RUSSIAN HYSTERIA 2.0: BOTH PRIMARY US CANDIDATES ARE KREMLIN AGENTS

In the upcoming US Presidential elections, the new hysteria is that Russia is attempting to influence US voters and is supporting both key candidates – Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.

This means that the “evil Russians” have stepped up their game and actually want either of the front-runners to win.

Senator Bernie Sanders, the most popular Democrat politician, winner of Nevada’s next party election and leader of polls in the US autumn presidential election, said Russian President Vladimir Putin is not his friend and accused the Russian leader of being an “autocratic thug.”

But that’s exactly what he would say if he was a Putin agent, of course, he wouldn’t let himself be discovered.

If voters have to choose between Trump and Sanders, they will suddenly find themselves in a situation of choice between politicians, both of whom are declared authoritative by the media and “intelligence sources” claim they are actual Kremlin agents.

It is hard to imagine how a society can maintain at least minimal prudence and minimal respect for its own security forces and democratic institutions in this case.

It is also noteworthy that the reports that Russia is providing electoral support to Sanders, who is trying to become a presidential candidate for the Democratic Party, began appea

According to American experts, now his chances of winning the national congress of the Democratic Party, which determines the presidential candidate, have increased significantly.

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders beat opponents at Democrats’ caucuses in Nevada. According to American media, he won 47% of the vote. This is almost two times that of Joe Biden, who became second. Third place went to the ex-mayor of South- Benda to Pete Buttigic.

However, in 2016 there was already a similar situation – and then Sanders was simply “robbed” by the votes at the national party congress, because the party elite decided that Hillary Clinton would still be the best candidate, and the votes of ordinary voters and Sanders delegates did not matter.

The “fact” that Russian structures are trying to help the election campaign of the Vermont Senator Sanders, the Washington Post reported, citing sources in the US intelligence circles. As the publication emphasized, American lawmakers, the Donald Trump administration, and the candidate himself were informed of this Russian intervention.Joy Reid@JoyAnnReid

And unlike Trump, @BernieSanders had the correct response:

“I don’t care, frankly, who Putin wants to be president,” Sanders said in a statement to The Washington Post. “My message to Putin is clear: stay out of American elections, and as president I will make sure that you do.” https://twitter.com/Santucci/status/1230966727183405056 …John Santucci@SantucciWOW —- WAPO – Bernie Sanders briefed by U.S. officials that Russia is trying to help his presidential campaign https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/bernie-sanders-briefed-by-us-officials-that-russia-is-trying-to-help-his-presidential-campaign/2020/02/21/5ad396a6-54bd-11ea-929a-64efa7482a77_story.html …28.1KTwitter Ads info and privacy7,048 people are talking about this

“Unlike Donald Trump, I do not consider Vladimir Putin a good friend. He is an autocratic thug,” Sanders also said. “I don’t care, frankly, who Putin wants to be president. My message to Putin is clear: stay out of American elections, and as president I will make sure that you do.”

US National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien said that he had seen no intelligence or analysis to support the claims that Russia was supporting anybody in the elections.

All information that claims Trump or Sanders are supported by Russia comes from unnamed US officials, and various intelligence sources.

Regardless, absurd rhetoric continues.

James Carville, a prominent democratic political strategist, said that Putin won the Nevada election.

Carville is known for actively participating in the winning election campaigns of Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, Ehud Barak and Afghan President Ghani and so on and so forth.

According to Carville, the Kremlin specifically supports Sanders to bring down the weakest democratic candidate against Trump who will definitely lose to Trump. And to save Trump for the 2nd term, the main goal of the Kremlin.

As a result, Sanders’ victory in Nevada and Biden’s defeat translate into discussion of whether Putin manipulated the elections in Nevada. Carville also called on all democratic candidates to unite against Sanders and prevent the Kremlin from implementing its plans.

Republicans, in turn, point out that the CIA (with the support of CNN and the Washington Post) specifically stated 1 day before the Nevada caucus that Russia supported Sanders (this is in addition to standard accusations that Sanders was allegedly a communist).

Thus, they wanted to cover up Sanders’ relations with the Kremlin, as they did with Trump and lower his chances in the elections. But the voter failed and the plan did not work, hence the growing hysteria among the democratic establishment, which created a very monstrous picture, where the main candidates from both parties are connected with the Kremlin.

Regardless, a plethora of memes and caricatures are now being spread in social media, depicting Putin as the biggest winner, Sanders as a communist, as well as both him and Trump as Kremlin agents and what not.

Some of them can be seen below:

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Democrats Reportedly Rattled by Prospect of Sanders Snaring Nomination to Face off Against Trump

After a strong showing in the first two contests of the 2020 Democratic race – the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary, self-proclaimed democratic socialist Senator Bernie Sanders has been shaping up as the new Democratic front-runner, with the potential to run against President Donald Trump.

Some Democrats are reportedly rattled by the possibility that Sen. Bernie Sanders, who registered to run as a Democrat and as an Independent in 2019 after parting ways with the party following his 2016 primaries defeat by Hillary Clinton, could win the Democratic nomination that would see him enter a final showdown with President Donald Trump, reports Fox News.

As Sanders was projected to win Saturday’s Nevada caucuses, furthering his lead over his Democratic rivals, individual representatives from the ranks of vulnerable, or freshman Democrats representing battleground states are believed to have concerns over how the Vermont Senator might match up against the current Commander-in-Chief.

The ‘Sanders Scare’

Some Democrats are reportedly anxious that Bernie Sanders’ socialist bent might prevent him from winning over swing voters, such as those in rural areas, the upper Midwest and some of the more conservative-minded Democrats.

The outlet quotes one such freshman Democrat as saying:

“It’s bad… We are having conversations about how to deal with this.”

Another source, who suggested that a primary win by Bernie Sanders would see many voters leave the top of the ticket blank, was cited as expressing the dire prediction:

“If [Sanders] is the nominee, we lose.”

A Sanders nomination would almost certainly result in their states being snapped up by Donald Trump, as well as influence the ballot race for Democratic House and Senate candidates, two other Democrats apparently indicated.

“I think that [Sanders] can be challenging in parts of the country that we have to win in order to win the presidency,” Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., was quoted as saying.

Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., was more emphatic:

“We have to win Pennsylvania. [If] we lose there, it’s over.”

As for what possible measures might be taken by Democrats to offset the Sanders situation, lawmakers have not offered any specifics.

When asked if perhaps the Democrats would attempt to block Sanders, or try to “spin” things, one Democrat reportedly said an attempt might be made to accentuate local issues to enlist votes, but admitted it would be challenging to contend with the Sanders “narrative” and Trump impeachment aftershocks.

“We’re just starting,” said one Democrat.

One House Democrat from a swing state reportedly tried to allay concerns, arguing that it didn’t matter who the Democratic nominee was, as voters in his state were prepared to support “anyone else”, even Sanders, besides President Trump.

Some Democrats are believed to question whether they should consider self-proclaimed democratic socialist Sanders one of their own.
Although having always “caucused” with the Democrats in both the House and Senate, Sanders has long identified as a socialist, and when serving in the House and Senate he was identified as an “independent”.

Bernie Sanders with supporters

Against the backdrop of “alarm bells” regarding a likely Sanders nomination, some democratic sources pointed out that the party had only apportioned a small percentage of delegates and there was enough time to mitigate matters.

“It’s still so early… We just have to win,” said one source.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was reported as attempting to quell the swelling up anxiety, saying:

“I can hear you say ‘Oh, we’re all in a panic. The establishment Democrats.’ I’m like ‘Is there some establishment that I don’t know about around here?’”

Pelosi added:

“It’s a messy business. But this is so: we’re calm. We’re cool. We’re collected.”

Against the backdrop of VSanders’ projected 22 February victory in the Nevada caucuses, Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg, who is seeking to establish himself as Sanders’ chief rival, warned the Democrats against rushing to nominate the democratic socialist, suggesting this could prevent them from defeating President Trump.

Democratic presidential candidate former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg speaks to supporters at a primary night election rally at Nashua Community College, Tuesday, Feb. 11, 2020, in Nashua, N.H.

© AP PHOTO / ANDREW HARNIKDemocratic presidential candidate former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg speaks to supporters at a primary night election rally at Nashua Community College, Tuesday, Feb. 11, 2020, in Nashua, N.H.

“Senator Sanders believes in an inflexible, ideological revolution that leaves out most Democrats, not to mention most Americans… Before we rush to nominate Senator Sanders as our one shot to take on this president… let’s take a sober look at the consequences – for our party, for our values, and for those with the most at stake,” said Buttigieg.

“Unstoppable!”

Sanders sent out a series of tweets to celebrate his projected victory in the Nevada caucuses Saturday and urged his supporters to keep the momentum going.

We just won the Nevada caucus. This grassroots movement is unstoppable. Together, let’s win the Democratic nomination, defeat Trump and transform the country! Join us live in San Antonio: https://t.co/XB1Ua14x8m— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) February 23, 2020

​Sanders, who’s making his second consecutive White House run, has been campaigning in San Antonio, Texas, ahead of the Super Tuesday contests.

He celebrated his Nevada triumph by touting “a multi-generational, multiracial coalition”.

Sanders, whose popularity has been surging as evidenced by a new national Washington Post-ABC News poll which showed him leading by a huge margin, has now triumphed in two of the first three states to weigh in on the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.

The Vermont Senator won a week and a half ago in the New Hampshire primary, and also won the popular vote total in the Iowa caucuses, but slightly trailed Pete Buttigieg in the delegate percentage after the Iowa Democratic Party announced the results of a recanvass of targeted precincts from the state’s Democratic caucuses.

Buttigieg now leads Sanders by .08 state delegate equivalents, according to results posted by the state party, with 26.186 percent for Buttigieg to 26.182 percent for Sanders. The initial results were marred by apparent confusion due to reporting or mathematical errors.

Related

Sanders: Saudi Arabia’s Rulers Are Murderous Thugs

By Staff, By Agencies 

The Democratic frontrunner for the US presidency, Senator Bernie Sanders, lambasted Saudi Arabia’s leadership during a town hall meeting on CNN, reaffirming his promise to pursue a more even-handed foreign policy in the Middle East. 

“For years, we have loved Saudi Arabia – our wonderful ally; the only problem is the people who run that country are murderous thugs,” Sanders said on Tuesday. 

The Vermont senator added that instead of “being really cozy” with Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman – whom he described as a “billionaire dictator” – Washington should try to resolve the issues between the kingdom and Iran to bring peace to the Middle East. 

“We can bring the Saudis and the Iranians together, tell them that we’re sick and tired as a nation [of] spending trillions of dollars on endless wars,” Sanders said. “They’re going to have to get their act together. And we have the resources to help bring that about.”

The senator, who won the popular vote in the first two Democratic contests, also reiterated his stance that the United States should not ignore Palestinians’ needs while being supportive of “Israel”.

Sanders pledged to protect the independence and security of Israeli citizens without being supportive of the “right-wing racist government that currently exists in “Israel”.

He also pointed to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza where the youth unemployment rate is near 70 percent.
“What American foreign policy has got to be about in the Middle East is bringing the Israelis, bringing the Palestinians together under the banner of justice,” Sanders said. 

He further stated: “We have the wealth to do it. It cannot just simply be one that we’re just pro-Israel and we ignore the needs of the Palestinian people. We’ve got to pay attention to both.”

The senator made similar remarks during a presidential debate in December when he said US foreign policy cannot be only pro-Israel, but must be “pro-Palestinian” as well.
 

Dershowitz on the Promotion of Jewish Values (precious)

 BY GILAD ATZMON

In his desperate attempt to defame Bernie Sanders, the Harvard professor has identified the enemy within: “the worst people in terms of not promoting Jewish values.” Dershowitz was referring to Norman Finkelstein, Karl Marx, Noam Chomsky and Gilad Atzmon. I guess that most people would regard the company above as guardians of justice and humanism. Not exactly a quality that can be attributed to Dershowitz and his arch pedo-pal Jeffrey Epstein.

Sooner or later, the American people will have to figure out how did lame characters such as Dershowitz have managed to invade their Ivy League institutions…

Donate

Why the ‘Left’ is Dead in the Water (revisited)

Source

left.jpg

Introduction: Following his party’s catastrophic defeat, humiliated Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn announced this morning that he would discuss with the party its need for a ‘process of reflection’ and promised that he himself “will lead the party during this period to ensure this discussion takes place.”

I will not hold my breath waiting for Labour to overcome its most acute problems. As a first step toward a recovery I would advise Corbyn and his caricature party that instead of suspending and expelling party members for reading yours truly, instead of expelling MPs for supporting my right to make a living as musician, or spending hundreds of thousands of taxpayers money trying to appease a foreign ardent right wing Lobby., the Labour partly/hardly should instead make my work compulsory reading for its members and leadership.

In this commentary from February 2019 I explain why the Left is dead in the water and why Corbyn’s Labour is a symptom of the total disaster that is the contemporary Left.

Why the ‘Left’ is Dead in the Water

By Gilad Atzmon

28.2.19

It seems that there is not much left of the Left and what remains has nothing to do with ‘Left.’

 Contemporary  ‘Left’ politics is detached from its natural constituency, working people. The so called ‘Left’ is basically a symbolic identifier for ‘Guardian readers’  a critical expression attributed to middle class people who, for some reason, claim to know what is good for the working class. How did this happen to the Left? Why was it derailed and by whom?

 Hierarchy is one answer. The capitalist and the corporate worlds operate on an intensely hierarchical basis. The path to leadership within a bank, management of a globally trading company or even high command in the military is of an evolutionary nature. Such power is acquired by a challenging climb within an increasingly  demanding system. It is all about the survival of the fittest. Every step entails new challenges. Failure at any step could easily result in a setback or even a career end. In the old good days, the Left also operated on a hierarchical system. There was a long challenging path from the local workers’ union to the national party. But the Left is hierarchical no more.

 Left ideology, like working class politics, was initially the byproduct of the industrial revolution. It was born to address the needs and demands of a new emerging class; those who were working day and night to make other people richer.  In the old days, when Left was a meaningful adventure, Left politicians grew out of workers’ unions. Those who were distinguished in representing and improving the conditions of their fellow workers made it to the trade unions and eventually into the national parties. None of that exists anymore.

 In a world without manufacturing, the working class have been removed from the consumption chain and demoted into an ‘under class.’ The contemporary Left politician has nothing to do with the workless people let alone the workless class.  The unions are largely defunct.  You won’t find many Labour politicians who have actually worked in factories and mixed with working people for real. No contemporary Left politician including Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders is the product of a struggle through a highly demanding hierarchical system as such a system hasn’t really existed within the Left  for at least four decades.

In most cases, the contemporary Left politician is a middle class university activist groomed through party politics activity. Instead of fighting for manufacturing and jobs, the Left has embraced the highly divisive identitarian battle.  While the old Left tended to unite us by leading the fight against the horrid capitalists rather than worrying about  whether you were a man or a woman, black or white, Jew or Muslim, gay or hetero, our present-day ‘Left’ actually promotes racial differences and divisions as it pushes people to identify with their biology (skin colour, gender, sexual orientation, Jewish maternal gene etc.) If the old Left united us against the capitalists, the contemporary ‘Left’ divides us and uses the funds it collects from capitalist foundations such as George Soros’ Open Society Institute.

 The British Labour party is a prime example of this. It is deaf to the cry of the lower classes. It claims to care ‘for the many’ but in practice is only attentive to a few voices within the intrusive Israeli Lobby. As Britain is struggling with the crucial debate over Brexit, British Labour has been focused instead on spurious  allegations of ‘antisemitsm.’  It is hard to see how any Left political body in the West even plans to bring more work to the people. The Left offers nothing in the way of a vision of a better society for all.  It is impossible to find the Left within the contemporary ‘Left.’

 Why has this happened to the Left, why has it become irrelevant?  Because by now the Left is a non-hierarchical system. It is an amalgam of uniquely ungifted people who made politics into their ‘career.’ Most Left politicians have never worked at a proper job where money is exchanged for merit, achievements or results. The vast majority of Left politicians have never faced the economic  challenges associated with the experience of being adults. Tragically such people can’t lead a country, a city, a borough or even a village.

The Left had a mostly positive run for about 150 years. But its role has come to an end as the condition of being in the world has been radically transformed. The Left failed to adapt. It removed itself from the universal ethos.

The shift in our human landscape has created a desperate need for a new ethos: a fresh stand point that will reinstate the Western Athenian ethical and universal roots and produce a new canon that aspires for truth and truthfulness as opposed to the current cancerous tyranny of correctness.


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

Donate

The International Zionist Conspiracy

It poisons everything it touches

The Jewish Progressive Agenda according to Bernie Sanders

 

sanders final.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon

In the 2016 Democratic primaries, Bernie Sanders presented himself as an American who happened to be Jewish.  Now, in a radical shift, Sanders identifies as “a proud Jewish American.” The progressive politician went from speaking in a universalist voice to defining himself as a 3rd category Jew, i.e., a person who identifies politically as a Jew (as opposed to identifying religiously:1st category, or ancestrally: 2nd category). In his new capacity as a proud Jew, Sanders has declared all out war on Anti Semitism on behalf of his people and in the name of what he describes as ‘multicultural progressive values’.

In his recent extended article titled How to Fight Antisemitism, published by the purportedly ‘Left’ Jewish Currents, Sanders takes up the same line you’d expect from an ADL spokesman, ticking every Hasbara box from the Jewish right of ‘self determination ‘to the primacy of Jewish suffering.

It is hard to miss the echo of Zionist propaganda in Sanders’ drivel. Understandably, Sanders doesn’t like Anti-Semitism. In that he isn’t alone. I would venture that no one, including antisemites, likes anti-Semitism. However, fighting anti Semitism is pretty simple. All it takes is self-reflection. This is exactly what early Zionists did and it was pretty effective. Early Zionism promised  to introduce a new Hebrew: civilized, proletarian, universalist and ethical. Some of the worst anti-Semites were impressed with the idea, for a while even Hitler supported that Jewish nationalist project. At the time, Zionists were so popular that they were largely forgiven their 1948 racist ethnic cleansing crimes. Their introspective project was perceived as genuine.

Now, Sanders informs us, “antisemitism is rising in this country. According to the FBI, hate crimes against Jews rose by more than a third in 2017 and accounted for 58% of all religion-based hate crimes in America.”  Does the ‘progressive’ presidential wannabe bother to ask himself why an ethnic group that comprises only 2% of the American population is subject to the vast majority of religion based hate crimes?

Sanders doesn’t advocate that Jews reflect on whether there is something they do that provokes such crimes,  he prefers to blame everyone else and White identitarians in particular. He argues that antisemites such as the Pittsburgh Synagogue murderer “acted on a twisted belief that Jews were part of a nefarious plot to undermine white America. This wave of violence is the result of a dangerous political ideology that targets Jews and anyone who does not fit a narrow vision of a whites-only America.”

Although I am a harsh critic all forms of identitarianism,  Sanders seems to want it both ways, he identifies himself as a “proud Jewish American” and yet he is hostile to those who identify as White and to their political and identitarian agenda. In reading Sanders’ piece, one can’t miss the fact that the so-called ‘progressive’ seems to support all forms of identitarianism except the White one. “This wave of violence” he writes, “is the result of a dangerous political ideology that targets Jews and anyone who does not fit a narrow vision of a whites-only America.”

Politicians who explore ideas in a manner that is ignorant, uneducated and clumsy are now a universal Western symptom. However, Sanders manages to form a category of his own. “The antisemites who marched in Charlottesville don’t just hate Jews. They hate the idea of multiracial democracy.”

What is multiracial democracy? Are we supposed to know or should we guess? Are there any voices that should be excluded from this type of diverse democracy?

 “They [presumably, the White Identitarians] hate the idea of political equality.”

Is this true? Perhaps ‘they,’ rightly or wrongly, just see themselves as among the oppressed and want their plight addressed?

“They hate immigrants, people of color, LGBTQ people, women, and anyone else who stands in the way of a whites-only America.”

Does Sanders understand that ‘hating people’ (women, migrants, people of color, LGBTQ etc,) is not the same as opposing the identity politics that divides nations into a manifold of discrete identities?

Sanders accuses the anti-Semites of being conspiratorial. “this is the conspiracy theory that drove the Pittsburgh murderer—that Jews are conspiring to bring immigrants into the country to “replace” Americans.”

I feel obliged to remind Mr. Sanders it is hardly conspiratorial to acknowledge the fact that Jewish politics in the West and in America in particular, is pro-immigration. It is well documented and is actually rational. As opposed to the Jewish State that performs some of the most brutal anti immigration policies, Diaspora Jews tend to prefer to live in a society that is made of an amalgam of many groups and ethnicities. Sanders who identifies himself as a ‘proud Jew’ should ask himself why he supports ‘multicultural democracy’ and what he means by that. Sanders ought to look into the work of HIAS and decide for himself how well it reflects his own political sentiments.

 Bernie Sanders sees anti-Semitism as “a conspiracy theory that a secretly powerful  (Jewish) minority exercises control over society.”

Someone should ask Sanders to explain the peculiar phenomenon at work when Israeli PM Netanyahu received  29 standing ovations during his hard line speech in Congress. Mr. Sanders, who believes that pointing at Jewish power arises from ‘conspiratorial’ inclinations may want to ask himself what drove him to declare war against anti Semitism instead of joining battle against all racism. Does Sanders plan to speak at AIPAC or J-Street as part of his presidential campaign or does he intend to deny himself the support of the most influential political lobbies in Washington?

Sanders writes that “like other forms of bigotry—racism, sexism, homophobia—antisemitism is used by the right to divide people from one another and prevent us from fighting together for a shared future of equality, peace, prosperity, and environmental justice.” But if Sanders is genuine here and his objective is ‘unity,’ why does he single out  White identitarians? Shouldn’t he invite the Whites to join his phantasmic identitarian ‘unity’ as equal partners? And more to the point, if “like other forms of bigotry—racism, sexism, homophobia—antisemitism is used by the right to divide people” why not simply oppose all racism and bigotry in a universal manner?

According to the “proud Jewish American” who wants to be the next  president, “opposing antisemitism is a core value of progressivism.” Is it?  I would have thought that progressivism is about opposing all forms of racism in the largest and least discriminatory manner.

To illustrate his alliance with what is currently the most racist state on the planet, Sanders delves into nostalgic memories of his Zionist youth. “I have a connection to Israel going back many years. In 1963, I lived on a kibbutz near Haifa. It was there that I saw and experienced for myself many of the progressive values upon which Israel was founded.”

Mr Sanders forgets to mention that Sha’ar Haamakim, the Kibbutz he briefly dwelled in, was founded on the land of a Palestinian village; Al Zubaidat that had been the home of 60 Palestinian families. In 1925 a Zionist organisation purchased the village land from a rich Beiruty family and beginning in 1931, the Jewish Agency struggled to evict the Palestinians of  El Zubeidat. A few years later, in 1935,  Kibbutz Sha’ar HaAmakim was founded by Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe. In short, the place Sanders describes as embodying  ‘progressive values’ was in fact, part of the vile racially driven, Zionist ethnic cleansing project.

The intellectually compromised Sanders goes on to describe a criminal state with a very odd use of the term ‘progressive.’  “I think it is very important for everyone, but particularly for progressives, to acknowledge the enormous achievement of establishing a democratic homeland for the Jewish people after centuries of displacement and persecution.” I find this confusing.  Unless the words ‘progressive’ and ‘Jewish’ have morphed into synonyms, I do not understand what is ‘progressive’ about the process of violent racist ethnic cleansing.

I guess even Sanders must realise that his pro Israeli screed is easily ridiculed.

  “We must also be honest about this: The founding of Israel is understood by another people in the land of Palestine as the cause of their painful displacement.”

According to Sanders the Palestinian plight is simply a matter of a subjective perception, that  it was merely ‘understood’ by the Palestinians that the founding of Israel resulted in their own painful displacement.  Sanders dismisses reality, ignoring the chain of massacres of Palestinians in 1948, and the clear agenda of the Israeli military to cleanse the indigenous people of Palestine from their land. I can’t think of anything more disgusting and duplicitous than Sanders’ fake humanism.

 Sanders finds that “some criticism of Israel can cross the line into antisemitism, especially when it denies the right of self-determination to Jews…” I allow myself to assert that no one out there denies Jews or anyone else’s right of self-determination but self determination becomes a serious problem when executed at the expense of others, whether this takes place in Palestine, in North America or anywhere else.

Bernie Sanders, a declared non universalist ‘progressive,’ uses a Jewish outlet to vow to his people “I will direct the Justice Department to prioritize the fight against white nationalist violence. I will not wait two years to appoint a Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, as Trump did; I will appoint one immediately.”

If America intends, as it should, to fight racism and to heal its wounds it could be that Bernie Sanders is the worst possible candidate as he clearly expresses that what he cares about is the hatred of the one group that happens to be his own. Maybe president of  the ADL is the more fitting post for the pretentious self confessed “proud Jewish American.” Leading the American people and the world should be left to a proper universalist and a genuine ethical character assuming that such a person is available and willing to commit.


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

Donate

 

%d bloggers like this: