Judeofascism.com

Duel-identity makes Judeofascists dangerously schizo; Deport them--it’s why Israel was created

2008-04-10T15:52:00.000-07:00

(By Chris Moore) -- Judeofascists show one face in gentile circles, another in Jewish ones. They profess to be anti-totalitarian and liberal, but when they have attained power, they quickly embrace totalitarianism and Red-fascist bullying tactics (as Jewish Bolshevism, Zionism and Neconservatism demonstrate). They claim to be anti-racist in public, but their fidelity to Talmudic doctrine, perhaps the first fascist tract, makes them the original racists.

But when it comes to formulating policy on behalf of their fellow Jews, the Judeofascist’s true nature and worldview can’t be hidden and is revealed for all to see.

The tension between their two identities is what underlies Judeofascist mental instability and willingness to embrace extreme measures. So long as the Judeofascist policy agenda remain on the margins and is not central to a national pursuit, Judeofascist hypocrisy and schizophrenia is tolerated and even venerated as a spark of “creativity.”But, as with the Zionist-engineered Iraq war and “war on terror,” when the Judeofascist agenda becomes central to the national pursuit, Zionist derangement becomes a national focal point and triggers an increase in so-called “anti-Semitism,” which more often then not is merely anti-Judeofascism.

This is why I support the existence of Israel: These Judeofascist nut-cases, who will forever be tormented by the conflict between their two-identities and hence perpetually dangerous, need to be put somewhere. In fact, Israel was created for this very purpose, and there is absolutely no reason not to utilize it as a steam valve. It’s stupid and self-destructive not to do so.

Those Jews who are suspected of using their official US government capacities to pursue the Israeli agenda should be put on trial and, if found guilty, stripped of their US citizenship and deported to Israel -- for their own good and the good of the US.

We can start with the entire cadre of Jewish nationalist Zionist neocons in the Bush administration who engineered the Iraq war on behalf of Israel and are today attempting to engineer a war against Iran on behalf of same. We can move along to Joe Lieberman, Rahm Emanuel, Carl Levin, Arlen Specter, Norm Coleman, Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Barney Frank and the multiplicity of other Jewish nationalist Zionists in the US Congress who, under the auspices of the US government, have diverted US taxpayer money to Israel on behalf of the Israeli government for years. We can then make our way into publicly funded academia to determine which Judeofascist scholars have used public tax money to advance the Israeli national agenda.

And no, I am not being ironic; I am deadly serious.

Ridiculous? Quixotic? McCarthyistic? A witch hunt? Hardly. More like realist.

History has shown time and again that a nation that doesn’t undertake dramatic measures in the fight against Judeofascism is destined to collapse, the Soviet Union merely being the most recent example. It’s no coincidence that post-Soviet Russia is now thriving since Communist Judeofascists emigrated to Israel and elsewhere (unfortunately, many to America) and the visionary Putin brought the hammer down on the Judeofascist oligarchs.

Visionaries understand that Judeofascism is an extremely well financed, organized, motivated, ambitious and emotionally driven enterprise that consumes, like a swarm of locusts, everything in its path. One of the reasons that the neocon agitprops are so capable of diagnosing and articulating the threat of Islamic totalitarianism (they incorrectly label it as Islamofasicsm) is that Judeofascism is Islamic totalitarianism’s mirror image. They know full well Islamic totalitarians can’t be trusted because they have seen that they themselves, as another subversive totalitarian religo-political movement, are capable of anything -- the Bush administration Judeofascist neocons’ “decisive” role (as Walt and Mearsheimer put it) in lying America into the Iraq war being merely one example.

Judeofascists should be pursuing the Israeli agenda from the shores of Israel, not America. The most clear-headed of them would probably even agree, if confronted, that such an arrangement is only right. Again, it’s why Israel was created, and it has the added benefit of sending an unmistakable message to “Christian” Zionists: your Judas-like treason will not be tolerated.

So investigate them, try them, and deport them. It’s really the only reasonable, humane way of dealing with the Judeofascist problem.

Does this generation of Americans have the balls and brains to do what needs to be done? I have my doubts, but if America is to survive as a nation, it better grow some bits, pieces and brain matter right quick.

*Originally posted on LibertarianToday.com

The Eternal Dilemma of the Authoritarian Jew

2008-02-06T19:01:00.000-08:00

A recent post on Mondoweiss goes to an important Neocon motive for orchestrating the Iraq war that has been roundly ignored by the mainstream media and the US Establishment: the Jewish-American Zionist desire to eliminate an enemy of Israel and expand the sphere of influence, security and glory of their spiritual homeland.

"The problem with the neocons is that they have by and large acted out of a strong sense of essentially religious concern with the security needs of the Jewish state, but suppressed that component of their thinking in the public square," writes Philip Weiss.

Weiss is right as far as he goes, but he doesn’t go far enough. Actually, the problem with the Neocons is that they are suffering the Eternal Dilemma of the ideologically authoritarian Jew: How can I craft policy that will serve my own needs while simultaneously convincing the gentile community the policy actually serves its needs? What do I do when the gentile community inevitably finds out that the policy I have crafted does not serve its needs as I have advertised?

The answer? Eventually there will always be a conflict of interest, at which point in time an authoritarian system will need to be in place to force the gentile community to accept the state of affairs beneficent to the authoritarian Jew and crafted by him.

The Neocons didn't so much suppress the religious-motive component of the Iraq war as hide it behind accusations of anti-Semitism hurled at anyone who brought it up in order to buy time. The Department of Homeland Security was crafted in order to put an authoritarian system in place to deal with the Eternal Dilemma when it inevitably arose. It hasn't worked because America is an open society, and because the Iraq war unraveled before the cement supporting the totalitarian structure could dry, which allowed the political heat that they originally envisioned would be shielded by the state to get to the Neocons.

To what extent does the Eternal Dilemma guide the thinking of the authoritarian Jew and govern other areas of his life (beyond his political life)? I suspect it has nearly total control of his intellect, which makes the authoritarian Jew a prisoner of his own belief system and a danger to everyone, more so because he isn’t even aware of the intellectual demon that thrives on the quandary that governs him.

Or is he unaware? An argument might be made that the authoritarian Jew is well aware of this demon, but chooses to live with it because it provides him stimulation, sustenance and can even be used to make him wealthy or powerful -- so long as it doesn’t get him killed first. It’s a chance the authoritarian Jew is often willing to take.

Henry Makow has written of the high that authoritarian Jews get from their intellectual demons, and how those demons drive them to commit heinous acts of murder, perhaps the ultimate example being Jewish Communists:

‘The greatest mass slaughter in history was not the Jewish holocaust but the Ukrainian Holodomor. By Stalin's own estimate, ten million Ukrainians died, mostly at the hands of Bolshevik Jews.

‘The extermination of the Ukrainian Kulaks was directed from the Kremlin where the Bolshevik leadership lived together and maintained a fraternal atmosphere suffused by their fervent collectivist idealism i.e. their egregore. This is how historian Simon Sebag Montefiore describes the scene in the Kremlin during the Holomodor. (Of course he doesn't mention that most of the main players were Jews.)

"This pitiless fraternity lived in a sleepless frenzy of excitement and activity, driven by adrenalin and conviction. Regarding themselves like God on the first day, they were creating a new world in a red-hot frenzy... " ("Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar", p. 40)’

Of course, once Hitler saw the rules by which the Jewish Communists were playing in Russia, the Holodomor and all the other wanton mass murders perpetrated by the Jewish Communists in the Soviet bloc countries against gentiles and dissidents, he adopted those rules himself, which resulted in the Holocaust.

And so it goes…

--Chris Moore

Giuliani advisor extols virtues of Palestinian suffering; are Americans next?

2008-01-01T15:06:00.000-08:00

(By Chris Moore, LibertarianToday.com) -- Featured in Jewish World Review and headlined ‘The Benefits of Palestinian Economic Collapse,’ one of Rudy Giuliani’s large coterie of Neocon advisers wrote in a recent article that the more Palestinians suffer, the better off they are.

Daniel Pipes, the founder of the McCarthyite group Campus Watch, a thought-police organization that that monitors academia for criticism of Israel, had the following to say about the virtues of subjecting Palestinians to privation:

‘For Palestinians, hope derives from a perception of Israeli weakness, implying an optimism and excitement that the Jewish state can be eliminated. Conversely, when Palestinians cannot see a way forward against Israel, they devote themselves to the more mundane tasks of earning a living and educating their children. Note that the Palestinian economy peaked in 1992, just as, post-Soviet Union and post-Kuwait war, hopes bottomed out to eliminate Israel.’

‘Exhilaration, not hardship, accounts for bellicose Palestinian behavior. Accordingly, whatever reduces Palestinian confidence is a good thing. A failed economy depresses the Palestinians' mood, not to speak of their military and other capabilities, and so brings resolution closer.’

If destroying Palestinian morale had a positive correlation toward resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, certainly the entire decades-long mess would have been settled years ago. The Jewish state has premeditatedly, sadistically and steadily strangled the life from the Palestinian people since its inception in 1948. For decades, Palestinians have suffered at the whim and mercy of Washington-funded Zionist troops who have systematically turned the occupied territories into a Jewish-administered gulag camp in an effort to drive Arabs out of the Levant and secure a firm foothold for an expansion-minded Jewish empire.

Jewish Zionist Pipes goes on at length in his article about how poor and inept the Palestinian economy is and how relatively prosperous the Jews living right next door are (the clear implication being that Palestinians are too backward and primitive to conduct their own economic affairs) without mentioning the billions in currency and material welfare injected into the Israeli economy annually by the Israel-lobby bought US Congress, the fact that the Jewish economy derives much of its lifeblood through exploiting the cheap labor of its non-Jewish second class citizens, and the fact that the Israeli government does everything within its power to wreck the Palestinian economy at each and every opportunity available.

No doubt the economies at Dachau and Belsen weren’t too hot, either.

But what really fascinated me about Pipes’ article is his Judeofascist thought-process. Like nearly all Judeofascists, he employs the same kind of logic as that used by Big Brother in Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984. Recall the Party’s three main slogans: WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH. In the case of the Palestinians, Pipes apparently wants to add: PRIVATION IS PROSPERITY.

And I don’t believe that Pipes’ mindset towards Palestinians in particular and gentiles in general is uncommon among Jewish Zionists.

Recently in Philip Weiss’s blog Mondoweiss, the author lamented of his fellow American Jews that “as an autonomous ethnic group, we are accountable only to ourselves. It's completely out of step with millennial America, where Jews are part of the establishment and have true power, the ability to influence others' lives. It would be nice to see more responsibility.”

My response in the Comments section of that blog is relevant to the discussion of the mindset of Pipes and other Jewish-American Zionists:

‘Dream on, Phil. You yourself recently cited an AJC poll that (despite unconditional support for Israel for decades, to great US tragedy and detriment) found that 87% of US Jews still see American anti-Semitism as "a very serious problem" or "somewhat of a problem" and found that 91% of US Jews expected anti-Semitism around the world to "stay the same," "increase somewhat," or "increase greatly."

‘Fear and loathing, paranoia and neurosis obviously isn't the result of anti-Semitism in America; they are obviously conditioned into the Jewish people by organized Judaism itself for its own purposes. And you want that irrational, paranoid, neurotic collective filled with fear and loathing of the gentiles that surround it to act "responsibly" toward people that they believe mean them harm? That itself is a fantasy.

‘Kevin McDonald is right: Due to their conditioned fear and hatred of gentiles, most Jews in America (unfortunately) comprise a "hostile elite."

‘This explains why America is having, and will continue to have, huge social, political and economic dislocation: a powerful minority within despises its neighbors, and on some level wants to see them suffer. It also apparently believes it is an imperative to extract as many resources as possible from them before those neighbors finally and inevitably turn on them so they can at least live comfortably in Israel with their extracted loot.’

The fact that the Giuliani campaign has so many Jewish Zionists advising it should scare a lot of Americans. The American Conservative recently did a cover story that took a close look at the Giuliani brain trust, and nearly all of them were fanatical Zionists. That disproportionate influence is not unlike the state of affairs in Washington, where much of US foreign policy is bought and paid for by the Israel lobby, and Congress is under heavy Zionist influence. Consequently, Washington has apparently internalized the Zionist mindset; its stubborn unwillingness to bring US troops home as demanded for months now by an overwhelming majority of Americans is a reflection of that.

The treacherous Jewish Zionist and philosemitic gentile elite that has Washington firmly in its grip has a deep-seated contempt not only for Palestinians, but apparently for Americans as well.

How long before it starts economically strangling Americans in order that ‘they devote themselves to the more mundane tasks of earning a living and educating their children’ and quit pestering Washington about sacrificing those same children to a Middle Eastern Jewish empire?

We are all Palestinians now.

Chris Moore is publisher of LibertarianToday.com and Judeofascism.com

What is "Judeofascism"?

2007-12-17T17:41:00.000-08:00

(By Chris Moore, Judeofascism.com) -- What do Bolshevism, Zionism and Neoconservatism have in common? In addition to being murderous, elitist, authoritarian and organizationally insular, they are all mass political movements in which Jewish ideologues played decisive and even definitive roles. In fact, without the Jewish contribution to each, they likely all would have been rendered either historically stillborn or unconceived altogether.

And although all three are scattered along the traditional Left-Right political spectrum, the Jewish network at the intellectual and political center of each has exhibited consistently fascist characteristics both operationally and in its bigoted treatment of “out-group” religions, ethnicities, opponents, rivals, dissidents, and even neutral bystanders. Hence all three can be categorized, to varying degrees, as Judeofascist movements.

In modern history, perhaps the history of the world, no ethno-religious-political network has inspired more chaos and mass murder, yet been able to remain virtually anonymous and even unnamed. It's death toll is staggering, easily in the tens of millions, and the devastation it has wrought is incalculable: tens of millions more maimed, rendered homeless, disenfranchised and financially ruined; families separated and broken, never to be reunited; civil wars sparked and governments overthrown.

What, precisely, is Judeofascism and, given the earth-shattering consequences of its political manifestations, how has it been able to keep itself hidden largely below the radar of mass consciousness? Researchers are only beginning to scratch the surface of its nature, motives and modus operandi, but certain characteristics and patterns in its behavior, organization and composition are beginning to emerge:

-- If diaspora Judaism has been described as a "nation within a nation," Judeofascism might be described as "a network within a nation within a nation."

--Judeofascism is a fascist political network comprised of an elite, self-selected religo-ethnic Jewish membership.

--Not all Jews are Judeofascists, but all Judeofascists are Jews, and Judeofascists have repeatedly leveraged organized Judaism on behalf of their agenda.

--Judeofascists believe that Jews are racially and religiously superior to non-Jews (gentiles) and that this supremacy gives them certain rights and privileges over gentiles either through historical fiat or in the eyes of God -- rights and privileges that should be extended and formally incorporated into the laws of man. These beliefs spring from a fixation on the supremacist components of the Jewish religious canon in general and the Talmud in particular, which expresses contempt and hatred for Christ and generally portrays gentiles as unclean, inferior and to be regarded with fear and loathing. It also springs from the living canon of Judeofascist experience, wherein the historically successful subjugation of gentiles by Judeofascist networks reinforces Judeofascist delusions of grandeur and supremacy.

--Judeofascism also draws its racialist beleifs from Jewish racial law, wherein only those born of a Jewish mother are worthy of "chosen" status, and from Israeli race law, which awards Jewish citizenship (and thus privilege) based upon Jewish bloodlines. Jewry as defined by Jewish or Israeli law then goes through a process of social natural selection wherein only the most shameless, clever, manipulative, greedy and ruthless of the Jews emerge into the ranks of the Judeofascists.

--Judeofascist racial supremacist beliefs find expression both in Judeofascist-constructed Israeli apartheid law (which formally extends special rights and privileges to its Jewish citizens over its non-Jewish citizens) and in Judeofascist attitudes towards and treatment of gentiles outside of Israel.

--Wherever they are located, Judeofascists regard the manipulation, subjugation, exploitation and general usury of gentiles as ethically, morally and spiritually justified due to the gentiles' inferior, non-chosen status. They regard their "rights" over gentiles as divinely, racially or historically ordained and self-evidently validated by the very ability of Judeofascists --through their collective guile--to successfully subjugate gentiles (and the inability or unwillingness of the gentiles to do anything about it). Judeofascists see Israel's ongoing ability to flout gentile international law without consequence as further evidence of Judeofascist supremacy.

--Judeofascism has no membership roles, political charter or political headquarters. However, as with any network of like-minded and subversive individuals that wishes to remain anonymous and unscrutinized, Judeofascism often operates within existing religious and secular institutions in the diaspora in order to co-opt their resources, credibility and power on its behalf. The Israeli government also regularly harbors its operatives and itself has been regularly co-opted on Judeofascism’s behalf.

--Usually, wherever there are Jews in large numbers, self-selected Judeofascists will coalesce into a unit or cell, which together comprise the Judeofascist network. In most cases, the network works on behalf of organized Judaism or Jewry, but at times it puts its own goals ahead of Jewry and is willing to sacrifice even masses of Jews to its agenda. Zionism's collaboration with Nazism during World War II in order to make the creation of Israel an international imperative is one such example of this strategic sacraficialism. A more contemporary but less consequential example (albeit one with a similar potential for violence) is the regular, angry, public denunciations by Neocons of their Jewish opponents in America as “self-hating Jews.”

--While there are technically no gentile Judeofascists, Judeofascism does receive financial, spiritual and material support and sustenance from useful idiot gentiles the world over. This comes A) through foreign aid and weaponry gifted to Israel by other governments, or through wars or military engagements fought by them on Israel's behalf (such as the Iraq war); B) from superstitious, bible-educated Christian Zionists who see "the Jews" as God's chosen people whose continued ingathering in Israel is a necessary component to eventual Rapture, Armageddon and the return of Jesus; and C) from more secular, "compassionate" and ostensibly intelligent Judeophile gentiles from both the liberal and conservative traditions who regard Jews as both perpetually embattled, and racially or socially gifted, and hence worthy of "protected status." The historical persecution of many Jews contributes to this line of thinking, even though anti-Semitism has usually been the consequence not of gentile bigotry, but rather of Judaism's arrogant, foolish and naive tolerance, protection and on-again, off-again collaboration with the Judeofascists in its midst.

This website approaches the Judeofascist problem from a pro-Israel perspective to the extent that it believes Jews have the right to self-association , self-determination and self-governance within a clearly demarcated Israel proper. However, it is anti-Zionist in that it believes Israel should extend all the rights and privileges enjoyed by Jews to its non-Jewish citizens (which is anathema to Zionism) if its wants continued aid and welfare from the West. (This web site believes all states the world over should be subject to such secular, pluralistic litmus tests). Alternatively, Israel can remain a Zionist state but be deprived of foreign aid and assistance and instead rely on contributions from sympathetic individuals the world over (both Jew and non-Jew alike) if it so chooses.

This website also believes that punishment for Judeofascist aggression is best dealt with by Jews themselves to the most reasonable and effectual extent possible. This means that those diaspora Jews who have not committed any technical crime, but who have demonstrated a pattern of intractable social subversiveness and active enmity and hostility towards gentile social cohesion on behalf of the Judeofascist or Israeli agenda that collectively amount to an attempt to fatally undermine or overthrow gentile self-governance and hence deprive gentiles of their own right to self-determination, should be stripped of their diaspora citizenship and deported to Israel without further punishment. Those Jews who are suspected of a technical crimes such as treason or sedition, or conspiring to overthrow or undermine the democratic process in gentile nations on behalf of the Judeofascist or Israeli agenda should first be tried and, if found guilty, punished by the gentile nations in which the crime was committed before loss of citizenship and deportation to Israel, similar to the way in which illegal alien criminals first serve time in domestic prisons prior to deportation. (Christian Zionists or Judeophiles attempting to overthrow gentile self-governance on behalf of Judeofascism either knowingly or through ignorance should be punished by the nations in which the crime was committed as appropriate.)

The continued existence of Israel is obviously a necessary component of this theoretical remedy to the Judeofascist problem, which has been a centuries-long plague upon humanity (particularly the West).

Clearly, for those interested in the continued existence, maintenance, prosperity and progress of Western civilization, ignoring the Judeofascist problem is no longer a viable option.

Chris Moore is publisher of Judeofascism.com and LibertarianToday.com (a libertarian-populist website)

No Iran nukes, says US intelligence; Thankfully, America didn’t listen to “World War” braying Neocons

2007-12-04T12:31:00.000-08:00

(By Chris Moore, LibertarianToday.com) -- The collective judgment of the United States’ best intelligence agencies has concluded that Iran long ago suspended its nuclear weapons program, which remains in mothballs to this day, according to recent analyses.

“A new assessment by American intelligence agencies made public Monday concludes that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and that the program remains on hold,” reports the International Herald Tribune.

The new National Intelligence Estimate, which represents the consensus view of all 16 American spy agencies, contradicts apocalyptic rhetoric that emanated from the White House following President Bush’s meeting with Neconservative guru and professional warmonger Norman Podhoretz, a Jewish nationalist Zionist who received the Guardian of Zion Award from Bar-Ilan University in May of 2007.

As reported in September by Politico:

‘President Bush and Karl Rove sat listening to Norman Podhoretz for roughly 45 minutes at the White House as the patriarch of neoconservatism argued that the United States should bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities. The meeting was not on the president’s public schedule. Rove was silent throughout, though he took notes. The president listened diligently, Podhoretz said as he recounted the conversation months later, but he “didn’t tip his hand.”’

Following that meeting, President Bush began publicly painting dark visions of the future unless Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program -- a program that US intelligence now says hasn’t been functioning for years.

“The administration called new attention to the threat posed by Iran earlier this year when President George W. Bush suggested in October that a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to "World War III" and Vice President Dick Cheney promised "serious consequences" if the government in Tehran did not abandon its nuclear program,” reported the Herald Tribune. “Yet at the same time officials were airing these dire warnings, analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency were secretly concluding that Iran's nuclear weapons work halted years ago and that international pressure on the Islamic regime in Tehran was working.”’

Americans should be thankful that Jewish nationalist Zionist agitator Podhoretz, who has been steadily lobbying for the bombing of Iran and “World War IV” for months, didn’t get his wish.

Recall back in June, holding forth in the Zionist fever swamp Commentary magazine in an article titled ‘The Case for Bombing Iran,’ Podhoretz wrote the following:

“As the currently main center of the Islamofascist ideology against which we have been fighting since 9/11, and as (according to the State Department’s latest annual report on the subject) the main sponsor of the terrorism that is Islamofascism’s weapon of choice, Iran too is a front in World War IV. Moreover, its effort to build a nuclear arsenal makes it the potentially most dangerous one of all.”

In a follow up interview, Podhoretz compounded his pro-war rhetoric with a strange utterance that really said more about the usurious state of mind of he and his fellow Jewish nationalist Zionists and their latent hatred of Americans than it did about the supposed “Islamofascist” enemy he was urging war against:

“Well, if we were to bomb the Iranians as I hope and pray we will,” Podhoretz said, “we’ll unleash a wave of anti-Americanism all over the world that will make the anti-Americanism we’ve experienced so far look like a lovefest.”

Podhoretz later released a book titled “World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism” in which he fantasized that America is merely in the early stages of an epic conflagration with Islam that will be fought for years to come.

Now take Norman Podhoretz and multiply him by thousands of pro-war, Jewish nationalist Zionist agitators, and what you get is the Israel lobby. Take the Israel lobby and combine it with an ignorant Christian Zionist like president Bush, and what you get is the Iraq war.

This is why these Jewish nationalist Zionist agitators should be deported to Israel: they are more loyal to that country than they are to America; they want to use the blood of American soldiers and the treasure of American taxpayers to secure a Jewish empire in the Middle East through world war; and like the Communist agitators who were deported to the Soviet Union during the Cold War, they are highly organized, disciplined, subversive and insidious.

If Podhoretz had had his way, America would have bombed Iran by now for its non-existent nuclear weapons program and probably be in the early stages of a world war that he and the Israel lobby helped to conjure.

Podhoretz is currently working as an advisor to Rudy Giuliani’s presidential campaign along with other well-known pro-war Jewish nationalist Zionists such as “Daniel Pipes, the director of the Middle East Forum, who has called for profiling Muslims at airports and scrutinizing American Muslims in law enforcement, the military and the diplomatic corps; and Michael Rubin, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who has written in favor of revoking the United States’ ban on assassination,” according to the New York Times.

Jewish nationalist Zionists of this ilk are riddled throughout the American establishment, in both parties, on both sides of the aisle, in in the halls of Congress as lobbyists, in the corporate boardrooms, and in US government agencies. Many of them are no less dedicated to sparking an American war against the entirety of Islam on behalf of a Jewish empire than is Norman Podhoretz.

Why even Michael Chertoff, absurdly a Secretary of Homeland Security for the US who has “de jure” Israeli citizenship and a record of funneling million of US taxpayer funds to US Jewish organizations for “security,” is among their ranks

They are warmongers, and they won’t stop until America is either neck deep in a bloody world war, or they have been deported to Israel, which is where their hearts truly lie anyway. Anyone who denies this is either simply ignorant of the history of Judeofascism (which spawned Bolshevism, Zionism and Neoconservatism), a Zionist collaborator sympathetic to their cause, or a selfish coward -- too scared, politically correct or financially-absorbed to fight back against the most potent threat to American democracy of the modern era.

I hope the FBI is reading, because if it didn’t know it already, that agency and the rest of the American intelligence and security communities have a fight on their hands -- and it’s not with Islamofascism.

Chris Moore is publisher of LibertarianToday.com

Destined to remain in Sisyphean hell, Neocons are dragging the West into their ordeal

2007-11-28T07:23:00.000-08:00

(By Chris Moore, LibertarianToday.com) -- From Wikipedia: “In Greek mythology, Sisyphus was a king punished in the Tartarus by being cursed to roll a huge boulder up a hill, only to watch it roll down again, and repeat this throughout eternity.”

The Neocons were warned by libertarians that the invasion of Iraq would be a disaster for both Israel and America. The insight wasn’t one of divine revelation or special powers of prognostication, but rather of common sense and the observation of nature and history.

Historically, occupying powers almost never succeed in subduing the occupied and, when success is attained, it is short term and comes at an ultimately intolerable cost to the alien power’s country or empire of origin. In the past, empires most certainly have been able to plant seeds that grew into replicants of the empire that then took on lives of their own (ie British in N. America, Spanish in S. America) but that was before the Western civilization collective had settled those continents, and while the West was still working towards fidelity to its profession of God-endowed human rights for all, including the right of native peoples to self-governance.

While not perfect, libertarian factions in the West, in conjunction with modernity, are still working towards those ideals, but are being obstructed and drawn backwards by Neoconservative totalitarians, who, operationally, are a collaboration between Judeofascists and Christian Zionists.

The Judeofascists are warped by the history of Jewish persecution, which in most cases flows from Jews collectively surrendering their sovereignty to cynical, charlatan Judeofascist leaders who then set the Jewish people in opposition to rationalism out of a combination of religious delusion, narcissism, egoism and opportunism.

Similarly, the Christian Zionists, through subservience to their charlatan leader Bush, have surrendered their sovereignty to the Neocons, who, utilizing the same Pharisaic tradition as the Judeofascists, have pitted the US against the Islamic world out of a similar combination self-important arrogance and hubris.

Just as the Judeofascists have always led the Jews to ruin (and always will), Neoconservatism is leading the US to ruin and always will. Yet in the warped, deluded collective mind of the entity, it sees its mission as essential and, indeed winnable -- if only the US invades one more country or sheds a bit more blood.

Just as Sisyphus was supernaturally forced to continue the futile effort of rolling the boulder up the hill time and again in a Greek version of hell, so too are the Neocons spiritually motivated to persist in their futile effort to attain totalitarian control over the Middle East. They seem to believe that in doing so, they can perhaps leverage such a position into totalitarian control over humanity.

Such are the delusions of “faith” as interpreted by Neoconservatism, which in its Judeofascist/Christian Zionist incarnations means not only the suspension of disbelief, but the suspension of judgment itself.

Perhaps the hate-blinded way in which the two components of the Neoconservative collaboration each interpret their respective religions leads to a similarly acquiescent, malleable mindset amongst the followers, one conducive to the psychological suppression of critical thinking and scientific evidence, and hostile to the lessons of history unflattering to their respective tribes.

To be sure, Muslim totalitarians are also caught in their own irrational, Sisyphean hell. But then, they don’t attempt to pass themselves off as modern and enlightened; they admit what they are and confess their intentions and bigotries. Fortunately, the innate intolerance and bigotry of Islamic totalitarianism leads, inevitably, to a self-negating Islamic schism.

No doubt, the Neocon Christian Zionist/Judeofascist axis will itself one day self-negate, but because it is not nearly as honest as Islamic totalitarianism, in the mean time it is far more dangerous.

Misery loves company, and so the Neoconservative movement is attempting to drag the world into its own version of hell by passing itself off as sophisticated, rational, modern and enlightened. And much of the West seems to be falling for this charade, proving that the Left-liberal establishment that now dominates the West, grown fat and soft on the coatails of rationalism, is intellectually unsuitable to the task of critical thinking necessary to defeat Neoconservatism.

In fact, due to years of worshipping at the altar of political-correctness, Left-liberalism’s own repressed masses may now be as malleable as the mass of Christian Zionist, Judeofascist, Islamic totalitarian intellectual peasantry.

No wonder the Neocons have been able to take the West down the Sisyphean road as far as they have. The Left-liberal “opposition“ is as morally and intellectually bankrupt as those it professes to oppose.

Chris Moore is publisher of LibertarianToday.com

Bush: Iranian “knowledge” of how to make the Bomb enough to trigger World War 3

2007-10-18T09:24:00.000-07:00

(By Chris Moore, LibertarianToday.com) -- 10/17/07 -- True to his pattern of using false claims to justify wars of agenda (recall Bush’s pernicious inferences that Saddam Hussein had ties to the 9/11 terrorist attacks used to deceive Americans into Iraq) the president is again playing deceptive word games in order to lower the threshold necessary to trigger his latest dark ambition: war with Iran.

"We have got a leader in Iran who has announced that he wants to destroy Israel," President Bush recently claimed of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. "So I have told people that, if you are interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."

What a clever mix of rhetorical propaganda, verbal gymnastics and outright lies -- all masked by a thin veneer of feigned idealism -- Bush and his neocon speechwriters are capable of employing in order to push America ever further down the road toward a Middle East conflagration.

Let’s start with Bush’s outright lie: "We have got a leader in Iran who has announced that he wants to destroy Israel."

What Bush is referring to is a 2005 speech in which Ahmadinejad is alleged to have said "Israel must be wiped off the map."

The problem is, even though the so-called quote was widely reported in the propaganda organs of Western media and to this day is parroted on television, in magazines and newspapers by neocon ideologues with a pro-war agenda, Ahmadinejad never actually said any such thing...

click HERE for full article

How the Israel lobby has played the Democrats for fools

2007-09-11T14:04:00.000-07:00

(By Chris Moore, LibertarianToday.com) -- Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who recently bragged of being “a master in calculation and tabulation” whose “double proof” formulas showed the US wouldn’t wage war on Iran, may want to recheck his figures and compare them with Pat Buchanan’s assessment of the chances for such an attack.

On MSNBC on Monday, August 27, and in his follow up columns of August 28 and September 1, Pat Buchanan hit the nail on the head in identifying the powerful forces pushing for a US war against Iran, a war that Buchanan believes might be met (at least initially) with public approval.

As Buchanan noted on MSNBC: “I think if you took polls of the American people, they would put Iran right up at the top of America's enemies list.”

The recent US public paranoia over Iran, of course, isn’t based on reality, but rather on the latest neocon media campaign claiming anti-US machinations by Iran in Iraq, and portraying Iran’s ongoing nuclear power program as an imminent WMD “threat.” The propaganda has effectively allowed the Bush administration to scapegoat Iran for America’s self-inflicted Middle East wounds, and portray Iran as on the cusp of developing renegade nuclear weapons, which is a lie.

Buchanan continues: “So I think in the Democratic Party, of course, you've got the -- with due respect, you've got the Israeli Lobby and Israel, and you've got the hardline like [Sen. Joe] Lieberman, and you've got the Neoconservatives, and you've got a lot of evangelical Christians and others who think this is a real menace and you ought to hit them.”

Translated from PC-speak, what Buchanan is correctly conveying here is that the Democratic Party is in the grip of the Israel lobby not only in the form of groups like AIPAC and the office of “hardline Joe Lieberman,” but also in the form of other members of the Congressional Jewish nationalist caucus, which includes left liberal Jewish Zionists such as Rahm Emanuel, Chuck Schumer, Tom Lantos, Gary Ackerman, Howard Berman, Carl Levin, Steve Rothman and Barney Frank, among others.

On the other side of the aisle, Buchanan says, you’ve got a GOP hierarchy heavily influenced by “evangelical Christians” and providing it cover for war. What Buchanan really means is, not all evangelicals, but rather fanatical Christian Zionist dispensationalists, who make up only a percentage of evangelicals, but who are as committed to putting Israeli interests ahead of American interests as are the Jewish ethnic nationalists in the Democratic Party, but for different political, cultural and theological reasons.

In his follow up columns, Buchanan continues to drive all these points home: ‘Who is pushing for attacks on Iran? Israel and its lobby. Vice President Cheney. Sen. Joe Lieberman, who has been calling for air strikes on al-Quds camps for months. And a War Party facing lasting disgrace for having lied the country into an unnecessary war, and for having assured the American people it would be a "cakewalk."'

In its rush to ape the GOP, Buchanan says, the Democratic Congress has basically destroyed its own ratings on the war issue--and this just months after it was swept into power on a huge American backlash against Bush’s incompetent management of the Iraq war:

“Incredibly, only 3 percent of the nation gives Congress a positive rating on its handling of the war,” Buchanan notes.

Why didn’t the Democrats simply continue to ride the anti-war tidal wave all the way to another big victory over the wounded, discredited GOP? Again, due to the Jewish nationalist influence over party leadership:

“Last spring, Nancy Pelosi herself, after a call from the Israeli lobby, pulled an amendment that would have forced Bush to come to Congress for specific authorization before attacking Iran,” writes Buchanan. “Before the August recess, the Senate voted 97 to zero for a resolution sponsored by Joe Lieberman to censure Iran for complicity in the killing of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.”

As blogger Arthur Silber observed, this vote has put the Democrats on record as supporting “an amendment that accuses Iran of committing acts of war against the United States. Thus, if we were to attack Iran, we would purportedly only be acting defensively, and in response to what Iran has already done. This amendment, based entirely on unproven, propagandistic, intentionally warmongering allegations, was pushed in large part by Lieberman. Democrats (and progressive bloggers) may condemn the former Democrat all they wish: the fact remains that every Democratic Senator who voted on this measure voted for it. When the wider war begins, they will have no serious basis on which to object.”

So what were the Democrats supposed to do, ask party partisans, cede the national security issue to the GOP by opposing the Lieberman’s censure?

Well, going back to the amendment that could have been used to stop a Bush attack on Iran that was killed by Nancy Pelsoi at the behest of AIPAC, (and from a sane, war-opposed perspective inline with the overwhelming majority of educated Americans), the Democrats could have done the following:

1) Passed the amendment forcing Bush to come to Congress for permission to wage war against Iran.

2) If such a request came, put forward a full throttle campaign portraying it as yet more GOP warmongering destined to compound America’s problems in the Middle East, consistent with the GOP’s last wrongheaded and misleading initiative against Iraq. Such a campaign would have properly educated the public about the minimal threat posed by Iran.

3) Rejected the request with the overwhelming support from the American people, which would have forced Bush to back down and limp from office in disgrace, thus solidifying the anti-war voting block going into the 2008 elections.

But it must be remembered: the Democratic leadership isn’t interested in what’s best for America or in advancing the will of the American people; they’re only interested in satisfying their Zionist partners and the actualization of a left-liberal, big-government, quasi-totalitarian state. War with Iran helps accomplish both.

The Democratic leadership didn’t want to allow their members to force Bush to obtain permission to attack Iran because they knew it would put them on record if and when the request came from Bush. Such a vote could have been painfully divisive to the party (in the same way their vote last May granting Bush the $120 billion Iraq war spending package with no strings attached has proven a problem ever since). Likely to pass, any Iran war vote would have demonstrated to the American public once and for all that the majority of Democrats are as complicit in America’s Middle East disasters as are the Republicans.

And if the American public realized that the Democrats were equally culpable, how could the party win the presidency by pulling off yet another bait and switch scam running as a force for “change” as it did in the 2006 elections? Simply put, it couldn’t. And so Pelosi killed the amendment vote altogether.

Democratic strategists thought the no-vote policy would accomplish two goals at once: an official position of ambiguity on Iran that, cynically, would allow the party to maintain at least some support from its huge war-opposed rank and file; and at the same time, advance the Israel lobby’s goal of a war with Iran (which is clearly the Bush administration default policy) by giving Bush a free hand to bomb without a any possible hitches--which is what originally motivated AIPAC to demand the amendment’s removal.

Of course, the Democrats didn’t count on the treacherous Joe Lieberman’s censure resolution, which forced them take a position anyway. And as a result, it has been all downhill for them since.

As Pat Buchan noted, when it comes to war, the Democratic Congress “has lost the hawks, and the owls, and the doves. No one trusts its leadership on the war.”

Indeed, few trust the Democrats now on anything at all; a recent Gallup poll found 55% of Americans disapprove of the way Democrats in Congress are handling their overall job. And why should they be trusted? They have tried to manipulate and massage nearly everyone, and as a result, have ended up with the support of no one.

Their collapse is almost epic, but a Logic 101 student could have predicted such an outcome.

The 10 - 20% of Americans who are fanatical hawks are of course always going to back the GOP, which has proven time and again it will happily wage perpetual war against “Islamofascism” on behalf of Israel with no qualms whatsoever. But the owls (wise independents and realists) have been backing away from Washington’s Middle East adventures for months now, and or today in full retreat; and the doves have been loudly opposed to U.S. Middle East interventionism for years.

So why didn’t the Democrast simply side with the owls and the doves and ride the anti-war tidal wave to yet another overwhelming election victory in 2008? Because in their greedy grab for power, they tried to have it all ways: as the "strong on defense" (read war) party, and as the party of peace; as the pro-Israel party, but also the party of responsible Middle East policy.

The Democrats are also making terrible decisions because they are listening to the neocons’ secret weapon, the Democratic Jewish nationalist Zionists, who are so warped by their Israeli loyalties that they can no longer determine what is and is not in the Democratic Party’s best domestic political interests. And of course, the bitter Joe Lieberman, who still caucuses with the Democrats, is ever eager to repay in kind the party that rejected him in his 2006 primary and forced him to run as an independent.

What all this really boils down to is that the Democrats are a venal party of cynics, knaves, and fools, because they have no principles other than the quest for power, and because in that quest, they take counsel from groups that put Israeli interests ahead of American ones. The GOP can get away with such behavior because its large Judeo-Christian Zionist base has no problem subordinating what it views as an increasingly decadent and pagan America’s interests to those of the Judeo state of Israel. But with a large secular base opposed to religious wars, such a strategy could never have succeed for the Democrats.

Of course, the delusional, scheming Democratic leadership apparently thought it could--so long as war with Iran was staved off until Hillary Clinton and a large Democratic Congressional majority were safely in office. But while successfully pounding away at the GOP on the issue of Iraq, the Democratic Party was back-stabbed by Joe Lieberman on behalf of the Right side of the Zionist-axis, which has now successfully moved the goalposts. The Democrats have been forced to buck up the battered and teetering GOP by siding with it on a contrived issue designed to demonize Iran in the form of a censure that was worded by Lieberman so as to be virtually fail proof.

Why were the Dems so easily played for fools? Perhaps they earnestly thought they could trust the historically Democrat-partisan Israel lobby to wait until 2009 for an Iranian war. But clearly, the Jewish Zionist coalition, which now includes many Republicans, wasn’t convinced that a future Congress, one that will likely be elected amidst an unpopular Iraq war, would be sufficiently hawkish to back a campaign against the Iranians--even one orchestrated by a president Hillary.

And so the U.S. is left once more with two parties at the helm in Washington DC hopelessly removed from the best interests of the people they purport to represent, and both yet again putting the country on the path to a destructive and unnecessary war.

Really, how much longer can a “democracy” with an unrepresented majority possibly continue to survive, let alone function?

Chris Moore is publisher of www.LibertarianToday.com

The Jewish nationalist problem in the Democratic Party

2007-07-13T15:20:00.000-07:00

(By Chris Moore, LibertarianToday.com) -- In yet another public relations stunt designed to maintain the illusion that the Democratic controlled Congress is serious about withdrawing US troops from Iraq, the House has passed, for the third time, “Iraq withdrawal legislation” that is virtually guaranteed to either be vetoed by President Bush or die in the Senate, as Congress’ first two ploys at creating the appearance of voter accountability already have.

Yet when the opportunity presented itself last May to attach troop-withdrawal deadlines that could have been made to stick by repeatedly inserting them into the Iraq war-spending package, Congressional Democrats and their GOP allies instead overwhelmingly voted President Bush $100 billion more in US taxpayer funds to escalate the war with no strings attached.

Democrats claimed it was because the president vetoed the first bill they sent containing withdrawal requirements. Yet when it mattered most and all they had to do was stick to their guns and keep sending the president bills with drawdown deadlines until he signed one in order to secure funding for the troops, they instead quickly caved in and granted Bush yet billions more unregulated war money after one meager veto. Talk about “opposition” theatre.

Is that the behavior of a body that really wants to end the Iraq war?

Time and again a majority of Americans have told Washington that the Iraq war was a mistake and to start bringing the troops home; time and again numerous politicians from the two-party system (especially its Democrat wing) have nodded gravely and said to the voters: “You have been heard.” And time and again the voters have been betrayed by their “representatives.”

Are these beltway cads politically suicidal, or do they understand something about the nature of the two party monopoly in Washington and how elections and policy there are bought and paid for by certain special interests that the rest of us do not?

Writing for CounterPunch.org, Jerry Kroth thinks so.

‘Bloggers called them "traitor Democrats", and the descriptor is apropos. At the time of the [$100 billion war funding] vote, sixty-two percent of the American people favored a time-table for a withdrawal, but, more significantly, seventy percent of Democrats were so inclined. Voting against this burgeoning tide of anger betrayed the will of the people and party that put these Democrats in office.

‘Curiously, all of the traitor Democrats were huge career recipients of funds from the Israeli lobby. If we took ten Democratic apostates and compared them to ten Democrats who stood by the voters, pro-Israeli PAC contributions were ten times greater for the turncoats than those who stayed with their constituencies ($322,000 versus $34,000 on average)…

‘Three months before we invaded Iraq, a New York Times poll showed only 30 percent of the American people favored an all-out invasion, but the Israeli lobby (AIPAC) did, and it prevailed. Hardly a sprinkling of Americans favored the "surge", a meager fourteen percent, but AIPAC did, and the surge is surging as we speak. Fewer than thirty percent of Democrats supported that no-strings-budget, but AIPAC did, and the conclusion plays out another hackneyed chorus of ‘Whatever AIPAC wants, AIPAC gets’.’

***

Over the course of the Iraq war, most Americans have come to understand that the modern GOP has been co-opted by militant Zionists whose (failing) retail political brand in the US is now widely known as neoconservatism. While it is true that some neocons (like President Bush, Newt Gingrich, and Rudy Guliani) are Christian Zionists, the overwhelming majority of the movement’s intellectual and political movers and shakers are Jewish nationalist Zionists: Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, William Kristol, Scooter Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Elliot Abrams, and Charles Krauthammer, to name just a few. All of these men were instrumental in lying America into the Iraq war.

What is not widely known is that a large percentage national Democratic Party politicians are also Jewish nationalist Zionists, and many of them are in party leadership positions.

For example, Rahm Emanuel, the chairman of the Democratic caucus and the fourth highest ranking Democrat in the House, was a patriotic volunteer during the first Gulf War in 1991 -- for Israel. As chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee for the 2006 elections, Emanuel hand-picked pro-Iraq war candidates in toss-up races, thus ensuring that the “change” being sold to voters by the Democrats wouldn’t dramatically affect the war status quo.

While Emanuel was celebrated as a genius by the left-liberal cognoscenti following the Democrats’ victory, a post-election analysis showed that Emanuel’s strategy actually cost the Democrats seats they otherwise would have won. Because so many Americans were opposed to the war, Emanuel’s pro-war Democrat candidates discouraged voter turnout in many war-opposed districts across the country.

He was, however, able to help secure a record number of Jewish members (43) into Congress, an accomplishment that excited Doug Bloomfield, the former legislative director for AIPAC.

"It's unprecedented that there have been so many [Jews] in so many positions of leadership in both houses," Bloomfield chortled after the election, perhaps confident in the knowledge that polls show 82% of American Jews identify themselves as supporters of Israel, meaning the increase in Jewish members would make Congress even more pro-Israel than it already was.

These new Jewish members have joined established Democrat Congressional leaders with staunch Jewish nationalist credentials such as Chuck Schumer, Tom Lantos, Gary Ackerman, Joe Lieberman, the notorious war profiteer Diane Feinstein, and many others.

While most on this list have decidedly left-liberals views when it comes to domestic American social policy, nearly all of them suddenly convert to right-wing hawks when it comes to US foreign policy in the Middle East and wars against Muslims. For example, all of the Jewish nationalist Democrat leaders listed in the paragraph above voted in favor of the 2002 Iraq War Resolution authorizing the Iraq war.

In fact, given the crossover of their political positions, it is somewhat unclear why Jewish nationalist Democrats aren’t also labeled neocons like their Jewish nationalist cousins on the right. After all, many components of the neoconservative foreign policy agenda (blind loyalty to Israel, a muscular US presence in the Middle East, massive military budgets) and the neoconservative domestic agenda (lax border control, massive immigration and a powerful central government that extracts wealth from the provinces and redistributes it to Washington-connected cronies), are also embraced by Jewish nationalist Democrats, too.

Regardless, the crossover between parties when it comes to worldviews and their policy manifestations hasn’t been lost on everyone. In 2004, writing for the Wall Street Journal’s Opinion Journal, Julia Gorin noted:

‘As a new staple of mainstream American vocabulary, "neoconservative" warrants a reminder of the term's beginnings, before it became chic newspeak. It originally referred to a movement of largely Jewish liberals who gave leftism an honest and protracted effort, who dutifully reviled every Republican president through Eisenhower, who did their time in inner cities, and who gave peace and social engineering a chance, until the real-world consequences of their good will forced them to acknowledge that what they were doing wasn't working but in fact backfiring. At which point, these men (e.g., Norman Podhoretz, Irving Kristol) underwent a midlife epiphany and became conservative after the 1960s. Today the word applies to anyone who undergoes such a transformation, Jewish or not…With today's "post-9/11 omigod I think I may be Republican" Democrats, what we have in effect are neo-neoconservatives.’

Gorin is right: today’s Democrats do bear a close resemblance to neocons of the right. And not just the Jewish nationalist Democrats. Politicians like the Clintons, and even Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi all have distinctly neocon foreign policy leanings. Hillary voted for the Iraq War Resolution, Pelsoi stripped a provision from the controversial $100 billion Iraq war funding bill that would have made it harder for Bush to go to war against Iran, and Harry Reid recently admitted he wants to keep tens of thousands of US troops in Iraq, even after the mythical ‘withdrawal.”

The sub-text of Gorin’s article for The Wall Street Journal (which was a long-winded complaint about how the word “neocon” had become a coded anti-Semitic epithet) was not just that after 9/11, we’re all “Republican Democrats” now, but that after 9/11, all Americans should adopt the perspective of Zionist victims of Islamic terror as well; after all, aren’t we all united in our common “victimization” at the hands of those evil Muslims?

Gorin may be indulging in a bit wishful thinking about the average American’s willingness to embrace the militant victim mantle (as so many hair-trigger Zionists have) and about Americans’ susceptibility to being manipulated into adopting the siege mentality of Israelis, but judging from the Israel-like policies of the two-party political class in Washington since 9/11, she’s taken a perfect reading of the character of Republican-Democrats of today, who’s post 9/11 policies can best be described as…kosher genocide.

***

So why does the left, ostensibly the opposition to the right, put up with neocon Democrats?

In part, it’s because as Kroth’s analysis of the “traitor Democrats” shows, they don’t have a choice. Strings are being pulled for -- and huge money is being thrown behind -- traitor Democrat candidacies. (Insiders like Rahm Emanuel and his wealthy friends see to that.) So essentially, the neocon Democrat problem in the Democratic Party is part and parcel of the Jewish nationalist presence in the Democratic Party.

But the left-liberal intelligentsia refuses to touch the Jewish nationalist problem because confronting it would largely undermine the worldview that motivates the left-liberal base’s raison d’etat: namely that A.) Christianity is the apex of evil, (and we all know that Jews are victims of Christians, never the other way around); and B.) there is a nearly miraculous, transcendent quality to multiculturalism (and Jews are part of the multicultural tapestry).

With regard to the latter, to acknowledge that the left-liberal program to institutionalize multiculturalism may in fact cause more problems than it solves (insomuch as the successful group-conscious warmongering of Jewish-American nationalists demonstrates that not every ethnic group that is granted a foothold in America is willing to assimilate, and some of those that are not have their own distinctly anti-liberal agendas and are fully capable of imposing those agendas on the rest of us) is to strike a huge blow to a major left-liberal tenet.

The left-liberal conceit is that a permanent minority victim class is perpetually under siege from the Christian majority, and only they (left-liberals) can hold back the tide and save Enlightenment, tolerance, and the progressive American way. (Ironically, this echoes the Israeli conceit that it is a bulwark against Islamofascism). If it turns out that a large percentage of a crucial member of the progressive-minority-victim coalition (the Jews) isn’t so enlightened (or even tolerant) after all, that poses a huge problem to left-liberal theory and a crisis to its self-image, at which point serious contemplation would be in order.

Will the left-liberals continue to compromise their principles to maintain the partnership with wealthy Jewish nationalists for the money, the influence and the shock troops that Jewish nationalists bring to the left-liberal cause, or will they break with them on principle and risk their flight to the GOP?

It’s all too much for the left-liberal intelligentsia to contemplate, and so it averts its eyes and insists that the Christian-Right, capitalism, the oil industry and the military-industrial complex comprise the extent of the forces pushing the Iraq war from the wings.

However, the left-liberal fantasy can only be maintained for so long. Americans want to end the war and bring the troops home, but the left-liberals will never be able to do that because their Jewish nationalist caucus won’t let them. Eventually, Americans are going to realize this.

And when that happens, the left-liberal Democratic coalition is going fracture on the question of US troops in the Middle East -- whether they are fighting in Iraq, Iran, or both -- just as the GOP coalition has been fractured by the same issue.

At that point, one possibility is that the Republican-Democrat neocons will morph into a single party (in many ways they already have), leaving the field wide open for a coalition of authentic conservatives and authentic liberals.

Libertarianism, anyone?

Chris Moore is publisher of LibertarianToday.com

Now that the GOP is spent, is the Israel lobby shifting back toward the Democrats?

2007-03-29T14:33:00.000-07:00

(By Chris Moore, LibertarianToday.com) -- Jewish nationalists across America and Israel are growing increasingly frustrated by the American people’s stubborn refusal to back any more Middle East wars on behalf of Israel and its territorial ambitions. Polls show that the vast majority of Americans are now opposed to the open-ended occupation of Iraq, and despite a steady drumbeat of demonization by Judeofascism’s allies in the media, only 10% of Americans view Iran as an imminent threat to the U.S.

Even the Bush administration, perhaps chastened by the Iraq fiasco, the GOP’s mid-term election “thumping,” or world polls showing Israel, Iran, the U.S. and North Korea as neck and neck in the running for “most negative influence in the world,” seems to have lost much of the revolutionary zeal behind its push for Middle Eastern “democracy.” And despite all it has done for them, it’s hearing from various Judeofascist factions about its lack of enthusiasm.

For example, none other than Vice President Cheney, who for years has sheltered Israeli-loyalists in the White House as they have painstakingly gone about propagating “evidence” that Israel’s enemies are also the primary threat to America, received a less-than-enthusiastic reception at the recent American Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) conference, according to The Jewish Daily Forward:

“The vice president’s speech, which focused on the war in Iraq, received a lukewarm welcome from the Aipac delegates. The crowd gave Cheney only one standing ovation and only partial applause when he made the connection between the need to stay in Iraq and the ability of the United States to deal effectively with Iran’s nuclear threat. In sharp contrast, when Cheney dedicated his speech last year to the dangers posed by Iran and Palestinian terrorism, he drew 48 rounds of applause, including eight standing ovations.”

Apparently the Aipacers were expecting Cheney to announce that the U.S. would happily blunder into yet another strategic disaster on behalf of Israeli security by bombing Iran at the Israel lobby’s beck and call.

As if that narcissistic mindset wasn’t bad enough, the Forward (which according to Alexa falls into the categories of “Jewish” and “socialist,” but who’s editorial board is closer to Jewish-nationalist-socialist) later that week took Cheney to task via an angry editorial for being insufficiently deferential to Zionist sensitivities about accusations of warmongering.

Cheney had the bad taste to remind the Aipacers that America still has Israeli-related business in Iraq that, if left unfinished, poses a threat to the Jewish state. “It is simply not consistent,” Cheney said, “for anyone to demand aggressive action against the menace posed by the Iranian regime while, at the same time, acquiescing in a retreat from Iraq that would leave our worst enemies dramatically emboldened and Israel’s best friend, the United States, dangerously weakened.”

The Forward correctly interpreted this statement as an implicit linking of the Iraq war with Israeli security.

From the Forward editorial:

“And so Cheney came to Aipac, not to deliver the expected message of solidarity and good cheer, but to administer a spanking. Friends owe it to friends, he said. You must support us in Iraq, he said, or else.”

“No less alarming, Cheney was telling the Jewish community that the war in Iraq had been launched and fought in considerable measure for their benefit and Israel’s. That’s precisely the message that Israel’s worst enemies have been peddling for the past four years as America’s blood and treasure have been poured wastefully down the sinkhole of a misconceived and unwinnable war. It was a lie then, and it is a lie now. And now he seems to be casting Iran in the same light: as the Jews’ war.”

The problem is that it wasn’t a lie then, and it isn’t a lie now. Who would know better if the Iraq war is being fought largely at the behest of Zionism: The Vice President, who’s Jewish nationalist underlings helped manufactured the false intelligence used to justify the invasion, or the Forward editorial board (hardly an objective source to begin with)?

To rebut the Forward’s lie that the Iraq war had nothing to do with Israeli security, one need only review a few short paragraphs from the study “The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy” originally published in the London Review of Books by distinguished academics John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt:

‘On August 16, 2002, eleven days before Vice President Cheney kicked off the campaign for war with a hard-line speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Washington Post reported that "Israel is urging U.S. officials not to delay a military strike against Iraq’s Saddam Hussein."140 By this point, according to Sharon, strategic coordination between Israel and the U.S. had reached "unprecedented dimensions," and Israeli intelligence officials had given Washington a variety of alarming reports about Iraq’s WMD programs.141 As one retired Israeli general later put it, "Israeli intelligence was a full partner to the picture presented by American and British intelligence regarding Iraq’s non- conventional capabilities."142

‘Israeli leaders were deeply distressed when President Bush decided to seek U.N. Security Council authorization for war in September, and even more worried when Saddam agreed to let U.N. inspectors back into Iraq, because these developments seemed to reduce the likelihood of war. Foreign Minister Shimon Peres told reporters in September 2002 that "the campaign against Saddam Hussein is a must. Inspections and inspectors are good for decent people, but dishonest people can overcome easily inspections and inspectors."143

‘At the same time, former Prime Minister Ehud Barak wrote a New York Times op-ed warning that "the greatest risk now lies in inaction."144 His predecessor, Benjamin Netanyahu, published a similar piece in the Wall Street Journal entitled "The Case for Toppling Saddam."145 Netanyahu declared, "Today nothing less than dismantling his regime will do," adding that "I believe I speak for the overwhelming majority of Israelis in supporting a pre-emptive strike against Saddam’s regime." Or as Ha’aretz reported in February 2003: "The [Israeli] military and political leadership yearns for war in Iraq."146’

So why would the Forward mislead its own readers about the role played by Israel in the push behind the Iraq war? Because the truth is not conducive to the ongoing Jewish nationalist agenda of conscripting as many Americans as possible into the cause of Zionist expansionism under the guise of defending Western civilization and America from “terrorism” and “Islamic extremism.”

The supposedly shrewd, rough and tumble political operative Dick Cheney is belatedly learning a hard lesson about the true nature of his chosen allies in the “war on terror”: Judeofascists never say “Thank you for your efforts on Zionism’s behalf” or “We’re satisfied you’ve done enough.” With them, its always “What have you done for us lately?”

This epic ingratitude and ceaseless grasping was driven home by the Forward’s editorial harangue, which continued:

“Let’s be clear. Iran is a genuine threat, in a way that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq never was. It threatens not just Israel but all of America’s allies in the region — Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and even the Palestinian Authority. It is the top issue on Aipac’s agenda, yet Aipac has worked hard to present it, correctly, as a global problem, not just a Jewish or Israeli one. Cheney, in his desperation, appears willing to undo that hard work and put the Jewish community at the center of the debate. That’s wrong. Friends don’t let friends drive each other over a cliff.”

Dick Cheney’s insistence on securing Iraq before moving onto Iran is getting in the way of the Israel lobby’s “hard work” alright -- the hard work of deflecting attention away from the fact that Zionism was a major force behind the Iraq invasion, and of framing Iran “as a global problem, not just a Jewish or Israeli one” as a precursor to a U.S. bombing campaign on behalf of Israel. By the way, if Iran were truly a threat, why did Aipac need to work so hard to sell it “a global problem”? Maybe because of the CIA’s assessment that Iran is a good 10 years away from developing a nuclear bomb, and today probably even longer given that the Russians have withdrawn from assisting Iran’s nuclear program.

“Cheney, in his desperation” -- is spilling the beans.

Clearly, the Bush administration is no longer up to the task of enabling Zionist expansionism. Perhaps it time to bring in…the Democrats?

Neocon William Kristol, the editor of the “conservative” Weekly Standard, hinted at just such a Judeofascist strategy as far back as 2004

“If we have to make common cause with the more hawkish liberals and fight the conservatives, that is fine with me,” he told the New York Times. "I will take Bush over Kerry, but Kerry over [Pat] Buchanan....If you read the last few issues of The Weekly Standard, it has as much or more in common with the liberal hawks than with traditional conservatives."

And no doubt the Democrats will welcome back the Zionists (and all their “New York money people,” as General Wesley Clark correctly labeled them) with open arms. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi signaled as much when she killed a provision in an Iraq war funding bill that would have required congressional approval before launching a new war on Iran. She did this at the behest of -- you guessed it -- Aipac.

And so the treacherous Jewish nationalist strategizing again kicks into high gear: Americans are increasingly opposed to the GOP as a result of the Iraq invasion? Let’s morph into Iraq war opponents, snuggle back up to the Democrats who have ridden the anti-war wave to power (we know they will accept us because of our money, and the fact that Democrats, like the Republicans, have no moral or ethical principles other than greed and the quest for power) and then use our insider status and our agents like Rahm Emanuel, Chuck Schumer, Barney Frank and Tom Lantos to push for war with Iran. Aren’t we clever?

Yes, the Judeofascists are clever -- too clever by half. Or as one sage has put it: Often clever, but rarely wise.

It may take a population some time to figure out their game, but playing both sides against the middle sooner or later ends up enraging both sides, and the middle to boot.

The “new anti-Semitism” that is getting ever more play in the media is merely a byproduct of Judeofascism’s ceaseless scheming and the growing realization by more in the U.S. that both the Republicans and the Democrats are more interested in representing Israel, its lobby, and money-worshipping war profiteers than the American people.

Chris Moore is publisher of LibertarianToday.com

Why the Israel lobby and Judeofascism must be forsaken to restore liberalism -- and America

2007-03-08T16:50:00.000-08:00

(By Chris Moore, Judeofascism.com) -- Former CIA analysts Bill and Kathleen Christison’s latest exposé of the Israel lobby and the way it works is a fascinating journey through the Judeofascist organizational structure and its timeless ability to adapt, evolve and adjust to opposition and resistance, as well as exert a strong psychological control over Jews who don’t necessarily even subscribe to its insidious program of insinuation and subjugation.

Much of the Christison’s article challenges the intellectual acrobatics carried out by some on the left to maintain the fiction that US Mideast policy is dictated by U.S. imperial interests alone and that the Israel lobby holds little to no sway over its formulation. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence of the Israel lobby’s power (and evidence of its propensity to use that power to push U.S. Mideast interventionism on behalf of Israel) many of those liberals who should be the far-right lobby’s natural opponents are in such deep denial about its nature that they can’t begin to examine the subject objectively. This denial is largely the result of Judeofascism’s psychological control over the minds of many Jewish-American liberals, who are often Israel’s chief apologists on the left and thus end up running interference for its powerful lobby in the U.S. as well.

Opposition to Judeofascsism from the left and from liberals is an important subject because so much of the right has already been co-opted by the Judeofascist movement. “Christian” Zionists, large segments of big business and big oil, the military-industrial complex, and a large portion of the GOP (and more than a few Democrats) are already basically in the Judeofascist camp.

These groups’ tacit agreement with Israel and its lobby is as follows: You spearhead the fight to take America into World War III against Islam under the guise of the “war on terror” and “defending our ally Israel,” and we’ll push (and pay, through campaign contributions) for congressional acquiescence. Together, we’ll all get disgustingly rich in the processes. (Never mind that it will be at the expense of American taxpayers and the lives of countless US soldiers and innocent Muslims, who are expendable to the moneymaking ambitions of the Judeofascists and other ruthless factions of the U.S. elite).

The Christison’s list the arguments of well-known and influential left-leaning writers and academics Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein and Stephen Zunes as epitomizing opposition from the left to the notion that the Israeli lobby tail is wagging the U.S. government dog. None of these writers are uncritical of Israel, but they are more inclined to blame the U.S. government for the actions of the Israelis than the Israelis themselves. On top of that, they cloud the fact that the Israeli government and much of the country’s private industry is deeply intertwined with the U.S. “political-corporate-military complex.”

“These critics do not dispute the existence of a lobby, but they minimize its importance, claiming that rather than leading the U.S. into policies and foreign adventures that stand against true U.S. national interests, as [Israel lobby critics] Mearsheimer and Walt assert, the U.S. is actually the controlling power in the relationship with Israel and carries out a consistent policy, using Israel as its agent where possible,” the Christison’s write.

“The tragedy of the present situation is that it has become impossible to separate Israeli from alleged U.S. interests -- that is, not what should be real U.S. national interests, but the selfish and self-defined ‘national interests’ of the political-corporate-military complex that dominates the Bush administration, Congress, and both major political parties. The specific groups that now dominate the U.S. government are the globalized arms, energy, and financial industries, and the entire military establishments, of the U.S. and of Israel -- groups that have quite literally hijacked the government and stripped it of most vestiges of democracy.”

By denying the reality of the Israel lobby’s indispensability to the neo-fascist power structure and pointing the blame for America’s growing corporate-government fascism in other directions, liberal defenders of Israel are dragging red-hearings across the American people’s pursuit of the truth.

But why would the likes of Chomsky, Finkelstein and Zunes want to minimize the Israel lobby’s role in formulating the U.S.’s belligerent and hegemonic Mideast policy? Is it because they are all Jewish, and thus (given their arguments) perhaps Zionists shills? Or is there some other component at play?

I have read a good portion of the work of Chomsky, Finkelstein and Zunes and I don’t believe that any of them are conscious Judeofascists; however, I do believe that Judeofascism holds them under its psychological sway (as it does many other earnest left-leaning Jews).

Because they are from the Leftist tradition, it is clear that each has been indoctrinated into the Left-wing dialectic materialist view of history, which was authored by Judeofascist Communists like Karl Marx, and put into action by Judeofascist Bolsheviks like Leon Trotsky.

It must be remembered that so much of Judeofascism’s reason for existence revolves around the accumulation of money and power on behalf of a Judeofascist ideological core through the enrichment of its most dedicated adherents. The adherents financially maintain the core, the core “advances history” in a way that will materially advance its adherents. This is one way Judeofascism gains and keeps so many devotees among the wealthy.

While people like Marx and Trotsky claimed high-minded motives for wanting to redistribute wealth (supposedly on behalf of the world’s poor), history shows that in action, much of what they wrote and did resulted in the redistribution of wealth into the hands of other Judeofascists.

When Judeofascists are relatively powerless, leading Judeofascists call for the redistribution of wealth into the hands of the poor and oppressed through the state (left-wing doctrine), and systematically go about taking control of the reins of state power; when the Judeofascists are powerful and wealthy (as they are in the United States and Israel today) leading Judeofascists call for even more concentration of wealth into the hands of the powerful and wealthy through the state (right-wing doctrine) and use both the state and private enterprise to exert control over all levels of society. Given their misanthropy, alienation and extremism, if Marx and Trotsky were alive today and living in America or Israel, they would probably both be Neoconservatives and Zionist, the two contemporary incarnations of the Judeofascist ideology.

People like Chomsky, Finkelstein and Zunes are out-of-tune holdovers from Judeofascism’s not-so-distant Left-wing past, and unlike the neocons, still (naively) believe that Marxist economic, political and social doctrine was an earnestly egalitarian attempt to attain justice for the earth’s wretched and poor.

It is their dedication to the concept of justice that suggests to me that they are probably not Judeofascists. However, their insistent clinging to quasi-Marxist doctrine, in conjunction with their refusal to acknowledge the power of the Israel lobby, tells me that they live in a world of denial. They simply refuse to believe that Jewish-instigated movements are capable of great evil -- perhaps even greater evil than that of the worst of the Gentile movements that their Jewish upbringings taught them to so despise.

They ignore the fact that, in the early years of the Soviet Union, Russia’s wealth was indeed transferred through the state -- but not into the hands of the workers, as promised. It stayed in the hands of the state, which was run by disproportionately Jewish Bolsheviks, who, as Communist Party members, enjoyed exorbitant power, pay, perks and privileges. Much of the wealth was consequently used by the state machinery and the Judeofascist Bolsheviks to persecute and murder the Jews’ chief antagonists in Russia, the Christian Orthodox -- some of whom had participated in anti-Jewish pogroms over the course of Russia’s pre-Soviet history.

But the retaliatory anti-Christian initiatives carried out by the Judeofascists under Soviet cover were far worse than any pogrom, and in fact reached the level of state-organized genocide by murdering millions.

This is how Judeofascism paved the way for the Holocaust: it was Soviet state-genocide instigated by Judeofascists against Christians that established the precedent that Hitler later used to justify the attempted genocide of the Jews.

As Toronto Sun Columnist Eric Margolis has noted: “The predominance of Jews among Bolshevik leaders, and the frightful crimes and cruelty inflicted by Stalin's Cheka on Ukraine, the Baltic states and Poland, led the victims of Red Terror to blame the Jewish people for both communism and their suffering. As a direct result, during the subsequent Nazi occupation of Eastern Europe, the region's innocent Jews became the target of ferocious revenge by Ukrainians, Balts and Poles.

“While the world is by now fully aware of the destruction of Europe's Jews by the Nazis, the story of the numerically larger holocaust in Ukraine has been suppressed, or ignored. Ukraine's genocide occurred 8-9 years before Hitler began the Jewish Holocaust, and was committed, unlike Nazi crimes, before the world's gaze. But Stalin's murder of millions was simply denied, or concealed by a left-wing conspiracy of silence that continues to this day. In the strange moral geometry of mass murder, only Nazis are guilty.”

Left-leaning Jews like Chomsky, Finkelstein and Zunes are so dogmatically vested in leftist doctrine that they can’t face up to the fact that: A) Communism was a greed and revenge-driven murderous enterprise revolving around the mass transfer of wealth from the hands of the Christian elite into the hands of the ruthlessly ambitious Judeofascist and secular elite in Russia (they still want to see it as a righteous instrument of political and economic justice); and B) the Israel lobby is an elaborate, disciplined and organized structure in the Bolshevik tradition designed to transfer more U.S. wealth and power through the state into the hands of already wealthy and powerful U.S. and Israeli Judeofascists and their allies.

If the devoted Leftist admits that Communism was a Judeofascist coup from the beginning, it means that he has dedicated his life to carrying water for the ideology of a bunch of greedy and grasping con artists and mass murderers. Worse yet for Jewish leftists, it also means that the seeds of the Holocaust, which shapes how they and nearly every other Jew sees the world, were sown largely by Jews themselves, and the Holocaust probably would never have occurred had the Soviet Judeofascists been cut off at the knees early on. (To his credit, I think Finkelstein senses this; “The Holocaust Industry” and much of his other writing pokes around the edges of the notion that a major component of contemporary organized Judaism -- Holocaust peddling -- is also a con game designed to keep Jews on the organized-Jewry plantation through fear, and Western gentiles on the “Judeo-Christian” plantation through a false sense of guilt.)

But left-wing Jews are not alone in their denial; much of left-liberalism’s refusal to look critically upon the Israel lobby and Jewish ideologues in Israel and the U.S. can be viewed in a similar light.

The unspoken internal calculus goes something like this: Yesterday Jewish ideologues were killing Russian Orthodox Christians in the Soviet Union in partnership with dialectic-material-obsessed, atheistic Left-wing ideologues; today they are killing Muslims, Christians, Arabs and Persians in the Middle East in partnership with materialistic, atheistic, neo-fascists and crazed Christian Zionist Right-wing ideologues. To acknowledge the continuity between the two is to acknowledge that Leftist doctrine (a good portion of it authored by Jewish ideologues) has a lot in common with the Right-wing doctrine it supposedly loathes. Indeed, to acknowledge that Jews (who in the Leftist paradigm supposedly fall into the “historical victims” category) enjoy tremendous power both today (as the Israel lobby) and yesterday (as the Bolsheviks) is to acknowledge the Left’s professed cause célèbre -- attaining power and justice for the powerless -- is merely cover for a power-grab by the power-mad.

It must be far easier for people like Chomsky, Finkelstein, and Zunes to deny, to themselves and everyone else, the horrible truth. Deny the existence of “Jewish Bolshevism.” Deny the power of the Israel lobby. Deny that the Israeli tail is wagging the U.S. government dog.

The problems is, those who identify themselves as liberals and then proceed to deny self-evident reality turn liberalism into a laughingstock, sow cynicism and despair among their own ranks and embolden liberalism’s authoritarian enemies, who can smell intellectual confusion and weakness. Transparently absurd acts of denial in the name of liberalism end up doing the cause of justice more harm than good.

And day by day, as it becomes ever more evident that Judeofascism is indeed the spearhead for the international neo-fascist movement, denying or trying to explain away the power of Zionism and the Israel lobby becomes a futile enterprise anyway. Those who persist merely end up isolating themselves as cranks and suspected double agents.

Jews, liberals and Jewish-liberals need to know: One need not forsake Judaism to restore liberal integrity and esprit de corps; one need only forsake Judeofascism and its Israel lobby.

Chris Moore is publisher of LibertaraianToday.com and Judeofascism.com