the use of sponge-tipped bullets for crowd control began three years ago, but now the Israelis have adopted a new version that is “twice as hard and heavy and their potential to cause injury is much greater.” Official police regulations stipulate the bullet should not be fired at children, and if used against adults only the legs should be targeted. Apparently, however, this regulation was disregarded in Nur’s case.

It may have been disregarded other times as well. One of the reports linked to above is from The Independent, whose article notes that, “as of January 2016, 15 people have lost an eye in similar shootings involving Israeli forces, including a six-year-old boy.”

It seems almost as if Israel’s behavior grows progressively worse the more global public opinion galvanizes against it. Perhaps there is a perverse sort of logic in this. Just a guess here, but maybe the thinking goes something along the lines of: “Well people are going to hate us anyway, so we might as well do whatever the f-ck we want.” Whether this is the new credo or not, certainly perversity and perverse thinking–quite a bit of it actually–can be found in the Talmud, one of Judaism’s “holy” books. For instance, a passage from the Moed Kattan reads, “If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.” If you think about it, there is a perverse sort of “logic” to it, I suppose.

The Talmud also has passages concerning non-Jews, such as this one from the Sanhedrin, “What a Jew steals from a Gentile he may keep,” and even those applying to non-Jewish children, such as this gem–“All gentile children are animals”–from the Talmudic tractate known as the Yebamoth.

The above quotes are taken from an article by Michael Hoffman, who is the author of Judaism’s Strange Gods and is widely regarded as one of the preeminent non-Jewish authorities on the Talmud. You might want to go and check it out. There are lots of other quotes from the Talmud as well.

So is there a connection between the perverse ideology found in the Talmud and the perverse behavior we see from Israelis? I don’t have a definitive answer to that, but my guess is probably there are Israeli rabbis who point to various passages in the Talmud in order to justify things such as settlement expansion, demolition of Palestinian homes, and–well, who knows?–maybe even shooting children in the eye. All this is not to say that there aren’t some good and decent Israeli Jews who oppose their government’s policies.  I suspect, however, these are not the ones who spend their days reading and studying the Talmud.

Jesus had a few thoughts on this subject as well, although I should qualify the title I’ve given to this post–“From the Heart to the Mouth: Jesus’ Views on the Talmud”–by mentioning that the Talmud did not exist in Jesus’ day. Ah, but the oral law did. And the oral law became the basis for a good portion of the Talmud, which began to be written down starting in about 200 A.D.

So what exactly was this oral law that existed in Jesus’ time? Well, it consisted of “interpretations” of the law of Moses, along with some outright additions that supposedly had been omitted from the five books of the Torah, presumably due to oversight, all of this as envisaged, or imagined, by rabbis and “sages” of the day–a group of people Jesus referred to (almost always derisively) as “teachers of the law.”

A clear picture of the contempt Jesus felt for their perverse edicts can be found in the fifteenth chapter of Matthew (a parallel passage can also be found in Mark 7). The chapter starts out with a group of Pharisees and teachers of the law coming to Jesus and demanding to know why he doesn’t insist on his disciples washing their hands before they eat. Here is his reply to them, starting in verse 3 and running through verse 9:

“And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’ But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,’ he is not to ‘honor his father’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:

‘These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
They worship me in vain;
Their teachings are but rules taught by men.’”

Jews were required in those days to make sacrifices at the Temple as well as pay a yearly Temple tax. Apparently the teachers of the law felt it more urgent and of greater priority for members of the public to fulfill these obligations  than obligations toward their own parents. And Jesus called them out on it.

The quote Jesus supplies from Isaiah is from chapter 29, verse 13. Interestingly, the entire 29th chapter of Isaiah is a prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem. Verse 14, immediately following the one quoted by Jesus, reads:

Therefore once more I will astound these people with wonder upon wonder; the wisdom of the wise will perish; the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish.

Isaiah seems to have been envisioning a time in which the intelligent and wise, the “sages” if you will, would sink into a morass of perversity and stupidity. Again, keep in mind the Talmud began to be written down starting in about 200 A.D.

Another interesting aspect to all this is that Isaiah refers to the city of Jerusalem not by its common name–Jerusalem–but by the name “Ariel.” The Hebrew word “ariel” means “lion of God,” but because of Isaiah’s use of it in this context, it has also come to be recognized as an alternate name for Jerusalem. Thus, Ariel Sharon, the former prime minister of Israel who spent the last eight years of his life in a vegetative state, could also be known as “Lion of God Sharon” or “Jerusalem Sharon.” Either would be technically correct.

Here is what Isaiah says about the city of Ariel/Jerusalem:

Woe to you Ariel, Ariel,
the city where David settled!
Add year to year
and let your cycle of festivals go on.
Yet I will besiege Ariel;
she will mourn and lament,
she will be to me like an altar hearth.

The above are the first two verses of chapter 29. A bit of explanation regarding the term “altar hearth” is warranted. In ancient Israel, particularly in the homes of the poor, a “hearth” consisted of a depression in the ground in which a fire was kindled. An “altar” was a place where sacrifices were made–and hence where blood was shed. So Jerusalem, Isaiah in effect was saying, will become like “a depression in the ground where blood is shed.” Also take note: the Hebrew word for “ariel”, spelled אךיאל ,   is very similar to the Hebrew word for “altar”, spelled  אךאיל ,  and both are pronounced ar-ee-ale’ . In other words, Isaiah was making a play on words! And a rather ironic one at that: the “lion of God” was going to become nothing more than a “depression in the ground where blood is shed.”

But to return to the Gospel of Matthew. The verbal dressing down of the teachers of the law is followed, in verses 10 and 11, with:

Jesus called the crowd to him and said, “Listen and understand. What goes into a man’s mouth does not make him ‘unclean,’ but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him ‘unclean.’”

It is while Jesus is addressing the crowd that the Pharisees and teachers of the law stalk away, apparently incensed at being called hypocrites and having the words of Isaiah thrown up in their faces. This in fact is remarked upon by one of the disciples. “Did you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?” he entreats Jesus with a sense of alarm. The latter replies:

“Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. Leave them; they are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.”

It is at this point that the ever-curious and ever-quizzical Peter asks for an elaboration–what exactly did Jesus mean about words coming out of a person’s mouth making the person unclean? The reply is well worth recording here:

“Don’t you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body? But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and these make a man ‘unclean.’ For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. These are what make a man ‘unclean’; but eating with unwashed hands does not make him ‘unclean.’”

In his article, Hoffman says that most religious Orthodox Jews ascribe greater authority to the Talmud than to the Old Testament, and he supplies a quote from a Rabbi Yehiel ben Joseph, who insists that without the Talmud, Jews would be unable to grasp the meaning of the Old Testament.

“God has handed this authority to the sages and tradition is a necessity as well as scripture,” ben Joseph asserts. “The Sages also made enactments of their own…anyone who does not study the Talmud cannot understand Scripture.”

In the video below we see a couple of erudite Israeli “sages” offering up their views on Gentiles.

On a scale of 1 to 10 how would you rate the level of perversity and stupidity you see in this video? Isn’t it ironic–that we observe these two teachers of the law referring to Gentiles as animals, insisting that they exist to serve only Jews, while at the same time congratulating themselves on being the most “humane” creatures on the planet? Is it any wonder Jesus referred to them as hypocrites and blind guides?

One of the foremost Talmudic scholars of the 20th century was a US rabbi by the name of Joseph D. Soloveitchik, who served at Yeshiva University in New York and is said to have ordained some 2,000 rabbis over the course of his career. Soloveitchik reportedly had a close relationship with Chabad Lubavitch Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, and is also said to have been highly admired by Rabbi Meir Kahane. Schneerson believed that two types of souls exist: a Jewish soul and a non-Jewish soul. The latter, he held, comes from “satanic spheres,” but the Jewish soul “stems from holiness.”* As for Kahane, he was founder of the Jewish Defense League (JDL) and was convicted of domestic terrorism in the US. All three men–Soloveitchik, Schneerson, and Kahane–were avid supporters of Israel.

Among the JDL’s more notable accomplishments were acts of violence aimed against Russian targets in the US as well as bomb threats called in over the 1970 TV sitcom Bridget Loves Bernie (the show portrayed an interfaith marriage between a Catholic woman and a Jewish man and was cancelled after only one season despite having high ratings).

Hoffman, who describes the Talmud as “hate literature,” says the body of writing “has caused untold suffering throughout history and now, in occupied Palestine, it is used as a justification for the mass murder of Palestinian civilians.”

Interestingly, Isaiah evinced what could possibly be construed as a premonition of the coming of the the oral law. In his chapter 29, verse 4, he writes:

Brought low, you will speak from the ground;
your speech shall mumble out of the dust
Your voice will come ghostlike from the earth;
Out of the dust your speech will whisper.

The prophet died in about 681 B.C. Legend has it that he was sawed in half. Mannasseh, one of the more evil rulers of the ancient Israelites, was king of Judah at the time. Roughly a hundred years after his death, Jerusalem, in 586 B.C., was sacked by the Babylonians.

Christ was crucified in 30 A.D. Forty years later, in 70 A.D. Jerusalem was sacked again, this time by the Romans.

Does history repeat itself? With the plethora of blind guides leading the blind that we see today in Israel, the answer to that is probably going to be yes.

* as quoted in Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, by Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky

Is Michael Foster a Chameleon?

June 13, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

The utterly repellent Michael Foster who has spent the last 2 years waging a relentless campaign against Jeremy Corbyn has now apparently become a Corbyn supporter.  Foster now admits that he was “wrong on Corbyn.”  The Jewish labour donor used the notorious Zionist Times of Israel to “tip his hat to the leader’s success”

In a spectacular admission that portrays total cultural and political  detachment Foster says,  “I was wrong on that his brand of leadership and socialism would not appeal.”

The samecharacter who a year ago professed that he despised Corbyn  and labelled his supporters “Sturm Abteilung” (Nazi stormtroopers) has convenientlychanged his spots.

However, don’t let the sly Foster mislead you. Foster is not a chameleon. He didn’t transform into a British patriot who cares for the working people or the resurrection of the NHS. Foster is a Jewish ethnic campaigner. Foster is interested in only one thing: Jewish tribal interests.    

“To the future, Jeremy (note the shift to personal language) from my point of view has two things that matter to me, to deal with. He must continue to stamp out any sign of anti Semitism within Labour; and he must on that score make i think more of an effort, both private and public to meet with, and meet the legitimate fears of, the Jewish Community.”

And now the warning: “Jeremy’s legitimacy as a leader of all factions within Britain will in part depend on him achieving this. He can make the Jews of Britain feel safe, without in any way abandoning his strong and righteous belief in the need for a self governing and free, Palestinian homeland.”

Can he? Will the Fosters of this world let Corbyn be? Will they let him support Palestine and denounce Israeli brutality? Seemingly Foster and the Jewish lobby have yet to read the picture. Corbyn’s success means thatalthough every Jewish institution in the kingdom was determined to destroy him, Corbyn was able to prevail by turning Labour into a popular movement. He is likely to becomePM within a year.

Corbyn proved that Western politics can survive without an injection of shekels. This is must be devastating news for the Lobby, for AIPAC, ADL, BOD, LFI, CFI, Criff and for the Michael Fosters. However, for the rest of us, it is  encouraging news, it arouses a spirit of emancipation.

Gilad’s Being in Time can be ordered on Amazon.co.uk  & Amazon.com  and on Gilad’s site  here.

It All Stays In The Family

By Gilad Atzmon

In this Jewish educational video, rabbi Moishe Zeldman elaborates on the meaning of being a Jew. What is that thing that binds the Jews together? Is it religion? Is it race? The blood? Zeldman’s answer is that Jews are the children of Israel and they are one family. Yet, I am left perplexed. What kind of a family are the Jews? And if the Jews are a family, as Zeldman claims, shouldn’t we expect that family to take responsibility for the crimes committed by the Jewish State? If Jews are a family, should we not expect this family to take responsibility for the global wars inflicted on us by their Jewish Lobbies (AIPAC, CFI, LFI, CRIF etc)? If the Jews are a family, shouldn’t we expect its leaders to restrain their reckless Wall Street mammonites?

Shockingly enough, this is exactly how the Jewish family operates. It forms Sanhedrin Courts that are there to sustain Jewish autonomy over Jewish affairs. The crimes of Israel are opposed by a few family members who insist on conveying a humanist image (JVP, Mondoweiss etc.) AIPAC’s crude interference with American politics is not really criticised by the American people. The fight against AIPAC has been reduced into an internal family battleground. Similarly, the crimes of Wall Street are debated by some pseudo-socialist tribal agents.

If the Jews are a family, ‘it all stays in the family’ is their survival code. Yet the family is far from being “dysfunctional” as rabbi Zeldman suggests. So far, this family has been overwhelmingly productive in maintaining its hegemony while dominating the opposition. However, some dissident voices, myself included, do believe that this celebration is now coming to an end. This family business has become too transparent.

Incest – Jewish family style (video)

April 08, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

This week, I was puzzled by Donna Miinkowitz’s response to her being invited to join four other leading intellectuals in a Literary event to discuss my forthcoming book: Being in Time (30 April, Theatre 80 NYC). For Donna, the invitation evoked only feelings of“horror, fear, anger and disgust”

So I decided to look around and find out exactly what Donna Minkowitz’s own literary events look like. What I found was a most disturbing disclosure of family incest and unseemly morbidity.

Minkowitz, a writer for the Jewish Forward, describes herself as a “Jewish, Lesbian progressive.” Fine, but I warn you, watch this short video only if you have a strong stomach.

https://youtu.be/Dkm5aqii-mM

 

Jewish Labour Movement Just won’t give up

April 06, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

Below is a sickening open letter issued by The Jewish Labour Movement (JLM).

The JLM is asking former and current Labour members and supporters, from across the Jewish community to sign for publication in a major newspaper.

I added my reflections on the letter along the text.

“Dear Editor,

We are former and current Labour members and supporters, from across the Jewish community and all sides of the party. We may disagree on policy, both domestic and international, but we are united by our unwavering commitment to anti-racism.”

GA: Surely what they really mean is ‘antisemitsm.’ You want to ask yourself how a political body that is defined by race can be ‘anti-racist’?  Needless to mention that we are yet to see the JLM ‘united’ against Israeli racism.

“Last night we collectively felt a sense of disgust and frustration at the decision by the NCC to not expel Ken Livingstone from the party.”

GA: I tend to agree. It is in indeed disturbing that hero socialist Livingstone is allowed to maintain his Labour party membership despite telling the truth.

“Livingstone’s comments betray a party that was founded on the values of equality and inclusivity. His history of inflammatory remarks against our community, be it his suggestions that our community’s ‘wealth’ determines our vote, or his recent smears of victims of the Holocaust, surely have no place in a progressive party.”

GA: Needless to mention that Livingstone told the absolute truth: The bond between Jewish donors and the Labour party has been disclosed by Michael Foster. Telling the truth about Zionism collaboration with Hitler’s regime is not a ‘smear’ unless being ‘progressive’ means lying compulsively and institutionally. 

Last night’s decision to allow him to remain a member presents us with an immediate dilemma about our future in the party. Despite pledges of ‘zero tolerance’ on anti-Semitism, Labour has been found wanting when it truly mattered.

GA: I tend to agree. Here is the ‘immediate dilemma.’ British Jews can either buy the Labour Party and expel the Goyim or, instead, form a new Bund party so they can celebrate their unique form of socialism that cares for one tribe only.

 

The Jewish community has a proud history with Labour, but this decision has thrown its future into jeopardy. We are sick of the complacency shown towards the prejudice we face. Enough is enough.

GA: What is it they have enough of? Prioritizing truthfulness over tribal political interests?

We fully support the Jewish Labour Movement’s proposal to initiate a debate at Labour Party Conference in September 2017 promoting the expulsion of Mr Livingstone from the Labour Party.

G: No kidding

We also support calls for an immediate review of the decision by the NEC.

GA: The people who initiated this letter seem to believe that the Labour Party is an internal Jewish affair. Sadly enough, Jeremy Corbyn, doesn’t really go out of his way to prove them wrong.

Lastly, we would like to thank those in the Labour Party who have offered us messages of solidarity, and would urge those who disagree with this decision to call on their representatives to speak out against it publicly.

G: for those who don’t understand British-Yiddish dialect, I will offer a brief translation. The JLM basically offers to look after its Sabbos Goyim within the party and in general.

Horror, Fear, Anger and Disgust…

April 05, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

By Gilad Atzmon

In her Forward article yesterday, self-identified “Jewish lesbian leftist” Donna Minkowitz admitted to feeling “horror, fear, anger and disgust” at an invitation to speak at a literary event. “Now, that’s quite a combination of sentiments to feel all at once,” I thought to myself, “How could an invitation to attend an intellectual gathering evoke such negative feelings?”

On 30 April human-rights lawyer Stanley Cohen, history professor Norton Mezvinsky, orthodox Jewish author and whistle-blower Michael Lesher and myself will, in light of my upcoming book Being in Time – A Post Political Manifesto, gather together in Theatre 80, Manhattan to reflect on the collapse of Identity politics, the crisis within new-Left thinking and the future of liberal and progressive thought. We invited Donna Minkowitz to participate in the panel discussion so she could present her Jewish LGBTQ outlook. For some reason Minkowitz got the impression that she was expected  to “tout” my new book. On the contrary, Minkowitz was invited to oppose my argument.

It obviously didn’t take Minkowitz long to gather that she and I have little in common. Minkowitz is an Identitarian merchant, while I am critical of all forms of Identity politics. In my writing, I examine the role of the Left and Jewish intelligentsia at the core of the promotion of sectarian Identitarianism, tyranny of correctness and the collapse of the Athenian ethos.

Minkowitz was offered a platform to demolish my thesis. Her invitation read:

“Our aim for the discussion is to explore this analysis (i.e.Gilad Atzmon’s post-political condition)  and the current political landscape from different vantage points.”

Since Minkowitz defines herself as a” Jewish writer, a lesbian and a proud progressive,” we wanted to believe she would be courageous enough to come and educate us on the metaphysics of ‘gay Jewish’ perspectives.

https://youtu.be/Hc5mCtWixj0

Just in case you are a Golem and you don’t know how to survive a Jewish mother…

Unfortunately, in her negative response, Minkowitz is  not alone. The conference publicist  invited most of my NYC detractors to join the panel discussion but, like Minkowitz, none of them found the wherewithal to confront me. Also like Minkowitz, they probably indulged themselves in some PRE-TSDs (pre-traumatic stress delusions) – projecting their own destructive and conspiratorial tendencies onto me.

The intellectual and ethical world in which we live is in pretty poor shape but, unlike Minkowitz, I believe dialogue is essential for human recovery. I do not believe in echo chambers. Instead, I subscribe to the notion of Athenian tolerance – open debate committed to free exchange.

We offered Minkowitz the chance to break away from her ghetto even if only for an hour or two and she had the opportunity to join a panel of four provocative and leading intellects. Instead she simply succumbed to tribal fear.

 

Alliel – A Window Into Tribal Arrogance

March 16, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

This video is a spectacular glimpse into Jewish Identity Politics. In the music clip, Alliel, an  arrogant yeshiva boy is subject to a historical continuum of harassment.   Seemingly, Alliel didn’t bother to ask himself why is he chased and abused time after time by so many people in so many places.  Humanity, for him, is a pictorial remote entity united by Jew hatred. For him the only thing that matters is that Am Israel Chai The Jew always prevail. But then, if this is the case, if the Jews see themselves as omnipotent superheroes why do they expect the rest of humanity to regard them as hopeless victims?

israel: Where Vision and Reality Violently Diverge

Source

By Jonathan Cook

Dustin Pfundheller, 30, an American dentist living in Singapore, was set to become the youngest person to visit every country in the world while in a full-time job. His globetrotting has taken him to 192 of the 193 recognised states, bringing his medical skills to the world’s remotest places. But in January he was barred for the second time from Israel, the only country left on his list, having previously been refused entry last year.
Despite an invitation to a dental conference in Tel Aviv, and Israelis who vouched for him, border officials banned Mr Pfundheller for 10 years. No reason was given, but lawyers suspect visits to Iran and the Arab states sealed his fate. There could hardly be starker evidence that Israel stubbornly refuses to become a normal country.
Paradoxically, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Singapore last month to promote Israel as a tolerant country, one “committed to a better world, a world of diversity.”
The reality could not be more different. Arabs and Muslims have always struggled to gain entry to Israel. Palestinians are routinely abused at the borders, and thousands, especially from Jerusalem, have been stripped of the right to return home after living abroad.
But new figures show Israel is excluding other groups too. Entry denials have increased nine-fold in the past five years, topping 16,000 people last year. Among those increasingly turned away are political activists. Israel controls all access to the occupied Palestinian territories, and now regularly denies entry to solidarity activists and those who support the boycott movement.
But in practice the net is cast wider still. Recently, Israel subjected Jennifer Gorovitz, an American Jewish vice-president of the New Israel Fund, to a humiliating interrogation at airport arrivals. NIF is one of the largest funders of Israeli organisations supporting human rights and social justice. That includes assistance to groups that monitor military abuses in the occupied territories. This presumably explains why Ms Gorovitz’s interrogators suggested she posed a “security threat”. She finally gained admittance only after Talia Sasson, the Israeli head of NIF, pulled strings.
Ms Gorovitz wrote of her experience: “My privilege as a Jew means I never imagined that Israel could or would deny me entrance.”
Such an assumption was justified. Israel’s Law of Return is supposed to guarantee Jews around the world the right to almost instant citizenship in Israel.
For that reason, the law is grossly unjust. It privileges Jewish access to Israel at the expense of the native Palestinian population, most of whom were expelled in 1948.
Nonetheless, it is noteworthy that Israel, a state that invested itself with the historical mission of offering sanctuary to Jews worldwide, is increasingly applying a political test to those who arrive at its borders. Israel is denying entry not only to Arabs and would-be record breakers. And it is deporting not just those such as migrant workers and African asylum seekers who might pollute the Jewish state with non-Jewish genes. Now it is openly targeting Jews whose politics do not align with the far-right government of Mr Netanyahu.

It should be noted that many of the solidarity and boycott activists turned away are Jewish. Famous Jewish critics of Israel such as Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein have been barred too.

In Israel’s eyes, it seems some Jews are more equal than others.

The pulling up of the drawbridge comes as Israel’s leadership has remained largely silent in the face of a rising tide of anti-semitism in the US, fuelled by Donald Trump’s election as president. Dozens of Jewish centres have received bomb threats, and Jewish cemeteries have been vandalised.
There are growing rumblings among American Jews that their interests are being overlooked by the Netanyahu government to avoid damaging relations with the new US administration. But another reason for the lack of response should be considered.

The principle of the “ingathering of the exiles”, according to Israel’s official ideology, Zionism, assumes that Israel is the rightful home of Jews everywhere. And the largest Jewish population outside Israel resides in the US.

In November, Yaron London, a popular TV host, welcomed Mr Trump’s election, pointing out that “a worldview which supports white supremacy matches our [Israeli] government’s interests.”
Last week opposition leader Isaac Herzog urged Israel to prepare for an influx of US Jews fleeing persecution.

But will Israel’s arms really be open to all Jews equally, or only to those willing to contribute enthusiastically to the tribal project?

And can Jews of conscience ignore the true cost of their migration? They can leave behind anti-Jewish bigotry in the US, but only if they bolster the Jewish bigots of Israel who lord it over the native Palestinian population.

Jonathan Cook is an independent journalist in Nazareth

Exactly who is it that is in ‘Denial’?

February 16, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

A somewhat biased film review

By Gilad Atzmon

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

“I am a Baby Aryan,

Not Jewish or Sectarian.

I have no plans to marry-an

Ape or Rastafarian.”

 

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

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

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

Back in 2000, Paxman probably failed to see that,

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

A Candle in the Dark

masters of victory

From the Village of Jibshit came out a man with a firm courageous position, a man that devoted his life for the sake of Jihad, Resistance, Land, Nation, and Islam. He was a man that held the meanings of moral and support and used them to revive people, and a man that always uttered the words of bravery, audacity and perseverance.

That man was assassinated by the filthy hands of the enemy, yet his precious blood did not go in vein. His Martyrdom was a memorable victory, for he was a flame glowing in the path of the Islamic Resistance, and he was the brightest color of dignity and honor.

He is the great leader Sheikh Ragheb Harb, the most eloquent of words, and the most luminous of positions.

Ragheb1

In loving memory of his Martyrdom, Moqawama.org had a special interview with his son Ragheb Harb Junior, who was born 6 months after Sheikh Ragheb’s Martyrdom.

Speaking of Sheikh Ragheb Harb’s character, Ragheb Jr. said his father was a leader; he held the main characteristics of a leader that made him unique in society. “My Father dealt with people as if they were his own family, he was a leader and a loving father to everyone.” he said.

He noted that his father was known for his fidelity for Islam, adding a quote from his father, “There is no better tomorrow without Islam.”

Ragheb continued that his father sacrificed his own self, family, money, time and efforts for the sake of Islam. He tried his best to help people and raise them to be part of a high, educated, knowledgeable Islamic society. “I’m sure my father’s ultimate joy was when he dedicated his blood for the sake of his goal, and that was the noblest thing ever”, Ragheb added. 

Ragheb2Being a leader in Hizbullah makes it hard to live a normal life, meaning that at many times, the leader may have to be away for a while. Ragheb Jr. considered he was privileged, for his father’s path despite the sacrifices, was an honor.

He said there is a huge difference between a person sitting at home and caring less about his responsibilities and a person away from home and holding not only his responsibilities but that of a whole Islamic nation. “Even though he was away, my family knew he had a sacred aspiration, and so they were all patient for the sake of his goal”, Ragheb said. “My father hardly came home, especially during the “Israeli” occupation, but mother took his place, and filled in the gaps. She was his Jihad companion.” he added.

As for Ragheb’s personal relationship with his father, he said that even though he didn’t have the chance to meet him in person, he learned from his father through the stories told by his siblings. “While he was at home, father used to play with my siblings, tell them jokes, and he was always concerned about their academic results. Even though he had a lot to do outside yet these things never controlled his thoughts at home. He used to preach in a funny way.” Ragheb added that his father’s basic request was for them to sustain their religion.
 

Ragheb3

Ragheb was influenced by his father psychologically and personally, he said that with no doubt he felt that his father was a blessing sent from God, and that he was affected by his superb and decent characteristics. “His imprints and breath where left everywhere”, he added.

Receiving Sheikh Ragheb’s martyrdom was a shock to the family. Ragheb Jr. said that his father had always sought after martyrdom, but his assassination was a shock to the family. “It was a Friday night, father came back home from the Mosque and sat down for awhile, and afterwards he said he was going to see the neighbors. After a couple of hours, my parents heard people echoing “Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar”. They didn’t know what was going on, not until they heard someone saying: “Sheikh Ragheb was killed”, It was the hardest news ever, for it wasn’t familiar yet.” he said.

Sheikh Ragheb had a great influence on Ragheb Jr.’s life. He said: “Father was a source of pride and dignity; he taught me the true meaning of anticipation and perseverance”. He added that his father’s path is with no doubt the right path leading to happiness in this life and the afterlife.”

 

Ragheb4

Speaking of the imprints of the Martyrs in our lives, Ragheb said that the Martyrs are following the path of Imam Hussein (pbuh), the path of Imam Ali (pbuh), the path of Imam Hassan (pbuh) and Ashura’a. Islam is immortal and continues to grow due to their valuable blood.

Ragheb continued:” All our accomplishments are due to what the blood of the Martyrs reaped throughout history. Our time isn’t any different than the previous times, for the blood of the precious Martyrs, are still pouring on Islam. It is the light of God on earth and God’s light is sealed.” Ragheb said that the imprints of the martyrs are countless; we’ll get to know their value as we grow older.

Ragheb ended by sending a message to his father saying: “Oh Father if you had the chance to ask about this world, you’d ask about Islam, the resistance, the Mujahideen, the oppressed, the land and your sons. As for Islam it is the Light that will never be turned off. As for the resistance, it is the beacon that was fueled by your blood and the blood of all the Martyrs, and its fire will remain so that it burns the bigotry of the enemy.

Ragheb6

As for the Mujahideen, they have never changed their determination and they never will, they will continue this path as it was drawn.

 

As for the tyrannized; they will remain our first priority until God gives permission for their savior to appear. As for the land it will remain precious and dear with the Jihad, strong with our fists, green with our pouring blood. As for us your children, if God wants, we’ll keep on following your dear path under the banner of Imam Khamenai and Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah until we reach what you reached.”

Source: al-Ahed news 

16-02-2010 | 09:59

Gilad Atzmon On Zionist Charities Targeting David Icke & The Meaning Of Jewish Identity

The Richie Allen Show

The Zionists vs. Jewish anti Zionists is a fake binary opposition. In this interview with Richie Allen I insist once again that people who identify politically ‘as Jews’ are subscribing to politics that are driven by race. In the program I also suggest for the first time that it is not Zionism that hijacked Judaism, it is actually the other way around. It is Judaism that hijacked Zionism! Zionism was initially an a secular, anti Jewish movement that promised to ‘civilise’ the Diaspora Jew by means of ‘homecoming’ (as if Palestine is a ‘Jewish home’).  But as time went by, it has become clear that the early Zionist initiative was defeated. Zionism was hijacked by Judaic exclusivity and adopted as a radical form of tribal exceptionalism. In practice, it is Rabbinical Jewish settlers who have been leading  plunderous Zionism since 1967. This is far from being a coincidence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtji4ENgyo0&feature=share

Why we must defend those who dare to speak about the ideology of Jewish supremacy

By Nahida Izzat | Aletho News | December 26, 2012

Source

Forbidden words, taboo topics, witch hunts, smear campaigns, excommunications, thought-policing and book banning are no longer the trademark of fascists and right wing extremists, the profession is shared now by Jewish “anti-Zionists,” alleged “friends of Palestine.” We are left watching in astonishment and disbelief  as some “anti-Zionists” are doing the work of hyper-Zionists the likes of ADL and BoDoBJ.

I have recently witnessed the ostracizing and excommunication of two activists, Paul Eisen and Gilad Atzmon, by my local group affiliated to the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) using the Zionist method of character assassination of using the labels “racist” “anti-Semitic” as a method of muffling truth.

Yet, among the numerous intellectuals and political activists that have publicly defended Atzmon are many Jews for whom I have only high praise and have expressed much admiration.

It seems that those who wish to stifle discourse are acting as controlled opposition. They attempt to block intellectual discussion, suppress academic freedom, obstruct rational and scholarly debate, filter vital information and smother serious research that examines three main identifiable problems:

The problem of the ideology of Jewish supremacy

The problem of global Jewish-Zionist networking and lobbying

The problem of idolizing the holocaust (which is used as a tool to further Zionist aims)

In 2009, soon after the Gaza massacres, by sheer coincidence I came across the word Neshama. Curious, I googled the word, and lo and behold a Pandora’s Box opened before my eyes; a new learning curve began; I learned about a group called Chabad Lubavitch. I was horrified to discover the supremacist ideology at the core of this group and the level of influence accomplished by the Rebbe and his followers.

Horror-struck, I started investigating, studying then writing about two main issues; the supremacist ideology and the high influence of this prominent organization, attempting to alert our Jewish PSC allies to the danger of such ideology and influence… only to be faced with utter silence.

The problem of the ideology of Jewish supremacy

First; if we accept that Zionism is defined by the crime of genocide and the ethnic cleansing of a nation and has caused the wiping out of a country, then investigating the motivation behind such crime is essential to fight it and hopefully to defeat it. Without unfiltered scrutiny, we would never know who we are dealing with and how to stop them.

Second; supremacism in Jewish ideology is not above criticism; like every other ideology, it should be transparent, accessible and not kept secretive. Without unfiltered scrutiny we would never know what animates Zionists to act with such aggravated cruelty and sadism.

Third; to accuse of “anti-Semitism” and “racism” those who expose Jewish supremacy, is the equivalent of covering up the ideology behind the crime and dissuading people from learning about it, hence challenging and fighting this form of racism.

Dismissing such supremacist beliefs as irrelevant and obsolete would be a huge mistake because these views are the very motor that charges, motivates and energizes the Jewish settlers in Palestine, and gives them the sense of entitlement to do what they do without feeling any guilt or remorse.

For us Palestinians and for our supporters in the solidarity movement, it is a matter of extreme importance to inspect and scrutinize the ideology that motivates and animates the Jewish settlers in our occupied Palestine in order to better understand it, hence combat it. Restricting our understanding of the occupiers, their ideology and mindset cripples our ability to fight back against them knowledgeably and effectively. Furthermore, in our day and age, racism has become outlawed, when people learn about the extent of the ideological racism in the Zionist entity, it will enable us to fight them in their weakest point, thus, bring the day of our liberation closer.

The problem of global Jewish-Zionist networking and lobbying

First; when we look at Zionism as a crime, again, then logically we must identify and investigate the modus operandi. Failure to do so would leave us unable to understand how our oppressors operate and succeed.

Second; with regards to the Jewish-Zionist lobby: investigative work that examines information, no matter how well concealed, and attempts to identify at least some of the culprits and the real criminals behind the fearmongering, the endless wars and the catastrophic conditions that our world suffers is neither racist nor anti Semitic.

Third; devoid of proof or evidence for their false accusations the controlled opposition gate-keepers insidiously filter information through intimidation and by labeling anyone who dares to divulge vital facts. They disable Friends of Palestine (FoP) members from understanding the animus and the methods used to install and to perpetuate the criminal Zionist project, in particular the global network of collaborators who organize and effectively manipulate world policies by coercing world governments into continuous support of the Zionist project in spite of its growing inhumanity.

Expecting to become myself sooner or later a victim of such smear and filtering activity, I always utilize extensive links to primary sources I quote, mostly Jewish organizations. The network formed by these organizations involves large sections of Jewish communities worldwide, and its ultimate role is generally to support the Zionist entity, by inserting themselves in influential positions.

Suppression of inquiry amounts to a dynamic protection system (by peripheral concealment) of the global Zionist network.

Lite-Zionist critics of Israel are attempting to impose on FoP their restrictive dogma, i.e. that a majority of Jews worldwide, whether Zionist “diaspora” or “Israelis”, are not the manipulators of international policy with regards to “Israel”, but the complacent, docile instrument of U.S. imperialism.

To persist, such dogma imperatively needs, again, to filter out glaring facts such as the over-representation of Jewish-Zionist dual citizens in vital areas of UK-US policy making, or the cross-pollination of racist and supremacist ideology between many Talmudic Rabbis and many Secular Jewish-Zionist Organizations supporting the Zionist project.

The persistence of this dogma also requires strict and repressive censorship and gagging of whomever tries to scrutinize, analyze and discuss the facts, let alone expose them to an audience concerned by matters of equality and humanism, such as FoP and the Palestine solidarity movement in general was supposed to be. That is how and why smear campaigns with killer words such as “anti-Semitism” or “racism” are launched.

At best, such activity on part of alleged “friends of Palestine” is irresponsible. The logical implication of such nonsense, would be that Jewish Israelis, almost all of them serving at least 2 full years in the Israeli army, are just naïve and innocent victims. Thereby, this nonsensical dogma exculpates the notoriously perverted cruelty and psychopathy of the Israeli military’s crimes, up and down the command ladder.

The problem of idolizing the holocaust

First; “Facts” do NOT need laws to enforce or defend them, what they require is research to examine their narrative and correct it for better accuracy and understanding. The denial of these principles will invariably lead to the eradication of the Science of History, and thus cause the blind repetition of more genocides, as we already see in Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan… Much like what we see with the cover up and suppression of information about The Truth about 9/11, who benefited and how the event was used to create a climate of hatred and fear which enables the power elite to continue waging wars of aggression and extermination.

Second; without understanding how the holocaust has been used by Zionists, from its onset til this very day, we would continue to succumb to intimidation and give allowances that legitimize and justify the existence of a criminal entity. By insisting on keeping an aura of holiness, uniqueness and exceptionality around the holocaust which would continue to put it above any historical event, preventing researchers from examining how this event has been used, and how it enables our occupier to continue to use it as justification for what they do in Palestine.

The holocaust ought to be studied as a historical event with a historical narrative that has NO sacred or exceptional dimension. The emotional, dogmatic and sacred luggage that has been attached to it has been systematically used and is still used by Zionists to justify and minimize their ongoing heinous crimes in Palestine, as well as the claim of special status with special benefits in their respective countries.

Third; there is absolutely no link -strictly none- between the so-called Holocaust and Palestinians. Nowhere can Palestinians be incriminated in the abhorrent oppression committed by central Europeans against Jews during World War II.

I, as a Palestinian, am not prepared to live in guilt, nor to pay for crimes my people haven’t committed. We refuse to accept and will reject forcibly if necessary, pathologically violent and racist Jewish occupiers.

Military conquest, terrorism, robbery, torture, ethnic cleansing and slow genocide ongoing since the arrival of the first Zionists in Palestine almost one century ago (i.e. before the holocaust) does NOT make someone the rightful “owners” or “co-owners” of my homeland, it makes them abject and violent occupiers.

I and with me my People are not accepting any more to keep having to listen to this narrative shoved down our throat with the repetition of tragedies about legendary love stories, human-fat soap or human-skin lamp shades in order that the Zionists continue to deceive, to trade with and reap the profit by deception and theft of a historical crime that has already been dealt with, and while they continue to use it to justify the ongoing theft of Palestine and extermination of Palestinians.

When someone claims to be in the solidarity movement with Palestine, but then at a crucial time when the Palestinian struggle for Liberation gains momentum, engages in such blatant cover up and concealment of vital information and analysis that would enable people to better understand the core problematic issues and how to effectively deal with them, I and with me every member of the FoP and the Palestine solidarity movement, have the right to question the dubious intentions and motivations of such acts, and to evaluate the damage such people are causing to the movement, hence to Palestinians.

I would like to add a thought about the accusation of racism and anti-Semitism used as a method to silence debate. Anti-Semitism is nothing but one form of racism. Jewish supremacy is yet another form of racism. All forms of racism are vile and ought to be rejected.

An aggravating factor makes the accuser’s motives appear to be even more dubious. Indeed the false accusations of racism is inconsistent with their deafening silence about the mountain of evidence of the wide-spread existence of the ominously racist Jewish supremacist ideologies. This utter silence is a glaring attempt to deflect from the real racism about which I happen to have done extensive research during the past 2 years.

Also, I perceive the attacks as an attempt to block intellectual debate about the problem of global Jewish-Zionist networking and lobbying, which to me is very worrisome, to say the least, when coming from self proclaimed “Friends of Palestine.”

What I find really mind-boggling and hard to fathom in all this is the inconsistency with regards to racism.

On the one hand they do not hesitate to throw such a label against many honorable activists, scholars and intellectuals, in fact they label as “racist” and “fools” anyone who exposes the revolting yet well concealed Jewish supremacy, anyone who notices the effect of Jewish-Zionist networking or  who objects to their disproportionate over-representation in key positions with all what it entails of conflict of interest and promotion of the interest of a foreign entity at the detriment of the interest of their national constituency. Yet, on the other hand, mystifyingly, the same people, who without hesitation accuse us of racism, stay utterly mute about the massive, revolting and offensive racism that fills thousands of pages in the Talmud, and major Jewish religious books! And I am not talking about some fringe lunatic fundamentalists who use these always mutating texts as tools, what I am talking about is the inter-connective network of people deeply entrenched in the main centers of government, power and capital, and who are veritably driving policies, war-mongering and hate-mongering!

This sharp contrast between the fervent reaction of those disloyal activists to alleged “racism” on one hand, and on the other, their apathetic deflated reaction or lack thereof, to the sickening anti-human racism emanating from Jewish sources with its correlation with Zionists’ activities, leaves me speechless, beyond words.

Since I started exposing this racism, and over the past two years, I heard NOT ONE WORD about their outrage, opposition or willingness to expose or fight Jewish supremacist ideology, such as seen in the writing of one of the most respected, most reputable Jewish philosophers Moses Ben Maimon (also known as Maimonides).

“Maimonides’s Mishneh Torah is considered by traditionalist Jews even today as one of the chief authoritative codifications of Jewish law and ethics.” Moses Ben Maimon sees no problem with subjugating and enslaving gentiles:

“They shall be your subjects and serve you.”

“The subjugation they must accept consists of being on a lower level, scorned and humble.

They must never raise their heads against Israel, but must remain subjugated under their rule. They may never be appointed over a Jew in any matter whatsoever.”

He also talks about the right of the Jewish king to:

wage a milchemet hareshut, (war of aggression) i.e. a war fought with other nations in order to expand the borders of Israel or magnify its greatness and reputation.

These “chief authoritative codifications of Jewish law and ethics” do not see any ethical predicament with “Jewish wars” of extermination and annihilation either.

Since this notorious ideology is the unequivocal underlying animus and root cause of the Zionist aggression and occupation, and since the “facts on the ground” prove the cross-pollination between this degradation and the secular Zionist aims, including the irrefutably slow-genocidal Zionist military policies, scrutiny and criticism of this racist supremacist filth is not a matter of fringe theology, but a vital matter of totalitarian politics.

Now, where is their outrage against such blatant Jewish racism and supremacy and terrifying nihilistic ideology? Don’t they claim to be against racism wherever it comes from? Why don’t they have the guts to condemn and campaign against such racism?

Is it not ludicrous to hear them condemn instead, those who expose and vehemently oppose such racism?

Without using any commonsense they jump into the ADL bandwagon and rub shoulders with Zionists!

If someone obstinately objects to the massive control and unwelcome influence and the robbing of others rights and property, under the pretext of divine entitlement, does that person become the unreasonable “bigot” !

What kind of skewed logic is that?

This inconsistency is incomprehensible to me.

Why are they entitled to classify people and to dictate to people what they should read and what they should avoid?

Why this condescending attitude that appears to be claiming to know what is best for people and selecting their intellectual diet for them?

Why deprive people of the right to read a wide range of opinions, including my own writing, and allow them to make up their analysis, and conclusions without manipulation, repression or restraint?

In my writing I vehemently criticize racist Jewish ideology, but I never accuse all Jews of being racist, never put them -or anyone else for that matter, in one basket. Ever.

In my writing I quoted the poll that 95% of USA Jewry support Israel as a Jewish state and 90% of British Jewry believe that Israel is the ‘ancestral homeland’ of the Jewish people, and concluded that most world Jewry are supportive of the theft of Palestine.

Truth is that the majority of world Jewry insist that Jews have a right and claim to the land. Including some of our Jewish “anti-Zionist” friends under whatever pretext. Their claims are not acceptable and unjustifiable!

I have pointed out the influence of organized Jewish networks, such information is available for any serious researcher, it can be easily verified, yes it is troublesome to find such a tiny group extremely overrepresented in so many vital areas of public affairs, such as finance, media, security and policy making, more so when the interests of such a group are in conspicuous conflict with the interest of the larger group, and when this minority supports a genocidal entity that has not evolved in six decades.

Over-representation is as unfair as under-representation, and if anti-racists take it upon themselves to defend the rights of the under-represented minorities, it is of equal importance to do the same with over-representation.

Perhaps such questions of over-representation might have not surfaced had the behavior of those in question been shrouded with morality and humanity. Had they been working to establish social justice, building homes, schools and hospitals instead of destroying and polluting the planet for generations to come, and instead of law of the jungle where the super-rich eat the poor to the last bone, had they chosen cooperation instead never-ending conflict, and promoted peace and justice instead of fomenting perpetual wars.

No one should be slandered for observing and objecting to such blatant mockery of morality, equality and justice.

I do not need to focus on Christian Zionists because their ideology is almost entirely sourced from the Old-Testament which is none other than the Jewish Torah! Most authentic Christians consider the Christian Zionists as worshipers of “Israel” and of the “Jewish people” rather than God, and in that sense they share the same ideology as Jewish-Zionist supremacists, in terms of their reverence and idolization of the Jewish people as the “Chosen”, they are one and the same. Furthermore, those who occupy my land, those who drove me out of my homeland, and those who are still depriving me from going home are the Jewish Zionists.

I criticize the deafening silence of anti-Zionist Jews with regard to the racism that thrives amidst many Jewish communities. A silence which I believe will backfire one day, as they would be seen as not only complaisant but also complacent by deflecting away and concealing horrendous truths.

My criticism is motivated by concern and genuine care for good Jewish individuals that I have known and those whom I don’t know, because of what I perceive as the danger that would befall all of them if they continue to ignore the supremacist ideology, the growing influence of the adherents of this ideology and if they continue to ignore all the warning signs that point to accumulating bottled rage against such villainy, which no doubt would one day manifest itself violently as an inevitable backlash to much unsaid, yet felt, oppression and unspoken, but lived, subjugation.

I find it rather pathetic that the only defense mechanism that the accusers come up with is the smear, slander and the accusation of being a “racist” against anyone who pokes the boil exposing the pus infesting inside one of the most vile racist and supremacist ideologies thriving at the heart of some Jewish teachings as per Mishna Torah, Zohar, Tanya, and Talmud. By insisting on dismissing Jewish supremacy and Jewish-Zionist networks they only promote the most cruel and degenerative racism to be found on the planet by means of concealment and shifting attention away from the real racism that I vehemently fight and deplore.

The persons who resort to accusation, suppression, character assassination and smear campaigns very cunningly and dishonestly omit to mention that those who expose and condemn the racist concepts of “chosen-ness”, “exceptionality”, “superior morality”, “superior intelligence”, and “Jewish entitlement of world leadership” do not invent these concepts. It is not racist to expose or quote such abomination, it is not a crime to bring such Jewish-claims to the public awareness. Any honest criticism should be directed against those who believe such filth and make such revolting claims.

To those individuals who take part in such ADL style smear campaigns of accusation of racism, I say:

I accuse you of acting as a smoke screen to cover up real racism as manifested by Jewish supremacists

I accuse you of acting as protectors and gatekeepers of the global Jewish Zionist networks and lobby groups by denying their existence and effectiveness.

I accuse you of complicity by insisting to conceal planned crimes against humanity as manifested in the supremacist nihilistic Chabad ideology.

Any Solidarity Movement with Palestine should take the opinions, the interests, and the future well being of Palestinians at heart, otherwise, it speaks only for itself, not for Palestinians.

Palestinians have the right to fight for the full liberation of their country, those who are willing to march with us all the way are welcome, those who are not, may look for other more convenient and less controversial campaigns to support.

I denounce any person or group who pretends to speak in my name as a Palestinian, yet behind closed doors, they plot and whisper about how to mute Palestinian voices and curtail the spread and impact of daring Palestinian opinions.

I denounce any person or group who claims to work for Palestine, yet their actions are contrary to the legitimate interest and aspirations of Palestinian people. Allowing themselves to be used as a vehicle to secure the future of the Jewish-Zionist invaders by facilitating the permanent takeover of Palestine with the pretext of “two peoples, one future” blather or “equal rights to both sides” nonsense.

I denounce any person or group who turns a blind eye and reacts with a deafening silence to the unimaginable repulsive racism that oozes from some Jewish supremacist groups, yet instead, hysterically and shamelessly react to someone who accidentally came to discover such horrors.

Finally, I fully trust the Palestine solidarity movement to have the intellectual integrity and capacity to see through the fog of manipulation, and to have the assertiveness, the respect for their own intellect and enough open-mindedness to look at many sources of information, and that they have the courage to read for themselves and evaluate what they read independently, without having some gurus spoon-feeding them with filtered, processed, misrepresented or manipulated information.

~

auteur_1643Nahida Izzat is a Jerusalem-born Palestinian refugee who has lived in exile for over forty five years, after being forced to leave her homeland at the tender age of seven in 1967, during the six-day war. She has a degree in mathematics, but art is one of her favorite pastimes. She loves hand-made things and so makes dolls, cards, and most of her own clothing. She also writes poetry, participates in written dialogues and believes in building bridges, not walls.

Traitors In Britain’s Leadership

Traitors In Britain’s Leadership

EDITOR’S CHOICE | 18.01.2017

Traitors In Britain’s Leadership

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

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

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

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

8 January 2017, Al Jazeera Investigative Unit

Israel apology after plot against UK politicians

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A PROPOSAL TO BRING ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE “INSULATED CEO”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It’s dangerous to democracy in any country.

countercurrents.org

Netanyahu openly boasts of israel’s war on Africans

Netanyahu openly boasts of Israel’s war on Africans

Close-up of Netanyahu with Israeli flag behind him
Benjamin Netanyahu remains Israel’s racist ringleader-in-chief.

Jonathan Ernst Reuters

Donald Trump’s election as US president has given closeted racists the license they have long sought to openly advocate against Muslims, refugees and people of color.

As progressive Americans strategize on how to defend victims of bigotry, they would be wise to take stock of how Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is already carrying out ethnic cleansing similar to that which Trump has promised to implement.

Two incidents bookending the year capture the zeitgeist of Israel’s war on African refugees in 2016. In January, an African refugee family, whose 1-year-old baby, Kako, had been stabbed in the head, departed Israel after the Netanyahu government refused to help them defer the child’s medical bills.

And in December, the Israeli police station responsible for south Tel Aviv honored May Golan, a leader of anti-African incitement campaigns that, for all intents and purposes, encourage attacks such as the one on baby Kako.

For the past five years, I have been compiling annual lists of the ringleaders in Israel’s war on Africans. My list for 2016 incorporates almost every branch of the Israeli state.

10. Moshe Kaspi, university dean

In February, the dean of an Israeli university gave his students an exam that contained a question which implicitly compared African refugees to rats.

In the test authored and administered by Moshe Kaspi, a dean at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, engineering students were asked to calculate the cost of removing rodents from the Tel Aviv area, transferring them to a holding center in the south of the country, and then shipping them to Africa, where they would be experimented on.

Man walks in between barracks and barbed wire fencing
An African asylum seeker walks inside the Holot detention center in southern Israel on 6 February 2016.

Oren Ziv ActiveStills

While the exercise did not explicitly mention African refugees, the analogy would have been obvious to many students, since the scenario it posits closely parallels political developments in Israel. For the last three years, the Israeli government has been rounding up African refugees in the Tel Aviv area and transferring them to a detention center in the south of the country. Following their detention, many of the refugees have been expelled to Africa, just like the rats in Kaspi’s test.

After one woman accused him of racism, Kaspi apologized for the question, claiming that he had intended “to insert an aspect of humor into the exam.”

The incident did not seem to significantly tarnish the reputation of Ben-Gurion University. A few months months later, the college received a $400 million gift, the largest college endowment in Israel’s history.

9. Israel Ziv, security consultant

Israel Ziv’s prior career as an officer in the Israeli military ended just before African refugees began arriving to the country in large numbers a decade ago. But since that time, Ziv has parlayed his army career into a successful business in the private sector with the security consulting firm Global CST.

In that capacity, Ziv has provided services to Salva Kiir Mayardit, president of South Sudan. Kiir is responsible for horrific crimes against his own citizens.

After a long career in the Israeli military, Israel Ziv now heads the security consulting firm Global CST. (Flickr)

Earlier this month, an Israel Channel 2 video report revealed that Ziv had advised Kiir in an effort to rehabilitate his international reputation. Kiir has come into disrepute for allowing his soldiers to rape women and young girls, in lieu of salary payment, and to castrate and kill young boys.

Israel is a significant supplier of weapons to South Sudan.

According to the Channel 2 report, Ziv hired Ron Prosor, a former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, as part of his work. One idea considered was that Kiir would make a speech at the UN, flanked by a woman who had been raped by soldiers from South Sudan.

Is it inherently racist of Ziv to want to profit from whitewashing a criminal despot like Kiir? Or did Ziv only take advantage of a global white supremacist system where Black lives matter so little that their mass rapes and castrations can be covered up, guilt free?

Either way, Ziv’s conduct was deplorable.

8. Eliyahu Asulin, rabbi

Hatred for African refugees extends even to their children.

In May, the spouses of foreign ambassadors serving in Israel volunteered to help clean up the outdoor play area of a Tel Aviv nursery for African children. Their aid had become necessary because Israelis had defiled the playground with dead animals, garbage and feces.

Refugee children playing in public parks are regularly harassed. In addition to cursing the kids, their harassers make a show of distributing condoms to African refugees, apparently thinking this is a clever way of saying Africans should not bear children, as long as they live in Israel.

But while ordinary Israeli citizens are trying to shame Africans into foregoing their reproductive rights, leading religious figures have been actually harming the reproductive organs of newborn babies.

In November, it emerged that Israeli circumcisers allow trainees without the necessary experience to practice their cutting techniques on the genitals of black and brown babies.

An exposé by Israel’s new public broadcaster Kan revealed that – for an $11,000 fee – Eliyahu Asulin, a popular rabbi, would allow novices who had not completed their professionally mandated studies to perform circumcisions in his stead on infants from African and Asian families.

Unaware that an undercover journalist was filming him, Asulin urged his new “apprentice” to carry out a circumcision ritual on the son of a Filipino woman. The baby’s mother had been misled as she had only consented to a circumcision undertaken by a professional.

In the video, Asulin describes African babies as “cannon fodder.” He says: “Even if your cut isn’t straight, they won’t say anything, because they don’t understand anything.”

After Asulin’s misconduct was publicly exposed, Israel’s chief rabbinate punished him lightly. Asulin was forbidden from training others for three years, but was still permitted to practice circumcision himself.

7. The Petah Tikva killers

In November, 38-year-old Sudanese asylum-seeker Babikir Adham-Uvdo was beaten to death by two Israeli youths outside of the city hall in Petah Tikva, a town near Tel Aviv. Security camera footage of the incident revealed that the youths beat Adham-Uvdo for more than an hour. He was brought to hospital but never recovered, and was disconnected from life-support systems days later.

Although the killing bore similarities to other attacks on Africans, an article in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz stated that “people close” to a suspect in the killing believed it was not a racist incident. Relying on those sources, Haaretz suggested that Adham-Uvdo may have been killed because he “made insulting comments to girls.”

Adham-Uvdo was seen walking and then stopping in front of three 16-year-old girls. The girls shouted at him to leave, and within seconds of first encountering them, Adham-Uvdo raised his hands and walked away.

The 16-year-old boy then attacked Adham-Uvdo from behind; another youth soon joined in, kicking Adham-Uvdo as he lay on the ground.

The video footage also shows that paramedics arrived on the scene midway through the beating. In the video, they are seen tending to Adham-Uvdo but, after a short while, leave him to fend for himself, seemingly satisfied that he no longer requires their aid. Within seconds of their departure, the two young men return and continue the beating.

Two persons have been charged in relation to the incident: one is Dennis Barshivatz, a Petah Tikva local, now aged 20; the other is a 16-year-old, whose name has not been published. An Israeli prosecutor has decided to charge the two with manslaughter, rather than murder.

Some observers noted the parallels between the deaths of Adham-Uvdo and Emmett Till. Till was an African-American teenager who was murdered in Mississippi, beaten until he was unrecognizable, ostensibly for flirting with a white woman.

Till’s killing occurred in 1955, a year after the US Supreme Court declared segregated schools to be unconstitutional. Yet in Israel, segregation remains widespread.

Just three months ago, an Israeli court was told that the Petah Tikvah municipality had hindered African refugees from registering their children for pre-schools in town.

Since the killing of Adham-Uvdo, dozens of African refugees have been arrested in Petah Tikva. The local mayor, Yitzhak Braverman, has approved the arrests.

6. Tal Schwartz, judge

Babikir Adham-Uvdo was the latest, but not the first, African refugee to be lynched in Israel. In October 2015, after a gunman shot and killed an Israeli soldier and wounded about 10 other bystanders in the central bus station complex in Bir al-Saba (Beersheba), a mob of Israelis attacked 29-year-old Eritrean refugee Haftom Zarhum.

Those who took part in the killing included Israeli soldiers, police officers and a prison warden.

People gather around lit candles, some formed into the shape of a cross
Eritreans mourn in south Tel Aviv in 2015 during a memorial ceremony for Haftom Zarhum, who was shot and beaten to death at a bus station in southern Israel after he was mistaken for an assailant in an attack that left an Israeli soldier dead.

Oren Ziv ActiveStills

In June this year, an Israeli tribunal ruled that prison warden Hananiya Shabbat would not be charged for beating Zarhum with a bench.

Rather than reprimanding Shabbat, Tal Schwartz, a judge in the tribunal, complimented him. Schwartz stated that Shabbat had “acted in a way that is expected of a prison guard, that which is needed to contribute to the positive image of the prison service.”

5. Zion Amir, lawyer

Zion Amir is a lawyer who has defended the rapist and former president of Israel Moshe Katsav.

Amir has represented some of the Israelis accused of firebombing a Palestinian family in the occupied West Bank. Ali Dawabsha, an 18-month-old baby, and his parents were fatally injured in that attack.

So it should come as no surprise that Amir is also defending some of the Israelis charged with the lynching of Eritrean refugee Haftom Zarhum.

In March, Aryeh Deri, Israel’s interior minister, announced that he would appoint Amir to head the government’s advisory panel on refugees.

After Amir had been on the job for four months, Haaretz reported that not even one asylum request had been approved. In that time, more than 1,000 asylum requests were rejected.

4. Roni Alsheikh, police chief

In the year he has occupied the post, Roni Alsheikh, head of Israel’s police, has advanced the idea that African refugees are inherently criminal, giving his officers a green light to attack them.

In August, Alsheikh made his anti-African bias explicit when he told a conference of the Israeli Bar Association: “In all criminological studies worldwide, it has been proven that immigrants are more involved in crime than others.”

Alsheikh’s comments drew strong criticism from Israeli citizens of Ethiopian descent. “With one sentence, the police chief has summarized and confirmed all of our complaints [about police racism],” Ethiopian-Israeli activist Inbar Bugala said, according to Haaretz.

Four uniformed Israeli police officers
Roni Alsheikh, second from right, during a military ceremony near Tel Aviv in February 2016.

Oren Ziv ActiveStills

Israeli police seem to be especially bothered by communities of color finding common cause in the struggle against Israeli racism.

When Haftom Zarhum was killed by a mob of Israelis in 2015, Bugala wrote on Facebook that a racist lynching had occurred. “Black people have become terrorists – there was no mistaken identification,” she wrote.

Minutes after posting the message, the Israeli police contacted Bugala and demanded that she delete it. The post disappeared from her Facebook page, and though she re-posted it several times, it was taken down after each instance.

3. David Amsalem, lawmaker

While some Israeli officials discriminate against all Africans in equal measure, others advocate opposing policies for Black people, depending on whether the people in question are Jews. Such is the case with David Amsalem, a rookie lawmaker from Likud, the largest party in Israel’s ruling coalition.

Amsalem labors to bring Black Jews to Israel, while working simultaneously to expel Africans who are not Jewish.

In March, when Israeli officials reversed a 2015 decision to facilitate the immigration of 9,000 Falashmura, the extended family members of Ethiopian-Israelis still living in Ethiopia, Amsalem accused the government of racism. “They don’t want to bring Black people to the country from a troubled place,” he said.

In protest, Amsalem refused to vote in favor of government-sponsored legislation, until the Falashmura were allowed to immigrate. The government eventually allowed some Ethiopians to enter Israel. But as punishment for disobeying party discipline, Amsalem was temporarily blocked from proposing laws or speaking in Israel’s parliament, the Knesset.

As chair of the Knesset’s interior and environment committee, however, Amsalem worked to make the already precarious lives of non-Jewish African refugees much more difficult. In November, Amsalem secured committee approval for an amendment to Israel’s Anti-Infiltration Law which would automatically deposit part of the wages paid to African refugee workers in a fund. The refugees would only be able to access the money taken from them when they leave Israel for good.

Refugee advocacy groups have warned Amsalem that the move would further impoverish African refugees, potentially triggering a humanitarian crisis. In a complaint, the groups wrote: “Asylum seekers are liable to find themselves on the streets, children will go hungry, women may turn to prostitution and more.”

Amsalem casually dismissed these appeals, asserting that Africans should be able to survive on their reduced salaries.

2. Aryeh Deri, interior minister

Aryeh Deri speaks at a podium
Aryeh Deri (Sapir College/Wikimedia Commons)

Ever since Benjamin Netanyahu’s re-election as prime minister in 2009, the post of interior minister has been filled by a steady stream of unabashed racists.

Aryeh Deri, the current incumbent, returned to politics in 2012 after a 13-year absence, two of which were spent in prison for corruption. He has developed a reputation for defending Israel’s downtrodden.

Deri’s compassion does not extend to Africans, however. In his first year on the job as interior minister, a post he also held before his downfall, Deri has campaigned with as much enthusiasm as his predecessors to expel African refugees.

In March, Deri told the Knesset’s interior and environment committee that if Israel’s high court won’t permit him to deport African refugees against their will, he would order the construction of an additional facility to imprison them. Since 2013, Israel has held 10,000 African refugees in Holot, a desert detention center.

In April, Deri’s ministry launched an advertising campaign warning Israeli citizens not to hire non-Jewish African refugees, even though a high court ruling allows them to work in Israel.

A week later, the ministry clarified that it would not issue temporary residency visas to the teenage children of African refugees. African teens need these documents because they can be easily mistaken for adults and detained by immigration police who patrol Israel’s cities.

After a migrant rights lawyer appealed against the policy in court, Deri agreed in principle to issue visas for African teens. The lawyer who challenged the policy, Osnat Cohen-Lifshitz, has predicted that it may take a long time before Deri’s agreement is implemented.

In September, a Jerusalem tribunal ruled that fleeing forced service in the Eritrean army can be grounds for refugee status. Determined to deport all Eritreans, who constitute a majority of the African refugees in Israel, Deri protested that the tribunal’s decision would cause “endless trouble” and ordered an immediate appeal.

1. Benjamin Netanyahu, prime minister

In 2016, Benjamin Netanyahu held five separate cabinet portfolios, as well as the prime minister’s post. He used the powers at his disposal to deport thousands of African refugees. Without question, the worst of these were the powers Netanyahu continues to wield as Israel’s foreign minister.

When the first wave of refugees from war-torn Darfur started to arrive in Israel 10 years ago, the government argued that they couldn’t be trusted to live in the country because they were from Sudan, a country that does not have diplomatic relations with Israel.

This argument has never made sense, as Darfuri refugees first fled to Israel precisely because they and their families were victims of the Sudanese regime, not supporters of it.

Paradoxically, in September, it emerged that Israel’s foreign ministry has been quietly lobbying the US to forge closer ties with Sudan.

Israel reportedly favored this move because Omar al-Bashir’s government had distanced itself from Iran.

Just two weeks after Netanyahu’s shilling for al-Bashir made news headlines, Amnesty International revealed that the Sudanese leader’s long list of war crimes now also includes the use of chemical weapons in Darfur.

In the past three years, Netanyahu’s government has spent $260 million to round up African refugees and bring them to desert detention centers. Israel has the gall to categorize this massive expenditure as “foreign aid.”

In late September, Netanyahu marked the Jewish new year of Rosh Hashanah with a self-congratulatory address to members of Likud, summarizing his supposed successes from the previous 12 months. Netanyahu boasted of his efforts to deport African refugees.

“Sixty thousand illegals entered,” he said. “Until today we have already removed 20,000, and we will remove another 20,000. We’ll remove all the illegal aliens because they are illegal, even the ones in southern Tel Aviv.”

Netanyahu has made similar boasts in the past. But what set 2016 apart from previous years was his new willingness to not only point out his anti-African policies to Israelis in Hebrew, but also to proudly announce them in English.

Apparently confident that his efforts would be admired abroad, Netanyahu tweeted in March: “A strong Israel prevents the passage of masses of refugees to Europe. The world would be different if we were not here.”

In a year-end opinion piece, the editorial board of Haaretz stated that Netanyahu “should be ashamed,” adding, “Israel can and must accept the 40,000 Africans living here today, along with the 6,000 children who were born here.”

For the eight years that the United States was led by a president of African descent, Netanyahu felt no need to rein in Israel’s war on Africans. Now that Donald Trump, the darling of white supremacists, has been elected to the Oval Office, we can only expect Netanyahu to ramp it up into an even higher gear.

David Sheen is an independent writer and filmmaker

israel’s army appoints rabid Rabbi who said raping Palestinian women was permitted

Israel Appoints Eyal Karim as the Israeli Army Chief Rabbi in Spite of His Response to Allow Soldiers Raping Palestinian Women

American Herald Tribune | December 5, 2016

Brig. Gen. Eyal Karim officially took his position as chief rabbi of the IDF Thursday evening after a change of command ceremony at the IDF headquarters in Tel Aviv attended by Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot.

During the ceremony, the chief of staff said, “The appointment of chief rabbi of the IDF is an extremely significant event in the army. Unfortunately, the ceremony took place a week late,” added Eisenkot. “I was convinced months ago that we are choosing Rabbi Eyal Karim for the job. He is the most fitting and appropriate choice for command and rabbinic authority in the IDF. I had no doubts.”

Following his official promotion, Karim spoke at length, saying, “During this journey of thousands of years, Israel drew its strength and spirit from the Torah—all its laws, values and morality. These are the foundation stones of the Jewish people. David Ben-Gurion, who asked Rabbi Goren to be chief rabbi, understood that the army has to address a wide range of people without creating a split in the army. He understood that there had to be a way for all soldiers to have a fulfilling service in the IDF together.”

Comments Karim made in 2003 when he was a civilian resurfaced after his appointment. In a column called “Ask the Rabbi” at Kipa.co.il, a popular Hebrew-language website catering to religious Jews, Karim responded to a number of anonymous letters inquiring about specificities of Jewish religious law, including a question about rape in times of war.

“Is it allowed nowadays for an IDF [Israeli army] soldier, for example, to rape girls during battle, or is such a thing forbidden?” Karim was asked. He answered: “Even though fraternizing with a gentile woman is a very serious matter, it was permitted during wartime … the Torah permitted the individual to satisfy the evil urge.”

Karim’s comments first attracted notice in 2012, when dissident Israeli journalist Yossi Gurvitz first published them in English at +972 Magazine. Gurvitz says that when he asked the military to comment on Karim’s statements, he was rebuked by an army spokesperson and told that his query “disrespects the IDF, the State of Israel and the Jewish religion.”

The Journalist, David Shenn, noted recently that “the army is hardly the only sector of Israeli society from which sexual assaults emanate. But rape culture in the military is especially disconcerting, as its soldiers have access to deadly weapons and the license to use them. And now its chief rabbi is a man who once gave Jewish soldiers sanction to rape Palestinian women until he was shamed into retracting it.”

Karim’s defenders insist that his comments on rape were misunderstood and that he couldn’t possibly have permitted sexual assaults against Palestinian women. But threats of rape have been wielded by Israeli occupation forces against Palestinians.

Strange just how much israel loves far right European politicians, in theory it should be the opposite

AUSTRIA – ‘Far right’Hofer would have been better for Israel, says Jewish FPO member

I-24 NEWS – Hofer as Austria’s president would have produced a better result for Israel, a Jewish member of the Freedom Party (FPOe) told i24news Sunday.

“I think Hofer would be the best president for Israel because he knows everything happening in Israel,” David Lasar said after the election results came in.

Hofer, swiftly conceded defeat after polls closed with tallies giving his opponent- independent ecologist Alexander Van der Bellen- 53.3 percent of the vote over Hofer’s 46.7 percent.

According to Lasar, Hofer last visited Israel in 2014, during the 50-day summer war with Hamas in the Gaza Strip. “The last time he was there, there were the rockets from Gaza to Sderot and also to Tel Aviv, so he sees the problems,” Lasar said.

SURPRISE, SURPRISE–Dutch Secret Service Investigating Geert Wilder’s Ties to Israel

f8274-geertwilderspamelagellder_atlasshrugs200_typepad_com
The reason for the probe, local daily says, was concern that Geert Wilders is ‘influenced by Israeli factors.’ Wilders’ anti-Muslim Party of Freedom is likely to be a leading member of the next government.

ed note–in other words, he is suspected of being an asset for Israeli intelligence and particularly in his role as a propagator of the same anti-Islamic hysteria that Israel needs in order to foment and fuel her ‘clash of civilizations’ designed not only to destroy the Middle East, but the Christian West as well.

Keep in mind as well that within ‘white nationalist’ circles, Geert is cheered as a hero by those who are too stupid to see how their disaffections and discontent have been harnessed by the very same Judaic forces which they claim to be against and who absolutely LOVE Wilders and the nasty things he has to say about ‘Muzzies’ taking over ‘white Europe’. 

Haaretz

Geert Wilders, leader of Holland’s far-right anti-Muslim Party of Freedom, was investigated in the past by the country’s General Intelligence and Security Service (AVID) over his “ties to Israel and their possible influence on his loyalty.”

Image result

Wilders, whose party is leading the polls ahead of the upcoming election in March, is likely to be a key figure in the next government.

The undercover investigation was exposed over the weekend by the veteran daily De Volkskrant. According to the article, AVID agents conducted the investigation from 2009 to 2010, with its existence and results remaining unknown until now. The Dutch central intelligence organization is in charge of safeguarding internal national security, handling non-military dangers to the country and preventing espionage.

Image result

An investigation of this kind into an active politician is an exceptional occurrence in Holland, the newspaper noted. If conducted, it is only in cases in which there are very reasonable grounds for suspicion. Wilders was a member of parliament at the time, with his party supporting the right-center coalition government from the outside and enabling it to remain in power.

Image result

The reason for the investigation, according to the newspaper, was concern in the Dutch security service about “the possibility that Geert Wilders is influenced by Israeli factors,” with whom he had close ties. He visited Israel at the end of 2008, meeting with “Gen. Amos Gilad in his office in the main military headquarters in Tel Aviv, and regularly attended meetings with Israel’s ambassador to Holland at the time,” according to De Volkskrant.

Image result

The reporters discovered the story during the course of a comprehensive investigation into the tight security protection that the country provided to the leader of the far right. For the purpose of that article they interviewed 37 civil servants, former secret agents, security guards etc.

Both the security services and Wilders declined to comment on the report.

Can Jews ever leave their Cult?

By Gilad Atzmon

Baruch Spinoza left the Jews. Heinrich Heine became a Christian. A few others, such as Israel Shamir and myself, a decade ago, simply drifted away.

Recently, Israeli historian Shlomo Sand announced that he too was no longer a Jew. I read his manuscript in Hebrew with great interest but soon realized that while he indeed stopped identifying as a Jew, he still hadn’t removed himself from kosher binaries.

“I don’t write for anti-Semites, I regard them as totally ignorant or people who suffer from an incurable disease,” (How I Ceased To Be A Jew  p’ 21). Lines like these, echoing as they do the language of the ADL, made me feel very uncomfortable and, when it came to the Holocaust, Sand, who is usually so astute and profound, somehow managed to lose it. The Nazis are  “beasts”, and their rise to power metaphorically he described as a “beast awakening from its lair.”  Despite my respect for Sand, I would expect a leading, inspirational  historian and a former-Jew to have moved beyond such banal  Hasbara-recycled clichés.

This week, in the Jewish progressive magazine Mondoweiss, Avigail Abarbanel, an ex-Israeli and anti- Zionist informed us that she too has now ‘left the cult,’. I agreed with most of Abarbanel’s arguments against Israel and Zionism but I was nonetheless alarmed at the intellectual dishonesty at the core of her argument.

“Rarely can people inside a cult see where they are. If they could, the cult wouldn’t be what it is” Abarbanel points out. “They think that they are members of a special group that has a special destiny, and is always under threat.

Thus does Abarbanel describe the Israelis, yet she fails to mention that this is also an accurate description of the Jewish left in general and the Mondoweiss/JVP cults in particular, to which she herself belongs. As we now know, just as Israel claims for itself a special place amongst the states of the world, so do the anti-Zionist Jews who, when it comes to Anti Israeli politics, operate within Jewish, racially exclusive political cells (JVP, IJAN etc.). So, if Abarbanel thinks that Israelis are at fault for being a ‘special group’ perhaps she should inform us what is the criterion that legitimates JVP and Mondoweiss being a special group within the solidarity movement?

Abarbanel continues: “cult members are taught from birth that the world outside is dangerous, that they have to huddle together for safety.” This is indeed a good description of Israeli collective psychosis, but it is also a prefect portrayal of Mondoweiss’ operational mode and it  puts Mondoweiss’ campaign against Alison Weir and Greta Berlin in perfect context. It also explains why Mondoweiss banned Jeffrey Blankfort and why the Jewish outlet changed its comment policy just to make sure that it can block any attempt to criticise the Jewish state in the light of Jewish culture and my own study of Jewish tribalism. Just like Israel, Mondoweiss is terrified of the ‘dangerous worl d out there’. As far as Abarbanel’s definition of cult is concerned, Mondoweiss, JVP and Israel are actually identical.

Abarbanel is obsessed with the holocaust and this is hardly surprising. The Holocaust is currently the most popular Jewish religion.  The Israeli prominent philosopher Yeshayahu Leibowitz observed in the 1970s that Jews believe in many different things but all Jews believe in the Holocaust.

“Have I forgotten the holocaust? No. Of course not,” Abarbanel writes. “Persecution of Jewish people throughout history was very real indeed.”

And if you expect Abarbanel, a psychotherapist by profession, to question why is it that Jews have been ‘hated throughout history,’ you’re probably wasting your time. In Abarbanel’s universe, the persecution of the Jews is a metaphysical constant. It is beyond questioning.

In her view, Jews are victims and the Goyim are oppressors.

“Jews were a hated and despised group among many cultures in Europe, and Jews have always had an uneasy co-existence with non-Jews. Any marginalised or persecuted group has an uneasy relationship with the dominant culture. Once you have been discriminated against it’s hard to trust.”

So again, despite ‘leaving the cult,’ Abarbanel’s take on the holocaust is well within that same Hasbara cult she claims to have left.

Actually, one would expect a psychotherapist to advise the Jews to look in the mirror and actually identify what is it about them that invokes so much animosity in so many different times and in so many different places. This is something Bernard Lazare, an early Zionist did just over a century ago when he identified what it was in the Jews that has made Jewish history into such a disastrous continuum. Sadly, Abarbanel falls far short of this task. Unable or unwilling to examine what is it in the Jew or in Jewishness that invokes animosity, for her, this is one step too far because to look into that question may suggest that Israel is not the problem, it is but a symptom of the problem.

In Abarbanel’s universe, the Jews are always the victims and all they have to do is to separate their victimhood from their identity. This is strange since if victimhood is embedded in Jewish existence, then surely it must also be inherent in Jewish identity. My guess is that the day Jews manage to distinguish between their victimhood and their identity will be the day they simply stop being Jews.

st

Jewish Bigotry on Speed? Just Check Out Rabbi Jonathan Sacks

September 30, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

by Gilad Atzmon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERuWj1qrYNo

Last week, Britain’s veteran chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks lectured to the European Parliament on antisemitism. The rabbi’s mission was to define antisemitism, but instead he just demonstrated some of the most problematic symptoms of Jewish supremacy, tribal arrogance and even crude Goy-hatred. Unwittingly, the rabbi didn’t make the Jews look too good.

“The hate that begins with Jews doesn’t end with Jews.” was the Rabbi’s starting point. Here, I tend to agree with the rabbi. The rabbi probably knows a lot about hate. Hate can so easily backfire. Hate is dangerous territory. Hate spreads fast. The Zionist project, initially driven by moderate animosity towards the Palestinians, quickly evolved into hate towards Arabs, then Islam, then Black migrant communities and eventually to Goyim in general.  The Jewish anti-Zionist Left follows the exact same pattern. They are now hating the ’White’ and the ‘redneck.’ All in all, it’s pretty clear that the rabbi’s presentation is mere projection – he simply attributes Jewish cultural symptoms onto the Goyim.

It didn’t take long for the rabbi to manifest his supremacist inclinations. “Antisemitism is not about Jews, antisemitism is about antisemites.” and if you really want to know who the antisemites are, the rabbi was quick to provide the answer. It is the failures and the losers in society. Antisemites are the“people who can’t accept their own failure and instead have to blame someone else (the Jews).” 

Yes, you’ve got it. For Rabbi Sacks, those who dare to criticise Jewish power and Israeli criminality are just a bunch of frustrated losers driven by jealousy. But here I can perhaps help the rabbi. Such an outrageously chauvinist statement is itself uniquely arrogant and dangerous and is not going to help the Jews defeat antisemites. On the contrary, it provides Jew haters with a rationale.

 “Antisemitism is symptom of a disease” the rabbi continues.  So basically, if you feel any  indignation whatsoever towards the rabbi’s disgusting remarks above, it means only that you are ill as well as being a ‘failure’ and ‘envious’. You’d better seek help.

But what is antisemitism? The rabbi answers. “Antisemitism means denying the right of Jews to exist collectively as Jews with the same rights as everyone else.” Well, in the world in which we live, no one denies Jews the right to exist or to enjoy every universal right. Trouble is, more and more people are repulsed by the Jewish State (for instance) celebrating its so called ‘rights’ at the expense of others.

And how exactly does the rabbi support the idea that antisemitism is on the rise?  Simple,  he points on an increase in Jewish anxiety. (Note how Jews constantly demand more and more police presence around their cultural and spiritual centres.)  But here is a problem. Analysing Jewish anxiety in Freudian terms may suggest that Jews may be fearful because they feel guilty. Jews understand very well that Zionist wars, Israeli criminality and the forceful Jewish lobby bear responsibility for many of our current humanitarian disasters. Is it possible, for instance,  that the rabbi is, likewise,  fearful of the ‘Goyim’ because he calls them failures and losers?

The rabbi detects a progress in the antisemitic discourse, “In the past antisemitism could be explored through religion (Christianity), then science (race), now it is human rights, ethnic cleansing and attempted genocide,”  and the Rabbi concludes that “anti Zionism is the anti Semitism of our time.” 

The rabbi is wrong: ethically, methodically and historically. Ethically, because if Israel attempts genocide and engages in ethnic cleansing then we, the rest of humanity, must and often do, oppose it.  But the rabbi is also mistaken methodically and historically because the opposition to Jewry extends far beyond Israeli criminality. It is really an ongoing battle against a choseness that fuels dissentto Jewish culture and spirit. This opposition is not new, it is, in fact, as old as the Jews and has been explored by the Hebrew prophets, by Christ, by Marx and even by early Zionists who were repulsed by the attitude of their brethren’s chauvinism. The opposition to choseness is driven by a humanist and universal intent. But if Christ, Marx and the Zionist Boruchov were entitled to criticiseJewish exceptionalism, shouldn’t the rest of humanity enjoy the same elementary right? Or maybe the rabbi thinks that criticism of Jewish culture and politics should be remain a Jews’-only territory?

Lying can be an act of courage but it takes a whole lot of courage for a celebrity rabbi to boldly spin the entire European Parliament.  “When bad things happen to a group,” the rabbi says, “its members can ask one of two different questions: 1, what did we do wrong 2, who did this to us?” This sounds like a beginning of a monumental Jewish confession on the rabbi’s part.  “Self criticism is essential for a free society. If a society asks who did this to us it defines itself as a victim and seek a scapegoat.”

Don’t hold your breath. This is not Jewish remorse. Rabbi Sacks, once again, projects his own symptoms onto the Goyim. It is in fact the Jews (Rabbi Sacks included) who never ask themselves‘what did we do wrong?’ It is the Jews who never self-reflect and try to identify what it is in their culture that invokes so much animosity in others. It is the Jews who block any attempt to verify, once and for all, why their history is an endless chain of holocausts with just a few tea breaks. The only Jews who ever attempted to address these crucial questions in the modern era were the early Zionists, people like Bernard Lazare, Borochov, A.D Gordon and just a few others and, as we know, their kind of Zionism wasn’t at all popular amongst the Jews at the time.

The rabbi warns the European Parliaments that if Jews leave Europe, liberty will come to an end. But reality suggests the complete opposite. No one asks Jews to leave Europe – it is actually Jewish institutions that prevent Europeans from thinking freely let alone revise their memory of their past. I suggest that rather than preaching to Europeans about the importance of Jews and Jerusalem, Rabbi Sack should take some time off from Jerusalem to study Athens.

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: