Saturday, January 30, 2010

Birth of a Zionist: In 'Defamation', Israeli filmmaker examines international Zionism's use of the Holocaust for profit and indoctrination

Watch the entire film HERE

(By Chris Moore) -- This fascinating 2009 documentary moves largely along two parallel tracks, flashing back and forth between filmmaker Yoav Shamir's interviews with American Jews (mostly Abraham Foxman and his Anti-Defamation League clique) on the one hand, and following young Israeli students on their Israeli government-sponsored journey to Poland for a tour through the Auschwitz death camp on the other.

The ADL portion nicely captures what we've come to expect from Holocaust/anti-Semitism huckster Foxman, and documents how his Jewish civil rights organization operates by taking minor, incidental ethnic conflicts that are a routine part of life in multi-cultural America, and blowing the ones involving Jews completely out of proportion for purposes of political exploitation, "Jewish victim" indoctrination, propaganda and organizational "emergency" fundraising.

In the course of the film, Foxman eventually takes his act on the road, and goes to Eastern Europe for some Holocaust tourism and tearful "on location" posing.

In this portion, there is a telling scene where Foxman meets with local government officials and instructs them that the Ukrainian Holodomor (the engineered genocide through famine of millions of Ukrainians by Stalinists and Jewish Bolsheviks from 1932-1933) must never be compared to the Nazi Holocaust of the Jews in any way, shape or form. (I've written about similar cynical Zionist efforts to downplay or dismiss the murder of millions of victims of Communism before here.) It should be noted that the Holdomor and other Communist atrocities like it preceded and set precedents for the Nazi Holocaust, thus providing Zionist groups twin incentives for wanting the truth of Communist history whitewashed: in order to preserve the "uniqueness" and "sanctity" of their own suffering as more profound and meaningful than the suffering of non-Jews; and to cover up the Judeofascist Left's role in the Communist atrocities themselves, and how they contributed to manifesting the tragedies of WWII and the Nazi Holocaust.

Of course, the obsequious government officials being schmoozed by Foxman all nod in agreement to his request for historical suppression -- which goes to show how easily-corrupted European governments can be conditioned, intimidated, and bought off by Zionists to elevate the importance of the lives of Jews over the lives of Gentiles, and how they are emotionally bullied into dismissing Gentile interests -- and even their own national interests -- as secondary and even irrelevant in any contest with Jewish interests. Americans know this phenomenon all too well, too, as epitomized by the Israel lobby's role in engineering a political climate where it is acceptable to send off Americans to fight Middle Eastern wars for Israeli interests, with American politicians from both wings either co-instigating and collaborating enthusiastically, or rolling over in appeasement to the Zionists with nary a sigh.

The other track of the film, where the Israeli government sends young teenage students to Auschwitz to be terrorized and indoctrinated, is fascinating as well. Upon their arrival in Poland, the Zionist tour guides keep the youths largely isolated from the local Gentiles, and fill their heads with horror stories about how hostile the locals have always been to Jews, and still are, and how there might be a neo-Nazi lurking around any corner. The tour guides slowly build up the tension and fear in the young Jews' minds, ratcheting it ever higher the closer they get to Auschwitz by retracing the footsteps of the Jewish victims on their long-ago journey to the death camps.

Eventually the frightened young students arrive at the camp and are ushered by the Zionists into the ovens and crematoriums, where it all becomes too much, their psyches broken and their hearts filled with bitterness and despair.

One girl, who initially felt emotionally distant from the Jewish Holocaust experience, finally breaks down and cries uncontrollably at a display of mounds of hair taken from camp inmates.

"They told me: 'Wait, wait. Soon you'll cry too! Soon you'll see!'," she says, sobbing. "They murdered people and took their hair only because of their nationality! But I didn't do anything! I didn't do anything to anyone!" she adds, apparently now internalizing the entire experience to the point where she has interwoven herself with the plight of the victims.

After emerging from the dungeons and bonding with her classmates in a tearful prayer circle adorned by Israeli flags, the same girl is interviewed by the documentary crew.

"When you see it, you say: 'I want to kill the people who did this!'...Who would I like to kill? All of them...the Nazis, our enemies who did this," she says.

"But you know they are dead?" she's asked.

"Yes, but they have heirs. They may be different, but they're there."

Birth of a Zionist.


It's not a far step from here to understanding how the Israeli government has cynically projected this skillfully engineered Jewish rage upon innocent Palestinians and Arabs in order to expand its own interests and territories, nor difficult to understand how Zionist ethnic rackets from Washington to Wall Street can psychologically rationalize their hoodwinking, usury and defrauding of average American Gentiles, whom they also apparently view as a hostile "other."

But the film also shows us how Jews themselves become the victims of these insane Zionist/Judeofascist machinations. The Jewish teens, prior to their harrowing descent into the Auschwitz indoctrination program, are like any other teens the world over -- full of innocence, rambunctiousness and life. There's a wonderful scene in the Polish hotel where they're staying, for example, where the manager has to come to their floor and shoo them all back into their own rooms because they're marauding around having pillow fights in each others' doorways.

These may be among the last moments of innocence they ever enjoy in their young lives, their youths torn away all too soon by those Machiavellian cynics who would steal their very childhoods to put them to work on the Zionist agenda.

At a couple of different points in the film, Shamir also visits famed author of The Holocaust Industry Norman Finkelstein -- before and after he has been hounded by Zionists from his professorship at DePaul University. In the second interview, a clearly emotionally frazzled and stressed Finkelstein is interviewed at home, and asked why everyone picks on Israel.

"[On the radio] I hear non stop about Sudan. I hear non stop about Tibet. I hear non stop about Darfur. I hear a lot. The only place I hear excuses made for is Israel. That's the place I hear excuses. And we do have to remember, it is the oldest occupation in the world -- I mean forty years really is enough."

"The irony is," says Finkelstein, "that the Nazi Holocaust has now become the main ideological weapon for launching wars of aggression. Every time you want to launch a war of aggression, drag in the Nazi Holocaust...It's a package deal with Israel and its American supporters. It's not just suffering. It's suffering which is then wrapped in a club, and the club is then used to break the skulls of the Palestinians. That's the problem."

"It's the best thing that will ever happen to Israel if they get rid of these American Jews who are warmongers from Martha's Vineyard. And they are warmongers from the Hamptons. And they're warmongers from Beverly Hills. And they're warmongers from Miami."

Here, we see a second peek into the psychological turmoil and harm that obsessive Jewish Holocaust fixation can cause -- in this case, by Finkelstein's own Holocaust survivor parents. Departing his apartment, Finkelstein makes a parody of a Nazi salute, saying it's the language of Israeli society.

"Everyone calls everyone a Nazi...It's also the language I grew up with. You know, everything in my house...The food? 'Worse than Auschwitz.' The clothes? 'Worse than Auschwitz.'"

One thing is clear: As more and more Jews and Gentiles learn the real history of Jewish Bolshevism in the decades leading up to World War II and how its treatment of Christians and dissidents then is comparable to Jewish Zionism's treatment of Muslims and Arabs today, and get fed up with being force-fed the entire blood-drenched Holocaust narrative, and get sick and tired of Zionists and their partners using it as a pretext for wars of aggression, reactions like Finkelstein's are going to become less and less controversial and the push back against the whole rotten enterprise is going to get more and more aggressive.

For this, we can all be thankful, including Jews who will subsequently be saved from the psychological torment of a sadistic, cult-like, ritualistic Holocaust indoctrination at the hands of opportunistic international Zionist elites angling to use them and others for canon fodder.

Friday, January 29, 2010

Jewish media still trying to stick knives in Mel Gibson for being a proud Christian and opposing their warmongering

Mel Gibson is back
(Occidental Observer Blog) -- By Kevin MacDonald ---

Mel Gibson’s new movie, Edge of Darkness, has just been released, so he’s making the media rounds. But of course, a lot of reporters want to remind people what the real story about Mel Gibson is — his anti-Jewish comments while being arrested for DUI in 2006. There was a great television moment during an interview with Sam Rubin that goes approximately as follows:

Rubin: “Some people are going to welcome you back and some people are going to say you should never come back.”

Gibson leans forward aggressively, and with a big smile says, “Why?”

Rubin: “Because of what happened before.”

Gibson, feigning ignorance: “Because what happened before?”

Rubin: “Because of the remarks that were attributed to you.”

Gibson: “Remarks that were attributed to me that I didn’t necessarily mean [translation: "Maybe I meant what I said and maybe I didn't"], but I gather you have a dog in this fight.”

Rubin: “What?”

Gibson: “Do you have a dog in this fight or are you being impartial?”

Beautiful. Putting Rubin on the defensive and calling attention to his Jewish identity — as much as saying, “Of course your remarks are completely understandable because you have an ax to grind: You’re Jewish.”

The best defense is a good offense. The LA Times described Rubin as looking “uncomfortable and, really, who could blame him? Every moviegoer learned long ago that no one comes uncorked quite like Mel Gibson.” I rather doubt that Gibson is going to have deal with his Jewish problem in future interviews.

After the interview, Rubin beats himself up for not being more aggressive and telling Gibson that “as a Jew and a human being ” he was offended by Gibson’s remarks. Rubin also says he doesn’t really think Gibson has apologized enough, nor has Gibson ever said that what he said was false. (For example, Gibson is reported to have said, “Fucking Jews…Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world.” In an interview with Diane Sawyer he attributed his remarks to the situation in the Middle East and to the “brutal sort of public beating” he received from Jews in the wake of The Passion. To take the most obvious recent example, if you think that the Iraq war would have happened without Jewish influence you are either seriously deluded or simply not paying attention.)...MORE...LINK

Swedish mayor says Zionism, anti-Semitism both equally extremist ideologies; local Zionist Jews outraged

Swedish mayor calls both Anti-Semitism and Zionism forms of 'unacceptable extremism'
(Haaretz) -- By Cnaan Liphshiz --

Swedish Jews are upset about comments made this week by the mayor of Malmo, who said anti-Semitism and Zionism were both forms of "unacceptable extremism," and urged local Jews to disassociate themselves from Israeli actions in the Gaza Strip.

"These statements and other events in Malmo are making the Jewish community feel very uncomfortable and some people, especially the young, are leaving the city," George Braun, the president of the Jewish community in Gothenburg, about 250 kilometers from Malmo, told Haaretz. Ilmar Reepalu, mayor of Malmo, Sweden's third largest city, spoke in an interview published in a Swedish newspaper on Wednesday, International Holocaust Remembrance Day. "We accept neither Zionism nor anti-Semitism," Reepalu said. "They are extremes who put themselves above other groups, seeing others as something lesser."

He said it was "terrible" that Jews felt so insecure in Malmo that they felt compelled to leave, but that a recent city-center demonstration in solidarity with Israel by local Jews stirred up feelings against them

"I wish the Jewish Community would distance itself from Israel's violations of the rights of the civilian population in Gaza," he said. I wish that representatives of Muslims in Malmo would clearly say that the Jews in Malmo shouldn't be mixed up in the Israel-Palestine conflict."...MORE...LINK

Left-wing Jewish-American anti-fascist deported from Israel proves only Judeofascists need apply for aliyah

An annoyance, not a threat
(Haaretz) -- By James Kirchick --

Reading about Israel's deportation last week of Jared Malsin, an editor for the Palestinian Ma'an news agency, I'm not surprised that his relatively short journalistic career has reached this impasse. Malsin and I were students at Yale University, where both of us were columnists for the Yale Daily News. He was an outspoken activist for leftist causes, ranging from support for the school's intransigent unions to opposition to the war in Iraq; I defended the university and the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. There was hardly an issue on which we agreed. But it was with his criticism of Israel that Malsin, like so many left-wing American Jews, made his mark.

I don't remember the specifics of his involvement with anti-Israel activities on campus, which included protesting Israeli policies and debating them at the Yale Political Union, but then, as now, he used his Jewishness to portray his views as being more meaningful than those of any gentile agitator ("Who if not the Jews should express their opinions and feelings about Israel?" he told YNet last week).

So when I heard, several years ago, that Malsin had taken advantage of a Birthright trip to get a free ticket to Israel, I groaned. He then used a series of three-month tourist visas to remain over the past two and half years. When detained by immigration officers at Ben-Gurion Airport last week, he said he was considering aliyah, according to an Interior Ministry official interviewed by The Washington Post.

Despite Malsin's attempt to game the system, he did nothing illegal. And despite the government's denials, it appears that it was the tone of his journalism that prompted his forced exile. "They judged me to have anti-Israeli politics," Malsin told the Post. "It's outrageous that would even appear in a legal argument, that a person's politics would be a relevant issue."

Although it pains me to agree with Malsin, he's right: His treatment at the hands of Israeli authorities was outrageous. One expects this type of behavior from Middle Eastern police states, whose systematic human rights abuses Malsin and his left-wing compatriots downplay or ignore - not from the region's sole functioning democracy...MORE...LINK

Thursday, January 28, 2010

Raging Zionists attempt verbal lynching of unflappable Goldstone at Yale

At Yale, Judge Goldstone faces down his accusers
(Mondoweiss) -- by Philip Weiss --

Judge Richard Goldstone gave a speech at Yale last night and though he said he would not be talking about Gaza, his report came up again and again, and in fact the anti-Goldstoners tried to turn the event into a circus. They waved Israeli flags, and two of them held up a banner comparing the judge’s report to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the accusers of Dreyfus. A group followed the judge afterward into the wine-and-cheese on the second floor, and surrounded him and some barked at him, and though now and then the judge held up his hand and turned away at a loud voice, he seemed ready for anything, and more than held his own, and left the crowd with an education in what it means to try and advance the regime of international law...

Upstairs the circle of accusers formed around him near the door. They angrily quoted his own words to him from clippings, or said he was afraid to debate Dershowitz, or said he was publicizing "untruths." Goldstone’s a man of medium height with a round face and narrow owlish eyes and a calm slightly dour expression. My friend said it’s a face out of a 19th century oil portrait; and the judge did not ever crack– a smile, a wince. The Orthodox man who had held the banner about Protocols said he would convey the judge’s words to the people of Auschwitz, and the judge turned away. A woman said he was holding Israel to a higher standard, and the judge said that he was, you do that to countries that say they are democracies. When someone said he should call it apartheid, he said that was an emotionally-laden term, so he avoided it–but in fact they did not have separate roadways in South Africa, as Israel does in the West Bank.

And when someone said that Israelis would not do such things, would not inflict wanton destruction–this was another Israeli, a woman, who had been in the army for Lebanon ‘06–the judge said that she should look at the satellite imagery accompanying his report (the report is a pdf). Israeli soldiers in their tanks had carved a 200-foot wide Star of David into Palestinian farmland in Gaza, to be seen from the sky...MORE...LINK

Why are we propagandized by elites that the only holocaust that matters is the one perpetrated against Jews?

How many other Holocausts have occured and why are not remembered?
(Pal Telegraph) - maysaa jarour

Today is UN International Holocaust Remembrance Day, but why do we only remember this one event, when so many other holocausts have taken place? Think Armenia, Rwanda, the Congo, Cambodia, Sudan, Iraq, etc. Why such a high-profile focus on this one holocaust, while the many other holocausts never get a mention?

I myself have always held great respect for the suffering of the Jewish people during the war, and many times have reflected on some of the locations where they were publically executed. I also allocated a special time to visit the Ann Frank house in Amsterdam on one of my many trips to the Netherlands.

But it seems that whenever there is any incident or conflict concerning Israel, we are almost forcibly reminded of the sad events that took place those many years ago. It is used as a sort of diversionary tactic, as if to say "hey, listen we are only protecting our existence after what happened to our people during the Holocaust." It's as if this is an excuse for the Israelis to do whatever they want today, because they were the victims of such a terrible crime during WW2. This mindset is terribly wrong and it is time to bring some logic back into the world.

It's perfectly natural for every nation to remember its dead or to have a day of remembrance for such events. But to have this particular Holocaust rammed down our throats, continuously, day after day, is not only an abuse of the very principal of remembrance, but also a manipulation of current politics, economics and military actions throughout the world.

Let's take a closer look at some facts: As we all know, around 6 million Jews died during the Holocaust -- not just by direct execution, but also from malnutrition, hypothermia, diseases,etc. Compare those numbers to the Democratic Republic of Congo, where around 5.4 million have died as of 2006. And the conflict there is still ongoing. In other countries in the region, the numbers of dead due to conflict (directly or indirectly) also are high: Rwanda, about 1 million; Sudan, 2-3 million; Somalia, at least 1 million; Cambodia, almost 2 million; Vietnam, 2 million; and, more recently, in Iraq, more than 1 million. Afghanistan is showing the same trend.

Let's also reflect on the two world wars. An estimated 1 million people were killed in Russia during WW!, and 10 million more in WW2. In total, the number of people killed in WW2 was 60 million. Obviously, we could spend every day, every week, every month creating a Holocaust theme and remembrance day for those countries, but we don't. However, for some strange reason we are told repeatedly about "The Holocaust" as if the one that occurred for the Jews is the only one that counts.

One must ask the Israelis if their holocaust justifies the genocide they are visiting on the Palestinian people?...MORE...LINK

Psychological parallel between U.S. Zionists and liberal Commies: they both live in denial

On the Lack of Interest in the Goldstone Report
(Mondoweiss) -- by David Bromwich --

Many American Jews who are liberals, supporters of Israel, and generally well informed about events of the day suppress their knowledge of Israel-Palestine to a second-rate level of almost innocence. An inadequacy which (out of pride) they wouldn’t allow themselves in approaching any other subject. They do it because they are afraid if they knew more, they would have to condemn much of Israel’s conduct toward the Palestinians.

This mentality has a recent historical parallel, in the liberal fellow-travelers of the Soviet Union from the late 1930s through the 1950s. Such people contented themselves with half-knowledge. Their reason was that, if they knew what they might have taken the trouble to know, they would have found themselves thinking and saying things about the Soviet Union that they couldn’t bear to think or say...LINK

Israel's vaunted "Jewish exceptionalism" and "desert miracle" more astutely traced to massive welfare, theft, and game-rigging

Stealing Success Tel Aviv Style
( -- by Philip Giraldi

A curious op-ed "The Tel Aviv Cluster" by the reliably neoconnish David Brooks appeared in the New York Times on January 12th. Brooks enthused over the prowess of Israel’s high tech businesses, attributing their success in large part to Jewish exceptionalism and genius, which must have provided the ultimate feel good moment for Brooks, who is himself Jewish. That Israel has a booming technology sector is undeniably true, but Brooks failed to mention other contributing factors such as the $101 billion dollars in US economic and military aid over the course of more than four decades, which does not include the additional $30 billion recently approved by President Barack Obama. American assistance has financed and fueled Israel’s business growth while the open access and even "preferential treatment" afforded to Israeli exporters through the Israel Free Trade Implementation Act of 1985 has provided Israelis with the enormous US market to sell their products and services. By act of Congress, Israeli businesses can even bid on most American Federal and State government contracts just as if they were US companies.

Brooks was characteristically undisturbed by the fact that American taxpayer subsidized development of Israeli enterprises combined with the free access to the US economy and government contracts eliminates jobs and damages competing companies on this side of the Atlantic. And there is another aspect of Israel’s growing high tech sector that he understandably chose to ignore because it is extremely sleazy. That is the significant advantage that Israel has gained by systematically stealing American technology with both military and civilian applications. The US developed technology is then reverse engineered and used by the Israelis to support their own exports with considerably reduced research and development costs, giving them a huge advantage against American companies. Sometimes, when the technology is military in nature and winds up in the hands of a US adversary, the consequences can be serious. Israel has sold advanced weapons systems to China that are believed to incorporate technology developed by American companies, including the Python-3 air-to-air missile and the Delilah cruise missile. There is evidence that Israel has also stolen Patriot missile avionics to incorporate into its own Arrow system and that it used US technology obtained in its Lavi fighter development program, which was funded by the US taxpayer to the tune of $1.5 billion, to help the Chinese develop their own J-10 fighter.

The reality of Israeli spying is indisputable. Israel always features prominently in the annual FBI report called "Foreign Economic Collection and Industrial Espionage." The 2005 report states, "Israel has an active program to gather proprietary information within the United States. These collection activities are primarily directed at obtaining information on military systems and advanced computing applications that can be used in Israel’s sizable armaments industry." It adds that Israel recruits spies, uses electronic methods, and carries out computer intrusion to gain the information. The 2005 report concluded that the thefts eroded US military advantage, enabling foreign powers to obtain expensive technologies that had taken years to develop...

So to David Brooks I would say that there is most definitely an economic surge taking place in high tech Israel, but it is less a miracle than the fruit of a long series of thefts and manipulations fueled by American tax money and the connivance of a Congress that is always willing to do favors for the country that it appears to love beyond all others. I’m sure most Americans would wish the Israelis well and would applaud the prosperity that derives from their own industry and inventiveness but it is also time to put the brakes on business as usual and to take the Israeli hand out of our pocket. I’m sure Brooks’ job is pretty secure and well paid, but many Americans are out of work and suffering, so let’s take some steps to protect our economy from the information thieves from Tel Aviv and keep our money and jobs over here...MORE...LINK

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Israeli attempt to exploit Holocaust Remembrance Day for p.r. destined to flop; world no longer sobs for Gaza-strangling Jewry

Holocaust remembrance is a boon for Israeli propaganda
(Haaretz) -- By Gideon Levy --

Israel's bigwigs attacked at dawn on a wide front. The president in Germany, the prime minister with a giant entourage in Poland, the foreign minister in Hungary, his deputy in Slovakia, the culture minister in France, the information minister at the United Nations, and even the Likud party's Druze Knesset member, Ayoob Kara, in Italy. They were all out there to make florid speeches about the Holocaust.

Yesterday was International Holocaust Remembrance Day, and an Israeli public relations drive like this hasn't been seen for ages. The timing of the unusual effort - never have so many ministers deployed across the globe - is not coincidental: When the world is talking Goldstone, we talk Holocaust, as if out to blur the impression. When the world talks occupation, we'll talk Iran as if we wanted them to forget.

It won't help much. International Holocaust Remembrance Day has passed, the speeches will soon be forgotten, and the depressing everyday reality will remain. Israel will not come out looking good, even after the PR campaign. On the eve of his departure, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke at Yad Vashem. "There is evil in the world," he said. "Evil must be stamped out at the beginning."...

The Holocaust must not be forgotten, and there is no need to compare it with anything. Israel must take part in the efforts to keep its memory alive, but in doing so it must show up with clean hands, clean of evil of their own doing. And it must not arouse suspicion that it is cynically using the memory of the Holocaust to obliterate and blur other things. Regrettably, this is not the case.

How beautiful it would have been if on this international day of remembrance Israel had taken the time to examine itself, look inward and ask, for example, how it is that anti-Semitism has reared its head in the world precisely in the past year, the year after we dropped white-phosphorous bombs on Gaza. How beautiful it would have been if on this International Holocaust Remembrance Day, Netanyahu had declared a new policy for integrating refugees instead of expulsion, or lifted the Gaza blockade.

A thousand speeches against anti-Semitism will not extinguish the flames ignited by Operation Cast Lead, flames that threaten not only Israel but the entire Jewish world. As long as Gaza is under blockade and Israel sinks into its institutionalized xenophobia, Holocaust speeches will remain hollow. As long as evil is rampant here at home, neither the world nor we will be able to accept our preaching to others, even if they deserve it...MORE...LINK

Zionist Commissariat ADL doesn't want Americans exercising free speech about warlike Israel lobby on C-SPAN, calls for suppression of "hate" speech

Truth about Israeli influence over US foreign policy gets out on C-SPAN
(LA Nonpartisan Examiner) -- By Robert Stark

There was controversy about a recent interview on C-span about terrorism with former CIA Bin Laden Unit Chief Michael Scheuer that many are complaining was anti-Semitic and were outraged that the C-SPAN host did not counter the remarks. The ADL said "we continue to receive many complaints from C-SPAN viewers about the unchallenged anti-Semitism and bigotry aired by callers to your shows, and we believe those complaints are justified. Recognizing that we share with you a commitment to freedom of speech and the marketplace of ideas, we also believe that respectable journalistic organizations have a responsibility and an obligation, consistent with the First Amendment, to speak out when the forum they provide is used to disseminate hate and anti-Semitism."

The caller who caused the controversy said , "I for one am sick and tired of all these Jews coming on C-SPAN and other stations and pushing us to go to war against our Muslim friends. They're willing to spend the last drop of American blood and treasure to get their way in the world. They have way too much power in this country. People like Wolfowitz and Feith and the other neo-cons -- that jewed us into Iraq -- and now we're going to spend the next 60 years rehabilitating our soldiers -- I'm sick and tired of it."

While his language may sound harsh, the reality is Americans are fed up with the power that the Israeli lobby has over our foreign policy which is costing us lives and treasure in the middle east and until recently has been taboo to even discuss. Those who speak out are labeled anti-Semites.

Michael Scheuer who is a critic of Israeli influence over our foreign policy basically agreed with the caller saying, "yeah. I think that of course American foreign policy is eventually up to the American people. One of the big things we have not been able to discuss for the past 30 years is our policy towards the Israelis. Whether we want to be involved in fighting Israel's wars in the future is something that Americans should be able to talk about. They may vote yes. They may want to see their kids killed in Iraq or Yemen or somewhere else to protect Israel. But the question is: we need to talk about it. Ultimately, Israel is a country that is of no particular worth to the United States."...

In response to another called who asked "Why is it that the United States does not want to talk about Israel?," Scheuer said, "why don't we talk about that? Because AIPAC and other influential American Jewish groups are extraordinarily involved in the funding of American political campaigns and have the ability to reach out and make sure that people lose their jobs, or are otherwise hurt, if they dare to criticize Israel."

Scheuer has personal experience with this since he lost a job with the Jamestown Foundation think tank for comments about presidential Obama pandering to the Israeli lobby saying he was "doing the Tel-Aviv Two Step". He claims that the foundations pro-Israel donors ordered his termination. He said that "you know, you always talk about the Israel Lobby and its power, but to see it up close and personal aimed right at me was very educational. In fact, it was worth the experience of losing a job."...MORE...LINK

Weak leaders: Following the same limp trajectory as Bush, Obama starts brash but quickly rolls over for the Israel lobby to "take on" the Muslims

Obama Takes on the Muslim World
( -- by John Taylor

In the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, George W. Bush recognized that Israel’s endless war on the Palestinians, a grossly unequal struggle waged with the military, financial, and diplomatic support of the United States, had put America at risk. For a brief moment, Bush spoke strongly of the need to establish a Palestinian state and bring the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to a speedy and just conclusion. Bush even demanded an end to Israeli incursions into the West Bank and the targeted assassinations of Palestinian leaders.

In very little time, the president realized that acknowledging America’s own foreign policy in the Middle East had put America in the terrorist crosshairs was unlikely to be a vote-getter, particularly among the Republican Party’s Evangelical faithful, who view the establishment of the state of Israel as the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. So the president, with the eager support of both parties and a tame corporate media, chose the explanation that foreigners willing to fly airplanes into buildings must hate America’s freedom and openness, our margaritas and miniskirts. This facile and entirely specious assertion was a much more palatable explanation for 9/11 than that American intervention, particularly U.S. support of corrupt Arab kings and potentates, a blank check for Israeli adventurism, and a murderous embargo on the Iraqi people, had provoked an intense hatred of the U.S. among a small but growing percentage of Muslims around the world.

Fast forward though the invasion of Iraq, justified by entirely bogus intelligence, through years of fighting in Afghanistan, bringing nothing but misery to the Afghan people, and through Israel’s brutal pounding of Lebanon and Gaza, to the election of a new American president determined to make a fresh start with the Muslim world. Barack Obama’s visit to Cairo in June of last year to deliver a much-ballyhooed speech seemed to break with the policies of the Bush administration, which had been perceived, especially in the Arab states, as blatantly anti-Arab and anti-Muslim. As part of Obama’s determination to change America’s profile among the world’s billion Muslims, he subsequently insisted that Israel end all settlement activity in Palestinian lands captured in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, a stance consistent with international law and favored by most of America’s allies.

As Bush learned in 2001, pressure on Israel, no matter how justified, takes courage and has political costs. The Democratic Party has long received a large proportion of its financial support from Israel’s friends in the United States, and Israel has many advocates in the Obama administration, the best example being the president’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, who served in the Israeli army. So President Obama quickly surrendered to Israel’s American constituency, dropped his insistence that settlement of Palestinian lands cease, and began to pressure the Palestinian Authority’s weakling President Mahmoud Abbas to resume negotiations without preconditions.

To put a seal on Obama’s humiliation at the hands of right-wing Israeli politicians Bibi Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman, the Obama administration sidelined the Goldstone Report detailing war crimes during the Gaza war (“willful killings and willful causing great suffering” to the civilian population and “collective punishment intentionally inflicted by the government of Israel on the people of the Gaza Strip”), signed a multi-year, $30 billion defense protocol with the Israelis, and rebuked U.S. Middle East negotiator George Mitchell for saying quite accurately that the U.S. had once withheld U.S. loan guarantees as a way showing displeasure at settlement activity.

At the same time, President Obama did nothing to alleviate the sufferings of 1.4 million desperate Palestinians under Israeli siege in Gaza...MORE...LINK

Chris Moore comments:

Clinton and Blair followed pretty much the same trajectory, too. Perhaps it's Baby Boomer syndrome: selfish, no principles other than self-preservation and comfort at any cost, shallow, compassionate on a superficial level that is more of a calculated pose out of personal vanity than a philosophy, highly materialistic to the point of completely selling out the country, its interests, and future generations of Americans for temporal luxuries; craven and cowardly -- bent on studiously averting their gaze as Israel rapes the Palestinians and America because noticing might effect their careers and personal bottom line...

I could go on and on, but America has been ill served by the Baby Boomer generation of leadership. It's almost as if it was custom engineered to roll over for the Zionists so America could be easily Judaized and thus sold out and co-opted by the Lobby for Jewish tribal interests.

Marx...Freud...Dr. Spock...Falwell...Spielberg...Hagee...what say you?

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

U.S. Jewish Zionist-network opportunists assemble authoritarian government infrastructure, profiteer off of its imposition

The Merchants of Fear: Israel’s Profiting from Homeland Insecurity
(Atlantic Free Press) -- by Maidhc O Cathail --

In the wake of the weird Christmas Day “underwear bomber” incident on Northwest Flight 253, former Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff, as if on cue, was all over the mainstream media touting whole-body scanners as the answer to America’s airline security problems. Since leaving public office in 2009, Chertoff had co-founded the Chertoff Group, a security and risk-management firm whose clients include a manufacturer of body-imaging screening machines. While some in the media noted this rather commonplace conflict of interest, ignored by all was a far more significant abuse of the American public’s trust.

In a CNN interview, Chertoff cited the Detroit incident as “a very vivid lesson in the value of that machinery.” One lesson that he hasn’t drawn, however, was about the unreliability of the security firm which allowed the young Nigerian Muslim without a passport to “slip through” Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport.

ICTS International N.V., the Dutch-based security firm, was established in 1982 by former members of Israel’s secret police, the Shin Bet, and El Al security. Menachem Atzmon, who holds the controlling shares in the firm, was convicted in 1996 for campaign finance fraud while co-treasurer of the Likud party. The other co-treasurer Ehud Olmert, who was acquitted of those charges, resigned as Israeli Prime Minister in 2008 amid multiple corruption charges.

Although the rapid worldwide expansion of ICTS was no doubt helped by the much vaunted reputation of Israeli aviation security, its record abroad is less reassuring. In December 2001, the so-called “shoe bomber” Richard Reid also slipped through ICTS security at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport to board a flight to Miami. And it was an ICTS subsidiary, Huntleigh USA, that shared security duties at Boston’s Logan Airport, where two of the four hijacked planes originated on September 11, 2001.

Interestingly, Michael Chertoff has close family ties to Israeli aviation. His father, an American rabbi, married Livia Eisen, who was an air hostess for El Al in the 1950s. “There are reports that she was involved in Operation Magic Carpet, which brought Jews to Israel from Yemen,” wrote Jonathan Cook in Israel and the Clash of Civilizations. “It therefore seems possible that Livia Eisen was an Israeli national, and one with possible links to the Mossad.”
Somehow, nobody thought of asking Michael Chertoff whether his mother had ties to a foreign country’s intelligence service during the Senate confirmation hearing on his appointment as secretary of Homeland Security in 2005. Most likely taking their cue from Senators Charles Schumer and Joseph Lieberman, who endorsed their fellow Jewish Zionist for the DHS job, the AIPAC-conscious Senate approved Chertoff by a vote of 98-0.

Normally hypersensitive to even the most tenuous links to Islamic terrorism, Sens. Schumer and Lieberman were apparently unconcerned by Chertoff’s 1998 legal representation of Dr. Magdy Elamir. The FBI had filed a report charging Elamir with skimming money from an Islamic charity to support al-Qaeda and financially supporting the al-Salam mosque, which the “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel-Rahman used as a base of operations for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Moreover, there are suspicions that Chertoff, as head of the Justice Department’s criminal division, may have been behind the deportation for “immigration violations” of the 200 Israelis arrested in 2001 for “suspicious activities” both before and after 9/11. According to a DEA report, these Israeli “art students” had “recently served in the Israeli military, the majority in intelligence, electronic signal intercept, or explosive ordnance units.” As editor Justin Raimondo wryly put it in his essential book The Terror Enigma, “the probability that these are graduates of the Mossad School of Art (summa cum laude) is certainly high.”

But then again, how could one possibly doubt the patriotism of the author of the USA PATRIOT Act? Whatever his other qualities, Chertoff must be a fast writer. The 342-page document was signed into law on October 26, 2001 – a mere 45 days after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Striking oil on 9/11

On October 11, 2001, exactly one month after 9/11, Senator Lieberman introduced S. 1534, a bill to establish a Department of Homeland Security. The bipartisan Department of National Homeland Security Act of 2001 was co-sponsored by Republican Senator Arlen Specter, who is, perhaps not coincidentally, also a Jewish Zionist...MORE...LINK

Was the Jewish "victim" in America's version of The Dreyfus Affair really guilty?

In the Matter of Leo Frank, Part I
(Occidental Observer) -- By Kevin MacDonald --

In 1913 Mary Phagan, a 13-year old girl, was murdered. The absolutely barebones account of the fascinating story behind this event and all that followed is that Leo Frank, a Jewish businessman who managed the factory in Atlanta where Mary worked, was convicted of the murder and sentenced to death by hanging. His sentence was later commuted to life in prison by the governor of Georgia after several rounds of legal appeals failed to change the judgment of the trial court. While in prison, Frank’s throat was slit by another prisoner, and soon thereafter a group of Georgians broke into the prison and lynched Frank.

The Leo Frank case is important if only because it continues to be the focus of Jewish activism. Recently a film on the events, The People vs. Leo Frank, was released, to much fanfare by the ADL, including special screenings and teacher guide books for use in classrooms. Leo Frank, therefore, has become an icon of all that was wrong with the old America and a morality tale with important lessons for the present— a miniature version of the Holocaust. Like the Holocaust, it is used as an indictment of the entire culture in which the events occurred — the trailer for the film begins ominously: “Set against the backdrop of an American South struggling to shed its legacy of bigotry and xenophobia …” More on that later...

Whereas much of the writing on Mary Phagan’s murder makes it into a Jewish morality tale emphasizing Southern racism, bigotry and xenophobia — not to mention Jewish victimhood, Lindemann notes that Jews were better received in the South than in the rest of the country. There were relatively few Jews in the South, and those who did live there did not act as a “dissenting minority” (p. 224) — that is, they were not engaged in constructing a high profile culture of critique that has been the hallmark of Jewish intellectual activity since the Enlightenment. Jews participated in Southern culture like other Whites. Before the Civil War, they bought and sold slaves and they owned them. Southern attitudes toward Jews “tended toward philo-Semitism” (p. 227)...

Given this background (and the reputation of Jews as not involved in violent crime), “Frank’s Jewishness weighed at least as much in his favor as against him” (p. 236). Indeed, “Frank’s lawyers and his other defenders, in order to strengthen their case, overstated the role of anti-Semitic prejudice in his arrest” (p. 237), thereby setting up later exaggerations of the role of anti-Jewish attitudes. The defense also appealed to anti-Black attitudes in their attempt to pin the crime on a Black man, describing the prime Black suspect (Jim Conley) as a “dirty, filthy, black, drunken, lying nigger” (p. 245).
Pompous Jewish racist Leo Frank poses as the mousy victim after trying to blame his crime on a "dirty, filthy, black, drunken, lying nigger" at his trial, 1913 (photo: georgianinfo). Jewish-network opportunists would later blame his fate on rampant southern "anti-Semitism."

Lindemann points out that the evidence at the time of Frank’s arrest was “of far greater substance and persuasiveness than that presented against [Alfred] Dreyfus” (p. 239), the French Jew accused of treason whose case became a cause célèbre for the forces combating anti-Jewish attitudes. In particular, Frank was one of very few people at the factory when the murder occurred. Several female employees testified at a Grand Jury hearing that he had made improper advances toward them and a male acquaintance of Mary testified that she had complained about Frank’s advances. Other stories alleging that Frank had engaged in perverse sexual behavior at local bordellos and had often used the factory as a place for sexual liaisons appeared in the newspapers. Lindemann writes that later this evidence was “demonstrably false or of uncertain validity” (p. 243), stating, for example, that at least some of the women’s evidence was “unreliable” (p. 243). (Based on Oney’s account to follow, the accusations of Frank’s history of sexual impropriety toward his employees are well-founded.)

Lindemann also notes that Frank’s statements to the police (that he didn’t know Mary Phagan) conflicted with testimony of employees (that he often called her by name). He also gave “seriously conflicting” accounts of what happened when Mary came to his office to pick up her pay. That he seemed very nervous during questioning and had already hired a lawyer and a private investigator before he was arrested were also seen as pointing to his guilt. The “most incriminating evidence” was that Frank had stated that he was in his office for an hour after giving Mary her pay, but this account conflicted with the testimony of another employee who came to his office at this time...MORE...LINK

Deeply biased New York Times sweeps its own Jewish-tribal agenda and ties to Israel under the rug

New York Times fails to disclose Jerusalem bureau chief's conflict of interest
(The Electronic Intifada) --

The New York Times has all but confirmed to The Electronic Intifada (EI) that the son of its Jerusalem bureau chief Ethan Bronner was recently inducted into the Israeli army.

Over the weekend, EI received a tip suggesting this had been the case and wrote to Bronner to ask him to confirm or deny the information and to seek his opinion on whether, if true, he thought it would be a conflict of interest.

Susan Chira, the foreign editor of The New York Times wrote in an email to The Electronic Intifada this morning:

"Ethan Bronner referred your query to me, the foreign editor. Here is my comment: Mr. Bronner's son is a young adult who makes his own decisions. At The Times, we have found Mr. Bronner's coverage to be scrupulously fair and we are confident that will continue to be the case."

The Electronic Intifada also wrote to Clark Hoyt, the public editor of The New York Times, to confirm the information and ask for an opinion on whether this constituted a conflict of interest, but had yet to receive a response.

Bronner, as bureau chief, has primary responsibility for his paper's reporting on all aspects of the Palestine/Israel conflict, and on the Israeli army, whose official name is the "Israel Defense Forces."

On 23 January, Bronner published a lengthy article on Israel's efforts to refute allegations contained in the UN-commissioned Goldstone report of war crimes and crimes against humanity during its attack on Gaza last winter ("Israel Poised to Challenge a UN Report on Gaza").

As'ad AbuKhalil, a frequent critic of Bronner's coverage, blogged in response that "The New York Times devoted more space to Israeli and Zionist criticisms of the Goldstone report than to the [content of the] report itself" (The Angry Arab News Service, "Ethan Bronner's propaganda services, 25 January 2010)

Bronner's pro-Israeli bias reporting on Israel's attack on Gaza last year was also criticized by the media watchdog Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) (See "NYT and the Perils of Mideast 'Balance'," 4 February 2009).

The New York Times' own "Company policy on Ethics in Journalism" acknowledges that the activities of a journalist's family member may constitute a conflict of interest. It includes as an example, "A brother or a daughter in a high-profile job on Wall Street might produce the appearance of conflict for a business reporter or editor." Such conflicts may on occasion require the staff member "to withdraw from certain coverage."...MORE...LINK

Monday, January 25, 2010

Judeofascists declare all investigations into their Gaza war crimes anti-Semitic

Israeli Information Minister Slams All Reports on Gaza War as Anti-Semitic
( -- By Jason Ditz

Just days before Israel is expected to release its own report on the January 2009 invasion of the Gaza Strip, Israeli Information Minister Yuli Edelstein declared that the UN report on the war, and every other report since the war ended, “are simply a type of anti-Semitism.”

The UN’s report, also known as the Goldstone Report, successfully moved through the UN Human Rights Council in October. It faulted both Israel’s government and the Hamas government in the Gaza Strip for the massive civilian poll in the war.

Israel warned that any report which didn’t put the blame 100 percent on Hamas was inherently biased and declared that it showed the hypocrisy of the entire planet and a global bias against Israel. The US House of Representatives also condemned the report as “unfair” and called for the president to block its consideration.

But Minister Edelstein took the usual complaints of anti-semitism against the report to a new level, saying that there was a clear connection between criticism of the Israeli war effort and the Holocaust and that it amounted to just the latest conflict in “the battle against global anti-Semitism.”...MORE...LINK

Chris Moore comments:

They've reached a new low, which for them is saying something.

This goes way beyond the anti-Semitism card, and even the shield. What these Zionists are essentially arguing is that they should be able to do whatever they want to whomever they want (including mass murder) whenever they want, with impunity, and anyone who objects or even investigates is beyond the pale of civilized standards.

We heard similar rhetoric from the Judeofascist Left when it and the Stalinists were running the Soviet Union, and declared any Western human rights objections to Communism's barbarous behavior as "imperialist" subversion and "counter-revolutionary" agitation -- as if it was the West who was in the wrong for objecting to Communist mass murder, (as weak as most of its objections were.)

Well, the West is at it yet again, today appeasing, coddling and indulging the Judeofascists worse than ever, because this time they've managed to triangulate both the Western establishment Right and Left, and apparently this corrupted establishment intends to indulge the anti-Semitism trope right on through World War III.

It just goes to show that post-Christian Western liberalism, mammonism, and Judaized-Christianity is corrupt and indulgent to the point of suicide, and simply lacks the character and moral fiber to stand up to these monsters. So long as it's killing Muslims in a Turkey shoot, no problem. But when it's asked to bear the traditional Christian/Western civilization cross of anti-Judeofascism, it cowers under the massage table.

Far from being tolerant, progressive, enlightened and modern, this kind of weakness is murderous, and spells doom.

Was Rush Limbaugh wrong about Jewish bankers and Wall Street "money people"?

Kevin MacDonald: What’s gotten into Rush Limbaugh?
(The Occidental Observer blog) -- By Kevin MacDonald

The ADL reports that Rush Limbaugh “raised the possibility that liberal Jews were having “buyer’s remorse” with President Obama in light of the outcome of the Senate election in Massachusetts.” Limbaugh:

"To some people, banker is a code word for Jewish; and guess who Obama is assaulting? He’s assaulting bankers. He’s assaulting money people. And a lot of those people on Wall Street are Jewish. So I wonder if there’s – if there’s starting to be some buyer’s remorse there."

Abe Foxman responded as follows:

"Rush Limbaugh reached a new low with his borderline anti-Semitic comments about Jews as bankers, their supposed influence on Wall Street, and how they vote..."

This is classic ADL-talk. Anything said about Jews as Jews is anathema. No need to actually look at the evidence that indeed Jews are vastly overrepresented in the Wall Street elite and that they gave vastly disproportionate amounts to Obama...

What’s surprising is that Limbaugh would go there, given the long track record of the ADL in condemning any mention of Jews as influencing anything at all. Unless he’s living under a rock (and he isn’t), Limbaugh must have known of the consequences and did it anyway. Perhaps things really are changing for the better.

This is from a previous article reacting to ADL angst about anti-Jewish comments that were appearing in a great many of the comment sections of news articles on the internet in the wake of financial meltdown in 2008:

"The problem is that we all know that there is more than a grain of truth to the claim that Jews run Wall Street, just as there is more than a grain of truth to the claim that Jews run Hollywood. In fact, as we previously pointed out, Benjamin Ginsberg, a prominent social scientist, noted during the 1990s that 50% of Wall Street executives were Jewish.

"Nevertheless, the immediate reaction of the ADL is to attempt to stifle any such comments and simply label them as “anti-Semitism.” …

"Such heavy-handed attempts to squelch discussion of Jewish influence can be seen on a wide range of issues, most notably the role of the Israel Lobby in influencing US foreign policy in the Middle East. When John Mearsheimer and Steven Walt published their work on the Israel Lobby, organizations like the ADL were quick to condemn them as anti-Semites and compared their writing to classic anti-Jewish themes in writings like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion...

"The situation is similar to a previous financial scandal — the one involving Michael Milken, the notorious 1980s junk bond king. As a 1989 National Review article noted, Milken “is Jewish, as were many of his partners and peers. (Indeed, about the only sympathy he has gotten is from those who see his prosecution as an instance of anti-Semitism.)”

"Much of the discussion of the Jewish role in this financial scandal centered around the book Den of Thieves by James B. Stewart. Jewish activist Alan Dershowitz called Den of Thieves an “anti-Semitic screed” and attacked a review by Michael M. Thomas in the New York Times Book Review because of his “gratuitous descriptions by religious stereotypes.”...

"The difference between the current crisis and the Den of Thieves debacle is that the consequences to the financial system of the current Wall Street disaster are far greater and they are far more likely to have a negative effect on pretty much everyone. When a new version of Den of Thieves describes in detail the Jewish involvement in the current catastrophe, perhaps not even Alan Dershowitz or the ADL will be able to keep the lid on the bottle"...MORE...LINK
------------------------- notes:

Update: Gutless Neocon Limbaugh says he was taken out of context, points to backing by Neocon warmonger Norman Podhoretz, adds he doesn't want bankers regulated

(Limbaugh apparently doesn't understand the difference between free markets and fascism, where crooked banksters, corrupt government "regulators" like Barney Frank and the Wall Street insiders who buy them off transfer billions of taxpayer dollars from average Americans into their own pockets. Or he does know the difference, but is in on the action himself. Either way, Limbaugh is a Neocon buffoon/Big Government shill -- ed.).

Limbaugh: "Earlier this week, I posed a political question in the process and in the context of trying to help a friend and my audience understand the concept that people ask me about a lot: “Why are so many Jewish people liberal?” And a friend of mine — a good friend of mine, Norman Podhoretz — has written a book, an excellent book to explain it. Mr. Podhoretz is himself Jewish. He is the husband of Midge Decter and the father of John Podhoretz, and I know all of them very well and have socialized with them on a number of occasions, and in the process of… Let me just read you this. Podhoretz has written a response to Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League, who is demanding that I apologize for “borderline anti-Semitism.” Now, anybody who listens to this program even marginally knows that this program is and has consistently been one of the most outspoken supporters of the Jewish people and of Israel in particular.

"And Mr. Foxman knows this as well. What I suspect is the usual thing that happened. Somebody took a few words that I said in a pretty long monologue, cut them up, and published them in a way to make it appear I said something that I didn’t say, and rather than check it out..."

"I don’t want the government telling banks how they can and can’t operate. I don’t want Obama being everybody’s boss. I don’t want the government being able to hire and fire people and set salaries. That’s all happened. I don’t want that kind of thing. I wanted him to fail. I was the only person to say so, and that changed the political dynamic...

"So the sheer hatred of me crystallized and compacted this week. You know, I totally understand people trying to damage me and my credibility so that I’m no longer a factor. The thing is when they do this they only amplify me and add to my supposed importance. But you don’t have to be anything other than a liberal to lie about me and attack me and so forth, and this is silly. This “borderline anti-Semitic” charge from the Anti-Defamation League is just silly, and here is what Mr. Podhoretz himself has written in response. He titled this: “It’s Not Rush Limbaugh Who Should Apologize — In my new book, ‘Why Are Jews Liberals?’, I argue that it no longer makes any sense for so many of my fellow Jews to go on aligning themselves with the forces of the Left...

"And Mr. Foxman, if you really want to go after anti-Semitism you should first start looking at it on the left and within the Obama administration and within his circle of friends, because that’s why you’re going to find it. You’re not going to find anti-Semitism on this radio show. You’re going to find nothing but love and respect and admiration for the Jewish people and an unwavering support for Israel that has not ever shaken. I was referring to the Jew haters, the bigots. Twice I referred to “prejudiced people.”...MORE...LINK

Friday, January 22, 2010

Philo-Judeofascist Rush Limbaugh says much anti-Semitism in (disproportionately Jewish Zionist) Democratic Party

Limbaugh agrees "Soros is a self-hating Jew," claims "there is so much anti-Semitism in the Democratic Party"
(Media Matters) --

On his radio show, Rush Limbaugh agreed with a caller who called George Soros "a self-hating Jew." Limbaugh also proclaimed that "[t]here is so much anti-Semitism today in the Democratic Party," later adding: "The seat of this anti-Semitism right now is focused in kooks, like [anti-war activist Cindy] Sheehan and the blogs and the people and Soros."

On the August 9 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio program, Rush Limbaugh agreed with a caller who called progressive financier, philanthropist, and political activist George Soros "a self-hating Jew." Limbaugh also proclaimed that "[t]here is so much anti-Semitism today in the Democratic Party," later adding: "The seat of this anti-Semitism right now is focused in kooks, like [anti-war activist Cindy] Sheehan and the blogs and the people and Soros."

Earlier, Limbaugh played an audio clip of MSNBC's Chris Matthews comparing Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman to "Uncle Tonoose," a character on the 1950s TV shows Make Room for Daddy and The Danny Thomas Show, which he appeared to argue was evidence of anti-Semitism in the Democratic Party.
From the August 9 edition of The Rush Limbaugh Show:

LIMBAUGH: Can we go back? I'm gonna need Chris Matthews again. Grab number 10. Audio sound bite number 10. This from Chris Matthews last night on his -- well, it wasn't Hardball. It was his election coverage on PMSNBC [sic].

MATTHEWS [audio clip]: The body language of the two is so different. You have this very WASP-y fellow, [businessman Ned] Lamont. Very calm, very casual, very St. Paul's, almost, in the prep-school sense. [...] Lieberman, of course, is the schmaltzy, ethnic guy, the Uncle Tonoose, you know. The guy that's very kind of lachrymose in his, almost, postnasal-drip voice of his. [...] But he doesn't look happy.

LIMBAUGH: All right. Now, let's -- "schmaltzy, ethnic guy, the Uncle Tonoose." And as I said in the last hour, Uncle Tonoose was a character on the old Danny Thomas Show, and I think I'm pretty safe in saying that Uncle Tonoose was played by Hans Conried. Huge hook nose and so forth. Here's Matthews describing -- let's be honest about this, folks. Let's just put it out there. When you say somebody is a schmaltzy, ethnic guy, you're not talking about an Arab. You are talking about a Jew. You describe somebody as a schmaltzy, ethnic guy who has postnasal drip with his voice, lachrymose and so forth. Uncle Tonoose, in character, was a Lebanese Arab. Danny Thomas was a Christian Lebanese, and Uncle Tonoose therefore -- but isn't it interesting that you have Chris Matthews describing an Arab as a Jew. On the basis of appearance. Schmaltzy, ethnic guy, which -- you know, there are some people saying this, but they're dancing around it. But one of the little -- not-often-discussed aspects of the kook fringe base of the Democratic Party, and I'm just gonna put it out there, is its anti-Semitism. There is so much anti-Semitism today in the Democratic Party. It is -- I don't think it's an accident that [Rev. Al] Sharpton and the Rev. [Jesse] Jackson are up there standing behind Lamont [during his victory speech on August 8].


CALLER: Their party has been taken over by people that are anti-Israel, as in Cindy Sheehan and Soros, who happens to be a self-hating Jew.


CALLER: They hate Israel, they hate Jews, they're terrorism deniers. And I just hope it's a wake-up call to the Jewish people that are out there. Is that still the best party for them?

LIMBAUGH: Yeah. Doubt that that's going to happen. It's going to take a little bit more than this. The seat of this anti-Semitism right now is focused in kooks like Sheehan and the blogs and the people and Soros...LINK

Disproportionately Jewish Zionist Democrat Party: Rosner's Domain: Jews in Congress: from 2.3% to 8.4%

(All are Zionists and Democrats except one Jewish Zionist Republican: Eric Cantor.)

Witness the consequences of allowing Judeofascism to roost in America, and over Palestine; Your own children could be next

(You Tube) -- By hindkhaled...LINK

The same Zionist criminals who orchestrated the Iraq war on behalf of Israel now have Iran and Pakistan in their sights

Criminal State - Part 3 of 3: A Closer Look at Israel's Role in Terrorism
(YouTube) -- By alawson911

This series is based on an article by Jeff Gates, who is a widely acclaimed author, attorney, merchant banker, educator and consultant to governments worldwide, who served for seven years as counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance. He is the author of Guilt by Association, Democracy At Risk and The Ownership Solution. See his website ...LINK

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Book review: Jeff Gates' Guilt By Association offers a matrix for understanding the trans-party political-criminal syndicate plundering America

Jeff Gates’ Guilt by Association
(Occidental Observer) -- Reviewed by Edmund Connelly --

...Guilt by Association makes treason transparent. The corruption that plagues American politics is traced to an alliance with elites and extremists loyal to the Land of Israel. Unable to rid politics of campaign finance corruption, the U.S. finds its security imperiled by those skilled at deceiving America into waging wars for the Zionist state.

Tracing this corruption to criminal syndicates from the 1920s, Guilt by Association reveals how those skilled at displacing facts with beliefs wield clout from the shadows. Both deception and self-deceit play critical roles in enabling this criminality to expand its reach on a global scale. Guilt by Association documents how by operating in the realms of politics, media, academia, think tanks and popular culture corruption came to dominate politics, as shown by presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama. Chronicling systemic corruption that predates these candidates by decades, the book explains how organized crime expanded worldwide while the U.S. discredited itself in the eyes of a global public astounded that Americans would tolerate such corruption to their own detriment. Featuring sophisticated analysis presented in layman’s language, Guilt by Association will transform political debate in the U.S. and beyond...

To be sure, Gates’ claims are vast and there is a bit of Da Vinci Code breathlessness to them. But consider this a preliminary consideration of important topics that need to be understood. If Gates is right to link them through an overarching network of Ashkenazi Jews, then we might begin to unravel many of the mysteries Gates takes on. After all, many of us have seen the “disproportionate power wielded by those with outsized influence in media, pop culture, politics, academia and think tanks,” and we can also verify the heavy Jewish presence in all of them.

These are matters of war and peace, prosperity and poverty. Many of the same people responsible for the economic meltdown are either still there, or worse, being brought into the Obama team...MORE...LINK

Prominent Israeli think tank encourages Zionists to infiltrate elite institutions internationally to subvert, suppress criticism of Zionism

Israel Finds a New Way to Play the Victim
( -- By Ira Chernus

...Right now, the hot new source of anxiety in Israel is an imagined worldwide conspiracy of anti-Semites bent on “delegitimization” – attacking the right of the Jewish state to exist. For many Israeli officials, it seems, this supposed conspiracy is all too real and all too dangerous. Soon they may be on full-scale alert, mobilizing their nation and its supporters to name this threat their “new battlefield,” make it a top priority, and fight back hard.

The idea of the “new battlefield” seems to have been born in the Reut Institute, a think-tank described by Thomas Friedman in the New York Times as “Israel’s premier policy strategy group.”

“Reut was established to serve Israeli government agencies and decisionmakers … from top-ranking politicians to government professionals,” its Web site explains – all at no charge, and no matter which party controls the government. When the current opposition leader, Tzipi Livni, was in the government as foreign minister, one of her advisers praised Reut: “They are very influential and highly respected. … Their alerts sometimes save the day.”

Now Reut is sounding the alert about the “new battlefield,” in a new report that’s been well-covered in the Israeli press. Here’s how Reut founder and president Gidi Grinstein explains it: “Turning Israel into a pariah state is central to its adversaries’ efforts. Israel is a geopolitical island. Its survival and prosperity depend on its relations with the world in trade, science, arts, and culture – all of which rely on its legitimacy. When the latter is compromised, the former may be severed, with harsh political, social, and economic consequences.”

The attack is being directed, Reut claims, from “hubs of delegitimization” – places like London, Toronto, Brussels, Madrid, and Berkeley that are hotbeds of anti-Israel criticism fueled by anti-Semitism.

One piece of this picture – and one piece only – is accurate enough. Worldwide criticism of Israel’s harsh occupation policies is growing rapidly, even among Jews, as well as millions of non-Jews whose moral credentials are spotless. That means the simplistic old charge that all critics of Israel are anti-Semitic is no longer plausible, even as a PR tactic.

So the sophisticated think-tankers at Reut have dreamed up a new way to try to make the stale charge of anti-Semitism stick. Now, it turns out, there is a crucial distinction we must all learn to make. “Soft critics” (including human rights groups like Oxfam) condemn Israeli policy but not necessarily the state’s legitimacy, and that’s apparently OK. Israel’s real enemies are the “hard-core delegitimizers,” fueled by anti-Semitic hatred, who are out to destroy the Jews.

The problem, Reut warns in good McCarthyite fashion, is that the “soft critics” are dupes of the “hard-core” anti-Semites, who want to use the “softies” to blur the difference between criticizing Israeli policy and denying Israel’s basic legitimacy. Reut calls for an all-out effort by Israel’s defenders to drive a wedge between the soft and hard-core critics.

That’s just part of the larger strategy described by Grinstein:
“In every major country, Israel and its supporters must develop and sustain personal connections with the entire elite in business, politics, arts and culture, science, and academia.”

For example, a Reut blogger recently wrote, “Promoting Israel studies on campus [in the U.S.] and ‘branding Israel’ – a strategy aimed at associating Israel with positive characteristics unrelated to the Arab-Israeli conflict – are central to improving Israel’s international standing and countering delegitimacy.”

All this might be just a tempest in a think-tank teapot. But it seems that Reut’s claim of influence on the Israeli government is well-founded, at least in this case. Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon recently told a group of diplomats in Jerusalem that Israel’s foes now rely mainly on tactics like boycotts and economic and legal sanctions to delegitimize Israel.

Ayalon dubbed it “lawfare” – and apparently the name is catching on. Britain’s attorney general, Baroness Scotland of Asthal, just gave a lecture at the law school of Jerusalem’s Hebrew University. The title: “Lawfare: Time for Rules of Engagement?”

But Ayalon took Reut’s intellectual fantasy one crucial step further, into the very real and violent world of the Israel-Palestine conflict, when he charged that the whole “lawfare” campaign is being directed by the Palestinian Authority. Since Palestinian violence has declined so precipitously, Ayalon would have us believe, the Palestinians are taking the struggle to a new phase, centered on the global battlefield of “delegitimizing Israel."

It all makes a neat package – much too neat, in fact. Rather than responding to the moderating trends in both the Palestinian Authority and Hamas with any concessions of their own, these Israeli leaders would rather find a new way to go on portraying Israel as the innocent victim of irrational hatreds, which can never be mollified at any negotiating table...MORE...LINK

Yet another U.S. Jewish Zionist indicted as possible Israel spy

U.S. Jew indicted as possible Israel spy
(Haaretz) -- By Yossi Melman

New documents presented in federal court in Washington, D.C. reveal deep ties (more than was known) between Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) and Dr. Stewart David Nozette, an American astronomer accused of spying for Israel.

The media here covered his arrest on October 19, 2009 and then interest waned, though the American media are still monitoring the case.

Two attorneys in the counterespionage unit of the U.S. Department's of Justice National Security division, Deborah Curtis and Heather Schmidt, presented documents found on the scientist's computer. One document, titled "Proposed Operations for 2005-2006," referred to the need to carry out "a penetration of NASA," the U.S. space agency.

Another document, according to the prosecution, shows Nozette attempted to obtain highly confidential material by using his high-level security clearance and infiltrating other people's computers.

Other documents mention the names of Yossi Weiss and Yossi Fishman. Weiss is a former project manager and today the deputy CEO of IAI and head of the company's missile and space division. Fishman was the IAI's representative in the U.S. and is today the CEO of ODF Optronics.

Fishman told Haaretz he knew Nozette the way he knew other Americans employed by the IAI at the time as consultants. "We did not engage in any kind of spying activity or information gathering, perish the thought. The relationship was business as usual."

The IAI is not mentioned specifically by name in the documents. It is referred to as a foreign company or as a space company owned by the Israeli government." Background talks with administration officials indicate the references are indeed to IAI.

Unreported visits

The indictment and the documents indicate that Nozette was employed for nine years as an IAI consultant. Versions vary as to how much he was paid, from $170,000 to $225,000. His direct superior was Israel Aircraft Industries International, a U.S.-registered company.

The FBI searched Nozette's home and computer and found additional proof of his connection to Israel. He visited here several times, but did not report this - as is required by his high security clearance. The FBI confiscated letters he wrote to Israelis, reports he forwarded to the IAI, a map of Israel, photos of assorted places in Israel, a Hebrew-language catalog of archaeological artifacts and other items.

Nozette, 52, of Chevy Chase, Maryland, was arrested after FBI surveillance that included wiretapping and undercover photography. The operation followed the former astronomer's interrogation on suspicion of tax evasion and defrauding the U.S. government. Nozette worked out plea bargain with the Justice Department; he admitted to fraud and accepted a sentence of up to three years in jail, plus a fine of $265,000. His jail term would have started in November, but he was arrested on the new and more serious charge of espionage...MORE...LINK

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

New book fleshes out Zionist supremacism's premeditated designs for subjugation, exploitation, conflict between Arabs, Muslims and Christians

Zionism's destabilizing force: "Israeli Exceptionalism" reviewed
Ahmed Moor
(The Electronic Intifada) --

In his new book Israeli Exceptionalism: The Destabilizing Logic of Zionism, M. Shahid Alam successfully argues that the moral force behind the Zionist movement is a sense of Jewish, and consequently Israeli, exceptionalism. This claim of exceptionalism underpins what he calls the "destabilizing logic of Zionism." According to Alam, Zionism "could advance only by creating and promoting conflicts between the West and the Islamicate" (p. 3). He defines the "Islamicate" as consisting of the broader Muslim world, with the Middle East at its heart.

Alam, a professor of economics at Boston's Northeastern University, begins his book by detailing the core problem that confronted the nascent Zionist movement: the creation of a Jewish nation from disparate and scattered Jewish communities. Zionists set out to solve this problem by creating a myth of exceptionalism that could be embraced by Jews around the globe. These myths were steeped in a combination of religious mythology and ethnic nationalist exclusivism that presented the Jews as the "chosen people" (p. 9) and Palestine as their sole and God-given birthright.

These claims were expanded upon during the British mandate of Palestine and after the founding of the State of Israel. Zionists asserted that the Jewish "liberation" movement was different from other liberation movements because "the long history of Jewish suffering, the Jewish ability to outlive their enemies, their signal contributions to human civilization, and their spectacular victories against Arab armies" demonstrated the purity of their cause and their exceptionalism (p. 5). Finally, they argued that Israel was a singular case because it was surrounded and threatened by hostile and murderous Arab states and masses. Through these arguments, Alam asserts, Zionists cultivated an environment that overlooks and in some cases endorses their movement's human rights abuses and racist policies.

In the second segment of the book, Alam examines the history of the region, reviewing the violent history of the early Zionist colonists and describing it as a core, rather than incidental, program of Zionism. Violent, racist attitudes towards the Arabs generally and the Palestinians specifically had to be nurtured by those who would make Palestine the Jewish homeland. They acted as intermediaries between the "West" and the "Islamicate" insofar as they were of the former and claimed to understand the latter. To galvanize Western support for Israel, it was vital for Zionists to create a myth of Muslim-Christian antipathy. Alam paraphrases the perceptions caused by the myth: "[I]f the Islamists vent their anger at the United States, it is not because of its policies, but because it is Christian" (p. 42). Naturally then, a Jewish state in Palestine could act both as a buffer against Muslim masses, and a projection of Western power and interests. This is the argument presented by some Zionists...MORE...LINK

Not-so-subtle Jewish supremacist agitprop: CNN's Elizabeth Cohen exploits Haiti crisis to do p.r. work for Israel, criticize efforts of Americans

Haiti Day 6 - No one but the Israeli's have come to help any of our patients that are dying -- (By mykidsrtallerthanme) --

CNN Elizabeth Cohen interviews makeshift medical tent personnel on January 18, 2010.

Asking Harvard Medical Dr. Jennifer Furin, "Have the American's set up a field hosptial?"

"Currently, not yet."

Cohen: "The Israeli's came from the other side of the world..."

Furin: "It's a frustrating thing that I really can't explain..."...MORE...LINK

Is Israel the actualization of the "Jewish spirit"?

Netanyahu, Hegel and the Jewish Spirit by Gilad Atzmon
(Gilad Atzmon Home Page) --

“Spirit does not toss itself about in the external play of chance occurrences; on the contrary, it is that which determines history absolutely, and it stands firm against the chance occurrences which it dominates and exploits for its own purpose”. (Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel 1770 – 1831)

PM Netanyahu was quoted by the Israeli Ynet last week saying that the “whole of Israel would be surrounded by a fence eventually”. According to another report he said “there will be no choice but to fence Israel in on all directions”. What Netanyahu means by ‘fence’ and ‘all directions’ may be left open for the time being. However, PM Netanyahu has managed to bring to light an Hegelian interpretation of the notion of ‘Jewish spirit’ as a relentless inclination towards segregation and isolation. It is the tendency to keep oneself apart that determines and shapes Jewish collectivism. Whether it is the Zionists and their walls, the Orthodox and their Kosher universe or even Jewish anti Zionists and their racially segregated miniature activist cells, somehow every form of Jewish political engagement is there to set the Jews apart.

“For Hegel” says Francis Fukuyama, “the contradictions that drive history exist first of all in the realm of human consciousness, i.e. on the level of ideas”. It is reasonable to argue that from an Hegelian perspective, all human behaviour and human history is rooted in a prior state of consciousness. For Hegelian thinkers such as Alexandre Kojève, understanding the underlying processes of history requires understanding the realm of consciousness for it is consciousness that will ultimately remake the material world into a mirror image of its own spirit. In short it is the spirit that would eventually shape the material reality as a mirror of itself. Accordingly, the Jewish state, could be realised as a reflection of the Jewish spirit for it is the Jewish spirit that shapes the reality of the Jewish state.

For Hegel history ended in 1806. For him mankind reached its end with the French and American Revolutions. Whether Hegel was correct or completely deluded in his reading of human history and mankind’s evolution is a matter for an ongoing philosophical debate. The Jewish state, however, can be easily interpreted in Hegelian terms as the ‘end of Jewish history’. Zionism presented a dream, it set itself a serious challenge: it promised to transform the Jew into a ‘civilised and authentic human being’. It vowed to make the Jews people like all other people. Zionism was in fact a call of defiance against the hitherto Jewish spirit. Yet, the current state of Israel proves beyond doubt that the spirit has defeated the Zionist proclaimed fantasy. The will to be ‘fenced from every possible direction’ prevailed. The aspiration to be ‘people amongst people’ is a matter for historical enquiry, it has no support on the ground whatsoever. The spirit won over the rational ideological fantasy...MORE...LINK

Chris Moore comments:

Whatever early Zionists, mostly anti-Christian left-wingers from the Soviet Union and Europe, might have professed, Zionism, like Jewish Bolshevism, always was intended as a political hammer for Jewish exceptionalism, insularity, and supremacy -- even though each was smuggled in under the p.r. guise of something higher.

As Atzmon notes, "Whether it is the Zionists and their walls, the Orthodox and their Kosher universe or even Jewish anti Zionists and their racially segregated miniature activist cells, somehow every form of Jewish political engagement is there to set the Jews apart."

This tendency can probably be traced to organized Jewish religious doctrine, dogma, and historiography. But because those are the forces that inevitably shape all organized manifestations of Jewry (because they are the forces that hold self-identifying Jewry together) such an insular and exclusive outcome is apparently inevitable.

Sure, individual Jews may reject components of those manifestations (for example, elitism or supremacy), but they are essentially "pissing against the river," because the current of Jewry's doctrinal river runs in the opposite direction.

This isn't to say that all Jews or Jewish groups are unsuitable for participation in Western liberalism, but rather that the gist of organized Jewish Zionism runs counter to Western values, and hence Jewish Zionists should concede, to themselves even, that their ideology doesn't fit well within the Western framework without the West undergoing a radical political transformation and subordination to the Zionist/institutionalized Jewish-supremacist vein -- which is exactly what most Western Zionists in general and American Zionists in particular (and those Gentiles under their influence) are attempting to accomplish.

And this is where the distinction needs to be made between Zionist Jewry and non-Zionist Jewry. For example, the Amish are highly insular, but don't aspire to politically overthrow or co-opt the U.S. government, hence they are not a threat to Western freedom. Similarly, insular Jewish groups who aren't crypto-Zionist Communists or open Zionists need not automatically be viewed as a threat, either.

But no question, due to Zionism's strong appeal, political manifestations of organized Jewry in the West should necessarily be viewed with a very jaundiced eye.

Alleged Jewish Zionist spy purged from FBI claims religious discrimination in complaint against firing for suspected espionage

Jewish FBI agent alleges firing due to religion
(By JTA via Jerusalem Post) --

An FBI agent said he was fired because he is Jewish, saying he was unfairly under suspicion over lawful contacts with Israel and AIPAC officials.

The agent, suing in federal court as John Doe, said he was wrongfully under suspicion for what amounted to lawful contacts with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee after he was tied to the 2004 case in which two AIPAC employees and a Pentagon analyst were indicted on charges of espionage, the Courthouse News Service reported Wednesday.

The Pentagon analyst, Lawrence Franklin, pleaded guilty to passing confidential information regarding US foreign policy on Iran. The case against the AIPAC employees was dismissed.

In his complaint, the agent claims that the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the US Justice Department "have allowed their personal, unfounded, and ill-informed biases regarding the country of Israel and the loyalty of Jewish Americans to improperly and illegally color their personnel decisions."...

He said the FBI revoked his security clearance and placed him on administrative leave without pay in 2005 after being told he was being investigated for espionage...MORE...LINK

Chris Moore comments:

This is why it's important define Zionism as a complete and alien political ideology as opposed to a religious stand. Otherwise, Jewish and even Christian Zionists (or plain old secular Zionists enamored of Zionist Jewry and Israel) within the U.S. government can hide behind accusations of "religious discrimination" when they are caught spying for Israel or imperiling American interests to advance the interests of their Zionist ideology.

Think of it this way: historically, if Communism or Nazism defined themselves as religious ideologies, and networks of their spies within the U.S. government caught committing acts of espionage and treason on their behalf were allowed to successfully claim "religious discrimination" as a defense, today we would likely be living under one of those tyrannical ideologies.

Components of organized Jewry who conflate religion and ideology should in no way be rewarded or excused for doings so; after all, isn't separation of religion and state one of the central tenets of the U.S. Constitution, and a mainstay of American doctrine? Its adherents' determination to conflate religion and ideology is what makes Zionism in general and Jewish Zionism in particular such a dangerous and alien menace to American values and interests.

Next thing you know, Islamists who have managed to work their way into high-level government positions will be making similar claims of religious protection.

So in addition to separation clauses, all these Jewish Zionist demands for exceptions, special treatment, and "passes" are totally undermining the equal protections clauses of the Constitution, as well.

Zionism is simply irreconcilable with the American way as defined by our governing documents and national doctrine.

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

How left-liberal/neoliberal Jewish Zionists granted big platforms by liberal MSM dishonestly grease the skids and spin for Israel

David Brooks seeks to reframe Zionism
(Mondoweiss) -- By Scott McConnell

When David Brooks puts forth a definition of Zionism, it merits our attention. Brooks is talented and sometimes incisive, but his main gift may be his acute sense of where Commentary leaves off and the ideological mainstream begins. There he parks, on the often shifting line between the two: kind of a neocon but not, understand, the frothing kind. It’s a slot he shares with The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, sometimes described here as the most important Jewish journalist in America, and given the current configuration of power and opinion, a central one.

So in a seeming aside to his column praising Jewish over-representation in the world of intellect (should pro-Iraq-war media figures be quantified as well?) Brooks writes:

“Israel’s technological success is the fruition of the Zionist dream. The country was not founded so stray settlers could sit among thousands of angry Palestinians in Hebron. It was founded so Jews would have a safe place to come together and create things for the world.”

Perhaps also sensing that Americans need a refresher course in the purpose of Zionism, Jeffrey Goldberg immediately reproduced the above paragraph on his blog, appreciating that Brooks “frames Zionism in a completely different way than the news pages do” and “writes smartly about the competition between tribal and worldly Zionism”.

There is a tale in these carefully crafted sentences. David Brooks’s settlers are “stray”—as if some overly enthusiastic campers missed their trail, only to put down their rucksacks in Hebron—and not, as is actually the case, a well-financed salient backed by the American tax code, the Israeli government, and overseen by the IDF. (I’m reminded of the time, many years ago, when Leon Wieseltier explained to my wife that the Israeli army ended up on the outskirts of Beirut because they had misread their maps and got lost.)

Note too the passivity Brooks attributes to them. They don’t occupy, or build, or settle, or agitate. They “sit” –surrounded by “angry Palestinians.”

One wonders whether David Brooks, after five hundred or so NY Times columns, has considered what would happen if he devoted just one to depicting the actual situation in Hebron. Not the stray settlers who “sit” –but the settlers who throw stones at Palestinian children on their way to school, throw garbage and feces at the Palestinian markets, who scrawl “gas the Arabs” on Palestinian homes, cut apart olive trees belonging to the remaining Palestinians–all under the watchful protection of the Israeli army...

But he doesn’t and probably never will. He is pleased to let us know that he finds the settlers a little bit infra dig, and that when Americans think of Israel they should think of software geniuses. It’s a skilled performance, but one almost prefers the forthrightness of the neocons who make no pretense of desiring a just settlement with the Palestinians, asserting instead that we should support Israel more than we do any other country in the world because it "shares our values."...MORE...LINK

Pike: Don't let Israel-firsters take over, destroy Tea Party movement

(National Prayer Network) -- By Rev. Ted Pike

...A generation ago, the Reagan Revolution promised to restore America. That hope was sabotaged when Israel-first president George W. Bush surrounded himself by a host of neo-conservative, Zionist Jews and rashly launched foreign wars to make the Mideast safe for Israel. Claiming to be an evangelical Christian, Bush may have thought he was blessing America by aiding “God’s chosen people.” Instead, military involvement in the Mideast has proven one of the greatest curses America has known. The draining wars in Iraq and Afghanistan empowered Democrats to smash the last vestiges of conservative power, sweeping in Obama’s aggressively pro-homosexual, anti-Christian regime.

Will this new movement’s leaders make the same deadly mistake of elevating Israel-first authority? If they do, and succeed in 2012, loyalty to Israel will lead only to more disastrous military ventures in the Mideast—and inevitably discredit and destroy the Tea Party movement itself.

In contrast to the past four US presidents, ex-Gov. Sarah Palin—featured speaker at the Tea Party Nation Convention on February 4-6—wants to allow illegal Jewish West Bank settlements to actually expand and has criticized Obama for urging a halt! Palin is maneuvering to take on Obama in 2012. She will be joined on stage by arch Israel supporter, and possible vice presidential candidate, Joseph Farah, who owns the popular conservative news source, WorldNetDaily. WND has a history of outspokenly defending freedom, particularly against hate crime laws and their persecution of Christians worldwide. Except in Israel. Over the past six years, because of Farah’s intense loyalty to Israel, he has enforced a virtual blackout of coverage of the rampant wave of sometimes violent hate crimes by ultra-Orthodox Jews against thousands of Jewish Christians. (See Lura Beckford's This anti-Christ persecution is tolerated by the government of Israel and local authorities...MORE...LINK

...I urge you to email this article, including the following petition, to as many Tea Party chapters and leaders as possible, especially in your area. Many hundreds are listed at You can make a powerful contribution to freedom by moving the Tea Party in the right direction at this formative time!

Dear Tea Party Leaders:

As Tea Party supporters, we are concerned that the Tea Party movement makes a fresh start toward American renewal and not repeat the same mistakes that brought us to political, economic, and moral crisis. President George Washington warned America to “beware of foreign entanglements.” Gen. Douglas MacArthur said that if America ever became militarily involved in the Middle East, it could lead to her ruin.

Undue loyalty to Israel has made America’s leaders discard their sage advice and embroil us in no-win wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. These wars could spread to Iran, Pakistan, and further—all to make the Mideast safe for Israel.

It is time we return to the advice of our forefathers. The Tea Party platform should state that Israel will no longer receive “most favored” status by the US but must mature as an equally accountable nation. It must be fully responsible for actions that violate international law. No longer can Israel expect America to aid Israel when she persists in illegal settlements, war crimes, collective punishment of innocent civilians and restriction of free speech and religion for minorities in Israel, particularly Christians.

Those of us who are Tea Party members and Christians resolve to bless Jews and “seek the peace of Jerusalem” in the way the Bible really teaches: by sharing the soul-saving gospel of Jesus Christ with the Jewish people. No longer will we “bless” a Christian-persecuting regime by providing it with horrific weapons of war or unconditional approval.

Instead of Israel-first candidates, the Tea Party must choose America-first candidates. Only a return to American interests and values can begin the long journey back to the autonomous freedom our nation’s founders envisioned more than two centuries ago.