For Goy Hatred on Speed Please Subscribe to the Forward

August 24, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

The Jewish Forward calls Trump’s supporters a bunch of bullies and  losers

The Jewish Forward calls Trump’s supporters a bunch of bullies and  losers

By Gilad Atzmon

If you want to grasp the level of contempt American ‘progressive’ Jews hold towards their host nation all you have to do is subscribe to the Forward.

Jay Michaelson, a contributing editor for the kosher outlet, proclaims that Donald Trump is the candidate of “the losers.”

The fact that progressive Jews don’t like goyim, especially when they appear in white, is not new, but Michaelson takes Jewish bigotry to a new level.

“As is now well known,” Michelson writes, Trump’s “core supporters are white, undereducated men who have been left behind by technology, globalization and the attendant erosion of America’s manufacturing base. Moreover, their days of white supremacy are coming to a close, and they’re mad as hell about it.”

Why does it seem natural for a Jew to label about half of the American people as ‘white supremacist’ i.e., rabid racists.

Jay Michaelson:  Donald Trump is the candidate of the 'white undereducated' and the 'losers.'

Jay Michaelson:  Donald Trump is the candidate of the ‘white undereducated’ and the ‘losers.’

In case you failed to get the message, the Jewish writer reiterates for you:

“Trump’s supporters are the losers of the new economy on the one hand, and of multiculturalism on the other.”

Trump supporters, pretty much like Bernie Sanders’s betrayed followers, have one thing in common: they crave a radical change. They long for a productive America, a country with a prospect of hope and a future.  They reject the narrative offered by Wall Street’s oligarchy that America is committed to one thing; Mammon. Does this make Americans into losers? Apparently so, in the eyes of the New York Jewish writer.  

The Forward calls Trump’s supporters a bunch of ‘bullies.’ And the losers always become bullies. At this stage, Michaelson realises that he’s gone a bit too far. After all, a Jew throwing gruesome insults at most of the American people can lead to some tragic consequences. The ‘progressive’ editor backtracks a bit. He concedes that Jews are also losers, yet, unlike Trump supporters, Michaelson explains, in the Jewish cultural heritage Jewish losers always prevail: 

“Of course, in each case, the(Jewish) ‘loser’ wins, enacting ancient Israel’s fantasies of triumph.”

And if you want to know why the Jews think they are so good at spotting injustice, Michaelson has the answer.

“Along the way, these biblical stories also instill a keenly felt sense of the injustice of bullying.”

The kosher progressive kindly allows a narrow outlet for criticism of Jewish bad behaviour.

“Often the Jewish state is not so different from what Trump’s would be, particularly in the past few years, as ugly racism has become mainstreamed in Israeli society, as Islamophobic rhetoric insists that ‘they’ are unlike ‘us.’”

This is a typical Jewish progressive spin. Israel is not an occasional mirror of an imaginary Trump America, Israel and Zionism were racist and plunderous from the day of inception. The 1948 Nakba was a barbarian act against the indigenous Palestinians driven by racist ideology that is deeply rooted in Jewish culture.

The Holodomor, the systematic starvation of Ukraine was perpetrated by “Stalin’s willing executioners” as the Jewish historian Yuri Slezkin refers to Stalin’s Jews in his monumental book The Jewish Century.  The Israeli ultra Zionist writer Sever Plocker repeated this line in the Israeli outlet Ynet admitting, “we mustn’t forget that some of greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish.”  In 1936, justice driven revolutionary Jews traveled to Spain to fight ‘Fascism’ by killing Catholics and burning their churches. It took us three quarters of a century to admit that three quarters of the Spanish International Brigade were Jewish volunteers and the Lingua Franca of the Brigade was Yiddish. Time to ask why these moral interventionists always happen to burn Churches and kill Goyim.  Is this their ultimate sense of Justice?

And what about the Neocon school, another Zionist ideological precept that has inflicted global disaster in the name of ‘moral interventionism.’ Also, consider Wilhelm Reich, Marcuse and the cultural Marxists who used their sexualised interpretation of ‘socialism’ to weaken the West and destroy the unity of the labour movement beyond repair.

Michaelson’s Jewish progressive propaganda is consciously misleading. It isn’t just recent Israeli politics that shows a small problem with the notion of ‘Jewish justice.’ We have suffered a century of global disasters. Many of them were and still are driven by Jewish ideologies and political practices. Bolshevism, Cultural Marxism, Ziocons, Zionism, Mammonism a la Soros et Goldman Sachs are just different horrid faces of one tribal supremacy – an ideology that refers to the goyim as a bunch of losers and ‘white supremacists’, as Michaelson does in his Forward article.

Let ‘s examine this progressive Pro-Palestine comment in light of Jewish supremacism: moderate and contained anti Zionism is a maneuver used by the Jewish Left as a diversion. Instead of examining the breadth of disastrous global activity by Soros, Goldman Sachs, Cultural Marxism, Bolshevism and Neocons, we are permitted limited criticism of Israeli politics. Why do they allow us to reproach Israel? Because they know that Israel can easily take it.

Michelson ends his Jewish self loving rant, writing

“Judaism is proudly the religion of losers. It is a faith, and now a culture, of people who remind themselves every year — every day, even — that they were slaves, that might doesn’t make right, and that while it is human nature for the weak to bully the weaker, it is our divine nature to rise above it.”

These words make clear why Michaelson is afraid of the so-called American ‘losers.’ He knows that people who are oppressed by Wall Street’s mammonism and tired of neocon wars may well rise like the Jews and in the name of Justice identify those who bully them for more than a while.  

I do not think that Trump is capable of leading such a move. But Michaelson knows enough Jewish history to gather that the conditions for America’s awakening are ripe.  In fact the rise of the Americans is overdue.   Michaelson knows that Justice may prevail and he is surely aware of the meaning it may carry for himself and his people whom he outrageously labels as of “divine nature.”

Another of israel’s pimps to become Labour’s saviour? Curse of the Milibands

Another of Israel’s pimps to become Labour’s saviour?


David Miliband

Those in the UK who hoped and prayed they’d seen the last of David Miliband may be in for a nasty shock

By Stuart Littlewood

Unbelievably, Labour Party chiefs are trying to persuade David Miliband to come back from New York, parachute into a safe seat and snatch the Labour Party leadership from Jeremy Corbyn, according to newspaper reports.

Presumably, these are the same chiefs who continue to crucify Corbyn for his links to so-called “terrorist” groups Hamas and Hezbollah. The plotters, it seems, are much more tolerant of friends and admirers of the Israeli terror regime.

Curse of the Milibands

Ralph Miliband arrived in the UK fleeing Nazi persecution. The cocky Miliband brood were soon telling the British nation what to do and how to do it. Ralph’s sons, David and Ed, lost no time taking a hand in misgoverning our country. Both sat in the Cabinet simultaneously.

Ed was Minister for the Cabinet Office, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change and, lately, Labour’s failed leader. David was Environment Secretary and Foreign Secretary. Under his watch two US rendition flights put down at Diego Garcia, which he initially denied.

Peter Oborne, writing in The Telegraph at the time of David Miliband’s exit from UK politics, said of him:

After Labour’s 1997 election victory he was the poster boy of a new ruling elite which seized control of the commanding heights of British politics. Anti-democratic, financially greedy and morally corrupt, this new political class has done the most enormous damage. Since David Miliband was its standard-bearer, his political career explains a great deal about what has gone wrong with British public life, about why politicians are no longer liked or trusted, and about how political parties have come to be viewed with contempt.

Oborne made the point that Miliband set the pattern so many others, including his brother Ed, followed:

Obsessed by politics at university, he has never had even the faintest connection with the real world. From life in think tanks he became a Labour Party researcher and special adviser, before being parachuted into the north-eastern constituency of South Shields as an MP.

David Miliband wrote Labour’s vacuous 1997 and 2001 election manifestos and was at the heart of the Labour machine when it generated the notorious falsehoods over Iraq. Oborne also noted the irony of Miliband’s new job in the US heading up a humanitarian organisation “when the government of which he was such a loyal member created so many of the world’s disasters”.

Being British became an embarrassment

To those who despair of the endless cruelty and slaughter in the Holy Land, David Miliband will be forever remembered as the shameless British foreign secretary who apologised to Israel’s gangsters for the risk they ran of being arrested if they set foot in London.

Back in 2009 the gruesome trio, Ehud Barak, Tzipi Livni and retired general Doron Almog, cancelled engagements in London for fear of “having their collar felt”. Israel complained bitterly and Miliband responded by promising the odious Avigdor Lieberman that UK laws relating to “universal jurisdiction” would be changed. He asked the prime minister, Gordon Brown, and the justice minister, Jack Straw for urgent action.

Thankfully, a general election intervened and ousted Miliband from the Foreign Office, but his grovelling promise was eagerly taken up by his replacement, William Hague, another fanatical friend of Israel. Hague declared that a situation where foreign politicians like Mrs Livni could be threatened with arrest in the UK was “completely unacceptable… We will put it right through legislation… and I phoned Mrs Livni among others to tell her about that and received a very warm welcome for our proposals.”

Impunity for Israeli criminals

Never mind that the arrest warrants in question were issued to answer well-founded criminal charges. Never mind that all states that are party to the Geneva Conventions are under a binding obligation to seek out those suspected of having committed grave breaches of the conventions and bring them, regardless of nationality, to justice. And never mind that there must be no hiding place for those suspected of crimes against humanity and war crimes.

Private arrest warrants were necessary because the government was in the habit of shirking its duty under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention and dragging its feet until the birds had flown. Bringing a private prosecution for a criminal offence, said Lord Wilberforce, is “a valuable constitutional safeguard against inertia or partiality on the part of the authority”. Lord Diplock, another respected Lord of Appeal, called it “a useful safeguard against capricious, corrupt or biased failure or refusal of those authorities to prosecute offenders against the criminal law”. And the beauty of the private warrant was that it could be issued speedily.

While David Miliband headed up foreign policy it was frankly embarrassing to be British. And Labour’s clowns want to bring him back?

Miliband’s move to scupper this was even more deplorable when it is remembered that Tzipi Livni, Israel’s former foreign minister, had been largely responsible for the terror that brought death and destruction to Gaza’s civilians during the blitzkrieg known as Operation Cast Lead. Showing no remorse, and with the blood of 1,400 dead Gazans (including 320 children and 109 women) on her hands and thousands more horribly maimed, Livni’s office issued a statement saying she was proud of it. Speaking later at a conference at Tel Aviv’s Institute for Security Studies, she said: “I would today take the same decisions.”

Any British government minister who brings this degree of obsequiousness to his job and is prepared to undermine our justice system in order to make the UK a safe haven for the likes of her, deserves banishment to outer darkness – permanently.

Miliband is also remembered for not having the guts to visit Gaza, or even Iran, while in office. Yet he managed to reach Gaza in 2011 with Save the Children. “I had not been able to visit while in government for security reasons,” he said in an article in The Guardian. What nonsense. The only danger would have been from an air-strike by his psychopathic friends in Tel Aviv. Risks go with the job. You can’t be an effective foreign secretary wrapped in cotton wool.

While David Miliband headed up foreign policy it was frankly embarrassing to be British. And Labour’s clowns want to bring him back?

Elie Wiesel–Oy Vey!!! Who Can Replace Him???


Jewish Tribalism on Display in JTA Article

First off, let me say this is not satire. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency, or JTA, solicited the views of a number of prominent Jews on the question of who, if anyone, might be able to replace the late Elie Wiesel as a unifying force among American Jews.

Apparently it’s a burning question.

The JTA’s rather instructive article on the matter, posted Monday and available here, is written by Ben Sales, and opens with the following line:

Being an American Jew, more than anything else, means remembering the Holocaust.

Stop and think for a moment what that means. It would suggest, perhaps among other things, that self-identifying as a victim is a major part of what it means to be an American Jew. Could it perhaps also suggest a desire for evening the score? If you accept that 6 million Jews died in what is known as the “holocaust,” and if remembering this is a central part of who you are, then what are likely to be your feelings toward the non-Jewish world? Or at least toward those in the non-Jewish world who have been critical of Jews, Jewish lobbies, or the state of Israel?

The second paragraph of the story reads as follows:

That’s what nearly three quarters of Jewish Americans said, according to the Pew Research Center’s landmark 2013 study on American Jewry. Asked to pick attributes “essential” to being Jewish, more Jews said Holocaust remembrance than leading an ethical or moral life, caring about Israel or observing Jewish law.

Wait a minute! Did we read that right? Do an overwhelming majority of American Jews–nearly three quarters–believe that remembering the holocaust is more important, more “essential” to “being an American Jew,” than incorporating ethics or morality into one’s life? Is that what this is saying?

One normally wouldn’t think of the JTA as an “anti-Semitic website,” but what the article seems to be giving us is a full-on, frontal view of Jewish tribalism, warts and all.

Sales states that Wiesel “personified that consensus,” (i.e. the consensus that being Jewish “more than anything else, means remembering the Holocaust”) and goes on to describe him as the “survivor who through his writing and speaking turned himself into perhaps the leading moral voice of American Jewry.”

A few malcontents on the Jewish left “derided” Wiesel for being insufficiently concerned about the Palestinians, Sales avers, but overall he was “the closest thing American Jews had to a unifier.”

The author then hits us with another eye-opening paragraph:

Regardless of religious observance or thoughts on Israel, nearly all Jewish Americans agreed with Wiesel’s message of remembering the genocide and preventing another one.

Sales seems to be trying to make a case: that the reason Jews view holocaust remembrance as so important, and as such a central part of their identity, is due to their innate concerns over “preventing another one.” This begs the question: what do the words “preventing another one” exactly mean? Is it a reference to preventing any future genocide of any people? Or preventing “another” genocide only of Jews?

If it means preventing any genocide of any people at all, then certainly that would be a noble sentiment. But then why does the state of Israel refuse, to this day, to recognize the Armenian genocide?

And why on earth–if the genuine concern is over any genocide at all–do the vast majority of American Jews support the state of Israel?

As I’ve said on a number of occasions, Israel’s occupation of the Palestinians probably meets the legal definition of the crime of genocide.

Following Wiesel’s death on July 2, will another consensus leader rise to take his place? Or is the American Jewish community too divided to unite under any one person’s moral voice?

Sales then goes on to gives us views on this question from ten different prominent Jews, including attorney Alan Dershowitz, who is a long time associate of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Before I give you the quote from Dehshowitz, let me give you a quote about Dershowitz from journalist Rania Khalek, who wrote the following in January of 2015:

There are two groups of people Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz has spent his career resolutely defending. The first is Israeli war criminals. And the second is accused and convicted rapists.

As rape allegations against Dershowitz intensify, his increasingly bellicose denials, steeped in brazen hostility towards child victims of sexual abuse, are raising eyebrows.

With smear tactics that closely resemble the manner in which he attacks Palestinian victims of Israeli violence, Dershowitz rejected the latest allegations as fabrications, telling Local 10 News that his accuser, Virginia Roberts, is a “serial liar” and “prostitute.”

Dershowitz was later formally cleared of the allegations, and apparently in Sales’ mind, this makes his views (on morality, no less!) worth quoting:

“No one can replace Elie as the moral voice,” Dershowitz wrote in an email to JTA. “There will be new voices, but none represents the combination of tragedy and hope that Elie characterized.”

The article also includes quotes from Atlantic correspondent Jeffrey Goldberg, who describes Wiesel as “the closest thing we had to a saint,” and Abe Foxman who praised him for his unique ability to be “comfortable in our very, very partisan, unique Jewish world and experience.”

Reflections on Wiesel, though from a vastly different outlook, can also be found on another website–Elie Wiesel Cons the World. The site is dedicated to exposing the “inaccuracies and contradictions” about some of Wiesel’s claims, and is run by Carolyn Yeager, who in an article here offers an analysis of some previously unreleased photos of Wiesel that have come to light only since his death.

So what does it mean if Jews see themselves as inhabiting–in Foxman’s words–a “very, very partisan, unique Jewish world and experience”? Would this possibly account for why Israel stands in violation of so many UN resolutions? And could it also explain why the Jewish state finds it eminently acceptable to continue stealing Palestinian while at the same time professing to the world that it wants peace? The answers to these questions are not cut and dried, but they definitelyare worth exploring.

Another question in dire need of being place under the microscope for analysis is: why does the world let them get away with it?



A little bit more on the adage that “being a Jew means remembering the holocaust.” Shortly after posting this article, I discovered a new post from blogger Richard Silverstein, whose latest revelation is that Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has appointed a rabbi named Eyal Krim to serve as the army’s new chief rabbi. Krim seems to be living in that “very partisan, unique Jewish world” that Foxman so eloquently described, having once proclaimed it would be acceptable for Israeli soldiers to rape non-Jewish women they may happen to find among the enemy.

“It is permitted to break the bounds of modesty…and to satisfy evil [sexual] urges through having sexual relations with attractive non-Jewish women against their will, out of consideration for the hardships of war and for the good of the whole [army’s objectives],” Krim wrote, as quoted by Silverstein.

How on earth could “the most moral army in the world” have such a man serving as it’s chief rabbi? Perhaps that’s what happens when we lose a major “moral,”  “unifying” voice like Eli Wiesel’s.

Rabbi Lerner Watch Your Language

By Gilad Atzmon

Can you imagine the Archbishop of Canterbury using the word ‘asshole?’ Can you imagine a supreme Islamic cleric referring to an intellectual in this manner?

Rabbi Michael Lerner, the man who used Muhammad Ali’s funeral as a Jewish propaganda podium, wrote to me yesterday:

“Wake up, asshole–you are spreading lies and deceit about me.”

The ‘progressive’ rabbi describes me as that place where the sun never shines.  I asked the Rabbi for permission to reprint his entire e mail to me but for the obvious reason the rabbi who claims to ‘represent American Jews’ kept silent.

In my article ‘Rabbi Lerner – Master of Compassion or Master of Deceit?’ I exposed Rabbi Lerner as a con artist. I quoted Rabbi Lerner accurately and in context.

In his email to me, Rabbi Lerner confirmed that he had consciously tried to deceive the American people.

The Rabbi wrote:

“I dared raise the issue of Palestinian freedom from Israeli oppression, the first time millions of Americans who don’t hang out with the Left have ever heard a rabbi challenge Israeli policies.”

Why is it that American people don’t hear rabbis supporting Palestinian freedom or universal human rights?  Because Rabbis don’t support Palestinian freedom. Rabbis do care about one thing: the rights of their chosen tribe. It’s odd, the Rabbi who claimed to “represent American Jews” admitted in his e-mail that the message he delivered at Muhammad Ali’s funeral contradicts what most rabbis believe. The Rabbi was deliberately misrepresenting American Jews. He stood before the nation and lied about Jews, Judaism and Jewishness. I guess that in the Rabbi’s eyes, lying for the cause is a kosher procedure.

I believe that Rabbi Michael Lerner is a precious human being. He is the ultimate epitome of the Jewish solidarity spin. He provides us a definitive glimpse into the Jewish controlled opposition.

I want to believe that by now most intelligent people are aware of Israeli criminality and the domination by the Jewish oligarchy of Western political lobbying, finance and media. The so-called ‘progressive’ rabbi serves the function of portraying the image of a ‘good Jew.’ His calling is to divert attention from the real problems.

If the Rabbi really wants to perform genuine good deeds, he should first learn to watch his lingo but more importantly he must make a serious and genuine attempt to tell the truth. Instead of diverting attention from the ‘J’ word, he should address publicly what Jewishness and Judaism mean for most Jews.

“Being a Jew and a Zionist are one and the same” (Jewish Chronicle)

By Gilad Atzmon

Anti’ Zionist Jews insist that Zionism and being Jewish are entirely different matters that have nothing to do with each other. Jonathan Boyd, the Executive Director of the Institute for Jewish Policy Research (JPR) claims the opposite.  According to Boyd, statistics proves that “being a Jew and a Zionist are one and the same, they cannot be separated out.” Demands to separate Zionism and the Jews tear “Jewishness in two,” Boyd wrote today in the Jewish Chronicle.

According to Boyd, a 2010 JPR survey of British Jewish attitudes towards Israel found that “82 per cent of British Jews say that Israel plays either a central or important part in their Jewish identity. 95 per cent of British Jewish adults have visited the country at least once, and 90 per cent regard it as the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people.”

I guess that Jewish statistics has now replaced the Talmud and the Torah as sources of law. If as many as 90% of Jews believe that Palestine is a Jewish land, then the Palestinians must have been living there by mistake.

Boyd opines that drawing parallels between Nazis and Israelis, or calling for boycotts of Israeli products makes British Jews feel threatened.

I agree with Boyd. I am not keen on the equation between ‘Israelis and Nazis.’ I think that it is not fair to German National Socialism. Israel is a democracy and its crimes reflect the popular choice of the Israeli Jews and according to Boyd the vast majority of world Jewry who identify with Israel and Zionism. National Socialist Germany wasn’t a democracy and the different measures of political oppression it inflicted on Jews and others lasted for, at most, 12 years. Israel’s racist abuse of Palestinians has been going on for almost seven decades. 

Boyd further reveals to us that most Jews do not believe in God. They actually believe in the ‘Jew.’ In 2013, JPR asked British Jews which aspects of Jewishness were most important to them.  Eighty-nine percent highlighted “feeling part of the Jewish people.” 

This makes economic sense. Instead of inventing a god who chooses you over all other people, the contemporary secular Jew cuts out the almighty middle ’man.’ The Jews love themselves just for being themselves. This seems the ultimate form of collective narcissism. JPR’s findings agree with what I have observed so far: all permutations of Jewish ID politics from JVP to ADL and beyond are in practice different forms of intense tribal self love. 

Boyd explains.

“The reason for that is because the Jews are a people over and above a religious group…the truth is you don’t actually have to believe anything to be Jewish. According to Jewish law, you simply need to be born to a Jewish mother, or convert. What you believe, or practice, whilst vital to the maintenance of that identity, is immaterial to your fundamental status as a Jew.”

There you go. Jewishness is a blood related identity, call it biology or race or a matter of conversion. Conversion into what? You guessed right –collective narcissism, self love or shall we simply say, ‘choseness.’

But Boyd insists that British Jews are also connected to Britain.

“That (Zionist) feeling does not necessarily translate itself into Jews wanting to live in Israel. While about 35,000 have made aliyah since 1948, most British Jews feel very connected to Britain.”

According to Boyd, EU data reveals that “84 per cent (of British Jews) feel fully part of British society.”

Fascinating. I would advise Boyd and his fellows at the Jewish research institute to try and find out what the British people think about the Jewish Lobby, the CFI and the LFI that push them into immoral interventionist wars in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Iran.  Boyd and his institute should try to ascertain what British people think about the fact that a tribal foreign lobby dominates Britain’s political affairs.

What do the British people think about the idea that an ethnic group that amounts to less than half a percent of British society has so much influence in politics, finance and media?

Looking into these topics may help to save both Britain and its Jewry from an unfortunate disaster. 

Kiryas Joel And The Rest Of America

By Eve Mykytyn

Kiryas Joel is a Hasidic enclave within Monroe, NY with its own schools, emergency medical and other governmental services. A recent book by Louis Grumet with John Caher, “The Curious Case of Kiryas Joel: The Rise of a Village Theocracy and the Battle to Defend the Separation of Church and State” (Chicago Review Press, $27.99), details the machinations behind the extraordinary carve out of a school district for a religious group.

Monroe contains incorporated and unincorporated land.  Hasidic Jews have bought land and settled in the unincorporated part of Monroe, and since 2013, they have been fighting to join the rest of Monroe and become a part of the Kiryas Joel school district.

The Wall Street Journal has published an excellent summary of the issues involved in the proposed annexation.

The issue is complicated. The Hasidim claim that opposition to incorporation is anti Semitic. If the new land is incorporated, Hasidim will form a majority in the town. If they follow the pattern they have in neighboring Monsey, Hasidim will dominate the school board and attempt to cut funds to public schools and advantage religious schools. A 2013 report by a state appointed monitor found that East Rampopo (the school district for Monsey) cut services to public schools while increasing public money spent on religious schools. On March 16, 2016, FBI agents raided schools and computer stores in Monsey, with a warrant that alleged that the Monsey had used federal educational technology funds (designated for public schools) to buy technology for yeshivas. As of yet, no charges have been filed.

But the problems in Kiryas Joel go beyond disdain for state and federal law and the rights of their neighbors. In May 2016 a video that appears to show a rabbi sexually abusing a young boy was posted on facebook and quickly went viral. The rabbi is the principal of the school. Did the community rise up and demand that the principal resign? Hardly. On May 12, the FBI raided the school and removed a number of computers.  The rabbi has yet to be charged.

This incident follows one a few months ago in which a similar video was leaked to police, an investigation by state authorities was launched and no charges were filed.

The now largely irrelevant New York Times wrote of the most recent video as an intrusion into a religious community that policed itself, and characterized the video as inconclusive.  The Times apparently did not consider the fraud of federal funds in Monsey to be newsworthy at all.

New York state law does not defer to a community to ‘police itself’ when a crime occurs. If the principal abused the boy (and the tape certainly looks like nothing else) he may or may not be liable to his religious community, but he is liable to the state of New York that has a responsibility and an obligation to protect its citizens. An abused child who is part of an insular yet powerful religious community would seem to be a prototypical powerless individual whom the state must protect.

It is hard to imagine a different example of an elementary school principal caught on video abusing a child and not facing immediate arraignment and parental protest. I know of no reason to afford Hasidic Jews any special deference within our legal system. There is no excuse for journalists from ‘the paper of record’ to follow a hands off policy where religious communities are concerned.

Who is John Kerry? A warmonger Khazar-Jew undercover, a dummy at work for the Zionist plans


Syrian Free Press


John Kerry’s ancestry

The entire world has been subjected to a barrage of war-mongering propaganda against Syria by US Secretary of State John Kerry—but little known is the fact that Kerry’s family name is Kohn and that he is, by Jewish definition and Israel’s own immigration laws, a Khazar-Jew.

This fact puts the war-mongering by Kerry/Kohn into perspective, and also reveals just how deeply the Israeli/Zionist Supremacist tentacles run in the American government.

According to the Israeli Haaretz newspaper, John Kerry’s family are actually Jews whose surname was Kohn.


His paternal grandfather Frederick A. Kerry, was born Fritz Kohn in a town in what today is the Czech Republic before changing his name ahead of his immigration to the United States a century ago.

In 1868, after the death of his first wife, he moved to Bennisch (today called Horni Benesov) and married Mathilde Frankel Kohn. Benedikt and Mathilde Kohn were two of the only 27 Jews living in Bennisch, which is listed as having a total population of 4,200, in 1880.

Soon after Benedikt died in 1876, Mathilde moved to Vienna with her children Ida (7), Friedrich “Fritz” (3) and Otto (newborn).

Fritz and Otto excelled in their studies in Vienna. Both Kohn brothers abandoned their Jewish heritage and converted to Roman Catholicism.

In addition, in 1897, Otto decided to shed the Jewish-sounding name of Kohn. He chose a new name by dropping a pencil on a map. The pencil landed on Ireland’s County Kerry. In 1901, Fritz followed his brother’s example and officially changed his name to Frederick Kerry.

Fred, who worked as an accountant at his uncle’s shoe factory, married Ida Loewe, a Jewish musician from Budapest. Ida was a descendant of Sinai Loew, a brother of Rabbi Judah Loew, the famous Kabbalist, philosopher and Talmudist known as the “Maharal of Prague” who some say invented the character of the Golem.

Kerry in Turkey: US Secretary of State visits tomb of Ataturk

In 1905, the young family immigrated to America. After entering through Ellis Island, the family first lived in Chicago and then settled in Boston. Fred and Ida had two more children in America, Mildred (1910) and Richard (1915).

Fred and Ida and their three children lived in Brookline, where Fred became a prominent man in the shoe business.

In 1921, Fred Kerry, at age 48, entered a Boston hotel and shot himself in the head. Richard was six years old when his father committed suicide. He attended Phillips Academy, Yale University and Harvard Law School. After serving in the U.S. Army Air Corps, Kerry worked in the U.S. Department of State and later the Foreign Service.

He married Rosemary Forbes, the beneficiary of the Forbes family trusts. The Forbes family amassed a huge fortune in China trade.

Richard and Rosemary had four children: Margery (1941), John (1943), Diana (1947) and Cameron (1950). John, a Massachusetts Senator, is the 2004 Democratic Nominee for President. Cameron, who married a Jewish woman and converted to Judaism in 1983, is a prominent Boston lawyer.

* Kerry is not be the first U.S. Secretary of State to have a Jewish family past later in life. In 1997 it was revealed that Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who was born in Prague,  was actually Jewish—as if people seeing her visage could not tell that.

Albright is more famous for telling the world during a television interview that the deaths of over half a million Iraqi children, caused by a US boycott of medical supplies, was “worth it”.

(By David Duke, 2 September 2013)

John Kerry marrano prega i giudei-dx

Who is John Kerry, alias Kohn-Lowe?

Who is John Kerry, the USA representative, that while provide weapons, pay and training mercenaries and terrorists at the edge with Syria, says at the same time want to fight them?? Mental dissociation or forked tongue?? No, it is just their nature.

In addition to being brought up in exclusive masonic sect “Skull & Bones“, John Forbes Kerry also belongs to an European family of Marranos Khazar crypto-Jews.

It was discovered in 2003 by Felix Gundacker, a genealogist who worked forthe Boston Globe, that Kerry‘s paternal grandparents, who traditionally for centuries belonged to the Austro-Hungarian Jewish community as “Fritz Kohn” and “Ida Löwe“, had changed their surnames to “Frederick and Ida Kerryin 1900, converted from Judaism to Christianity in 1901 or 1902.

The last name Kerry”, widely misinterpreted as indicative of Irish descent, was chosen arbitrarily: According to family legend, Fritz (the elder brotherwhose name was Otto, who had previously, 1887-1896,” converted Christian)and another family member opened an atlas at random and dropped a pencilon the map that fell down on County Kerry, Ireland.

It is an established practice, to change his name with another indicating a geographic location (a city, a region, a county) between members of the Jewish community who embrace another religion falsely to better blend in among the population.

Leaving Mödling hometown, a suburb of Vienna where they had lived since 1896, Fred and Ida, grandparents emigrated to the U.S. in 1905, living at first in Chicago and then moved to Brooklyn and Massachusetts in 1915.

USA administration could not have been find a better representative to manipulate the Middle East diplomacy in favor of the Zionist entity, making believe that they want to fight that terrorism who is instead precisely created, backed, supported and feeded by US & Israeli.

People like Kerry have a long history, attitude and secular practice to say one thing while in reality they are thinking and doing another one. They are the well known Marranos on duty over the centuries…

NOTE: information about the Jewish origins of Kerry are verifiable on Wikipedia:

(By SyrianPatriot, 10 May 2013)


By David Duke, 2 September 2013
By SyrianPatriot, 10 May 2013
Submitted by SyrianPatriots 30 May 2016 
War Press Info Network at:

Apartheid in action: Christian Schools “in immediate danger” as the israel Government offered no solution to unfair budget cuts

Christian Schools “in immediate danger” as the Israeli Government offered no solution to unfair budget cuts


Christian Schools “in immediate danger” as the Israeli Government offered no solution to unfair budget cuts

Christian Schools “in immediate danger” as the Israeli Government offered no solution to unfair budget cuts


ISRAEL – The Office of Christian Schools in Israel issued a statement on May 23, 2016, following up to the strike held on September 2015, in which it expressed its discontentment as the Israeli Government and the Ministry of Education have not honored their commitments nor have they offered a solution to the Government unfair cutting of budgets allocated to Christian schools. At the end of the Academic year, “Christian Schools in Israel are now in immediate danger of collapsing financially”.


Download (PDF, 653KB)

Paedophilia and Tribal Loyalty

By Gilad Atzmon

The Holocaust Memorial Trust and the BOD have yet to disassociate themselves from Lord Janner and his alleged history of multiple child sex abuse.  Seems that tribal loyalty is so firmly entrenched that it far surpasses ethics or compassion.

Now there is yet another case of tribal loyalty that is inconsistent with British values and law.  This time a Jewish children’s summer camp is the chosen locale.

The Jewish Chronicle reports today the “owner of a (Jewish) children’s summer camp, who is accused of failing to act when naked images of three- and four-year-old girls were found on his business partner’s phone, has chosen not to give evidence.”

The prosecution claims that Tal Landsman, the owner of the Jewish camp, “willfully exposed children to harm by not immediately reporting his best friend Ben Lewis to the authorities.”

Landsman and Lewis were co-founders of LL Camps in Bushey, Hertfordshire. The camp was closed down in August 2015 after an employee who had seen the images reported Lewis to the police.

Demonstrating tribal loyalty, one Ilan Ben-Zion, a trainee clinical psychologist, described Mr. Landsman to the court as “extremely bright, vibrant, enthusiastic and determined”.

Tribal loyalty ended once the Goyim became involved. The JC reports: “the jury of seven men and five women had heard from a member staff, Sandra Vicente, that the sight of the images on Lewis’s phone had “polluted” her brain.”

Ms Vicente said Lewis had given her his phone and PIN so she could play music at a children’s party on 1 August last year. She said the images were also seen by two other workers, Mohammed Ramli and Shelby Silver.

That night she said she told Mr. Landsman what she had seen, but the prosecution claims he failed to act, and allowed his friend to continue at work.

Ms Vicente said the next day Lewis spoke to her at work. “He said: ‘There is something disgusting on my phone. I don’t know how it got there.” Three days later she reported Lewis to the police.

Prosecutor Ann Evans told the jury:

“You may think this is the height of irresponsibility and, as co-owner, his first duty in this situation should have been to the children, not the co-owner Ben Lewis…In an effort to protect his friend he did nothing about what he had heard, and allowed the parties and activities to keep running at the camp until eventually Ofsted moved in and closed the place down on August 6 last year.”

I guess that prosecutor Evans doesn’t really grasp what tribal loyalty is all about.

To learn more about paedophilia in the light of  tribal loyalty watch the following videos.

Palestinian Women Land in Jail Over Facebook Posts

 photo fbincitmentarsts_zpsvyf5yd2u.jpg

Thou Shalt Not Incite

[Ed. note – The favorite word of Israeli officials these days seems to be “incitement.” In the article below you will read about Palestinian women who have been thrown in Israeli jails for posting on Facebook–a total of 28 such women have been so arrested since last October, and one of the favored charges against them seems to be “incitement.” This at any rate is what 22-year-old Majd Atwan was convicted of.

Atwan, from the West Bank village of Al-Khader, near Bethlehem, was sentenced to 45 days in jail and fined 3,000 shekels (approximately $794)–all for a post on Facebook.

Democracy Type!
Majd Atwan, 22, sentenced to 45 days imprisonment for Facebook postings  via @SamidounPP

Photo published for Majd Atwan, 22, sentenced to 45 days imprisonment for Facebook postings

Majd Atwan, 22, sentenced to 45 days imprisonment for Facebook postings

Majd Yousef Atwan, 22, a young Palestinian woman from Al-Khader village, Bethlehem, and a recent beauty school graduate, was sentenced by an Israeli Ofer military court to 45 days imprisonment and …

 I don’t guess I need to remind people that two years ago Israeli Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked put up a Facebook post in which she referred to Palestinians as “snakes” and in essence called for a campaign of genocide against them–but Shaked was not arrested for incitement. And only just last month the following image surfaced–taken at a rally held by Israelis in support of a soldier who fired a bullet into the head of an unconscious Palestinian, killing him. To my knowledge, the lady never got hauled away to jail, even though the sign she is holding is about the most blatant form of incitement you could imagine.

 photo ktaisrael1_zpsn1mhec7u.jpg

We have additionally had prominent Israeli rabbis calling for Palestinians to be killed, with one even calling it a “religious duty,” though not a single one seems to have been arrested for counseling in such a manner.

So what did Atwan post on Facebook that the Israelis found so objectionable? It seems to have been this picture:

 photo hamid_zpseu0pml88.jpg

The image was posted to Atwan’s Facebook timeline on April 22. This was four days after a bus bombing in Jerusalem, and just one day after the bomber was identified as 19-year-old Abdul Hamid Abu Srour. I can’t tell you what the writing within the photo says (presumably it at least gives the young man’s name), but I can give you the words that Atwan posted along with the photo when she posted it:

وتزنر يا ابو البشاير …. ‫#‏بحزام_الناسف‬ عالداير .

الاستشهادي عبد الحميد سرور

Facebook translations from Arabic to English are a little rough sometimes, and this one seems to be no exception, but this is how it comes out:

The DIODE ABO LBSHẠYR…. ‪#‎Belt‬ _ Blaster about deyr rains.
Happy Hybrid Martyr Abdul Hamid

Why does Atwan refer to Abu Srour as a “hybrid” martyr? I haven’t an answer to that. All I can tell you is that according to the Times of Israel, 20 Israelis were injured in the blast, one of them–a 15-year-old girl–critically; Abu Srour himself, however, was the only fatality, according to the report.

There are several different ways of looking at all of this. There is what might be thought of as the “typically Western” perspective, which goes something like this: Abu Srour despicably set out to commit mass bloodshed and murder on a bus loaded with civilians, and for a 22-year-old girl to pay tribute to him on Facebook–well, it is misguided and stupid at best.

Then there is the Palestinian perspective (or at least the perspective of some Palestinians). Here, Abu Srour was not only resisting a brutal occupation but retaliating for horrendous crimes that have occurred over the course of that occupation’s 68 interminable years–crimes such as the Deir Yassin massacre of 1948, the Kafr Qasim massacre of 1956, and the attack on Gaza in 2014–crimes for which there has never been a reckoning, and toward which the West not only has turned a blind eye but in some cases, such as the US with its billions of dollars of military assistance each year, bears criminal responsibility for.

And then finally there is what might be thought of as the “fed-up-with-hypocrisy-and-double-standards” perspective. Falling into this category are those of us who have taken note of the fact that the word “terrorist” is inevitably applied to enemies of Israel but never to Israel itself–this irregardless of how many white phosphorous bombs and flechette bombs might rain down upon Gaza civilians or how many missiles may destroy apartment buildings full of families with children, and of course we also note that while Israelis are quick to condemn Palestinian “terrorists,” they often lionize Jews who do similar things.

In 1946, members of the Jewish terror organization Irgun bombed the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, killing 91 people. In July of 2006–exactly 60 years later–Israelis unveiled a plaque commemorating the event and paying homage to the terrorists.

The Irgun group got started in 1936, and one of its most famous members, Menachem Begin, went on to become a prime minister of Israel. But there is yet another Irgun terrorist who is also given special recognition today, and that is Shlomo Ben-Yosef.

In 1938, Ben-Yosef was hanged by the British mandate, this after he and others threw grenades in a failed effort to kill the passengers aboard a Palestinian bus. Trying to kill people on a bus…hmm…sounds very similar to Abu Srour, does it not? Maybe the Israelis should have written Ben-Yosef off as a “hybrid martyr” and left it at that. But no. Instead they named streets after him.

Today in Israel there are streets named after Shlomo Ben-Yosef in a number of cities, including Tel Aviv, Acre and Herzliya. Vehicles travel down them, people live and work on them…this while we watch Palestinian women being carted off to jail for posting things on Facebook.


Google maps view of Shlomo Ben Yosef street in Acre

It all serves to underscore the fact that Israel is an apartheid state. There is one set of law for Jews. And a separate set of laws for Palestinians. This is the essence of apartheid. And this is the essence of Israel.

Moreover, what pops its head up each morning when the sun rises over Occupied Palestine and its various incarnations of Shlomo Ben Yosef streets is an apartheid state which at the same time very much likes to pretend to be a democracy, at least on talk shows in the United States…and in this we have the essence of hypocrisy as well.

In Israel, the words “Thou shalt not incite” in reality mean, “Thou shalt not incite against Jews.”]


Israel Arrests 28 Women Over FB Posts

Days of Palestine

Days of Palestine, West Bank -Israeli occupation has arrested 28 Palestinian women over Facebook posts since October, Palestinian Prisoner Centre for Studies (PPCS) said on Wednesday.

Ages of the women arrested ranged between 19 and 39, the PPCS director Riyad al-Ashqar said, noting most of them were released after days of interrogation and bad treatment.

He also stated that eight of the women are being held under the illegal administrative detention inside the Israeli jails.

One of the prominent women, Al-Ashqar said, is Samah Dweik, 25, from occupied East Jerusalem, who is a journalist in The Jerusalem Network. She was kidnapped from her home on April 10 after posting and sharing pictures in support for a Palestinians recently killed by Israeli forces.

Another one, who is pictures went viral on social media, is Majd Atwan. She was sentenced by an Israeli court earlier this month to 45 days in prison and a 3,000 shekel ($794) fine over charges of incitement on her Facebook account.

In recent months, Israel has detained scores of Palestinians for social media activity, alleging that a wav

Research into “Jewish” history confirms that they are not “semitic” and that they originate from an area around Turkey

Scientists reveal Jewish history’s forgotten Turkish roots

web-ashkenazi-jews-1-getty.jpgA group of Ashkenazic Jews in Jerusalem, circa 1885 Getty Images

New research suggests that the majority of the world’s modern Jewish population is descended mainly from people from ancient Turkey, rather than predominantly from elsewhere in the Middle East.

The new research suggests that most of the Jewish population of northern and eastern Europe – normally known as Ashkenazic Jews – are the descendants of Greeks, Iranians and others who colonized what is now northern Turkey more than 2000 years ago and were then converted to Judaism, probably in the first few centuries AD by Jews from Persia. At that stage, the Persian Empire was home to the world’s largest Jewish communities.

According to research carried out by the geneticist, Dr Eran Elhaik of the University of Sheffield, over 90 per cent of Ashkenazic ancestors come from that converted partially Greek-originating ancient community in north-east Turkey

His research is based on genetic, historical and place-name evidence. For his geographic genetic research, Dr Elhaik used a Geographic Population Structure computer modelling system to convert Ashkenazic Jewish DNA data into geographical information.

Dr Elhaik, an Israeli-born geneticist who gained his doctorate in molecular evolution from the University of Houston, believes that three still-surviving Turkish villages – Iskenaz, Eskenaz and Ashanaz – on the western part of an ancient Silk Road route were part of the original Ashkenazic homeland. He believes that the word Ashkenaz originally comes from Ashguza – the ancient Assyrian and Babylonian name for the Iron Age Eurasian steppeland people, the Scythians.

Referring to the names of the three Turkish villages, Dr Elhaik points out that “north-east Turkey is the only place in the world where these place-names exist”.


Ulta-orthodox Ashkenazic Jews during a protest in Jerusalem last year (Getty Images)

From the 690s AD onwards, anti-Jewish persecution by the Christian Byzantine Empire seems to have played a part in forcing large numbers of Jews to flee across the Black Sea to a more friendly state – the Turkic-ruled Khazar Empire with its large Slav and other populations.

Some analyses of Yiddish suggests that it was originally a Slavic language, and Dr Elhaik and others believe that it was developed, probably in the 8th and 9th centuries AD, by Jewish merchants trading along some of the more northerly Silk Roads linking China and Europe.

By the 730s, the Khazar Empire had begun to convert to Judaism – and more people converted to the faith

But when the Khazar Empire declined in or around the 11th century, some of the Jewish population almost certainly migrated west into Central Europe. There, as Yiddish-speaking Jewish merchants came into contact with central  European, often German-speaking, peoples, they began to replace the Slav words in Yiddish with large numbers of German and German-derived words, while retaining some of its Slav-originating grammar. Many Hebrew words also appear to have been added by that stage

The genetic modelling used in the research was based on DNA data from 367 Jews of northern and eastern European origin and more than 600 non-Jewish people mainly from Europe and western Asia.

Dr Elhaik says it is the largest genomic study ever carried out on Ashkenazic Jews. His research will be published in the UK-based scientific journal, Genome Biology and Evolution.

Further research is planned to try to measure the precise size of the Semitic genetic input into Jewish and non-Jewish genomes


Everything israel does is part of a plan, not a forced ‘response’ to ‘terrorism’

Everything Israel does is part of a plan, not a forced ‘response’ to ‘terrorism’

MEMO | May 15, 2016


dissapearing-palestine-map-1200x800On the 68th anniversary of the Nakba (Catastrophe), when the Zionist State of Israel was created on Palestinian land, it is worth reflecting on the propaganda that the world has been fed ever since. Arguably the most pervasive is the perennial claim that Israel only ever “responds” to Palestinian “terrorism” every time it sends its tanks, jets and drones over the border into the Gaza Strip, or its troops into the West Bank and East Jerusalem to destroy Palestinian homes and lives.

Let’s put aside for one moment the fact that the Palestinians have a legal right – some would say obligation – to resist Israel’s brutal military occupation of their land with all means at their disposal. Their legitimate resistance is neither “terrorism” nor mindless violence; it is focused and with a clear purpose in mind: the liberation of Palestine. This is a fact that is ignored by media and politicians alike when they back Israel’s offensives against Palestinian civilians with the claim that Israel has a “right to defend itself”. It certainly does if it is attacked by a belligerent state, but not, in law, to defend itself against the people living under its military occupation. Statements by Western politicians dismiss the Palestinians’ legal rights at a stroke, exposing their blatant support for Zionism in the process.

Scrutiny of how Israel’s offensives have been launched against the people of Gaza over the past few years demonstrates that the Zionist state is the prime cause of the violence through its vicious occupation policies in the occupied West Bank and the blockade of the Gaza Strip; indeed, its polices before, during and since the Nakba. Rockets fired from the territory and other acts of resistance have to be viewed within that context if there is to be a genuine attempt to decipher the reality of the situation. The same is true of the three major Palestinian uprisings in 1987-1991, 2000-2005 and 2015-present. All were in response to Israeli oppression and occupation, rather than the over-simplistic “violence against Israelis” that some claim.

When Israel’s “Declaration of Independence” was read out by David Ben-Gurion in 1948, the pro-Israel narrative insists that “Arab armies” immediately invaded the nascent state to strangle it at birth, ignoring very conveniently that, apart from anything else, a deal had been struck by the Zionists with the then King Abdullah of Jordan (the current monarch’s grandfather), who also had his eyes on Palestinian territory. The context of the ethnic cleansing and massacres committed as part of “Jewish terror tactics” (Guerrilla Warfare, Robin Corbett, 1986) in the run-up to May 1948 is not mentioned, nor is the steadily-rising levels of Jewish immigration to British Mandate Palestine during the 1920s and 1930s; nor, indeed, is the Zionist lobbying that went on to squeeze the infamous Balfour Declaration out of the British government in 1917, when Britain had no right whatsoever to promise to give Palestine, or parts thereof, to “the Jewish people”. In short, the narrative, which has been picked up and disseminated by pro-Israel politicians and media in the West for decades, was and remains that Israel – “the only democracy in the Middle East” – is always being attacked by “the Arabs” and so must be supported with endless military, political and economic assistance. Context is everything, and it is missing from this narrative, as is the fact that Israel has nuclear and possibly chemical weapons.

If there is an iota of sincerity in Israel’s claims that its legitimacy was provided by either Balfour (which mentioned a “national home” not a state) or the 1947 UN Partition Plan (passed without consulting the indigenous people of Palestine), then let its government pull back to the land designated under the UN plan and place Jerusalem under international control; end the occupation of the West Bank and Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, and around 25 per cent of what is now part of Israel. This will never happen, of course, for the simple reason that the aim of Zionism is to establish “Greater Israel”, from the sea to the River Jordan, at the very least. This was described by Joseph Weitz, the head of the Jewish National Fund (which buys land in Palestine for settlement by Jews) in 1940 as “… the Western Israel”. Some argue that it goes further (as Weitz implied), and includes southern Lebanon (which was occupied by Israel from 1982 to 2000), the Sinai Peninsula (occupied from 1967 to 1982, apart from Taba, 1989), across to the Euphrates and south into what is now Saudi Arabia. Israel remains to this day the only member state of the United Nations which has never declared what its borders are.

This is all consistent with what prominent Zionist Israelis have expressed over the years. In 1954, for example, Ben-Gurion wrote, “To maintain the status quo will not do. We have to set up a dynamic state, bent upon creation and reform, building and expansion.” (Rebirth and Destiny of Israel, 1954, p419).

A year later, ex-prime minister Menachim Begin, who was wanted in Britain until the day he died for his role in massacres carried out by the Zionist terror group Irgun in the 1940s, told the Knesset (Israeli parliament): “I deeply believe in launching preventive war against the Arab states without further hesitation. By doing so, we will achieve two targets: firstly, the annihilation of Arab power; and secondly, the expansion of our territory.”

Begin’s “preventive war” came about in 1956, with the British-French-Israeli assault on the Suez Canal, and in 1967 when, again contrary to the pro-Israel narrative, Israel attacked and destroyed the Egyptian air force in a pre-emptive strike to launch the “Six-Day War”. Former minister Mordechai Ben-Tov denounced the claim that Israel’s existence had “hung upon a thread” in the run-up to the war: “The entire story of the danger of extermination was invented in every detail and exaggerated a posteriori, to justify the annexation of new Arab territory.” Furthermore, General Ezer Weizmann was quoted in Maariv, also in 1972, as saying “There was never a danger of extermination [prior to the Six-Day War in 1967].”

In 1972, Yitzhak Rabin, a general and then Prime Minister of Israel, who was assassinated by a Zionist fanatic in 1995, told France’s Le Monde, “I do not believe that Nasser [Egypt’s president] wanted war. The two divisions which he sent into Sinai on 14 May [1967] would not have been enough to unleash an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it.”

Numerous Israeli politicians have, over the years, expressed their intentions with regards to the land of Palestine, and what should be done to the Palestinians. Before his first term as prime minister, the then Deputy Foreign Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told students at Bar Ilan University in 1989, “Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China [Tiananmen Square], when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the [occupied Palestinian] territories.”

According to the late Ariel Sharon in 1998, “It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonisation, or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands.”

With this in mind, it is worth remembering that Israel has wiped off the map more than 500 Palestinian towns and villages since 1948 in a deliberate effort to destroy all evidence that Palestine was ever an Arab land. “Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages,” said former General Moshe Dayan in Haaretz in April 1969. “You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.” (Quoted by Edward Said in, Zionism from the Standpoint of Its Victims, Social Text, Volume 1, 1979, 7-58)

It should be obvious, therefore, that Israel does not “respond” to Palestinian violence, but the Palestinians are defending themselves against the existential threat that is the State of Israel and its expansionist policies. The ethnic cleansing that began prior to the creation of the Zionist State in 1948 has been ongoing for 68 years and shows no sign of abating.

That is the lesson that we must learn from the Nakba: everything that Israel does is part of a well-thought out plan; it is not prone to spontaneous “responses” to Palestinian resistance, but it is very good at being the aggressor and blaming the victims. We – and the Palestinians – forget that at our peril.

Keep Tyson Fury In The Ring Rabbis Say

May 16, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

 Boxer Tyson Fury is once again at the centre of a media storm. The boxer told the camera that  ‘Zionist, Jewish people own all the banks, all the media’.   The Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) has called on Fury to be barred from boxing following his comments. Seemingly, sportsmen in Britain are not allowed to express their thoughts, let alone be observant.

But here is the satirical twist to this story.  Some prominent British orthodox Rabbis who are well versed in the Talmud and Jewish survival strategies protested against the CAA call. They insisted that for the Jews, it is much safer if Tyson Fury is kept inside the ring where he is unlikely to meet a single Jew.  According to the Rabbis Fury shouldn’t  be free to walk in the streets of  London where he can terrify some members of the tribe.

The CAA is now reconsidering its position. It is taking advice from some Jewish banker and Zionist media moguls.

Gilad Atzmon on Jewish Racism (TradCatKnight Radio)

May 06, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon

I spoke about  Jewishness, Jewish Controlled Opposition,  the antisemitic fantasy, holocaust vs. history,  Jews and revolutions, humanism vs. tribalism, socialism vs Judeo bolshevism, current state of the world, Hitler, Obama, ISIS and MUCH more….

God’s Chosen Drivers

April 25, 2016  /  Gilad Atzmon


My Canadian friend Richard Guillemette sent me the following a few days ago. I think that this is an extraordinary description of the Jewish condition where racial supremacy is celebrated trough tribalism, narcism and aggression:

“In essence it goes a lit bit like this. You travel all over the world Gilad. You see and meet all kind of people,different ethnicities, different ideologies, different cultures etc. let’s say you rent a car in each one and you have a car accident in every country. You then deduce that the reason this is happening is because nobody knows how to drive. Your solution is then to return to London and fight to abolish driving for everybody but you. You might allow some of your close friend to drive also. This problem can never be resolved and you have to live in constant fear every time you go somewhere and have to rent a car.

You know that you are right because God has chosen you as the best driver in the world.”

UK Labour Party Descends Into Madness–Searching for Anti-Semites Under the Bed!

Israel continues to kill and murder Palestinians while seizing more and more of their land, but instead of addressing this all-important issue, the Labour Party in the UK has become obsessed with anti-Semitism.

With some members openly calling for the suspension of others, the party is on a frenzied quest to flush and ferret out supposed “anti-Semites” from within its ranks. The latest victims are Naz Shah, a member of Parliament, and former London Mayor Ken Livingstone.

Shah found herself at the center of a storm when a Facebook post she had posted in 2014 was made public on a right-wing blog and picked up by the rest of the media. Shah’s post, deemed “offensive” and “anti-Semitic” by critics, suggested that Israel should be relocated to the US, though it was obviously posted tongue-in-cheek:


As I say, the post was obviously intended to be humorous, the humor framed in such a manner as to offer a well-merited critique of the policies of both the US and Israel. But lunatics, as we know, don’t usually have much of a sense of humor, and two of Shah’s Labour colleagues were quick to pounce. One of them, Kate Hoey, insisted that Shah should resign “right away,” while another, Lisa Nandy (supposedly a leftist), seemed intent on branding herself as a valiant crusader against anything, however merited it might be or humorously framed, that might conceivably offend powerful British Jews:

We have a policy that people who make antisemitic remarks are suspended and an investigation carried out … and the policy ought to be followed without any exception.

Sadly Shah didn’t have the courage of her convictions. As soon as the controversy exploded, she went before Parliament and issued a groveling apology. The full text, available here, is almost embarrassing to read.

The Facebook post was accompanied by some Tweets that critics have also huffed and puffed over…

 photo shahtweet_zpstwtgl3je.gif
Someone has obviously been scouring the Internet for anything they can dig up on Shah, for the same blog that posted the above, also published this…

 photo shahtweet2_zpsj5jk2wag.jpg

…and it is also reported that, horror of horrors, she compared Israel to Nazi Germany! How many people in the world today are comparing Israel to the Nazis would be difficult to say, but those doing so are probably at least as numerous as grains of sand on a California beach. As for “the Jews” rallying to alter the outcome of an Internet poll, particularly one on whether or not Israel commits war crimes–well that the Zionist state has trolls on its payroll combing the Internet posting comments in a hasbara war of words is a well known fact. No one that I know of even disputes it.

In her apology, Shah tries to make amends by explaining that her posts were made at the time of the 2014 conflict in Gaza. “The language I used was wrong,” but “feelings were running high” at the time, she says. Well yes, they were running high then–and they still are. In fact–what has really changed since 2014? About the only thing that’s changed is that Shah got elected to Parliament–and now that she’s in office, she doesn’t want to lose her position. That’s really the only thing that’s different.

When the controversy broke out, Livingstone came to Shah’s defense. And what do you suppose happened? The mob started screaming for his blood as well…and now Livingstone has been suspended from the party too.

Former London Mayor Ken Livingstone has been one of the few British politicians I’ve had a mostly favorable opinion of over the years. In 2003 he opposed the US war in Iraq and referred to George W. Bush as “the greatest threat to life on this planet.” As Voltaire famously said, “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you’re not allowed to criticize.” In the UK, politicians can obviously criticize American presidents, but Livingstone, in defending Shah, in an  interview he gave to the BBC, made the mistake of criticizing the one group of people you’re not allowed to criticize:

“There’s been a very well-orchestrated campaign by the Israel lobby to smear anybody who criticises Israeli policy as anti-Semitic.

“I had to put up with 35 years of this. It’s completely over the top but it’s not anti-Semitic. Let’s remember when Hitler won his election in 1932, his policy was that Jews should be moved to Israel.

“He was supporting Zionism – this is before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews.”


Ken Livingstone

As the Telegraph put it, “Within an hour the backlash had begun.” No fewer than 39 Labor MPs called for Livingstone’s suspension, one of them, John Mann, denouncing the former mayor–in a face-to-face confrontation, no less–as a “Nazi apologist” and a “f*#*ing disgrace!”

Livingstone defended himself by pointing out what he had said about Hitler and the Zionists making common cause with each other was indeed an historical fact (which is true), but lunatics, in addition to having no sense of humor, are also notoriously uninterested in history.

“You’re a disgusting racist, Livingstone. A disgusting racist rewriting history. You’re a disgusting racist,” cried Mann.


Labour MP John Mann

“Are you saying it’s not true?” retorted the former London mayor.

“Yes, you’re a lying racist,” Mann repeatedly sputtered.

Livingstone was placed on suspension, which I gather is pretty much the equivalent of being burned at the stake in British politics. Meanwhile, the witch hunt continues…

A lot is being said these days about Jewish power and its reach. We see Jewish neocons in America able to start wars and initiate regime changes with seemingly little effort, and Jewish billionaires purchasing politicians, much as if they were going into a jewelry store and buying a cheap, fake diamond. But perhaps the most mutagenic Jewish power of all is the power to cause sabbath goy politicians to lose their marbles and go instantly insane.


A few days ago, Gilad Atzmon also posted an article about the controversy engulfing the Labour Party. It appears to have been posted just before the news broke of Shah’s postings, otherwise I’m sure he would have mentioned it. In the article, Atzmon talks about Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s capitulation to demands that he expel members of his party for holding politically incorrect views, and he makes a comment that I’m in complete agreement with: he expresses the view that the left is a “dead concept,” one which “has nothing to offer” in the fight to restore the world to some form of sanity.


Corbyn’s Labour is not a Party, More Like and Occupied Territory

By Gilad Atzmon

John McAuliffe is the latest victim of Labour’s current philo-Semitic purge. According to the Jewish Chronicle,  McAuliffe wrote that: “The Holocaust has been the most useful political tool of the Zionist government in Israel to establish a financial racket in the West, whereby Israel receives an unlimited sum for the duration of its existence.”  McAuliffe merely states the facts.  Everybody knows that ‘there is no business like shoah business,’ as Israeli politician Abba Eban put it in the 1950’s. But denying the truth and killing the messenger is now standard procedure in Corbyn’s Labour.

Like a proper Lefty, McAuliffe bent the truth a bit to fit it neatly into the party ‘narrative’. McAuliffe said that ”The Zionist government of Israel is incompatible with Judaism and Jewish history.” This is a popular statement, but it is wrong. Leftists tend to draw an imaginary demarcation line between the ‘Jew’ and the ‘Zionist.’  No such line exists. Zionism is, by far, the most popular Jewish political ideology. And Zionism in its current state is compatible with Judaism and Jewish culture: Israeli barbarism is light in comparison with some genocidal Old Testament verses and Talmudic teachings. And aggressive Zionistlobbying is consistent with the Book of Esther.

But bending the truthabout Jewish culture didn’t save McAuliffe. He was thrown out of the party in accordance with Corbyn and McDonnell’s commitment to ‘expel’ those who are making ‘Jew-hate remarks.’

For years I have suggested that the Left is Jewish by proxy, but Corbyn’s Labour exceeds the realm of proxy.  Corbyn’s Labour is now unequivocally a spineless club of Sabbos Goyim.  The Labour party’s policies are now compatible with Jewish culture: intolerant to the core and concerned primarily with the imaginary suffering of one people only. These people are not the working class, they are probably the most privileged ethnic group in Britain.  Corbyn’s Labour is a Zionist Occupied Territory.

I should be happy with the current development. It proves my theses that the Left is not a friend to Palestine, the oppressed or the workless people.

I would have never believed that Jeremy Corbyn would engage in such colossally treacherous politics. I did not anticipate that Corbyn would become a Zionist lapdog.  Corbyn was a great hope to many of us. I guess that the time has come to accept that The Left is a dead concept, it has nothing to offer. Thedissent to Global capitalism and Zio-con barbarism should take a different shape.

Ex-Marxist turned neocon David Horowitz, says that anyone who supports BDS movement has a terrorist agenda

UCLA officials denounce David Horowitz posters as intimidation

SEE ALSO David Horowitz spreading Kosher hatred @ Brooklyn College

David Horowitz/ NYTimes’ ad: ‘Anyone who attacks Israel is a Nazi!’

Horowitz: ‘BDS supports new Holocaust’

Anti-Semitism is a Trick: A Brief Historical and Theological Analysis

UCLA officials accused conservative writer David Horowitz Tuesday of using intimidation tactics after he posted flyers around campus Friday that named students and faculty members as supporters of terrorism against Israel.

Jerry Kang, vice chancellor for equity, diversity and inclusion, sent an email to students Tuesday denouncing Horowitz’s action. Horowitz, who is based in Los Angeles but unaffiliated with UCLA, alleged student members of the Muslim Student Association and Students for Justice in Palestine supported violence that targeted Jewish individuals.

In his email, Kang said Horowitz implicated the listed students and faculty members as terrorists and murderers. He added he thinks Horowitz caused severe psychological harm by listing names and releasing personal information that makes students and faculty members more vulnerable to threats.

“This serious escalation amounts to a focused, personalized intimidation that threatens specific members of our Bruin community,” Kang said in the email.

Horowitz said he did not call the students and faculty members terrorists, but instead described them as supporters of the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, which encourages sanctions against Israeli companies and institutions. Horowitz added he thinks people who support the BDS movement have a terrorist agenda.

“I want to embarrass members of MSA and SJP,” he said.

Kang said MSA and SJP are recognized student organizations in good standing, and condemned Horowitz’s attempts to malign them. He added the campus can take legal action against those responsible for the posters because they violated university policies on unauthorized graffiti and postings.

Chancellor Gene Block sent messages to those targeted by the posters Friday, and Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs Janina Montero met with the students Friday afternoon. Rahim Kurwa, a member of SJP and doctoral candidate in sociology whom Horowitz named, said Montero told students to contact campus officials if they felt unsafe.

Horowitz put up posters accusing SJP of supporting the murder of Israelis in November 2015 but did not name individual students or faculty. He told the Daily Bruin in November he did not post the flyers, but later claimed responsibility.

Horowitz said he would continue putting up flyers at UCLA until the campus formally apologizes to him and invites him to speak to students or engage him in a debate with Kang.

In a letter submitted to Kang, Horowitz’s attorneys demanded Kang retract his statement, issue an apology and refrain from further circulating what Horowitz called defamatory statements to the campus community.

Kurwa said he thinks UCLA administrators should develop a more comprehensive plan to prevent and address future incidents because they pose a threat to personal safety.

“I don’t get the sense there’s any particular training (administrators) get about how Islamophobia, anti-Arab or anti-Palestinian sentiments manifest or how to respond appropriately,” Kurwa said.

Kang said UCLA will enforce university policies on harassment and intimidation by pursuing legal action against Horowitz.

A Comparison of Jewish Behavior…2,000 Years Ago and Today


Two thousand years ago a mob of Jews stood on a paved walkway outside of Pilate’s residence in Jerusalem and screamed for Jesus’ crucifixion.

This past week, a group of Israeli soldiers and medics stood about a dying Palestinian man lying prone upon a street, offering him no medical assistance–just as one of the soldiers stepped forward and pumped a bullet into the man’s head.

The question we might ask ourselves is what do these two incidents, spaced 2,000 years apart, tell us about Jewish behavior? Do they suggest a pattern? Maybe even an historical one?


Recently I published my second novel, The Memoirs of Saint John: When the Sandstone Crumbles. The book has a lengthy section in it set in Alexandria in 38 AD. One of the first pogroms against Jews in recorded history took place in the Egyptian city at that time, and the events which unfolded, including a massive explosion of violence against Jews, serve as the story’s backdrop.

Here’s a true fact–a man named Philo lived in Alexandria in those days. He was one of the wealthiest, most prominent Jews of the city, and he also happened to be a prolific writer. You can do a search and turn up a number of his treatises on the Internet today. One of these is entitled “Embassy to Gaius,” in which he referred to the native Egyptians as “a seed bed of evil in whose souls both the venom and the temper of the native crocodiles and asps were reproduced.” Philo, though highly respected by Jewish scholars today, was, as you can see, a bit of a racist.

The population of Alexandria at the time was comprised mainly of three different groups. There were the Native Egyptians, the Greeks, and the Jews. Considerable tensions existed between the Jews, on the one hand, and the Greeks and Native Egyptians on the other. The Native Egyptians by and large tended to work as laborers for Jewish traders and shopkeepers, though some excelled in a variety of other endeavors including philosophy and sciences.

In addition to his supremacist attitude toward the Egyptians, Philo also managed to enrage Greek scholars at the Museion–the sector that housed the city’s famed library–by insisting that Plato had gotten all his ideas from Moses. The Greeks, of course, revered Plato, much in the way that the Jews venerated Moses. A brouhaha ensued, particularly after Philo asserted that Moses had been in essence “the very summit of philosophy.”

An Egyptian scholar jumped into the fray by arguing that the ancient Israelites had not actually escaped from Egypt, as their books maintain, but had in reality been expelled–while a Greek scholar interjected, by way of elaboration, that the expulsion had been due to the Israelites being “scabby and leprous.”

Thus, as we see, tensions in the city were seething under the surface–at virtually every level of society. It was in essence a “perfect storm” waiting to engulf the Jews of Alexandria. And it did indeed engulf them.

One of the things I noticed when I started studying the events of 38 AD is the striking parallel between Jewish behavior at that time and what we see occurring in Occupied Palestine today. In fact, it was one of the reasons I wrote the novel.

For 275 years–from 305 BC up to 30 BC–Alexandria was under the rule of a family dynasty known as the Ptolemies. During this time the city was subdivided into five districts, each named after the first five letters of the Greek alphabet. The Jews were assigned the Delta district with the stipulation that they remain in that district and not move into other areas of the city. This took place under one of the early Ptolemy leaders, who also accorded the Jews a large measure of self-government. The privileges extended to them included the right to practice their own religion according to their own laws, with a Jewish ethnarch to preside over their civil affairs whose power was officially recognized by the Ptolemy kings. The Ptolemies had in effect rendered Jews independent of the council and civic government of the city as a whole, though as I say, there was one stipulation–that they remain in the Delta district.

But in the following years, the Jewish population grew, and eventually leave was given them to expand into a second district. Into a third district they also moved, followed by a fourth, until, by 38 AD, Jews could be found living in all five districts of the city. This in itself probably would have brought them into conflict with the other two ethnic groups, but Jews were granted additional licenses as well.

The lone Jewish ethnarch had been replaced by a Gerousia, which had 71 members–just like the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem. Theoretically, the Gerousia was subject to the authority of Flaccus, the Roman-appointed governor of Egypt, but Jews also had considerable political influence in Rome. Herod Agrippa, part Jewish, was best friends with the emperor Gaius. The two were old school chums, and Gaius appointed Agrippa as king over a vast swath of territory, including most of Palestine as well as parts of what is today Syria.

In Alexandria itself, Jews equally held political influence. Despite being presided over by their own Gerousia, through which they conducted their own civil affairs, they also held administrative posts in the city government. In fact, Philo’s brother, a man named Alexander, held the position of alabarch, making him the chief customs official for both of the city’s harbors. He was widely suspected of corruption.

The riots against the Jews started in early August that year, and ended up with Jewish shops being plundered and with Jews being bound and dragged through the streets. The anger had been building for nearly three centuries, and suddenly it found release in an explosion of pent-up fury. A “court” was set up in the city’s theater. Here Jews were taken, accused of crimes, and subsequently found guilty. Some were killed, others were stripped of their clothing and flogged in front of an audience of cheering spectators. The flogged and chastened included a group of 38 members of the Gerousia who had been captured and paraded through the streets.

All of these events are described in my novel. What I see in Palestine today is notexactly the same, but it does have certain similarities. Glaring examples of Jewish supremacism can of course be seen on display in modern day Israel. For instance, compare Philo’s quote about the Native Egyptians–that they are “a seed bed of evil in whose souls both the venom and the temper of the native crocodiles and asps were reproduced”–with remarks about the Palestinians by Israeli “Justice” Minister Ayelet Shaked:

They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there.

Crocodiles and asps…little snakes. You get my drift. Striking, striking similarities! And of course, compare the expansion out of the Delta district by Alexandria’s Jews with the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

Note also what Shaked said regarding blood, namely that the Palestinian’s “blood shall be on all their heads,” and then look at Matthew 27:25. “Then answered all the people, and said, ‘His blood be on us and on our children.’” It has often been the contention of Jews that passages like this from the gospels are nothing more than fabrications by anti-Semites–but the extent to which we see Israel now validating the portrayals of Jews in the New Testament is little short of amazing!

This past week a video (the lower one above) went viral all over the world. What it shows is an Israeli soldier stepping up toward Abdul Sharif and firing a bullet into his head. You can’t make out Sharif’s features too well in video above, but in the photo below, he is the one on the right.

 photo qasrasharif_zpsnnigi8fv.jpgBoth Sharif and Ramzi Aziz Qasrawi were shot after an alleged stabbing attack on an Israeli soldier in the West Bank city of Hebron. Both died. Both were 21 years old.

The video has created an international uproar. Clearly Sharif had been subdued and posed no threat to anyone. So why did the soldier shoot him in the head? What was going through his mind?

The shooting took place in the morning hours of Thursday, March 24. The day was a holiday in Israel. The holiday, Purim, marks the massacre of thousands of Gentiles, as related in the Old Testament book of Esther. The shooting took place in the same area of Hebron where a Purim celebration was scheduled to be held later that day. Here is a video showing a portion of that celebration:

The celebrants seem oblivious to the international outrage that was, at that very time, beginning to brew. Israeli officials, however, were not oblivious, and a few were exerting efforts at damage control. One of these was Brigadier Gen. Moti Almoz.

“As far as the orders given to soldiers are concerned, the moment terrorists are neutralized, soldiers are supposed to immediately give medical assistance to the wounded, including the terrorists,” Almoz claimed. “This is the IDF, these are the values of the IDF, and this is not up for interpretation. We are unambiguous about this.”

 photo almoz_zpsfovdroa7.jpgThe general, in other words, was attempting pass off the atrocity as nothing more than a stunning aberration. Nothing like this has ever happened before!

“This is not the IDF culture or the Jewish peoples’ culture,” he insisted.

Perhaps Almoz hasn’t heard the news that Israel is a sick society, as confessed by the country’s own president.

For most of us, I guess, it would be hard to conceive of a country where people are left to bleed on the street as being anything other than a sick society, and as one writer put it, “Maybe even worse than the murder itself is the fact that no one in the vicinity seems at all moved by it.”

The timeline of events is kind of interesting. On March 15, just nine days before Sharif’s execution, Israel announced it had seized 579 acres of Palestinian land near the Dead Sea for construction of Jewish settlements as well as tourism enterprises. It was the largest confiscation in recent years. Two days later, on March 17, the act was condemned by the EU, but then on March 21, a brand new land grab was announced, of approximately 296 additional acres, near Nablus. Then came the brutal killing in Hebron, captured on videotape. Much of the world’s attention at the time was focused on Belgium, which had experience a bloody terrorist attack just the day before, but the video that emerged from Hebron was so shocking it even managed to upstage the images from Brussels.

On Friday, the day after Purim, Ma’an News reported that the Palestinian cameraman who had shot the video had become the target of threats and harassment. Meanwhile, Aymen Odeh, a Palestinian member of the Israeli Knessett, tweeted that “Israel has turned in recent months into a place in which executions are carried out in public with the encouragement of cheering mobs.” Others were tweeting similar things.

Zionist Squatters in occupied Ashkelon demonstrating in support for IOF that executed Palestinian in Hebron

Observations like Odeh’s are being made more and more frequently these days–by Jews as well as non-Jews–both inside and outside of Israel.

“Our collective moral compass has become so fundamentally twisted that even the most decent of people, those who are not considered extremists, believe that there is nothing wrong with shooting a man as he lies dying on the ground,” writes Jewish Israeli Orly Noy.

“One of the more dangerous and frustrating aspects of the fascism taking over the Jewish-Israeli public, led by its elected officials, is the way it is fed by every single thing that happens here. Nearly every piece of news pushes this process forward — even events that should serve as a warning sign,” she adds.

Another astute observer is US author E. Michael Jones. In an interview with Press TV last December, Jones said what we’re seeing in Israel now, both with regard to the killing of Palestinians as well as the theft of their lands, is a rebellion against what the Greeks referred to a logos, or “reason.”

“Reasonable people know that you can’t steal the property of other people, but these are not reasonable people,” said Jones–and what we are witnessing now is “the internal logic of Zionism.” He went on to add:

They stole the land in 1948. They’re going to keep stealing the land until some type of external force stops them from stealing the land, because when you don’t have reason, you don’t recognize any boundaries. You expand and you expand until you are stopped from the outside…What they’re doing is basically turning world opinion against themselves, and we’re in for a long process, of basically the change–the Jews, the Israelis, the Zionists acting in a way that will lead to their total ostracism by civilized people throughout the world.

The “long process” Jones alludes to is actually a long and lengthy repetition of cycles–of Jews entering a country or region, followed by a pogrom or expulsion of them or their descendants from the same area some years, decades, or centuries later. The list here shows 109 such expulsions over a period beginning in 250 AD and running through 1948.

Taking some of this history perhaps into account, Theodore Herzl, regarded as the father of modern Zionism, made a rather telling observation in his book, Der Judenstaat, or The Jewish State:

The Jewish question persists wherever Jews live in appreciable numbers. Wherever it does not exist, it is brought in together with Jewish immigrants. We are naturally drawn into those places where we are not persecuted, and our appearance there gives rise to persecution. This is the case, and will inevitably be so, everywhere, even in highly civilised countries—see, for instance, France—so long as the Jewish question is not solved on the political level.

Herzl thought the only way Jews would ever be able to avoid anti-Semitism was by having a state of their own. But if the mere “appearance” of Jews in a new place naturally “gives rise to persecution,” as he put it, how would it be possible for such a people to found a state that would or ever could live in peace with its neighbors? This is what Herzl seemingly failed to take into consideration.

Bolivia shows the way forward by declaring israel a ‘terrorist state’

Bolivia declares Israel a ‘terrorist state’

Bolivian President Evo Morales declared Israel a “terrorist state,” Wednesday, because of the ongoing offensive in the Gaza Strip.

Israeli citizens will now be required to obtain a visa before traveling to Bolivia. Previously, under a 1972 agreement, which Morales denounced for being “signed under a dictatorial regime,” Israelis could travel freely into Bolivia without having to obtain a visa, according to La Razón.

Israel is now considered a “group 3” country, meaning visa applications must be reviewed by the National Migration Administration.

“In other words we are declaring (Israel) a terrorist state,” Página Siete reported Morales as saying.

“Israel does not respect the principles or purposes of the United Nations charter nor the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” Morales said, according to Página Siete.

Morales, an admirer of the late Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez’s Bolivarian socialism, broke off diplomatic relations with the Jewish state in 2009, and has renounced Israel’s treatment of Palestinians “a genocide.”

South America is a popular destination for young Israelis.

Other South American countries, including Brazil, Chile, Ecuador and Peru, have recalled their ambassadors from Israel in protest over the fighting in Gaza.

Contributing: The Associated Press

Pew Study Exposes israel’s Racism: The NY Times Buries It

Pew Study Exposes Israel Racism: The NY Times Buries It

By Barbara Erickson | TimesWarp | March 14, 2016

When the Pew Research Center found that 48 percent of Israeli Jews would like to expel or transfer Palestinians from their land, the press took notice. Although this finding was one result among many in an extensive poll, media outlets everywhere devoted their headlines to this striking sign of racism in Israeli society.

Groundbreaking Pew Survey: Almost Half of Israeli Jews Back Transfer or Expulsion of Arabs,” the Israeli newspaper Haaretz proclaimed. The British paper The Independent announced, “Nearly half of Israeli Jews believe in ethnic cleansing, survey finds.”

Similar headlines appeared elsewhere, even in Jewish papers within the United States . But there was one notable exception: The New York Times presented readers with this aberrant title: “Deep Rifts Among Israeli Jews Are Found in Religion Survey.”

Readers who dig into the text that follows find no mention of the attitude toward expulsion until they have plowed through eight paragraphs of commentary about divisions between Israeli Jewish groups.

When the author, Isabel Kershner, finally addresses the burning topic of expulsion, she immediately adds that the result should be taken with a grain of salt because the question was not specific enough. She then drops the subject for another 10 paragraphs before circling back to take it up once again.

The fact that she concludes her piece with this topic suggest that it is the data on transfer and expulsion that most concern her, in spite of the diversionary headline and story line.

Readers who stick with Kershner until the end find several paragraphs of commentary aimed at whitewashing Israel’s image: The question about expulsion was too general; other surveys have produced different results; it may be used as a “weapon” by Israel’s critics; and this single result shouldn’t be taken “in isolation.”

These are the final words in the piece, and they are aimed at denying Israel’s problem with racism. But Kershner has omitted other findings from the survey that paint a different picture. Nearly 80 percent of all Israeli Jews agreed that Jews should have “preferential treatment” in Israel, and some 80 percent of Israeli Muslims said discrimination against their group is common.

She also omits Israeli President Reuven Rivlin’s comment on the data concerning Palestinians. She provides only his vague quote that Israelis need to “address our problems at home, more than ever,” omitting the fact that he had named the “attitude towards Israel’s Arab citizens” as a singular challenge.

Kershner’s story drew the attention of James Zogby, president of the Arab-American Institute, who wrote in the Huffington Post that her article includes a “classic example of deflection.” After reporting that nearly half of Israeli Jews want to get rid of the Palestinians in their midst, he noted, she immediately adds that “Israeli pollsters found the wording of the question problematic.”

In other words, she couldn’t report the finding in a straightforward way, as she did with the data on other issues dividing various Jewish religious groups.

The entire story, from the headline to the final quote, is built around evasion, beginning with the title and a photo—not of the threatened Palestinian population, but of Jewish citizens at a market. It wanders into sidetracks before reporting the alarming result from the Pew study, then veers away again, coming back to end the piece with a series of quotes meant to deflect the blame from Israel.

Times editors know that many readers never get beyond the headlines and many others read little more than the opening paragraphs of a story. Once again it has buried the real story under piles of diversion, knowing well that few readers will take note.

%d bloggers like this: