From:
Jewry’s Push For War On Iran
(RealZionistNews.com) -- by Brother Nathanael Kapner --
Chris Moore comments:
How many wars for Israel does Zionist-occupied Washington intend to lie the American people into? How much blood will ever be enough for these insatiable, racketeering criminals? Just as there is never enough bailout funding, never enough taxes, never enough crony capitalism, never enough Big Government, there will never be enough wars for the neo-fascist, Zionist racket and its left-right accomplices.
What kind of species would sacrifice their own countrymen and long term interests of the U.S. for temporal luxuries, self-aggrandizement, money and careerism? The kind of species low enough to collaborate with racist, Zionist Jewry in wars of aggression, the kind that would sell its souls and sell out the country for peanuts, the kind that currently inhabits the seats of power in Washington.
Is this soulless species even human? I see no evidence of humanity in any of them. I do see profound evil, though, of the kind that grows upon spiritually bereft, Judeo-corrupted, atheist-materialist-mammonite-cultural Marxism-indoctrinated societies like a cancer. -- C.M.
Thursday, February 09, 2012
Wednesday, February 08, 2012
Short-sighted greed and egomania mindset of Judaized American capitalism vs. "anti-Semitic," Christian-era mindset as epitomized by Henry Ford
Introduction by Chris Moore:
In the following article from Naked Capitalism, Yves Smith discusses Wired magazine's whitewash coverage of worker abuse in China by Foxconn, one of the world's biggest multinational electronics manufacturers, and China's largest private employer.
The New York Times also featured an article in late January documenting abusive conditions at Foxconn, which included the following passage:
Ford, of course, was a Christian, and notoriously anti-Jewish, and it occurred to me while reading this article that the egomaniacal mentality of Jobs that Smith complains about, as well as the insatiable greed mentality of the larger Wall Street culture, are both very Jewish characteristics. Now Jobs wasn't Jewish, but he is the product of a very Judaized American business culture, which has been infected with the greedy, short-sighted mindset of Jewish-dominated Wall Street.
-------------------------
Henry Ford, fought against organized Jewish racketeering and economic predations; the last true, American patriot?
---------------------
This is yet another example of how and why Zionist Jews, who in their hearts and minds are clearly primarily loyal to the Jewish Zionist nations (Israel and the various ethnocentric, racketeering Diaspora Zionist virtual nations they establish around the world) are so corrosive and destructive to the long term interests of not only any given Gentile country, but the entirety of Gentile humanity around the world in general.
In order to compete with the kind of self-serving greed and tribal racism that radiates from their rackets as they gain ever more control over key centers of the economy, EVERYONE must become a ruthless, Judeofascist-like cretin in order to compete with the Tribe; and of course, non-Jews are already at a tremendous disadvantage when it comes to self-serving ruthlessness because Jewry has been perfecting its ethnocentric racket over millennium -- all of which ratchets up the corruption and cravenness even more.
Now contrast this with the "anti-Semitic" (read: little tolerance for organized Jewish racism, racketeering, and economic predations) playing field established by an America that was once governed by Greco-Christian moral authority, and we can quickly see why that America succeeded, and Judaized America is balkanizing, eating its own tail, funneling ever more income and resources into Jewish hands, and quickly heading to the bottom. And we can see why it will continue to fail until something is done about the Zionist problem, with its insatiable, self-serving economic machinations that are now falling out across the entire world like a radioactive cloud cover.
-------------------------
From:
Wired’s Embarrassing Whitewash of Foxconn
(Naked Capitalism) -- by Yves Smith --
Wired’s Joel Johnson has written a stunning bit of PR for Foxconn, now-controversial supplier to the consumer electronics industry, duly wrapped in credibility-enhancing guilt over Western materialism.
The article, “1 Million Workers. 90 Million iPhones. 17 Suicides. Who’s to Blame?” pretends to be about Foxconn’s factories...
Did he try to talk to Foxconn workers outside the factory? Ex Foxconn workers? Apparently not. The only perspective he has outside his guided tour and his noisy imagination is from one Paul, a “steward for Western electronics companies seeking to procure components or goods from one of the city’s thousands of suppliers.” Do you think someone who makes his living connecting Western tech executives to Chinese manufacturers is going to say ANYTHING bad about the biggest fish in the electronics pond?
The piece goes to obvious lengths to soften the perception of the situation. He frames his account in terms of the suicides, when the recent New York Times series on Apple and Foxconn did not focus on those deaths, but the extreme hours and sometimes grinding physical toll (such as workers getting swollen feet from standing and working more than 24 hours straight). So the article skips almost completely over that issue, juxtaposing the seeming niceness of the clean factory he visited versus the deaths, and only very much later gets to the conditions that produced the suicides...
There is a huge, unexamined leap between “things critical to our survival” and those critical to what we have come to define as our comfort. It’s the unwillingness to examine the difference between the two, or any serious question raised by the role of Foxconn, that makes this piece so dubious...
I find this little chart (hat tip Richard Smith) from ninety9 via Alea (who is the antithesis of a socialist) to be more though-provoking than the entire Wired piece:
There have been numerous articles complaining about how the Chinese don’t consume enough, and the blame is laid on the high savings rate, which is in turn attributed to the lack of social safety nets (and a second, related issue is the lack of retail infrastructure). Yet it was a sonofabitch capitalist, Henry Ford, that helped create the American middle class in 1914 by paying his workers double the prevailing rate, which partly paid for itself by reducing costly turnover and increasing productivity (well paid workers are grateful workers and want to help their company what a thought!). But the big benefit for Ford was the higher wages were in large measure met by manufacturers in other cities, and created a consumer base for Ford’s own big ticket product. It was not safety nets that created higher consumption and greater American prosperity; it was higher wages.
Ford didn’t see his pay raise as a wage increases but as profit sharing. The chart Alea highlighted shows Apple could kick start a revolution in China that would help American companies, including Apple, at comparatively little cost to itself. What stood in the way when Jobs was alive was his monumental ego and his desire to leave a legacy though his products rather than his conduct as an industrialist. And now that he is dead, Apple’s practices are likely to be guided by American short-sightedness and bad incentives for executives of public companies...MORE...LINK
In the following article from Naked Capitalism, Yves Smith discusses Wired magazine's whitewash coverage of worker abuse in China by Foxconn, one of the world's biggest multinational electronics manufacturers, and China's largest private employer.
The New York Times also featured an article in late January documenting abusive conditions at Foxconn, which included the following passage:
In the last decade, Apple has become one of the mightiest, richest and most successful companies in the world, in part by mastering global manufacturing. Apple and its high-technology peers — as well as dozens of other American industries — have achieved a pace of innovation nearly unmatched in modern history.Naked Capitalism's Smith notes how easily Apple could have injected $1 billion dollars into Foxconn to dramatically improve worker conditions that would barely have touched Apple's bottom line profit margin, and concludes:
However, the workers assembling iPhones, iPads and other devices often labor in harsh conditions, according to employees inside those plants, worker advocates and documents published by companies themselves. Problems are as varied as onerous work environments and serious — sometimes deadly — safety problems.
What stood in the way when [Apple founder Steve] Jobs was alive was his monumental ego and his desire to leave a legacy though his products rather than his conduct as an industrialist. And now that he is dead, Apple’s practices are likely to be guided by American short-sightedness and bad incentives for executives of public companies.Smith contrasts this with the mentality of the great American industrialist Henry Ford, who took a much broader and patriotic, long-term view of business than Jobs, and helped lay the foundations for the greatest economy that created the broadest middle class in world history.
Ford, of course, was a Christian, and notoriously anti-Jewish, and it occurred to me while reading this article that the egomaniacal mentality of Jobs that Smith complains about, as well as the insatiable greed mentality of the larger Wall Street culture, are both very Jewish characteristics. Now Jobs wasn't Jewish, but he is the product of a very Judaized American business culture, which has been infected with the greedy, short-sighted mindset of Jewish-dominated Wall Street.
-------------------------
Henry Ford, fought against organized Jewish racketeering and economic predations; the last true, American patriot?---------------------
This is yet another example of how and why Zionist Jews, who in their hearts and minds are clearly primarily loyal to the Jewish Zionist nations (Israel and the various ethnocentric, racketeering Diaspora Zionist virtual nations they establish around the world) are so corrosive and destructive to the long term interests of not only any given Gentile country, but the entirety of Gentile humanity around the world in general.
In order to compete with the kind of self-serving greed and tribal racism that radiates from their rackets as they gain ever more control over key centers of the economy, EVERYONE must become a ruthless, Judeofascist-like cretin in order to compete with the Tribe; and of course, non-Jews are already at a tremendous disadvantage when it comes to self-serving ruthlessness because Jewry has been perfecting its ethnocentric racket over millennium -- all of which ratchets up the corruption and cravenness even more.
Now contrast this with the "anti-Semitic" (read: little tolerance for organized Jewish racism, racketeering, and economic predations) playing field established by an America that was once governed by Greco-Christian moral authority, and we can quickly see why that America succeeded, and Judaized America is balkanizing, eating its own tail, funneling ever more income and resources into Jewish hands, and quickly heading to the bottom. And we can see why it will continue to fail until something is done about the Zionist problem, with its insatiable, self-serving economic machinations that are now falling out across the entire world like a radioactive cloud cover.
-------------------------
From:
Wired’s Embarrassing Whitewash of Foxconn
(Naked Capitalism) -- by Yves Smith --
Wired’s Joel Johnson has written a stunning bit of PR for Foxconn, now-controversial supplier to the consumer electronics industry, duly wrapped in credibility-enhancing guilt over Western materialism.
The article, “1 Million Workers. 90 Million iPhones. 17 Suicides. Who’s to Blame?” pretends to be about Foxconn’s factories...
Did he try to talk to Foxconn workers outside the factory? Ex Foxconn workers? Apparently not. The only perspective he has outside his guided tour and his noisy imagination is from one Paul, a “steward for Western electronics companies seeking to procure components or goods from one of the city’s thousands of suppliers.” Do you think someone who makes his living connecting Western tech executives to Chinese manufacturers is going to say ANYTHING bad about the biggest fish in the electronics pond?
The piece goes to obvious lengths to soften the perception of the situation. He frames his account in terms of the suicides, when the recent New York Times series on Apple and Foxconn did not focus on those deaths, but the extreme hours and sometimes grinding physical toll (such as workers getting swollen feet from standing and working more than 24 hours straight). So the article skips almost completely over that issue, juxtaposing the seeming niceness of the clean factory he visited versus the deaths, and only very much later gets to the conditions that produced the suicides...
There is a huge, unexamined leap between “things critical to our survival” and those critical to what we have come to define as our comfort. It’s the unwillingness to examine the difference between the two, or any serious question raised by the role of Foxconn, that makes this piece so dubious...
I find this little chart (hat tip Richard Smith) from ninety9 via Alea (who is the antithesis of a socialist) to be more though-provoking than the entire Wired piece:
There have been numerous articles complaining about how the Chinese don’t consume enough, and the blame is laid on the high savings rate, which is in turn attributed to the lack of social safety nets (and a second, related issue is the lack of retail infrastructure). Yet it was a sonofabitch capitalist, Henry Ford, that helped create the American middle class in 1914 by paying his workers double the prevailing rate, which partly paid for itself by reducing costly turnover and increasing productivity (well paid workers are grateful workers and want to help their company what a thought!). But the big benefit for Ford was the higher wages were in large measure met by manufacturers in other cities, and created a consumer base for Ford’s own big ticket product. It was not safety nets that created higher consumption and greater American prosperity; it was higher wages.Ford didn’t see his pay raise as a wage increases but as profit sharing. The chart Alea highlighted shows Apple could kick start a revolution in China that would help American companies, including Apple, at comparatively little cost to itself. What stood in the way when Jobs was alive was his monumental ego and his desire to leave a legacy though his products rather than his conduct as an industrialist. And now that he is dead, Apple’s practices are likely to be guided by American short-sightedness and bad incentives for executives of public companies...MORE...LINK
Tuesday, February 07, 2012
Jewish cop who targeted Mel Gibson for drunk driving seeks to profit from case in lawsuit
From:
Mel Gibson likely won't testify at deputy's trial
(Associated Press) --
LOS ANGELES – A civil jury will likely not hear directly from Mel Gibson about the night of his drunken driving arrest because his testimony doesn't appear relevant to a deputy's claim that he was discriminated against because of the traffic stop, a judge said Tuesday.
In a series of tentative rulings, Superior Court Judge Barbara Scheper said she will likely block attorneys for Deputy James Mee from showing the jury a video of Gibson being booked into jail and a 30-second TV ad he made supporting the Sheriff's Department three years before his arrest.
Mee, who is Jewish, claims he suffered religious discrimination by superiors after arresting Gibson in 2006, and that he was ordered to remove the actor-director's anti-Semitic rants from a report.
He claims he was passed over for promotions and suffered other reprisals because of the case and that he was personally offended by Gibson's remarks.
Gibson's work as a spokesman for the department helps explain "the circumstances that serve as a backdrop to the harassment and hostile work environment that Deputy Mee suffered," his attorneys wrote in a court filing...
Gibson's reputation was damaged for years after details of the arrest and his anti-Semitic and sexist rant was leaked to celebrity website TMZ.
The actor apologized for his conduct, and his conviction was expunged in 2009 after he completed all the terms of his sentence.
Scheper has said she expects Mee will have difficulty proving his case, but that jurors should ultimately decide whether he was passed over for promotions and targeted for reprisals because he is Jewish.
Mee remains a deputy, although he no longer patrols for drunken drivers in the coastal community of Malibu where Gibson was arrested...MORE...LINK
Mel Gibson likely won't testify at deputy's trial
(Associated Press) --
LOS ANGELES – A civil jury will likely not hear directly from Mel Gibson about the night of his drunken driving arrest because his testimony doesn't appear relevant to a deputy's claim that he was discriminated against because of the traffic stop, a judge said Tuesday.
In a series of tentative rulings, Superior Court Judge Barbara Scheper said she will likely block attorneys for Deputy James Mee from showing the jury a video of Gibson being booked into jail and a 30-second TV ad he made supporting the Sheriff's Department three years before his arrest.
Mee, who is Jewish, claims he suffered religious discrimination by superiors after arresting Gibson in 2006, and that he was ordered to remove the actor-director's anti-Semitic rants from a report.
He claims he was passed over for promotions and suffered other reprisals because of the case and that he was personally offended by Gibson's remarks.
Gibson's work as a spokesman for the department helps explain "the circumstances that serve as a backdrop to the harassment and hostile work environment that Deputy Mee suffered," his attorneys wrote in a court filing...
Gibson's reputation was damaged for years after details of the arrest and his anti-Semitic and sexist rant was leaked to celebrity website TMZ.
The actor apologized for his conduct, and his conviction was expunged in 2009 after he completed all the terms of his sentence.
Scheper has said she expects Mee will have difficulty proving his case, but that jurors should ultimately decide whether he was passed over for promotions and targeted for reprisals because he is Jewish.
Mee remains a deputy, although he no longer patrols for drunken drivers in the coastal community of Malibu where Gibson was arrested...MORE...LINK
Monday, February 06, 2012
Bill Maher demonstrates why limousine liberal, Diaspora Jewish racket can never be trusted to put humane principle over selfish tribal interests
Introduction by Chris Moore
For a short while there, it looked like Zionist Jew Bill Maher might have been developing a humane consciousness, given that he actually had a few nice words to say about Ron Paul and his anti-war foreign policy, and seemed to have realized establishment liberalism is nothing but a massive brainwashing operation.
But I should have known it was just a fluke, because Zionist Jews always ultimately rally around their criminal racket and its financial interests, and Maher is no different.
The article below documents how Maher is now ripping the Occupy movement as comprised of nothing but deadbeats and "douche bags," sneering that they need to "get a job."
Of course, Maher recognizes that the Occupy movement is a threat, even if merely a mild one, to the Zionist bankster regime that ultimately butters his bread, and butters the bread of the entire Zionist, limousine liberal establishment, as well.
So where the rubber meets the road, "liberal" Jews like Maher are always going to side with the Tribe and its interests over any serious reform or challenge to the neo-fascist, Jewish supremacist political current of the left-right establishment.
That's why members of the Diaspora Jewish establishment, no matter how much "game" they talk, can ultimately never be trusted to look after the interests and general welfare of anyone but themselves. When it comes to gaining and protecting their own, self-aggrandizing money, power, and "prestige," they will betray the goyim at the drop of a hat.
Indeed , betrayal seems to be inherent in their low character. And if the didn't have low character, they never would have sustained their membership in the neo-fascist, Jewish Zionist racket in the first place.
-------------------------
Maher: Occupy Protesters Are "Douchebags" Who Need To "Get A Job"
(Real Clear Politics) -- by ? --
Bill Maher turned his ire toward the "Occupy" protests that took place across the country in the fall and continue in some locations today. Maher says he find himself "almost in agreement with Newt Gingrich" and tells them to "get a job."
Maher said they initially did a good job, but now the "movement" is "just a bunch of douchebags who think throwing a chair through the Starbucks window is going to bring on the revolution." Read what he said below.
"Similar to Afghanistan, when you occupy anything for too long people do get pissed off," Bill Maher said about the "Occupy" protests on his HBO program "Real Time."
"As I watch them on the news now, I find myself almost in agreement with Newt Gingrich, like, 'You know what, get a job.' Only because the people who originally started it, I think they went home. Now it's just these anarchists stragglers. And this is the problem when your movement involves sleeping over in the park. You wind up attracting the people who were sleeping over in the park anyway. And I think this is where we are with the 'Occupy movement'" Maher said on this week's broadcast.
"They did a great job of bringing up the issue of income inequality to the floor, but now it's just a bunch of douchebags who think throwing a chair through the Starbucks window is going to bring on the revolution," he also said to his panel...MORE...LINK
------------------------
Tribe First! Stereotypical, limousine liberal Jew Bill Maher
For a short while there, it looked like Zionist Jew Bill Maher might have been developing a humane consciousness, given that he actually had a few nice words to say about Ron Paul and his anti-war foreign policy, and seemed to have realized establishment liberalism is nothing but a massive brainwashing operation.
But I should have known it was just a fluke, because Zionist Jews always ultimately rally around their criminal racket and its financial interests, and Maher is no different.
The article below documents how Maher is now ripping the Occupy movement as comprised of nothing but deadbeats and "douche bags," sneering that they need to "get a job."
Of course, Maher recognizes that the Occupy movement is a threat, even if merely a mild one, to the Zionist bankster regime that ultimately butters his bread, and butters the bread of the entire Zionist, limousine liberal establishment, as well.
So where the rubber meets the road, "liberal" Jews like Maher are always going to side with the Tribe and its interests over any serious reform or challenge to the neo-fascist, Jewish supremacist political current of the left-right establishment.
That's why members of the Diaspora Jewish establishment, no matter how much "game" they talk, can ultimately never be trusted to look after the interests and general welfare of anyone but themselves. When it comes to gaining and protecting their own, self-aggrandizing money, power, and "prestige," they will betray the goyim at the drop of a hat.
Indeed , betrayal seems to be inherent in their low character. And if the didn't have low character, they never would have sustained their membership in the neo-fascist, Jewish Zionist racket in the first place.
-------------------------
Maher: Occupy Protesters Are "Douchebags" Who Need To "Get A Job"
(Real Clear Politics) -- by ? --
Bill Maher turned his ire toward the "Occupy" protests that took place across the country in the fall and continue in some locations today. Maher says he find himself "almost in agreement with Newt Gingrich" and tells them to "get a job."
Maher said they initially did a good job, but now the "movement" is "just a bunch of douchebags who think throwing a chair through the Starbucks window is going to bring on the revolution." Read what he said below.
"Similar to Afghanistan, when you occupy anything for too long people do get pissed off," Bill Maher said about the "Occupy" protests on his HBO program "Real Time."
"As I watch them on the news now, I find myself almost in agreement with Newt Gingrich, like, 'You know what, get a job.' Only because the people who originally started it, I think they went home. Now it's just these anarchists stragglers. And this is the problem when your movement involves sleeping over in the park. You wind up attracting the people who were sleeping over in the park anyway. And I think this is where we are with the 'Occupy movement'" Maher said on this week's broadcast.
"They did a great job of bringing up the issue of income inequality to the floor, but now it's just a bunch of douchebags who think throwing a chair through the Starbucks window is going to bring on the revolution," he also said to his panel...MORE...LINK
------------------------
Tribe First! Stereotypical, limousine liberal Jew Bill Maher
Zionist colonization of Quaker Seminary a microcosm of money-worshipping, organized Jewish corruption of U.S.
From:
The American Dilemma by Gilad Atzmon
(gilad.co.uk) -- by Gilad Atzmon --
On January 12TH at a Martin Luther King Birthday Concert I joined the NYC Meeting House Orchestra to perform a set of my music. The event was the annual fundraiser for a local homeless shelter and it took place at the auditorium of the Friends Seminary, an elite Quaker private school in Lower Manhattan. The cause was obviously worthy and fully consistent with Quaker values, the house was packed and the concert was a smashing success.
Apparently, some Zionist parents were devastated by my invitation. A few days before the concert, I learned that an Israeli parent was mounting pressure on the Seminary’s management and a day or two before the concert, notorious ethnic cleansing enthusiast Alan Dershowitz joined in. As he himself proudly admits, he relentlessly threatened and harassed the school and its administration...
...First, it wasn’t the Seminary that invited me it was the teachers within the Seminary who have been following my writing and clearly saw a continuum and consistency between my texts and Quaker’s philosophy. And why not? I write about universal human and civil rights. I fight for justice for all and I tour around the world educating students (of all ages) about the ‘primacy of the ear’ and the art of listening to others. I oppose supremacy and I preach only tolerance and brotherhood. True, I do indeed openly oppose Jewish political exclusiveness, but my criticism is humanist and founded in ethical and ideological criticism. I do not oppose the Jewish people and I refrain from criticising Judaism.
Living as I do in London and being supported by Quaker institutes in the past, I was initially pretty perplexed by the Zionist influence within the NYC Quaker Seminary. To start with, I couldn’t understand the logic of it. Why would Zionists send their kids to a Quaker school? Clearly the discrepancy between Quaker pacifism and Zionist militancy must be blindingly obvious to every Jewish nationalist parent.
However when I visited the Seminary the fog lifted a little. Apparently there is a dispute at NYC Friends Seminary between a management that is striving to survive within a highly competitive educational market and the teachers who are spiritually driven by Quaker philosophy. Also, once in NYC I was pleased to find out that, in accordance with Quaker ideas of inclusiveness, peace and tolerance, the Seminary is sympathetic towards the Palestinian cause and in fact is about to send a mission of student to Palestine this month. It didn’t take a genius to work out that the Zionist parents who opposed my visit were also opposing the mission to Palestine.
The practicality of the Zionist parents sending their kids to the school is obvious. The expensive, elitist school (around $40.000 a year) is located in Lower Manhattan, an area thickly populated by very rich people, many of them of Jewish origin so, the percentage of Jewish students is pretty high, maybe as high as 40% according to one of the teachers.
But I still can’t work out why Zionist parents - supporters of Israel and promoters of Jewish, nationalist, militant ideology - would send their kids to a tolerant, pacifist school. I mean, surely those parents must loathe Quaker ideals. So how do they get over the ideological divide? Simple. The Zionist parents, in collaboration with warmonger Dershowitz, are now insisting that the school give up on its Quaker principles and start to operate as a Yeshiva. They openly lobby against tolerance, freedom of expression and relentlessly suppress freedom of speech. As we always knew - in the ‘land of the free’ money can buy everything.
In fact, what we see here is a microcosm of the Zionification of America. Once Zionist money changes hands, tribal indoctrination will soon follow. The Wall Street Journal confirmed this week that some parents “vowed to pull their applications in protest” unless their demands are met. The message to the Quaker seminary was clear - surrender or face financial extinction.
The Quaker Seminary is facing a serious challenge here. It has to decide whether to stand up for its precious principles or surrender to mammon seeking and face total moral bankruptcy. Interestingly enough, America faces the exact same dilemma. It has to choose between a fight for freedom or total surrender to a foreign materialist ideology conveyed by AIPAC, ADL and other Zionist warmongers.
I wish America and the Friends Seminary’s Quakers lots of luck, because in this battle we are all together. We’re all Palestinians seeking liberation...MORE...LINK
The American Dilemma by Gilad Atzmon
(gilad.co.uk) -- by Gilad Atzmon --
On January 12TH at a Martin Luther King Birthday Concert I joined the NYC Meeting House Orchestra to perform a set of my music. The event was the annual fundraiser for a local homeless shelter and it took place at the auditorium of the Friends Seminary, an elite Quaker private school in Lower Manhattan. The cause was obviously worthy and fully consistent with Quaker values, the house was packed and the concert was a smashing success.
Apparently, some Zionist parents were devastated by my invitation. A few days before the concert, I learned that an Israeli parent was mounting pressure on the Seminary’s management and a day or two before the concert, notorious ethnic cleansing enthusiast Alan Dershowitz joined in. As he himself proudly admits, he relentlessly threatened and harassed the school and its administration...
...First, it wasn’t the Seminary that invited me it was the teachers within the Seminary who have been following my writing and clearly saw a continuum and consistency between my texts and Quaker’s philosophy. And why not? I write about universal human and civil rights. I fight for justice for all and I tour around the world educating students (of all ages) about the ‘primacy of the ear’ and the art of listening to others. I oppose supremacy and I preach only tolerance and brotherhood. True, I do indeed openly oppose Jewish political exclusiveness, but my criticism is humanist and founded in ethical and ideological criticism. I do not oppose the Jewish people and I refrain from criticising Judaism.
Living as I do in London and being supported by Quaker institutes in the past, I was initially pretty perplexed by the Zionist influence within the NYC Quaker Seminary. To start with, I couldn’t understand the logic of it. Why would Zionists send their kids to a Quaker school? Clearly the discrepancy between Quaker pacifism and Zionist militancy must be blindingly obvious to every Jewish nationalist parent.
However when I visited the Seminary the fog lifted a little. Apparently there is a dispute at NYC Friends Seminary between a management that is striving to survive within a highly competitive educational market and the teachers who are spiritually driven by Quaker philosophy. Also, once in NYC I was pleased to find out that, in accordance with Quaker ideas of inclusiveness, peace and tolerance, the Seminary is sympathetic towards the Palestinian cause and in fact is about to send a mission of student to Palestine this month. It didn’t take a genius to work out that the Zionist parents who opposed my visit were also opposing the mission to Palestine.
The practicality of the Zionist parents sending their kids to the school is obvious. The expensive, elitist school (around $40.000 a year) is located in Lower Manhattan, an area thickly populated by very rich people, many of them of Jewish origin so, the percentage of Jewish students is pretty high, maybe as high as 40% according to one of the teachers.
But I still can’t work out why Zionist parents - supporters of Israel and promoters of Jewish, nationalist, militant ideology - would send their kids to a tolerant, pacifist school. I mean, surely those parents must loathe Quaker ideals. So how do they get over the ideological divide? Simple. The Zionist parents, in collaboration with warmonger Dershowitz, are now insisting that the school give up on its Quaker principles and start to operate as a Yeshiva. They openly lobby against tolerance, freedom of expression and relentlessly suppress freedom of speech. As we always knew - in the ‘land of the free’ money can buy everything.
In fact, what we see here is a microcosm of the Zionification of America. Once Zionist money changes hands, tribal indoctrination will soon follow. The Wall Street Journal confirmed this week that some parents “vowed to pull their applications in protest” unless their demands are met. The message to the Quaker seminary was clear - surrender or face financial extinction.
The Quaker Seminary is facing a serious challenge here. It has to decide whether to stand up for its precious principles or surrender to mammon seeking and face total moral bankruptcy. Interestingly enough, America faces the exact same dilemma. It has to choose between a fight for freedom or total surrender to a foreign materialist ideology conveyed by AIPAC, ADL and other Zionist warmongers.
I wish America and the Friends Seminary’s Quakers lots of luck, because in this battle we are all together. We’re all Palestinians seeking liberation...MORE...LINK
Sunday, February 05, 2012
"Paranoid" Ron Paul Army sabotages billionaire Zionist Jew Sheldon Adelson's try for a Jews-only caucus in Nevada
From:
At Nevada's Conspiracy Caucus, the Paul Army Wins
(The Atlantic) -- by Molly Ball --
LAS VEGAS -- When Sheldon Adelson, the billionaire backer of Newt Gingrich, arranged to have a special after-hours voting session to accommodate him at Saturday's Nevada caucuses, Ron Paul supporters were convinced a conspiracy was afoot.
But the Paul army had the last laugh.
They flooded the evening caucus at the Adelson Educational Campus, a private school in the Las Vegas suburbs. They stood to testify in the most alarming terms. And in the end, Paul got more than three times as many votes as Gingrich, who came in third.
Adelson and his wife, Miriam, sat patiently near the front as caucus-goers, the great majority of them Paul supporters, stood to speak for more than an hour. He leaned his wrist on a cane while she checked her iPhone. Approached by this reporter, he barked, "No comments," and his bodyguards politely indicated that rule would be enforced.
The caucus commenced in the packed auditorium with a few speakers for Gingrich. First was a man who said he favored Gingrich because "he's done it before," even if "we may not like his personal issues -- he's been through three marriages."
The next speaker said he was backing Gingrich because "I'm very afraid of Mitt Romney." The reason, he said: "I'm concerned about if Romney gets elected having the most important position in the United States being a member of the LDS church."
And then there was this guy: "The Bilderberg Group is behind Mitt Romney."
Those were just the Gingrich speakers. Next came about 25 passionate speakers for Paul. In short order, the scene in the auditorium began to feel like a revival meeting for anti-government paranoiacs.
The first one accused the government of "genocide." Another complained that Paul was the victim of media bias, as evidenced by the fact that in the GOP debates, "When they go on Ron Paul the lighting's dimmer." Another accused the government of "using our own men as guinea pigs."
As Gingrich, across town, was vowing bitterly to continue his campaign, a Paul supporter was testifying: "Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney run the two-legged race together at Bohemian Grove! There's not a bit of difference between those two puppets! I got one word to describe my support for Ron Paul, and that is: End the Fed!"
A few people then spoke for Romney and Rick Santorum. Last was a senior orthodox rabbi, complete with hat and beard, who thanked the GOP for the post-sundown caucus: "I didn't realize there were so many orthodox Jews and Seventh-Day Adventists in Las Vegas!" he said.
The night caucus was supposed to be only for observers of a Saturday Sabbath, and attendees were required to sign a form swearing that they were "precluded from participating" in the morning caucus "because of my religious beliefs."
The Paul campaign decided this was unconstitutional and unenforceable (they were probably right). They robo-called their supporters earlier in the day, informing them that if they missed their morning caucus they could go at night. Many of those who showed up adopted an expansive interpretation of "religious beliefs," saying, for example, that they were working religiously, or praying in their sleep.
When the votes were finally cast, the totals were: 183 for Paul (58 percent), 61 for Romney (19 percent), 57 for Gingrich (18 percent) and 16 for Santorum (5 percent)...MORE...LINK
------------------------
Chris Moore comments:
Notwithstanding the sneering tone of this article vis-a-vis Paul supporters (the Atlantic is a notorious Zionist front), apparently Sheldon Adelson is trying to bring a kind of traveling, Jews-only, mini-Israel bubble to the U.S. caucus process.
Here's an idea, Adelson. Just move to Israel, and take your fellow Zionist Jews with you. That way you never have to brush shoulders with the dirty goyim again in your life.
At Nevada's Conspiracy Caucus, the Paul Army Wins
(The Atlantic) -- by Molly Ball --
LAS VEGAS -- When Sheldon Adelson, the billionaire backer of Newt Gingrich, arranged to have a special after-hours voting session to accommodate him at Saturday's Nevada caucuses, Ron Paul supporters were convinced a conspiracy was afoot.
But the Paul army had the last laugh.
They flooded the evening caucus at the Adelson Educational Campus, a private school in the Las Vegas suburbs. They stood to testify in the most alarming terms. And in the end, Paul got more than three times as many votes as Gingrich, who came in third.
Adelson and his wife, Miriam, sat patiently near the front as caucus-goers, the great majority of them Paul supporters, stood to speak for more than an hour. He leaned his wrist on a cane while she checked her iPhone. Approached by this reporter, he barked, "No comments," and his bodyguards politely indicated that rule would be enforced.
The caucus commenced in the packed auditorium with a few speakers for Gingrich. First was a man who said he favored Gingrich because "he's done it before," even if "we may not like his personal issues -- he's been through three marriages."
The next speaker said he was backing Gingrich because "I'm very afraid of Mitt Romney." The reason, he said: "I'm concerned about if Romney gets elected having the most important position in the United States being a member of the LDS church."
And then there was this guy: "The Bilderberg Group is behind Mitt Romney."
Those were just the Gingrich speakers. Next came about 25 passionate speakers for Paul. In short order, the scene in the auditorium began to feel like a revival meeting for anti-government paranoiacs.
The first one accused the government of "genocide." Another complained that Paul was the victim of media bias, as evidenced by the fact that in the GOP debates, "When they go on Ron Paul the lighting's dimmer." Another accused the government of "using our own men as guinea pigs."
As Gingrich, across town, was vowing bitterly to continue his campaign, a Paul supporter was testifying: "Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney run the two-legged race together at Bohemian Grove! There's not a bit of difference between those two puppets! I got one word to describe my support for Ron Paul, and that is: End the Fed!"
A few people then spoke for Romney and Rick Santorum. Last was a senior orthodox rabbi, complete with hat and beard, who thanked the GOP for the post-sundown caucus: "I didn't realize there were so many orthodox Jews and Seventh-Day Adventists in Las Vegas!" he said.
The night caucus was supposed to be only for observers of a Saturday Sabbath, and attendees were required to sign a form swearing that they were "precluded from participating" in the morning caucus "because of my religious beliefs."
The Paul campaign decided this was unconstitutional and unenforceable (they were probably right). They robo-called their supporters earlier in the day, informing them that if they missed their morning caucus they could go at night. Many of those who showed up adopted an expansive interpretation of "religious beliefs," saying, for example, that they were working religiously, or praying in their sleep.
When the votes were finally cast, the totals were: 183 for Paul (58 percent), 61 for Romney (19 percent), 57 for Gingrich (18 percent) and 16 for Santorum (5 percent)...MORE...LINK
------------------------
Chris Moore comments:
Notwithstanding the sneering tone of this article vis-a-vis Paul supporters (the Atlantic is a notorious Zionist front), apparently Sheldon Adelson is trying to bring a kind of traveling, Jews-only, mini-Israel bubble to the U.S. caucus process.
Here's an idea, Adelson. Just move to Israel, and take your fellow Zionist Jews with you. That way you never have to brush shoulders with the dirty goyim again in your life.
Friday, February 03, 2012
Diaspora Zionist Jewry is simultaneously Big Government-authoritarian, extremely liberal, and hyper-capitalist; how and why is this?
(By Chris Moore) -- Wherever it is confident it can infiltrate the centers of power, organized Jewry seeks to grow the size and scope of government for multiple, self-serving purposes.
Probably the foremost reason is in order to control societal purse strings by creating a powerful central bank, which its network can slowly infiltrate and eventually control.
For example, the U.S. Federal Reserve system is today utterly dominated by organized Jewry.
This provides it tremendous influence in areas all across the economy, and allows it to channel Big Government spending through its own "private" Jewish banker syndicates on Wall Street and elsewhere, which take large chunks as fees for their "services" before spreading the spending out to the various Big Government constituencies.
These banks also circulate the general national monetary supply, taking additional large, highly profitable fees for themselves along the way. They then use some of these easy profits to underwrite other companies that are part of the Jewish Zionist syndicate, and to finance syndicate politicians, and those friendly to Zionism.
This essentially gives organized Jewry control of the purse strings across a wide swath of society, and helps it to pick the private sector winners and losers.
Recall how, in the roaring 1990's, Alan Greenspan fretted that the national deficits and government debts were shrinking into relative insignificance, which he feared would cause the Fed to “lose control of monetary policy.” So Greenspan recommended tax cuts for the wealthy in order to pump back up the national deficits and debt.
It was also around this time that the Israel lobby pushed the Clinton administration to tighten sanctions and no-fly zones against Iraq (which ended up killing around a million Iraqis), on the way to ultimately inciting a trillion dollar war against Iraq under the neocon G.W. Bush administration, which destroyed the lives of millions more.
Between war debt under the neocons, and the Big Government debt currently being accumulated under the Obama administration (Obama has been financed and advanced by Jewish Zionist interests nearly his entire career) the Jewish controlled Federal Reserve system now has record U.S. government spending, deficits and debt , and is now using it to "control monetary policy" not only in the U.S., but around the entire world.
Another reason that organized Jewry is pro-Big Government is that it does not proselytize due to the institutional racism inherent in its ethno-religion. Hence, with millions on government payrolls and dependent upon government monetary policy, and with organized Jewry in control of government purse strings, it is essentially able to control and utilize vast numbers of secular "subjects" both materially and psychologically. This allows it to continue its racist exclusivity while simultaneously gaining the power and benefits of sheer numbers enjoyed by non-racist, proselytizing religions that take the time and the effort, and do the good deeds, that are necessary to build a vast congregation and constituency.
Thus, its influence upon and within "secular" Big Government essentially allows organized Jewry to buy underlings and loyalty -- using national credit and resources, no less -- that other religions have to earn by way of hard work and serving their congregations.
Its accomplices, sympathizers and left-wing useful idiots like to claim that organized Jewry is pro-government because it is "liberal" and "compassionate," but this is just more window dressing.
Note how quickly "liberal" Jewish politicians morph into police state authoritarians when they feel the least bit threatened by domestic populist blowback against Diaspora Zionism for engineering crimes against humanity overseas, or for the fallout from its domestic predations.
For example, liberal favorite Senator Carl Levin, along with most of his Jewish cohorts in Congress (Jews enjoy hugely disproportionate representation within the Democratic Party in Congress) was behind the recent National Defense Act of 2012, which suspends habeas corpus protection of US civilian citizens in their own country.
Hence, Diaspora Jewry's vaunted "liberalism" is entirely self-serving, as cover for its Big Government monetary and control agenda as outlined above, and in order to use authoritarian government as protection from blowback against its various crimes and criminal rackets.
But there is an additional reason for Jewry's social liberalism: It is a means to soften up and corrupt Gentile society in order to make it easier to infiltrate, penetrate and co-opt on behalf of all of the above.
Conservative societies are far more suspicious of outsiders and far less susceptible to predatory interests like organized Jewry with its control-mania and money-worshipping racketeering, which manifest not only in pseudo "secular," State Capitalist Big Government and Zionist authoritarianism, but additionally in Jewish hyper-capitalism.
Corrupt and gullible statist "liberalism" is far more conducive not only to infiltration and corruption, but to Jewish hyper-capitalism and its attendant, market-driven, sell-sell-sell and profit-profit-profit at any social cost mentality, no matter how destructive the products that these hyper capitalists are pushing may be to society at large.
An example of this is the liberal cultural pollution that Jewish-dominated Hollywood and mainstream media have relentlessly spewed, distributed and broadcast over the entire country for decades now, resulting in the large populations of the dumbed-down, socially adrift, highly-medicated, zombie-like citizens we see across large swaths of the nation today, and millions of youth being warehoused in crumbling, failing, public schools that do nothing but indoctrinate political correctness, and put future Americans not on a path to happiness and success, but rather down the tragic road to unfulfilled futures as compliant, cattle-like consumers, substance abusers, and taxpayer drones. (From the perspective of pathologically cynical Zionist Jewry, happy, confident, and fulfilled individuals pose a higher likelihood of throwing off their blinders and rebelling against their dark overlords than medicated, beaten down and addicted subjects.)
Conservative societies are far less tolerant of predators who deliberately desecrate the honor codes and moral values of the majority, and who induce this kind of social decline, decay and malaise, which is why, in its Diaspora incarnation at least, organized Jewry leans toward extreme "tolerance" and "liberalism," which is the perfect environment for Zionist infiltration, subjugation, and sabotage.
All tolled, because of its pathological greed and racism, its self-serving "liberal" fanaticism, its insatiable quest for totalitarian domination and supremacy, and its relentless racketeering and sabotage, Zionist Jewry is entirely incompatible with responsible, moderate, self-governing and self-regulating, democratic Western civilization, and incompatible with the Greco-Christian values and ethics that cultivated it.
Probably the foremost reason is in order to control societal purse strings by creating a powerful central bank, which its network can slowly infiltrate and eventually control.
For example, the U.S. Federal Reserve system is today utterly dominated by organized Jewry.
This provides it tremendous influence in areas all across the economy, and allows it to channel Big Government spending through its own "private" Jewish banker syndicates on Wall Street and elsewhere, which take large chunks as fees for their "services" before spreading the spending out to the various Big Government constituencies.
These banks also circulate the general national monetary supply, taking additional large, highly profitable fees for themselves along the way. They then use some of these easy profits to underwrite other companies that are part of the Jewish Zionist syndicate, and to finance syndicate politicians, and those friendly to Zionism.
This essentially gives organized Jewry control of the purse strings across a wide swath of society, and helps it to pick the private sector winners and losers.
Recall how, in the roaring 1990's, Alan Greenspan fretted that the national deficits and government debts were shrinking into relative insignificance, which he feared would cause the Fed to “lose control of monetary policy.” So Greenspan recommended tax cuts for the wealthy in order to pump back up the national deficits and debt.
It was also around this time that the Israel lobby pushed the Clinton administration to tighten sanctions and no-fly zones against Iraq (which ended up killing around a million Iraqis), on the way to ultimately inciting a trillion dollar war against Iraq under the neocon G.W. Bush administration, which destroyed the lives of millions more.
Between war debt under the neocons, and the Big Government debt currently being accumulated under the Obama administration (Obama has been financed and advanced by Jewish Zionist interests nearly his entire career) the Jewish controlled Federal Reserve system now has record U.S. government spending, deficits and debt , and is now using it to "control monetary policy" not only in the U.S., but around the entire world.
Another reason that organized Jewry is pro-Big Government is that it does not proselytize due to the institutional racism inherent in its ethno-religion. Hence, with millions on government payrolls and dependent upon government monetary policy, and with organized Jewry in control of government purse strings, it is essentially able to control and utilize vast numbers of secular "subjects" both materially and psychologically. This allows it to continue its racist exclusivity while simultaneously gaining the power and benefits of sheer numbers enjoyed by non-racist, proselytizing religions that take the time and the effort, and do the good deeds, that are necessary to build a vast congregation and constituency.
Thus, its influence upon and within "secular" Big Government essentially allows organized Jewry to buy underlings and loyalty -- using national credit and resources, no less -- that other religions have to earn by way of hard work and serving their congregations.
Its accomplices, sympathizers and left-wing useful idiots like to claim that organized Jewry is pro-government because it is "liberal" and "compassionate," but this is just more window dressing.
Note how quickly "liberal" Jewish politicians morph into police state authoritarians when they feel the least bit threatened by domestic populist blowback against Diaspora Zionism for engineering crimes against humanity overseas, or for the fallout from its domestic predations.
For example, liberal favorite Senator Carl Levin, along with most of his Jewish cohorts in Congress (Jews enjoy hugely disproportionate representation within the Democratic Party in Congress) was behind the recent National Defense Act of 2012, which suspends habeas corpus protection of US civilian citizens in their own country.
Hence, Diaspora Jewry's vaunted "liberalism" is entirely self-serving, as cover for its Big Government monetary and control agenda as outlined above, and in order to use authoritarian government as protection from blowback against its various crimes and criminal rackets.
But there is an additional reason for Jewry's social liberalism: It is a means to soften up and corrupt Gentile society in order to make it easier to infiltrate, penetrate and co-opt on behalf of all of the above.
Conservative societies are far more suspicious of outsiders and far less susceptible to predatory interests like organized Jewry with its control-mania and money-worshipping racketeering, which manifest not only in pseudo "secular," State Capitalist Big Government and Zionist authoritarianism, but additionally in Jewish hyper-capitalism.
Corrupt and gullible statist "liberalism" is far more conducive not only to infiltration and corruption, but to Jewish hyper-capitalism and its attendant, market-driven, sell-sell-sell and profit-profit-profit at any social cost mentality, no matter how destructive the products that these hyper capitalists are pushing may be to society at large.
An example of this is the liberal cultural pollution that Jewish-dominated Hollywood and mainstream media have relentlessly spewed, distributed and broadcast over the entire country for decades now, resulting in the large populations of the dumbed-down, socially adrift, highly-medicated, zombie-like citizens we see across large swaths of the nation today, and millions of youth being warehoused in crumbling, failing, public schools that do nothing but indoctrinate political correctness, and put future Americans not on a path to happiness and success, but rather down the tragic road to unfulfilled futures as compliant, cattle-like consumers, substance abusers, and taxpayer drones. (From the perspective of pathologically cynical Zionist Jewry, happy, confident, and fulfilled individuals pose a higher likelihood of throwing off their blinders and rebelling against their dark overlords than medicated, beaten down and addicted subjects.)
Conservative societies are far less tolerant of predators who deliberately desecrate the honor codes and moral values of the majority, and who induce this kind of social decline, decay and malaise, which is why, in its Diaspora incarnation at least, organized Jewry leans toward extreme "tolerance" and "liberalism," which is the perfect environment for Zionist infiltration, subjugation, and sabotage.
All tolled, because of its pathological greed and racism, its self-serving "liberal" fanaticism, its insatiable quest for totalitarian domination and supremacy, and its relentless racketeering and sabotage, Zionist Jewry is entirely incompatible with responsible, moderate, self-governing and self-regulating, democratic Western civilization, and incompatible with the Greco-Christian values and ethics that cultivated it.
Thursday, February 02, 2012
Israel lobby ordered hit on Iraq, seeks to wipe away its fingerprints and order hit on Iran; liberal establishment is its accomplice in this
From:
The Iraq war coverup: What did AIPAC do and when did it do it?
(Mondoweiss) -- by Philip Weiss --
As I pointed out yesterday, the Center for American Progress (CAP), a Democratic-Party-linked thinktank in D.C., has met quietly with officials of the Israel lobby group AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and explicitly sought to squelch suggestions by its own journalists that AIPAC is pushing war on Iran...
Though AIPAC wants to deny it now, it lobbied for the Iraq war. And CAP is participating in a coverup.
Here's the data:
Back in 2000, AIPAC specifically worked to ramp up sanctions on Iraq because of its "weapons of mass destruction." Remember them? In March 2000, AIPAC circulated an Action Alert to Congress, urging its members to put pressure on Congress to pressure the Clinton administration.
Then in April 2003, according to JWeekly, AIPAC rose up against a congressional effort led by California Republican Tom Campbell, then taking on Dianne Feinstein in a Senate race, to weaken those sanctions:
Let's skip forward to the Iraq war itself, 2003.
In The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, Walt and Mearsheimer clearly show that AIPAC pushed the Iraq war, though quietly.
In 2007 Virginia Congressman James Moran said that AIPAC had pushed the Iraq war in comments to Tikkun:
But Moran got slammed for saying this. Matt Yglesias, then at CAP himself, was fabulous on this point back in '07, a post bracingly titled AIPAC and Iraq:
The best way to oppose war against Iran is not just to say, We're against it, but to identify who is pushing for it.
AIPAC and the neoconservative lobby are back to their old tricks, pushing sanctions on Iran, and saber-rattling too. Eery parallels indeed...MORE...LINK
The Iraq war coverup: What did AIPAC do and when did it do it?
(Mondoweiss) -- by Philip Weiss --
As I pointed out yesterday, the Center for American Progress (CAP), a Democratic-Party-linked thinktank in D.C., has met quietly with officials of the Israel lobby group AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and explicitly sought to squelch suggestions by its own journalists that AIPAC is pushing war on Iran...
Though AIPAC wants to deny it now, it lobbied for the Iraq war. And CAP is participating in a coverup.
Here's the data:
Back in 2000, AIPAC specifically worked to ramp up sanctions on Iraq because of its "weapons of mass destruction." Remember them? In March 2000, AIPAC circulated an Action Alert to Congress, urging its members to put pressure on Congress to pressure the Clinton administration.
If sanctions were lifted, Saddam could spend the oil revenue to accelerate Iraq's military programs rather than on the humanitarian needs of Iraqi citizens.Very similar to the Iran sanctions AIPAC pushed last summer.
It is essential that you contact your representative today and urge them to sign the letter to President Clinton:
Then in April 2003, according to JWeekly, AIPAC rose up against a congressional effort led by California Republican Tom Campbell, then taking on Dianne Feinstein in a Senate race, to weaken those sanctions:
The military threat from Iraq is a major concern of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which favors retaining economic sanctions.Talk about eery parallels: When Obama tried to stop sanctions on the Iran Central Bank, AIPAC posterized Obama in the Senate 100-0 last December.
"Lifting sanctions wouldn't benefit the Iraqi people," said Amy Friedkin, an AIPAC national vice president who lives in San Francisco. Rather, it would enable Saddam to obtain more oil money, and use it to amass more weapons. That would constitute a danger to the rest of the Middle East and the world, she added...
Campbell and his allies are now rallying behind H.R. 3825, legislation by Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) that would allow U.S. companies to export food and medicine to Iraq outside of the U.N. oil-for-food program. Campbell and Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose) are among the bill's co-sponsors.
Friedkin said AIPAC opposes the bill, although the organization recognizes the sponsors' "very compassionate reasons" for proposing it.
Elliot Brandt, AIPAC's Pacific Northwest regional director, said: "AIPAC has no desire to hurt the people of Iraq, but we have a vested interest in hurting Saddam Hussein's ability to build weapons of mass destruction. Rather than blaming the sanctions for hurting the people of Iraq, we should be putting the blame on Saddam Hussein, who is cynically and cruelly using his people as a political card to generate sympathy and support."
Let's skip forward to the Iraq war itself, 2003.
In The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, Walt and Mearsheimer clearly show that AIPAC pushed the Iraq war, though quietly.
AIPAC usually supports what Israel wants, and Israel certainly wanted the United States to invade Iraq. Nathan Guttman made this very connection in his reporting [in Haaretz, April 2003] on AIPAC's annual conference in the spring of 2003, shortly after the war started: "AIPAC is wont to support whatever is good for Israel, and so long as Israel supports the war, so too do the thousands of the AIPAC lobbyists who convened in the American capital." AIPAC executive director Howard Kohr's statement to the New York Sun in January 2003 is even more revealing, as he acknowledged "‘quietly’ lobbying Congress to approve the use of force in Iraq" was one of "AIPAC’s successes over the past year." And in a lengthy New Yorker profile of Steven J. Rosen, who was AIPAC's policy director during the run-up to the Iraq war, Jeffrey Goldberg reported that "AIPAC lobbied Congress in favor of the Iraq war."Dana Milbank reported in the Washington Post on that AIPAC conference as the Iraq war began:
Officially, AIPAC had no position on the merits of a war against Iraq before it started. Officially, Iraq is not the subject of the pro-Israel lobby's three-day meeting here.The clear thrust of this information is that AIPAC wanted a war but didn't want its fingerprints on the war. So it has cried foul whenever anyone has called it out.
Now, for the unofficial part:
As delegates to the AIPAC meeting were heading to town, the group put a headline on its Web site proclaiming: "Israeli Weapons Utilized By Coalition Forces Against Iraq." The item featured a photograph of a drone with the caption saying the "Israeli-made Hunter Unmanned Aerial Vehicle" is being used "by U.S. soldiers in Iraq."
At an AIPAC session on Sunday night, Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom proclaimed in a speech praising Secretary of State Colin L. Powell: "We have followed with great admiration your efforts to mobilize the international community to disarm Iraq and bring democracy and peace to the region, to the Middle East and to the rest of the world. Just imagine, Mr. Secretary, how much easier it would have been if Israel had been a member of the Security Council."
In 2007 Virginia Congressman James Moran said that AIPAC had pushed the Iraq war in comments to Tikkun:
He said that AIPAC was in favor of the Iraq war and "pushed this war from the beginning." And he claimed that on the Iraq war, AIPAC didn't represent "the mainstream of American Jewish thinking at all."
But Moran got slammed for saying this. Matt Yglesias, then at CAP himself, was fabulous on this point back in '07, a post bracingly titled AIPAC and Iraq:
One of the odder notions to take hold in recent years is that AIPAC specifically, and the so-called “Israel lobby” more generally had absolutely nothing to do with the Iraq War, and that anyone who says otherwise is an anti-semite. As John Judis writes for The New Republic, however, this is just false:To answer Yglesias, some Jews really did push the Iraq war, out of a perceived Jewish interest-- supporting Israel right or wrong. They're neoconservatives, well represented at AIPAC.
'At the time, a Senate staff person with a responsibility for foreign policy told me of AIPAC’s lobbying. But I don’t have to rely on my memory. AIPAC’s lobbying wasn’t widely reported because AIPAC didn’t want Arab states, whose support the Bush administration was soliciting, to be able to tie Bush’s plans to Israel, but it lobbied nonetheless. In September 2002, before Congress had begun considering the administration’s proposal authorizing force with Iraq, Rebecca Needler, a spokeswoman for AIPAC, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, “If the president asks Congress to support action in Iraq, AIPAC would lobby members of Congress to support him.” Then at an AIPAC meeting in New York in January 2003, before the war began, but after Congress had voted to authorize Bush to go to war, Howard Kohr, AIPAC’s executive director, boasted of AIPAC’s success in lobbying for the war. Reported the New York Sun, “According to Mr. Kohr, AIPAC’s successes over the past year also include guaranteeing Israel’s annual aid package and ‘quietly’ lobbying Congress to approve the use of force in Iraq.”'
And, obviously, other institutions of the hawkish “pro-Israel” establishment — the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, the Saban Center, JINSA, The New York Sun, The New Republic, etc. — all advocated strongly in favor of invasion. That’s not to say that “the Jews caused the war” (I think Bush, Cheney, Blair, Powell, Rumsfeld, Rice, etc. had a little something to do with it) but it’s still true.
The best way to oppose war against Iran is not just to say, We're against it, but to identify who is pushing for it.
AIPAC and the neoconservative lobby are back to their old tricks, pushing sanctions on Iran, and saber-rattling too. Eery parallels indeed...MORE...LINK
Just as they did with Iraq, Zionist-front New York Times and its Zionist Jew "journalists" claim war with Iran will be a cakewalk
From:
Another War on the Cheap
(AntiWar.com) -- by Philip Giraldi --
There has been altogether too much stuff in the media lately about how Iran is not really a threat to anyone and how even some prominent Israelis don’t really believe that they have to go to war (or have Washington go to war on their behalf). It was perhaps inevitable that there would be some pushback to again stoke the fires and make the case that Iran is indeed evil incarnate and on the verge of obtaining an apocalyptic weapon.
Not surprisingly, some of the latest pushback comes from the redoubtable Ethan Bronner of The New York Times in his article “Israel Senses Bluffing in Iran’s Threats of Retaliation,” which appeared on the paper’s front page on Jan. 26. Bronner, whose son has served in the Israeli Defense Forces, is the Times’ Jerusalem bureau chief and covers much of the Middle East. He lives in Israel, and his objectivity has often been questioned, but the self-proclaimed newspaper of record has refused to consider replacing him with someone less openly tied to Israel and its interests.
As a former intelligence officer, I am acutely aware of how easy it is to create and spread disinformation. Journalists are frail creatures with big egos who want to get an important story that no one else has. What could be better than to get something fresh from a well-placed, unnamed government source? Who cares if it is phony? Bronner, who has been in Israel for four years, is no doubt a confidant of a number of Israeli officials who perceive value in the careful cultivation of a New York Times journalist willing to hew closely to the Netanyahu government’s line. When Mossad sees Bronner walking their way, it’s like Hanukkah coming early.
All of that said, Bronner’s current agenda is clear right from the get-go, as reflected in his apparent endorsement of the view that Iran “has called for Israel’s destruction and … finances and arms militant groups on Israel’s borders.” He reports that “Israeli intelligence estimates, backed by academic studies, have cast doubt on the widespread assumption that a military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities would set off a catastrophic set of events like a regional conflagration, widespread acts of terrorism, and sky-high oil prices.” Thanks to Bronner’s report, the whole world can no doubt breathe a sigh of relief. Attacking Iran will produce few or no consequences. And who is telling us that? No less than Israel and The New York Times, one an interested party in minimizing concern over the damage that such a war would cause and the other a newspaper that prints all the news that fits its point of view.
Bronner actually cites one source by name to make his case. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in a November speech that “the retaliation [from Iran] would be bearable.” And then Bronner is off to the races with “eight current and recent top Israeli security officials” who are, alas, unnamed. One opines, “Take every scenario of confrontation and attack by Iran…” before delivering his judgment that Tehran having a nuclear weapon would greatly complicate Israel’s possible responses. Excuse me, but even Bronner and his Israeli friend should realize that Iran has not been talking about attacking anyone — the threats to attack have all been coming from the Israeli side for the past five years and more recently from a gaggle of American presidential wannabes. Any “confrontation and attack” by Iran would be retaliation...MORE...LINK
-------------------------
How many wars are these neo-fascist Zionists and their accomplices and boot lickers going to be allowed to start under the auspices of "saving the Jews"?
What a perfect Trojan horse for neo-fascism. Only someone as morally insane as the Zionists and those willing to jump into bed with them could ever even conjure such a diabolical plot, and then set out to ring it for all its worth.
Subduing neo-fascist Zionism and all those who profit from and enable it from left to right is the moral struggle of our time. Anything less than their complete subjugation will likely result in WWIII. -- C.M.
Another War on the Cheap
(AntiWar.com) -- by Philip Giraldi --
There has been altogether too much stuff in the media lately about how Iran is not really a threat to anyone and how even some prominent Israelis don’t really believe that they have to go to war (or have Washington go to war on their behalf). It was perhaps inevitable that there would be some pushback to again stoke the fires and make the case that Iran is indeed evil incarnate and on the verge of obtaining an apocalyptic weapon.
Not surprisingly, some of the latest pushback comes from the redoubtable Ethan Bronner of The New York Times in his article “Israel Senses Bluffing in Iran’s Threats of Retaliation,” which appeared on the paper’s front page on Jan. 26. Bronner, whose son has served in the Israeli Defense Forces, is the Times’ Jerusalem bureau chief and covers much of the Middle East. He lives in Israel, and his objectivity has often been questioned, but the self-proclaimed newspaper of record has refused to consider replacing him with someone less openly tied to Israel and its interests.
As a former intelligence officer, I am acutely aware of how easy it is to create and spread disinformation. Journalists are frail creatures with big egos who want to get an important story that no one else has. What could be better than to get something fresh from a well-placed, unnamed government source? Who cares if it is phony? Bronner, who has been in Israel for four years, is no doubt a confidant of a number of Israeli officials who perceive value in the careful cultivation of a New York Times journalist willing to hew closely to the Netanyahu government’s line. When Mossad sees Bronner walking their way, it’s like Hanukkah coming early.
All of that said, Bronner’s current agenda is clear right from the get-go, as reflected in his apparent endorsement of the view that Iran “has called for Israel’s destruction and … finances and arms militant groups on Israel’s borders.” He reports that “Israeli intelligence estimates, backed by academic studies, have cast doubt on the widespread assumption that a military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities would set off a catastrophic set of events like a regional conflagration, widespread acts of terrorism, and sky-high oil prices.” Thanks to Bronner’s report, the whole world can no doubt breathe a sigh of relief. Attacking Iran will produce few or no consequences. And who is telling us that? No less than Israel and The New York Times, one an interested party in minimizing concern over the damage that such a war would cause and the other a newspaper that prints all the news that fits its point of view.
Bronner actually cites one source by name to make his case. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in a November speech that “the retaliation [from Iran] would be bearable.” And then Bronner is off to the races with “eight current and recent top Israeli security officials” who are, alas, unnamed. One opines, “Take every scenario of confrontation and attack by Iran…” before delivering his judgment that Tehran having a nuclear weapon would greatly complicate Israel’s possible responses. Excuse me, but even Bronner and his Israeli friend should realize that Iran has not been talking about attacking anyone — the threats to attack have all been coming from the Israeli side for the past five years and more recently from a gaggle of American presidential wannabes. Any “confrontation and attack” by Iran would be retaliation...MORE...LINK
-------------------------
How many wars are these neo-fascist Zionists and their accomplices and boot lickers going to be allowed to start under the auspices of "saving the Jews"?
What a perfect Trojan horse for neo-fascism. Only someone as morally insane as the Zionists and those willing to jump into bed with them could ever even conjure such a diabolical plot, and then set out to ring it for all its worth.
Subduing neo-fascist Zionism and all those who profit from and enable it from left to right is the moral struggle of our time. Anything less than their complete subjugation will likely result in WWIII. -- C.M.
Wednesday, February 01, 2012
New leaseholder of World Trade Center complex at time of 9/11 attacks, Israel-connected Zionist Jew Larry Silverstein collected billions in insurance
Larry Silverstein an “ardent” Zionist Jew with many close connections to top Israeli politicians, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
Zionist Jew Larry Silverstein laughs all the way to the bank
--Compiled by Chris Moore
"Silverstein is connected to the Zionist elite in Israel in numerous ways, most notably via his close association and friendship with no less than three former Israeli prime ministers, namely Benjamin Netanyahu, Ariel Sharon and Ehud Barak. Silverstein is especially close to Benjamin Netanyahu who was in New York on the morning of 9/11, and who fathered the "war on terror" doctrine. According to Haaretz.com, "Many Israeli politicians are acquainted in one degree or another with the 70-year-old Silverstein." It's via these channels that Silverstein was uniquely placed to assist Israeli intelligence and the Zionist mafia in Israel and America with carrying out the 9/11 attacks.""Silverstein already owned WTC 7, the third building to collapse on 9/11 following the collapse of the Twin Towers
"7 World Trade Center is a building in New York City located across from the World Trade Center site in Lower Manhattan. It is the second building to bear that name and address in that location. The original structure was completed in 1987 and was destroyed in the September 11 attacks. The current 7 World Trade Center opened in 2006 on part of the site of the old 7 World Trade Center. Both buildings were developed by Larry Silverstein, who holds a ground lease for the site from the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey."Silverstein acquires leaseholder rights to Twin Towers a few months before 9/11 attacks
"In 1998, the Port Authority approved plans to privatize the World Trade Center.[106] In 2001, the Port Authority sought to lease the World Trade Center to a private entity. Bids for the lease came from Vornado Realty Trust, a joint bid between Brookfield Properties Corporation and Boston Properties,[107] and a joint bid by Silverstein Properties and The Westfield Group.[108] By privatizing the World Trade Center, it would be added to the city's tax rolls[108] and provide funds for other Port Authority projects.[109] On February 15, 2001, the Port Authority announced that Vornado Realty Trust had won the lease for the World Trade Center, paying $3.25 billion for the 99-year lease.[110] Vornado outbid Silverstein by $600 million though Silverstein upped his offer to $3.22 billion. However, Vornado insisted on last minute changes to the deal, including a shorter 39-year lease, which the Port Authority considered nonnegotiable.[111] Vornado later withdrew and Silverstein's bid for the lease to the World Trade Center was accepted on April 26, 2001,[112] and closed on July 24, 2001.[113]"Silverstein immediately takes out an insurance policy on the WTC complex for terrorism with a double indemnity clause.
"1. The WTC did not have insurance coverage for terrorism. Silverstein took out the policy for terrorism with a double indemnity clause. The ink was not dry on the contract when the towers fell.The Israeli government is alleged to be behind the 9/11 attacks
2. The lease for the Trade Center was a 99 year lease for 3.5 billion dollars. The Press gives the false impression Silverstein paid 3.5 billion for the lease. This is outright false. The lease was just uncured by Silverstein and just the first payments were made which would have been a cash outlay of maybe 100 or 200 million.
So here, we have days old insurance coverage for a max of 7 billion dollars with a cash outlay of less than 200 million and poof goes the towers and in goes a 6.5 billion dollar claim. Go figure?"
"When an event occurs that that fundamentally changes the dynamics of global geopolitics, there is one question above all others whose answer will most assuredly point to its perpetrators. That question is "Cui bono?". If those so indicted are in addition found to have had both motive and means then, as they say in the US, it's pretty much a slam-dunk.Silverstein and his partners ultimately collect a $4.6 billion insurance judgement on the WTC complex
And so it is with the events of 9/11.
Discounting the 'Official narrative' as the absurdity it so clearly is, there are just two organisations on the entire planet with the expertise, assets, access and political protection necessary to have both executed 9/11 and effected its cover-up to date (ie the means). Both are Intelligence Agencies - the CIA and Israel's Mossad - but only one had a compelling motive - Mossad. That motive dovetailed perfectly with the Neocon PNAC agenda, with it's explicitly stated need for "...a catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor" [1] in order to mobilise US public opinion for already planned wars, the effects of which would be to destroy Israel's enemies."
"A page, if not a chapter, has come to closure in the long dark saga of Sept. 11, 2001. A federal jury on Monday ruled that the assault on the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center was in fact two occurrences for insurance purposes. The finding in U.S. District Court in Manhattan means leaseholder Larry Silverstein may collect up to $4.6 billion, according to reports. "I strongly felt, and the jury agreed, that the destruction of the twin towers by two separate airplanes at two separate times was two separate occurrences," the Gotham real estate titan said....In a statement, Silverstein said he was thrilled with the verdict, and described it as a victory for all New Yorkers, as it secures greater funds to rebuild the ravaged WTC zone. "These insurers have an obligation to pay their fair share, to help make Lower Manhattan whole again," he declared."
Zionist Jew Larry Silverstein laughs all the way to the bank--Compiled by Chris Moore
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)