Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
(slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and  bastardization of classic Unix

Isreal lobby bulletin, 2019

Home 2020 2019 2018 2017

For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

[Dec 29, 2019] People you are voting for actually serve as representatives of MIC, not you: House Dems Unanimously Vote to Condemn Withdrawal From Syria

Dec 29, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

yaridanjo , 21 minutes ago link

Congress' constitutional duty is putting Israel first!

Reality_checkers , 18 minutes ago link

MIGA!

yaridanjo , 11 minutes ago link

You can find here who the warmongers in congress are:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/116-2019/h560

the warmongers voted 'yea' to get their bribes from the Rothschild Banking Cartel!

[Dec 24, 2019] Netanyahu calls ICC war crimes probe anti-Semitic

Dec 24, 2019 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

The Rev Kev , December 23, 2019 at 9:02 am

"Netanyahu calls ICC war crimes probe anti-Semitic"

In breaking news, the International Criminal Court (ICC) today accused Netanyahu of being anti-Gentile and intend to lay charges against him for this. Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Iran, Jordan and several other countries offer to bear witness against him while Saudi Arabia & the Gulf States say they will offer character references in his defense.

xkeyscored , December 23, 2019 at 12:21 pm

from Debka :

Government imposes gag on ICC controversy
Dec 22, 2019 @ 15:47
The Israeli government in its weekly session on Sunday classified as secret all references to the decision of the International Crimes Court in the Hague to probe Israel for offences in "Palestinian areas." The ministers passed the subject over to the security-policy cabinet. PM Binyamin Netanyahu again denounced the Hague court: "While we are moving forward in new areas of hope and peace with our Arab neighbors, the ICC in The Hague has taken a step backwards. On Friday, it finally became a weapon in the political war against the State of Israel."

Massinissa , December 23, 2019 at 2:09 pm

I mean, technically Arabs are also semitic.

Which is why anti-semitic meaning exclusively anti-jewish is a bit strange.

John , December 23, 2019 at 2:14 pm

Seems to me that anything Netanyahu dislikes or which he feels is a threat to him he labels as anti-Semitic. After a while, who listens.

Carey , December 23, 2019 at 5:29 pm

Umm, the US Prezdint, Senate, House ever heard of Anti-BDS resolutions and legislation?

[Dec 21, 2019] The apparent basis for accusations against Corbyn of anti-Semitism is because of his historic support for the Palestinian cause and legitimate criticism of Israel's barbaric and criminal treatment of those living in the occupied West Bank and in Gaza. If any direct reference was made to this viewpoint, it was only in references to Corbyn's support for terrorists meaning Hamas

Notable quotes:
"... Also seldom acknowledged by left remainers is that the EU is structurally neo-liberal and is enforcing austerity on the peoples of Europe. Read Costas Lapavitsas: 'The Left Case Against the EU'. ..."
"... Another unmentionable is that important parts of Corbyn's programme would have been illegal under the rules of the EU's single market. ..."
"... The fact is that America became an extension of Britannia. Actually the biggest part of the Empire known as the East India Company. Don't believe me. Take a look at the flag. All the bars without the stars. ..."
"... "Corbyn in the UK represented a last futile effort to re-transform the British Labour party, trying to turn the clock back into what it was once. But the core and base for that reconstitution no longer exists. And that's also, at least in part, why Labour suffered the historic defeat yesterday. And why Nationalism is on the ascend once again. ..."
"... Nationalism is undermining national unity in the UK–just as it is doing so in the USA and in Spain, Italy, and elsewhere in Europe, and let's not forget India and Kashmir, and other locales in Asia. Capitalism in crisis always turns to nationalism as a shield to divert blame for its economic and social troubles on 'the others'. The extreme version of this nationalist 'blame it on the outsiders game' is called Fascism. ..."
"... Even with all the abuse, gaslighting, spoiler candidates and a winter election on cold rainy dark prexmas day – nearly 11 MILLION GENUINE voters did choose Corbynite Labour. ..."
Dec 20, 2018 | off-guardian.org

It is an anger that would be shared by millions, if they understood the truth about the way they have been deceived and manipulated by the UK Establishment, not simply over the election but over the most fundamental issues of trust and decency.

Some of the most evident deceptions that were used against Jeremy Corbyn, such as the mendacious claims of anti-semitism, have been well aired – if not successfully countered.

The failure to challenge and dismiss these claims rests almost entirely with the most influential media – the BBC and Guardian particularly – who have the greatest influence with Labour voters, even though they may not have been initially responsible for contriving this high-level smear campaign.

The producers of those media and the journalists who work for them are also primarily responsible for failing to present an opposing view that legitimised Labour's position and demonised that of the Tories.

One issue stands out a mile in the context of anti-Semitism claims, being Israel's continuing crimes against Palestinians, and the silence on the extraordinary and illegal moves being made by the Israeli government during the election period.

The apparent basis for accusations against Corbyn of anti-Semitism is because of his historic support for the Palestinian cause and legitimate criticism of Israel's barbaric and criminal treatment of those living in the occupied West Bank and in Gaza. If any direct reference was made to this viewpoint, it was only in references to Corbyn's "support for terrorists" – meaning Hamas.

But reflecting on the election campaign, the absence of any direct reference to foreign affairs, and policies on which Labour may have had significant support from many in the UK, is striking. In fact it is more than that – it is indicative. Because the sub-text – the subliminal message beneath the main issues of contention was always about foreign affairs.

... ... ...

In his recent essay on the operation of propaganda , Edward Curtin highlighted the power of movies in embedding false ideas in peoples' minds, something also noted by Christopher Donnelly in his exposition on "hybrid warfare".

There is, I think, now substantial evidence that both the broadcasting and suppression of particular movies played a part in pushing the UK electorate into voting against its interests. It was the coincidence of these two movies' appearance – and disappearance, with the election period that makes the case persuasive.


Capricornia Man ,

I was with this author all the way until he made the infantile complaint that only 30 per cent of the electorate voted for Brexit. The corollary of this is, of course, that LESS than 30 per cent voted to remain. But such inconvenient, if obvious, truths need not be mentioned if you happen to be a crusading leftist remainer.

Also seldom acknowledged by left remainers is that the EU is structurally neo-liberal and is enforcing austerity on the peoples of Europe. Read Costas Lapavitsas: 'The Left Case Against the EU'.

Unmentionable, too, is that the undeclared leader of the stop-Brexit campaign is one Tony Blair who has called Brexit "rancid" and has reputedly put ten million pounds of his own money into this campaign.

Another unmentionable is that important parts of Corbyn's programme would have been illegal under the rules of the EU's single market.

The author follows a well-trodden path in insulting working-class people who voted 'leave' allegedly in "ignorance" and had "longstanding prejudices".

With this kind of stuff coming from sections of the left, why be surprised that sections of the working class voted for the right?

When Labour promised in 2017 to implement Brexit, it achieved a 10 percent swing and almost won the election. When the Blairites turned Labour into a remain party in 2019, it lost the general election badly.

How many times does the electorate have to show what it wants before EU-idolaters will accept it?

Gall ,

You have some very insightful comments on this site. Also you publish a needed antidote to the Guardian and all the other mainstream propaganda out there.

Personally I was ambivalent about Brexit being from across the pond or as the elites like to say from the "colonies" I didn't really think it was my business. Unlike some from the commonwealth ( the euphemism for the British Empire) like to go on about our love for guns.

Compare what happened at the Battle of the Little Big Horn to Wounded Knee. Just as a thought experiment but I digress. Not too much because we're told that thanks to what would become the Second Amendment we gained "Independence" from Britain. A nice fairytale we were all taught in school and like GW chopping down some cherry tree because he couldn't tell a lie or whatever. More myth than actual truth.

The fact is that America became an extension of Britannia. Actually the biggest part of the Empire known as the East India Company. Don't believe me. Take a look at the flag. All the bars without the stars.

Maybe I'm wrong but I see this whole Brexit now is an effort to resurrect an Anglo-American alliance and all drunken Boris who has as much tact as his Russian counterpart who almost single handedly and handily destroyed Russia by selling it off at bargain basement prices which is what I'm sure Boris II plans to do and set up the old mercantile empire using America's military much like Israel is using us as a "force multiplier".

Thus I sympathize with you all over there. Here we dodged the bullet known as Clinton who probably would have turned us all into radioactive dust if elected for Trump who in reality was the lesser of two evils but evil just the same since he seems to be selling us out to the Rothschilds who as you know rule the City of London and are the benefactors of the terrorist state of Israel.

Personally I thought you would have been better off with Cobryn but instead got Boris the Terrible who promises to "get Brexit done". I wish you all the best and hope that it all comes out alright.

George Mc ,

More fun:

https://www.globalresearch.ca/boris-revenge-coming-assault-britain-democracy/5697885

" things will certainly go wrong for Boris. The great "Get Brexit Done" lie may have helped him back to Downing Street, but it left untouched the insoluble conundrum at the heart of Brexit – the fact that we can maintain the close economic relationship with the European Union on which Britain's prosperity depends; or we can go for the sort of low-cost, low-regulation "Singapore-on-Thames" that Johnson's financiers (oligarchs, hedge funds, expatriate media barons) demand "

Merry Christmas!

M. le Docteur Ralph ,

You are a civil servant for an exceptional nation, a nation so exceptional that it expends almost 4% of its GDP on defence, but a nation that is also so exceptional that it expends that 4% of GDP simply by printing up pieces of paper in the basement.

Imagine a bunch of loser nations get together and have this really stupid idea of creating their own new currency.

If these bunch of losers succeed instead of printing up pieces of paper in the basement you will have to pay real money to finance that 4% of GDP and pay those outlandish bonuses to the bosses of the industrial complex that receives your defence spending.

So, the first thing you do is you use your prison bitch to join the proto-new currency and then you use your Hungarian Jewish asset to force your prison bitch to leave. A failure.

Next, you push the exchange rate against your own currency so low that you are sure the loser nations will bend, they do not. A failure.

Next, you raise their new currency so high against your own currency that they cannot trade and you are sure that the loser nations will bend, they do not. A failure.

Next, you take the country where your security services have previously established a military junta and with your leading investment bank help you falsify their national accounts. A failure but a disaster for the country in question. Everyone is too scared to sue your leading investment bank.

Next, you take your prison bitch of a country and get them to run a referendum to leave the loser nation trading block. You fix the referendum through postal votes. Then you run an election and get an upper-class clown elected to make sure they leave on absolutely the worst terms possible.

You are sure that this time you are on to a winner, pity for the prison bitch country, pity for the risk for the whole of the rest of the world given what happened when you helped your buddies at Goldman tank Lehman, but who cares you live in Chevy Chase and your government pension is perfectly secure.

George Mc ,

Just found this helpful essay on possible future scenarios of the UK. And they're not happy ones:

https://www.globalresearch.ca/brexit-collapse-british-labour-post-mortem-uk-election/5698109

The ending is ominous:

"Corbyn in the UK represented a last futile effort to re-transform the British Labour party, trying to turn the clock back into what it was once. But the core and base for that reconstitution no longer exists. And that's also, at least in part, why Labour suffered the historic defeat yesterday. And why Nationalism is on the ascend once again.

And why, after the next crisis, even ascendant Nationalism as we see it today may not be sufficient for the continuation of late Neoliberal rule for global capitalism."

because it refers to an earlier part:

"Nationalism is undermining national unity in the UK–just as it is doing so in the USA and in Spain, Italy, and elsewhere in Europe, and let's not forget India and Kashmir, and other locales in Asia. Capitalism in crisis always turns to nationalism as a shield to divert blame for its economic and social troubles on 'the others'. The extreme version of this nationalist 'blame it on the outsiders game' is called Fascism."

Dungroanin ,

Not so George. Here are 3 simple upsides:

1. Even with all the abuse, gaslighting, spoiler candidates and a winter election on cold rainy dark prexmas day – nearly 11 MILLION GENUINE voters did choose Corbynite Labour.

2. Many of the backstabbing exLabour and pains in the arses are gone from their shouty AS accussing perches.

3. Aside from losing Pidcock (to postal fraud) the next leadership is looking like a great team and will be backed by the still solid membership- and the remainder shit on shoe parachutists are deselected in good time for next election.

Its a long game politics and there was no predicted wipeout – Again.

That what does not kill you makes you stronger!

[Dec 21, 2019] The US strategy is based on two core principles: (1) Maintain extend hegemony over whole world. (Resources, military etc etc) (2) Act as Israel's Golom

Notable quotes:
"... Erster General-Quartiermeister ..."
"... The US strategy is based on two core principles: (1) Maintain – extend hegemony over whole world. (Resources, military etc etc) (2) Act as Israel's Golom. ..."
"... Of course this (very abbreviated) view of US "strategy" is open to the criticisms that it's both dumb & evil. As if US establishment cares. Compared to cost of traditional "war" it's pretty cheap ..."
Jun 13, 2018 | www.unz.com

In truth, infinite war is a strategic abomination, an admission of professional military bankruptcy. Erster General-Quartiermeister Ludendorff might have endorsed the term, but Ludendorff was a military fanatic.

Check that. Infinite war is a strategic abomination except for arms merchants, so-called defense contractors, and the " emergency men " (and women) devoted to climbing the greasy pole of what we choose to call the national security establishment. In other words, candor obliges us to acknowledge that, in some quarters, infinite war is a pure positive, carrying with it a promise of yet more profits, promotions, and opportunities to come. War keeps the gravy train rolling. And, of course, that's part of the problem.

Who should we hold accountable for this abomination? Not the generals, in my view. If they come across as a dutiful yet unimaginative lot, remember that a lifetime of military service rarely nurtures imagination or creativity. And let us at least credit our generals with this: in their efforts to liberate or democratize or pacify or dominate the Greater Middle East they have tried every military tactic and technique imaginable. Short of nuclear annihilation, they've played just about every card in the Pentagon's deck -- without coming up with a winning hand. So they come and go at regular intervals, each new commander promising success and departing after a couple years to make way for someone else to give it a try.

... ... ...

Congressional midterm elections are just months away and another presidential election already looms. Who will be the political leader with the courage and presence of mind to declare: "Enough! Stop this madness!" Man or woman, straight or gay, black, brown, or white, that person will deserve the nation's gratitude and the support of the electorate.

Until that occurs, however, the American penchant for war will stretch on toward infinity. No doubt Saudi and Israeli leaders will cheer, Europeans who remember their Great War will scratch their heads in wonder, and the Chinese will laugh themselves silly. Meanwhile, issues of genuinely strategic importance -- climate change offers one obvious example -- will continue to be treated like an afterthought. As for the gravy train, it will roll on.


Anon [323] Disclaimer , June 7, 2018 at 9:57 pm GMT

"The United States of Amnesia."

That's actually a universal condition.

unseated , June 7, 2018 at 11:00 pm GMT
@Andrei Martyanov

1. WW1 had total casualties (civilian and military) of around 40M. WW2 had total casualties of 60M. So yes WW2 was more deadly but "pales in comparison" is hardly justified, especially relative to population.

2. Marshal Foch, 28 June, 1919: "This is not a peace. It is an armistice for 20 years."
WW1 inevitably led to WW2.

c matt , June 8, 2018 at 1:18 pm GMT
"Enough! Stop this madness!"

The only politician with a modest national stage to have said that (and meant it) in the last 50 years was Ron Paul, who was booed and mocked as crazy. Trump made noises in that direction, but almost as soon as the last words of his oath echoed off into the brisk January afternoon, he seemed to change his tune. Whether he never meant it, or decided to avoid the JFK treatment, who knows.

No, as I believe Will Rogers said, democracy is that form of government where the people get what they want, good and hard.

anonymous [340] Disclaimer , June 8, 2018 at 2:08 pm GMT
@c matt

Yes.

I supported Ron Paul in 2012. But after his candidacy was crookedly subverted by the Establishment (cf., Trump's) I vowed never to vote again for anyone that I believe unworthy of the power wielded through the public office. I haven't voted since, and don't expect to until the Empire collapses.

Carlton Meyer , Website June 8, 2018 at 4:02 pm GMT
Kirk Douglas starred in a great film about fighting in World War I: "Paths of Glory." I highly recommend the film for its accuracy, best described in Wiki by the reaction of governments:

Controversy

On its release, the film's anti-military tone was subject to criticism and censorship.

In France, both active and retired personnel from the French military vehemently criticized the film -- and its portrayal of the French Army -- after it was released in Belgium. The French government placed enormous pressure on United Artists, (the European distributor) to not release the film in France. The film was eventually shown in France in 1975 when social attitudes had changed.[17]

In Germany, the film was withdrawn from the Berlin Film Festival to avoid straining relations with France;[18] it was not shown for two years until after its release.

In Spain, Spain's right-wing government of Francisco Franco objected to the film. It was first shown in 1986, 11 years after Franco's death.

In Switzerland, the film was censored, at the request of the Swiss Army, until 1970.[18]

At American bases in Europe, the American military banned it from being shown.[18]

Mike P , June 8, 2018 at 4:33 pm GMT

No, it's not the generals who have let us down, but the politicians to whom they supposedly report and from whom they nominally take their orders.

I'd say both. The generals have greatly assisted in stringing along the trusting public, always promising that victory is just around the corner, provided the public supports this or that final effort. Petraeus in particular willingly played his part in misleading the public about both Iraq and Afghanistan. His career would be a great case study for illuminating what is wrong with the U.S. today.

As to the apparent failure of the Afghanistan war – one must be careful to separate stated goals from real ones. What kind of "lasting success" can the U.S. possibly hope for there? If they managed to defeat the Taliban, pacify the country, install a puppet regime to govern it, and then leave, what would that achieve? The puppet regime would find itself surrounded by powers antagonistic to the U.S., and the puppets would either cooperate with them or be overthrown in no time. The U.S. are not interested in winning and leaving – they want to continue disrupting the peaceful integration of East, West, and South Asia. Afghanistan is ideally placed for this purpose, and so the U.S. are quite content with dragging out that war, as a pretext for their continued presence in the region.

TG , June 8, 2018 at 7:44 pm GMT
An interesting and thoughtful piece.

I would disagree on one point though: "Today, Washington need not even bother to propagandize the public into supporting its war. By and large, members of the public are indifferent to its very existence."

This is an error. A majority of the American public think that wasting trillions of dollars on endless pointless foreign wars is a stupid idea, and they think that we would be better off spending that money on ourselves. It's just that we don't live in a democracy, and the corporate press constantly ignores the issue. But just because the press doesn't mention something, doesn't mean that it does not exist.

So during the last presidential election Donald Trump echoed this view, why are we throwing away all this money on stupid wars when we need that money at home? For this he was attacked as a fascist and "literally Hitler" (really! It's jaw-dropping when you think about it). Despite massive propaganda attacking Trump, and a personal style that could charitably be called a jackass, Trump won the election in large part because indeed most American don't like the status quo.

After the election, Trump started to deliver on his promises – and he was quickly beaten down, his pragmatist nationalist advisors purged and replaced with defense-industry chickenhawks, and now we are back to the old status quo. The public be damned.

No, the American people are not being propagandized into supporting these wars. They are simply being ignored.

Left Gatekeeper Dispatch , June 8, 2018 at 9:10 pm GMT
When are you going to stop insulting our intelligence with this Boy's State civics crap? You're calling on political leaders to stop war, like they don't remember what CIA did to JFK, RFK, Daschle, or Leahy. Or Paul Wellstone.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/tribute-to-the-last-honorable-us-senator-the-story-of-paul-wellstones-suspected-assassination-2/5643200

Your national command structure, CIA, has impunity for universal jurisdiction crime. They can kill or torture anyone they want and get away with it. That is what put them in charge. CIA kills anybody who gets in their way. You fail to comprehend Lenin's lesson: first destroy the regime, then you can refrain from use of force. Until you're ready to take on CIA, your bold phrases are silent and odorless farts of feckless self-absorption. Sack up and imprison CIA SIS or GTFO.

James Kabala , June 9, 2018 at 11:24 pm GMT
@Carlton Meyer

Since Spain was smart enough to stay out of both World Wars (as was Switzerland, of course), I wonder what Franco was thinking when he banned the film. Anyway, the final scene may be the best final scene in the history of movies.

exiled off mainstreet , June 10, 2018 at 1:15 am GMT
This writer, a retired military officer whose son died in service to the yankee imperium seems to have as good a grasp as any if not a better grasp than any about the nature of the yankee system of permanent war.
smellyoilandgas , June 13, 2018 at 4:48 am GMT
@TG

While I agree the slave-American is ignored, I think the elected, salaried members of the elected government are also ignored.. The persons in charge are Pharaohs and massively powerful global in scope corporations.
Abe Lincoln, McKinnley, Kennedy discovered that fact in their fate.

Organized Zionism was copted by the London bankers and their corporations 1897, since then a string of events have emerged.. that like a Submarine, seeking a far off target, it must divert to avoid being discovered, but soon, Red October returns to its intended path. here the path is to take the oil from the Arabs.. and the people driving that submarine are extremely wealthy Pharaohs and very well known major corporations.

I suggest to quit talking about the nation states and their leaders as if either could beat their way out of a wet paper sack. instead starting talking about the corporations and Pharaohs because they are global.

Mr. Anon , June 13, 2018 at 4:49 am GMT
The yawning silence accompanying the centennial of the Great War is baffling to me. It was the pivotal event of the 20th century. It was the beginning of the unmanning, the demoralization of Western Civilization. It was the calamity that created the World we inhabit today.

I've heard nary a peep about it in the U.S. over the last four years. It's as if it were as remote in people's consciousness as the Punic Wars.

MarkinPNW , June 13, 2018 at 5:49 am GMT
The World Wars (I and II) can be seen as an increasingly desperate attempt of a fading British Empire to hold on to and maintain its power and hegemony, with the material, human, and moral cost of the wars actually accelerating the empire's demise.

Likewise, the current endless "War on Terra" can be seen as an increasingly desperate attempt of a fading American Empire to hold on to and maintain its power and hegemony, again with the material, human, and moral cost of this war actually accelerating its demise.

But in the meantime, in both examples, the Bankers and the MIC just keep reaping their profits, even at the expense of the empires they purportedly support and defend.

animalogic , June 13, 2018 at 8:14 am GMT
@Mike P

Good points Mike P.

Author says: "strategy has ceased to exist".

In a traditional sense the author is right. Strategy is the attainment of political goals, within existing constraints. (diplomatic, political, resources etc)
"Goals" traditionally means "victories". (WWI is a great example of the sometimes dubious idea of victory)
Has the US ceased to have a strategy ? No. (Their strategy is myopic & self destructive – ie it's not a "good" strategy)

The US strategy is based on two core principles: (1) Maintain – extend hegemony over whole world. (Resources, military etc etc) (2) Act as Israel's Golom. Afghanistan, at (relatively) minimal cost, US controls key land mass (& with possible future access to fantastic resources). Threaten, mess up Russian – Chinese ambitions in this area. Iraq: Israeli enemy, strategic location, resource extraction. Syria: Israeli enemy, strategic location, key location for resource transfer to markets (EU esp). Deny Russia an ally. Libya: who cares ? Gaddafi was a pain in the arse. Iran: Israeli enemy, fantastic resources, hate them regardless.

Of course this (very abbreviated) view of US "strategy" is open to the criticisms that it's both dumb & evil. As if US establishment cares. Compared to cost of traditional "war" it's pretty cheap ( which is funny, because it's such a yummy gravy train for the 1% sorry, actually, forgot the FIRST core principle of US strategy: enrich all the "right" people)

Tom Welsh , June 13, 2018 at 10:05 am GMT
'There has never been a just [war], never an honorable one–on the part of the instigator of the war. I can see a million years ahead, and this rule will never change in so many as half a dozen instances. The loud little handful–as usual–will shout for the war. The pulpit will– warily and cautiously–object–at first; the great, big, dull bulk of the nation will rub its sleepy eyes and try to make out why there should be a war, and will say, earnestly and indignantly, "It is unjust and dishonorable, and there is no necessity for it." Then the handful will shout louder. A few fair men on the other side will argue and reason against the war with speech and pen, and at first will have a hearing and be applauded; but it will not last long; those others will outshout them, and presently the anti-war audiences will thin out and lose popularity.

Before long you will see this curious thing: the speakers stoned from the platform, and free speech strangled by hordes of furious men who in their secret hearts are still at one with those stoned speakers–as earlier– but do not dare to say so. And now the whole nation–pulpit and all– will take up the war-cry, and shout itself hoarse, and mob any honest man who ventures to open his mouth; and presently such mouths will cease to open. Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception'.

- Satan, in Mark Twain's "The Mysterious Stranger" (1908)

annamaria , June 13, 2018 at 2:06 pm GMT
@Carlton Meyer

European politicians, the war on terror, and the triumph of Bankers United: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/06/12/europe-brainwashed-normalize-relations-russia/
"Europe has not had an independent existence for 75 years. European countries do not know what it means to be a sovereign state. Without Washington European politicians feel lost, so they are likely to stick with Washington .

Russian hopes to unite with the West in a war against terrorism overlook that terrorism is the West's weapon for destabilizing independent countries that do not accept a unipolar world."

The world is ripe for barter exchange. Screw the money changers.

[Dec 18, 2019] With impeachment imminent, Kushner has pushed out his enemies, installed allies, and taken control of the campaign and large swaths of policy -- only Kellyanne Conway is still pushing back.

Dec 18, 2019 | www.unz.com

renfro , says: December 18, 2019 at 2:39 am GMT

"Jared Treats Mick Like the Help": It's Jared's White House Now (Trump's Just Living in It)

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/12/with-impeachment-imminent-jared-kushner-white-house-takeover-finally-complete

"With impeachment imminent, Kushner has pushed out his enemies, installed allies, and taken control of the campaign and large swaths of policy -- only Kellyanne Conway is still pushing back.

Inside the West Wing, Kushner has both eliminated opponents and installed acquiescent officials. "Jared was very frustrated with [Reince] Priebus and John Kelly," a Republican close to the White House, said. Acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney "was Jared's pick," the source said, and has allowed Kushner to function as de facto chief of staff. "Mick has decided not to be in control," a former West Wing official said. "Jared treats Mick like the help. There's no pushback," a prominent Republican said. John Bolton, who recently mocked Kushner in a private speech, has been replaced by Robert O'Brien, a Kushner ally. Sources say that Vice President Mike Pence and his advisers don't challenge Kushner after a string of leaks that Kushner wanted to replace Pence on the ticket with Nikki Haley. "Pence people look at Jared apprehensively. Pence treats Jared as a peer," said former Trump aide Sam Nunberg. (The White House did not respond to a request for comment.)"

Jared the Jew Prince is the number one reason not to reelect Trump.

[Dec 18, 2019] Trump Creates a New Nation by Philip Giraldi

Looks like Trump lost many votes of independents.
Notable quotes:
"... The Jerusalem Post ..."
Dec 18, 2019 | www.unz.com

The pandering by Donald Trump and those around him to Israel and to some conservative American Jews is apparently endless. Last Wednesday the president signed an executive order that is intended to address alleged anti-Semitism on college campuses by cutting off funds to those universities that do not prevent criticism of Israel. To provide a legal basis to defund, the administration is relying on title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits any discrimination based on race, color or national origin. Since the Act does not include religion, Trump's order is declaring ipso facto that henceforth "Jewishness" is a nationality.

The executive order does not mention Israel by name, but it does state that its assumptions are based on "the non-legally binding working definition of anti-Semitism adopted on May 26, 2016, by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), which states, 'Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities'; and (ii) the 'Contemporary Examples of Anti-Semitism' identified by the IHRA, to the extent that any examples might be useful as evidence of discriminatory intent."

The IHRA "contemporary examples" supplementing the basic description are important. They considerably broaden the definition of anti-Semitism, to include "Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations" and "claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor." The examples also included holding Israel to a higher standard than other nations when criticizing it, and IHRA offers no possible mitigation even if the accusations are, in the case of the behavior of some Jews and of Israel, accurate.

Those who are confused because in the past expressions like "Italian" or "Irish" or "British" meant actual countries should recognize that Trump-speak never respects any connection with reality when there is political advantage just sitting out there waiting to be snatched and exploited. And that imperative is considerably multiplied when one is referring to either the state of Israel or of Jews in general, particularly as seen by the Trump White House, which clearly and repeatedly sends the message that it reveres both. Trump's order will in effect constitute a government-promoted argument that Jews are a people or a race with a collective national origin, like Italian or Polish Americans, an assertion that clearly is untrue.

In fact, suppressing criticism of Israel on college campuses using a "weaponized" claim of anti-Semitism has long been a major foreign policy objective of the Israeli government even though nonviolent assembly and free speech are guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Congress has several times considered a comprehensive Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, though it has not passed due to legitimate free speech concerns. The nonviolent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (B.D.S.), which is very active on American campuses, has been particularly targeted and criticism of it is frequent in the media and from Congress while also emanating from the White House. As most accredited colleges receive federal funding, which can be considerable at a major research university, the executive order will create a major dilemma over how to respond, particularly for those schools that have Middle East study programs.

Work on the presidential executive order was initiated in the summer inside the White House by a team led by Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser, together with his close aide special assistant to the president Avi Berkowitz. They sought to develop a formula whereby government policy would equate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, and Donald Trump both agreed with that assessment and followed through on it. On December 8 th he promised to take action against B.D.S. and other critics in a speech delivered before the Israeli-American Council. The speech is worth reading in full by anyone who is concerned that the United States now has a government that favors one already privileged, wealthy and powerful constituency in particular and is not committed to upholding the civil liberties of all Americans.

Israel is an apartheid state. Covering up for its crimes against humanity as well as its war crimes is something of a growth industry in the United States, with Zionist billionaire oligarchs launching new foundations on a regular basis. Jewish power in the U.S. means that Israel always has been given a pass, even when it deliberately attacked and sought to sink the U.S.S. Liberty, an American Naval vessel in international waters in 1967. Thirty-four crewman died in the assault. The subsequent investigation of the attack was whitewashed by the president, secretary of state and the Navy department while the survivors were threatened with imprisonment if they revealed what had occurred. That is how a powerful and ruthless Israel acting through its traitorous domestic proxies operates and it illustrates how feeble the Establishment is in standing up to it.

This latest outrage, in which free speech and association will be denied to benefit one group on the basis of its claimed perpetual victimhood, had its genesis earlier this year when the federal government's Education Department ordered Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill to reorganize the Consortium for Middle East Studies program run jointly by the two colleges in part based on their failure to include enough "positive" content relating to Judaism. The demand came with a threat to suspend federal funding of Title VI Higher Education Act international studies and foreign language grants to the two schools if the curriculum were not changed.

The Education Department was particularly irate over a conference in March called "Conflict Over Gaza: People, Politics and Possibilities." A Republican congressman was outraged by the development and asked Secretary DeVos to investigate because the gathering was full of "radical anti-Israel bias."

Coverage of the story revealed that "Betsy DeVos, the education secretary, has become increasingly aggressive in going after perceived anti-Israel bias in higher education." Her deputy who has served as a focal point for the effort to root out anti-Israel sentiment is Assistant Secretary of Civil Rights Kenneth L. Marcus, who might reasonably be described as "a career pro-Israel advocate," the founder and president of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, which he has used to exclusively defend the rights of Jewish groups and individuals against BDS and other manifestations of Palestinian pushback against the Israeli occupation of their country. He has not hesitated to call opponents anti-Semites and has worked with Jewish students to file civil rights complaints against college administrations, including schools in Wisconsin and California. In an op-ed that appeared, not surprisingly, in The Jerusalem Post , he observed that even when student complaints were rejected, they created major problems for the institutions involved. "If a university shows a failure to treat initial complaints seriously, it hurts them with donors, faculty, political leaders and prospective students."

Last year Kenneth Marcus reopened an investigation into alleged anti-Jewish bias at Rutgers University that the Obama Administration had closed after finding that the charges were baseless. Marcus indicated that the re-examination was called for as his office in the Education Department would henceforth be using the IHRA-derived State Department definition of anti-Semitism that also includes "denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination," making virtually all criticism of Israel a civil rights violation or even a hate crime.

Critics of the Trump move, many of whom are themselves Jewish , are uncomfortable with being placed by government into one category, noting inter alia that ALL students are de facto already protected by Title VI, which has been interpreted as making all forms of discrimination illegal. And they also note that the law was never intended to protect individuals whose feelings were hurt or who claim to be unwelcome or even threatened by someone saying something that they disapprove of. Since such protection is clearly the intention of the executive order, it is undeniable that the Trump's latest ploy is little more than a mechanism to pressure colleges into effectively banning B.D.S. and other groups critical of Israel.

And the order itself raises at least one unpleasant thought: if "Jewishness" is a nation even though it is demonstrably not one, what is the alleged Jewish nationality all about? Is this just one more example of the politics of Jewish identity or is it really some form of dual loyalty, with American Jews divided between those who are loyal to the U.S. and those who are loyal to some supra-nationality or allegiance? The fact is, that Donald Trump himself has several times expressed the view that American Jews, particularly those who are politically liberal, should be more loyal to Israel.

Trump's maneuver is unfortunately part of a well-funded and highly coordinated federal and state campaign to pass laws to criminalize critics of Israel . And the issue has also surfaced within the Democratic Party among those campaigning for the presidential nomination . Speaker Nancy Pelosi forced Representative Ilhan Omar to apologize after she criticized proposed anti-boycott legislation. More recently Bernie Sanders is being smeared as an anti-Semite even though he is Jewish because he associates with critics of Israel and has spoken out in favor of defending free speech while also supporting Palestinian rights.

There is a certain irony in all of this political theater, that the wealthiest and most powerful identifiable group in the United States should yet again be playing the victim is in itself astonishing. And making it a crime to deny Israel legitimacy while at the same time denying the same thing to Palestinians should give anyone pause.

And there is also considerable hypocrisy in that pro-Israel groups on campus have been if anything better funded and more aggressive in promoting their point of view than B.D.S. has been without any consequences. Canary Mission , for example, claims to "document people and groups that promote hatred of the U.S.A., Israel and Jews on North American college campuses" by posting their names, photos and personal information on its website. Israeli-American real estate investor and billionaire Adam Milstein is reported to be its principal funder while the site's listings have been allegedly used by the Israeli border security officials to deny entry to pro-B.D.S. American citizens and also with potential employers to deny applicants jobs.

The Lawfare Project's Campus Civil Rights Project meanwhile helps aggrieved Zionist students to "take legal action to ensure that schools live up to their legal obligations to protect Jewish students from anti-Semitic harassment, intimidation, and discrimination."

So here we are again. Special privileges for the perpetual victims. And no one in the media is willing to tell it like it is, while the handful of meek voices in congress have been effectively silenced. So sad, particularly as an election year is coming up and there will undoubtedly be much more of this. When the Israelis occupy nearly all of the West Bank with Donald Trump's approval and start "relocating" the existing population, who will be around to speak up? No one, as by that time saying nay to Israel will be a full-fledged hate crime and you can go to jail for doing so.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org .


Rebel0007 , says: December 17, 2019 at 2:39 am GMT

This is a case of extreme 1st amendment rights abuse, not solely for violating freedom of speech, the press, the right to assemble, and redress the government with greivances, but it is also making both an establishment of religion, and prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

If this anti-Semetic definition is to be claimed to allow for the free exercise of Judaism, then it would only be fitting that it is anti-Islamic to Boycott, Sanction, and Divest from the Islamic Republic of Iran, which again, proves that this has made Judaism the established religion in America, where most Americans are Christians.

There are no equal protection laws passed for Christianity, Islam, Buddism, Hinduism, Taoism, Zoroastrianism, Seiks, or any other religion.

This is totally insane! I know that Ivanka converted to Judaism, and Trump loves his daughter, but this is disgusting!

geokat62 , says: December 17, 2019 at 5:04 am GMT
With this incredible speech, Pastor Chuck Baldwin gives Rick Wiles of TruNews a run for his money.

Chuck Baldwin Exposes Donald Trump's
Tyrannical Executive Order

https://www.youtube.com/embed/LPby6C6BSrU?feature=oembed

Description:

Donald Trump's so-called "antisemitism" Executive Order Is abominable, reprehensible & downright tyrannical. It is a blatant attack against the First Amendment protection of free speech and for all intents and purposes elevates all things Jewish to royalty status in America -- being granted official government protection against any kind of criticism.
In this video, Chuck Baldwin exposes the fact that not only is Donald Trump a hack for Zionism; he is also a wanna-be tyrant -- and this Executive Order proves it.

Here's the full transcript:

[MORE]

Donald Trump's Executive Order this past week will empower the federal Department of Education to withhold funding to campuses that do not squash anti-Israel rhetoric. In other words, it is now official government policy to deny college students and faculty members their natural and constitutional right to criticize, especially and primarily, if they criticize any and all things Israel. This will also, doubtless, include speech that supports Palestinian rights. Trump also declared that the religion of Judaism is a nationality or ethnicity, and is beyond criticism. Can you imagine the outcry if he had declared Christianity to be a nationality. Plus, by issuing this Executive Order, Donald Trump has made every Christian and non-Jew in the United States a second class citizen. But don't expect Robert Jeffress and his gaggle of Christian Zionists to figure that out. I have said repeatedly that Donald Trump is America's first Zionist president. And Trump's actions continue to prove that statement right. Trump's latest attack against the constitution – specifically the First Amendment – is just his latest sellout to Israel. I'll say it straight out: Donald Trump is not trying to make America great. He's trying to make Israel great. By the way, I'm glad to see the rabid Jewish Zionist, Mark Levin, agree with me. At the signing ceremony of this draconian Executive Order, Levin called Trump "America's first Jewish president." Even casual research will easily discover that Trump's family is dominated by Jewish Zionists, as is his circle of friends and business associates. What a coincidence! Trump says his EO is protecting free speech on college campuses. That's a lie. His EO is squashing free speech specifically, speech that criticizes Israel or Zionism. Donald Trump is a pathetic puppet of the likes of the ultra Zionist billionaire, Sheldon Adelson. Even worse is the fact that the Christian Zionist preachers and churches in this country are as much Adelson's puppet as is Trump, which is why they love Trump so much. And all of this hypnotic support for faux Israel can be traced directly to the false teachings of John Darby and CI Scofield and the thousands of Christian Zionist churches and scores of Christian Zionist colleges that those two men created. Now, the Zionist, Donald Trump, is trying to prohibit colleges from criticizing Zionism. If you were looking for an impeachable offence, this blatant abridgement of the First Amendment by the president of United States is it. But, don't expect Democrats in Congress to challenge Trump's unconscionable EO that officially elevates Jewishness to royalty status. Because the same Israeli Lobby that controls the Republicans in Washington DC also controls the Democrats. Trump's EO will deny funding for colleges and universities unless they prohibit the right of faculty and students to exercise their First Amendment freedom of speech to criticize Israel. How long will it be before Donald Trump decides to criminalize anyone who criticizes Israel? Donald Trump is not only a Zionist hack, he is a wannabe tyrant, and this Executive Order proves it! [loud applause]

Colin Wright , says: Website December 17, 2019 at 5:18 am GMT
@Bragadocious 'Obama considered something similar to this. He also signed two major international trade agreements with anti-BDS language. Giraldi said nothing about this; I checked. He did mention the trade agreements but forgot the punchline: Obama signed them into law! Why one standard for President Zero, another for Orange man?'

We'll have to revisit this if Obama becomes president again.

Colin Wright , says: Website December 17, 2019 at 5:20 am GMT
@Robert Dolan 'Trump has lost his mind.

I sort of wish they would impeach the stupid cuck bastard.'

They very well may. Unless you can explain how the Senate would convict, it means nothing.

Truth , says: December 17, 2019 at 5:23 am GMT
@Robert Dolan Bro, 2 years ago you were wearing a MIGA hat (Israel).
22pp22 , says: December 17, 2019 at 5:35 am GMT
Silly on the part of Jews. If they are counted separately, it becomes even harder to hide that they are absurdly overrepresented in all the desirable professions.
Yaakov , says: December 17, 2019 at 5:38 am GMT
The Enemy is now in plain sight
One Tribe , says: December 17, 2019 at 5:39 am GMT
Thank you again for your courageous reporting, Mr. Giraldi.

This is a very interesting situation!

I am seeing it with a double-vision.

If this so, and passed into law?!
Then, what possible legal excuse still exists for not declaring AIPAC, and all of the other 'special interest extra-governmental agencies', foreign agents of a foreign 'nation'?

We shall see.

Z-man , says: December 17, 2019 at 6:33 am GMT
@geokat62 Thank you for the clip geokat62 . Chuck Baldwin simply speaks the truth.
But here is where I diverge from the conclusions of the good pastor. Trump has now stated the obvious, Jews are a race and a religious cult. Besides this truth he is, hopefully, forming an irreparable wedge between secular and Zionist Jews. This only helps the majority in this nation. Unfortunately this majority also includes Christian Zionists, a heretic group even more revolting than Zionist Jews.
I still believe that Trump is cynically doing this to protect his flanks from the rabid Zionists, who with the rest of that Jew Cabal, who hate him more than anything, would all attack Trump and make him a one term POTUS.
Because, believe it or not, Trump is still better than any of the Demo'krat candidates out there for, as the 'good pastor' said, both political parties are owned .
As far as the exec. order itself it is unconstitutional and will be shot down in the courts. But if this power isn't checked and destroyed now it will become a crime to even think anti I z rael thoughts (Orwell, Huxley et al).
A pox on that most artificial of nation states, BDS now but in a conflict 4 more years of Donald because I can see him going to war with the NEOCONS over Russia and other Satanic goals of the Cabal. Time will tell and hopefuly Trump will do the right thing.
Rebel0007 , says: December 17, 2019 at 6:44 am GMT
@Anon

What you stayed is not equal protection. The law prohibits the criticism and boycott of a Jewish state. The government has a double standard. It is a rock solid case of an establishment of Judaism as the religion of America.

The government has boycotted, sanctioned, and divested from the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is an Islamic state, but not the terrorist group, and in fact the adversary of the terrorist group IS.

The Israeli government has waged war on every religion, and so has our own government by refusing Christians and Muslims to criticize the barbaric racial holocaust, precisely as Hitler refused to allow Catholics and Protestants to criticize his racist policies, the Nazis raided the Catholic and Protestant churche, seized assets, and placed clergy in concentration camps.

This anti-Semetic law is an affront to all religions because it has nothing to due with the Jewish religion and everything to do with the Israeli government. It has nothing to do with Jewish people and everything to do with the Israeli government.

This is simply an effort to silence any criticism of murderous regimes and the holocaust against Islam, precisely as Hitler had done in Germany towards those who criticized his insane racist policies and barbaric holocausts.

thotmonger , says: December 17, 2019 at 7:02 am GMT
How would it fly if Trump's EO instead forbade criticism of Russia in schools and colleges in USA?

Very strange that something like this could ever be written and signed. A fast budding and explicit "Judeo lese majetse" is unfolding before our eyes. And if it is meant to protect Jews as a race and nation, then that will naturally induce people to see them as exactly that: a separate nation. Will this quell concern about loyalty or raise more doubt?

p.s. In 2018, Israeli army expert snipers made a turkey shoot of Palestinians marching on the 70th anniversary of their people being ethnically cleansed from their ancestral homeland. A "shoot to cripple" policy only murdered several score but, with high speed dum dum bullets, they blasted bloody wreckage through the flesh and bones of many thousands of unarmed people. You may not see them on your porno channels and game shows, but a large number will be crippled for the rest of their lives.

This is a good example of a very recent state sponsored atrocity on a large scale. Students in our schools and colleges might want to examine this in a variety of ways. The history, legality, ethics, demographic dilemmas etc. Sure, it might roll over into some criticism and activism, e.g. DBS Israel, but is that to be prohibited by our government? What sort of citizens are our schools and colleges supposed to be cultivating if students are not permitted to exercise their freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of conscience?

https://ahtribune.com/world/north-africa-south-west-asia/palestine/2297-israel-shoot-to-cripple-policy-in-gaza.html

Miro23 , says: December 17, 2019 at 7:27 am GMT

Critics of the Trump move, many of whom are themselves Jewish, are uncomfortable with being placed by government into one category, noting inter alia that ALL students are de facto already protected by Title VI, which has been interpreted as making all forms of discrimination illegal.

A positive side of this is that even the most dopey university students now understand the situation

EliteCommInc. , says: December 17, 2019 at 9:42 am GMT
executive order:

"Combating Anti-Semitism

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Policy. My Administration is committed to combating the rise of anti-Semitism and anti-Semitic incidents in the United States and around the world. Anti-Semitic incidents have increased since 2013, and students, in particular, continue to face anti-Semitic harassment in schools and on university and college campuses.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq., prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance. While Title VI does not cover discrimination based on religion, individuals who face discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin do not lose protection under Title VI for also being a member of a group that shares common religious practices. Discrimination against Jews may give rise to a Title VI violation when the discrimination is based on an individual's race, color, or national origin.

It shall be the policy of the executive branch to enforce Title VI against prohibited forms of discrimination rooted in anti-Semitism as vigorously as against all other forms of discrimination prohibited by Title VI.

Sec. 2. Ensuring Robust Enforcement of Title VI. (a) In enforcing Title VI, and identifying evidence of discrimination based on race, color, or national origin, all executive departments and agencies (agencies) charged with enforcing Title VI shall consider the following:

(i) the non-legally binding working definition of anti-Semitism adopted on May 26, 2016, by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), which states, "Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities"; and

(ii) the "Contemporary Examples of Anti-Semitism" identified by the IHRA, to the extent that any examples might be useful as evidence of discriminatory intent.

(b) In considering the materials described in subsections (a)(i) and (a)(ii) of this section, agencies shall not diminish or infringe upon any right protected under Federal law or under the First Amendment. As with all other Title VI complaints, the inquiry into whether a particular act constitutes discrimination prohibited by Title VI will require a detailed analysis of the allegations.

Sec. 3. Additional Authorities Prohibiting Anti-Semitic Discrimination. Within 120 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency charged with enforcing Title VI shall submit a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, identifying additional nondiscrimination authorities within its enforcement authority with respect to which the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism could be considered.

Sec. 4. Rule of Construction. Nothing in this order shall be construed to alter the evidentiary requirements pursuant to which an agency makes a determination that conduct, including harassment, amounts to actionable Start Printed Page 68780discrimination, or to diminish or infringe upon the rights protected under any other provision of law.

Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person."

9/11 Inside job , says: December 17, 2019 at 11:25 am GMT
theguardian.com : "Believe it or not , Barack Obama had Israel's best interests at heart " By Avi Shlaim :
"Obama's actual record during his eight years in office make him one of the most pro-Israeli American presidents since Harry S. Truman . Obama has given Israel considerably more money and arms than any of his predecessors ."

[Dec 17, 2019] The Israel Lobby's Hidden Hand in the Theft of Iraqi and Syrian Oil by Agha Hussain and Whitney Webb

Notable quotes:
"... The outsized role of U.S. Israel lobby operatives in abetting the theft of Syrian and Iraqi oil reveals how this powerful lobby also facilitates more covert aspects of U.S.-Israeli cooperation and the implementation of policies that favor Israel. ..."
"... Israel imported massive amounts of oil from the Kurds during this period, all without the consent of Baghdad. Israel was also the largest customer of oil sold by ISIS, who used Kurdish-controlled Kirkuk to sell oil in areas of Iraq and Syria under its control. To do this in ISIS-controlled territories of Iraq, the oil was sent first to the Kurdish city of Zakho near the Turkey border and then into Turkey, deceptively labeled as oil that originated from Iraqi Kurdistan. ISIS did nothing to impede the KRG's own oil exports even though they easily could have given that the Kirkuk-Ceyhan export pipeline passed through areas that ISIS had occupied for years ..."
"... This arrangement orchestrated by Jeffrey, served the long-time neoconservative-Israeli agenda of empowering the Kurds, selling Iraqi oil to Israel and weakening Iraq's Baghdad-based government. ..."
"... The WINEP connection to the KRG-Israel oil deal demonstrates the key role played by the U.S. pro-Israel Lobby, not only in terms of sustaining U.S. financial aid to Israel and ratcheting up tensions with Israel's adversaries but also in facilitating the more covert aspects of U.S.-Israeli cooperation and the implementation of policies that favor Israel. ..."
"... Yet the role played by the U.S. Israel lobby in this capacity, particularly in terms of orchestrating oil sale agreements for Israel's benefit, is hardly exclusive to Iraq and can accurately be described as a repeated pattern of behavior. ..."
Dec 17, 2019 | www.unz.com

The outsized role of U.S. Israel lobby operatives in abetting the theft of Syrian and Iraqi oil reveals how this powerful lobby also facilitates more covert aspects of U.S.-Israeli cooperation and the implementation of policies that favor Israel.

Kirkuk, Iraq -- "We want to bring our soldiers home. But we did leave soldiers because we're keeping the oil," President Trump stated on November 3, before adding, "I like oil. We're keeping the oil."

Though he had promised a withdrawal of U.S. troops from their illegal occupation of Syria, Trump shocked many with his blunt admission that troops were being left behind to prevent Syrian oil resources from being developed by the Syrian government and, instead, kept in the hands of whomever the U.S. deemed fit to control them, in this case, the U.S.-backed Kurdish-majority militia known as the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

Though Trump himself received all of the credit -- and the scorn -- for this controversial new policy, what has been left out of the media coverage is the fact that key players in the U.S.' pro-Israel lobby played a major role in its creation with the purpose of selling Syrian oil to the state of Israel. While recent developments in the Syrian conflict may have hindered such a plan from becoming reality, it nonetheless offers a telling example of the covert role often played by the U.S.' pro-Israel lobby in shaping key elements of U.S. foreign policy and closed-door deals with major regional implications.

Indeed, the Israel lobby-led effort to have the U.S. facilitate the sale of Syrian oil to Israel is not an isolated incident given that, just a few years ago, other individuals connected to the same pro-Israel lobby groups and Zionist neoconservatives manipulated both U.S. policy and Iraq's Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) in order to allow Iraqi oil to be sold to Israel without the approval of the Iraqi government. These designs, not unlike those that continue to unfold in Syria, were in service to longstanding neoconservative and Zionist efforts to balkanize Iraq by strengthening the KRG and weakening Baghdad.

After the occupation of Iraq's Nineveh Governorate by ISIS (June 2014-October 2015), the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) took advantage of the Iraqi military's retreat and, amidst the chaos, illegally seized Kirkuk on June 12. Their claim to the city was supported by both the U.S. and Israel and, later, the U.S.-led coalition targeting ISIS. This gave the KRG control, not only of Iraq's export pipeline to Turkey's Ceyhan port, but also to Iraq's largest oil fields.

Israel imported massive amounts of oil from the Kurds during this period, all without the consent of Baghdad. Israel was also the largest customer of oil sold by ISIS, who used Kurdish-controlled Kirkuk to sell oil in areas of Iraq and Syria under its control. To do this in ISIS-controlled territories of Iraq, the oil was sent first to the Kurdish city of Zakho near the Turkey border and then into Turkey, deceptively labeled as oil that originated from Iraqi Kurdistan. ISIS did nothing to impede the KRG's own oil exports even though they easily could have given that the Kirkuk-Ceyhan export pipeline passed through areas that ISIS had occupied for years.

In retrospect, and following revelations from Wikileaks and new information regarding the background of relevant actors, it has been revealed that much of the covert maneuvering behind the scenes that enabled this scenario intimately involved the United States' powerful pro-Israel lobby. Now, with a similar scenario unfolding in Syria, efforts by the U.S.' Israel lobby to manipulate U.S. foreign policy in order to shift the flow of hydrocarbons for Israel's benefit can instead be seen as a pattern of behavior, not an isolated incident.

"Keep the oil" for Israel

After recent shifts in the Trump administration in its Syria policy, U.S. troops have controversially been kept in Syria to " keep the oil ," with U.S. military officials subsequently claiming that doing so was "a subset of the counter-ISIS mission." However, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper later claimed that another factor behind U.S. insistence on guarding Syrian oil fields was to prevent the extraction and subsequent sale of Syrian oil by either the Syrian government or Russia.

One key, yet often overlooked, player behind the push to prevent a full U.S. troop withdrawal in Syria in order to "keep the oil" was current U.S. ambassador to Turkey, David Satterfield. Satterfield was previously the assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs, where he yielded great influence over U.S. policy in both Iraq and Syria and worked closely with Brett McGurk, the former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Iraq and Iran and later special presidential envoy for the U.S.-led "anti-ISIS" coalition.

Over the course of his long diplomatic career, Satterfield has been known to the U.S. government as an Israeli intelligence asset embedded in the U.S. State Department. Indeed, Satterfield was named as a major player in what is now known as the AIPAC espionage scandal, also known as the Lawrence Franklin espionage scandal, although he was oddly never charged for his role after the intervention of his superiors at the State Department in the George W. Bush administration.

David Satterfield, left, arrives in Baghdad with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, right, and Joey Hood, May 7, 2019. Mandel Ngan | AP

In 2005, federal prosecutors cited a U.S. government official as having illegally passed classified information to Steve Rosen, then working for AIPAC, who then passed that information to the Israeli government. That classified information included intelligence on Iran and the nature of U.S.-Israeli intelligence sharing. Subsequent media reports from the New York Times and other outlets revealed that this government official was none other than David Satterfield, who was then serving as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Near East Affairs.

Charges against Rosen, as well as his co-conspirator and fellow AIPAC employee Keith Weissman, were dropped in 2009 and no charges were levied against Satterfield after State Department officials shockingly claimed that Satterfield had "acted within his authority" in leaking classified information to an individual working to advance the interests of a foreign government. Richard Armitage, a neoconservative ally with a long history of ties to CIA covert operations in the Middle East and elsewhere, has since claimed that he was one of Satterfield's main defenders in conversations with the FBI during this time when he was serving as Deputy Secretary of State.

The other government official named in the indictment, former Pentagon official Lawrence Franklin, was not so lucky and was charged under the Espionage Act in 2006. Satterfield, instead of being censured for his role in leaking sensitive information to a foreign government, was subsequently promoted in 2006 to serve as the Coordinator for Iraq and Senior Adviser to then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

In addition to his history of leaking classified information to AIPAC, Satterfield also has a longstanding relationship with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a controversial spin-off of AIPAC also known by its acronym WINEP. WINEP's website has long listed Satterfield as one of its experts and Satterfield has spoken at several WINEP events and policy forums, including several after his involvement with the AIPAC espionage scandal became public knowledge. However, despite his longstanding and controversial ties to the U.S. pro-Israel lobby, Satterfield's current relationship with some elements of that lobby, such as the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), is complicated at best.

While Satterfield's role in yet another reversal of a promised withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria has largely escaped media scrutiny, another individual with deep ties to the Israel lobby and Syrian "rebel" groups has also been ignored by the media, despite his outsized role in taking advantage of this new U.S. policy for Israel's benefit.

US Israel Lobby secures deal with Kurds

Earlier this year, well before Trump's new Syria policy of "keeping the oil" had officially taken shape, another individual with deep ties to the U.S. Israel lobby secured a lucrative agreement with U.S.-backed Kurdish groups in Syria. An official document issued earlier this year by the Syrian Democratic Council (SDC), the political arm of the Kurdish majority and U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a New Jersey-based company, founded and run by U.S.-Israeli dual citizen Mordechai "Motti" Kahana, was given control of the oil in territory held by the SDC.

Per the document, the SDC formally accepted the offer from Kahana's company -- Global Development Corporation (GDC) -- to represent SDC in all matters pertaining to the sale of oil extracted in territory it controls and also grants GDC "the right to explore and develop oil that is located in areas we govern."

The SDC's formal acceptance of Global Development Corporation's offer to develop Syrian oil fields. Source | Al-Akhbar

The document also states that the amount of oil then being produced in SDC-controlled areas was 125,000 barrels per day and that they anticipated that this would increase to 400,000 barrels per day and that this oil is considered a foreign asset under the control of the United States by the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

After the document was made public by the Lebanese outlet Al-Akhbar , the SDC claimed that it was a forgery, even though Kahana had separately confirmed its contents and shared the letter itself to the Los Angeles Times as recently as a few weeks ago. Kahana previously attempted to distance himself from the effort and told the Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom in July that he had made the offer to the SDC as means to prevent the "Assad regime" of Syria from obtaining revenue from the sale of Syrian oil.

The Kurds currently hold 11 oil wells in an area controlled by the [Syrian] Democratic Forces. The overwhelming majority of Syrian oil is in that area. I don't want this oil reaching Iran, or the Assad regime."

At the time, Kahana also stated that "the moment the Trump administration gives its approval, we can begin to export this oil at fair prices."

Given that Kahana has openly confirmed that he is representing the SDC's oil business shortly after Trump's adoption of the controversial "keep the oil policy," it seems plausible that Kahana has now received the approval needed for his company to export the oil on behalf of the SDC. Several media reports have speculated that, if Kahana's efforts go forward unimpeded, the Syrian oil will be sold to Israel.

However, considering Turkey's aversion to engaging in any activities that may benefit the PKK-SDF – there are considerable obstacles to Kahana's plans. While the SDF -- along with assistance from U.S. troops -- still controls several oil fields in Syria, experts assert that they can only realistically sell the oil to the Syrian government. Not even the Iraqi Kurds are a candidate, considering Baghdad's firm control over the Iraq-Syria border and the KRG's weakened state after its failed independence bid in late 2017.

Regardless, Kahana's involvement in this affair is significant for a few reasons. First, Kahana has been a key player in the promotion and funding of radical groups in Syria and has even been caught hiring so-called "rebels" to kidnap Syrian Jews and take them to Israel against their will. It was Kahana, for instance, who financed and orchestrated the now infamous trip of the late Senator John McCain to Syria, where he met with Syrian "rebels" including Khalid al-Hamad – a "moderate" rebel who gained notoriety after a video of him eating the heart of a Syrian Army soldier went viral online . McCain had also admitted meeting with ISIS members, though it is unclear if he did so on this trip or another trip to Syria.

In addition, Kahana was also the mastermind behind the "Caesar" controversy, whereby a Syrian using the pseudonym "Caesar" was brought to the U.S. by Kahana and went on to make claims regarding torture and other crimes allegedly committed by the Assad-led government Syria, claims which were later discredited by independent analysts. He was also very involved in Israel's failed efforts to establish a "safe zone" in Southern Syria as a means of covertly expanding Israel's territory from the occupied Golan Heights and into Quneitra.

Notably, Kahana has deep ties -- not just to efforts to overthrow the Syrian government -- but also to U.S. Israel lobby, including the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) where Satterfield is as an expert. For instance, Kahana was a key player in a 2013 symposium organized by WINEP along with Syrian opposition groups intimately involved in the arming of so-called "rebels." One of the other participants in the symposium alongside Kahana was Mouaz Moustafa, director of the "Syrian Emergency Task Force" who assisted Kahana in bringing McCain to Syria in 2013. Moustafa was listed as a WINEP expert on the organization's website but was later mysteriously deleted.

Kahana is also intimately involved with the Israeli American Council (IAC), a pro-Israel lobby organization, as a team member of its national conference. IAC was co-founded and is chaired by Adam Milstein , a multimillionaire and convicted felon who is also on the boards of AIPAC, StandWithUs, Birthright and other prominent pro-Israel lobby organizations. One of IAC's top donors is Sheldon Adelson, who is also the top donor to President Trump as well as the entire Republican Party.

Though the machinations of both Kahana and Satterfield to guide U.S. policy in order to manipulate the flow of Syria's hydrocarbons for Israel's benefit may seem shocking to some, this same tactic of pro-Israel lobbyists using the Kurds to illegally sell a country's oil to Israel was developed a few years prior, not in Syria, but Iraq. Notably, the individuals responsible for that policy in Iraq shared connections to several of the same pro-Israel lobby organizations as both Satterfield and Kahana, suggesting that their recent efforts in Syria are not an isolated event, but a pattern.

War against ISIS is a war for oil

In an email dated June 15, 2014, James Franklin Jeffrey (former Ambassador to Iraq and Turkey and current U.S. Special Representative for Syria) revealed to Stephen Hadley, a former George Bush administration advisor then working at the government-funded United States Institute of Peace, his intent to advise the KRG in order to sustain Kirkuk's oil production. The plan, as Jeffery described it, was to supply both the Kurdistan province with oil and allow the export of oil via Kirkuk-Ceyhan to Israel, robbing Iraq of its oil and strengthening the country's Kurdish region along with its regional government's bid for autonomy.

Jeffrey, whose hawkish views on Iran and Syria are well-known , mentioned that Brett McGurk, the U.S.' main negotiator between Baghdad and the KRG, was acting as his liaison with the KRG. McGurk, who had served in various capacities in Iraq under both Bush and Obama, was then also serving Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Iraq and Iran. A year later, he would be made the special presidential envoy for the U.S.-led "anti-ISIS" coalition and, as previously mentioned, worked closely with David Satterfield.

James Jeffrey, left, meets with Kurdish Regional Government President Massoud Barzani, April 8, 2011, at an airport in Irbil, Iraq. Chip Somodevilla | AP

Jeffrey was then a private citizen not currently employed by the government and was used as a non-governmental channel in the pursuit of the plans described in the leaked emails published by WikiLeaks. Jeffrey's behind-the-scenes activities with regards to the KRG's oil exports were done clandestinely, largely because he was then employed by a prominent arm of the U.S.' pro-Israel lobby.

At the time of the email, Jeffrey was serving as a distinguished fellow (2013-2018) at WINEP. As previously mentioned, WINEP is a pro-Israel foreign policy think-tank that espouses neoconservative views and was created in 1985 by researchers that had hastily left AIPAC to escape investigations against the organization that were related to some of its members conducting espionage on behalf of Israel. AIPAC, the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, is the largest registered Israel lobbyist organization in the US (albeit registration under the Foreign Agents Registration Act would be more suitable), and, in addition to the 1985 incident that led to WINEP's creation, has had members indicted for espionage against the U.S. on Israel's behalf.

WINEP's launch was funded by former President of the Jewish Federation of Los Angeles, Barbara Weinberg, who is its founding president and constant Chairman Emerita. Nicknamed 'Barbi', she is the wife of the late Lawrence Weinberg who was President of AIPAC from 1976-81 and who JJ Goldberg, author of the 1997 book Jewish Power, referred to as one of a select few individuals who essentially dominated AIPAC regardless of its elected leadership. Co-founder alongside Weinberg was Martin Indyk. Indyk, U.S. Ambassador to Israel (1995-97) and Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs (1997-99), led the AIPAC research time that formed WINEP to escape the aforementioned investigations.

WINEP has historically received funding from donors who donate to causes of special interest for Zionism and Israel. Among its trustees are extremely prominent names in political Zionism and funders of other Israel Lobby organizations, such as Charles and Edgar Bronfman and the Chernicks . Its membership remains dominated by individuals who have spent their careers promoting Israeli interests in the U.S.

WINEP has become more well-known, and arguably more controversial, in recent years after its research director famously called for false-flag attacks to trigger a U.S. war with Iran in 2012, statements well-aligned with longstanding attempts by the Israel Lobby to bring about such a war.

A worthy partner in crime

Stephen Hadley, another private citizen who Jeffrey evidently considered as a partner in his covert dealings discussed in the emails, also has his own past of involvement with Israel-specific intrigues and meddling.

During the G.W. Bush administration, Hadley tagged along with neoconservatives in their numerous creations of fake intelligence and efforts to incriminate Iraq for possessing chemical and nuclear weapons. Hadley was one of the promoters from within the U.S. government of the false claim that 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta met with Iraqi officials in Prague.

Hadley also worked with then-Chief of Staff to the Vice President, Lewis Libby -- a neoconservative and former lawyer for the Mossad-agent and billionaire Marc Rich -- to discredit a CIA investigation into claims of Iraq purchasing yellowcake uranium from Niger. That claim famously appeared in Bush's State of the Union address in 2002.

What this particular claim had in common with the 'Iraq meets Atta in Prague' disinformation, and other famous lies against Iraq fabricated and circulated by the dense neocon network, was its source: Israel and pro-Israel partisans.

The distribution network of these now long-debunked claims was none other than the neoconservatives who act a veritable Israeli fifth column that has long sought to promote Israeli foreign policy objectives as being in the interest of the United States. In this, Hadley played his part by helping to ensure that the United States was railroaded into a war that had long been promoted by both Israeli and American neoconservatives, particularly Richard Perle -- an advisor to WINEP -- who had been promoting regime change in Iraq for Israel's explicit benefit for decades.

In short, for covert intrigues to serve Israel that would likely be met with protest if pitched to the government for implementation as policy, Hadley's resume was impressive.

Israeli interests pursued through covert channels

Given his employment at WINEP during this time, Jeffrey's intent to advise the KRG to sustain Kirkuk's oil production despite the seizure of the Baiji oil refinery by ISIS is somewhat suspect, especially since it required that 100,000 barrels per day pass through ISIS-controlled territory unimpeded.

Jeffrey's email from June 14, therefore, demonstrated that he had foreknowledge that ISIS would not disturb the KRG as long as the Kurds redirected oil that was intended originally for Baiji to the Kirkuk-Ceyhan export pipeline, facilitating its export and later sale to Israel.

Notably, up until its liberation in mid-2015 by the Iraqi government and aligned Shia paramilitaries, ISIS kept the refinery running and, only upon their retreat, destroyed the facility.

In July 2014, the KRG began confidently supplying Kurdish areas with Kirkuk's oil per the plan laid out by Jeffrey in the aforementioned email. Baghdad soon became aware of the arrangement and lashed out at Israel and Turkey, whose banks were used by the KRG to receive the oil revenue from Israel.

One would normally expect ISIS to be opposed to such collusion given that the KRG, while a beneficiary of the ISIS-Baghdad conflict, was not an ally of ISIS. Thus, a foreign power with strategic ties to ISIS used its close ties to the KRG and assurances that it was on-board for the oil trade, to deliver a credible guarantee that ISIS would 'cooperate' and that a boom in production and exports was in the cards.

This foreign power -- acting as a guarantor for the ISIS-KRG understanding vis-a-vis the illegal oil economy, represented by Jeffrey and clearly not on good terms with Iraq's government -- was quite clearly Israel.

Israel established considerable financial support as well as the provision of armaments to other extremist terrorist groups active near the border between the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights and Southern Syria when war first broke out in Syria in 2011. At least four of these extremist groups were led by individuals with direct ties to Israeli intelligence . These same groups, sometimes promoted as 'moderates' by some media, were actively fighting Syria's government – an enemy of Israel and ally of Iran – before ISIS existed and eagerly partnered with ISIS when it expanded its campaign into Syria.

Furthermore, Israeli officials have publicly admitted maintaining regular communication with ISIS cells in Southern Syria and have publicly expressed their desire that ISIS not be defeated in the country. In Libya, Israeli Mossad operatives have been found embedded within ISIS , suggesting that Israel has covert but definite ties with the group outside of Syria as well.

Israel has also long promoted the independence of Iraqi Kurdistan, with Israel having provided Iraq's Kurds with weapons, training and teams of Mossad advisers as far back as the 1960s . More recently, Israel was the only state to support the KRG independence referendum in September 2017 despite its futility, hinting at the regard Israel holds for the KRG. Iraq's government subsequently militarily defeated the KRG's push for statehood and reclaimed Kirkuk's oil fields with assistance from the Shia paramilitaries which were responsible for defeating ISIS in the area.

A 2014 map shows the areas under ISIS and Kurdish control at the time. Source | Telegraph

This arrangement orchestrated by Jeffrey, served the long-time neoconservative-Israeli agenda of empowering the Kurds, selling Iraqi oil to Israel and weakening Iraq's Baghdad-based government.

WINEP's close association with AIPAC, which has spied on the U.S. on behalf of Israel several times in the past with no consequence, combined with Jeffrey's long-time acquaintance with key U.S. figures in Iraq, such as McGurk, provided an ideal opening for Israel in Iraq. Following the implementation of Jeffrey's plan, Israeli imports of KRG oil constituted 77 percent of Israel's total oil imports during the KRG's occupation of Kirkuk.

The WINEP connection to the KRG-Israel oil deal demonstrates the key role played by the U.S. pro-Israel Lobby, not only in terms of sustaining U.S. financial aid to Israel and ratcheting up tensions with Israel's adversaries but also in facilitating the more covert aspects of U.S.-Israeli cooperation and the implementation of policies that favor Israel.

Yet the role played by the U.S. Israel lobby in this capacity, particularly in terms of orchestrating oil sale agreements for Israel's benefit, is hardly exclusive to Iraq and can accurately be described as a repeated pattern of behavior.

Agha Hussain is an independent researcher based in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. He specialized in Middle Eastern affairs and history and is an editorial contributor to Eurasia Future, Regional Rapport and other news outlets.

Whitney Webb is a MintPress News journalist based in Chile. She has contributed to several independent media outlets including Global Research, EcoWatch, the Ron Paul Institute and 21st Century Wire, among others. She has made several radio and television appearances and is the 2019 winner of the Serena Shim Award for Uncompromised Integrity in Journalism.

[Dec 17, 2019] "My administration will never tolerate the suppression, persecution or silencing of the Jewish people," Trump declared. Does this means that ordinary Americans are now second class citizens and he will tolete those abuses for them?

Notable quotes:
"... He screwed up when he didn't disown Ivanka. ..."
Dec 17, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Art_Vandelay , 1 hour ago link

"My administration will never tolerate the suppression, persecution or silencing of the Jewish people," Trump declared at the ceremony, which doubled as a Hanukkah party.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trumps-order-combat-anti-semitism-131527480.html

rent slave , 8 minutes ago link

He screwed up when he didn't disown Ivanka.

[Dec 17, 2019] History of Zionism: At the beginning, it was kind of a well-intentioned movement: there were a lot of locations discussed for the foundation of this new country, all of them uninhabited land (from empty portion of land in Africa to a piece of Patagonia).

Dec 17, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

vk , Dec 16 2019 11:41 utc | 40

@ Posted by: Russ | Dec 16 2019 6:15 utc | 33

Zionism was a movement born in Europe during the end of the 19th Century, whose objective was to found a Jewish nation-State.

At the beginning, it was kind of a well-intentioned movement: there were a lot of locations discussed for the foundation of this new country, all of them uninhabited land (from empty portion of land in Africa to a piece of Patagonia).

In the 1930s, many Zionist bigwigs indeed supported the Nazis: their rationalization was that the Nazi threat would push their cause both because Hitler would expel all of the Jews from Germany and because that would trigger more funds to their cause.

It's important to highlight that the Holocaust per se was an improvisation made during WWII: the original plan was to deport, not kill, the German Jewish population.

snake , Dec 16 2019 10:46 utc | 38

Russ @ 33 whitewash the Nazis while smearing the Muslims? really I don't know how to answer that question? AFAICT the Nazis in Germany were not bad guys.. the Nazis were just the government in a nation targeted by the oil guys and their bankers because Germany was taking their thunder and out producing the industries of the western oil and bankers guys, and making new colonies about the world.. and because if Germany had ever hooked up with Russia all western bets were off and because before wwI, Germany was highly integrated with, and very well thought of by the Ottoman empire (even building for the Ottoman a RR to transport the Ottoman oil to markets) and because the western oil and bankers guys wanted that Ottoman owned oil and the western oil and bankers guys wanted German competition out of the picture so the western oil and banker guys installed in the USA a propaganda monster and a banking monster and used those monsters and the rule of law to push the Americans into supplying the force that was used to herd the Eastern Jews into the Ottoman Empire in order to allow the western oil and banker guys to take the oil from the Ottoman and in order to remove Germany and keep Germany from competing in the global economy.

Probably I should have attributed the origin of Zionism as reflective of intentions reflective of greed to the Ottomans, not the Muslims it was the Ottoman that first felt the impact of Zionism. What happened in Wilhelm's Germany was forced on Germany.. what happened in Hitler's Germany was forced on Germany.. The difference between the German Governments and the people governed by the German Governments is the same as the difference between the people governed by the British Government and the people governed by the American Government.

Humanity has no say under the top down nation state system. What these top down governments say and do<= never reflects what the governed people want, but always reflects what the propaganda says the governed want. What those who win elections say they will do, never reflects in their actions; instead accomplishments and effort of sitting politicians are targeted to satisfy the deep dark well hidden agendas developed by the Global Zionist.

It is the Zionist, not the Jews, not the banks, not the corporations, not the poor man on the park bench, not even the gods, that run the world. Until now, the humanity has allowed the Zionist to run the world, and until 1897 there was no way to identify them into a single group. Most people just are not interested in telling everyone else how to live, or to make other people into private property slaves, or chase for profit that which is in someone else's back yard, most humans just want to live their short 80 years or so in relative peace and comfort.

If you can shed some explanatory light on your question.. it would be helpful. Thanks for the reply..

[Dec 15, 2019] Repeating the utterly and cynically manufactured fake anti-semitism smear. The scandal is from the witchhunters, the abusers -- vicious liars who slander Labourites as anti-semites based on nothing

Notable quotes:
"... The scandal is from the witchhunters, the abusers -- vicious liars who slander Labourites as anti-semites based on nothing. ..."
"... Thanks Emma for posting a longer list here in another thread, of Labour's Jewish anti-Semites hounded out by the vicious witchhunters. Again, while the Israel Lobby and Jewish organizations wield a lot of power in the USA, it has never gotten that crazy here. ..."
"... Jews like the existence of antisemitism. It's how they can do whatever they want - from robbery to torture to murder - without anyone complaining or doing anything about those actions. ..."
"... Operation Gladio. ..."
Dec 15, 2019 | www.truthdig.com

Calgacusa day ago • edited ,

Corbyn also appeared indecisive, or somewhat worse than that, when it came to Labour's burgeoning anti-Semitism scandal, in which some Jewish Labour MPs or candidates were targeted for abuse by pro-Palestinian leftists.

What a lie, an inversion of the truth, from Salon. Repeating the utterly and cynically manufactured fake anti-semitism smear. The scandal is from the witchhunters, the abusers -- vicious liars who slander Labourites as anti-semites based on nothing.

Thanks Emma for posting a longer list here in another thread, of Labour's Jewish anti-Semites hounded out by the vicious witchhunters. Again, while the Israel Lobby and Jewish organizations wield a lot of power in the USA, it has never gotten that crazy here.

si91a day ago ,

"Whatever you make of Jeremy Corbyn, he is a person of great moral decency and unbending principle,"

No he's not. He laid a wreath at the graves of the vile perpetrators of the Munich Massacre. There's nothing "decent" about honoring Jew hating scum.

voza0db si9119 hours ago • edited ,

Jews like the existence of antisemitism. It's how they can do whatever they want - from robbery to torture to murder - without anyone complaining or doing anything about those actions.

In REALITY this rejection of Judaism has many centuries. But, then again, all those mentally weak enough to follow religious fairy tales do reject in the same manner other fairy tales.

It's a funny party in the end!

emma peele si91a day ago ,

More lies and smears

"Mr Corbyn took up an invitation to join a delegation paying respects to those killed in a 1985 Israeli bombing of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) headquarters in Tunis. Yes. Mr Corbyn has confirmed he did lay a wreath, saying this was for those who died in the 1985 bombing."

It seems to be a growing club

Gee I wonder why

si91 emma peelea day ago ,

Where's the smear? The people Israel bombed at the PLO HQ in Tunis included the perpetrators of the Munich Massacre of 1972, and Corbyn laid a wreath to commemorate these jihadist savages.

emma peele si91a day ago ,

That's a lie

Murdock and Maxwell must be your heroes. How's the Epstein show going? Think people don't notice?

Lydia Mpls C-13 Sceptique8 hours ago ,

You posted your dancing Pepe The Frog meme so, it's clear that you're yet another white nationalist fool who would hand over white working class people to their Corporate Owners under the guise of "we;re only going to hurt the brown people & the Muslims". What's so sad is how many white working class people fall for such shit.

Dave Lydia Mpls4 hours ago ,

Yet another post from the TDS infected Lydia who only has "WAYCISS!" in her brain. Talking about falling for shit....

If it weren't for the continual "WAYCISS!" meme the left would cease to exist.

Lord Dude Lydia Mpls8 hours ago ,

He can't see that he's obligated to import diversity into his country.

gustave courbet C-13 Sceptique10 hours ago ,

Operation Gladio.

[Dec 15, 2019] The mainstream media mercilessly and relentlessly attacked Corbyn as being an antisemitic Russian asset

Notable quotes:
"... And this brings me to the US elections. The only way to counter the demagoguery of a "part monster and part buffoon" is to attack him "stridently" from the Left and NOT from the Right. A candidate CANNOT be feckless on issues of social justice, BUT on the other hand cannot be seen as an ALLY to the security state. ..."
"... This is an impossible task in the US, especially when there's only two "right-wing" political parties. This explains why the "supposed" opposing political party-- the Democrats only will attack Trump on national security issues rather than for his numerous social crimes--hence alienating "Trump's working-class" who view this attack as bogus and meaningless. But this is the inevitable outcome when the non-opposition political party is controlled by the security/surveillance state. ..."
Dec 15, 2019 | www.truthdig.com

Charlotte Ruse14 hours ago ,

"Corbyn confronted a widely-despised, internally-divided government, whose leader is viewed as part monster and part buffoon, amid record social inequality and growing support for socialism. (This description applies to Boris Johnson and Donald Trump. ) The UK is now led by an extreme-right Conservative government which, under Boris Johnson, is pledged to exit the European Union (EU) on January 31 in order to complete the "Thatcher revolution."

Several contributing factors led to Corbyn's loss: the election was a mandate on BREXIT; the mainstream media mercilessly and relentlessly attacked Corbyn as being an antisemitic Russian asset; and the growing emergence in dispossessed rural areas of a nationalist right wing ideology targeting refugees as the reason for working-class austerity. In other words, the ruling class clearly stacked the "propaganda" deck against Corbyn and ensured his defeat......

It should be noted, that the day after the election the U.K. pound surged. The explanation for this is simple, the financiers and bankers know that the workers who voted for Bojo will have a greater chance of losing their socialized medicine before they ever get back their good paying manufacturing jobs.

And this brings me to the US elections. The only way to counter the demagoguery of a "part monster and part buffoon" is to attack him "stridently" from the Left and NOT from the Right. A candidate CANNOT be feckless on issues of social justice, BUT on the other hand cannot be seen as an ALLY to the security state.

This is an impossible task in the US, especially when there's only two "right-wing" political parties. This explains why the "supposed" opposing political party-- the Democrats only will attack Trump on national security issues rather than for his numerous social crimes--hence alienating "Trump's working-class" who view this attack as bogus and meaningless. But this is the inevitable outcome when the non-opposition political party is controlled by the security/surveillance state.

A Leftist candidate running within the Democratic Party needs to SEPARATE his campaign "entirely" from the security state nonsense (propaganda) and aggressively speakout against the imperialist agenda and how the trillions spent on endless needless wars MUST be reallocated to rebuilding the decaying infrastructure, improving public education, Medicare-for-All, ending homelessness, etc... In other words, to excite the "entire" working-class you have to GENUINELY prove that you DESPISE the decades long policies imposed by the ruling class which betrayed US workers and led to their economic demise.

This type of political campaign requires "battling" the security state who'll use the state-run mainstream media to demonize their candidacy in right wing outlets or ERASE and mock their candidacy on "progressive" media cable channels. Propaganda, will be unleashed nonstop to taint their message so that their campaign platform will eventually politically alienate both the Left and the Right

[Dec 15, 2019] There is no anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. This was all hatched by the Netanyahu government in Jerusalem along with the Blairites. Watch the 4 al jazeera 'The Lobby' videos on youtube - it's all there.

Notable quotes:
"... there is no anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. This was all hatched by the Netanyahu government in Jerusalem along with the Blairites. Watch the 4 al jazeera 'The Lobby' videos on youtube - it's all there. ..."
Dec 15, 2019 | www.truthdig.com

terryindorset11 hours ago ,

4 things: 1 = Farage did a deal with Johnson to field Brexit Party candidates in 300 odd seats Labour seats that the Tories targeted, to split the Labour vote. This is what did the damage. Johnson is going to give Farage a knightood for services to the Tory Party.

2 = that Labour didn't support the leave referendum vote was a wrong (actually catastrophic) descicion.

3 = advocating a second referendum vote igored the idea that the election was a second referendum.
2 & 3 hastened core Labour voters to go for Johnson's 'get brexit done' which is doesn't. It's Brexit in name only &, the UK will not leave the EU. Johnson is lying again

4 = there is no anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. This was all hatched by the Netanyahu government in Jerusalem along with the Blairites. Watch the 4 al jazeera 'The Lobby' videos on youtube - it's all there.

Russifier terryindorset8 hours ago ,

"It's Brexit in name only &, the UK will not leave the EU"
Would you like to elaborate on that?

John Kauai terryindorset10 hours ago ,

I appreciate your analysis. I did not understand the average Briton's [hatred | distrust | fear of] the E.U. Some examples would be nice. US media painted Brexit as a complete folly.

[Dec 15, 2019] The irony is that insisting that Israel is above criticism and deserves special treatment creates more genuine anti-Semites than any criticism of Israel ever could.

Dec 15, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com

>

AlmostNormalTexan 3 days ago
College students are free to protest the behavior of Russia without being labeled anti-Russian; they can protest the People's Republic of China without being accused of sinophobia.

Why does Israel need a special dispensation from this? If the argument is that any criticism of Israel for any reason is antisemitic, then you are essentially saying that Israel should be uniquely immune from criticism that every other country on earth is subject to.

Sid Finster AlmostNormalTexan 3 days ago
The irony is that insisting that Israel is above criticism and deserves special treatment creates more genuine anti-Semites than any criticism of Israel ever could.

[Dec 14, 2019] Financial oligarchy and Israel policies toward Palestinians provoke new wave of anti-Semitism, with each episode documented and used to suppress dissent against Zionism

Like in old times Jews are incorrectly equalized with the financial oligarchy as group and hated accordingly... The fact that they are overrepresented among financial oligarchy does not help iether. And the quote from the article: ""unique position to control the policy of nations There is not a war, a revolution, an anarchist assassination, or any other public shock, which is not gainful to these men; they are harpies who suck their gains from every new forced expenditure and every sudden disturbance of public credit." is fully applicable to financial oligarchy. In this sense Anti-Semitism is primitive and misguided form of the protest against the rule of financial oligarchy. The quote above is fully applicable to vulture financial capital and capitalists such as Romney and his Bain Capital, a private equity firm he helped co-found in 1984. The same is true about vulture hedge funds such as Elliott Management and Aurelius Capital Management and thier role in Argentina debut repayments (The final payout on the debt to the bondholders was negotiated at $6.5 billion. Which made Paul Singer something like "the enemy of the people of Agrentina" figure. Via Comcast they control MSNBC.
At the same time financial oligarchy now is much better organized, controls MSM, and uses Anti-Semitism as a smear to suppress political opponents like it was with Corbin in the UK. Even minor incidents are classified as a crime: "Over the last 12 months, there were 246 ­anti-Semitic crimes in the Big Apple, up from 144 over the previous 12 months. The number of anti-Semitic assaults jumped to 33 in 2018, up from 17 in 2017, and is on pace to rise again this year, with 19 in just the first half of the year."
Notable quotes:
"... one Labour member was told that the Jewish Labour Movement was "financed and controlled by the Israeli government." ..."
"... In 2016, at the Oxford University Labour Club, Auschwitz was described as "a cash cow." ..."
"... Jeremy Corbyn himself has written the foreword to the reissue of a 1902 book by J.A. Hobson that includes a chapter on Europe's financial and political life as controlled by "men of a single and peculiar race" who were in a "unique position to control the policy of nations There is not a war, a revolution, an anarchist assassination, or any other public shock, which is not gainful to these men; they are harpies who suck their gains from every new forced expenditure and every sudden disturbance of public credit." Corbyn praised the book as "a great tome" and "brilliant." He attacked the BBC in 2011 for being in thrall to those who believe the Jewish state "has a right to exist." Yet Corbyn still had the endorsement of the Guardian . Tony Blair told us he would vote for Corbyn's party -- despite 50 percent of British Jews saying they would "seriously consider" emigrating had Labour won the election. ..."
Dec 14, 2019 | nymag.com
The New Anti-Semitism

Here's a confession. For much of my adult life, I thought real anti-Semitism was dead in the West. Yes, I imagined it existed on the far fringes of both right and left. By real anti-Semitism, I should hasten to add, I don't mean criticism of Israel's policies of West Bank settlements or of the Israeli government's attempts to sabotage Barack Obama's foreign policy.

I mean the kind of conspiracy theories, slurs about money, and charges of dual loyalty that were once commonplace in mainstream Western discourse. Maybe it was because I grew up in an era that focused on the horrors of the Holocaust that it seemed unconscionable to me that people would ever bring up these old smears. Or because in Washington, I had become used to seeing how often any and all criticism of Israel was reflexively dismissed as anti-Semitic (I did work at The New Republic in the 1990s after all).

But I was wrong. This virus has returned like a deadly flu. The domestic terror attack on a kosher deli in Jersey City is yet another case in which terrifying Jewish Americans where they should feel perfectly at home -- a deli, a synagogue , a school -- has become a regular reality. This is Brooklyn in the fall of 2019:

On Friday night, surveillance video captured a man throwing a brick through the window of a Hasidic girls' school in Crown Heights. On the same night in the Borough Park neighborhood, at least three identifiably Orthodox men were punched by assailants . Also in Borough Park, multiple Orthodox Jews had eggs thrown at them over the weekend.

This is New York City as a whole:

Over the last 12 months, there were 246 ­anti-Semitic crimes in the Big Apple, up from 144 over the previous 12 months. The number of anti-Semitic assaults jumped to 33 in 2018, up from 17 in 2017, and is on pace to rise again this year, with 19 in just the first half of the year.

Among the incidents on the subway :

A June 13 incident in which a man screamed "Fuck all Jews" and "Kill all Jews" at a fellow straphanger -- before chucking the victim's phone onto the tracks. In March, a subway ad featuring the image of Ruth Bader Ginsburg was found with a swastika and "Die, Jew Bitch!" scrawled over the Jewish Supreme Court justice's face .

A friend of mine who was visiting London was spat on in broad daylight for wearing a kippa. In 2017, a 27-year-old Parisian deliberately tortured and murdered a 65-year-old teacher by throwing her out of her own window, because she said, "I felt persecuted. When I saw the Torah and a chandelier in her home I felt oppressed. I saw her face transforming." He was treated leniently by the judges because he had been smoking weed, and was alleged to have had a psychotic episode. No, I'm not making that up.

Bari Weiss has a comprehensive account of this surge of Jew-hatred. Among those Jew-haters is Bernie Sanders surrogate Linda Sarsour:

The part of her talk that circulated online focused on the apparent hypocrisy of progressive Zionists: How, Ms. Sarsour asked about people who are the No. 1 target of white supremacists, can they claim to oppose white supremacy when they support "a state like Israel that is built on supremacy, that is built on the idea that Jews are supreme to everybody else?"

In Britain, a formal complaint about anti-Semitism in the Labour Party from the Jewish Labour Movement was leaked last week. It makes for some sobering reading. Here are a few of the incidents these Jewish socialists have compiled: In March 2019 , a Labour councilor made a joke about "Jew process"; she also rewrote the "First they came for the Jews " trope to include "they came for the anti-Zionists"; one Jewish Labour member claims that at local Labour Party meetings, he was called "a Tory Jew," "Zio-scum," a "child killer," and told "to shut the fuck up, Jew" and "Hitler was right." One former Labour councilor was told to "go home and count your money"; one Labour member was told that the Jewish Labour Movement was "financed and controlled by the Israeli government." Two Labour delegates at the annual party conference in 2018 averred that Jews are "subhuman" and that "they should be grateful we don't force them to eat bacon at breakfast every day." These are in reports from Labour Party officials.

In the broader Labour movement, it's just as bad. In 2016, at the Oxford University Labour Club, Auschwitz was described as "a cash cow." Online, Jews have been described as "bent-nosed manipulative liars"; there have been claims that Zionists ran the Nazi death camps; and former Labour MP Luciana Berger was subjected to horrifying abuse in 2018, such as "we shall rid the Jews who are a cancer on all of us." Another Jewish Labour MP, Ruth Smeeth, was called a "yid cunt" and a "fucking traitor." Margaret Hodge MP has been described on pro-Corbyn Facebook pages as "Zionist bitch," a "zionist remedial cancer," "under orders from her paymasters in Israel." She has received abusively anti-Semitic emails, among which include the following: "Isn't better [sic] that troublemakers like yourself return to where you and your religion comes from. If you think about it in detail, your are the ones who are racist, by telling us what we must do to please you. We are in our homeland." And: "Your smear campaign in defense of a racist ethno-state would make Goebbels proud." It's striking how many Jewish women have experienced some of the worst anti-Semitic abuse.

The Labour Party leadership has been extremely slow in addressing these complaints -- countless are pending -- so that the Jewish Labour Movement has had to appeal to the Equality and Human Rights Commission. Jeremy Corbyn himself has written the foreword to the reissue of a 1902 book by J.A. Hobson that includes a chapter on Europe's financial and political life as controlled by "men of a single and peculiar race" who were in a "unique position to control the policy of nations There is not a war, a revolution, an anarchist assassination, or any other public shock, which is not gainful to these men; they are harpies who suck their gains from every new forced expenditure and every sudden disturbance of public credit." Corbyn praised the book as "a great tome" and "brilliant." He attacked the BBC in 2011 for being in thrall to those who believe the Jewish state "has a right to exist." Yet Corbyn still had the endorsement of the Guardian . Tony Blair told us he would vote for Corbyn's party -- despite 50 percent of British Jews saying they would "seriously consider" emigrating had Labour won the election.

To give a sense of how unseriously the rise in Jew-hating has been taken, look at what Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York said after the Jersey City news: "This confirms a sad truth, there is a crisis of anti-Semitism gripping this nation. And now this threat has reached the doorstep of New York City." Now? And on the doorstep? After the surge in anti-Semitic violence in the city for the past two years?

Why this relative indifference? Perhaps for the same reason I didn't see it coming: So many of us thought this kind of thing was done with, we dismissed some of this news from our minds. But perhaps too it is a function of the race of these particular anti-Semites. We easily recognize -- as we should -- the familiar and ugly anti-Semitism of the far right, which remains much more of a threat than the far left. There was a telling tweet by Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, when she first heard the Jersey City news: "This is heartbreaking. White Supremacy Kills." But the anti-Semitism of the Black Hebrew Israelite movement doesn't as well? Remember the last time the Black Israelites were in the news -- for taunting and lobbing racist insults at the white schoolboys from Covington. Adam Serwer, who sees white supremacy everywhere, reassured us that there was nothing really to see here: "Its members stand on crowded street corners with bullhorns and yell vile things, including racist, sexist, and homophobic slurs, at anyone who passes by. D.C. residents do not respond to these provocations with confrontation. They ignore them." If those same insults were delivered by members of the Klan on street corners, would Serwer have said the same thing?

And that helps expose how the social-justice movement has diminished anti-Semitism as a threat. Since racism has been redefined to mean "structural racism" -- as opposed to prejudice against others because of the color of their skin -- the Black Israelites or groups of young black men in Brooklyn as agents of bigotry doesn't compute for many of the woke. Under the new orthodoxy, people of color are almost by definition incapable of manifesting racial hatred, because it is merely a form of power. We were told by Tamika Mallory, former co-president of the Women's March, that "white Jews, as white people, uphold white supremacy." That is, Jews are victims but also victimizers according to these rules. The social-justice response to targeted murders of Jews qua Jews is thereby qualified.

This is not to deny that white supremacists are a much bigger threat overall. They are. We need many more resources to tackle them. But that does not help the Orthodox in Brooklyn or East London. We should know by now that anti-Semitism is a peculiarly resilient toxin, can infect anyone's soul, and can easily inhabit the minds of those on the left as well as on the right. Time to wake up, and take this poison seriously.

See you next Friday.

[Dec 14, 2019] The only anti-semitic thing I've seen has been the way the mainstream political/media class in both the US and UK have adopted the longstanding neo-Nazi claim that all Jews are Zionist agents and therefore one can't be anti-Zionist without being anti-Jew as such

Dec 14, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

snake , Dec 13 2019 18:59 utc | 86

The only anti-semitic thing I've seen has been the way the mainstream political/media class in both the US and UK have adopted the longstanding neo-Nazi claim that all Jews are Zionist agents and therefore one can't be anti-Zionist without being anti-Jew as such.by: Russ @ 57 yes, I agree give an example..
what i see is the Zionist are once again asking the masses to attack the Jews, just as the masses were asked to
Attack the Jews in Hitler's Germany.. its a divide and conquer world.
this is the story in America
This is the story in Iraq
The decision to settle large numbers of Jews in Palestine after the First World War was in my view one of the most disastrous ever taken by a British government. From that inevitably followed the Arab Revolt, the Nakba, and all the tragedy since. English Outsider @ 62 <=blackmail brought the British government assistance in using Jewish Immigration to occupy and take from the Ottoman their oil rich land. Certain oil companies were involved also.

[Dec 14, 2019] Donald Trump and Israel When Does a 'Passionate Attachment' Threaten National Security

Dec 12, 2019 | www.strategic-culture.org
The White House In his Farewell Address , of 1796 America's first president George Washington famously warned his fellow citizens that " a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification."

In today's United States, there is no more "passionate attachment" than that which exists with Israel. The tie that binds is assiduously cultivated by the media and the politically ambitious, so much so that the Jewish state is frequently referred to hyperbolically as America's best friend and closest ally. But Israel, with its own regional interests driving its policies, is in reality neither a friend nor an ally.

Politicians mired in the past like Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer can see no light between Israel and the United States. Pelosi has declared astonishingly that "I have said to people when they ask me if this Capitol crumbled to the ground, the one thing that would remain is our commitment to our aid and I don't even call it aid our cooperation with Israel. That's fundamental to who we are." Biden has repeatedly denounced any reduction in the ridiculously high level of military assistance given to Israel to convince it to modify its behavior as "bizarre," while Schumer has identified himself as the Jewish state's "shomer" or guardian in the US Senate.

Many members of the Democratic Party base are no longer enchanted by Israel and one would like to know what politicians like Biden and Pelosi really think about the Jewish state, but it is unlikely that that will ever be revealed. It is nevertheless clear that the adhesion to Israel by Democrats has been far overshadowed by the constant pandering to the Jewish state that has been the hallmark of the current administration of Donald J. Trump. To be sure, the musical chairs line-up of neo-conservatives that has included John Bolton, Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo has been unstinting in its praise of the malignant Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but it is the president himself who has raised the level of adoration to heights previously not observed coming out of the White House.

Donald Trump has overturned long standing foreign policy positions to favor Israel even more than has been the case hitherto. He withdrew from the nuclear pact with Iran, has moved the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, has recognized Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights, has declared the illegal settlements on the West Bank "not illegal," has cut off funding to the Palestinians and the United Nations and is sending signals that he will approve further moves by the Jewish state to annex much of the remaining Palestinian territory. Along the way, his Ambassador to Israel David Friedman has been making excuses for Israeli shooting of unarmed demonstrators and the everyday brutality inflicted on the hapless Palestinians.

Worse might even be coming, as Secretary of State Pompeo and Netanyahu have recently been discussing a formal defense pact which would obligate the United States to intervene on the side of Israel if it were to go to war, even if the war were initiated by the Jewish state. As Israel is now reportedly considering the value of a possible pre-emptive nuclear strike on Iran, the stakes could not be higher.

But as bad as all that is, nothing outdoes the speech delivered by Trump in Florida last Saturday in front of the Israeli American Council (IAC) National Summit. IAC is a basically right-wing group funded largely by Las Vegas casino multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who is also a close adviser to the president on the Middle East. Its annual gathering included 4,000 mostly well-heeled Israelis and American Jews who cheered and periodically chanted "four more years!" as the president was speaking.

Trump spoke for 45 minutes, most of which consisted of preening over how much he has done for Israel. But he also discussed Jews in America, saying that "We have to get the people of our country, of this country, to love Israel more, I have to tell you that. We have to do it. We have to get them to love Israel more. Because you have Jewish people that are great people -- they don't love Israel enough." He also said that his audience should be supporting him and not voting for Elizabeth Warren, whom he called "Pocahontas," saying "You're not going to vote for the wealth tax Let's take 100 percent of your wealth away."

There was considerable pushback almost immediately coming from Jewish groups and prominent individuals who saw Trump's words as classic borderline anti-Semitic tropes. Trump, who often speaks to Jewish audiences in the second person, saying "you" rather than "we," clearly sees the Jewish attachment to Israel as normal and acceptable, but there is an implicit second message about potential disloyalty to the United States. In August he said that American Jews who vote for Democrats show "either a total lack of knowledge or great disloyalty."

And Trump also is not reluctant to link Jews with money, a generally taboo subject that he has raised before, most particularly when he was campaigning and he told an audience of Jewish Republicans that "you're not going to support me because I don't want your money. You want to control your politicians, that's fine." And, of course, the irony is that everyone who has not been asleep knows very well that the Israel Lobby in the US and Europe is indeed all about money. Money buys access to power.

For someone who has spent much of his life around Jews in the New York business world, Donald Trump is remarkably ignorant of their political culture. To be sure there is a group of oligarch billionaires that includes Adelson, Paul Singer, Ron Lauder and Bernard Marcus who are politically conservative and fund Trump as well as other Republicans. They do so not because Trump is good for the United States but because he is a gift to Israel and can easily be bought or persuaded.

But most Jews, while supporting the existence of Israel, do not exactly see things quite that way and many Jews of a liberal persuasion want to see a secure Israel that will deliver justice for the Palestinians. Plus, Trump's authoritarianism and denigratory, abrasive style offend many Jews, so the president will not be getting many Jewish votes no matter what he does. His approval rating is 29% among Jewish voters nationwide , according to a Gallup poll while only 17% of Jews voted Republican in 2017. And one would have thought even the narcissistic president might have noticed the large number of Jewish witnesses, "experts" and congressmen who seem to be "out to get him" in the impeachment hearings.

Beyond that, Trump's constant exaltation of the Israelis and of Jews in general as something like a gift to humanity should offend all other Americans. The president is elected to represent the interests of all Americans, not just a wealthy and powerful ethno-religious minority that is able and willing to give him a great deal of money to run his political campaigns. It is unthinkable that a national politician should mount his bully pulpit to praise interminably any specific ethnic group, and so it should be. It is offensive and completely unacceptable, particularly as in this case it is a favor bought that brings with it grave damage to genuine US interests and could easily lead to a major war in which Americans will die.

Nevertheless, the painful issue of who is loyal to what is genuine, particularly when a dedicated and powerful group affiliated with a foreign country is able to game the system to get what it wants. We are all supposed to be Americans first. In her comment on the Trump speech, conservative pundit Ann Coulter maintained that the president didn't go far enough in impugning the loyalty of some Jews to Israel, writing, "Could we start slowly by getting them to like America?" Philip Giraldi December 12, 2019 | Featured Story Donald Trump and Israel: When Does a 'Passionate Attachment' Threaten National Security? In his Farewell Address , of 1796 America's first president George Washington famously warned his fellow citizens that " a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification."

In today's United States, there is no more "passionate attachment" than that which exists with Israel. The tie that binds is assiduously cultivated by the media and the politically ambitious, so much so that the Jewish state is frequently referred to hyperbolically as America's best friend and closest ally. But Israel, with its own regional interests driving its policies, is in reality neither a friend nor an ally.

Politicians mired in the past like Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer can see no light between Israel and the United States. Pelosi has declared astonishingly that "I have said to people when they ask me if this Capitol crumbled to the ground, the one thing that would remain is our commitment to our aid and I don't even call it aid our cooperation with Israel. That's fundamental to who we are." Biden has repeatedly denounced any reduction in the ridiculously high level of military assistance given to Israel to convince it to modify its behavior as "bizarre," while Schumer has identified himself as the Jewish state's "shomer" or guardian in the US Senate.

Many members of the Democratic Party base are no longer enchanted by Israel and one would like to know what politicians like Biden and Pelosi really think about the Jewish state, but it is unlikely that that will ever be revealed. It is nevertheless clear that the adhesion to Israel by Democrats has been far overshadowed by the constant pandering to the Jewish state that has been the hallmark of the current administration of Donald J. Trump. To be sure, the musical chairs line-up of neo-conservatives that has included John Bolton, Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo has been unstinting in its praise of the malignant Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but it is the president himself who has raised the level of adoration to heights previously not observed coming out of the White House.

Donald Trump has overturned long standing foreign policy positions to favor Israel even more than has been the case hitherto. He withdrew from the nuclear pact with Iran, has moved the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, has recognized Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights, has declared the illegal settlements on the West Bank "not illegal," has cut off funding to the Palestinians and the United Nations and is sending signals that he will approve further moves by the Jewish state to annex much of the remaining Palestinian territory. Along the way, his Ambassador to Israel David Friedman has been making excuses for Israeli shooting of unarmed demonstrators and the everyday brutality inflicted on the hapless Palestinians.

Worse might even be coming, as Secretary of State Pompeo and Netanyahu have recently been discussing a formal defense pact which would obligate the United States to intervene on the side of Israel if it were to go to war, even if the war were initiated by the Jewish state. As Israel is now reportedly considering the value of a possible pre-emptive nuclear strike on Iran, the stakes could not be higher.

But as bad as all that is, nothing outdoes the speech delivered by Trump in Florida last Saturday in front of the Israeli American Council (IAC) National Summit. IAC is a basically right-wing group funded largely by Las Vegas casino multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who is also a close adviser to the president on the Middle East. Its annual gathering included 4,000 mostly well-heeled Israelis and American Jews who cheered and periodically chanted "four more years!" as the president was speaking.

Trump spoke for 45 minutes, most of which consisted of preening over how much he has done for Israel. But he also discussed Jews in America, saying that "We have to get the people of our country, of this country, to love Israel more, I have to tell you that. We have to do it. We have to get them to love Israel more. Because you have Jewish people that are great people -- they don't love Israel enough." He also said that his audience should be supporting him and not voting for Elizabeth Warren, whom he called "Pocahontas," saying "You're not going to vote for the wealth tax Let's take 100 percent of your wealth away."

There was considerable pushback almost immediately coming from Jewish groups and prominent individuals who saw Trump's words as classic borderline anti-Semitic tropes. Trump, who often speaks to Jewish audiences in the second person, saying "you" rather than "we," clearly sees the Jewish attachment to Israel as normal and acceptable, but there is an implicit second message about potential disloyalty to the United States. In August he said that American Jews who vote for Democrats show "either a total lack of knowledge or great disloyalty."

And Trump also is not reluctant to link Jews with money, a generally taboo subject that he has raised before, most particularly when he was campaigning and he told an audience of Jewish Republicans that "you're not going to support me because I don't want your money. You want to control your politicians, that's fine." And, of course, the irony is that everyone who has not been asleep knows very well that the Israel Lobby in the US and Europe is indeed all about money. Money buys access to power.

For someone who has spent much of his life around Jews in the New York business world, Donald Trump is remarkably ignorant of their political culture. To be sure there is a group of oligarch billionaires that includes Adelson, Paul Singer, Ron Lauder and Bernard Marcus who are politically conservative and fund Trump as well as other Republicans. They do so not because Trump is good for the United States but because he is a gift to Israel and can easily be bought or persuaded.

But most Jews, while supporting the existence of Israel, do not exactly see things quite that way and many Jews of a liberal persuasion want to see a secure Israel that will deliver justice for the Palestinians. Plus, Trump's authoritarianism and denigratory, abrasive style offend many Jews, so the president will not be getting many Jewish votes no matter what he does. His approval rating is 29% among Jewish voters nationwide , according to a Gallup poll while only 17% of Jews voted Republican in 2017. And one would have thought even the narcissistic president might have noticed the large number of Jewish witnesses, "experts" and congressmen who seem to be "out to get him" in the impeachment hearings.

Beyond that, Trump's constant exaltation of the Israelis and of Jews in general as something like a gift to humanity should offend all other Americans. The president is elected to represent the interests of all Americans, not just a wealthy and powerful ethno-religious minority that is able and willing to give him a great deal of money to run his political campaigns. It is unthinkable that a national politician should mount his bully pulpit to praise interminably any specific ethnic group, and so it should be. It is offensive and completely unacceptable, particularly as in this case it is a favor bought that brings with it grave damage to genuine US interests and could easily lead to a major war in which Americans will die.

Nevertheless, the painful issue of who is loyal to what is genuine, particularly when a dedicated and powerful group affiliated with a foreign country is able to game the system to get what it wants. We are all supposed to be Americans first. In her comment on the Trump speech, conservative pundit Ann Coulter maintained that the president didn't go far enough in impugning the loyalty of some Jews to Israel, writing, "Could we start slowly by getting them to like America?"

2010 - 2019 | Strategic Culture Foundation | Republishing is welcomed with reference to Strategic Culture online journal www.strategic-culture.org . The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation. In his Farewell Address , of 1796 America's first president George Washington famously warned his fellow citizens that " a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification."

In today's United States, there is no more "passionate attachment" than that which exists with Israel. The tie that binds is assiduously cultivated by the media and the politically ambitious, so much so that the Jewish state is frequently referred to hyperbolically as America's best friend and closest ally. But Israel, with its own regional interests driving its policies, is in reality neither a friend nor an ally.

Politicians mired in the past like Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden and Chuck Schumer can see no light between Israel and the United States. Pelosi has declared astonishingly that "I have said to people when they ask me if this Capitol crumbled to the ground, the one thing that would remain is our commitment to our aid and I don't even call it aid our cooperation with Israel. That's fundamental to who we are." Biden has repeatedly denounced any reduction in the ridiculously high level of military assistance given to Israel to convince it to modify its behavior as "bizarre," while Schumer has identified himself as the Jewish state's "shomer" or guardian in the US Senate.

Many members of the Democratic Party base are no longer enchanted by Israel and one would like to know what politicians like Biden and Pelosi really think about the Jewish state, but it is unlikely that that will ever be revealed. It is nevertheless clear that the adhesion to Israel by Democrats has been far overshadowed by the constant pandering to the Jewish state that has been the hallmark of the current administration of Donald J. Trump. To be sure, the musical chairs line-up of neo-conservatives that has included John Bolton, Mike Pence and Mike Pompeo has been unstinting in its praise of the malignant Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but it is the president himself who has raised the level of adoration to heights previously not observed coming out of the White House.

Donald Trump has overturned long standing foreign policy positions to favor Israel even more than has been the case hitherto. He withdrew from the nuclear pact with Iran, has moved the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, has recognized Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights, has declared the illegal settlements on the West Bank "not illegal," has cut off funding to the Palestinians and the United Nations and is sending signals that he will approve further moves by the Jewish state to annex much of the remaining Palestinian territory. Along the way, his Ambassador to Israel David Friedman has been making excuses for Israeli shooting of unarmed demonstrators and the everyday brutality inflicted on the hapless Palestinians.

Worse might even be coming, as Secretary of State Pompeo and Netanyahu have recently been discussing a formal defense pact which would obligate the United States to intervene on the side of Israel if it were to go to war, even if the war were initiated by the Jewish state. As Israel is now reportedly considering the value of a possible pre-emptive nuclear strike on Iran, the stakes could not be higher.

But as bad as all that is, nothing outdoes the speech delivered by Trump in Florida last Saturday in front of the Israeli American Council (IAC) National Summit. IAC is a basically right-wing group funded largely by Las Vegas casino multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who is also a close adviser to the president on the Middle East. Its annual gathering included 4,000 mostly well-heeled Israelis and American Jews who cheered and periodically chanted "four more years!" as the president was speaking.

Trump spoke for 45 minutes, most of which consisted of preening over how much he has done for Israel. But he also discussed Jews in America, saying that "We have to get the people of our country, of this country, to love Israel more, I have to tell you that. We have to do it. We have to get them to love Israel more. Because you have Jewish people that are great people -- they don't love Israel enough." He also said that his audience should be supporting him and not voting for Elizabeth Warren, whom he called "Pocahontas," saying "You're not going to vote for the wealth tax Let's take 100 percent of your wealth away."

There was considerable pushback almost immediately coming from Jewish groups and prominent individuals who saw Trump's words as classic borderline anti-Semitic tropes. Trump, who often speaks to Jewish audiences in the second person, saying "you" rather than "we," clearly sees the Jewish attachment to Israel as normal and acceptable, but there is an implicit second message about potential disloyalty to the United States. In August he said that American Jews who vote for Democrats show "either a total lack of knowledge or great disloyalty."

And Trump also is not reluctant to link Jews with money, a generally taboo subject that he has raised before, most particularly when he was campaigning and he told an audience of Jewish Republicans that "you're not going to support me because I don't want your money. You want to control your politicians, that's fine." And, of course, the irony is that everyone who has not been asleep knows very well that the Israel Lobby in the US and Europe is indeed all about money. Money buys access to power.

For someone who has spent much of his life around Jews in the New York business world, Donald Trump is remarkably ignorant of their political culture. To be sure there is a group of oligarch billionaires that includes Adelson, Paul Singer, Ron Lauder and Bernard Marcus who are politically conservative and fund Trump as well as other Republicans. They do so not because Trump is good for the United States but because he is a gift to Israel and can easily be bought or persuaded.

But most Jews, while supporting the existence of Israel, do not exactly see things quite that way and many Jews of a liberal persuasion want to see a secure Israel that will deliver justice for the Palestinians. Plus, Trump's authoritarianism and denigratory, abrasive style offend many Jews, so the president will not be getting many Jewish votes no matter what he does. His approval rating is 29% among Jewish voters nationwide , according to a Gallup poll while only 17% of Jews voted Republican in 2017. And one would have thought even the narcissistic president might have noticed the large number of Jewish witnesses, "experts" and congressmen who seem to be "out to get him" in the impeachment hearings.

Beyond that, Trump's constant exaltation of the Israelis and of Jews in general as something like a gift to humanity should offend all other Americans. The president is elected to represent the interests of all Americans, not just a wealthy and powerful ethno-religious minority that is able and willing to give him a great deal of money to run his political campaigns. It is unthinkable that a national politician should mount his bully pulpit to praise interminably any specific ethnic group, and so it should be. It is offensive and completely unacceptable, particularly as in this case it is a favor bought that brings with it grave damage to genuine US interests and could easily lead to a major war in which Americans will die.

Nevertheless, the painful issue of who is loyal to what is genuine, particularly when a dedicated and powerful group affiliated with a foreign country is able to game the system to get what it wants. We are all supposed to be Americans first. In her comment on the Trump speech, conservative pundit Ann Coulter maintained that the president didn't go far enough in impugning the loyalty of some Jews to Israel, writing, "Could we start slowly by getting them to like America?"

The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.

[Dec 14, 2019] Spotlight on defense authorization bill: Saudi Arabia wins big with assist from Kushner

Dec 14, 2019 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

barrisj , December 13, 2019 at 3:35 pm

From al-Monitor's ME lobbying update note:

Spotlight on defense authorization bill: Saudi Arabia wins big with assist from Kushner

The White House secured a major reprieve for Saudi Arabia this week by convincing Congress to drop several provisions from its annual defense bill before the House passed it on Wednesday. The Senate is expected to vote on the bill next week. Gone are sanctions on key Saudi officials for the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi and restrictions on US support for Riyadh's campaign in Yemen. The New York Times reports that President Donald Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner – who reportedly maintains a direct WhatsApp line with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman – played a key role in the negotiations.

The United Arab Emirates also came out ahead as the final bill removes language taking aim at the $8 billion in emergency arms sales to Gulf countries that Trump authorized in May citing the threat of Iran. The UAE had lobbied against these provisions and also opposed calls for a report detailing the "military activities" of the UAE, Saudi Arabia and other international actors in Libya. . The final bill no longer singles out specific countries but still requires "a detailed description of the military activities of external actors" in the country.

https://linkst.al-monitor.com/view/5d1841f924c17c7feec17e30b8vfs.u9/46c21583

We always stick by our friends, through thick and thin and murder, and war crimes, and terrorism, and well, all of it. After all, what are friends for?

[Dec 14, 2019] I drafted the definition of antisemitism. Rightwing Jews are weaponizing it by Kenneth Stern

Notable quotes:
"... Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law and special adviser, wrote in the New York Times that the definition "makes clear [that] Anti-Zionism is antisemitism". ..."
Dec 14, 2019 | www.theguardian.com

Jared Kushner, the president's son-in-law and special adviser, wrote in the New York Times that the definition "makes clear [that] Anti-Zionism is antisemitism". I'm a Zionist. But on a college campus, where the purpose is to explore ideas, anti-Zionists have a right to free expression.

I suspect that if Kushner or I had been born into a Palestinian family displaced in 1948, we might have a different view of Zionism, and that need not be because we vilify Jews or think they conspire to harm humanity. Further, there's a debate inside the Jewish community whether being Jewish requires one to be a Zionist. I don't know if this question can be resolved, but it should frighten all Jews that the government is essentially defining the answer for us.

The real purpose of the executive order isn't to tip the scales in a few title VI cases, but rather the chilling effect. ZOA and other groups will hunt political speech with which they disagree, and threaten to bring legal cases. I'm worried administrators will now have a strong motivation to suppress, or at least condemn, political speech for fear of litigation. I'm worried that faculty, who can just as easily teach about Jewish life in 19th-century Poland or about modern Israel, will probably choose the former as safer. I'm worried that pro-Israel Jewish students and groups, who rightly complain when an occasional pro-Israel speaker is heckled, will get the reputation for using instruments of state to suppress their political opponents.

Antisemitism is a real issue, but too often people, both on the political right and political left, give it a pass if a person has the "right" view on Israel. Historically, antisemitism thrives best when leaders stoke the human capacity to define an "us" and a "them", and where the integrity of democratic institutions and norms (such as free speech) are under assault.

... ... ...

Kenneth Stern is the director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate, and the author of the forthcoming The Conflict Over the Conflict: The Israel/Palestine Campus Debate

[Dec 14, 2019] Sanders: it's very troubling to me that we are also seeing accusations of antisemitism used as a cynical political weapon against progressives.

Dec 14, 2019 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

integer , December 13, 2019 at 11:01 pm

Bernie Sanders Has a Big Jeremy Corbyn Problem Noah Rothman – Commentary Magazine

Corbyn rendered his party toxic. His penchant for standing in solidarity with terrorists and anti-Semites opened a seal out of which a cascade of anti-Jewish sentiments poured, engulfing his party in scandal. His brand of radical socialism was insufferably hidebound. His expressions of sympathy for history's greatest criminals were thoughtlessly dogmatic. The Labour Party under Corbyn drifted so far toward overt Jew-hatred that Britain's chief rabbi denounced the institution. The Archbishop of Canterbury agreed with that assessment, as did 85 percent of the country's Jews. There was no ambiguity here.

Sanders may be insulated from the charge that he shares these suspicious sentiments because he is Jewish, but this clear pattern raises some disturbing questions. It is incumbent on the press to ask them. To at least a degree, Sanders clearly evinces some of Corbyn's instincts on policy, but his affiliations suggest a similar tolerance for the radical left's occasionally anti-Semitic indulgences.

Plenue , December 13, 2019 at 11:17 pm

Not often that I see an article that is almost entirely comprised of outright lies.

integer , December 13, 2019 at 11:40 pm

Rothman's rant was published two days after the following article by Sanders:

How to Fight Antisemitism Bernie Sanders – Jewish Currents

Opposing antisemitism is a core value of progressivism. So it's very troubling to me that we are also seeing accusations of antisemitism used as a cynical political weapon against progressives. One of the most dangerous things Trump has done is to divide Americans by using false allegations of antisemitism, mostly regarding the US–Israel relationship. We should be very clear that it is not antisemitic to criticize the policies of the Israeli government.

Ending that occupation and enabling the Palestinians to have self-determination in an independent, democratic, economically viable state of their own is in the best interests of the United States, Israel, the Palestinians, and the region. My pride and admiration for Israel lives alongside my support for Palestinian freedom and independence. I reject the notion that there is any contradiction there. The forces fomenting antisemitism are the forces arrayed against oppressed people around the world, including Palestinians; the struggle against antisemitism is also the struggle for Palestinian freedom . I stand in solidarity with my friends in Israel, in Palestine, and around the world who are trying to resolve conflict, diminish hatred, and promote dialogue, cooperation, and understanding.

[emphasis mine]

[Dec 13, 2019] But Mr. Trump, Is Israel Lovable? by Sheldon Richman

Dec 12, 2019 | original.antiwar.com
Speaking before Sheldon Adelson's Israeli-American Council the other day, Trump took a shot at Jewish Americans who he says don't "love Israel enough."

"We have to get the people of our country, of this country, to love Israel more," Trump said . "We have to get them to love Israel more because you have people that are Jewish people, that are great people – they don't love Israel enough. You know that."

Typical of Trump, this is scatter-brained. He begins by talking about "the people of our country," which sounds like everyone, but ends up focusing on Jews who "don't love Israel enough." In either case, Trump talks rubbish.

First off, observe that although Trump stands accused of fomenting anti-Semitism by such remarks, he actually turns the loyalty issue upside-down. He doesn't say that some Jewish Americans are too loyal to Israel (presumably at the expense of America), which is what a classic anti-Semite would say, but that they are not loyal enough. Recall that he previously labeled Jews who vote for Democrats "disloyal." Disloyal to whom? Disloyal to Israel! We know this because he's criticized the Democratic Party for "defending [Reps. Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, who sympathize with the Palestinians] over the State of Israel." Trump's critics seem to overlook this twist because it doesn't fit their stock narrative.

But turning to the matter at hand, Trump now entitles us to ask: what's so lovable about Israel anyway? The modern state was founded through a campaign of ethnic cleansing – violent expulsion of Arabs, that is, non-Jews, from their long-held properties – and outright massacres and terrorism. For the next couple of decades it subjected those who avoided expulsion to martial law. Then in 1967 it conquered the remainder of Palestine, the West Bank and Gaza Strip, creating new refugees. Since then Israel has denied the inhabitants of those territories all rights while the Israeli occupiers built privileged Jewish-only settlements and otherwise usurped the land it acquired through aggressive force – contrary to morality and international law. The West Bank today resembles apartheid South Africa. But things are even worse in Gaza, a small, crowded piece of land under blockade that dissenting Israelis call a concentration camp and others euphemistically refer to as merely the world's largest open-air prison. Gaza consists largely of refugees from the 1947-48 ethnic cleansing and their families.

So, I ask again, what's lovable about Israel? Is it because Israel calls itself the nation-state of the Jewish people (whether or not they live or want to live there) and Jews were treated horribly by Christian Europe, culminating in the monstrous Nazi Judeocide? That doesn't make Israel lovable. It is accountable for its crimes against humanity in Palestine regardless of the atrocities Jews suffered elsewhere. Israel is not exempt from moral judgment.

As for Jewish Americans in particular not loving Israel enough, Trump has again stuffed his foot in his mouth, something so commonplace that most people don't notice it. Like other Americans, Jewish Americans are not obligated to love Israel. How could they be? They are not part of a supposed Jewish national people – they are Americans with a particular private religious faith (unless they are secular). If they wanted to become Israelis, they would have done so.

Israel, despite what it claims, cannot be the nation-state of all Jews everywhere (even atheists with Jewish mothers); it is the state only of its own Jewish citizens/nationals. The 25 percent of non-Jewish Israeli citizens unfortunately are out of luck, but then it shouldn't call itself a democracy. Jewish Americans have roots in many countries, yet no one would say they are obliged to love those places.

We may ask: what does today's state of Israel have to do with the Jewish creed, especially the universalism of the prophets? Little, really: Zionism was a secular movement that disparaged traditional and secularized Jews in Europe and America. Theodor Herzl et al. promised a new Jew in his own state, strong and hardy farmers and soldiers, unlike the frail bookish scholars and rootless "parasitic" financiers of the so-called "diaspora." (It wasn't a diaspora since the Judeans were not exiled by the Romans in 70 CE.) That's one reason Zionism was a minority movement for a long time.

No one is clear about what it means to be a Jewish state. True, you have to be a properly credentialed Jew to get the benefits the Israeli state offers, but that only means having a Jewish mother or being converted by an approved Orthdox rabbi. (Conservative and Reform converts need not apply.) Jews and non-Jews may not marry each other, but that is not a religious injunction for Israelis; rather it's a matter of secular (pseudo-)ethnic purity. It's feared that Israeli children of interfaith marriages are less likely than other children to identify as Jewish – but then what would happen to the "Jewish people's" state?

In fact, no Jewish national ethnicity exists to be kept pure, but many Israelis (who do constitute an Israeli ethnicity) don't accept that. Nevertheless, Jews worldwide are of virtually every ethnicity, culture, language group, and color, and despite what Israel's apologists say today, Hitler was wrong: there is no Jewish race (or gene or blood). Most Jews descend from the converts of many ethnicities -- Judaism was a wide-ranging proselytizing religion roughly from 200 BCE to 200 CE (and later) -- and most ancient Israelites, Judahites, Yehudis, and Judeans never left their homes, although many of their offspring converted to Christianity or Islam.

For the record, ancient kingdoms of Israel, Judah, Yehud, and Judea, according to the Old Testament, were no more lovable bastions of enlightenment than any other kingdom in the vicinity, what with their authoritarian monarchies, military conquests, genocides, Hebrew and gentile slave labor, animal and occasional human sacrifice, forced conversion of gentiles, suppression of religious pluralism among the Hebrews, and persecution and even capital punishment of sundry peaceful nonconformists, such as homosexuals and dissenters.

Moreover – and I wouldn't expect Trump to know this – there is a long and honorable tradition of Jewish anti-Zionism . It goes back to the days of Herzl, though his idea of a "return" to Canaan originated earlier with non-Jews for perhaps less-than-honorable reasons. On different grounds, Orthodox and Reform Jews vehemently opposed Herzl's movement. (See details on this and other matters discussed here in my book Coming to Palestine .) The Orthodox regarded the Zionists as charlatans because a "return" was not to occur until the Messiah appeared in order to redeem the sinful Jews; the Orthodox anti-Zionists did not regard any of the atheists running the Zionist movement as Messiahs – even if they had Jewish mothers.

The Reform shared that disdain for the Zionists and Zionism but on different grounds. First, they rejected the premise that the people around the world who profess Judaism constitute an exiled national people, race, or ethnicity. Judaism is just a religion, they said. Second, they objected to a country that would proclaim itself the nation-state of all the "Jewish people," including Jews who don't and won't live there. This, they said, would harm the Jewish citizens of other countries and the non-Jewish residents of Israel. Third, they knew that Palestine was not a "land without a people," and so they rejected the land theft and expulsion they knew would be required to make a Jewish state there. I would say the Reform were right. (The remnant of this movement resides at the American Council for Judaism .)

So, Mr. Trump, I can't see how Jewish Americans, who when surveyed rank justice high on their list social concerns, have an obligation to love Israel – or how this admonition from you, an enthusiast for Palestinian oppression, could possibly be taken seriously.

Sheldon Richman is the executive editor of The Libertarian Institute , senior fellow and chair of the trustees of the Center for a Stateless Society , and a contributing editor at Antiwar.com . He is the former senior editor at the Cato Institute and Institute for Humane Studies, former editor of The Freeman , published by the Foundation for Economic Education , and former vice president at the Future of Freedom Foundation . His latest book is Coming to Palestine .

[Dec 13, 2019] A lot of you are in the real estate business because I know you very well. You're brutal killers, not nice people at all

Dec 13, 2019 | www.veteranstoday.com

Ft. Lauderdale, FL – Dissociated Press

President Donald J. Trump, in a speech to The Organization of Eminent Jewish-American Magnates (TOEJAM), shocked his audience yesterday by vowing to "finish the job Hitler started."

"A lot of you are in the real estate business because I know you very well. You're brutal killers, not nice people at all," Trump said. "That's why, together, we can finish the job Hitler started."

Amid audible gasps, Trump continued: "By 'finish the job,' I mean the Greater Israel project. Did you know that without Hitler, Israel never would have existed? It was Hitler who signed the Transfer Agreement to send Jews to Palestine. He later became the Zionists' number one PR asset. Without Hitler and the Nazis, the world never would have allowed you, brutal killers, to slaughter and expel the Palestinians."

[Dec 13, 2019] Has Big Capital and the establishment ruling class not been, and does it not remain, significantly Jewish?

Dec 13, 2019 | www.theoccidentalobserver.net

November 20, 2019

Originally from: Slavoj Žižek's "Pervert's Guide" to anti-Semitism by Andrew Joyce, Ph.D.

... ... ...

In Paper Against Gold (1812), Cobbett expressed the belief that the concepts of paper money and the national debt were basically Jewish "tricks and connivances," endorsed by an aristocracy grown greedy and toothless. Initially a loyalist, Cobbett later came to the opinion that while the concept of aristocracy was not altogether bad or illegitimate, the British aristocracy had betrayed and exploited the people it was supposed to lead. That the aristocracy had given itself over to Jewish thought, through ties of blood and finance, was hinted most strongly in the Political Register of December 6 1817:

Let us, when they have the insolence to call us the 'lower orders,' prepare ourselves with useful knowledge, and let these insolent wretches marry amongst one another, 'till, like the Jews, they have all one and the same face, one and the same pair of eyes, and one and the same nose. Let them, if they can, prevent their footmen from bettering their blood and from reinforcing the limbs of their rickety race; and let us prepare for the day of their overthrow. They have challenged us to the combat. They have declared war against us .

Cobbett's views on finance capital and the ruling class can only be regarded as fiercely oppositional, and the same holds for such "infamous anti-Semites" as Wilhelm Marr , Adolf Stoecker , Georg Ritter von Schonerer , Pierre-Joseph Proudhon , and Alphonse Toussene l, all of whom combined a radical critique of Big Capital with opposition to the specific role of Jews in finance, culture, politics, and society. In fact, many of these figures articulated specific reasons as to why a separate and distinct critique of "Semitism" was required. A key feature of nineteenth century socialism was a strong anti-Semitism that rejected Jewish-Marxist claims to being part of "the people," and many anti-Jewish socialists portrayed such claims as opportunistic and cryptic strategies to secure power anew under the new form of government. One of the most memorable statements of the era in this regard is the French socialist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's remark that far from being genuine, Karl Marx was "the tapeworm of socialism." Proudhon (1809–1865), seen by many as the father of anarchism, regarded apparently socialist Jewish "allies" like Heinrich Heine as "nothing but secret spies" whose hidden agenda was merely to secure the continuation of age-old Jewish privileges and protections under the guise of a putative social justice. In light of the historical trajectory of anti-Jewish critique and the biographies of its major proponents, Žižek's assertion that anti-Semitism is merely a "fetish" that obstructs criticism of capitalism is simply unsustainable.

V. Jews, Big Capital, and the Ruling Class

Equally unsustainable is the implication that Big Capital and the establishment ruling class is not, and has not been, significantly Jewish over historical time. Žižek simplifies and caricatures the Middle Ages as a time when "the Jew emerged as the enemy, a parasitic intruder who disturbs the harmonious social edifice." Žižek obviously employs the term "harmonious social edifice" with skepticism and disdain, seeing the pre-existing order (that before the arrival of the Jews) as fraught with exploitation, tensions, and contradictions. In Žižek's framework then, Jews may be a chaotic capitalist force that enters Europe, but this was a Europe already experiencing chaotic capitalist forces, and therefore it would be irrational to blame Jews for anything arising from their emergence and expansion in Europe. What needs to be distinguished here is the distinction between what might be termed the organic development of finance in Europe, [18] and the exorbitant and often extremely negative developments ushered in by the arrival of the Jews and their subsequent special relationship with European elites and with capitalism itself.

The organic development of finance and class divisions in Europe is demonstrated in the evolution of feudalism as a result of the adoption of heavy cavalry by the Franks in the eighth century, with other, non-military, aspects of continental feudalism arising as the inevitable social repercussions of this change in military organization. [19] Since knights needed money, horses, servants, attendants, and freedom from all other non-military occupations, like tilling the soil, knighthood gradually became an upper-class affair. Increasing technological sophistication then made mounted warfare more and more expensive and caused knights to become more sharply distinguished from the ordinary peasant. It also caused free peasants to become less and less valuable as soldiers, and they therefore declined towards mere servitude. It was, therefore, in a sense inevitable that the new class of knights should become a landed aristocracy, and its members were thus in a sense destined to low-level jurisdiction of a semi-agricultural kind over their peasants. This situation really was, in a sense, a "harmonious social edifice" to the extent that it followed a clear logic and permitted these communities and their territories to be competitive in a rapidly changing military and geopolitical context. The ruling classes were obliged to adopt paternalistic practices in relation to the peasantry, and outright exploitation was rare since it could be dangerous and counterproductive in that it could provoke a mass uprising and thus damage militarily-valuable social cohesion. The social edifice was thus indeed "harmonious" in the sense that it was coordinated and balanced, and was generally beneficial to the organic national community.

The arrival of Jews in Europe undoubtedly created an imbalance in these class relations, and between the ruling class and the lower orders. Evidence of this imbalance in medieval Europe can be obtained both from surviving documentation and artefacts, and from analogous modern situations such as the the Great Romanian Peasant Revolt of 1907, during which Jewish intrusion into the existing quasi-feudal social arrangement ended in widespread rebellion and societal collapse due to the specific excesses of Jewish exploitation. The arrival of the Jews in Western Europe as a financial and geopolitical power can be dated to their ascent under the Carolingians in the ninth century, and possibly earlier in the Narbonne where they were noted as an extraordinarily wealthy class. In this development, the birth of formal, symbiotic relationships between Jews and self-interested European elites, we see a crucial fissure in European class relations. Jewish financiers entered into the harmonious social edifice as privileged and protected outsiders whose sole purpose was to accelerate and distort resource transfer between European classes, rendering internal class division less about communal efficiency than about personal gain. In this system, paternalism gave way to such situations as the permitted Jewish trade in Christian slaves (a key reason for the agitations for Agobard of Lyons) and widespread exploitative tax farming.

One of the great modern myths, a stroke of Jewish revisionist genius, is that Jews were forced into such practices by restrictive laws on the ownership of land, and certain other local contexts. This is historicist relativism at its most bankrupt and, thankfully, modern scholarship is slowly eroding such misrepresentations and outright falsehoods. Take, for example, the most recent edition of The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Religion , which states the "remarkable" fact that Jews

whether in Narbonne in 899 or Gironne in 922, in Trier in 919 or Worms in 1090, in Barcelona in 1053 or Toledo in 1222, or in early medieval England, were permitted to acquire and own land if they wished. Not only were Jews legally permitted to own land, they could acquire significant amounts (especially in Italy, southern Spain, southern and east-central France, and Germany); possessed fields, gardens, and vineyards; and owned, transferred, and mortgaged land holdings. They preferred to hire tenants, sharecroppers, and wage laborers to work their lands. For themselves, they chose the most skilled and profitable occupations, foremost money lending. [20]

Essentially then, we see the immediate and deliberate entrance of the Jews into European society at the level of knight, if not higher, but without any of the logic or benefits of the position of knight within the organic social edifice. The Jew in this new social order existed for no logical reason other than the personal enrichment of certain elites and the communal enrichment of the Jews themselves. This may be regarded as the first perversion of capitalism and the first true exploitation (excessive or unfair use of workers with no reason other than greed) of the serving class within this system.

Again, dispensing with historicist relativism, we can demonstrate the pattern of Jewish disruptive behaviors within capitalism with reference to analogous modern conditions. For example, the arenda system of late nineteenth- and early twentieth century-eastern Europe (especially Poland, Ukraine, and Romania) was remarkably similar to the feudal system of medieval Western Europe. The arenda system can be regarded as broadly harmonious until the mass influx of Jewish arendasi during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, which saw the Jews increasingly operate as tax farmers, property agents, customs agents, and loan merchants. Jewish monopoly in these roles prompted both the rapid commercialization of land and the expansion of Big Capital, both of which were intended by Jews to exclusively benefit their in-group. Since the existence of entire Jewish communities depended on exploitative capitalism, Jews fiercely contended for monopolies in key areas. For example , The Va'ad Medinat Lita (Lithuanian Jewish Council) twice passed a resolution supporting the lease of customs and taxes by Jews, stating: "We have openly seen the great danger deriving from the operation of customs in Gentile hands; for the customs to be in Jewish hands is a pivot on which everything (in commerce) turns, since thereby Jews may exert control."

Crucially, high Jewish position in the social hierarchy was not accompanied by paternalism of any kind. In fact, Jews are notable throughout history for their incredibly hostile and exploitative behaviors towards non-elite Europeans. Philip Eidelberg, a historian of the Great Romanian Peasant Revolt of 1907, describes how Jewish arendasi " exploited the estates more ruthlessly than the native Rumanian arendasi ." He continues by explaining that Jews were not interested in the long-term prosperity of estates or their workers, and often hiked rents to breaking point "even at the risk of eventually exhausting the available land and inventory." [21] In Rumania, Jews enjoyed monopolies, with Eidelberg demonstrating that Jewish bankers would decline to grant capital to any non-Jew wanting to enter this form of finance. [22] Thus, the Jews competed for profit solely with each other, ever-increasing the chokehold on their European peasantries. Eidelberg writes that "the result was a bidding spiral in which the peasant was the loser. In fact, it was just such a competition between the two greatest Jewish arendas families -- the Fischers and the Justers -- which was to help spark the 1907 revolt." [23]

Jews, of course, continue to occupy conspicuous roles in the worst and most exploitative aspects of capitalism. Jews have also continued to acquire land for exploitative purposes, the most interesting example being the Argentinian activities of the British Jewish oligarch Joe Lewis , a tax avoider and currency speculator who made his billions alongside George Soros when both gambled on the British pound sterling crashing out of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1992. As one commentator explains, "Soros' and Lewis' bet against the pound actually led to the pound crashing, after Soros ordered his hedge fund to " go for the jugular " and aggressively trade against the currency, thereby prompting its sharp devaluation. Though Soros is often called "the man who broke the Bank of England" as a result of the $1 billion in profits he made on that fateful day, Lewis is said to have made an even larger profit than Soros." While these Jews made billions, the British public suffered a rapid economic recession. Lewis didn't mind. He repeated the experiment in Mexico, causing the Mexican peso crisis , which "led to a massive jump in poverty, unemployment and inequality in Mexico and left its government beholden to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) through a loan package arranged by then-U.S. President Bill Clinton."

Growing extravagantly rich from parasitic currency speculation, Jewish oligarchs Soros and Lewis, together with co-ethnic Big Capitalists Eduardo Elsztain and Marcelo Mindlin, started buying massive tracts of Argentine real estate, particularly in Patagonia, where they pooled resources to take over local banks, the regional water supply, oil and gas wealth, and the area's largest energy supplier. Lewis then set about buying tens of thousands of hectares, declaring his wish to create "his own state in Patagonia." Some locals were willing to sell their land. One, Irineo Montero, had refused, and he, along with his wife María Ortiz and their employee José Matamala, were all found dead under mysterious circumstances. Lewis' land consolidation was then made complete, and paved the way for a Zionist enclave that has exploited locals so thoroughly that there have been regular massive demonstrations ("March for Sovereignty) against this new Jewish ruling class, attracting 80 percent of the local population. According to the research of former French intelligence officer turned journalist Thierry Meyssan, Lewis is much more amenable to his fellow Jews, and has been inviting thousands of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers to his territory annually. In late 2017, former French intelligence officer turned journalist Thierry Meyssan alleged : "Since the Falklands War, the Israeli army has been organizing 'holiday camps' in Patagonia for its soldiers. Between 8,000 and 10,000 of them now come every year to spend two weeks on Joe Lewis' land."

What we see here is just a very modern example of the millennia-old Jewish pattern of establishing full-scale operations for extracting a nation's riches and exploiting its people. We must earnestly ask of Slavoj Žižek: Has Big Capital and the establishment ruling class not been, and does it not remain, significantly Jewish?

[Dec 13, 2019] Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights bestows on everyone "the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference ";

Dec 13, 2019 | www.veteranstoday.com

Jeremy Corbyn, knifed by his senior lieutenants and failed by his media team, is on the danger list and now looks isolated.

At the fatal NEC (National Executive Committee) meeting this week to discuss whether the party should adopt the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism in full, with all its examples, he prepared and presented a 500-word statement to water down the definition but this met with an angry reaction from most NEC members and he dropped it.

According to the Guardian the most controversial passage in Corbyn's draft statement said: "It cannot be considered racist to treat Israel like any other state or assess its conduct against the standards of international law. Nor should it be regarded as antisemitic to describe Israel, its policies or the circumstances around its foundation as racist because of their discriminatory impact, or to support another settlement of the Israel-Palestine conflict."

That these words caused such a rumpus tells us all we need to know about the mentality of the modern Labour Party. It is surely self-evident that the Israel project was racist from the start and confirmation, if any were needed, is provided by the discriminatory nation state laws, emphasising Jewish supremacy, recently passed by the Knesset. Why deny the glaring truth? And last time I checked there was no 'settlement' of the Israel-Palestine conflict and the two-state idea endlessly talked about but never energetically pursued was stone-dead.

At the end of a stormy meeting the NEC accepted the IHRA definition and all its examples but added a statement "which ensures this will not in any way undermine freedom of expression on Israel or the rights of Palestinians."

But the Israel lobby were still not satisfied and renewed their whingeing. The Jewish Leadership Council's chief executive, Simon Johnson, said Corbyn had "attempted shamefully to undermine the entire IHRA definition", adding that the free speech caveat "drives a coach and horses" through that definition. "It is clearly more important to the Labour leader to protect the free speech of those who hate Israel than it is to protect the Jewish community from the real threats that it faces."

A false dichotomy of course. And if their case cannot withstand free speech it must have been bullsh*t in the first place.

Richard Angell, director of the centre-left Progress group, said : "The Jewish community made it clear and simple to Labour: pass the IHRA definition in full – no caveats, no compromises. Jeremy Corbyn and the Momentum-dominated NEC have just failed the most basic test. A 'right to be racist' protection when debating the Middle East is not just wrong, it harms the cause of peace but it will also continue a culture where Jewish people cannot feel at home in Labour."

Today's decision is an insult. Labour does not know better than Jewish people about antisemitism."

He was backed up by another Progress director, Jennifer Gerber, who is also a director of Friends of Israel. She said: "It is appalling that the Labour party has once again ignored the view clearly and repeatedly stated by the Jewish community: that it should adopt the full IHRA definition without additions, omissions or caveats.

"The IHRA definition has been adopted in full by 31 countries, including the UK, as well as over 130 UK local councils, the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the judiciary. A 'freedom of expression on Israel' clause is unnecessary and totally undermines the other examples the party has supposedly just adopted."

The recurring message is that free speech is a threat and doesn't seem to have a place in their world.

Re-frame anti-Semitism accurately – don't accept skewed version by the Israel lobby

So let's get this straight: DNA research confirms that the great majority of those calling themseves Jews are not of Semitic blood. So does anti-Semitism mean what it says? Shouldn't it mean that if we outlaw anti-Semitism we outlaw being nasty to the genuine Semites of the Holy Land, i.e. the indigenous people who include Palestinians whether Muslim, Christian or Jewish? And are they not terrorised and persecuted by the Israeli regime which is the chief perpetrator of anti-Semitism and which has oppressed, dispossessed, impoverished and slaughtered those people for 70 years?

Corbyn and his New Look Labour Party were in a position to lead a move to 'unskew' the definition of anti-Semitism and re-frame it accurately – with of course the help of the various campaign and BDS groups worldwide. But now they've effectively muzzled themselves.

And for some strange reason Corbyn and his team, throughout the unpleasant warfare in his party over anti-Semitism, completely ignored the warnings issued by legal experts Hugh Tomlinson QC, Geoffrey Robertson QC, Sir Stephen Sedley and others which explained how:

Robertson adds: "The Governments 'adoption' of the definition has no legal effect and does not oblige public bodies to take notice of it. The definition should not be adopted, and certainly should not be applied, by public bodies unless they are clear about Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights which is binding upon them, namely that they cannot ban speech or writing about Israel unless there is a real likelihood it will lead to violence or disorder or race hatred."

Crucially, freedom of expression applies not only to information or ideas that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive, but also to those that "offend, shock or disturb the State or any sector of the population" – unless they encourage violence, hatred or intolerance.

What's more, the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee recommended adoption of the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism subject to the inclusion of these two caveats :
(1) It is not antisemitic to criticise the Government of Israel, without additional evidence to suggest antisemitic intent.
(2) It is not antisemitic to hold the Israeli Government to the same standards as other liberal democracies, or to take a particular interest in the Israeli Government's policies or actions, without additional evidence to suggest antisemitic intent.

The Government in adopting the IHRA definition dropped these caveats saying they weren't necessary. But you'd expect that from an administration brazednly stuffed with members of the Zionist Tendency.

These top legal opinions are lethal ammunition. Had Corbyn and his media team deployed them to good effect the baying attack dogs would have been stopped in their tracks.
So the IHRA definition is not something a sane organisation would incorporate into its Code of Conduct – certainly not as it stands. It contravenes human rights and freedom of expression. But when did the admirers of apartheid Israel ever care about other people's rights?

© Stuart Littlewood, 6 September 2018

[Dec 13, 2019] Parlez-vous Anti-Semitism? by Stuart Littlewood

Dec 13, 2019 | www.veteranstoday.com

Stuart Littlewood in Great Britain on election day

[ Editor's Update: The BBC/Sky/ITV poll suggested the Conservative would win 368 seats, 42 above the 326 needed for an absolute majority in the House of Commons ]

– First published December 12, 2019 –

It's polling day in the UK. Right up to the last gasp so-called anti-Semitism has been used as a lethal weapon in this general election campaign. Ignorant and gullible people, supported by a mischievous mainstream media, have deployed it indiscriminately to trash Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour Party and to remove a number of candidates from the lists .

I have watched pushy TV reporters demanding to know if their quarry "has a problem with Jews". So how would you deal with an onslaught of media and even party slurs, assuming you aren't guilty as charged?

Do you have a problem with Jews?
Which Jews are you talking about?
Er, Jews in general
No.
Any particular Jews?
Yes.
Oh. Which ones then?
Israeli Jews.
Why?
Don't you know what's going on over there?
Umm
Go do your homework. I'm busy.

You are accused by your party of making anti-Semitic remarks. What do you say to that?
What anti-Semitic remarks?
They say you criticised the state of Israel
Wouldn't you, if you knew what's going on over there?
What do you mean?
Do your homework. I'm too busy to give you a history lesson.

Your leader has said repeatedly that anti-Semitism isn't tolerated. Yet you made anti-Semitic remarks about another party member.
Is he/she a Semite?

Er, Jewish anyway. That makes him a Semite.
Not necessarily. Very few Jews are Semites according to DNA research. On the other hand most Palestinians are. Are you saying my remarks were directed at someone I thought was a Palestinian? Now that would make a great story.

The IHRA [International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance] definition is what we must go on . blah, blah blah
The IHRA definition doesn't stand up.
Why do you say that?
Read Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 10 of the UK's own Human Rights Act 1998. I can express my views – so can you – even if we upset someone, as long as we're not stirring up hatred or inciting violence.
But if you criticise Israel you stir up Jew-hatred.
No, Israel's criminal behaviour towards our Palestinian friends – Christian and Muslim – is what stirs up Jew-hatred. The more savvy Israelis admit it.
But the IHRA definition is universally accepted
No it isn't. It's widely criticised. I'd suggest you read what top legal opinion such as Hugh Tomlinson QC, Sir Stephen Sedley and Geoffrey Robertson QC have to say.
So where does anti-Semitism come in?
It doesn't really. And here's the irony. DNA research – for instance that done by Johns Hopkins University and published by Oxford University Press – found that only a tiny proportion of Jews are Semitic. Very few have ancestral links to the Holy Land, whereas most indigenous Arabs, especially Palestinians, are proper Semites.

Have those findings been refuted? If not, the real anti-Semites would seem to be the non-Semitic Israeli Jews with their hatred and oppression of the Palestinians – including the Christian communities. If you're so hot on anti-Semitism why not go after them?

What about the Jewish community in the UK? We are told they are fearful and thinking of leaving.
The Jews I know have integrated and prospered here. They love it and wouldn't want to be anywhere else.

Are you saying they are not fearful?
There's a noisy Zionist hardcore that supports the Israeli regime and claims to speak for British Jews. They make the Jewish community nervous about a backlash. Fortunately an increasing number of Jews oppose Israel and its brutal policies and actively campaign for Palestinian freedom from Israel's military occupation. This is admirable but means the hardcore Israel flag-wavers are getting more and more hysterical.

The Labour Party is under investigation for anti-Jewish racism. Isn't it shocking? What do you say to that?
The Equalities and Human Rights Commission is investigating to see if the party has committed any unlawful acts or failed to deal with complaints in a proper and effective manner. It says it may have regard to the IHRA working definition of anti-Semitism and associated examples "while recognising it is a non-legally binding definition".

So it looks bad for the Labour Party.
The party certainly has some explaining to do, especially the excessive time it takes to investigate and set up hearings and its policy of suspending the accused before checking the truth of the allegations. It must do better. But I suspect the general public are getting bored with the whole subject. And so am I.

Stuart Littlewood
12 December 2019

[Dec 13, 2019] Note on political activism of Zionist billionaires

All pigs are equal, but some are more equal then other...
Dec 13, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Jewish hedge fund manager Henry Laufer keeps a low profile.

Laufer and his business partner Jim Simons burned $14 million on Hillary Clinton in 2016. He is currently spending $2.8 million on figures like Nancy Pelosi and disgraced, corrupt Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz's re-election campaign.

The Laufers are also generous patrons of Media Matters for America, the anti-free speech organization that has made multiple attempts to get Tucker Carlson off the air.

Paul Singer [***] (GOP)

If you're wondering why so many prominent conservative figures are **** stars and homosexuals, it's all downstream from international *** Paul Singer.

Singer, who puts the "vulture" in "vulture capitalist," is one of the country's top funders of homosexual activism and the reason the Republican party did not fight against gay marriage. He was instrumental in paying to obtain the infamous "Steele Dossier," which falsely claimed Donald Trump was being blackmailed by Vladimir Putin with video of prostitutes urinating on him in Russia. He has a wide array of politicians, journalists and other influential people in his pocket, largely dedicated to pushing hawkish Israel policies, homosexuality and discrediting critics of capitalism .

Going into 2020, the hedge fund oligarch is pouring $3.4 million dollars into Lindsey Graham's PAC , the WFW Fund (dedicated to financing female conservatives) and the American Unity PAC (a group dedicated to advancing homosexual activists inside the Republican party).


SpeechFreedom , 6 hours ago link

While the JEWS that run and own google decide your fate, their *** buddies are doing this to your U.S. political system:

'Zionist Money Already Corrupting the 2020 Elections'

by Eric Striker

"WATCHING THE last Democratic debate, you would think the candidates were vying for an electorate that is 90% Black and illegal alien.

Issues like jobs, infrastructure, even foreign policy were largely ignored.

The [***] parasites in the shadows making a mockery out of representative democracy have good reason to be confident: they are already starting to corrupt the 2020 elections.

Open Secrets analyzed the most recent donor data for the top 10 political donors going into next year's first quarter.

Unsurprisingly, 8 out of 10 of these fat cats are Jews.

Henry and Marsha Laufer [JEWS] (Democrat)

Jewish hedge fund manager Henry Laufer keeps a low profile.

Laufer and his business partner Jim Simons burned $14 million on Hillary Clinton in 2016.

He is currently spending $2.8 million on figures like Nancy Pelosi and disgraced, corrupt Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz's re-election campaign.

The Laufers are also generous patrons of Media Matters for America, the anti-free speech organization that has made multiple attempts to get Tucker Carlson off the air.

Karla Jurvetson [***] (Democrat)

Jurvetson, whose real surname is Tinklenberg, is a physician who recently divorced billionaire Steve Jurvetson.

Her ex-husband is a big player in Silicon Valley, known for hosting drug-fueled orgies where mentally disturbed tech CEOs dress up like bunny rabbits.

Paul Singer [***] (GOP)

If you're wondering why so many prominent conservative figures are **** stars and homosexuals, it's all downstream from international *** Paul Singer.

Singer, who puts the "vulture" in "vulture capitalist," is one of the country's top funders of homosexual activism and the reason the Republican party did not fight against gay marriage. He was instrumental in paying to obtain the infamous "Steele Dossier," which falsely claimed Donald Trump was being blackmailed by Vladimir Putin with video of prostitutes urinating on him in Russia. He has a wide array of politicians, journalists and other influential people in his pocket, largely dedicated to pushing hawkish Israel policies, homosexuality and discrediting critics of capitalism .

Going into 2020, the hedge fund oligarch is pouring $3.4 million dollars into Lindsey Graham's PAC , the WFW Fund (dedicated to financing female conservatives) and the American Unity PAC (a group dedicated to advancing homosexual activists inside the Republican party).

Deborah Simon [***] (Democrat)

The *** Simon inherited her money from her property development father, Melvin Simon, of Simon Property Group. The elder Simon was the subject of multiple lawsuits when he ripped off his shareholders and paid himself a $120 million dollar bonus.

Deborah has so far spent $3.5 million dollars on various Democratic PACs, including $1 million dedicated to bankrolling David Brock's operations.

Bernard Marcus [***] (GOP)

Bernard Marcus, the Jewish emigre who founded Home Depot, was one of the a handful of billionaires to give Donald Trump big donations during his 2016 presidential run.

Now, Zionist activist Marcus has set aside $4.6 million dollars to keep Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, both up for re-election in 2020, in his pocket.

George Soros [***] (Democrat)

Soros is one of many Jewish finance-capitalists corrupting our politics. He spent $20 million during the 2016 election.

Today, Soros looks to be the big fish in small bowls by targeting prosecutorial races. This is dangerous, as few people pay much attention to District Attorney races, even though these figures have the power to put innocent people in prison and let guilty people go free.

The $5.1 million he's utilizing this quarter have all gone to his new "Democracy PAC," which played a major role in getting extremist prosecutors elected in Virginia. Soros also famously provided $1.7 million dollars to fellow *** Larry Krasner, who ran for prosecutor in Philadelphia as a literal supporter of Black Lives Matter.

Superficially these elections are low stakes, so even a few hundred thousands dollars can guarantee a landslide victory for the most absurd and extreme candidates. Soros' money going into 2020 promise to accelerate the US judicial system's decline into anarcho-tyranny .

Tom Steyer [***] (Democrat)

Steyer is yet another Jewish hedgefund manager with a penchant for lavish political spending.

Steyer funds countless neo-liberal think-tanks and Democratic party causes. Now, he is planning to blow $100 million on his highly unpopular presidential run.

This billionaire who made much of his money in the coal industry is now primarily pushing climate change , which is really just austerity through the backdoor . This quarter, he has spent $6.5 million on his own Super PAC, NextGen Climate Action.

Donald Sussman [***] (Democrat)

This hedgefund *** leads in donations during this period.

Sussman is Paul Singer's former business partner and played a major role in the billionaire cabal that tried to win the Democrats the whole Congress in 2018.

He is giving $7.5 million to various Democratic party PACs, and has a special interest in Cory Booker's flagging campaign -- currently polling at 3%.

yungmiwong , 7 hours ago link

Please think about it, folks. These companies thrive on H1B Visas and foreign talent. With the social power invested in these companies, the foreign-born employees create yet another conduit of foreign election influence.

pitz , 7 hours ago link

The H-1Bs have ruined the industry. So much American talent is underemployed or unemployed simply because they can't get noticed amidst the oceans of foreign nationals.

Epstein101 , 10 hours ago link

Big Tech Oligarchs' Best Tool for Censoring the Internet: The Jewish ADL

The so-called "Anti-Defamation League," like every Jewish interest group, doesn't practice what it preaches. In fact, the ADL under CEO Johnathan Greenblatt is one of the main organizations working to defame its political enemies and to censor free speech online. Their cause? As usual, securing Jewish ethnic interests.

Fluff The Cat , 9 hours ago link

This is what it all boils down to in the end. All the censorship is at the behest of the ADL and crony CEOs (mostly Jewish) working in tandem to attack free speech on the internet...

[Dec 12, 2019] Paul Singer Funded Washington Free Beacon Behind Initial Fusion GPS Trump Effort by Adam Shaw

Notable quotes:
"... The Washington Examiner first reported Friday that lawyers for the Free Beacon -- a conservative outlet based in the nation's capital -- funded the project from fall 2015 to spring 2016, when it pulled its funding as Trump looked set to clinch the nomination. ..."
"... Washington Free Beacon ..."
"... After the Democrats took over funding of the operation in mid-2016, Fusion GPS would hire former British spy Christopher Steele and would lead to the production of the so-called "Trump dossier," filled with salacious but unconfirmed claims about how Trump was compromised by the Russians. ..."
"... The Free Beacon noted in its statement that it had "no knowledge of or connection to the Steele dossier, did not pay for the dossier, and never had contact with, knowledge of, or provided payment for any work performed by Christopher Steele." ..."
"... The Free Beacon is funded in large part by the New York hedge fund billionaire and major GOP donor Paul Singer. The New York Times reports that Singer initially supported Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) for the Republican nomination, but later spearheaded a campaign to deny Trump the nomination even after Rubio dropped out of the race. ..."
"... While supporting Republican establishment favorites such as Rubio and 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney, Singer was a major backer of Common Core and was the founder of a super-PAC that has the express purpose of turning the GOP pro-gay marriage. ..."
"... Kristol is also the founder of the Weekly Standard, which like the Free Beacon has a neoconservative foreign policy outlook. The Free Beacon was co-founded by two former Weekly Standard writers, chairman Michael Goldfarb and editor-in-chief Matthew Continetti. ..."
Oct 27, 2017 | www.breitbart.com

The Washington Free Beacon, funded by GOP mega-donor Paul Singer, was the original funder of Fusion GPS' research project that attempted to dig up dirt on then-candidate Donald Trump -- a project that would later be funded by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's campaign.

The Washington Examiner first reported Friday that lawyers for the Free Beacon -- a conservative outlet based in the nation's capital -- funded the project from fall 2015 to spring 2016, when it pulled its funding as Trump looked set to clinch the nomination.

Lawyers for the Free Beacon informed the House Intelligence Committee of its role in the funding on Friday. The outlet issued a statement standing by its decision to fund the project:

Since its launch in February of 2012, the Washington Free Beacon has retained third party firms to conduct research on many individuals and institutions of interest to us and our readers. In that capacity, during the 2016 election cycle we retained Fusion GPS to provide research on multiple candidates in the Republican presidential primary, just as we retained other firms to assist in our research into Hillary Clinton.

After the Democrats took over funding of the operation in mid-2016, Fusion GPS would hire former British spy Christopher Steele and would lead to the production of the so-called "Trump dossier," filled with salacious but unconfirmed claims about how Trump was compromised by the Russians.

Fusion has come under scrutiny for its alleged ties to Russia, including the fact that many of the claims originate from Kremlin sources -- meaning that the information came from inside the Russian government.

The Free Beacon noted in its statement that it had "no knowledge of or connection to the Steele dossier, did not pay for the dossier, and never had contact with, knowledge of, or provided payment for any work performed by Christopher Steele."

"The Washington Free Beacon has issued a statement asserting that it had no involvement with Christopher Steele or the dossier he compiled from Russian sources," Jack Langer, spokesman for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, told Breitbart News. "The Beacon has agreed to cooperate with the House Intelligence Committee to help the Committee verify this assertion."

Yet, the revelation is likely to fuel questions about the role the so-called "Never Trump" movement played in an effort that would eventually inflict damage on President Trump, and that was possibly part of a Russian misinformation scheme.

The Free Beacon is funded in large part by the New York hedge fund billionaire and major GOP donor Paul Singer. The New York Times reports that Singer initially supported Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) for the Republican nomination, but later spearheaded a campaign to deny Trump the nomination even after Rubio dropped out of the race.

While supporting Republican establishment favorites such as Rubio and 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney, Singer was a major backer of Common Core and was the founder of a super-PAC that has the express purpose of turning the GOP pro-gay marriage.

The Examiner reports that the Free Beacon was originally part of the 501(c)(4) tax-exempt organization -- the Center for American Freedom -- but in 2014 became a for-profit organization. The Center's original board of directors includes William Kristol, a prominent "Never Trump" activist.

Kristol is also the founder of the Weekly Standard, which like the Free Beacon has a neoconservative foreign policy outlook. The Free Beacon was co-founded by two former Weekly Standard writers, chairman Michael Goldfarb and editor-in-chief Matthew Continetti.

***Update***

"The Washington Free Beacon has issued a statement asserting that it had no involvement with Christopher Steele or the dossier he compiled from Russian sources," Jack Langer, spokesman for the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, told Breitbart News. "The Beacon has agreed to cooperate with the House Intelligence Committee to help the Committee verify this assertion."

TrumpAlways 2 years ago • edited I smell McCain. Anyone else smell McCain with a little bit of Bush in there...

[Dec 12, 2019] Trump Signs Order Interpreting Judaism as a Nationality and Race

the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) definition of anti-Semitism the official guideline for Title VI is as following "Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities." So this hatred against certain ethnic category. Much like Russophobia. Looks pretty reasonable to me. For example, claiming that Paul Singer is a criminal financial racketeer is not anti-Semitism, because Romney is not that different.
The Washington Free Beacon, funded by GOP mega-donor Paul Singer, was the original funder of Fusion GPS’ research project that attempted to dig up dirt on then-candidate Donald Trump — a project that would later be funded by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Paul Singer-Funded Washington Free Beacon Behind Initial Fusion GPS Trump Effort
Notable quotes:
"... The order will effectively interpret Judaism as a race or nationality, not just a religion, to prompt a federal law penalizing colleges and universities deemed to be shirking their responsibility to foster an open climate for minority students. ..."
"... But the IHRA is hotly disputed. The State Department has adopted it but critics say it is too vague and all-encompassing, and can be a trap for honest critics of Israel's domestic and foreign policies. For example, it describes as anti-Semitic "denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination" under some circumstances, and offers as an example of such behavior "claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor." ..."
Dec 12, 2019 | www.theamericanconservative.com

With his son-in-law and senior advisor Jared Kushner hovering inches behind him, President Trump signed an executive order Wednesday that interprets Judaism as a nationality or race and religion so that the federal government can threaten to withhold funds from schools deemed to be fostering anti-semitism in school activities, programs, curricula and classrooms. What it really will do is put a chill on speech, as skittish administrations shut down protests, screen speakers, and monitor classrooms for unsanctioned criticisms against Israel.

"It is a game changer," said Trump legal advisor Alan Dershowitz who along with Kushner promoted the plan to Trump. "One of the most important events in the 2,000-year battle against anti-Semitism."

12/11/19, 11:42 A.M.: President Trump is expected to sign an executive order that will effectively put a chill on BDS (Boycott Divestment Sanction) campaigns or any other campus protests against Israel's treatment of Palestinians, illegal settlements, or U.S.-Israel foreign policy.

As The New York Times reported last night:

The order will effectively interpret Judaism as a race or nationality, not just a religion, to prompt a federal law penalizing colleges and universities deemed to be shirking their responsibility to foster an open climate for minority students.

Currently, Title VI prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color and national origin. By declaring Judaism a nationality rather than religion, it puts it under the rubric of federal protection, unlocking all sorts of tools for the school to shut down speech. As of this writing, however, Jewish Insider claims to have a copy of the executive order and says, contra to the NYT, there is no mention of national origin in it.

Nevertheless, the order as being reported will allow the federal government to force schools to restrict protests and monitor speech and curriculum in the classroom. For example, if there is an active BDS organization on campus or ongoing protest against the lockdown of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, it might be deemed anti-Semitic and the Department of Education could threaten a withdrawal of financial assistance to the school. This goes, perhaps more importantly, to courses and professors that are accused of being "anti-Semitic." We can see where this is going. From the Jerusalem Post :

A senior administration official said on Tuesday that antisemitism on campuses is often hidden in an anti-Israel agenda. If campuses that receive money from the government adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism in cases of discrimination, students who will feel that they are being bullied on college campuses would be able to complain to their institution's administration, who will then need to decide if the incident is considered antisemitic.

Trump's order would make the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) definition of anti-Semitism the official guideline for Title VI.

But the IHRA is hotly disputed. The State Department has adopted it but critics say it is too vague and all-encompassing, and can be a trap for honest critics of Israel's domestic and foreign policies. For example, it describes as anti-Semitic "denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination" under some circumstances, and offers as an example of such behavior "claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor."

The White House's latest move, if fulfilled, is a huge victory for pro-Israel organizations here in the United States that, according to Forward magazine has been funneling tens of millions of dollars into combating constitutionally protected boycotts on school campuses and in American states.

Not only well-funded by groups like AIPAC, according to Forward, these pro-Israel campaigns use social media bird-dogging and rapid response strikes against student governments and planned demonstrations and other measures to cast the pro-Palestinian protests as anti-Semitic. In the states, they've convinced lawmakers and governments to pass laws that would require any companies and individuals working for the government to sign "contracts" or other affidavits declaring that they would never boycott Israeli companies or be denied work. These laws have been overturned by multiple courts as unconstitutional.

Nevertheless, afraid of the "anti-Semitic" taint, federal and state elected officials have not only continued to pass these laws, but have proposed criminal charges against offenders. The issue has riven the Democratic party, with pro-Palestinian and free speech proponents on one side, and pro-Israeli advocates (joining all but a few Republicans) on the other. The often raucous BDS debate has quieted down from earlier this year, when Rep. Ilhan Omar was forced to apologize for her own comments when criticizing the anti-boycott laws, but Trump is sure to re-invigorate things now.

Meanwhile, a slow-burn smear campaign has begun against 2020 candidate Bernie Sanders, who is Jewish, and who has also spoken out against what he calls are attacks against BDS and free speech. In this outrageous Federalist piece yesterday, Melissa Langsam Braunstein, "a former U.S. Department of State speechwriter," suggests Sanders is "associating with antisemites," ignoring "far-left" and "Islamist" anti-Semitism, and employing secret anti-Semites on his staff. Again, criticism of Israel's Palestinian policies and supporting people who support the boycotts seem to be the core definition of Bernie's burgeoning anti-Semitism here.

This is should be an alarming sign for anyone, but it may be worse for Bernie. He is up in the polls, which makes him a target. He is also an avowed socialist who has been openly against the anti-boycott movement on Capitol Hill. In addition, he could suffer the same slings and arrows that his compatriot Jeremy Corbyn is taking across the pond. The Labor Party leader and candidate for prime minister has been accused of being personally anti-Semitic for his criticism of Israel and his entire party criticized for fostering a "culture of anti-Semitism" and not taking serious various formal complaints against it. Read this whole Atlantic piece for the details, but the money passage for our purposes is here:

Disproportionate hatred of Israel is one strand of left-wing anti-Semitism. The other is the conspiracist turn, turbocharged by social media, which gains succor from attacks on "the elite," "the 1 percent," "the mainstream media," and "billionaires." Corbyn has made such attacks a key part of Labour's appeal, adopting the slogan "For the many, not the few." The trouble is that while all of these are superficially innocent phrases -- as well as useful ways of describing a world in which wealth and opportunities are unequally distributed -- it is clear that some supporters hear them as a dog whistle

This is Sanders' platform, too. Heck it is a critical part of Elizabeth Warren's and President Trump's appeal. If this kind of populism–and to be sure I am not talking about the Reddit "turbo charged" racist conspiracy driven memes that we all know are out there -- is to be deemed "a dog whistle," we may all be accused of anti-Semitism before the year is done.


Phil Jester 15 hours ago

It's wonderful when people hold onto their culture and heritage. The idea of "melting pot" wasn't some kind of blast furnace that stripped immigrants of their past, but rather a blending of the many different cultures that created something uniquely American.

To be an American doesn't mean abandoning caring about your homeland - but it does mean that you should prioritize the success and prosperity of your fellow Americans more than you do the success and prosperity of those in the land you left behind.

The implication of labeling Judaism a nationality (and the implicit tying that to Zionism) is that American Jews owe their first loyalty not to fellow Americans ... but to Judaism, and by the associative property, to Israeli Jews.

A very dangerous path for American Jews to trod, as history has shown repeatedly.

The ironic thing here is that Trump is managing to play to three different bases here
- to the most conservative Zionist Jews in America
- to Evangelical Christians who are happy to have a cudgel to use in their battle against those who don't embrace the idea of a Judeo-Christian America, and
- to White Nationalists who themselves don't consider Jews to be part of "White Culture" and will enjoy referring to a Federal declaration of Jewish otherness

Steve Naidamast Phil Jester 12 hours ago
As one writer succinctly put it, a lot of these endeavors are indicators that the influence and power of the Jewish elite is slowly and irreversibly diminishing.

The Orange Moron can do anything he wants in this vein but it will most likely only speed up what is already in motion...

pensword 12 hours ago
we may all be accused of anti-Semitism before the year is done

When an American vessel in neutral waters was deliberately attacked by Israel in 1967, all subsequent investigation of the attack was whitewashed and the survivors threatened with imprisonment. Nothing has been done to restore the dignity of the veterans.

When the late Paul Findley compiled copious evidence of Israel's stranglehold on institutions of government and education, using a fringe publishing house to present his findings, which enjoyed 9 weeks on the Washington Post 's bestseller list, nothing was done to forestall the Lobby's influence.

When the FBI held tens of Israeli nationals engaged in suspicious activity in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, subjecting them to polygraph tests which some failed, Richard Armitage and Alan Dershowitz applied
political pressure to free them and send them packing to Israel. Nothing more was done.

When professors Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer provided a thoroughly documented analysis of Israel's headlock on American foreign policy, proving that it was Israel who drew us into the current Middle Eastern quagmire, nothing was done to forestall the Lobby's influence.

And now Israel, applying its usual pressure in Washington, wants Americans to fight yet another war on its behalf, this time against Iran, who has done nothing to America since the 1970s.

If you discuss these plain-as-day, readily available facts, you're called an "anti-Semite" and a "Nazi." If you want to discuss them on YouTube, you risk being demonetized or deplatformed. If you raise the topics in the public square, you're certain to confront censure, if not unemployment.

And, however much one may naively regard some claims as "conspiratorial," these phenomena are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

You had better get used to it. Free speech isn't free and there's one group in America that's more interested in eliminating it than any other.

Of course, mentioning this is "anti-Semitic" as well.

cka2nd 11 hours ago
I was just telling a friend that the "Bernie is a self-hating Jew" meme was right around the corner, and Kelly has just confirmed it.
Zgler 10 hours ago
Trump is first and foremost pandering to his evangelical Christian supporters and a few rich Jewish donors here. He doesn't care that he feeds into anti-semitism by implying that Jewish Americans identify with Israel rather than the U.S. Most Jewish Americans won't vote for him (he has almost a 70% dis-approval rating with Jews in the U.S.). He's also toadying to Netanyahu, who he identifies with. Netanyahu is continually under investigation for corruption.
AlmostNormalTexan 10 hours ago
College students are free to protest the behavior of Russia without being labeled anti-Russian; they can protest the People's Republic of China without being accused of sinophobia.

Why does Israel need a special dispensation from this? If the argument is that any criticism of Israel for any reason is antisemitic, then you are essentially saying that Israel should be uniquely immune from criticism that every other country on earth is subject to.

Doug Wallis 10 hours ago
It started in Europe with creating a class of people protected from free speech, then the envelope widened to include immigrants and then muslims then leftists use it to prevent a discussion on immigration and then you get 10+ years of pedophile and female muslim rape gangs patrolling streets and having the entire crime known by police and covered up for fear of hate speech toward a group even though its specific groups that engage in honor killings, terrorist attacks, knifing s, grooming gangs, rape gangs, etc.
Name Doug Wallis 7 hours ago
You actually believe the Garbage you just posted?
Name 7 hours ago
If Judaism is a nationality, then what nationality do American Secular Jews belong to?

[Dec 10, 2019] The U.S. Campaign To Weaken Iran's 'Axis Of Resistance' Is Failing

The crisis of Us propaganda machine caused by Trump election serious undermined Israel lobby effectiveness... Schiff behaviour and Epstein scandal were two nail in the coffin.
Dec 10, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org
karlof1 , Dec 9 2019 20:01 utc | 4
Now the former MI6 agent and diplomat Alastair Crooke detects a new Israeli attempt to instigate a war on Iran:
"This is a historic opportunity", whispered one of Netanyahu's insiders into Ben Caspit (a leading Israeli journalist)'s ear this week: ..
...
What sort of history might that be? Why six months? Well, Caspit points up: "Netanyahu's people, headed by minister Yuval Steinitz clearly state that a widespread war is likely to erupt in the next six months between Iran and its adversaries in the region, including Israel". And the new Defence Minister, Bennett, threatens Iran on an almost daily basis.

"Perhaps Netanyahu simply needs a war with Iran in order to survive politically," one of the Blue and White leaders told Caspit: "That is scary and dangerous " .

There nothing new with that one might say. Netanyahoo has for years plotted to instigate a U.S. war on Iran. But there was so far no reason for the U.S. to wage one. War needs a narrative, a story than can be sold to the people who will have to pay for it. Crooke sees a possible one in the recent riots in Iran and elsewhere:

Well, here it is : "For a long time it looked like the spread of Iranian influence across the Middle East was unstoppable. Now, the entire Iran-hegemony enterprise is at risk. Protests have been going on in Iraq and Lebanon for weeks, bringing their economies to a near standstill, and forcing their Iran-approved prime ministers to step down. There's no end in sight to the protests ".

And hence, the Israeli push – led by the newly-appointed Defence Minister, Bennet, that now – precisely – is the moment for the US to act against Iran. This is the narrative for war.

So the idea is that the current turmoils in the 'axis of resistance' countries - Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Iran - has weakened Iran so much that it can be attacked.

But a look at each of those countries shows that it is doubtful that the narrative is true.

Cont. reading: The U.S. Campaign To Weaken Iran's 'Axis Of Resistance' Is Failing

Posted by b at 18:26 UTC | Comments (34) Thanks b for adding to the analysis of Crooke's fine article. It was good to get confirmation of my prediction that Iran had its own internal internet that can be sealed, which also means its internal military com system is separated from the global internet--external cyber attacks will no longer see success. Today Zarif said he wanted to exchange further prisoners with the Evil Outlaw US Empire, but the "ball's in Trump's court;" and after this latest failed operation, Iran likely has hundreds it could parlay. Some may have missed Pepe Escobar's reporting on Iran b posted in the weekly review listing, thus its inclusion. Iran's economy will continue to improve as it's now operating in markets and systems outside Imperial control thanks to the myopia blurring anything beyond its nose. Iran's key move along with Russia was to diversify its economy away from energy sales and focus on promoting its human capital.


Ghost Ship , Dec 9 2019 20:05 utc | 5

RAI News interview (in English) with Assad now available on Youtube . SAG put it up after RAI News broke agreement to transmit it by a set date.
With the Washington Post reporting on Bush, Obama and Trump's lies about Afghanistan , it's becoming hard to understand why anyone still believes any of the bullshit about Syria propagated by the Washington elite including the CIA and State Department.
snake , Dec 9 2019 20:06 utc | 6
I agree B, no way the bankers and their corporate scum can expect to defeat Iran at this point. Iranian response to an attack from anywhere might not be good for Israel.
Netanyohu and Google seem to be competing for the most dangerous entities award. very interesting the competition. The Iranian's seem intent on defending themselves.

On another note.. have a look at this

more fire the journalist to control the narrative stuff, very interesting

almare , Dec 9 2019 20:25 utc | 7
I live in the south of France. Yesterday morning by opening the shutters at 6 o'clock, I saw in the night sky, facing east, a cohort of bright spots (lit by the rising sun of the east) as far as the eye can see. I went out and I understood, hearing a low continuous rumbling, that they were fighter planes over 8000 meters that were heading in the north-west-> southeast direction. I counted about 80 but I missed a lot. We are always worried when we see the pack ... Maybe it's future turbulence for the Middle East ...
Laguerre , Dec 9 2019 20:29 utc | 8
My Lebanese colleague explained to me last week that most wealthy Lebanese don't keep their money abroad, as you might suppose, but in Lebanon, in dollar accounts, because the interest rates are that much better. And so they're stuck with being limited to withdrawing $300 a week.
Canthama , Dec 9 2019 21:02 utc | 10
Patience if a virtue for the Iranian people, but never misunderstand it by weakness, Iran is doing everything right, it has brought a rather under developed country in the 40-70's to a highly advanced country in terms of technology and education. It partially reflects in its military, but it definitively reflects in the daily life for Iranians.
There is no doubt in my mind Iran will be a powerhouse a decade for now, there are few countries in the ME, northern Africa and southern Asia that will be able to compete with Iran in many areas.
The apartheid regime's nightmare is exactly that, and Iran thus share it with the key members of The Resistance, and that is very scary to the anyone in Occupied Palestine.
I see, absolutely no way, that the US will venture in a war with Iran, not for the apartheid regime and not for anyone, any war with Iran means one thing, the end of the Occupation in Palestine, and surely the US doesn't want that, so sanctions will continue, war rhetoric will continue, until cheap warmongers are removed or a change in US Dollar dominance happens to the point anyone depending on it is forced to look for a different route thus geopolitics are changed for good. We are closer to either options, closer and closer.
james , Dec 9 2019 21:20 utc | 11
thanks b... excellent reporting..

regarding the constant narrative on going to war with iran..some will do all in their power to continue to convince the need for this - netanyahu in particular.. but aside from it being a huge mistake, how much of this is driven by capitalism and its need to exploit every corner of the earth?? is this really what the narrative is about - chasing after money 24-7? it sure looks like it to me... how else do the financial sanctions get rationalized? and, they are not working as your example notes.. when they get applied, the countries in question, find alternatives to kelloggs corn flakes and etc. etc whether it be in russia or iran... the financial sanctions have unintended consequences for the empire.. the empire imposes them to control the real narrative - the financial narrative - capitalism... it ain't working! time for war is the answer to all this, if you side with the present capitalist system..

that bit about "the Hariri family had earned $108 million between 2006 and 2015 from interest on the public debt." is pretty shameful and embarrassing for the hariri family with it's ties to ksa... i can't see how this works out for them long term, not that the hariri family are any different then the bush family and etc.. being willing to exploit your fellow citizens seems to imply money trumps national identity.. of course everyone knew this already... all these kleptomaniacs need to go live on an island somewhere and kill themselves trying to up one each other over this world game called monopoly.. most of us aren't into this game.. why force it on the world?

psychohistorian , Dec 9 2019 22:02 utc | 12
Below is a new posting up at ZH about Iran/Occupied Palestine & Syria

Israel Threatens Iran With "Own Vietnam" In Syria, Hints At Major Pre-Emptive Strike

no quotes...go read

c1ue , Dec 9 2019 22:13 utc | 13
@Canthama #10
Indeed, it is ironic that Iran - despite literally decades of sanctions and international isolationism plus a long shooting war - has managed to create a very credible military and economy.
This is especially in contrast to all of its neighbors.
Dick , Dec 9 2019 23:31 utc | 15
The brief interchange with Assistant Secretary Schenker, shows a man believing his own propaganda, and believing in his exceptionalism. The belief in one's own exceptionalism leads one to view oneself as superior to others (ie. Aryan Supremacy under the Nazis). Unfortunately, this belief leads to hubris, which leads to arrogance where one overestimates one's own capabilities and underestimates the capabilities of one's adversary; this always leads to fatal misjudgments.
Jackrabbit , Dec 9 2019 23:47 utc | 17
The problem I have with the notion that Netanyahu has become more dangerous is that it downplays the long-term planning for war and deep-seated animosity toward Iran.

!!

Jen , Dec 10 2019 0:58 utc | 20
Not only is Binyamin Netanyahu crazy but his wife Sara is probably even more crazy than he is.
Multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson, once Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's key supporter, and his wife Miriam testified to police that Sara Netanyahu was "crazy" and that "she decides everything," including key appointments and even some political matters , in the Netanyahu household, Channel 13 reported Sunday.

"She's completely crazy," said Sheldon Adelson, publisher of the Israel Hayom daily. "She was compulsive about photos of herself and how she looked. She said 'I'm the first lady, I'm a psychologist and I teach children about psychology.' ... She would tell my wife that if Iran attacked it would be her fault because we didn't publish good pictures of her," said Adelson, a leading donor to Israeli and Jewish causes as well as to the Republican Party ...

... Dr. Miriam Adelson told police that Sara chooses the people who work with the prime minister. "She chooses the workers, the people around him, the staff, his secretary. Then she knows everything that goes on," she said. When asked if Sara Netanyahu influences governmental appointments, Adelson said, "Those too, I believe." ...

If Netanyahu has become more dangerous because he is trying to avoid being indicted on various bribery, fraud and other corruption charges, then Sara Netanyahu will have become just as dangerous as well because she's trying to avoid corruption charges herself.

How on earth did Israel end up with such a dysfunctional de facto monarchy?

OHH , Dec 10 2019 1:21 utc | 21
Is the Iranian national budget really $36 billion? That seems astonishingly tiny, certainly compared to the USA's $2 trillion or whatever. I think New York City's budget is $92 billion. Yet Iran stands.

Despite all the damage it does across the globe, It never ceases to amaze how little, ultimately, is the practical effect of the USAs seemingly endless economic and military resources.

Really?? , Dec 10 2019 2:22 utc | 22
Jen #20

Sara Netanyahu looks like Miss Piggy's ugly stepsister.

blues , Dec 10 2019 2:25 utc | 23
"War alone brings up to their highest tension all human energies and imposes the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have the courage to make it." -- Benito Mussolini

"It is well that war is so terrible, else we should grow too fond of it." -- General Robert E. Lee

"Magnificent! Compared to war all other forms of human endeavor shrink to insignificance.
God help me, I do love it so!" -- General George S. Patton

Hoarsewhisperer , Dec 10 2019 6:22 utc | 24
I hope that Bibi gets his way.
"Israel" declared its independence a few years after I was born and has been a troublesome parasite ever since.
I hope that it will cease to exist before I die.
It's utterly insane for a shitty little fake country to incubate so much hatred that it wishes to destroy a country of 80 million Human Beings for reasons which have yet to be explained in any coherent manner. Why do Jews hate ALL Iranians so much?
I'm quite confident that an attack on Iran by "Israel" will make my
dream come true.
I feel a bit sorry for the Good Jews in "Israel" and I hope that both of them escape before "Israel" is destroyed as a direct result of its own psychopathy, angst, racism and hatred.
uncle tungsten , Dec 10 2019 10:50 utc | 30
Thank you b for an ineresting post. I find two statements by Alaistair Cooke disturbing and incongruous.
And, in Syria, US forces are trying to use the Syrian Kurds to block connective links between Iran and Iraq (tightening the economic siege), whilst Israel attacks Iranian infrastructure there, from the air.

This shows either a typo or a confused sense of the borders between the three nations. Regardless it is a serious element of his story but poorly expressed.

On the other hand – in what may also be understood as an 'other' aspect to a 'preparing of the stage', Israel is at work to pacify Gaza (with Gulf cash); and the US is active with the Houthis in trying to tamp down the war with Saudi Arabia: i.e. de-conflicting other potential war fronts.

Read that twice and see if it conforms to what is actually happening in the real world. I read it as a complete misrepresentation of reality. Weasel words perhaps but I cannot take this guy seriously.

Regarding the Iranian state and the rounded up violent 'colour revolution' gangs. I suspect that Iran became aware of the preparation and plans for a new year surprise and the fuel price hike was deliberately brought forward and the initial demonstration / protest by citizens was intended to prematurely trigger the violent gangs while they had intense surveillance in place from the minute of the price rise statement.

The shutting down of the global internet was an excellent strategy to force the activist disrupters to rely on the internal tightly monitored network. We may be seeing an effective snuff mechanism to put the fires out before they commence. If the model works it will severely inhibit the global finance subversives from undermining nations that don't want them around.

paul , Dec 10 2019 12:57 utc | 33
Stunning/not-stunning, as ever, to see the US asst, Secretary of State, in seemingly the same breath, take credit on behalf of the US for wreaking the economy of Iran, while blaming Iranian 'incompetence' and supposed misuse of funds for Iran's economic problems! Of course, it seems the 'journalist' didn't call this incoherent narrative out for either its dishonesty or its sheer ethical awfulness.
Russ , Dec 10 2019 14:16 utc | 34
I'm not sure exactly what Alfred @27 meant by the incompetence of Iran and Venezuela, but certainly if you're cursed by having oil or anything like that under your land, it's a bad idea to compound the predicament by shackling your economy to it.

If the threat of external predation leaves you no choice but to extract and export the stuff in order to get the money to buy/develop military hardware, at least don't let any surplus money corrupt and inflate your domestic economy.

[Dec 10, 2019] Donald Trump Is Bad for the Jews: There are things more important than your tax rate by Paul Krugman

Highly recommended!
He is bad for Jewish programmers, nurses, etc. He is certainly good for Jewish financial oligarchs like Adelson and singer as well as Zionists like natuanuahoo.
Notable quotes:
"... I think it was an Israeli friend who first told me that Judaism, unlike other faiths, has rarely been a religion of oppression -- but that the reason was simply lack of opportunity, a diagnosis that recent Israeli governments seem determined to confirm. ..."
"... An aside: American Jews almost all support Israel, but many don't support the policies of its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. But that's presumably a distinction Trump doesn't understand, at home or abroad ..."
Dec 10, 2019 | www.nytimes.com

On Saturday Donald Trump gave a speech to the Israeli American Council in which he asserted that many in his audience were "not nice people at all," but that "you have to vote for me" because Democrats would raise their taxes.

Was he peddling an anti-Semitic stereotype, portraying Jews as money-grubbing types who care only about their wealth? Of course he was. You might possibly make excuses for his remarks if they were an isolated instance, but in fact Trump has done this sort of thing many times, for example asserting in 2015 that Jews weren't supporting him because he wasn't accepting their money and "you want to control your politicians."

Well, it's not news that Trump's bigotry isn't restricted to blacks and immigrants. What is interesting, however, is that this particular anti-Semitic cliché -- that Jews are greedy, and that their political behavior is especially driven by their financial interests -- is empirically dead wrong. In fact, American Jews are much more liberal than you might expect given their economic situation.

... ... ...

In other words, American Jews aren't the uniquely greedy, self-interested characters anti-Semites imagine them to be. But it would be foolish to make the opposite mistake and imagine that Jews are especially public-spirited; they're just people, with the same virtues and vices as everyone else. I think it was an Israeli friend who first told me that Judaism, unlike other faiths, has rarely been a religion of oppression -- but that the reason was simply lack of opportunity, a diagnosis that recent Israeli governments seem determined to confirm.

An aside: American Jews almost all support Israel, but many don't support the policies of its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. But that's presumably a distinction Trump doesn't understand, at home or abroad

MikeBoma

MikeBoma VA 8m ago

Excellent column to which I would add only that Trump is not pro-Israel. Rather, he is pro-Netanyahu because he identifies with individuals he identifies as apparent "strong men" and believes that making "deals" with Netanyahu and others of his ilk will be mutually and personally beneficial. Trump has no concern with national policy or the best interests of the U.S. It's all about his power and wealth and he is open to deals with others who share his principal concern with self-benefit above all else. Any action taken by Trump that may seem pro-Israel in reality is merely a means to a self-serving and perhaps corrupt end. Birds of a feather...
esthermiriam DC 43m ago
Surprised Paul didn't mention the main sponsor of the group that invited Trump to speak, the Israeli American Council, is Sheldon Adelson, whose politics are of the minority in the Jewish community but very close to Trump (and Bibi's). Which actually makes the speech rather even uglier, perhaps.
NorthernVirginia Falls Church, VA 43m ago
Difficult to appreciate why the US, or Krugman for that matter, would support a religion-based Apartheid country, much less associate with that country's chief lobbying arm. Say what you will about our founding fathers, but George Washington was absolutely prescient and correct in his farewell address when he advised against "a passionate attachment of one nation for another"; the "variety of evils" he warned of regularly manifest themselves.
Bonku Madison 50m ago
The question is not who is Trump bad for. The question is- who is he good for! He is not so great for his own die-hard supporters, or even his own long term interest. In fact, he sabotaged his own presidency and basically got himself into this impeachment affair. Almost everyone is suffering under this guy. Vast majority realized that as soon as he became the President. Many realized it little later. Hopefully the remaining tiny few will understand in near future.
Mark New York 1h ago
Dear Professor K, weaponizing religion is nothing new. What's most amazing is that people were cheering him while being marginalized as stereotypes. The God of Mamon won the evening. This is the only religion Trump adheres to. Apparently it's popular among other religions too.
RLJ Manhattan 1h ago
Trump is supported by the Chabad sect which is ultra-orthodox and ultra-right wing. And his go-between is Jared Kushner.
RLJ Manhattan 1h ago
Trump is supported by the Chabad sect which is ultra-orthodox and ultra-right wing. And his go-between is Jared Kushner.
Sue Brooklyn 1h ago
Please don't conflate my Judaism with support for Israel. Israel would not support me, a secular Jew. Brooklyn is my homeland. Next year in Flatbush.
JayK CT 1h ago
In my first 59 years, I'd never felt concern for my physical safety as a Jew in this country until this man became president. I knew exactly where this was all headed at the moment Sean Spicer took to the podium and lied to the country about the inauguration crowd size in his first official act for Trump. It made me sick to my stomach, and I couldn't believe that most people were laughing it off as no big deal. Any Jew who trust this administration is a fool, and although there a few more "precise" Yiddish words for these members of my tribe, I'll refrain from using them as I'm sure you can fill in the blanks just fine.
Ilya Los Angeles 1h ago
A good reference to this opinion column, which was written and probably edited by highly intelligent people- The Stupidity of Intelligence: What Happened to Common Sense? Every sentence could be easily argued and overturned based upon some simple facts.
Bruce Rozenblit Kansas City, MO 2h ago
Trump and his minions try to buy Jewish support by backing right wing Israelis in their goal of a greater Israel at the expense of the Palestinians. In fact, when asked if Trump is anti-Semitic, one his strongest supporters, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, gave the standard response, "Trump supports Israel". Supporting Israel is a political position. All the while, Trump has about as much use for Jews as Archie Bunker had for the Jews in his fictional law firm, Rabinowitz, Rabinowitz and Rabinowitz. Then they often mention that his son-in-law is Jewish, like he had a choice in the matter. Simultaneously, Trump derives strong support from white nationalists that would be perfectly happy to send all American Jews to Israel. Those two motivations are inexorably linked. Because of this linkage, I can't understand for one minute how American Jews can support Trump. Is the money that good? Do they think that their money can protect them? Others have made that mistake before.
Luchino Brooklyn, New York 2h ago
Among Trump's lies is that he is far more friendly to Israel than Obama was. Sadly, some Jews take this lie as fact and, because of this, overlook everything else Trump does or says, supporting him without wavering, no matter what.
john connell columbia md 2h ago
The difference is intelligence. My college psychology textbook said that Russian Jewish immigrants had the highest IQs of all identified ethnicities. Number two was all other Jews. Of course they voted for Hillary.
Greg Cincinnati 2h ago
The attachment the wealthy have for the Republican Party goes beyond just a lower tax rate. It is power and deference. The wealthy want an unquestioned dominance that not only protects and expands their wealth, but celebrates them not only for their wealth as symbol of personal success but of their moral superiority. Obama certainly did not threaten their wealth, and, in fact, pursued policies that protected them from the worst of the Great Recession. Yet, the masters of wealth whined endlessly about Obama not respecting them and that his language toward them was disrespectful and not sufficiently deferential. Trump's "policies" threaten long term economic health, and the wealth creation that keeps concentrating wealth at the top. His trade gyrations, his dismantling of the environmental regulatory regime to favor fossil fuels, and his reward and punishment of private corporations based on politics are doing the damage that no Democrat would ever inflict. Yet, nary a corporate executive will said a word, and far too many are happy to be props at events for Trump's endless glorification of himself. Because they, like Trump, believe themselves heroes and geniuses whose domination should never be questioned. So they and Trump wind up all being pretty comfortable with each other. The neo-liberal promise of free market economics producing rational economic actors free from political motives and protecting all of us from political abuse rings pretty hollow.
James F Traynor Punta Gorda, FL 2h ago
"I think it was an Israeli friend who first told me that Judaism, unlike other faiths, has rarely been a religion of oppression -- but that the reason was simply lack of opportunity, a diagnosis that recent Israeli governments seem determined to confirm." Considering my age, and extrapolating therefrom, I think Einstein beat your friend to it. Pondering the moral weight given to Jewish thought at the time, Einstein thought political power was behind it, Jews simply had not the opportunity. As not unusual, Einstein's theory has been supported by experiment.
Plato CT 2h ago
Prof. Krugman, I loved this statement " An aside: American Jews almost all support Israel, but many don't support the policies of its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. But that's presumably a distinction Trump doesn't understand, at home or abroad" Please make sure that your colleague Bret Stephens get this memo.
Alan Kaplan Morristown, NJ 2h ago
I loved Trump's conclusion that people who are not nice vote for him. This is almost certainly true, we need to all be nice and vote the clown out.
Mike kelly nyc 2h ago
The audience at the Israeli American Council cheered Trump enthusiastically through out his whole speech. They cheered when he said he learned his tricks from Sheldon Adelson. They cheered when he said that maybe he should stay for eight more years. They hardly thought he was anti-Semitic. He has done exactly what he promised his big donors starting with the embassy in Jerusalem. His shutting down of any opposition to the Netanyahu administration especially the BDS movement . He seems to know his audience very well and they were loving it.
C. Bernard Florida 2h ago
Trump is not just saying "look at the taxes you are saving", he's saying "look what I've done for Israel!" I don't understand why the media persists on calling him a white nationalist. His daughter and son in law are strict Jews, he recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, he's given them the Golan Heights and has listened to their advice on Iran (bad idea). He's not after Jewish votes necessarily, because there are only about 2 million Jews in the U.S . But being more "affluent on average" he's more likely after some big campaign contributions.
Guesser San Francisco 2h ago
Everyone in my Jewish family votes Democratic, although we have all done well financially. I remember growing up that my Dad would say that he personally would benefit financially from a Republican administration, but that it would not be good for the nation as a whole. I believe that it is not just self-interest and fear of anti-Semitism that has led Jews to favor the Democratic party, but also Jewish values, including wanting to make the world a better place.
Watah Oakland, CA 2h ago
Trump is our Nero for the 21st century. United States and the Republicans who support him will define the decline of our status in the world stage.
JUHallCLU San Francisco Bay Area, CA 3h ago
An argument can also be made that Netanyahu (extreme Right) has been excessively partisan to the degree that it has divided both Israel and diaspora Jews. Israel might be bettered by negotiating with all of its territorial stakeholders. Land is at issue. Palestinians will not vanish or evaporate. The West Bank must be addressed. The Trump rubber stamp of a Jarusalem Embassy does not solve much.
Alan J. Shaw Bayside, NY 2h ago
@Justice Support for Israel may mean many things, at its most basic it's a belief that Israel had and still has a right to exist among the nations of the world. If one believes that at its inception it was and continues to be nothing more than an "ethnoreligious state," that imay not be support , though Krugman distinguises between the former and criticism of the current Israeli administration. I suppose the commenter would also find theocratic states like Saudi Arabia or Iran "deeply problematic " One thing for sure is that most Jews will not suport the supposedly Zionist Trump when he says that Jews who vote Democratic are either uninformed or disloyal.
Skip Moreland Baldwinsville 2h ago
@Justice My own take is that american jews support having a home for jews, esp in the land they came from. But the government of Israel is conservative while most american jews are more liberal. There are many liberal jews in Israel. I support the idea of a homeland for the jews, just not how that has been accomplished. Real democracy is fragile and far too many countries are moving from democracy to more authoritarian governments.
Eben Spinoza 5h ago
I'm told that many Israelis who were enthusiastic about Trump got a wakeup call when he abandoned the Kurds. They now better understand that he regards everyone as disposable, and can't imagine that anyone could be motivated by something other than pure-self interest.
edwardc San Francisco Bay Area 4h ago
@Eben Sadly, Donald is not the first president to abandon the Kurds. In the words of Henry Kissinger, "America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests." Yes, this could conceivably at some time in the future be relevant to Israel. Even if not under Donald.
Election Inspector Seattle 3h ago
@edwardc - Kissinger, "America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests." Our current problem is that the "interests" being pursued are solely those of Donald Trump personally -- appeasing his secret Russian lenders; doing the bidding of "tough" guy dictators like Turkey's so he can feel tough himself and build hotels in their capitals; exercising his long held bigotry about people of color in this country. Our allies the Kurds, on the other hand, helped with an actual, important US national interest: beating ISIS and holding it back from growing again to where it can resume attacking us. But since that doesn't put money in Trump's pocket he abandons the cause.
Concerned Citizen Anywheresville 2h ago
@Eben : I have great empathy for the Kurdish people, but does "support for the Kurds" mean we must stay in Iraq and Afghanistan literally forever? we've already been there going on 17 years -- at the cost of trillions of dollars spent and thousands of American lives.
Jacquie Iowa 5h ago
"In last year's midterms, 52 percent of voters with incomes over $200,000 voted Republican, compared with only 38 percent of voters with incomes under $50,000. The rightward tilt is especially strong at the very top; although there are a few high-profile liberal billionaires, most of the extremely wealthy are also extremely right-wing." And that group will vote for Trump for re-election even if he is impeached unfortunately.
Gone Coastal NorCal 5h ago
Israel does not seem to understand the long term damage being done to its country. The U.S. has always been its number one defender, but there is a whole generation of Americans that think Israel is bad, that it is mistreating the Palestinians. Demographics are working against it. Israel can always look to Europe, but I don't know how that is going to work out in the long run.
dr scott Kailua Kona 4h ago
@Gone Coastal Trump is all about the sugar high you get from immediate gratification of the baser impulses. His influence will end soon enough, perhaps another five years but the potential destruction of the Repulican party and the reaction against Trumpism could last for decades. Its a big danger to Israel if Israel is just seen as the last gasp of European colonialism and a part of the Western white world : a European imposition on the middle east. Roosevelt tried to create institutions that would lead to peace though out the life times of the people who lived when he was president. Sadly Trump is making strides to destroy the institutions initiated by Roosevelt, leaving a world where small countries are more easily bullied by their larger neighbors.

[Dec 09, 2019] Anti-semitism Is Cover for a Much Deeper Divide in Britain's Labour Party by Jonathan Cook

Anti-Semitism in UK serves the same role as Neo-McCartyism in the USA as demonstrated by RussiaGate.
There is a deep analogy between neo-McCarthyism complain in the USA nad anti-Semitism campaign in the US Parliament.
Notable quotes:
"... Luciana Berger (image on the right), a Jewish MP who has highlighted what she sees as an anti-Semitism problem under Corbyn, led the charge, stating at the Independent Group's launch that she had reached "the sickening conclusion " that Labour was "institutionally racist". ..."
"... She and her allies claim she has been hounded out of the party by "anti-semitic bullying". Berger has suffered online abuse and death threats from a young neo-Nazi who was jailed for two years in 2016. There have been other incidences of abuse and other sentences, including a 27-month jail term for John Nimmo , a right-wing extremist who referred to Berger as "Jewish scum" and signed his messages, "your friend, the Nazi". ..."
"... That is one reason why anti-semitism smears have been so maliciously effective against anti-Zionist Jews in the party and used with barely a murmur of protest – or in most cases, even recognition that Jews are being suspended and expelled for opposing Israel's racist policies towards Palestinians. ..."
"... The Blairites in Labour, joined by the ruling Conservative Party, the mainstream media and pro-Israel lobby groups, have selected anti-semitism as the terrain on which to try to destroy a Corbyn-led Labour Party, because it is a battlefield in which the left stands no hope of getting a fair hearing – or any hearing at all. ..."
Feb 23, 2019 | www.globalresearch.ca

Breakaway MPs hope that smearing Corbyn will obscure the fact that they are remnants of an old political order bankrupt of ideas

The announcement by seven MPs from the UK Labour Party on Monday that they were breaking away and creating a new parliamentary faction marked the biggest internal upheaval in a British political party in nearly 40 years, when the SDP split from Labour.

On Wednesday, they were joined by an eighth Labour MP, Joan Ryan , and three Conservative MPs. There are predictions more will follow.

With the UK teetering on the brink of crashing out of the European Union with no deal on Brexit, the founders of the so-called Independent Group made reference to their opposition to Brexit.

The chief concern cited for the split by the eight Labour MPs, though, was a supposed "anti-semitism crisis" in the party.

The breakaway faction seemingly agrees that anti-Semitism has become so endemic in the party since Jeremy Corbyn became leader more than three years ago that they were left with no choice but to quit.

Corbyn, it should be noted, is the first leader of a major British party to explicitly prioritize the rights of Palestinians over Israel's continuing belligerent occupation of the Palestinian territories.

'Sickeningly racist'?

Luciana Berger (image on the right), a Jewish MP who has highlighted what she sees as an anti-Semitism problem under Corbyn, led the charge, stating at the Independent Group's launch that she had reached "the sickening conclusion " that Labour was "institutionally racist".

She and her allies claim she has been hounded out of the party by "anti-semitic bullying". Berger has suffered online abuse and death threats from a young neo-Nazi who was jailed for two years in 2016. There have been other incidences of abuse and other sentences, including a 27-month jail term for John Nimmo , a right-wing extremist who referred to Berger as "Jewish scum" and signed his messages, "your friend, the Nazi".

In an interview with the Jewish Chronicle, the former Labour MP said the Independent Group would provide the Jewish community with a " political home that they, like much of the rest of the country, are now looking for".

In a plea to keep the party together, deputy leader Tom Watson issued a video in which he criticised his own party for being too slow to tackle anti-Semitism. The situation "poses a test" for Labour, he said, adding: "Do we respond with simple condemnation, or do we try and reach out beyond our comfort zone and prevent others from following?"

Ruth Smeeth , another Jewish Labour MP who may yet join a later wave of departures, was reported to have broken down in tears at a parliamentary party meeting following the split, as she called for tougher action on anti-semitism.

Two days later, as she split from Labour, Ryan accused the party of being "infected with the scourge of anti-Jewish racism".

Hatred claims undercut

The timing of the defections was strange, occurring shortly after the Labour leadership revealed the findings of an investigation into complaints of anti-semitism in the party. These were the very complaints that MPs such as Berger have been citing as proof of the party's "institutional racism".

And yet, the report decisively undercut their claims – not only of endemic anti-semitism in Labour, but of any significant problem at all.

That echoed an earlier report by the Commons home affairs committee, which found there was "no reliable, empirical evidence " that Labour had more of an anti-semitism problem than any other British political party.

Nonetheless, the facts seem to be playing little or no part in influencing the anti-semitism narrative. This latest report was thus almost entirely ignored by Corbyn's opponents and by the mainstream media.

It is, therefore, worth briefly examining what the Labour Party's investigation discovered.

Over the previous 10 months, 673 complaints had been filed against Labour members over alleged anti-semitic behaviour, many based on online comments. In a third of those cases, insufficient evidence had been produced.

The 453 other allegations represented 0.08 percent of the 540,000-strong Labour membership. Hardly "endemic" or "institutional", it seems.

Intemperate language

There is the possibility past outbursts have been part of this investigation. Intemperate language flared especially in 2014 – before Corbyn became leader – when Israel launched a military operation on Gaza that killed large numbers of Palestinian civilians, including many hundreds of children.

Certainly, it is unclear how many of those reportedly anti-semitic comments concern not prejudice towards Jews, but rather outspoken criticism of the state of Israel, which was redefined as anti-semitic last year by Labour, under severe pressure from MPs such as Berger and Ryan and Jewish lobby groups, such as the Board of Deputies and the Jewish Labour Movement.

Britain's Witchfinders Are Ready to Burn Jeremy Corbyn

Seven of the 11 examples of anti-semitism associated with the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's definition adopted by Labour concern Israel. That includes describing Israel as a "racist endeavour", even though Israel passed a basic law last year stripping the fifth of its population who are not Jewish of any right to self-determination, formally creating two classes of citizen.

Illustrating the problem Labour has created for itself as a result, some of the most high-profile suspensions and expulsions have actually targeted Jewish members of the party who identify as anti-Zionist – that is, they consider Israel a racist state. They include T ony Greenstein, Jackie Walker, Martin Odoni, Glyn Secker and Cyril Chilson .

Another Jewish member, Moshe Machover , a professor emeritus at the University of London, had to be reinstated after a huge outcry among members at his treatment by the party.

Unthinking prejudice

Alan Maddison , who has been conducting statistical research on anti-semitism for a pro-Corbyn Jewish group, Jewish Voice for Labour, put the 0.08 percent figure into its wider social and political context this week.

He quoted the findings of a large survey of anti-semitic attitudes published by the Institute for Jewish Policy Research in 2017. It found that 30 percent of respondents from various walks of society agreed with one or more of eight anti-semitic views, ranging from stereotypes such as "Jews think they are better than other people" to Holocaust denial.

However, lead researcher Daniel Staetsky concluded that in most cases, this was evidence of unthinking prejudice rather than conscious bigotry. Four-fifths of those who exhibited a degree of anti-semitism also agreed with at least one positive statement about Jewish people.

This appears to be the main problem among the tiny number of Labour Party members identified in complaints, and is reflected in the predominance of warnings about conduct rather than expulsions and suspensions.

Far-right bigotry

Another of the institute's findings poses a particular problem for Corbyn's opponents, who argue that the Labour leader has imported anti-semitism into the party by attracting the "hard left". Since he was elected, Labour membership has rocketed.

Even if it were true that Corbyn and his supporters are on the far-left – a highly questionable assumption, made superficially plausible only because Labour moved to the centre-right under Tony Blair in the late 1990s – the institute's research pulls the rug out from under Corbyn's critics.

It discovered that across the political spectrum, conscious hatred of Jews was very low, and that it was exhibited in equal measure from the "very left-wing" to the "fairly right-wing". The only exception, as one might expect, was on the "very right-wing", where virulent anti-semitism was much more prevalent.

That finding was confirmed last week by surveys that showed a significant rise in violent, anti-semitic attacks across Europe as far-right parties make inroads in many member states. A Guardian report noted that the "figures show an overwhelming majority of violence against Jews is perpetrated by far-right supporters".

Supporters of overseas war

So what is the basis for concerns about the Labour Party being mired in supposed "institutional anti-semitism" since it moved from the centre to the left under Corbyn, when the figures and political trends demonstrate nothing of the sort?

A clue may be found in the wider political worldview of the eight MPs who have broken from Labour.

All but two are listed as supporters of the parliamentary "Labour Friends of Israel" (LFI) faction. Further, Berger is a former director of that staunchly pro-Israel lobby group, and Ryan is its current chair, a position the group says she will hold onto, despite no longer being a Labour MP.

So extreme are the LFI's views on Israel that it sought to exonerate Israel of a massacre last year, in which its snipers shot dead many dozens of unarmed Palestinian demonstrators in Gaza in a single day. Faced with a social media backlash, it quietly took down the posts .

The eight MPs' voting records – except for Gavin Shuker, for whom the picture is mixed – show them holding consistently hawkish foreign policy positions that are deeply antithetical to Corbyn's approach to international relations.

They either "almost always" or "generally" backed "combat operations overseas"; those who were MPs at the time supported the 2003 Iraq war; and they all opposed subsequent investigations into the Iraq war.

Committed Friends of Israel

In one sense, the breakaway group's support for Labour Friends of Israel may not be surprising, and indicates why Corbyn is facing such widespread trouble from within his own party. Dozens of Labour MPs are members of the group, including Tom Watson and Ruth Smeeth.

Smeeth, one of those at the forefront of accusing Corbyn of fostering anti-semitism in Labour, is also a former public affairs director of BICOM, another stridently pro-Israel lobby group .

None of these MPs were concerned enough with the LFI's continuing vocal support for Israel as it has shifted to the far-right under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to have stepped down from the group.

'Wrong kind of Jews'

Anti-semitism has taken centre stage in the manoeuvring against Corbyn, despite there being no evidence of significant hatred against Jews in the party. Increasingly, it seems, tangible abuse of Jews is of little interest unless it can be related to Corbyn.

The markedly selective interest in anti-semitism in the Corbyn context among the breakaway MPs and supposed anti-semitism watchdogs has been starkly on show for some time.

Notably, none expressed concern at the media mauling of a left-wing, satirical Jewish group called Jewdas when Corbyn was widely attacked for meeting "the wrong kind of Jews". In fact, leading Labour figures, including the Jewish Labour Movement, joined in the abuse .

And increasingly in this febrile atmosphere, there has been an ever-greater indulgence of the "right kind of anti-semitism" – when it is directed at Corbyn supporters.

A troubling illustration was provided on the TV show Good Morning Britain this week, when Tom Bower was invited on to discuss his new unauthorised biography of Corbyn, in which he accuses him of anti-semitism. The hosts looked on demurely as Bower, a Jewish journalist, defamed fellow Jewish journalist Michael Segalov as a " self-hating Jew " for defending Corbyn on the show.

Revenge of the Blairites

So what is the significance of the fact that the Labour MPs who have been most outspoken in criticising Corbyn – those who helped organise a 2016 leadership challenge against him, and those who are now rumoured to be considering joining the breakaway faction – are heavily represented on the list of MPs supporting LFI?

For them, it seems, vigorous support for Israel is not only a key foreign policy matter, but a marker of their political priorities and worldview – one that starkly clashes with the views of Corbyn and a majority of the Labour membership.

Anti-semitism has turned out to be the most useful – and damaging – weapon to wield against the Labour leader for a variety of reasons close to the hearts of the holdouts from the Blair era, who still dominate the parliamentary party and parts of the Labour bureaucracy.

Perhaps most obviously, the Blairite wing of the party is still primarily loyal to a notion that Britain should at all costs maintain its transatlantic alliance with the United States in foreign policy matters. Israel is a key issue for those on both sides of the Atlantic who see that state as a projection of Western power into the oil-rich Middle East and romanticise Israel as a guarantor of Western values in a "barbaric" region.

Corbyn's prioritising of Palestinian rights threatens to overturn a core imperial value to which the Blairites cling.

Tarred and feathered

But it goes further. Anti-semitism has become a useful stand-in for the deep differences in a domestic political culture between the Blairites, on one hand, and Corbyn and the wider membership, on the other.

A focus on anti-semitism avoids the right-wing MPs having to admit much wider grievances with Corbyn's Labour that would probably play far less well not only with Labour members, but with the broader British electorate.

As well as their enthusiasm for foreign wars, the Blairites support the enrichment of a narrow neo-liberal elite, are ambivalent about austerity policies, and are reticent at returning key utilities to public ownership. All of this can be neatly evaded and veiled by talking up anti-semitism.

But the utility of anti-semitism as a weapon with which to beat Corbyn and his supporters – however unfairly – runs deeper still.

The Blairites view allegations of anti-Jewish racism as a trump card. Calling someone an anti-semite rapidly closes down all debate and rational thought. It isolates, then tars and feathers its targets. No one wants to be seen to be associated with an anti-semite, let alone defend them.

Weak hand exposed

That is one reason why anti-semitism smears have been so maliciously effective against anti-Zionist Jews in the party and used with barely a murmur of protest – or in most cases, even recognition that Jews are being suspended and expelled for opposing Israel's racist policies towards Palestinians.

This is a revival of the vile "self-hating Jew" trope that Israel and its defenders concocted decades ago to intimidate Jewish critics.

The Blairites in Labour, joined by the ruling Conservative Party, the mainstream media and pro-Israel lobby groups, have selected anti-semitism as the terrain on which to try to destroy a Corbyn-led Labour Party, because it is a battlefield in which the left stands no hope of getting a fair hearing – or any hearing at all.

But paradoxically, the Labour breakaway group may have inadvertently exposed the weakness of its hand. The eight MPs have indicated that they will not run in by-elections, and for good reason: it is highly unlikely they would stand a chance of winning in any of their current constituencies outside the Labour Party.

Their decision will also spur moves to begin deselecting those Labour MPs who are openly trying to sabotage the party – and the members' wishes – from within.

That may finally lead to a clearing out of the parliamentary baggage left behind from the Blair era, and allow Labour to begin rebuilding itself as a party ready to deal with the political, social, economic and environmental challenges of the 21st century.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Jonathan Cook, a British journalist based in Nazareth since 2001, is the the author of three books on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He is a past winner of the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His website and blog can be found at: www.jonathan-cook.net He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

[Dec 09, 2019] Jews, Antisemitism and Labour A Letter to the BBC by Jewish Voice for Labour

Essentially anti Semitism smear is used to derail Corbin in the same way as Russiagate smear was used to derail Trump and Republican in 2018.
Dec 09, 2019 | www.globalresearch.ca

To Tony Hall , Director General of the BBC
cc: Fran Unsworth and Tracey Henry

December 6, 2019

URGENT – "Is the BBC Antisemitic?"

We need to register with you our deep concern that, once again, and in the closing stages of an acrimonious election campaign, the BBC's coverage of antisemitism charges against the Labour Party has been both unbalanced and uncritical. Your reporting today of the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM)'s repetition of its flimsily-based charges against the Party that it used to support falls disastrously short of the Corporation's own formal standards of accuracy and balance.

This represents what we can only call a flagrant breach, and of all times during a general election campaign, of the BBC's legal commitment to due impartiality and fairness.

Over recent months, and with no remission during the election campaign, coverage of allegations of Labour antisemitism has featured repeatedly in the BBC News, and often as the lead item. In news programmes the allegations have been reported as quasi-factual, with no indication that they are fiercely contested. In more discursive formats such as the Today programme or Newsnight, presenters have consistently adopted a negative, attacking stance towards anyone who questions the basis of the allegations. In complete contrast, those making the allegations, usually based on hearsay rather than personal experience, are supplied with leading questions and softball follow-up.

Jews are as diverse as any other substantial group in society. Yet people whose representative status is highly doubtful are routinely presented by the BBC as 'representatives of the Jewish community'. Surely you can ensure that your broadcasting staff know the facts and convey them appropriately. The Board of Deputies, for example, has no supervised electoral process – and in any case its synagogue-based membership covers no more than one third of the UK's Jewish population. Secular Jews make up at least 50% of British Jews and have no voice through the Board of Deputies.

As Battle Rages in UK Labour Party, Moshe Machover Expelled After Asserting 'Anti-Zionism Does Not equal Anti-Semitism'

In particular the voices of the large numbers of Jews who are Party members, who know how atypical the quite rare examples of antisemitic behaviour in the party are, and who are enthusiastic supporters of a Corbyn-led Labour government have been almost entirely ignored. The BBC has allowed itself to be used as a megaphone for deeply contested charges.

The BBC's Guidelines state that when a partisan political position is put forward, an opposing one, if it exists, should be broadcast too. The Labour Party does have many Jews who support it and who are prepared to speak out, notably in the organisation Jewish Voice for Labour. Our many requests to be able to present our experience and our perspective are routinely ignored, and in the rare exceptions have never been given equal weighting with the negative voices.

The BBC's coverage of the JLM's release of its evidence to the Equalities and Human Rights Commission's inquiry (into any discrimination in Labour's processes for handling complaints of anti-Semitism) is a prime example of the BBC's systematic imbalance. This deliberately-timed attempted destabilization of the Labour Party's position by JLM has appeared in virtually every main news bulletin today, including live coverage – uncontested – of the JLM news conference on BBC News Channel.

The evidence that Jewish Voice for Labour gave to the EHRC inquiry was made public at the time and is publicly available on our web-site . This evidence is directly relevant to your news item but was not even mentioned in today's extended BBC coverage. It seems that the BBC is treating us as the 'wrong sort of Jew'.

All Jews are not the same. Asserting that they are is an aspect of anti-Semitism. The BBC should be ashamed of its record in openness to the multiple voices of British jewry.

By behaving in the way that it has (and today's JLM coverage is only the latest example) the BBC has, constructively, been contributing to an assiduously promoted anti-Labour agenda.

We look forward to immediate corrective action.

This letter will be published on our website.

Sincerely,

Leah Levane and Jenny Manson, co-chairs JVL

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

[Dec 09, 2019] Presidential candidates who want to place conditions on Israeli military aid have prompted pro-Israel House Democrats to go on the offensive.

Notable quotes:
"... "I'm opposed to conditioning the aid, and I would fight it no matter what," Engel told Al-Monitor. "The Democratic Party has traditionally been a pro-Israel party, and I see no reason for that to change now. If there are people who are Democrats who don't feel that way, then I don't think they should be elected president of the United States." ..."
"... Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., is the most vocal proponent of conditioning Israeli military aid in the presidential race -- ​ going even further left than J Street and all his primary opponents. At J Street's conference in October he said that some of the $3.8 billion in annual assistance "should go right now to humanitarian aid in Gaza." ..."
"... J Street has set any formal Israeli annexation of the West Bank as its red line for placing conditions on Israeli military aid. But it also supports the $38 billion memorandum of understanding. ..."
"... Shortly after the vote, Sanders campaign co-chair Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., as well as Reps. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., and Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., asked colleagues to sign a letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo asking him to clarify whether Israel has used US military equipment while demolishing Palestinian homes in the West Bank. ..."
"... The letter, seen by Al-Monitor, notes that the Arms Export Control Act "narrowly conditions the use of transferred US-origin defense articles" and requires the president to inform Congress if the equipment is used for unauthorized purposes ..."
Dec 09, 2019 | www.unz.com

renfro , says: December 8, 2019 at 4:46 am GMT

The Jews try to run US policy ..but lately the Dem base (and part of the party) has become more pro Palestine.

Democratic (Jewish) lawmakers reckon with 2020 rhetoric on Israel aid

December 6, 2019

Presidential candidates who want to place conditions on Israeli military aid have prompted pro-Israel House Democrats to go on the offensive.

REUTERS/Joshua Roberts

It's becoming harder and harder for pro-Israel Democrats on Capitol Hill to ignore the increasingly critical voices of the US ally within their party and the presidential race.

House Democratic leaders -- who happen to be some of the staunchest Israel supporters on Capitol Hill -- this week added language supportive of the annual $3.8 billion military aid package to Israel to a symbolic resolution that endorses a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The stalled resolution passed 226-188, largely along party lines, today. But pro-Israel Democrats only came on board after House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., added their new language to the bill. The new provision is a response to the fact that several presidential candidates have come out of the woodwork in recent months with calls to place conditions on the largest recipient of US military aid.

"I'm opposed to conditioning the aid, and I would fight it no matter what," Engel told Al-Monitor. "The Democratic Party has traditionally been a pro-Israel party, and I see no reason for that to change now. If there are people who are Democrats who don't feel that way, then I don't think they should be elected president of the United States."

When Engel's committee first advanced the resolution in July, Democratic leaders opted not to put it on the floor, even as they passed another nonbinding resolution condemning the pro-Palestinian boycott, divestment and sanctions movement 398-17, which was backed by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

That changed last month after the Trump administration repealed a decades-old legal opinion maintaining that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are illegal under international law.

"There are those on the far-left side of the Democratic Party -- and some of the presidential candidates -- who are pushing for new conditions on aid, especially in their interactions with Gaza, which is run by Hamas -- a terrorist organization," Gottheimer told Al-Monitor.

An October poll from the liberal Center for American Progress found that 56% of American voters, including 71% of Democrats, oppose "unconditional financial and military assistance to Israel if the Israeli government continues to violate American policy on settlement expansion or West Bank annexation."

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., is the most vocal proponent of conditioning Israeli military aid in the presidential race -- ​ going even further left than J Street and all his primary opponents. At J Street's conference in October he said that some of the $3.8 billion in annual assistance "should go right now to humanitarian aid in Gaza."

J Street has set any formal Israeli annexation of the West Bank as its red line for placing conditions on Israeli military aid. But it also supports the $38 billion memorandum of understanding.

Presidential hopefuls Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana, have jumped on board with J Street's position. However, the current front-runner, former Vice President Joe Biden, has flatly ruled out conditioning the aid.

Notably, J Street did not oppose the effort to amend the Lowenthal resolution with the military aid language. That said, progressive Democrats do not necessarily view that provision as incompatible with calls to attach strings to that assistance. Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., called the Engel language "meaningless."

"It's just restating what current practice or current law is," Pocan told Al-Monitor. "We don't really see it as affecting the bill one way or the other. At any time if we feel like we're better off putting conditions on money and holding back money, Congress could always do that with any country through the normal process."

Shortly after the vote, Sanders campaign co-chair Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., as well as Reps. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., and Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., asked colleagues to sign a letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo asking him to clarify whether Israel has used US military equipment while demolishing Palestinian homes in the West Bank.

The letter, seen by Al-Monitor, notes that the Arms Export Control Act "narrowly conditions the use of transferred US-origin defense articles" and requires the president to inform Congress if the equipment is used for unauthorized purposes

Read more: https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2019/12/democratic-lawmakers-2020-rhetoric-israel-aid.html#ixzz67UEIl383

[Dec 08, 2019] Anti-Semite as any person who does not contribute money to Jewish settlements; who does not believe in God-chosen nation being above all laws

Dec 08, 2019 | www.unz.com

I am all for such definitions; their scope is too narrow, if anything.

I'd prefer a broad definition that would describe as anti-Semite any person who attends a church or a mosque; who does not contribute to Jewish settlements; who does not believe in God-chosen Jewish nation being above all mortal laws.

Maybe then the Gentiles would be healed of their fear of being labelled 'anti-Semite'.

[Dec 08, 2019] Politization of anti-Semitism as any anti-Israel position: anti-Semite is any person who does not contribute to Jewish settlements; who does not believe in God-chosen Jewish nation being above all laws and displace Palestinians by Israel Shamir December 7, 2019 2,000 Words

Dec 08, 2019 | www.unz.com

129 Comments Reply

England and France, two antagonists, two mainstays of European civilisation, are simultaneously engulfed in paroxysm of Judeophilia. The result of the forthcoming very important parliamentary elections in Britain hinges on this issue, with Labour and Tories competing who will express their love of Jews more profusely, while the Jews can't decide whom they loath less. France, after a year of the middle-class Yellow Vests rebellion, enters the fresh working class uprising with million strikers rioting on the streets, but its parliament finds prime time to ponder and rule how Frenchmen should love Jews and hate those who hate them. What is the meaning of this charade?

Surely they do not argue about Jewish cuisine. While palatable, it is rarely more than that. A proof can be found in Israel, where Arab food rules, Japanese is recognised, Italian cherished but Jewish cuisine shines by its absence. It is not Jewish noses, though a significant feature of facial anatomy, they are not more elaborate or prominent than, say, Sicilian. It is all about ideas.

Judeophilia, love of Jews is a troublesome symptom of a dangerous malady, of elites' estrangement from its working classes, the malady presently in full bloom in France and England. Judeophilia strikes divided societies and could lead to their collapse much faster than its Siamese counter-twin, antisemitism. It did so in the past, most famously in Kingdom of Poland, where the szlachta (nobility) loved Jews and despised ordinary folks, the bydlo ( rednecks), until their state collapsed. In a Christian, or post-Christian society, Jews are a symbol, a signifier of a certain attitude and behaviour that is profoundly non-Christian.

Jews are a small minority that defies the large society and opposes it. Jews care for themselves and disregard the majority and its needs; they have no scruples beyond prescribed by the criminal law; they feel no communality with the majority. Jews do not share communion with majority, and do not appeal to the same deity. Jews prosper when the majority regresses. They are fast to see a break and use it for their advantage.

We won't enter a discussion whether the real Jews fit the description, and to what extent. That is how they are perceived by those who love them and who hate them. There were Jews who acted against the paradigm, and they weren't considered 'good for Jews'. Bruno Kreisky, the Austrian Chancellor, Lazar Kaganovich, the Soviet official, Leon Trotsky or Torquemada weren't 'good for Jews'. And there are plentiful Gentiles who were considered 'good for Jews', like Hillary Clinton or Tony Blair. Usually they were bad for everybody else. So, while we shall defer our judgment on 'real Jews', there is no doubt that philo-Semites are bad for your health.

The dominant economic and political paradigm, Neo-Liberalism claims that Jewish attitude is the right one, and that we all should emulate Jews. This is an impossible claim; a majority can't emulate a minority. A society whose members relate to each other as Jews-to-Gentiles is a cannibals' cabal, and that is exactly what happens in our world. Jews prosper because they are few; if all emulate Jews, the result is misery, not prosperity . An all-Jewish society can't exist; Israel is a place where Thai, Chinese, Ukrainians and Palestinians work, the Russians and Druze guard them, while Jews do usual Jewish things.

In England, the Jews are divided about Boris Johnson. They do not want Brexit to succeed, but the access of Corbyn scares them even more. Corbyn is an avowed enemy of no, not of Jews, but of neo-liberalism. Combine it with his rejection of Israeli politics, and you come to the sum of anti-Jewish attitudes. Yes, Corbyn is anti-Jewish, if you wish, even anti-Semite, i.e. a man whom Jews hate, for he is against both Jewish modes of operation, the capitalist and the Zionist. He is perfectly ok with people of Jewish origin, he has no prejudice, he is no racist, but it is irrelevant. His victory won't be 'good for Jews', neither for Jews who bleed Palestine, nor for Jews who prosper at the expense of the British worker. Perhaps Corbyn would be wonderful for Jewish workers, but they are not represented in the Board of Deputies , and the Chief Rabbi does not care for them.

On the international scene, Corbyn is not a friend of NATO. If he could he would take the UK out of this obsolete military alliance. So would President Trump, who is looking for a justification to steer the US out of NATO. Jews do not like this attitude. For them, the US and the UK should stay in NATO, for NATO is a strong defender and supporter of the Jewish state.

Brits have a difficult choice in the coming elections. Johnson is not too bad, and his stand against EU should be applauded. Corbyn is likely to seek compromise on every position, including Brexit, immigration, NATO, but his initial stand is good. For a working man, he is the right choice. And the Jewish attitude to him is a strong indicator: of the two contenders, Corbyn would be better for those who do not emulate Jews.

France

In France, the Jews are very close to power, and it is usually a sign that things do not go well for native middle and working classes. Indeed things go from bad to worse. While a million of French workers demonstrated against Macron's government, the French parliamentarians discussed antisemitism. Not surprisingly, they accepted the definition produced by a Jewish organisation. Demurring against this definition caused a lot of trouble for Corbyn; Macron had learned a lesson.

I am all for such definitions; their scope is too narrow, if anything. I'd prefer a broad definition that would describe as anti-Semite any person who attends a church or a mosque; who does not contribute to Jewish settlements; who does not believe in God-chosen Jewish nation being above all mortal laws. Maybe then the Gentiles would be healed of their fear of being labelled 'anti-Semite'. This fear kills their souls more than the accusation. Though, best of people, Shakespeare, St John the Divine, Dostoyevsky and Chesterton are considered anti-Semites, and it did not diminish their fame and glory.

You can't escape this label; if they want they will attach it to your name. Likewise, a man can't avoid being called a male chauvinist and accused of harassment by a radical feminist. Anna Ardin, the Swedish feminist who accused Julian Assange of rape and destroyed his life as surely as if she'd knifed him, also accused a student of harassment because he avoided looking at her. Such accusations should be shrugged off.

France is not doing well because its elites are engaged in the rip-off and sale of their country's industrial, political, and cultural assets. In the last few years, France had lost Alstom, Pechiney, Technip, Alcatel. These premium assets were lost to US companies. French businessmen and officials who were supposed to care about French heirlooms, betrayed their trust and defrauded their country, that's why France is not doing well.

Not all of these treacherous men are Jewish, not by a long chalk. But Jews are invaluable partners in such publicity-shy schemes, and that's why: "The Shoah Memorial is a secular temple for the entirety of France's post-Christian elite. Holocaust foundations, Jewish communal projects, Jewish benevolent societies and Jewish philanthropies allow the Jewish community to discourage reporting affairs they are involved in. They can facilitate the deals in obscurity" – I was told by a knowledgeable Jewish person, well versed with goings-on within the French Jewish community and in the higher business, banking and political circles of the Republic. I'll call him JT (I shall share more of his knowledge in the next essay – ISH). –

"Jewishness has once again become a way of avoiding scrutiny and accountability. Only anti-Semites dare to see a link between the sale of Alstom, Macron's career, the Rothschilds, and the Jewish community." Wink wink.

"At two crucial moments Jewish communal support was decisive to Macron's political career; first, at the second tour of the French elections, in which major Jewish organizations unanimously cajoled and preached the Macron vote to all and sundry; second, to suppress the Yellow Vests Uprising. Only anti-Semites dare to think the Rothschilds had anything to do with either."

JT is very critical with France and French people: "French White gentiles are ashamed of their past and identity, flee into hedonism, profligacy, drugs, anti-depressants, libertinism, pornography, and homosexuality. Their Stockholm syndrome is driven by an extra-European-birth-cohort whose numbers now exceed that of the native population. Unwilling to fight for their land and heritage, ignorant of their past and increasingly illiterate, their love of France is futile, superfluous, and incoherent at best.

"As France increasingly resembles a North African backwater, its Jews, the chief facilitators of this demographic shift, have become its chief losers, and a process of Jewish de-assimilation from the Republic has began. French Jews cannot identify with a society on its last legs, and a spineless native population. In such circumstances, French Jews shift their focus to survival and opportunism, not to national defence. Israel, Miami, New York have become second homes. France's Jewish patricians (all to the last dual-citizens since the fifties), are helpless. Their ties to an increasingly hard-up Israel and to the powerful Jewish American community make them leaders of the fire-sale of France's industrial, political, and cultural assets. France is sliding into failed nation status in which everyone is abandoning ship."

French Jews help the US to rob France, says JT. The American companies supported by all-powerful DoJ are the main reason why France does not prosper. When France attempted to tax American Internet companies (Amazon, Google, Facebook) Trump threatened to slap 100% custom duties on French wine. The right choice for France is to part the company with the Yankee predator, to cease paying billions of fines for breaking unjustifiable unilateral American 'sanctions', to part with NATO and to laugh at Trump's demands to pay more for unnecessary American protection. But France, and other European nations are hesitant. They do not jump at the opportunity offered by Trump's stupidity and arrogance, though the Orange man did everything he could to free the Europeans. He opened the gates, he insulted them and kicked them, but they refused to leave the stables.

An Excellent American expert in International relations, Prof Michael Brenner of Pittsburgh U, has noted:

"Europe's political class is psychologically unable to break free of its dominant/subordinate relationship with America. This pattern endures despite the presence of a mentally impaired man in the White House. The prognosis, therefore: 'Wither thou goest, we go!" American leaders have exploited this compulsive deference ruthlessly. It allows Washington to ensure European fealty at virtually no cost. Moreover, they can extract compliance across a wide array of non-security issues – commercial, financial, IT (warring against Huawei), political, diplomatic – by drawing on the same free-floating loyalties.

Europe has been obedient to the siren call of Uncle Sam in following it over the cliff time after time – in Afghanistan, in Iraq (France excepted), on Russia, on Iran (by acquiescing in severe sanctions), on Saudi Arabia, in Yemen, in embracing Bolsonaro (invited Keynoter at Davos), even on Venezuela and Bolivia. The ultimate test will come were Washington to pick a fight with China that it, and the West, cannot win; will Europe then take the final, fatal leap hand-in-hand?"

It appears that love of Jews is an integral element of this fealty, together with LGBT nonsense and other peculiar American imports. Love of Jews and love of America – are they separable at all? If and when France and England regain their independence, their Jews would recover their normal place in their societies. Admittedly, it won't be a place at the top, but it would be a respectful place of equals in a healthy society, rather than a place of a symbol and a facilitator of foreign influence on the ruins of Europe, as it is now.

[Dec 07, 2019] This is clearly one of the most dirty tricks played by UK Israel lobby, if we talk about Corbin. Baseless charge of anti-Semitism became a political smear, the way to destroy political opponent.

Zionist McCarthyism?
Notable quotes:
"... Charges of anti-Semitism against Corbyn are highly suspect. From what I can see, they all stem from Corbyn's remarks supporting Palestinian rights in the face of the Israeli government's institutionalized racism and oppression of Palestinians. ..."
"... Yes. This is clearly one of the most dirty tricks played by UK Israel lobby, if we talk about Corbin. Baseless charge of anti-Semitism became a political smear, the way to destroy political opponent. ..."
Dec 07, 2019 | economistsview.typepad.com

JohnH -> anne... , December 06, 2019 at 03:53 PM

Charges of anti-Semitism against Corbyn are highly suspect. From what I can see, they all stem from Corbyn's remarks supporting Palestinian rights in the face of the Israeli government's institutionalized racism and oppression of Palestinians.

If Bernie were not Jewish, there would have been an enormous smear campaign against him for exactly the same reasons.

likbez -> JohnH... , December 07, 2019 at 01:53 AM


Charges of anti-Semitism against Corbyn are highly suspect. From what I can see, they all stem from Corbyn's remarks supporting Palestinian rights in the face of the Israeli government's institutionalized racism and oppression of Palestinians.

Yes. This is clearly one of the most dirty tricks played by UK Israel lobby, if we talk about Corbin. Baseless charge of anti-Semitism became a political smear, the way to destroy political opponent.

Much like charge of "Putin stooge" in the USA. And Russophobia is very similar to Anti-Semitism, if you think about it. It serves as a kind of politically correct anti-Semitism.

[Dec 06, 2019] Who Is Making US Foreign Policy by Stephen F. Cohen

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... A more plausible explanation is that Trump thought that by appointing such anti-Russian hard-liners he could lay to rest the Russiagate allegations that had hung over him for three years and still did: that for some secret nefarious reason he was and remained a "Kremlin puppet." Despite the largely exculpatory Mueller report, Trump's political enemies, mostly Democrats but not only, have kept the allegations alive. ..."
"... The larger question is who should make American foreign policy: an elected president or Washington's permanent foreign policy establishment? (It is scarcely a "deep" or "secret" state, since its representatives appear on CNN and MSNBC almost daily.) Today, Democrats seem to think that it should be the foreign policy establishment, not President Trump. But having heard the cold-war views of much of that establishment, how will they feel when a Democrat occupies the White House? After all, eventually Trump will leave power, but Washington's foreign-policy "blob," as even an Obama aide termed it , will remain. ..."
"... Listen to the podcast here ..."
"... War With Russia? From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate ..."
"... The John Batchelor Show ..."
"... Trump's anti-Iranian fever is every bit as ludicrous as the DNC's anti-Russian fever. There is absolutely nothing to support the anti-Iranian policy argument or the anti JCPOA argument. The only thing that is missing from all of this is Iranian hookers, and that would certainly be an explosive headline! ..."
"... You know why Rhodes called it the blob, right? Why he made it sound so formless and squishy? Ask yourself, how does a failed novelist with zilch for foreign-affairs credentials get the big job of Obama's ventriloquist? That's a CIA billet. It so happens that Rhodes' brother has a big job of his own with CBS News, the most servile of the Mockingbird media propaganda mills. ..."
"... It's not a blob, it's a precisely-articulated hierarchy. And the top of it is CIA. So please for once somebody answer this blindingly obvious question, Who is making US foreign policy? CIA, that's who. For the CIA show trial run by Iran/Contra nomenklatura Bill Barr and his blackmailed flunky Durham, Trump's high crime and misdemeanor is conducting diplomacy without CIA supervision. They come out and say so, pointing to the National Security Act's mousetrap bureaucracy. ..."
"... CIA runs your country. They've got impunity, they do what they want. We've got 400,000 academics paid to overthink it. ..."
"... We cannot trust that the people that destroyed the country will repair it. It is run by a Cult of Hedonistic Satanic Psychopaths. If they were limited to just the CIA, America would be in far better shape than its in. The CIA is not capable of thinking or intelligence, so we should stop paying them. ..."
"... Drumpf has been a tool of the Wall Street/Las Vegas Zionist billionaires for many, many years. so his selection of warmongering Zio neo-con advisors should be no surprise. ..."
"... Perhaps part of the reason that Trump often seems to be surrounded by people who don't support his policies or values is, as Paul Craig Roberts suggested in 2016, that Trump would have real problems simply because he was an outsider. An outsider to the Washington swamp, a swamp that Clinton had been swimming in for decades. In short he didn't know who to trust, who to keep "in the tent" & who to shut out. Thus, we have had this huge churn in Secretaries & on so on downwards. ..."
"... Sociopaths are the ones that do the worst because they lack any concern or "Empathy", like robots. So I read that the socio's are some of the brightest people who often are very successful in business etc. and can hide the fact that they would soon as kill as look at ya, but cool as ice, all they want is to get what the hell they want! They don't give a rats petoot who likes likes it or not, except as . ..."
"... Trump hasn't fired any of the neocons, but he proved that he CAN fire defense executives. He fired the Sec of Navy for disagreeing with some ridiculous personal thing that Trump wanted to do. Since Trump hasn't fired any neocons, we have to conclude that he's fully on board. ..."
"... There are so many security holes in the constitution of the USA including that it was ratified by those who invented it, not by a vote put to the people that would be made to suffer being governed by it. Basically the USA is useless as a defender of human rights (one of which is the right to self determination). The so called bill of rights (1st 10 amendments) are contractual promises, but like all clauses in contracts if there is no way to enforce them, then there is no use for the clause except maybe propaganda value. ..."
"... In a normally functioning world you simply can't simultaneously argue that in one case West can bomb a country to force self-determination as in Kosovo, and also denounce exactly the same thing in Crimea. On to Catalonia and more self-determination ..."
"... Trump, among his other occupations, used to engage with the professional wrestling circuit. In that well-staged entertainment there is always a bad guy – or a ' heel ' – who is used to stir up the crowds, the Evil Sheik or Rocky's hapless movie enemies. It makes it ' real '. The ' heel ' is sometimes allowed to win to better manage the audience. But the narrative never changes. Our rational judgments should focus on what happens, and on outcomes – not on talk, slogans, speeches, etc Based on that, Trump is a classical ' heel ' character. He might even be playing it consciously, or he has no choice. ..."
"... To answer the question who runs ' foreign policy ', let's ignore the stadium speeches, and simply look at what happens. In a world bereft of enough profitable consumer things to do, and enough justifiable careers for unemployable geo-political security 'experts' of all kinds, having enemies and maybe even a small war occasionally is not such an irrational thing to want. Plus there are the deep ethnic hatreds and traumas going back generations that were naively imported into the heart of the Western world. (Washington warned against that 200+ years ago.) ..."
"... or maybe trump was a lying neocon, war-loving, immigration-loving neoliberal all along, and you and the trumptards somehow continue to believe his campaign rhetoric? ..."
"... The fact is Trump is not an anti-neocon (Deep State) president he only talks that way. The fact that he surrounded himself with Deep State denizens gives lie to the thought that he is anti-Deep State no one can be that god damn stupid. ..."
"... "TRUMP SUPPORTERS WERE DUPED – Trump supporters are going to find out soon enough that they were duped by Donald Trump. Trump was given the script to run as the "Chaos Candidate" .He is just a pawn of the ruling elite .It is a tactic known as 'CONTROLLED OPPOSITION' ". Wasn't it FDR who said "Presidents are selected , they are not elected " ? ..."
"... Trump selected the Neocons he is surrounded with. And he's given away all kinds of property that he has absolutely no legal authority to give. He was seeking to please American Oligarchs the likes of Adelson. That's American politics. "Money is free speech." Of course, there is another connection with foreign policy beyond the truly total corruption of American domestic politics, and that's through America's brutal empire abroad. ..."
"... Obama or Trump, on the main matters of importance abroad – NATO, Russia, Israel/Palestine, China – there has been no difference, except Trump is more openly bellicose and given to saying really stupid things. ..."
Dec 06, 2019 | www.unz.com
President Trump campaigned and was elected on an anti-neocon platform: he promised to reduce direct US involvement in areas where, he believed, America had no vital strategic interest, including in Ukraine. He also promised a new détente ("cooperation") with Moscow.

And yet, as we have learned from their recent congressional testimony, key members of his own National Security Council did not share his views and indeed were opposed to them. Certainly, this was true of Fiona Hill and Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman. Both of them seemed prepared for a highly risky confrontation with Russia over Ukraine, though whether retroactively because of Moscow's 2014 annexation of Crimea or for more general reasons was not entirely clear.

Similarly, Trump was slow in withdrawing Marie Yovanovitch, a career foreign service officer appointed by President Obama as ambassador to Kiev, who had made clear, despite her official position in Kiev, that she did not share the new American president's thinking about Ukraine or Russia. In short, the president was surrounded in his own administration, even in the White House, by opponents of his foreign policy and presumably not only in regard to Ukraine.

How did this unusual and dysfunctional situation come about? One possibility is that it was the doing and legacy of the neocon John Bolton, briefly Trump's national security adviser. But this doesn't explain why the president would accept or long tolerate such appointees.

A more plausible explanation is that Trump thought that by appointing such anti-Russian hard-liners he could lay to rest the Russiagate allegations that had hung over him for three years and still did: that for some secret nefarious reason he was and remained a "Kremlin puppet." Despite the largely exculpatory Mueller report, Trump's political enemies, mostly Democrats but not only, have kept the allegations alive.

The larger question is who should make American foreign policy: an elected president or Washington's permanent foreign policy establishment? (It is scarcely a "deep" or "secret" state, since its representatives appear on CNN and MSNBC almost daily.) Today, Democrats seem to think that it should be the foreign policy establishment, not President Trump. But having heard the cold-war views of much of that establishment, how will they feel when a Democrat occupies the White House? After all, eventually Trump will leave power, but Washington's foreign-policy "blob," as even an Obama aide termed it , will remain.

Listen to the podcast here . Stephen F. Cohen Stephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University. A Nation contributing editor, his most recent book, War With Russia? From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate , is available in paperback and in an ebook edition. His weekly conversations with the host of The John Batchelor Show , now in their sixth year, are available at www.thenation.com .


Curmudgeon , says: December 5, 2019 at 8:49 pm GMT

because of Moscow's 2014 annexation of Crimea or for more general reasons was not entirely clear.

In an otherwise decent overview, this sticks out like a sore thumb. It would be helpful to stop using the word annexation. While correct in a technical sense – that Crimea was added to the Russian Federation – the word comes with all kinds of connotations, that imply illegality and or force. Given Crimea was given special status when gifted to Ukraine for administration by the USSR, one could just as easily apply "annexation" of Crimea to Ukraine. After Ukraine voted to "leave" the USSR, Crimea voted to join Ukraine. Obviously the "Ukrainian" vote did not include Crimea. Even after voting to join Ukraine, Crimea had special status within Ukraine, and was semi autonomous. If you can vote to join, you can vote to leave. Either you have the right to self determination, or you don't.

Rebel0007 , says: December 5, 2019 at 10:38 pm GMT
This is what is so infuriating, Stephen! These silent coups of the executive branch have been taking place for my entire life! Both parties are guilty of refusing to appoint cabinet members that the elected presidents would have chosen for themselves, because both parties are more interested in making the president of the opposing party look bad, make him ineffective, and incapable of carrying out policies that he was elected to carry out. That is the very definition of treason!

Things are a disaster. The JCPOA is at the heart of the issue and Trump and his advisors stubborn refusal to capitulate on this issue very well may cause Trump to lose the 2020 election. Trump's anti-Iranian fever is every bit as ludicrous as the DNC's anti-Russian fever. There is absolutely nothing to support the anti-Iranian policy argument or the anti JCPOA argument. The only thing that is missing from all of this is Iranian hookers, and that would certainly be an explosive headline!

The anti-Iranian fever has created so much havoc not only with Iran, but with every country on earth other than Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE. Germany announced that it is seeking to unite with Russia, not only for Gazprom, but is now considering purchasing defense systems from Russia, and Germany is dictating EU policy, by and large. Germany has said that Europe must be able to defend itself independent of America and is requesting an EU military and Italy is on board with this idea, seeking to create jobs and weapons for its economy and defense.

The EU is fed up with the economic sanctions placed on countries that the U.S. has black-listed, particularly Russia and Iran, and China as well for Huwaei 5G.

Nobody in their right mind could ever claim this to be the free market capitalism that Larry Kudlow espouses!

National Institute for Study of the O... , says: December 5, 2019 at 11:00 pm GMT
You know why Rhodes called it the blob, right? Why he made it sound so formless and squishy? Ask yourself, how does a failed novelist with zilch for foreign-affairs credentials get the big job of Obama's ventriloquist? That's a CIA billet. It so happens that Rhodes' brother has a big job of his own with CBS News, the most servile of the Mockingbird media propaganda mills.

It's not a blob, it's a precisely-articulated hierarchy. And the top of it is CIA. So please for once somebody answer this blindingly obvious question, Who is making US foreign policy? CIA, that's who. For the CIA show trial run by Iran/Contra nomenklatura Bill Barr and his blackmailed flunky Durham, Trump's high crime and misdemeanor is conducting diplomacy without CIA supervision. They come out and say so, pointing to the National Security Act's mousetrap bureaucracy.

CIA runs your country. They've got impunity, they do what they want. We've got 400,000 academics paid to overthink it.

follyofwar , says: December 5, 2019 at 11:53 pm GMT
@Curmudgeon Pat Buchanan also uses the word "annexation" all the time.
Rebel0007 , says: December 6, 2019 at 4:31 am GMT
National Institute for the study of the obvious,

The CIA has no authority what so ever as defined by the supreme law of the land, the constitution. That would make them guilty of a coup which would be an act of treason, so if what you claim is true, why have they not been prosecuted.

It is a political game between to competing kleptocratic cults. The DNC and RNC are whores and will do what ever their donors tell them to do. That is also treason. This country is just a total wasteland.

Everyone has pledged allegiance to fraud.

Too big to fail, like the Titanic and the Hindenberg.

We cannot trust that the people that destroyed the country will repair it. It is run by a Cult of Hedonistic Satanic Psychopaths. If they were limited to just the CIA, America would be in far better shape than its in. The CIA is not capable of thinking or intelligence, so we should stop paying them.

Haxo Angmark , says: Website December 6, 2019 at 6:01 am GMT
Drumpf has been a tool of the Wall Street/Las Vegas Zionist billionaires for many, many years. so his selection of warmongering Zio neo-con advisors should be no surprise.
Monty Ahwazi , says: December 6, 2019 at 6:03 am GMT
What kind of stupid question is this? You mean you don't know or asking us for confirmation? If you really don't know then why are you writing an article about it? If you do know then why are you asking the UNZ readers?
animalogic , says: December 6, 2019 at 6:21 am GMT
Perhaps part of the reason that Trump often seems to be surrounded by people who don't support his policies or values is, as Paul Craig Roberts suggested in 2016, that Trump would have real problems simply because he was an outsider. An outsider to the Washington swamp, a swamp that Clinton had been swimming in for decades. In short he didn't know who to trust, who to keep "in the tent" & who to shut out. Thus, we have had this huge churn in Secretaries & on so on downwards.
EdNels , says: December 6, 2019 at 6:49 am GMT
@Rebel0007

It is run by a Cult of Hedonistic Satanic Psychopaths.

That's ok but it's a bit unfair to Hedonistic Satanic Psychopaths After all most of the country is Hedonistic as hell, it sells commercials or wtf. Satanic is philosophical and way over the heads of these clowns, though if the be a Satan, then they are in the plan for sure, and right on the mark. As for psychopaths, those are criminals who are insane, but they can have remorse and be their own worst enemies, often they just go off and go psycho and bad things happen, but can be unplanned off the wall stuff, not diabolic.

Sociopaths are the ones that do the worst because they lack any concern or "Empathy", like robots. So I read that the socio's are some of the brightest people who often are very successful in business etc. and can hide the fact that they would soon as kill as look at ya, but cool as ice, all they want is to get what the hell they want! They don't give a rats petoot who likes likes it or not, except as .

So, once upon a time, a people got so hedonistic and they didn't watch the game and theier leaders were low quality (especially religeous/morals ) and long story short Satan unleashed the Socio's , Things seem to be heading disastrously, so will bit coin save the day? Green nudeal?

Jon Baptist , says: December 6, 2019 at 6:54 am GMT
The simple questions that beg to be asked are who are the accusers and what media agencies are providing the amplification to transmit these accusations?
https://forward.com/news/national/434664/impeachment-trump-democrats-jewish/
https://www.jta.org/2019/11/15/politics/the-tell-the-jewish-players-in-impeachment

There is also this link courtesy of Haass' CFR – https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/russia-trump-and-2016-us-election

While massive attention is directed towards Russia and the Ukraine, the majority of the public are shown the slight of hand and their attention is never brought near to the real perpetrators of subverting American and British foreign policy.

https://electronicintifada.net/content/watch-film-israel-lobby-didnt-want-you-see/25876
http://joshdlindsay.com/2019/04/the-israel-lobby-in-the-u-s-al-jazeera-documentary/
The Truth Archive
2K subscribers
The Israeli Lobby in the United States of America (2017) – Full Documentary HD

polistra , says: December 6, 2019 at 7:49 am GMT
Doesn't matter if he's surrounded. A president CAN make foreign policy, and a president CAN fire people who disagree with his policy. Trump hasn't fired any of the neocons, but he proved that he CAN fire defense executives. He fired the Sec of Navy for disagreeing with some ridiculous personal thing that Trump wanted to do. Since Trump hasn't fired any neocons, we have to conclude that he's fully on board.
sally , says: December 6, 2019 at 8:51 am GMT
@Rebel0007

The CIA has no authority what so ever as defined by the supreme law of the land, the constitution. That would make them guilty of a coup which would be an act of treason, so if what you claim is true, why have they not been prosecuted.

--
first off the supreme law of the land maybe the Constitution and to oppose it may be Treason, but the Law that is supreme to the Law of the land is Human rights law.. it is far superior to, and it is the TLD of all laws of the land of all of the Nation States that mankind has allowed the greedy among its masses, to impose.

There are so many security holes in the constitution of the USA including that it was ratified by those who invented it, not by a vote put to the people that would be made to suffer being governed by it. Basically the USA is useless as a defender of human rights (one of which is the right to self determination). The so called bill of rights (1st 10 amendments) are contractual promises, but like all clauses in contracts if there is no way to enforce them, then there is no use for the clause except maybe propaganda value.

If you note the USA constitution has seven articles..

Article 1 is about 525 elected members of congress and their very limited powers to control
foreign activities. Each qualified to vote member of the governed (a citizen so to speak) is allowed to
vote for only 3 of the 525 persons. so basically there is no real national election anywhere .

Article II grants the electoral college the power to appoint two persons full control of the assets,
resources and manpower of America to conquer the entire world or to make peace in the entire world.
Either way: the governed are not allowed to vote for either; the EC vote determines the P or VP.

Article III allows the Article II person to appoint yes men to the judiciary

Where exist the power of the governed to deny USA governors the ability to the use the powers the constitution claims the governors are to have, against the governed? <==No where I can find? Theoretically, the governed are protected from abuse for as long as it takes to conduct due process?

One person, the Article II person, is basically the king when in comes to constitutional authority to establish, conduct, prosecute or defend USA involvement in foreign affairs.

No where does the constitution of the USA deny its President the use of American resources or USA military power, to make and use diplomat appointments, or to use the USA to use the wealth of America and the hegemonic powers of the USA to make a private or public profit in a foreign land. <= d/n matter if the profit is personal to the President or if it assigned by appointment (like the feudal powers granted by the feudal kings to the feudal lords) to corporate feudal lords or oligarch personal interest.

AFAICT, the president can USE the USA to conduct war, invade or otherwise infringe on, even destroy, the territory, or a private or public interest, within a foreign sovereign more or less at will. So if the President wants to command a private or secret Army like the CIA, he can as far as I can tell, obviously this president does, because he could with his pen alone shut it down.

Seems to me the "NO" from Wilson's four points

  1. no more secret diplomacy peace settlement must not lead the way to new wars
  2. no retribution, unjust claims, and huge fines <basically indemnities paid by the losers to the winners.
  3. no more war; includes controls on armaments and arming of nations.
  4. no more Trade Barriers so the nations of the world would become more interdependent.

have been made the essence of nation state operations world wide.

IMO, The CIA exists at the pleasure of the President.

Beckow , says: December 6, 2019 at 9:29 am GMT
@Curmudgeon all of that, plus the Kosovo precedent.

In a normally functioning world you simply can't simultaneously argue that in one case West can bomb a country to force self-determination as in Kosovo, and also denounce exactly the same thing in Crimea. On to Catalonia and more self-determination

Beckow , says: December 6, 2019 at 9:52 am GMT
Trump, among his other occupations, used to engage with the professional wrestling circuit. In that well-staged entertainment there is always a bad guy – or a ' heel ' – who is used to stir up the crowds, the Evil Sheik or Rocky's hapless movie enemies. It makes it ' real '. The 'heel ' is sometimes allowed to win to better manage the audience. But the narrative never changes. Our rational judgments should focus on what happens, and on outcomes – not on talk, slogans, speeches, etc Based on that, Trump is a classical ' heel ' character. He might even be playing it consciously, or he has no choice.

To answer the question who runs ' foreign policy ', let's ignore the stadium speeches, and simply look at what happens. In a world bereft of enough profitable consumer things to do, and enough justifiable careers for unemployable geo-political security 'experts' of all kinds, having enemies and maybe even a small war occasionally is not such an irrational thing to want. Plus there are the deep ethnic hatreds and traumas going back generations that were naively imported into the heart of the Western world. (Washington warned against that 200+ years ago.)

Anon [424] Disclaimer , says: December 6, 2019 at 10:47 am GMT
https://russia-insider.com/en/politics/majority-germans-wants-less-reliance-us-more-engagement-russia/ri27985

Macron said that NATO is " brain dead " :

https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/11/07/emmanuel-macron-warns-europe-nato-is-becoming-brain-dead

The more the US sanctions so many countries around the world , the more the US generate an anti US reaction around the world .

gotmituns , says: December 6, 2019 at 11:09 am GMT
Who Is Making US Foreign Policy?
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -
Could it be israel?
DrWatson , says: December 6, 2019 at 11:20 am GMT
Trump should have kept Steve Bannon as his advisor and should have fired instead his son-in-law. Perhaps "they" are blackmailing Trump with photos like here: https://www.pinterest.com/richarddesjarla/creepy/

That would explain why Trump is so ineffective at making a reality anything he campaigned for.

Marshall Lentini , says: December 6, 2019 at 11:28 am GMT
@melpol Betas in power -- an underappreciated dimension of this morass.
propagandist hacker , says: Website December 6, 2019 at 11:29 am GMT
or maybe trump was a lying neocon, war-loving, immigration-loving neoliberal all along, and you and the trumptards somehow continue to believe his campaign rhetoric?
Realist , says: December 6, 2019 at 11:52 am GMT

An anti-neocon president appears to have been surrounded by neocons in his own administration.

The fact is Trump is not an anti-neocon (Deep State) president he only talks that way. The fact that he surrounded himself with Deep State denizens gives lie to the thought that he is anti-Deep State no one can be that god damn stupid.

Realist , says: December 6, 2019 at 12:00 pm GMT
@sally

IMO, The CIA exists at the pleasure of the President.

The CIA sees it differently; and they are part of the Deep State.

Realist , says: December 6, 2019 at 12:03 pm GMT
@propagandist hacker

or maybe trump was a lying neocon, war-loving, immigration-loving neoliberal all along, and you and the trumptards somehow continue to believe his campaign rhetoric?

That is my contention.

Sean , says: December 6, 2019 at 12:11 pm GMT
MICHAEL CARPENTER Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine, and Eurasia from 2015 to 2017.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2019-11-26/oligarchs-who-lost-ukraine-and-won-washington

Halfway around the world from Washington's halls of power, Ukraine sits along a civilizational and geopolitical fault line. To Ukraine's west are the liberal democracies of Europe, governed by rule of law and democratic principles. To its east are Russia and its client states in Eurasia, almost all of which are corrupt oligarchies. [ ] In this war on democratic movements and democratic principles, Russia's biggest prize and chief adversary has always been the United States. Until now, however, Russia has always had to contend with bipartisan resolve to counter

No mention of China, and this is the problem with the whole foreign policy establishment not just the neocons. Russia is more of an annoyance than anything, but they are still operating assumptions on what is the Geographical Pivot of History , so they want to talk about Russia. Like an Edwardian sea cadet we are supposed to care about Russia getting (back) a water port in Crimea. Mahan's definition of sea power included a strong commercial fleet. After tearing their own environment apart like a car in a wrecking yard and heating up the planet China has taken time out from deforestation and colonising Tibet, to send huge container vessels full of cheap goods through the melting Arctic round the top of Russia all the better to get to Europe and deindustrialise it.

Western elites have sold out to China, seen as the future, so we hear about Russia rather than the three million Uyghurs in concentration camps complete with constantly smoking crematoria, and harvesting of organs for rich foreigners.

Who poses a greater threat to the West: China or Russia?
By the time the West finds itself in open conflict with Beijing, we will have lost our relative advantage. Brendan Simms and K.C. Lin [ ] The concept of China being a threat is harder to comprehend. In what way? Yes, its hacking and intellectual property theft is a headache. But is it worse than what Russia is up to? And don't we need Chinese investment, so does it really matter if China builds our 5G mobile networks? In London, ministers agonise over these issues -- not knowing whether to pity China (we still send foreign aid there), beg for its money and contracts (with prime ministerial trade trips), or treat it as a potential antagonist.

Aid ! They sent robots to the far side of the Moon

Beijing has been the beneficiary of liberal revulsion at the Trump presidency: if the Donald is against the Chinese, who cannot be for them? As a result, Trump's efforts to address China's unfair trade practices have so far missed the mark with the domestic and international audience. As Trump declares war on free trade, China -- one of the most protectionist economies in the world -- is now celebrated at Davos as the avatar of free trade. Later this month, China's Vice-President is likely to be in attendance at Davos -- and there is even talk of him meeting with Trump. Similarly, the messiness of American politics has made China's one-party state an apparent poster boy of political stability and governability.

9/11 Inside job , says: December 6, 2019 at 12:14 pm GMT
911endofdays.blogspot.com : "Sackcloth&Ashes – The 16th Trump of Arcana " :

"TRUMP SUPPORTERS WERE DUPED – Trump supporters are going to find out soon enough that they were duped by Donald Trump. Trump was given the script to run as the "Chaos Candidate" .He is just a pawn of the ruling elite .It is a tactic known as 'CONTROLLED OPPOSITION' ".
Wasn't it FDR who said "Presidents are selected , they are not elected " ?

JOHN CHUCKMAN , says: Website December 6, 2019 at 12:25 pm GMT

Trump selected the Neocons he is surrounded with. And he's given away all kinds of property that he has absolutely no legal authority to give. He was seeking to please American Oligarchs the likes of Adelson. That's American politics. "Money is free speech." Of course, there is another connection with foreign policy beyond the truly total corruption of American domestic politics, and that's through America's brutal empire abroad.

The military/intelligence imperial establishment definitely see Israel as a kind of American colony in the Mideast, and they make sure that it's well provided for. That's what the Neocon Wars have been about. Paving over large parts of Israel's noisy neighborhood. And that includes matters like keeping Syria off-balance with occupation in its northeast. And constantly threatening Iran.

Obama or Trump, on the main matters of importance abroad – NATO, Russia, Israel/Palestine, China – there has been no difference, except Trump is more openly bellicose and given to saying really stupid things.

By the way, the last President who tried seriously to make foreign policy as the elected head of government left half of his head splattered on thec streets of Dallas.

Sick of Orcs , says: December 6, 2019 at 12:36 pm GMT
@propagandist hacker Or he was fooled, tricked, bribed, coerced by The HoloNose.

Don't get me wrong, the Orange Sellout is to blame regardless.

9/11 Inside job , says: December 6, 2019 at 12:37 pm GMT
@Jon Baptist We have all been brainwashed by the propaganda screened by the massmedia ,whether it be FOX , MSNBC , CBS ,etc.. SeptemberClues.info has a good article entitled "The central role of the news media on 9/11 " :

"The 9/11 psyop relied foremostly on that weakspot of ours .We all fell for the images we saw on TV at the time we can only wonder why so many never questioned the absurd TV coverage proposed by all the major networks The 9/11 TV imagery of the crucial morning events was just a computer-animated, pre-fabricated movie."

Was "The Harley Guy" a crisis actor ?

geokat62 , says: December 6, 2019 at 1:00 pm GMT
@National Institute for Study of the Obvious

So please for once somebody answer this blindingly obvious question, Who is making US foreign policy? CIA, that's who.

Close. You got 4 of the correct letters, AIPAC. You were just missing the P.

CIA runs your country.

No, Jewish Supremacist oligarchs run America.

Herald , says: December 6, 2019 at 1:05 pm GMT
@follyofwar Pat inhabits a strange Hollywood type world, where the US is always the good guy. He believes that, although the US may make foreign policy mistakes, its aims and ambitions are nevertheless noble and well intentioned.

In Pat's world it's still circa 1955, but even then, his take on US foreign policy would have been hopelessly unrealistic.

[Dec 04, 2019] American Pravda the Nature of Anti-Semitism by Ron Unz

Notable quotes:
"... Now consider the notion of "anti-Semitism." Google searches for that word and its close variants reveal over 24 million hits, and over the years I'm sure I've seen that term tens of thousands of times in my books and newspapers, and heard it endlessly reported in my electronic media and entertainment. But thinking it over, I'm not sure that I can ever recall a single real-life instance I've personally encountered, nor have I heard of almost any such cases from my friends or acquaintances. Indeed, the only persons I've ever come across making such claims were individuals who bore unmistakable signs of serious psychological imbalance. When the daily newspapers are brimming with lurid tales of hideous demons walking among us and attacking people on every street corner, but you yourself have never actually seen one, you may gradually grow suspicious. ..."
"... It has also become apparent that a considerable fraction of what passes for "anti-Semitism" these days seems to stretch that term beyond all recognition. A few weeks ago an unknown 28-year-old Democratic Socialist named Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez scored a stunning upset primary victory over a top House Democrat in New York City, and naturally received a blizzard of media coverage as a result. However, when it came out that she had denounced the Israeli government for its recent massacre of over 140 unarmed Palestinian protesters in Gaza, cries of "anti-Semite" soon appeared, and according to Google there are now over 180,000 such hits combining her name and that harsh accusatory term. Similarly, just a few days ago the New York Times ran a major story reporting that all of Britain's Jewish newspapers had issued an "unprecedented" denunciation of Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party, describing it as an "existential threat" to the Jewish community for the anti-Semitism it was fostering; but this apparently amounted to nothing more than its willingness to sharply criticize the Israeli government for its long mistreatment of the Palestinians. ..."
Aug 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

I recently published a couple of long essays, and although they primarily focused on other matters, the subject of anti-Semitism was a strong secondary theme. In that regard, I mentioned my shock at discovering a dozen or more years ago that several of the most self-evidently absurd elements of anti-Semitic lunacy, which I had always dismissed without consideration, were probably correct. It does seem likely that a significant number of traditionally-religious Jews did indeed occasionally commit the ritual murder of Christian children in order to use their blood in certain religious ceremonies, and also that powerful Jewish international bankers did play a large role in financing the establishment of Bolshevik Russia .

When one discovers that matters of such enormous moment not only apparently occurred but that they had been successfully excluded from nearly all of our histories and media coverage for most of the last one hundred years, the implications take some time to properly digest. If the most extreme "anti-Semitic canards" were probably true, then surely the whole notion of anti-Semitism warrants a careful reexamination.

All of us obtain our knowledge of the world by two different channels. Some things we discover from our own personal experiences and the direct evidence of our senses, but most information comes to us via external sources such as books and the media, and a crisis may develop when we discover that these two pathways are in sharp conflict. The official media of the old USSR used to endlessly trumpet the tremendous achievements of its collectivized agricultural system, but when citizens noticed that there was never any meat in their shops, "Pravda" became a watchword for "Lies" rather than "Truth."

Now consider the notion of "anti-Semitism." Google searches for that word and its close variants reveal over 24 million hits, and over the years I'm sure I've seen that term tens of thousands of times in my books and newspapers, and heard it endlessly reported in my electronic media and entertainment. But thinking it over, I'm not sure that I can ever recall a single real-life instance I've personally encountered, nor have I heard of almost any such cases from my friends or acquaintances. Indeed, the only persons I've ever come across making such claims were individuals who bore unmistakable signs of serious psychological imbalance. When the daily newspapers are brimming with lurid tales of hideous demons walking among us and attacking people on every street corner, but you yourself have never actually seen one, you may gradually grow suspicious.

Indeed, over the years some of my own research has uncovered a sharp contrast between image and reality. As recently as the late 1990s, leading mainstream media outlets such as The New York Times were still denouncing a top Ivy League school such as Princeton for the supposed anti-Semitism of its college admissions policy, but a few years ago when I carefully investigated that issue in quantitative terms for my lengthy Meritocracy analysis I was very surprised to reach a polar-opposite conclusion. According to the best available evidence, white Gentiles were over 90% less likely to be enrolled at Harvard and the other Ivies than were Jews of similar academic performance, a truly remarkable finding. If the situation had been reversed and Jews were 90% less likely to be found at Harvard than seemed warranted by their test scores, surely that fact would be endlessly cited as the absolute smoking-gun proof of horrendous anti-Semitism in present-day America.

It has also become apparent that a considerable fraction of what passes for "anti-Semitism" these days seems to stretch that term beyond all recognition. A few weeks ago an unknown 28-year-old Democratic Socialist named Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez scored a stunning upset primary victory over a top House Democrat in New York City, and naturally received a blizzard of media coverage as a result. However, when it came out that she had denounced the Israeli government for its recent massacre of over 140 unarmed Palestinian protesters in Gaza, cries of "anti-Semite" soon appeared, and according to Google there are now over 180,000 such hits combining her name and that harsh accusatory term. Similarly, just a few days ago the New York Times ran a major story reporting that all of Britain's Jewish newspapers had issued an "unprecedented" denunciation of Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party, describing it as an "existential threat" to the Jewish community for the anti-Semitism it was fostering; but this apparently amounted to nothing more than its willingness to sharply criticize the Israeli government for its long mistreatment of the Palestinians.

One plausible explanation of the strange contrast between media coverage and reality might be that anti-Semitism once did loom very large in real life, but dissipated many decades ago, while the organizations and activists focused on detecting and combating that pernicious problem have remained in place, generating public attention based on smaller and smaller issues, with the zealous Jewish activists of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) representing a perfect example of this situation. As an even more striking illustration, the Second World War ended over seventy years ago, but what historian Norman Finkelstein has so aptly labeled "the Holocaust Industry" has grown ever larger and more entrenched in our academic and media worlds so that scarcely a day passes without one or more articles relating to that topic appearing in my major morning newspapers. Given this situation, a serious exploration of the true nature of anti-Semitism should probably avoid the mere media phantoms of today and focus on the past, when the condition might still have been widespread in daily life.

Many observers have pointed to the aftermath of the Second World War as marking a huge watershed in the public acceptability of anti-Semitism both in America and Europe, so perhaps a proper appraisal of that cultural phenomenon should focus on the years before that global conflict. However, the overwhelming role of Jews in the Bolshevik Revolution and other bloody Communist seizures of power quite naturally made them objects of considerable fear and hatred throughout the inter-war years, so the safest course might be to push that boundary back a little further and confine our attention to the period prior to the outbreak of the First World War. The pogroms in Czarist Russia, the Dreyfus Affair in France, and the lynching of Leo Frank in the American South come to mind as some of the most famous examples from that period.

Lindemann's discussion of the often difficult relations between Russia's restive Jewish minority and its huge Slavic majority is also quite interesting, and he provides numerous instances in which major incidents, supposedly demonstrating the enormously strong appeal of vicious anti-Semitism, were quite different than has been suggested by the legend. The famous Kishinev Pogrom of 1903 was obviously the result of severe ethnic tension in that city, but contrary to the regular accusations of later writers, there seems absolutely no evidence of high-level government involvement, and the widespread claims of 700 dead that so horrified the entire world were grossly exaggerated, with only 45 killed in the urban rioting. Chaim Weizmann, the future president of Israel, later promoted the story that he himself and some other brave Jewish souls had personally defended their people with revolvers in hand even as they saw the mutilated bodies of 80 Jewish victims. This account was totally fictional since Weizmann happened to have been be hundreds of miles away when the riots occurred.

Although a tendency to lie and exaggerate was hardly unique to the political partisans of Russian Jewry, the existence of a powerful international network of Jewish journalists and Jewish-influenced media outlets ensured that such concocted propaganda stories might receive enormous worldwide distribution, while the truth followed far behind, if at all.

For related reasons, international outrage was often focused on the legal confinement of most of Russia's Jews to the "Pale of Settlement," suggesting some sort of tight imprisonment; but that area was the traditional home of the Jewish population and encompassed a landmass almost as large as France and Spain combined. The growing impoverishment of Eastern European Jews during that era was often assumed to be a consequence of hostile government policy, but the obvious explanation was extraordinary Jewish fecundity, which far outstripped that of their Slavic fellow countrymen, and quickly led them to outgrow the available spots in any of their traditional "middleman" occupations, a situation worsened by their total disinclination to engage in agriculture or other primary-producer activities. Jewish communities expressed horror at the risk of losing their sons to the Czarist military draft, but this was simply the flip-side of the full Russian citizenship they had been granted, and no different from what was faced by their non-Jewish neighbors.

Certainly the Jews of Russia suffered greatly from widespread riots and mob attacks in the generation prior to World War I, and these did sometimes have substantial government encouragement, especially in the aftermath of the very heavy Jewish role in the 1905 Revolution. But we should keep in mind that a Jewish plotter had been implicated in the killing of Czar Alexander II, and Jewish assassins had also struck down several top Russian ministers and numerous other government officials. If the last decade or two had seen American Muslims assassinate a sitting U.S. President, various leading Cabinet members, and a host of our other elected and appointed officials, surely the position of Muslims in this country would have become a very uncomfortable one.

As Lindemann candidly describes the tension between Russia's very rapidly growing Jewish population and its governing authorities, he cannot avoid mentioning the notorious Jewish reputation for bribery, corruption, and general dishonesty, with numerous figures of all political backgrounds noting that the remarkable Jewish propensity to commit perjury in the courtroom led to severe problems in the effective administration of justice. The eminent American sociologist E.A. Ross, writing in 1913, characterized the regular behavior of Eastern European Jews in very similar terms .

Lindemann also allocates a short chapter to discussing the 1911 Beilis Affair, in which a Ukrainian Jew was accused of the ritual murder of a young Gentile boy, an incident that generated a great deal of international attention and controversy. Based on the evidence presented, the defendant seems likely to have been innocent, although the obvious lies he repeatedly told police interrogators hardly helped foster that impression, and "the system worked" in that he was ultimately found innocent by the jurors at his trial. However, a few pages are also given to a much less well-known ritual murder case in late 19th century Hungary, in which the evidence of Jewish guilt seemed far stronger, though the author hardly accepted the possible reality of such an outlandish crime. Such reticence was quite understandable since the publication of Ariel Toaff's remarkable volume on the subject was still a dozen years in the future.

Lindemann subsequently expanded his examination of historical anti-Semitism into a much broader treatment, Esau's Tears , which appeared in 1997. In this volume, he added comparative studies of the social landscape in Germany, Britain, Italy, and several other European countries, and demonstrated that the relationship between Jews and non-Jews varied greatly across different locations and time periods. But although I found his analysis quite useful and interesting, the extraordinarily harsh attacks his text provoked from some outraged Jewish academics seemed even more intriguing.

For example, Judith Laikin Elkin opened her discussion in The American Historical Review by describing the book as a "545-page polemic" a strange characterization of a book so remarkably even-handed and factually-based in its scholarship. Writing in Commentary , Robert Wistrich was even harsher, stating that merely reading the book had been a painful experience for him, and his review seemed filled with spittle-flecked rage. Unless these individuals had somehow gotten copies of a different book, I found their attitudes simply astonishing.

I was not alone in such a reaction. Richard S. Levy of the University of Illinois, a noted scholar of anti-Semitism, expressed amazement at Wistrich's seemingly irrational outburst, while Paul Gottfried, writing in Chronicles , mildly suggested that Lindemann had "touched raw nerves." Indeed, Gottfried's own evaluation quite reasonably criticized Lindemann for perhaps being a little too even-handed, sometimes presenting numerous conflicting analyzes without choosing between them. For those interested, a good discussion of the book by Alan Steinweis, a younger scholar specializing in the same topic, is conveniently available online .

The remarkable ferocity with which some Jewish writers attacked Lindemann's meticulous attempt to provide an accurate history of anti-Semitism may carry more significance than merely an exchange of angry words in low-circulation academic publications. If our mainstream media shapes our reality, scholarly books and articles based upon them tend to set the contours of that media coverage. And the ability of a relatively small number of agitated and energetic Jews to police the acceptable boundaries of historical narratives may have enormous consequences for our larger society, deterring scholars from objectively reporting historical facts and preventing students from discovering them.

The undeniable truth is that for many centuries Jews usually constituted a wealthy and privileged segment of the population in nearly all the European countries in which they resided, and quite frequently they based their livelihood upon the heavy exploitation of a downtrodden peasantry. Even without any differences in ethnicity, language, or religion, such conditions almost invariably provoke hostility. The victory of Mao's Communist forces in China was quickly followed by the brutal massacre of a million or more Han Chinese landlords by the Han Chinese poor peasants who regarded them as cruel oppressors, with William Hinton's classic Fanshen describing the unfortunate history that unfolded in one particular village. When similar circumstances led to violent clashes in Eastern Europe between Slavs and Jews, does it really make logical sense to employ a specialized term such as "anti-Semitism" to describe that situation?

Furthermore, some of the material presented in Lindemann's rather innocuous text might also lead to potentially threatening ideas. Consider, for example, the notorious Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion , almost certainly fictional, but hugely popular and influential during the years following World War I and the Bolshevik Revolution. The fall of so many longstanding Gentile dynasties and their replacement by new regimes such as Soviet Russia and Weimar Germany, which were heavily dominated by their tiny Jewish minorities, quite naturally fed suspicions of a worldwide Jewish plot, as did the widely discussed role of Jewish international bankers in producing those political outcomes.

Over the decades, there has been much speculation about the possible inspiration for the Protocols , but although Lindemann makes absolutely no reference to that document, he does provide a very intriguing possible candidate. Jewish-born British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli certainly ranked as one of the most influential figures of the late 19th century, and in his novel Coningsby , he has the character representing Lord Lionel Rothschild boast about the existence of a vast and secret network of powerful international Jews , who stand near the head of almost every major nation, quietly controlling their governments from behind the scenes. If one of the world's most politically well-connected Jews eagerly promoted such notions, was Henry Ford really so unreasonable in doing the same?

Lindemann also notes Disraeli's focus on the extreme importance of race and racial origins, a central aspect of traditional Jewish religious doctrine. He reasonably suggests that this must surely have had a huge influence upon the rise of those political ideas, given that Disraeli's public profile and stature were so much greater than the mere writers or activists whom our history books usually place at center stage. In fact, Houston Stewart Chamberlain, a leading racial theorist, actually cited Disraeli as a key source for his ideas. Jewish intellectuals such as Max Nordau and Cesare Lombroso are already widely recognized as leading figures in the rise of the racial science of that era, but Disraeli's under-appreciated role may have actually been far greater. The deep Jewish roots of European racialist movements are hardly something that many present-day Jews would want widely known.

One of the harsh Jewish critics of Esau's Tears denounced Cambridge University Press for even allowing the book to appear in print, and although that major work is easily available in English, there are numerous other cases where an important but discordant version of historical reality has been successfully blocked from publication. For decades most Americans would have ranked Nobel Laureate Alexander Solzhenitsyn as among the world's greatest literary figures, and his Gulag Archipelago alone sold over 10 million copies. But his last work was a massive two-volume account of the tragic 200 years of shared history between Russians and Jews, and despite its 2002 release in Russian and numerous other world languages, there has yet to be an authorized English translation, though various partial editions have circulated on the Internet in samizdat form.

ORDER IT NOW

At one point, a full English version was briefly available for sale at Amazon.com and I purchased it. Glancing through a few sections, the work seemed quite even-handed and innocuous to me, but it seemed to provide a far more detailed and uncensored account than anything else previously available, which obviously was the problem. The Bolshevik Revolution resulted in the deaths of many tens of millions of people worldwide, and the overwhelming Jewish role in its leadership would become more difficult to erase from historical memory if Solzhenitsyn's work were easily available. Also, his candid discussion of the economic and political behavior of Russian Jewry in pre-revolutionary times directly conflicted with the hagiography widely promoted by Hollywood and the popular media. Historian Yuri Slezkine's award-winning 2004 book The Jewish Century provided many similar facts, but his treatment was far more cursory and his public stature not remotely the same.

Near the end of his life, Solzhenitsyn gave his political blessing to Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Russia's leaders honored him upon his death, while his Gulag volumes are now enshrined as mandatory reading in the standard high school curriculum of today's overwhelmingly Christian Russia. But even as his star rose again in his own homeland, it seems to have sharply fallen in our own country, and his trajectory may eventually relegate him to nearly un-person status.

A couple of years after the release of Solzhenitsyn's controversial final book, an American writer named Anne Applebaum published a thick history bearing the same title Gulag , and her work received enormously favorable media coverage and won her a Pulitzer Prize; I have even heard claims that her book has been steadily replacing that earlier Gulag on many college reading lists. But although Jews constituted a huge fraction of the top leadership of the Soviet Gulag system during its early decades, as well as that of the dreaded NKVD which supplied the inmates, nearly her entire focus on her own ethnic group during Soviet times is that of victims rather than victimizers. And by a remarkable irony of fate, she shares a last name with one of the top Bolshevik leaders, Hirsch Apfelbaum, who concealed his own ethnic identity by calling himself Grigory Zinoviev.

ORDER IT NOW

The striking decline in Solzhenitsyn's literary status in the West came just a decade or two after an even more precipitous collapse in the reputation of David Irving , and for much the same reason. Irving probably ranked as the most internationally successful British historian of the last one hundred years and a renowned scholar of World War II, but his extensive reliance on primary source documentary evidence posed an obvious threat to the official narrative promoted by Hollywood and wartime propaganda. When he published his magisterial Hitler's War , this conflict between myth and reality came into the open, and an enormous wave of attacks and vilification was unleashed, gradually leading to his purge from respectability and eventually even his imprisonment.

These important examples may help to explain the puzzling contrast between the behavior of Jews in the aggregate and Jews as individuals. Observers have noticed that even fairly small Jewish minorities may often have a major impact upon the far larger societies that host them. But on the other hand, in my experience at least, a large majority of individual Jews do not seem all that different in their personalities or behavior than their non-Jewish counterparts. So how does a community whose individual mean is not so unusual generate what seems to be such a striking difference in collective behavior? I think the answer may involve the existence of information choke-points, and the ability of relatively small numbers of particularly zealous and agitated Jews in influencing and controlling these.

We live our lives constantly immersed in media narratives, and these allow us to decide the rights and wrongs of a situation. The vast majority of people, Jew and Gentile alike, are far more likely to take strong action if they are convinced that their cause is a just one. This is obviously the basis for war-time propaganda.

Now suppose that a relatively small number of zealous Jewish partisans are known to always attack and denounce journalists or authors who accurately describe Jewish misbehavior. Over time, this ongoing campaign of intimidation may cause many important facts to be left on the cutting-room floor, or even gradually expel from mainstream respectability those writers who refuse to conform to such pressures. Meanwhile, similar small numbers of Jewish partisans frequently exaggerate the misdeeds committed against Jews, sometimes piling their exaggerations upon past exaggerations already produced by a previous round of such zealots.

Eventually, these two combined trends may take a complex and possibly very mixed historical record and transform it into a simple morality-play, with innocent Jews tremendously injured by vicious Jew-haters. And as this morality-play becomes established it deepens the subsequent intensity of other Jewish-activists, who redouble their demands that the media "stop vilifying Jews" and covering up the supposed evils inflicted upon them. An unfortunate circle of distortion following exaggeration following distortion can eventually produce a widely accepted historical account that bears little resemblance to the reality of what actually happened.

So as a result, the vast majority of quite ordinary Jews, who would normally behave in quite ordinary ways, are misled by this largely fictional history, and rather understandably become greatly outraged at all the horrible things that had been done to their suffering people, some of which are true and some of which are not, while remaining completely ignorant of the other side of the ledger.

Furthermore, this situation is exacerbated by the common tendency of Jews to "cluster" together, perhaps respresenting just one or two percent of the total population, but often constituting 20% or 40% or 60% of their immediate peer-group, especially in certain professions. Under such conditions, the ideas or emotional agitation of some Jews probably permeates others around them, often provoking additional waves of indignation.

As a rough analogy, a small quantity of uranium is relatively inert and harmless, and entirely so if distributed within low-density ore. But if a significant quantity of weapons-grade uranium is sufficiently compressed, then the neutrons released by fissioning atoms will quickly cause additional atoms to undergo fission, with the ultimate result of that critical chain-reaction being a nuclear explosion. In similar fashion, even a highly agitated Jew may have no negative impact, but if the collection of such agitated Jews becomes too numerous and clusters together too closely, they may work each other into a terrible frenzy, perhaps with disastrous consequences both for themselves and for their larger society. This is especially true if those agitated Jews begin to dominate certain key nodes of top-level control, such as the central political or media organs of a society.

Whereas most living organizations exist solely in physical reality, human beings also occupy an ideational space, with the interaction of human consciousness and perceived reality playing a major role in shaping behavior. Just as the pheromones released by mammals or insects can drastically affect the reactions of their family members or nest-mates, the ideas secreted by individuals or the media-emitters of a society can have an enormous impact upon their fellows.

A cohesive, organized group generally possesses huge advantages over a teeming mass of atomized individuals, just as a Macedonian Phalanx could easily defeat a vastly larger body of disorganized infantry. Many years ago, on some website somewhere I came across a very insightful comment regarding the obvious connection between "anti-Semitism" and "racism," which our mainstream media organs identify as two of the world's greatest evils. Under this analysis, "anti-Semitism" represents the tendency to criticize or resist Jewish social cohesion, while "racism" represents the attempt of white Gentiles to maintain a similar social cohesion of their own. To the extent that the ideological emanations from our centralized media organs serve to strengthen and protect Jewish cohesion while attacking and dissolving any similar cohesion on the part of their Gentile counterparts, the former will obviously gain enormous advantages in resource-competition against the latter.

Religion obviously constitutes an important unifying factor in human social groups and we cannot ignore the role of Judaism in this regard. Traditional Jewish religious doctrine seems to consider Jews as being in a state of permanent hostility with all non-Jews , and the use of dishonest propaganda is an almost inevitable aspect of such conflict. Furthermore, since Jews have invariably been a small political minority, maintaining such controversial tenets required the employment of a massive framework of subterfuge and dissimulation in order to conceal their nature from the larger society surrounding them. It has often been said that truth is the first casualty in war, and surely the cultural influences of over a thousand years of such intense religious hostility may continue to quietly influence the thinking of many modern Jews, even those who have largely abandoned their religious beliefs.

The notorious Jewish tendency to shamelessly lie or wildly exaggerate has sometimes had horrifying human consequences. I very recently discovered a fascinating passage in Peter Moreira's 2014 book The Jew Who Defeated Hitler: Henry Morgenthau Jr., FDR, and How We Won the War , focused on the important political role of that powerful Secretary of the Treasury.

A turning point in Henry Morgenthau Jr.'s relationship with the Jewish community came in November 1942, when Rabbi Stephen Wise came to the corner office to tell the secretary what was happening in Europe. Morgenthau knew of the millions of deaths and the lampshades made from victims' skin, and he asked Wise not to go into excessive details. But Wise went on to tell of the barbarity of the Nazis, how they were making soap out of Jewish flesh. Morgenthau, turning paler, implored him, "Please, Stephen, don't give me the gory details." Wise went on with his list of horrors and Morgenthau repeated his plea over and over again. Henrietta Klotz was afraid her boss would keel over. Morgenthau later said the meeting changed his life.

It is easy to imagine that Morgenthau's gullible acceptance of such obviously ridiculous war-time atrocity stories played a major role when he later lent his name and support to remarkably brutal American occupation policies that probably led to the postwar deaths of many millions of innocent German civilians .

[Dec 04, 2019] Britain's Chief Rabbi in interfering in the UK election using anti-Semitism charge the way intellignce againces use false flag oprations

Dec 04, 2019 | www.unz.com

Mirvis' intervention in the election campaign makes sense only if he believes in one of two highly improbable scenarios.

The first requires several demonstrably untrue things to be true. It needs for Corbyn to be a proven antisemite – and not just of the variety that occasionally or accidentally lets slip an antisemitic trope or is susceptible to the unthinking prejudice most of us occasionally display, including (as we shall see) Rabbi Mirvis.

No, for Mirvis to have interfered in the election campaign he would need to believe that Corbyn intends actively as prime minister to inflame a wider antisemitism in British society or implement policies designed to harm the Jewish community. And in addition, the chief rabbi would have to believe that Corbyn presides over a Labour party that will willingly indulge race-hate speeches or stand by impassively as Corbyn carries out racist policies.

If Mirvis really believes any of that, I have a bridge to sell him. Corbyn has spent his entire political career as an anti-racism campaigner, and his anti-racism activism as a backbencher was especially prominent inside a party that itself has traditionally taken the political lead in tackling racism.

... ... ...

Even now, our most prized rights, such as free speech, are being eroded and subverted to protect Israel from criticism. In the US, the only infringements on the American public's First Amendment rights have been legislated to silence those seeking to pressure Israel over its crimes against the Palestinians with a boycott – similar to the campaign against apartheid South Africa. In the UK, the Conservative manifesto similarly promises to bar local councils from upholding international law and boycotting products from Israel's illegal settlements.

Rewarding war crimes

The real left focuses on this continuing colonial crime against the Palestinians not because it is antisemitic (a claim the Economist survey amply refutes), but because the left treats Israel as emblematic of British and western bad faith and hypocrisy. Israel is the imperial west's Achilles' heel, the proof that war crimes, massacres and ethnic cleansing are not only not punished but actively rewarded if these crimes accord with western imperial interests.

But ardent friends of Israel such as Mirvis are blind to these arguments. For them, one western antisemitic crime – the Holocaust – entirely obscures another western antisemitic crime: seeking to rid Europe of Jews by forcing them into the Middle East, serving as pawns on an imperial chessboard that paid no regard to the Palestinians whose homeland was being sacrificed.

In his state of historical and political myopia, Mirvis cannot begin to understand that there might be political activists who, in defending the Palestinian people, are also defending Jews. That they, unlike him, understand that Israel was created not out of western benevolence towards Jews, but out of western malevolence towards "lesser peoples". The real left in Britain speaks out against Israel not because it hates Jews but because it holds dear a commitment to justice and a compassion for all.

Mirvis, on the other hand, is the Zionist equivalent of a little Englander. He prefers particularist, short-term interests over universalist, long-term ones.

It was he, remember, who threw his full support behind Israel in 2014 as it indiscriminately bombed Gaza, killing some 550 children – a bombing campaign that came after years of an Israeli blockade on the Palestinian population there. That siege has led the United Nations to warn that the enclave will be uninhabitable by next year.

It was Mirvis, along with his predecessor Jonathan Sacks, who in 2017 endorsed the fanatical Jewish settlers – Israel's equivalent of white supremacists – on their annual march through the occupied Old City of Jerusalem. This is the march where the majority of the participants are recorded every year waving masses of Israeli flags at Palestinians and chanting "Death to the Arabs". One Israeli newspaper columnist has described the Jerusalem Day march as a "religious carnival of hatred".

Anonymous [106] Disclaimer , says: November 28, 2019 at 2:45 pm GMT

Just goes to show how ... so called "Chief Rabbi" has become the most important commentator on a British general election, and the Tories and much of the media in Britain absolutely love it.

Not even America they would let a Rabbi blatantly interfere with a presidential election. It's incredible how a British general election has literally become about Jews, I've never seen anything like it in any other country. The media is so obsessed with what Jews think anyone would think Corbyn was running to be PM of Israel!

[Dec 03, 2019] The FIVE EYES in Israel, the connection between NSA and IDF

Dec 03, 2019 | www.zerohedge.com

Kirk2NCC1701 Chupacabra-322 Nov 12, 2016 6:23 AM ,

FYI... An Israeli investigative journalist (and anti-Zioinist) Richard Silberstein gives us this treasure trove on the FIVE EYES in Israel, the NSA and IDF:

Other Related Articles can be found on the website. How this guy can still operate is amazing. He'd better not stray too far into the gray zone of reporting, is my guess. Gutsy guy. More than can be said for US or Western Presstitutes.

[Dec 01, 2019] Ilhan Omar deposition text also names Sarsour and Kushner as Qatari assets by DONNA RACHEL

Notable quotes:
"... Despite knowing that it was a failing investment, Qatar leaned on Brookfield to buy 666 Fifth Avenue from Kushner, to write off his debts ..."
"... Jared Kushner approached the government of Qatar for a bailout of 666 Fifth Avenue?" Castenda clarified. "Correct. That's what they told me. ... And they did it. ..."
"... the Qataris said Kushner told them: 'Choose one of two. You pay what I tell you to pay, or I unleash my dogs.'" "The dogs being who?" she asked. "Saudi Arabia and the UAE," Bender replied. ..."
"... American officials are the cheapest to recruit. "British officials, they demand millions to be recruited. American politicians, some of them accept $50,000." ..."
Nov 27, 2019 | www.jpost.com

"We recruited both, Republicans and Democrats, but that's not good enough. We want to rule the White House," the Qataris allegedly said. E

... ... ...

"Everything [Alan Bender] said in the deposition about me has happened," Imam Tawhidi told The Post . "I believe in the deposition and await an investigation. All I want is to be treated fairly," he added. However, Omar was not the only prominent American named in the Bender testimony.

"They [the Qataris] said: 'We recruited both, Republicans and Democrats, but that's not good enough. We want to rule the White House.' So they will," he told the court. Indeed, if Bender's testimony is accurate, they are already close. Explaining that Qatar uses western companies to effectively launder the money they paid to American citizens, Bender cited a $1.4 billion payment which he claims was passed to Jared Kushner from Qatar, via a Canadian company named Brookfield, which he says they have invested heavily in.

Despite knowing that it was a failing investment, Qatar leaned on Brookfield to buy 666 Fifth Avenue from Kushner, to write off his debts. "Why didn't they pay Kusher directly?" the lawyer for the plaintiffs, Ms. Castenda, asked. "Too risky," Bender replied. "Jared Kushner approached the government of Qatar for a bailout of 666 Fifth Avenue?" Castenda clarified. "Correct. That's what they told me. ... And they did it.

And Kushner is happy with them because, according to them, I don't know Kushner personally, but the Qataris said Kushner told them: 'Choose one of two. You pay what I tell you to pay, or I unleash my dogs.'" "The dogs being who?" she asked. "Saudi Arabia and the UAE," Bender replied.

The Qataris were aware that as an investment the pay-off was a write-off, but told Bender, "'We just paid it to pay off his debt. And as long as he's in the White House, we have to do what he wants until we control the White House.' We as in Qatar," Bender clarified. The Jerusalem Post has reached out to Mr Kushner's office for a response. However, no comment has been received as of yet.

Among other claims made by Mr. Bender were that: - The real power in Qatar is Mohammed Al-Masnad, known as 'the CEO.' "After a couple of hours, I was convinced that the Emir of Qatar does not run the show and Mohammed Al-Masnad is in charge of everything. He is also the Emir's uncle. [...] And the Emir's mother is the real king of Qatar." - The second most powerful man in Qatar is a Palestinian, Azmi Bishara. - That Jamal Khashoggi was set up by Qatar to be killed by the Saudis after he was found to have been "playing both sides." "Jamal Khashoggi and Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal were very close friends," Bender said. "[Khashoggi] would receive sensitive secrets ... and he leaks them to the Qataris. The Qataris would leak them to media outlets ... and he was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. I got that confirmation from the Qatari officials." - that "they [Qatar] finance almost 99 percent of Saudi dissidents in the US and the UK. They pay them."

Bender named Ghanem al-Dosari, a well known YouTuber, as one such individual. - Three Italians, known as 'the engineers' were paid by Qatar to hack the accounts of Saudi Arabian and the United Arab Emirates's citizens. "E-mails, text messages, regular phone calls, laptops. Anything you can think of. They hacked into all that."

American officials are the cheapest to recruit. "British officials, they demand millions to be recruited. American politicians, some of them accept $50,000." - The Qataris refer to Trump as "the orange man," and to Kushner as the "descendant of pigs and apes," because he is Jewish.

"And they refer to other American Senators and Congressmen who are Christians as 'Crusaders'."

[Dec 01, 2019] Opinion - The Antisemitic Card

Notable quotes:
"... Mirviz got prominent media coverage for his views this week in the London Times and Daily Mail, among others. Britain's rightwing media are owned by billionaire oligarchs who despise Labour's manifesto for progressive wealth redistribution. ..."
"... The antisemitic card is played to shield Israel from important criticism; and by Britain's plutocrats and their media who would rather see the public squabbling over spurious claims about antisemitism so they can keep on plundering wealth from the majority of British people. ..."
Dec 01, 2019 | www.informationclearinghouse.info

The Antisemitic Card

By Finian Cunningham

November 27, 2019 " Information Clearing House " - It is a ludicrous situation when anyone criticizing Israeli state violations against Palestinians or neighboring countries is then instantly discredited as being "antisemitic".

We see this in Britain and the United States all the time. Congresswomen like Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib have been denounced for being "anti-Jewish", including by President Trump, simply because they protested Israeli policy of occupying Palestinian lands or for having a malign influence on US foreign policy.

In Britain, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and his party have once again this week been vilified as "antisemitic" in prominent news media.

The reality is that Corbyn is neither racist or anti-Jewish . The specious allegation stems from him and sections of Labour being vehemently critical of Israel and its conduct towards Palestinians.

If elected in the general election next month, Labour says it will cut military trade with Israel and move to officially recognize a Palestinian state.

This conflation of valid criticism of the Israeli state with being "anti-Jew" is a cynical distortion which is wielded to give Israel impunity from international law. It plays on moral blackmail of critics by equating the historical persecution of Jews and in particular the Nazi holocaust with the sanctity of the modern Israeli state.

That distortion is exposed by many Jews themselves who have spoken out in the US and in Britain to defend the right of people to criticize Israeli policies. They understand the vital distinction between the Israeli state and the much wider existence of Jewishness. They understand that to be opposed to Israeli state practices is in no way to mean animus towards Jews in general.

Are You Tired Of The Lies And Non-Stop Propaganda?

Get Your FREE Daily Newsletter No Advertising - No Government Grants - This Is Independent Media

Only in the past week, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has declared his government intends to expand annexation of Palestinian territory in the West Bank. The land occupied by Israeli forces since the 1967 Six Day War is illegally occupied , according to multiple UN resolutions under international law. Now Netanyahu wants to increase the violations. And with the support of the Trump administration which also announced it was no longer viewing Israeli settlements on Palestinian land as illegitimate.

Over the past month, the Israeli military has stepped up airstrikes on the Gaza Strip where nearly two million Palestinians subsist in abject poverty largely because of an Israeli blockade. One family of nine, including children, was killed by an airstrike on their home on November 14. As always the death toll among Palestinian civilians is grotesquely disproportionate to Israeli victims of rockets fired from Gaza.

Israeli forces have also been carrying out hundreds of airstrikes in Syria, including the capital Damascus, over the past year. Russia, among others, has condemned those attacks as "unlawful aggression". Arguably, war crimes.

When Jeremy Corbyn and Britain's Labour Party and a handful of American politicians speak out to denounce Israeli violations they are doing so to uphold international law and voice support for victims of state violence. That is a principled and honourable position.

Shamefully, the US and British governments and much of the corporate news media never do speak out. They shield Israeli leaders from international accountability by vetoing UN resolutions or by turning a blind eye. Pro-Israeli lobbies funnel massive donations to politicians in Washington on both sides of the aisle, and to the British Conservative Party. Their silence is bought. Not only silence but outright distortion, such as when people criticize Israeli malfeasance – and there is much of that – then they are absurdly character-assassinated as "antisemites".

Admittedly, many British Jews phoned into radio stations this week to complain that they feel unwelcome in Britain due to what they perceive as growth in antisemitism under the Labour Party . To be fair though, their claims were not backed up by hard evidence of specifically anti-Jewish behaviour. They were eliding their Jewishness with Labour's criticism of Israel.

The claims made against Corbyn this week by the British Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirviz of being "unfit for office" because of an alleged complacent attitude towards antisemitism in his party should be put in context.

Corbyn has apologized several times for a tiny fraction (less than 0.1 per cent) of party members accused of antisemitism. Why should he be obliged to keep on apologizing, as BBC interviewer Andrew Neil imperiously demanded again this week?

Chief Rabbi Mirviz is a self-declared friend of Conservative leader Boris Johnson and an ardent, uncritical supporter of the Israeli state.

Mirviz does not represent all British Jews, as many other Jewish groups came out voicing their support for Corbyn and his valid right of free speech to criticize Israel.

Mirviz got prominent media coverage for his views this week in the London Times and Daily Mail, among others. Britain's rightwing media are owned by billionaire oligarchs who despise Labour's manifesto for progressive wealth redistribution.

Official race-hate figures for Britain show that physical attacks against British Muslims are preponderantly more than attacks against any other religious minority, including Jews . Boris Johnson's Conservatives have evident problems of fomenting Islamophobia. Yet we don't see British media providing proportionate criticism on that to balance their focus on Corbyn and his alleged views.

The antisemitic card is played to shield Israel from important criticism; and by Britain's plutocrats and their media who would rather see the public squabbling over spurious claims about antisemitism so they can keep on plundering wealth from the majority of British people.

Finian Cunningham has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. He is a Master's graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. He is also a musician and songwriter. For nearly 20 years, he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organisations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent.

[Nov 30, 2019] Chief Rabbi Mirvis is Helping Stoke Antisemitism Dissident Voice

Notable quotes:
"... Mirvis has no lessons to teach Corbyn or the Labour party about racism. In fact, it is his own, small-minded prejudice that blinds him to the anti-racist politics of the left. His ugly message is now being loudly amplified by a corporate media keen to use any weapon it can, antisemitism included, to keep Corbyn and the left out of power – and preserve a status quo that benefits the few at the expense of the many. ..."
Nov 30, 2019 | dissidentvoice.org

Chief Rabbi Mirvis is Helping Stoke Antisemitism

by Jonathan Cook / November 29th, 2019

Chief rabbi Ephraim Mirvis has not only misrepresented the known facts about Labour and its supposed antisemitism crisis. He has not only interfered in an overtly, politically partisan manner in the December 12 election campaign by suggesting that Jeremy Corbyn – against all evidence – is an antisemite.

By speaking out as the voice of British Jews – a false claim he has allowed the UK media to promote – his unprecedented meddling in the election of Britain's next leader has actually made the wider Jewish community in the UK much less safe. Mirvis is contributing to the very antisemitism he says he wants to eradicate.

Mirvis' intervention in the election campaign makes sense only if he believes in one of two highly improbable scenarios.

The first requires several demonstrably untrue things to be true. It needs for Corbyn to be a proven antisemite – and not just of the variety that occasionally or accidentally lets slip an antisemitic trope or is susceptible to the unthinking prejudice most of us occasionally display, including (as we shall see) Rabbi Mirvis.

No, for Mirvis to have interfered in the election campaign he would need to believe that Corbyn intends actively as prime minister to inflame a wider antisemitism in British society or implement policies designed to harm the Jewish community. And in addition, the chief rabbi would have to believe that Corbyn presides over a Labour party that will willingly indulge race-hate speeches or stand by impassively as Corbyn carries out racist policies.

If Mirvis really believes any of that, I have a bridge to sell him. Corbyn has spent his entire political career as an anti-racism campaigner, and his anti-racism activism as a back-bencher was especially prominent inside a party that itself has traditionally taken the political lead in tackling racism.

Rising tide of nationalism

The second possibility is that Mirvis doesn't really believe that Corbyn is a Goebbels in the making. But if that is so, then his decision to intercede in the election campaign to influence British voters must be based on an equally fanciful notion: that there is no significant threat posed by antisemitism from the right or the rapidly emerging far right.

Because if antisemitism is not an issue on the right – the same nationalistic right that has persecuted Jews throughout modern history, culminating in the Nazi atrocities – then Mirvis may feel he can risk playing politics in the name of the Jewish community without serious consequence.

If there is no perceptible populist tide of white nationalism sweeping Europe and the globe, one that hates immigrants and minorities, then making a fuss about Corbyn might seem to make sense for a prominent Jewish community leader. In those circumstances, it might appear to be worth disrupting the national conversation to highlight the fact that Corbyn once sat with Hamas politicians – just as Tony Blair once sat with Sinn Fein leaders – and that Corbyn's party has promised in the latest manifesto to stop selling weapons to Israel (and Saudi Arabia) of the kind that have been used to butcher children in Gaza. Mirvis might believe that by wounding Corbyn he can help into power a supposedly benevolent, or at least inoffensive, Tory party.

But if he is wrong about the re-emergence of a white nationalism and its growing entry into the mainstream – and all the evidence suggests he would be deeply wrong , if this is what he thinks – then undermining Corbyn and the Labour party is self-destructiveness of the first order.

It would amount to self-harm not only because attacking Corbyn inevitably strengthens the electoral chances of Boris " watermelon smiles " Johnson. It plays with fire because Mirvis' flagrant intervention in the election campaign actually bolsters a key part of the antisemitic discourse of the far right that is rapidly making inroads into the Conservative party.

Succour to white nationalists

White nationalists are all over social media warning of supposed Jewish global conspiracies, of supposed Jewish control of the media, of supposed Jewish subversion of "white rights". It was precisely this kind of thinking that drove European politics a century ago. It was arch-antisemite Arthur Balfour who signed off the Balfour Declaration of 1917 that sought to end Britain's "Jewish problem" by encouraging European Jews to move far away, to a part of the Middle East then known as Palestine.

That is, of course, why today's white supremacists love Israel, why they see it as a model, why they call themselves " white Zionists ". In creating a tribal democracy, and one heavily fortified, land hungry, belligerent and nuclear-armed, Israel has done for Jews exactly what white nationalists hope to do again for their white compatriots. The white supremacists' love of Israel is intimately bound up with their hatred and fear of Jews.

Mirvis has given succour to white nationalist discourse both because he has spoken out against Corbyn without offering evidence for his claims and because those entirely unsubstantiated claims have been echoed across the media.

There is good reason why the billionaire-owned print media and the Establishment-dominated BBC are happy to exploit the antisemitism smears – and it has nothing to do with concern for the safety of Jews. The corporate media don't want a Labour leader in power who is going to roll back the corporate free-for-all unleashed by Margaret Thatcher 40 years ago that nearly bankrupted the rest of us in 2008.

But that is not what those flirting with or embracing white nationalism will take away from the relentless media chorus over evidence-free antisemitism claims.

Mirvis' intervention in the democratic process will drive them more quickly and more deeply into the arms of the far-right. It will persuade them once again that "the Jews" are a "problem". They will conclude that – though the Jews are now helping the right by destroying Corbyn – once the left has been dealt with, those same Jews will then subvert their white state. Like Balfour before them, they will start thinking of how to rid Britain and Europe of these supposed interlopers.

This is why Mirvis was irresponsible in the extreme for meddling. Because the standard of proof required before making such an intervention – proof either that Cobyn is an outright Jew hater, or that white nationalism is no threat to the UK – is not even close to being met.

The left's anti-imperialism

In fact much worse, all the evidence shows the exact reverse. That was neatly summed up in a survey this month published by The Economist, a weekly magazine that is no friend to Corbyn or the Labour party.

It showed that those identifying as "very left-wing" – the section of the public that supports Corbyn – were among the least likely to express antisemitic attitudes. Those identifying as "very right-wing", on the other hand – those likely to support Boris " piccaninnies " Johnson – were three and a half times more likely to express hostile attitudes towards Jews. Other surveys show even worse racism among Conservatives towards more obviously non-white minorities, such as Muslims and black people. That, after all, is the very reason Boris " letterbox-looking Muslim women " Johnson now heads the Tory party.

The Economist findings reveal something else of relevance in assessing Mirvis' meddling. Not only is the real left (as distinguished from the phoney, centrist left represented by Labour's Blairites) much less antisemitic than the right, it is also much more critical of Israel than any other section of the British public.

That is easily explained. The real left has always been anti-imperialist. Israel is a particularly problematic part of Britain's colonial legacy.

Elsewhere, the peoples who gained independence from Britain found themselves inside ruined, impoverished states, often with borders imposed out of naked imperial interest that left them divided and feuding. Internal struggles over the crumbs Britain and other imperial powers left behind were the norm.

But in a very real sense, Britain – or at least the west – never really left Israel. In line with the Balfour Declaration, Britain helped to establish the institutions of a "Jewish home" on the Palestinians' homeland. British troops may have departed in 1948, but waves of European Jewish immigrants were either encouraged or compelled to come to the newly created state of Israel by racist immigration quotas designed to prevent them fleeing elsewhere, most especially to the United States.

The west helped engineer both the ethnic cleansing of Palestine and Israel's creation to solve Europe's "Jewish problem". It provided the components necessary for Israel to build a nuclear bomb that won it a place at the international top table and ensured the Palestinians were made Israel's serfs in perpetuity. Ever since, the west has provided Israel with diplomatic cover, military aid and special trading status, even as Israel has worked relentlessly to disappear the Palestinian people from their homeland.

Even now, our most prized rights, such as free speech, are being eroded and subverted to protect Israel from criticism. In the US, the only infringements on the American public's First Amendment rights have been legislated to silence those seeking to pressure Israel over its crimes against the Palestinians with a boycott – similar to the campaign against apartheid South Africa. In the UK, the Conservative manifesto similarly promises to bar local councils from upholding international law and boycotting products from Israel's illegal settlements.

Rewarding war crimes

The real left focuses on this continuing colonial crime against the Palestinians not because it is antisemitic (a claim the Economist survey amply refutes), but because the left treats Israel as emblematic of British and western bad faith and hypocrisy. Israel is the imperial west's Achilles' heel, the proof that war crimes, massacres and ethnic cleansing are not only not punished but actively rewarded if these crimes accord with western imperial interests.

But ardent friends of Israel such as Mirvis are blind to these arguments. For them, one western antisemitic crime – the Holocaust – entirely obscures another western antisemitic crime: seeking to rid Europe of Jews by forcing them into the Middle East, serving as pawns on an imperial chessboard that paid no regard to the Palestinians whose homeland was being sacrificed.

In his state of historical and political myopia, Mirvis cannot begin to understand that there might be political activists who, in defending the Palestinian people, are also defending Jews. That they, unlike him, understand that Israel was created not out of western benevolence towards Jews, but out of western malevolence towards "lesser peoples". The real left in Britain speaks out against Israel not because it hates Jews but because it holds dear a commitment to justice and a compassion for all.

Mirvis, on the other hand, is the Zionist equivalent of a little Englander. He prefers particularist, short-term interests over universalist, long-term ones.

It was he, remember, who threw his full support behind Israel in 2014 as it indiscriminately bombed Gaza, killing some 550 children – a bombing campaign that came after years of an Israeli blockade on the Palestinian population there. That siege has led the United Nations to warn that the enclave will be uninhabitable by next year.

It was Mirvis, along with his predecessor Jonathan Sacks, who in 2017 endorsed the fanatical Jewish settlers – Israel's equivalent of white supremacists – on their annual march through the occupied Old City of Jerusalem. This is the march where the majority of the participants are recorded every year waving masses of Israeli flags at Palestinians and chanting "Death to the Arabs". One Israeli newspaper columnist has described the Jerusalem Day march as a "religious carnival of hatred".

It was Mirvis and Sacks that encouraged British Jews to join them on this tub-thumping trip to Israel, which they suggested would provide an opportunity to spend time "dancing with our brave soldiers". Those soldiers – Israeli, not British – occupy West Bank cities like Hebron where they have locked down life for some 200,000 Palestinians so that a handful of crazed religious Jewish bigots can live undisturbed in their midst.

What is so appalling is that Mirvis is blind to the very obvious parallels between the fearful Palestinians who hastily have to board up their shops as a Jewish mob parades through their neighbourhood and today's white supremacists and neo-Nazis in the west who seek to march provocatively through ethnic minority communities, including Jewish neighbourhoods, in places like Charlottesville .

Mirvis has no lessons to teach Corbyn or the Labour party about racism. In fact, it is his own, small-minded prejudice that blinds him to the anti-racist politics of the left. His ugly message is now being loudly amplified by a corporate media keen to use any weapon it can, antisemitism included, to keep Corbyn and the left out of power – and preserve a status quo that benefits the few at the expense of the many.

Jonathan Cook , based in Nazareth, Israel is a winner of the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East (Pluto Press) and Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair (Zed Books). Read other articles by Jonathan , or visit Jonathan's website .

[Nov 28, 2019] Kushner's Apparent Extortion of Qatar is an interesting gem

Nov 28, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

dltravers , Nov 28 2019 20:51 utc | 44

Kushner's Apparent Extortion of Qatar is an interesting gem. If you remember Rex Tillerson quitting, Saudi Arabia and the UAE almost going to war with Qatar and then Brookstone Partners, financed by Qatar paying, 1.4 billion for Kushers failed 666 building in NY where they were hemorrhaging money.

All this happened so Kushner could shake down Qatar to pay for his families losses? This came out of a recent deposition in Florida concerning the royal family of Qatar. Read Ilhan Omar deposition text also names Sarsour and Kushner as Qatari assets

Quoting...

Indeed, if Bender's testimony is accurate, they are already close.

Explaining that Qatar uses western companies to effectively launder the money they paid to American citizens, Bender cited a $1.4 billion payment which he claims was passed to Jared Kushner from Qatar, via a Canadian company named Brookfield, which he says they have invested heavily in.

Despite knowing that it was a failing investment, Qatar leaned on Brookfield to buy 666 Fifth Avenue from Kushner, to write off his debts.
"Why didn't they pay Kusher directly?" the lawyer for the plaintiffs, Ms. Castenda, asked.
"Too risky," Bender replied.

"Jared Kushner approached the government of Qatar for a bailout of 666 Fifth Avenue?" Castenda clarified.

"Correct. That's what they told me. ... And they did it. And Kushner is happy with them because, according to them, I don't know Kushner personally, but the Qataris said Kushner told them: 'Choose one of two. You pay what I tell you to pay, or I unleash my dogs.'"
"The dogs being who?" she asked.

"Saudi Arabia and the UAE," Bender replied.

The Qataris were aware that as an investment the pay-off was a write-off, but told Bender, "'We just paid it to pay off his debt. And as long as he's in the White House, we have to do what he wants until we control the White House.' We as in Qatar," Bender clarified.

Did we really expect anything less than this?

[Nov 27, 2019] Pompeo Gives Away the Palestinian West Bank, by Philip Giraldi - The Unz Review

From comments: "After all, Pompeo might as well announce hippos can fly. The settlements are illegal. That's a matter of fact -- not opinion."
Notable quotes:
"... If one is seeking evidence to suggest that Pompeo, a man who lies with a fluency that takes one's breath away, is delusional, it would certainly have to include his self-assessment that he has a reputation to protect. It is possible to cite many instances in which Pompeo has asserted something that is absolutely contrary to the truth, though one might also have to concede that he could often be saying what his factually challenged boss wants to hear. When Pompeo was Director of the CIA he even joked openly about how "We lied, we cheated, we stole." ..."
Nov 27, 2019 | www.unz.com

A story has been circulating suggesting that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will soon be resigning because he needs to focus on planning for his campaign to become a Senator from Kansas in 2020. This is good news for the United States, as Senator Lindsey Graham has had no one he is able to talk to about exporting democracy by blowing up the planet since Joe Lieberman retired and John McCain died. And the tale even has a bit of palace intrigue built into it, with an interesting back story as Pompeo is apparently considering his move because he fears that staying in harness with Donald Trump for too long might damage his reputation. There are also reports that he has been traveling to Kansas frequently on the State Department's dime to test the waters, a violation of the Hatch Act which prohibits most government officials from engaging in self-promotional political activities unrelated to their actual jobs.

If one is seeking evidence to suggest that Pompeo, a man who lies with a fluency that takes one's breath away, is delusional, it would certainly have to include his self-assessment that he has a reputation to protect. It is possible to cite many instances in which Pompeo has asserted something that is absolutely contrary to the truth, though one might also have to concede that he could often be saying what his factually challenged boss wants to hear. When Pompeo was Director of the CIA he even joked openly about how "We lied, we cheated, we stole."

Mike Pompeo's latest concession to the war criminals in charge of Israel, clearly intended to boost the electoral chances of Benjamin Netanyahu, is only the most recent dose of the Secretary of State's falsehood piled on fiction. It is generally assumed that the move to help Bibi by interfering in Israeli politics has been made in an effort to have Tel Aviv reciprocate by putting pressure on its many American fellow travelers in the media and congress to go easier on Trump in the impeachment saga. And Trump would also expect additional reciprocity when he runs again in 2020. Even though Netanyahu, who has been indicted over bribery and fraud, will not be able to shift many liberal Jewish votes, he will be able to get allies like mega billionaire Sheldon Adelson to pony up tens of millions of dollars to support the GOP campaign.

The Trump Administration's gifts to Israel are unprecedented, including moving the capital to Jerusalem and acknowledging the annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights. Pompeo, driven by his Christian Zionist beliefs, has been the point man on many of those moves, ably assisted by a U.S. Ambassador David Friedman, ex-bankruptcy lawyer, who has served as a consistent advocate and apologist for Israel with little or no concern for actual American interests. One might also observe that if Pompeo is truly interested in running for the Senate a little help and cash from Israel and its many friends might be very welcome.

The Pompeo gift to Bibi was announced early last week. He said that the Trump Administration is now rejecting the 1978 State Department Hansell Memorandum legal opinion that the creation of civilian settlements in occupied territories is indeed "inconsistent with international law." In a sense, he was giving something away to Israel that neither he nor the Israelis legally possess. He said that he was "accepting realities on the ground" and elaborated on his view that the White House believes legal questions about settlements should be dealt with in Israeli courts, meaning that the hapless Palestinians would have no voice in developments that would deprive them of their homes.

Per Pompeo, "Calling the establishment of civilian settlements inconsistent with international law has not advanced the cause of peace. The hard truth is that there will never be a judicial resolution to the conflict, and arguments about who is right and who is wrong as a matter of international law will not bring peace."

Pompeo's latest statement, consistent with many of his earlier ones, is completely contrary to the Fourth Geneva Convention framework of international law governing behavior by occupying military powers that was established after the Second World War. It ignores the fact that the status quo of expanding settlements has only taken place because of Washington's refusal to do anything about it. The State Department's new interpretation completely embraces arguments being made by hard-line politicians in Israel and opens the door to endorsement by the White House of a total de facto or even de jure annexation of the West Bank by the Jewish state.

Pompeo was talking about the nearly 700,000 illegal exclusively Jewish settlers currently on the West Bank and in East Jerusalem. Palestinians, in many areas under a brutal regime of martial law enforced by the Jewish state's army and police, have virtually no rights and are subject to increasing violent attacks by the settlers. Not surprisingly, Pompeo's statement was rejected by everyone but the Israelis and the usual crowd in the U.S. Congress and media, but even some leading Democratic candidates, including Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, found the decision troubling. The 28 member European Union declared that "All settlement activity is illegal under international law and it erodes the viability of the two-state solution and the prospects for a lasting peace. The E.U. calls on Israel to end all settlement activity, in line with its obligations as an occupying power."

And, of course, there are potential consequences when a government does something stupid. Shortly after Pompeo's announcement, the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem put out a security advisory warning Americans traveling in the West Bank, Jerusalem and Gaza, stating, "Individuals and groups opposed to [the Pompeo] announcement may target U.S. government facilities, U.S. private interests, and U.S. citizens." It suggested that visitors ought "to maintain a high level of vigilance and take appropriate steps to increase their security awareness in light of the current environment."

There is inevitably considerable discussion in some circles regarding what the new situation on the West Bank actually means. To be sure, the number and size of settlements will increase, but some knowledgeable critics like Gilad Atzmon suggest that the move will backfire on the Israelis, who, by taking control of the land, will eventually have to accept some kind of one state solution, giving the Palestinians considerable rights in a not-completely-denominational state. He observes how " inadvertently, Trump has finally committed the U.S.A. to the One State Solution. It is hard to deny that the area between the 'River and the Sea' is a single piece of land. It shares one electric grid, one pre-dial code (+972) and one sewage system. At present, the land is ruled over by a racist, tribal and discriminatory ideology through an apparatus that calls itself 'The Jewish State' and declares itself home for every Jew around the world; yet, is abusive, lethal and some would say genocidal toward the indigenous people of the land Pompeo's declaration provides an explicit and necessary message to the Palestinians in general and in the West Bank in particular. The conflict is not progressing toward a peaceful resolution. Those amongst the Palestinians who advocated the 'Two States Solution' will have to hide now. Pompeo has affirmed that there is one Holy Land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. From now on the battle over this disputed land is whether it will be subject to the racist discriminatory ideology implied by the notion of 'The Jewish State' and its ' National Bill ,' or if it will transform itself into a 'State of its Citizens' as is inherent in the notion of One Palestine."

Tom Suarez posits similarly at Mondoweiss, observing that any form of annexation of the West Bank without giving Palestinians equal rights would basically make Israeli apartheid so visible and unacceptable to world opinion that the Jewish state would become a complete pariah internationally and would be forced to adopt some kind of one state formula.

Nevertheless, even if a one state solution with equal citizenship status for everyone would appear to be both desirable and compliant with modern notions of human rights, it is not necessarily inevitable. The chosen-by-God Israeli state is quite capable of ethnic cleansing or even genocide on a massive scale, as it did originally in 1947-8 when it was founded and also later after it occupied the West Bank and Gaza in 1967. The Jewish state's leaders have repeatedly asserted that there is no such thing as a Palestinian, that Jordan is actually Palestine. They have become skilled at making the lives of Palestinians so miserable by destroying their farms, other livelihood and even their homes while also controlling their infrastructure, killing them if they resist, that they emigrate. Christians in Palestine, the original followers of Jesus Christ, constituted close to 8 percent of the population in 1946 but now number less than 2 percent. Most have chosen to leave rather than submit to Israel.

There is no reason to doubt that the Israelis could continue their creeping annexation of the West Bank for ten more years or so while also deliberately driving the remaining Arabs out. I have little doubt that that is precisely what they will do and they will be empowered to do so by the United States, which will never develop either the integrity or the courage to push back against "America's closest ally and best friend in the entire world."

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org .


Anon [154] Disclaimer , says: November 26, 2019 at 3:01 am GMT

Well, what the heck, why not? It's not like the Palestinians were doing anything with the West Bank. They might as well pass it on off to a more ambitious property developer. Call it the Middle East's version of Eminent Domain. If you can't develop it, it's going to end up in the hands of someone who will, and they'll gentrify it in the process. The Palestinians will be redlined right out of their old neighborhoods, and since the Palestinians are more hoods than neighbors, good riddance.
Anonymous [362] Disclaimer , says: November 26, 2019 at 5:25 am GMT
@Anon "Why not? It's not like Jews were doing anything with Lebensraum in the first place. They might as well pass it to more ambitious Reich developers. Call it 'Adolfian Domain'! If you can't develop it, Shlomo, give it to those who will. In any case, Juden will be rothlined out of their old shtetls. And since the Tribe is filled with hoods, not good neighbors, the world will say, 'Good auschwitzriddance'!"
Colin Wright , says: Website November 26, 2019 at 5:27 am GMT
@Anon ' The Palestinians will be redlined right out of their old neighborhoods, and since the Palestinians are more hoods than neighbors, good riddance.'

More or less what Hitler said about inferior races.

Great minds think alike.

chris , says: November 26, 2019 at 5:52 am GMT
@Colin Wright Yeah, we certainly have reached 'peak grovel,' however, there's a long way down to the nadir, because Israel is not done digesting its pray, nor with expanding its territory.

As in their attack of southern Lebanon in 2006, where they were stopped by Hesbollah, that expansion is still in the plans. All the ME wars we've been involved with since 911 have had as a strategic goal to destroy Iran in order to weaken Hesbollah, in order to, among other things, take southern Lebanon.

We're being lowered into hell in a hand-basket and are probably only 1/3 of the way down, so we're going to reach many more 'peak grovel' milestones on the way to John McCain's resting place.

mark green , says: November 26, 2019 at 6:17 am GMT

"[Pompeo's latest statement] ignores the fact that the status quo of expanding [Jewish] settlements has only taken place because of Washington's refusal to do anything about it."

Actually, it's even worse than that, Philip.

The US–as a deeply-compromised, long-term 'peace broker' between Israel and the Palestinians–has in fact been an active and willing partner with the Jewish State vis-a-vis it's race-centered, biblically-inspired objective of acquiring East Jerusalem, Syria's Golan Heights, conquering Gaza, and colonizing the West Bank.

With the possible exception of Jimmy Carter, the construction of Israeli 'settlements' (as well as the confiscation of land adjacent to Israel) has occurred under the watch of each and every US administration and Congress since 1967. This deliberate process amounts to incremental warfare.

Despite these facts, every Israeli transgression has been followed up by the delivery of billions more in US aid to Israel along with additional billions in state-of-the-art US weaponry. This is an extremely sweet deal. And it is incredibly one-sided.

At the UN, Zio-Washington has also provided diplomatic cover for the rogue Zionist state every time Israel has violated international law or UN protocols since LBJ.

Over the past 50 years, scores of UN resolutions that sought to censure Israel for its lawlessness have been vetoed by top US officials. These actions are unparalleled.

Despite the feeble attempt of a few US Presidents to push back (Ford and Bush Sr.) Zio-Washington has never decisively withheld aid to the Jewish state, no matter what–(this acquiescence by Washington even includes the 'unfortunate accident' that occurred in 1967 in international waters involving US-made Israeli fighter jets and one American intelligence-gathering vessel.)

What kind of a 'relationship' is this?

Not only is American aid to the Zionist state more lavish than the amount of aid received by any other country in US history, it is also awarded to Israel unconditionally.

Actual US states don't have a relationship this deliciously one-sided with our Federal government.

This one-way 'relationship' renders Zio-Washington a working (junior) partner in Israel's slow-motion genocide of its native gentiles.

Ironically, modern Israel has displaced a culture in Palestine that was relatively peaceful, tolerant, and integrated.

Stranger still: secular, 'multicultural' America has unwittingly signed on to this colonial, supremacist agenda with nary a peep of protest.

It's quiet out there. Too quiet.

Greg Bacon , says: Website November 26, 2019 at 8:25 am GMT
Some breathed a sigh of relief when Nutty Nikki Haley left that spot, only to be replaced by someone just as deluded, if not crazier.
I'm sure President Jared will find another clueless and irrational, Israeli-Firster to appoint to that position, one who has been blessed by Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban.
Paul , says: November 26, 2019 at 9:28 am GMT
Donald Trump's groveling before the Israel Lobby is not going to get rid of Jewish support for ending his presidency. It is a sign of weakness.
anon [282] Disclaimer , says: November 26, 2019 at 9:31 am GMT
Where is Europe on all of this? Can't they sanction the United States to prevent this? Or maybe openly endorse sanctions on Israel? It's time for the world to step up and act.
AnonStarter , says: November 26, 2019 at 9:59 am GMT
Israel is headed for difficult times. The BDS movement is gaining steam at a pace that's outstripped that of the anti-apartheid movement, and anti-BDS legislation in America is collapsing in the courts. Demographically, Israel's military service-resistant Haredim will soon become their largest constituency and Arabs on both sides of the wire will outnumber Jews throughout the region.

It won't happen overnight, but it isn't too far away.

Anonymous [671] Disclaimer , says: November 26, 2019 at 10:28 am GMT
Nasty bit of work, that Trump. I think it's a shame that nationalists all across the Western world see him as their figurehead because it doesn't look good at all.
lavoisier , says: Website November 26, 2019 at 12:08 pm GMT
@Colin Wright We are a servile nation in thrall to a genocidal regime.

Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting.

The crimes of our government have turned all of us into criminals.

Auld Alliance , says: November 26, 2019 at 12:24 pm GMT

Pompeo, driven by his Christian Zionist beliefs,

I`m always wary of trying to get into people`s heads and declaring what they think

How about :-

Pompeo, who claims to be driven by his Christian Zionist beliefs,

Or something like that instead?

After all, I`m sure Pompeo would prefer to claim "I`m doing this due to my (perhaps a bit wacky) beliefs, and I am also clearly a Christian" rather than say "I`m doing this for Israeli Benjamins and not just the Netanyahu type."

SolontoCroesus , says: November 26, 2019 at 12:40 pm GMT
Truman: "I am Cyrus!"

Pompeo: "I am Balfour!"

Factoid: Balfour had buyer's remorse very shortly after having been cornered into giving to Jews that which they did not have. His remorse was heightened by Jewish terrorists who killed the British soldiers and diplomats who secured Palestine for Jews.

His preference was for Britain to wash its hands of 'the Jewish state,' as the British ultimately did.
"The sins of the father are visited on their children."

Mr. A. J. Balfour to the Secretary of State
Washington, January 13, 1922
.

My Dear Mr. Hughes: You will remember that some days ago I mentioned my great anxiety to get the agreements in regard to the Mandate for Palestine advanced a stage in order that the Council of the League of Nations might give it their blessing at the meeting which is now, I think, going on at Geneva. . . .

The task which the British Government have undertaken in Palestine is one of extreme difficulty and delicacy. At Paris I always warmly advocated that it should be undertaken, not by Britain, but by the U.S.A. ; and though subsequent events have shewn me that such a policy would never have commended itself to the American people I still think that, so far as the Middle East is concerned, it would have been the best.

ChuckOrloski , says: November 26, 2019 at 1:28 pm GMT
@mark green Wisely, and I place emphasis on the word "possible," Mark Green wrote: "With the possible exception of Jimmy Carter, the construction of Israeli 'settlements' (as well as the confiscation of land adjacent to Israel) has occurred under the watch of each and every US administration and Congress since 1967."

Hey Mark!

As you know, President Carter brokered the 1979 Camp David Agreement with Begin and Sadat. Such is considered the former president's greatest achievement.

A question. Who do you think most benefited from this agreement?

As reminder, in October 1981, Anwar Sadat was assassinated by presumably the Muslim Brotherhood, and the murder soon elevated the authoritarian & ruthless Hosni Mubarak as Egypt president. Of course, Israel and the US were comfortable with Mubarak.

If no response comment, Mark, I understand. Thank you.

Johnny Walker Read , says: November 26, 2019 at 1:28 pm GMT
Christian Zionism – The gift that keeps on giving(((for a certain few))). You can't fix stupid!!
Richard B , says: November 26, 2019 at 1:39 pm GMT
@mark green I go into detail here folks, and will offer a justification as to why. So, kindly bear with me.

What kind of a 'relationship' is this?

Master/Slave.

Or, since many of the same people are the purveyors of porn,

Sado-Masochistic.

Their Master/Sadism can be seen, quoting from Mark's comment,

expanding [Jewish] settlements

race-centered colonizing

Israeli confiscation of land

deliberate incremental warfare

Israeli transgression

the rogue Zionist state violated international law

Israel lawlessness

colonial, supremacist

deliciously one-sided

one-way 'relationship'

incredibly one-sided

The last three work both ways, of course, and provide a nice segue into the Slave/Masochist role played by the US (and not just the US).

The US–deeply-compromised

an active and willing partner

US aid to Israel

diplomatic cover for the rogue Zionist state

feeble attempt to push back

acquiescence – no matter what

unconditionally

There's a reason many sites have dropped their comment sections. As the comment section at TUR, and not just TUR, has made perfectly clear, commenters can help amplify and extend the ideas covered in any article, thereby driving the point home.

The point here is that human beings have but one task – to adapt to their environment, which is the same thing as saying, to adapt the environment to themselves.

Humans have the power to manipulate the environment to their advantage. But, they also have the power to manipulate the environment to their disadvantage, if they're stupid enough, as they must necessarily be, since they can see the environment only under the pressure of their needs.

The more people do this, the more the single-mindedness of purpose emerges, the less flexibility they demonstrate, the more Either/Or (Master/Slave, S & M) the world becomes, the more psychotic the behavior, the more the crazy comes out.

When enough people can see this to form a critical mass, then a culture crisis inevitably breaks out.

And that is the position we're in today.

No wonder they're cracking down on the Internet.

If there's one thing psychotics fear above all else, it's exposure.

Jewish Supremacy Inc. has rendered the USA powerless and reduced it to the status of a domesticated animal, a pet. And therein lies their stupidity and the world's dilema.

JSI routinely violates that which it is dependent on. By killing its Proxy, it kills itself.

And there's no question that the USA is dying. But then, so to is JSI.

That's what is really going on. What we're witnessing is The Pyrrhic Victory of JSI.

This explains why, now that they've sucked all of the blood out of the West in general and the USA in particular, they're currently engaged in a Fire Sale, where everything must go, and with only one buyer – China.

All Master/Slave, S & M relations are a degrading Dance of Death, which is how it ends, for both.

Osama , says: November 26, 2019 at 2:04 pm GMT
1. According to our Bible, it was Jews who were responsible for falsely accusing Jesus (pbuh), deceiving the masses about his true mission and causing him to be crucified by the Romans. It is also true that in the Bible Jesus called Jews murderers, children of the devil, vipers, liars and other vile things. Jesus did not pull any punches in describing them. I guess in today's world he would have been arrested for Antisemitism. He realized the truth and exposed them for what they really were. You Christian Zionists and far right Christians should go study your Bible. You may either learn something or come back denouncing Jesus as an anti-Semite.
2. According to many respected WW1 historians it was Jews who tricked Britain into agreeing to give them Palestine in exchange for getting the U.S. into WW1. Benjamin Freedman, a friend of some of the major leaders in our time and who is also a Jew, admitted this during a major speech given to patriots in 1961. The Neturei Karta, a devoutly Jewish religious group also admits the same. There are numerous scholars, historians and Jews who describe in detail how WW1 was started and fought with one of the main goals being securing Palestine for Jews. Here is a link to more information about that:
A Jewish Defector Warns America
3. It was Jews who caused the pogroms of their own people in Russia around the 1890s, so that the world will hate the regime of the Czar and cause millions of Jews to flee to the U.S. for political gain. Under the orders of Jacob Schiff in New York and the Rothschilds, they massacred hundreds of fellow Jews to have Russians blamed for this act and cause the immigration of thousands of other Jews to the US. Among other things, this resulted in world opinion turned against the Czar and his government and set up the bloody overthrow of his regime by the Bolsheviks.
The Illuminati and the Council on Foreign Relations
4. As admitted to by many historians and even by the ultra Israeli religious group, the Neturei Karta, WW2 was engineered by Jews and the leadership of the Jews made an alliance with Hitler causing thousands of German Jews to be killed so that others will flee en mass to Israel. They also forced the U.S. president Roosevelt to get into WW2 by embargoing Japanese oil causing them to attack the U.S. at Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt went along with this plan, all the while knowing ahead of time about the Japanese attack and the murder of thousands of Americans. See the following for more:
Stranger Than Fiction

5. The Iraqi Jew Naeem Giladi wrote a book detailing how Israelis performed terrorist actions and caused the deaths of many Jewish Iraqis during the 1950s so that Arab Iraqis can be blamed for it. The purpose of these terrorist actions was to cause Jews to migrate to Israel from Iraq. All but 6,000 of the 125,000 Jews in Iraq fled to Israel.
http://www.savethemales.ca/030203.html
6. A few years after the end of World War II, the Zionist plan to establish the nation of Israel in Palestine was finally realized. But not before the British protectors of Palestine were chased out by acts of terror carried out by ungrateful Zionist terrorists. It was British troops who unwittingly sacrificed their lives in order to steal Palestine away from Arab control and allowed the Jews of Europe to immigrate there. But with Great Britain left weakened and in debt from World War II, the ungrateful Zionists saw their opportunity to now chase the British out of Palestine by committing acts of terrorism against them. The most notorious of the Zionist terror groups was the Irgun, whose leader Menachem Begin would one day go on to become the Prime Minister of Israel and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize.
On the morning of July 22, 1946, a group of 15-20 Irgun terrorists dressed as Arabs entered the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. They unloaded 225 kilograms of explosives hidden in milk churns. The King David Hotel housed the Secretariat of the Government of Palestine and Headquarters of the British Forces in Palestine. When a British officer became suspicious, a shootout took place and the Irgun lit the fuses and fled. The explosion destroyed part of the hotel and killed 91 people. Most of the victims were British but 15 innocent Jews also died. Menachem Begin was not merely suspected of being behind these murderous deeds. Begin admitted that the Irgun committed these acts and that they were necessary for the establishment of a Jewish state.
Stranger Than Fiction
7. In 1956, as reported by the Times Of London, during one of Israel's perpetual wars with its neighbors, the Israeli Mossad tried to trick the United States into siding with Israel against Egypt by blowing up a US facility in Cairo and blaming the Egyptians for it. The plot was wrecked when the operatives were caught and confessed, creating a huge scandal. This event was referred to as the Lavon Affair named after the Israeli Defense Minister, Pinhas Lavon, at that time.
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=6854
http://www.the7thfire.com/new_world_order/zionism/mossad/lavon_affair.htm
8. According to Victor Ostrovski, a defector from the Israeli Mossad, the US was tricked into bombing Libya when the Israeli Mossad planted a radio transmitter in Tripoli which sent out fake orders to "terrorists" which the US could intercept. The faked orders caused Libya to be blamed for a German disco bombing. As a result of this fake transmission, Reagan used it as evidence to bomb Libya killing 30 innocent people including Qaddhafi's baby daughter.
http://100777.com/node/101
9. On June 8, 1967 Israel used unmarked fighters and torpedo boats to launch an hour and one-half long attack on the American Navy ship the USS Liberty, costing 34 American sailors their lives and 171 wounded. The Israelis first attacked the Liberty's radio towers in an attempt to stop the Sixth Fleet from learning that the Israelis were the attackers. After unmarked Israeli fighters horrendously bombed and strafed the Liberty, Israel sent in torpedo boats to finish the job. They even machine gunned the deployed life rafts in an effort to ensure that there would be no survivors (witnesses) who could expose them. Just as in the Lavon Affair, Israel hoped to blame this act of war on their enemy, the Egyptians. This time, only the courage and resourcefulness of the Liberty's crew prevented a further compounding of the travesty.
http://home.cfl.rr.com/gidusko/liberty/
9. It was Israelis who were armed with 9mm pistols, nine grenades, explosives, three detonators and 58 bullets and caught in Mexico in an attempt to blow the Mexican Congress up on October 10, 2001, one month after 9/11. Curiously these Israelis were found not with Israeli passports in their possession but with Pakistani passports. The Israelis were booked for conspiracy to destroy a building by means of an explosive by the Mexican police. If they were successful in blowing up the Mexican Congress, then like 9/11, it would have been blamed on Muslim terrorists, especially if Pakistani passports were found at the scene of the crime. They got caught red-handed here and only God knows how many other incidents that innocent Muslims are being blamed for that was really done by Israelis. See the following link for more on this:

"America's only ally in the Middle East, Israel, has been responsible for more acts of terror, sabotage, and murder of American citizens than the Muslims ever were. By her duplicity, she has put Americans in more danger than they have ever known or will know. She has bombed hotels, American government buildings, deliberately allowed hundreds of US Marines to be killed in their barracks in Lebanon, assaulted a US intelligence gathering ship, the USS Liberty (for the purposes of blaming the Arabs and thus drawing America into her war against them) stole and then sold America's most sensitive nuclear weapons technology to her enemies, (Russia and China) and by all indicators most certainly was involved in the 9/11 attacks. Whether it was the testimony given by the Israeli pilots who bombed and machine gunned the USS Liberty (killing 34 American sailors and wounding almost 200 more) or whether it was the Israeli intelligence officers who were arrested on 9/11 (while videotaping the destruction and cheering for a job well done) so much evidence exists which leaves no doubt as to who America's real enemy is, and yet short of one individual's conviction and prison sentence, Jonathon Pollard, nothing has been done with Israel with respect to justice or the interests of America's security. By contrast, year after year she is rewarded with more and more money and even more in terms of immunity and insulation from public scrutiny. The American people, supposedly a Christian people, have displayed not an ounce of the same concern for this obvious danger against their physical well-being which they attempt to display now over the supposed danger posed by Islamic extremism. Through the eyes of a Muslim therefore, the picture of the modern day Western Christian is one of an intellectually compliant, politically and religiously complacent individual who cannot think for himself or act in his own best interests outside of the programming which he receives from his Zionist puppet masters. Even today, as the headlines are blaring out the obvious vindication of this image by virtue of the fact that the war in Iraq was fought on completely false pretenses, the average conservative Christian in America who has adopted this irrational fear of Islam has taken no note of this nor does he appear to have been affected in the least."
Through the Eyes of a Muslim

Sean , says: November 26, 2019 at 2:12 pm GMT
@Richard B

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank
The name West Bank is a translation of the Arabic term ad-Diffah I-Garbiyyah, given to the territory west of the Jordan River that fell, in 1948, under occupation and administration by Jordan, which subsequently annexed it in 1950. This annexation was considered illegal and was recognized only by Britain, Iraq and Pakistan .[14] The term was chosen to differentiate the west bank of the River Jordan from the "east bank" of this river

America never recognised Jordan as having sovereignty over the West Bank, so when it lost it the position was not obviously the same as one country occupying another's territory. There was a legal opinion of how international law applied, that is all.

Durruti , says: November 26, 2019 at 2:33 pm GMT

The chosen-by-God Israeli state is quite capable of ethnic cleansing or even genocide on a massive scale, as it did originally in 1947-8 when it was founded and also later after it occupied the West Bank and Gaza in 1967. The Jewish state's leaders have repeatedly asserted that there is no such thing as a Palestinian, that Jordan is actually Palestine. They have become skilled at making the lives of Palestinians so miserable by destroying their farms, other livelihood and even their homes while also controlling their infrastructure, killing them if they resist,

The above is the Heart of Giraldi's article. Add to that, one of today's headlines, below, where the leader of Britain's Labor Party, Jeremy Corbyn , is routinely attacked in the Zionist owned American and British Mainstream Media. In the Zionist diatribe, there is not a mention of the complaints of the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine. Not an ounce of honesty is allowed by the Zionist New World Order's propaganda machine. If you oppose them, they will assassinate you, one way, or another.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/uk-chief-rabbi-says-corbyns-labour-is-poisoned-against-jews/ar-BBXkozX?li=BBnbcA1&ocid=iehp

The Zionist Financial Oligarchs are omnipotent, but no one loves them.

Durruti

Rich , says: November 26, 2019 at 4:08 pm GMT
The Turkish flag still flies over Constantinople, after having killed millions and forcefully converting or mistreating the Christians who lived there. In fact, the now Muslim countries of N Africa as well as Lebanon and Syria were also Christian lands. The tortures and degradations suffered by the formerly Christian people in this region are well documented. Where is the outrage? When does Mr Giraldi write an article about what Muslims have done to the original Christians who lived in this region?

The Israelis aren't leaving. The Palestinians, as a defeated peaple, have to find a way to make peace with their conqueror. Their Muslim ancestors were much less kind to the Christians who lived there, than the Israelis have been to them.

tradecraft46 , says: November 26, 2019 at 4:18 pm GMT
As the World Court has ruled, Israel holds the land by "Right of Conquest", by winning a defensive war.

If you live by the sword you die by the sword, so you have no complaint if you lose.

Israel may not be very good, but you have to be obey the law.

Personally, being a WASP, I think Muslims deserve what they get, but so do the Jews, Fiat Ludi!

Baaw , says: November 26, 2019 at 4:56 pm GMT
Pompeo was clearly rotated through the DCI billet just long enough to get him briefed for his focal point job at CIA's Foggy Bottom site. A rare non-tendentious question: What was the line he was getting on Israel policy? "International law has not advanced the cause of peace" is CIA boilerplate for everyplace. Is it CIA's stated policy to repudiate international law for the benefit of Israel? Or did Pompeo go off the reservation?
ChuckOrloski , says: November 26, 2019 at 5:29 pm GMT
The ZUS Executive Branch and cohort Knesset Congress West gave the West Bank to Israel. Pompeo merely conveyed the done-deal to Amerikans.

Fyi, as the Crusades have become topical on this article thread, it's good to recall how ZUS "War President" G.W. Bush slipped up (as usual ) and announced his administration's Crusade.

Curmudgeon , says: November 26, 2019 at 5:51 pm GMT
@Durruti I agree with your comment overall, but would like to point out the flaw in your Giraldi quote that no one addresses.
If the Jews claim Jordan is the real Palestine, then why do the Jews want Jerusalem as their capital, and claim the Golan Heights, West Bank and the rest of "Israel"?
The Balfour Declaration supported the resettlement of Jews in Palestine therefore Jordan, not all of the other territory they claim. As poster Sean has observed, the West Bank is not universally recognized as part of Jordan. Neither the Golan Heights nor Jerusalem have ever been part of Palestine – Jordan.
While it may piss off the King of Jordan, perhaps the question needs to be put to the Zionists, suggesting strongly that the Balfour Declaration has been misinterpreted, and the US recognition of Israel was wrong and will be withdrawn.
9/11 Inside job , says: November 26, 2019 at 6:02 pm GMT
Jeremy Hammond : "Why Israel has no right to exist " writing in the Foreign Policy Journal :
" There is a popular belief that Israel was founded through some kind of legitimate political process . This is absurd .when they declared Israel's independence Jews owned less than 7% of the land of Palestine The Zionist leadership relied on the UN's Resolution 181 for their claim of legitimate authority . The truth is that the resolution did no such thing . The UN General Assembly had no authority to partition the land against the will of the majority of its inhabitants . Nor did it claim to ."
Curmudgeon , says: November 26, 2019 at 6:03 pm GMT
The "problem" with Trump, is that his thought processes were developed for different circumstances. His statements are often confusing, giving opposite affirmatives or negatives. They are likely perfect for the business world. I think it is too soon to discard his sometimes bizarre actions.
He has stated many times that he's the best thing ever for Israel. He has made decisions regarding Israel that have been ridiculed at home and abroad. In Trump's drain the undefined swamp world, Israel could well be part of his swamp. There is an old adage, keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
His seemingly bizarre actions have made more people than ever acutely aware of the poisonous effects of the Israeli lobby. The attack on his Presidency is dominated by Jews, and the public sees that.
"If music be the food of love, play on,
Give me excess of it; that surfeiting,
The appetite may sicken, and so die."

― William Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

AnonStarter , says: November 26, 2019 at 7:08 pm GMT
@Rich /When does Mr Giraldi write an article about what Muslims have done to the original Christians who lived in this region?/

Don't like what Mr. Giraldi has to say, eh?

There are an astounding number of blogs throughout cyberspace devoted to your perspective. You're more than welcome to part company with us and join your fellow hasbaraites there.

On your way out the door, a little perspective for you, courtesy of Moshe Sharett:

http://www.palestinechronicle.com/attacking-churches-in-palestine-an-israeli-policy-since-1948/

Israeli documents have revealed that the Israeli army deliberately adopted a policy based on the destruction, vandalism and harm of the sanctity of churches in Palestine, during and after the 1948 war. An Israeli book, which will be published next month, explains how the Israeli army carried out seizure and destruction operations against churches located in the Palestinian cities, towns and villages the army took control off after expelling their people.

According to the protocol, Sharett described the army's violations of the church saying, "the officers and soldiers deliberately harmed the Christian sanctities; their behaviour is that of beasts, not human beings." Sharett also said, "The attacks suffered by the churches at the hands of the soldiers and officers are a shameful page in Israel's history."

This book also revealed that Sharett compared Israel, which allowed such acts, to "an evil and brutal Caesar that promotes nothing but destruction." He added: "The soldiers and officers turned the churches to toilets where they would tend to their needs." The book also goes on to reveal that Sharett told members of the Mapai party, in a meeting in July 1949, that Israel deliberately declared the areas containing churches as military zones in order to justify its refusal to allow foreign visitors and tourists to enter these areas and churches in an attempt to prevent them from witnessing the army's heinous violations.

Sharett also said that the soldiers stole a very valuable crown made of precious stones from one of the churches. He also noted another incident where the soldiers broke the hand off a sculpture of Jesus in one of the churches in order to steal the gold bracelets that were on it, as an example of the systematic looting and stealing from the churches which lasted for months. He stressed that the Israeli officers and soldiers also intentionally harmed the sanctity of the churches and tore holy books, mentioning that the acts of destruction committed against the churches were not only committed by the officers and soldiers, but also by many settlers, especially those who newly immigrated.

Herald , says: November 26, 2019 at 7:16 pm GMT
@SolontoCroesus So Balfour announced his sordid scheme, and then expected someone else to get their hands dirty by putting it into effect. It took a little time though, but effectively that is just what has happened. Much of the filth has now washed off Britain's grubby hands and has floated its way across the North Atlantic, where it now seems very much at home. Balfour would be well pleased.
DeepThought , says: November 26, 2019 at 7:17 pm GMT
@Colin Wright Dual citizenship has killed loyalty to America.
Truth3 , says: November 26, 2019 at 7:31 pm GMT

Orthodox leaders say they've embraced Trump because of his pro-Israel policies, including voiding the Iran nuclear deal. Some pointed to Trump's commuting of Hasidic meatpacking boss Sholom Rubashkin's 27-year-sentence for bank fraud and money laundering in 2017.

Trump has always been a shabbos goy just like his Dad and Brother.

His wives and kids are all Jews, so you see, he was never one to care about the goyim.

He was faking all along.

Miggle , says: November 26, 2019 at 7:44 pm GMT
@DESERT FOX

It is worse than that, they attacked the USS Liberty and the WTC on 911, they have free rein to do anything , they are the untouchables, killers and wreckers of nations including America.

It is worse than that. Today the whole world hates the USA. Until the Jews went on their genocidal rampage in 1948 the whole world loved the USA. Even the Iranians loved the USA then, but not for long, not after the USA, the worst enemy of Democracy the world has ever known, turned their constitutional monarch into a particularly vicious, obedient dictator.

So that's Israel's (and the CIA's) greatest achievement, making everyone in the whole world hate the USA, making the final demise of the USA a total certainty.

Yet it would be so, so easy for the USA to make the whole world love it again. Step one, force an immediate One State Solution, with equal rights for all, on Israel.

Robert Dolan , says: November 26, 2019 at 8:08 pm GMT
@Curmudgeon The Greater Israel Plan means that israel is going to steal massive tracts of arab land, and white

Christian soldiers are going to die in the effort.

Anonymouse , says: November 26, 2019 at 8:11 pm GMT
@anarchyst Montesquiou pointed out that every nation is founded on a crime. A known truth for historical times, and a likely supposition about pre-historical change of rulership. True of the US, Canada, NZ, Australia in recent times.

The jews are merely the most recent example of that principle. Most of the Arab inhabitants of Israel's slice of Palestine were driven into exile, into the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon.

The jews have no right to their territory, no more than any other nation. They hold their territory by force of arms. Selective arm-chair moralizing about injustice to the Palestinians may be judged to be nothing more than hot air plus an atavistic hatred, possibly religiously based, of the jews.

The 75 year long existence of Israel has culminated in a high-class civilization, materially and professionally impressive, socially unified by majority army conscription, with efficient governance chosen democratically.

Their Ungluck is to have colonized in the wrong area surrounded by religiously based enemies. The Spartans in antiquity is an approximate parallel.

They prevailed over their enemies for centuries until they didn't. Why? One possible explanation is that their fertility rate dwindled with a concommitant loss of military supremacy. Happily, the Israeli birthrate is extremely high among the 20% religious and among the secular as well.

According to Wikipedia, "With an average of three children per woman, Israel also has the highest fertility rate in the OECD by a considerable margin and much higher than the OECD average of 1.7."

Anastasia , says: November 26, 2019 at 8:42 pm GMT
Well trumps campaign promise was to get rid of NATO and while it looks like he reneged on that promise his actions in forcing nato countries to pay their fair share is effectively dismantling nato. Maybe in his recognition of things in Israel which he has no authority to recognize is causing Israel to act in a way to create the one state scenario as the author suggests. Maybe trump is not as dumb as he looks or maybe someone above has his hand on the throttle
mark green , says: November 26, 2019 at 8:47 pm GMT
@ChuckOrloski Hi Chuck. Who benefited most from the Camp David? As you may recall, there were a series of agreements and accords that began with Camp David (which was primarily just an overrated peace deal between Israel and Egypt) but it set the stage (allegedly) for a comprehensive peace settlement involving the Palestinians as well as the larger Arab world.

But this vaunted peace process finally failed. The 'two state' solution has been dumped. Israel is now in conquest mode.

As for Camp David, Israel got Egypt to accept Greater Israel and to break away from the rest of the Arab League. This marked one of the first significant cracks in the Arab wall of anti-Zionist solidarity. It looks as if this was Israel's game plan all along. Jewish Henry Kissinger made this happen. Very clever. Very duplicitous.

The crypto-Israelis among us continue to dominate this multi-decade chess match, with Washington still carrying their bags. So we're left with this:

The expanding Jewish state continues to gain more territory while bringing its divided foes to heel.

US aid to nuclear Israel remains unconditional.

Israel's native non-Jews are still being crushed.

Looking back, the US squandered vast amounts of time, money and prestige on a peace process that went nowhere. The Palestinians continue to suffer and die. And Israel isn't done yet.

The Zions want 'regime change' in Iran and the alliance between Russia, Assad's Syria and Iran smashed. More conflict ahead.

Amerimutt Golems , says: November 26, 2019 at 9:43 pm GMT
@mark green

With the possible exception of Jimmy Carter, the construction of Israeli 'settlements' (as well as the confiscation of land adjacent to Israel) has occurred under the watch of each and every US administration and Congress since 1967. This deliberate process amounts to incremental warfare.

Carter is no saint. He covered up Israel's nuclear test just to preserve his legacy as international peacemaker.

The Vela Incident: South Atlantic Mystery Flash in September 1979 Raised Questions about Nuclear Test
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nuclear-vault/2016-12-06/vela-incident-south-atlantic-mystery-flash-september-1979-raised-questions-about-nuclear-test

[Nov 27, 2019] Could your county use some extra money?

Highly recommended!
Nov 27, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com

catherine , 26 November 2019 at 05:16 PM

Could your county use some extra money?

According to the US Census there are 3031 counties in the US.
If we redirected the $3.8 billion plus the 500,000,000 for missile defense that we give Israel to US counties budgets each county would receive about
$ 1.3 million.

If we included the $1.2 billion each we give to Egypt and Jordon for signing the Carter peace treaty with Israel that figure increases to $2.3 million for each county.

While $2.3 million may be a small figure for counties with metro cities, it would be a large amount for the majority of counties across the nation.

Since aid to Israel alone accounts for 50% of US foreign aid who would oppose this re direct of taxpayers money...besides the politicians...and how would the politicians explain their opposition to the districts they supposedly represent?

[Nov 26, 2019] Why Pompeo Gives Away the Palestinian West Bank

Nov 26, 2019 | www.unz.com

BannedHipster , says: November 26, 2019 at 3:21 pm GMT

Trump must be doing some really terrible stuff on all those Ghislaine Maxwell/Jeffrey Epstein tapes.

[Nov 26, 2019] Anti-Semitism Bandwagon Resumes Against Corbyn by JonathanCook

Notable quotes:
"... The anti-Semitism smear campaign is being revived in the corporate media for good reason. The stakes could not be higher for Britain's ruling class. As worried as many of them are by Brexit, Corbyn is seen as a bigger threat. He might call time on the banquet they have been gorging on for four decades uninterrupted. ..."
"... A Corbyn government, by contrast, is an unknown quantity. The free-lunch might end, or at least start to feel more like an unsatisfying snack. ..."
"... Or, more likely, the right-wingers and centrists who conflate Israel and Jews -- as a proportion appear to do -- are equally indulgent of a particularist and regressive approach to rights. Instead of committing to universal human rights, shared by all alike, the particularists assign superior rights to those they think of as more like themselves. Right-wingers, it seems, tend to exclude Jews from this category, while centrists have a greater tendency to include them. ..."
"... It is OK to say that financial elite is largely Jewish. Especially if you are happy about it. But if you do not cherish those most productive members of the society for the oodles of money they produce every minute, then you make them insecure, and thus you are an anti-Semite. Perhaps of self-hating variety, although at that points perhaps even Mr. Pollard would feel some strain, a middle class Socialist Jew is not in this "most productive" elite. ..."
"... The attack on Corbyn is just the elite seeking to smear him, in defense of their own interests. They have stolen so much, that they need now above all to stop anyone who would prevent them from keeping it all. ..."
"... That Israel can be used in this turns on the fear that good government in Britain would not support what Israel has been doing for so long. No doubt. No principled government could, nor does any such government anywhere in the world. ..."
"... With z-list celebrities like Rachel Riley adding to the 'anti-semite' debate routinely on twitter this story will not ever go away until Corbyn does. One way and another the media elites under the tutalage of the upper classes in the UK Corbyn is depicted as everything that is 'evil' with the world. It is of course all fake news. There's no more anti-semitism in labour as any other part of the country. But it suits those in fear of change. ..."
"... Aww, the parasitic financial elite (of ALL religio-ethnic backgrounds) doesn't like Corbyn's policy proposals so they're going to resort to Alan Dershowitz style mud-slinging. What's new? They will resort to any tactic, no matter how vile and pernicious, in order to hold onto their class privileges. That 40% of working folks can't come up with $500 for an emergency car repair or medical bill simply does not matter. ..."
Nov 15, 2019 | consortiumnews.com

With the election nearing, the British corporate media is once again running smears of the Labour leader. And for good reason, says Jonathan Cook. The stakes could not be higher for Britain's ruling class.

In the coming elections, Prime Minister Boris Johnson on left, is facing off against Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn.

Jonathan-Cook.net

F or a few months over the summer the British corporate media largely lost interest in smearing Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn as an anti-Semite. Maybe they had begun to worry that the constant drum-beat of the past three years was deadening the public's sensitivity to such claims.

But an election is now weeks away, and the anti-Semitism smear bandwagon is being rolled out once again.

Stephen Pollard, editor of The Jewish Chronicle (who also writes for the Tory-loving Mail , Express , Sun and Telegraph newspapers) has yet again been terrifying readers as best he can, implying not so subtly that voting for Labour might risk a genocide of British Jews. After several years of painting Corbyn – preposterously – as some kind of unkempt, gray-bearded leader of a British Gestapo-in-the-making, Pollard spent a few recent days highlighting in the corporate media the predictable results of the latest survey of Jewish public opinion. It suggests that a growing number of Jews are considering leaving Britain if Corbyn manages to oust Boris Johnson from power.

That we have reached the point where so many British Jews have been persuaded that Corbyn's vocal criticism of Israel's oppression of Palestinians means his entire party is infected with a supposed hatred of Jews needs some explaining. It is something I have been trying to do regularly, and in real time, as life has been breathed into these various slurs , both by a corporate media that detests the fairer society a Corbyn party promises and by an Israel lobby that identifies so closely with Israel that it has completely dehumanized Palestinians, to the extent that the crimes against them can be entirely overlooked -- treated as no more significant than stepping on an ant.

In the figure of Pollard, we have a journalist who merges both outlooks, typified in this extraordinary tweet last year that at the time stunned even some of his followers but has now become a staple of the campaign against Corbyn and his democratic socialist politics. Efforts by the left to highlight the class war waged by an elite that's been sucking the life out of the British economy to enrich itself have been maliciously recharacterised by Pollard and other rightwing journalists (some of whom ensconced themselves in the Labour party during Tony Blair's rule) as an attack on Jews. But it is not the left that conflates the corporate elite with Jews, it is rightwing journalists like Pollard.

We shall return to this issue later in the post.

Jonathan Freedland's Libel

A recent incident helped to illustrate just how organized and malevolent the anti-Semitism smears against Corbyn truly are.

Jonathan Freedland, a supposedly liberal columnist at The Guardian newspaper and a BBC regular, again proved how he has been a key figure in weaponizing this allegation against a Corbyn-led party. So eager is he to damage Labour and make sure it is no position to end a decade of Tory-imposed austerity that he threw aside all normal journalistic caution and published a libelous claim of anti-Semitism against a potential Labour candidate in the coming general election.

There were several revealing aspects to this incident. Freedland defamed Majid Mahmood, a Labour local councilor in Birmingham, without making even the most rudimentary factual checks that the highly damaging claim was actually true -- a basic journalistic duty. He simply relied on the word of a "previously reliable Labour source" -- in other words, one of the many Blairite enemies of Corbyn within the Labour parliamentary faction and party bureaucracy who have been briefing against the leader for the past four years.

(It is worth recalling that a prominent anti-racism activist, Marc Wadsworth, was hounded from the party last year, accused of anti-Semitism, for warning that Blairite MPs like Ruth Smeeth were briefing against their own leader to journalists in the rightwing press. Smeeth accused Wadsworth of anti-Semitism because she is Jewish, though Wadsworth says he did not know that -- and, of course, her Jewishness is irrelevant to the issue of whether she was seeking to malign her own party's leader through the media. Wadsworth's mistake, it seems, was to assume that corporate "liberal" journalists like Freedland were not also part of those smear efforts.)

In Mahmood's case, it was an egregious example of mistaken identity. Freedland and his "source" had confused the Birmingham councilor with a London lawyer of the same name who was fined over anti-Semitic comments four years ago. Such confusion was clearly neither accidental nor innocent. Mahmood's case highlighted something that was already patently obvious: that anti-Corbyn groups have been trawling the histories and social media posts of Labour members in an organized effort to weaponize anything they can find against the Labour leader. The defamation of Mahmood was simply the latest smear to emerge from this campaign.

Smears from Within Labour

Freedland's "defense" was itself telling. The person relaying the smear to him was, he said, from inside Labour and had been "previously reliable." That meant someone fairly senior in the party -- thereby explaining Freedland's readiness to believe him uncritically -- and someone who had passed on similar damaging information before. It was irrefutable confirmation that Corbyn's most venomous opponents are not in the Conservative Party but drawn from Labour's own top ranks. They want a Corbyn-led party destroyed even if it means keeping the Brexit-backing, austerity-loving, racism-indulgent Tories in power.

There was another ugly aspect to the behavior of Freedland and his "source." It looked suspiciously like both had uncritically accepted the unfounded claim against Mahmood because he had a Muslim name. They both appeared to have assumed that Muslims are more likely to be racist towards Jews and therefore accepted the claim with a much lower standard of evidence than would have been expected in the case of anyone else.

In fact, the councilor's name is a Muslim equivalent of "David Brown" or "George Smith." Can we really imagine Freedland libeling someone with either of those names so casually, without making even cursory checks to be sure he had identified the right David Brown or George Smith?

This kind of behavior has a name: it is called racism. And it is quite extraordinary to see Freedland so susceptible, after he has made a journalistic career out of exploring the intricacies of racism when it applies to Jews. It almost leaves one suspecting that this paragon of liberal journalism is really a hypocrite.

Fears the Free Lunch Will End

The anti-Semitism smear campaign is being revived in the corporate media for good reason. The stakes could not be higher for Britain's ruling class. As worried as many of them are by Brexit, Corbyn is seen as a bigger threat. He might call time on the banquet they have been gorging on for four decades uninterrupted.

If Corbyn shunts Prime Minister Boris Johnson and the Tories out of power, the millionaires and billionaires who control both the British print and broadcast media, including the BBC, fear the good times could come to an abrupt end. The Brexit threat pales in comparison. That would simply shift our primary economic allegiance from Europe to the United States, leaving the predatory capitalism on which the corporate class has grown unimaginably rich as strong as ever.

A Corbyn government, by contrast, is an unknown quantity. The free-lunch might end, or at least start to feel more like an unsatisfying snack.

In truth, given the bitter divisions tearing apart his own party -- between most of the mass membership, who are behind him, and the holdouts from the Blair-Brown era that still dominate the parliamentary party -- it is hard to imagine Corbyn being able to do as much as his critics fear.

He may manage to curb the worst excesses of the neoliberal financial system; he may block further privatization of the National Health Service, even reverse it a little; and he may bring a few vital national industries back into public ownership. He may manage too to redirect some of the cream the fat cats have been lapping up back into the public coffers for a New Green Deal. All of that would be a relief after so many years of Tory-designed austerity for the many and state socialism for the few.

But the corporate class are now so greedy, so used to getting their way, that even the smallest diminishment of their power and wealth is seen as an unbearable offence against what they divine as the natural order.

Tool of Class War

They are not about to leave anything to chance. Corbyn must be tarred and feathered again. Four years of experimenting with various smears have selected anti-Semitism as the weapon of choice. That false accusation can most easily be disguised to ensure it does not look like what it is intended to be when used against Corbyn and Labour: a tool of class war.

Claims of anti-Semitism have worked ideally in damaging Corbyn because no real evidence has been needed. In fact, such claims succeed even when opposed to the known evidence (as we shall see). They work chiefly by innuendo and emotion. And better still, they work even when those accused like Corbyn and his allies deny the accusation. As in all good witch-hunts, denial is proof of guilt, as an ally of Corbyn's, the MP Chris Williamson, has repeatedly found out. He has been barred from standing in the election, and has now resigned from the party, after correctly noting that Labour had in effect made the anti-Semitism smears appear more credible by constantly apologizing over evidence-free claims of anti-Semitism from those seeking to harm the party's image with voters.

This is a winning formula for the ruling class because anyone who tries to argue that Corbyn's opponents are weaponizing anti-Semitism through the corporate media is thereby proved to be an anti-Semite. The smears are entirely resistant to all evidence that they are smears.

Survey: Little Anti-Semitism on Left

That the anti-Semitism claims are slurs has been demonstrated over and over again. But paradoxically the latest refutation came last week from the corporate elite's house journal, The Economist -- though, of course, it was not presented that way .

The magazine published a new survey of British public opinion showing that an ideological group it labelled as "very left wing" -- presumably the people who share Corbyn's views -- were among the least likely to hold anti-Semitic opinions, even though they also had by far the most critical views of Israel (an outlook The Economist mischievously termed "highly anti-Israel").

In other words, those people on the left who firmly oppose Israel's oppression of the Palestinians were unlikely also to harbor anti-Jewish views. The great majority could clearly distinguish between Israel and Jews, and did not hold Jews responsible for the crimes committed by the state of Israel.

The same could not be said, however, of either the center or the right. Supporters of the right were less than half as likely to adopt critical views of Israel as the left but were three and a half times more likely to hold anti-Semitic views. Meanwhile, only a small number of centrists were critical of Israel, and an almost identical number held anti-Semitic views.

What the figures reveal is the very opposite of the Labour anti-Semitism narrative -- unless we wish to argue improbably that Labour and its 500,000 members (the largest party in Europe) are entirely unrepresentative of the wider public that shares their ideological worldview. The left overwhelmingly opposes Israeli colonial oppression of Palestinians but very few blame Jews for Israel's behavior. Israel is seen as a political project, one driven by an ugly ideology of settler colonialism, not a project representing all Jews. The latter is an anti-Semitic position that, paradoxically, is supported and promoted by Israel itself.

Conversely, the same figures suggest that there is an identifiable problem of racism and anti-Semitism on the right, and a potential one among centrists too. Whereas the left understands that Israel and Jews are entirely separate and distinct categories, both the center and right appear to share a tendency of conflating Israel and Jews.

Racism Rife on the Right

In the case of the right, the figures show a close correlation between opposition to Israel and anti-Jewish feeling. A significant portion of the right either blame Jews collectively for Israel's crimes or dislike Jews and so oppose the state that claims to represent them. Even though you would never know it from the media coverage, which concentrates exclusively on a supposed problem within the Labour Party, anti-Semitism is rife on the right in a way that simply isn't true on the left.

The survey also hints at the possibility of a more veiled problem of racism and latent anti-Semitism among "centrists," a group presumably represented politically by the Lib Dems and the Blairite wing of the Labour Party. Very few in this group express anti-Jewish sentiments – in fact, exactly the same small proportion as on the left. (Tellingly, despite these identical results, the Labour Party has been smeared as "institutionally anti-Semitic", whereas the centrist Lib Dems have not.)

Nonetheless, there is a significant difference between the two political blocs -- and one that could reflect much less well on the centrists than the left.

A much larger proportion of the centrist group appear to harbor sympathies for Israel, or at least view it uncritically, despite the ever-mounting evidence of Israel's record of human rights abuses and intensifying oppression of Palestinians.

Remember that large numbers of the centrist Blairite faction of Labour MPs (though not the wider Labour membership) belong to Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) and have proudly maintained their association with that organization. They have continued to do so even after the LFI at first vigorously defended, then fell silent on Israel's repeated massacres over the past 18 months of Palestinians protesters at the Gaza perimeter fence that encages them.

More than 220 Palestinians, including women, children, journalists, and medical staff, have been killed by Israeli snipers at the protests, while tens of thousands more have been maimed. But in a blatant example of anti-Arab racism, the LFI has blamed Hamas for these deaths, as though ordinary Palestinians in Gaza are simply pawns of Hamas and lack the volition to demand for themselves an end to an Israeli blockade that has imprisoned them for 12 years.

Centrists Conflate Jews & Israel

Only a quarter as many centrists as leftists are critical of Israel, according to The Economist survey. In other words, a proportion of centrists appear to identify with Israel's colonial oppression of Palestinians -- possibly because they favor Jews over Arabs and Muslims (presumably as part of a "clash of civilizations" worldview) or maybe because they have positive feelings about Jews that translate into uncritical support for Israel, whatever it does to the Palestinians it rules over.

That could indicate a significant problem of anti-Arab or anti-Muslim prejudice among centrists, similar to the ugly assumptions made by Jonathan Freedland and his "source." However, we can do little more than speculate on this point because the survey is concerned exclusively with Jews and Israel.

Nonetheless, the figures also allude to a potential anti-Semitism problem in the ranks of the centrist camp. The stark lack of criticism of Israel among centrists, combined with little anti-Semitism, suggests that a significant proportion of centrists, like right-wingers, consider Jews and Israel to be intimately connected -- that they struggle to disentangle a political project (Israel) from an ethnic or cultural group (Jews).

There is only a narrow distinction between a right-winger who conflates Israel and Jews in a way that vilifies Jews and a centrist who conflates Israel and Jews in a way that venerates Israel.

Rejecting Universal Rights

The difference in the respective outcomes of this conflation could reflect differing understandings of what Israel does. Israel's treatment of Palestinians – whether seen as justified or not – is then projected on to Jews. Once the conflation is accepted, Jews unfairly receive either credit (from centrists) or blame (from the right) for Israel's actions.

Or, more likely, the right-wingers and centrists who conflate Israel and Jews -- as a proportion appear to do -- are equally indulgent of a particularist and regressive approach to rights. Instead of committing to universal human rights, shared by all alike, the particularists assign superior rights to those they think of as more like themselves. Right-wingers, it seems, tend to exclude Jews from this category, while centrists have a greater tendency to include them.

But the danger is that, if these centrists can be persuaded that Jews are not part of their in-group -- for example, by undermining the idea of a supposed Judeo-Christian West, embodying the supposed values of "civilization" -- then they could be as susceptible as the right to a generalized Jew hatred. It is a commitment to universal human rights -- a doctrine to which most on the left subscribe but which some on the right and the center appear to reject -- that provides the only sure-fire political inoculation against racism in general and anti-Semitism in particular.

The Economist , of course, wishes to avoid drawing this very obvious conclusion, one implied by its findings, because that would wreck the narrative it and the rest of the corporate media have been constructing to damage Corbyn. In fact, The Economist poll echoes earlier research ignored by the corporate media, such as figures showing that instances of anti-Semitism in Labour amount to 0.08 percent of the membership, and surveys demonstrating that the Tory party -- and its "watermelon smiles" leader Boris Johnson -- have a far bigger problem with racism, towards both Muslims and Jews .

'Not a Whiff of Anti-Semitism'

Not everyone in the political and media class is ready to dance to the same tune, as was made clear in an interview that gently turned the tables on Alastair Campbell, chief adviser to Tony Blair when he was Labour prime minister. Campbell helped Blair distort the intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war in 2003 that gave superficial credence to a different but equally confected story: both that Saddam Hussein's Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that those weapons were just a hair's-trigger away from being fired at the U.K. Up to 1 million Iraqis were killed as a result of that illegal war, and many millions more were driven from their homes.

Campbell, a man whose anti-Muslim, anti-Arab prejudices permitted him to help lay waste to another country on an entirely bogus pretext, and whose reputation in the corporate media suffered not a whit as a result, decided to use the interview to try to revive the Corbyn anti-Semitism smears and undermine Labour's chances of winning the election. Like other Blairites, Campbell has been an outspoken critic of Corbyn, even going public with the fact that he has started voting for the Lib Dems.

He asked his interviewee, John Bercow, the outgoing speaker of the House of Commons and a Jewish member of the Conservative Party, to comment on Corbyn and the anti-Semitism allegations. Campbell's transparent aim was to recruit Bercow to the smear campaign – both as a Jew and as someone who has come to be widely trusted since becoming house speaker as an arbiter of an even-handed politics.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/SVcWo-W60lU?feature=oembed

Bercow's response was not what Campbell hoped for. The former speaker answered cautiously, but observed: "I myself have never experienced anti-Semitism from a member of the Labour Party I do not myself believe Jeremy Corbyn is anti-Semitic I have known him for the 22 years I have been in parliament and I have never detected so much as a whiff of anti-Semitism from him."

Campbell's face could barely conceal his disappointment.

The interview was another reminder that those leading the anti-Semitism smear campaign often have, given their own histories, precisely zero credibility on the issue of racism, let alone class politics. Whatever they may think they believe, it is not racism that truly concerns Campbell or Freedland; it is their fear of a different kind of politics, one that requires from them an entirely different way of understanding British colonial history, of interpreting Britain's role in the world, and of ending the U.K.'s gaping class divide. They, like so many others in the media and political elite, are frightened that a different kind of politics might force them to look in the mirror – and finally understand that long ago they chose to stand with the oppressors rather than the oppressed.

Jonathan Cook is a freelance journalist based in Nazareth. This article is from his blog Jonathan Cook.net .Tags: Anti-Semitism Jeremy Corbyn Jonathan Cook


Piotr Berman , November 19, 2019 at 01:48

"But it is not the left that conflates the corporate elite with Jews, it is rightwing journalists like Pollard."

The author does not understand what is (New) anti-Semitism. One of the un-enumerated symptoms is begrudging. It is OK to say that financial elite is largely Jewish. Especially if you are happy about it. But if you do not cherish those most productive members of the society for the oodles of money they produce every minute, then you make them insecure, and thus you are an anti-Semite. Perhaps of self-hating variety, although at that points perhaps even Mr. Pollard would feel some strain, a middle class Socialist Jew is not in this "most productive" elite.

Corbyn is vile in so many ways that the responsible forces in UK had to try all methods. The first I have read was that he is a bicyclist who uses a CHEAP (!!!) bike to go to work. A template from Maoist China. The second thing, he does not like Trident. How can Britannia rule the waves without Tridents, rented for the occasion from Colonials. Without Tridents, Russians would overrun Norway and than, in quick succession, Scotland and Isle of Man. Then I read that Corbyn is inept, so inept that he cannot be sufficiently snide during the question period in Parliament. And so on. (Everything from The Guardian.) I still do not understand why "anti-Semitism" is sticks so much better than this other stuff.

Cara MariAnna , November 18, 2019 at 14:48

Thank you Jonathan Cook (and CN) for this excellent in-depth analysis of how and why the predatory elite deploy false accusations of anti-semitism in their ongoing campaign to horde wealth, resources and power.

Joe Bien , November 18, 2019 at 10:48

Thank you, CN. Very good analysis/observation. That this is only one of countless cases of the same merry-go-round, of the same flaccid (yet effective) tactic(s) employed by the lobbies and individuals perpetuating the quashing of dissent, is, as ever, truly shocking and compelling.
Excellent article.

Mark Thomason , November 16, 2019 at 14:56

The attack on Corbyn is just the elite seeking to smear him, in defense of their own interests. They have stolen so much, that they need now above all to stop anyone who would prevent them from keeping it all.

That Israel can be used in this turns on the fear that good government in Britain would not support what Israel has been doing for so long. No doubt. No principled government could, nor does any such government anywhere in the world.

The use of Israel in this way is just one more cost, one more burden borne, by the West. It is the price of doing the wrong that is the Israel Project today.

Israel could have been done better. It has not been. Especially under Netanyahu, it is an exercise in "How low can you go?" It has found deep depths, and has not yet ended its plunge.

bob , November 16, 2019 at 03:41

With z-list celebrities like Rachel Riley adding to the 'anti-semite' debate routinely on twitter this story will not ever go away until Corbyn does. One way and another the media elites under the tutalage of the upper classes in the UK Corbyn is depicted as everything that is 'evil' with the world. It is of course all fake news. There's no more anti-semitism in labour as any other part of the country. But it suits those in fear of change.

Drew Hunkins , November 15, 2019 at 17:24

Aww, the parasitic financial elite (of ALL religio-ethnic backgrounds) doesn't like Corbyn's policy proposals so they're going to resort to Alan Dershowitz style mud-slinging. What's new? They will resort to any tactic, no matter how vile and pernicious, in order to hold onto their class privileges. That 40% of working folks can't come up with $500 for an emergency car repair or medical bill simply does not matter.

[Nov 26, 2019] Israel, racism, anti-semitism and the definition of jewishness: When the central task of a state is to import persons of a select religious/ethnic group -- and to develop the country for their benefit alone -- it is crucially important to be officially recognized as a bona fide member of that group

Nov 26, 2019 | www.counterpunch.org

Israel's champions owe us an explanation. First, they insist that Israel is and always must be a Jewish state, by which most of them mean not religiously Jewish but of the "Jewish People" everywhere, including Jews who are citizens of other states and not looking for a new country. To be Jewish, according to the prevailing view, it is enough to have a Jewish mother (or to have been converted by an approved Orthodox rabbi). Belief in one supreme creator of the universe, in the Torah as the word of God, and in Jewish ritual need have nothing whatever to do with Jewishness. (We ignore here the many problems with this conception , such as: how can there be a secular Judaism?)

The definition of Jew has been bitterly controversial inside and outside of Israel since its founding. The point is, as anthropologist Roselle Tekiner wrote, "When the central task of a state is to import persons of a select religious/ethnic group -- and to develop the country for their benefit alone -- it is crucially important to be officially recognized as a bona fide member of that group." (This is from the anthology Anti-Zionism: Analytical Reflections , which is not online and is apparently out of print. But see Tekiner's article, "Israel's Two-Tiered Citizenship Law Bars Non-Jews From 93 Percent of Its Lands." )

Second, Israel's champions insist that Israel is a democracy -- indeed, the only democracy in the Middle East. They vehemently object whenever someone demonstrates how Israel-as-the-state-of-the-Jewish-People must harm the 25 percent of Israeli citizens who are not Jewish, most of whom are Arabs.

Israeli law uniquely distinguishes citizenship from nationality . The nationality of an Israeli Arab citizen is "Arab" not Israeli, while the nationality of a Jewish citizen is "Jewish" not Israeli. Are citizens of any other country distinguished in law like that? The prohibition on marriage between Jews and non-Jews is not the result of political bargaining with religious parties but of a desire to protect the Jewish people from impurity. These contortions are required by Israel's self-declared status as something other than the land of all its citizens. Early Zionists said they wanted Palestine to be as Jewish as Britain is British and France is French -- a flagrant category mistake that has had horrific consequences for the Palestinians.

The insistence by Israel's supporters -- that Israel can be both Jewish and democratic -- thus is puzzling. What does it mean for Israel to be a Jewish state if that status has no real consequences for non-Jews? If all it meant was that the Star of David was on the flag, we might hear far fewer objections to Israel. But of course it means much more.

To see what it means, one has to look beyond Israel's Declaration of Independence, Basic Law (its de facto constitution), and specific statutes, which contain language that on its face forbids discrimination against non-Jews. We should know better than to take official documents at face value. What matters in any society is the "real constitution," the principles that underlie commonly accepted behavior. The old Soviet Union's constitution listed freedom of the press among the "rights" of Soviet citizens, and the U.S. Constitution says that only Congress may declare war and that "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

More pertinent, the 1917 Balfour Declaration, wherein the British government "view[ed] with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people," also stated that "it [was] clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country." We know how that worked out.

So what's the story inside Israel? (I'm not talking about the West Bank and Gaza Strip, which Israel has occupied for 52 years and where Palestinians have no rights whatever.)

After doing an interview recently about my new book, Coming to Palestine , I was challenged by a listener over my statements that the Israeli government treats Arab and Jewish criminals differently depending on whether they shed "Jewish blood" or "Arab blood" (no such distinction actually exists) and that political parties can't call for changing Israel from a Jewish state to a state of all its citizens.

Who is right?

Regarding criminal justice, Ha'aretz columnist Gideon Levy shows anecdotally that Arab Israeli citizens who kill Jews can spend more time in prison than Israeli Jewish citizens who kill Arabs. "Arab blood is cheaper in Israel," Levy wrote in 2014, "and Jewish blood is thicker." He says things are the same today. Over the years, many articles have been published documenting this de facto, though not de jure, disparity. Indeed, Ha'aretz reported in 2011 that

Arab Israelis who have been charged with certain types of crime are more likely than their Jewish counterparts to be convicted, and once convicted they are more likely to be sent to prison, and for a longer time. These disparities were found in a recent statistical study commissioned by Israels Courts Administration and the Israel Bar Association . The [unpublished preliminary] study is unique in that it is the first of its kind to be commissioned and funded in part by the courts administration, and in that it sought to examine claims by attorneys that Israeli judges deal more harshly with Arab criminals than with Jews.

Note that government discrimination against non-Jews across the spectrum of issues is not usually written into the law, although it may be . Mostly flagrantly, discrimination is legally applied to the "right of return." People defined as Jews, no matter where they were born or live, can become Israeli citizens/nationals virtually on arrival, while Arabs driven from their ancestral homes in 1947-48 and 1967 may not go back, much less become full-rights citizens/nationals. Put concretely, I, an atheist born in Philadelphia to Jewish parents born in Philadelphia (with roots likely in the vicinity of the Black Sea), can "return" [sic] to Israel and become an Israeli citizen at once, while my friend Raouf Halaby, a naturalized American citizen born to Arab Christian parents in west Jerusalem three years before Israel was founded, may not. The only difference is that my mother was Jewish, making me, a Spinozist, a Jewish national in Israel's eyes, and Raouf's mother was not.

Regarding restrictions on political parties, the Basic Law: The Knesset states :

A candidates' list [party] shall not participate in elections to the Knesset, and a person shall not be a candidate for election to the Knesset, if the objects or actions of the list or the actions of the person, expressly or by implication, include :

1. negation of the existence of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state;

Before proceeding, let us note a conundrum. The issue I'm raising here is whether a state be both Jewish and democratic. The root of the word democracy is demos , people. So if the raison d'être of Israel is the welfare of only some of its citizens and millions of certain others who are citizens and residents of other countries, how can Israel be a real democracy? Strictly speaking, considering that word and , the law's language legitimizes a party that "negat[es] the existence of the State of Israel as a Jewish state" but not as a democratic state. Would the Israeli election authorities accept that distinction? I don't think so.

In the past the Israeli Supreme Court has reversed government bans on a party's or candidate's inclusion in an election. Particular cases will revolve around the exact wording of a party's mission statement or candidate's platform, and legal language is subject to endless, unpredictable, and political interpretation. But, regardless, the government has the power to ban at its disposal, and future Supreme Courts may not be so liberal. So the threat of a ban always looms. Incidentally, a party or candidate that engages in "incitement to racism" is also ineligible to participate in elections, yet this provision has yet to be applied to Jewish parties and politicians, such as Likud and Benjamin Netanyahu, that routinely spout racist rhetoric.

Israel's champions also deny that Arab Israelis -- citizens, mind you -- have grossly inferior access to land, most of which is owned by a "public" authority and the Jewish National Fund (very little is privately owned); building and village permits; public utilities; education; roads; and other government-controlled services and resources. The Israeli government has carried out programs in the Galilee and Negev, known as Judaization, from which Arab Israelis, especially Bedouins, have been cleared to make way for Jewish Israelis. Such restrictions inside Israel have the stink of apartheid.

In his book Palestinians in Israel: Segregation, Discrimination, and Democracy , Ben White documents that the Israeli government allocates resources -- unsurprisingly -- just as one would expect, considering that Israel by its founding doctrine is not the land of all of its citizens but only of some. This doctrine was reinforced last year in the Nation-State Law , which declares that "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."

So, as Israel's champions say, all Israeli citizens are indeed equal. It's just that some -- those whose nationality is "Jewish" -- are more equal than others -- those whose nationality is "Arab" or anything else but "Jewish." Join the debate on Facebook More articles by: Sheldon Richman

Sheldon Richman , author of Coming to Palestine , keeps the blog Free Association and is a senior fellow and chair of the trustees of the Center for a Stateless Society , and a contributing editor at Antiwar.com . He is also the Executive Editor of The Libertarian Institute.

[Nov 26, 2019] Slavoj i ek's "Pervert's Guide" to anti-Semitism by Andrew Joyce

In any case, as a philosopher Zizek is a nothing-burger, like most of these Post-Modern clowns.
Nov 26, 2019 | www.unz.com
V. Jews, Big Capital, and the Ruling Class

Equally unsustainable is the implication that Big Capital and the establishment ruling class is not, and has not been, significantly Jewish over historical time. Žižek simplifies and caricatures the Middle Ages as a time when "the Jew emerged as the enemy, a parasitic intruder who disturbs the harmonious social edifice." Žižek obviously employs the term "harmonious social edifice" with skepticism and disdain, seeing the pre-existing order (that before the arrival of the Jews) as fraught with exploitation, tensions, and contradictions. In Žižek's framework then, Jews may be a chaotic capitalist force that enters Europe, but this was a Europe already experiencing chaotic capitalist forces, and therefore it would be irrational to blame Jews for anything arising from their emergence and expansion in Europe. What needs to be distinguished here is the distinction between what might be termed the organic development of finance in Europe, [18] For an excellent summary in relation to this process in feudalism, see R. Allen Brown, Origins of English Feudalism, (New York: Barnes and Noble Books, 1973). and the exorbitant and often extremely negative developments ushered in by the arrival of the Jews and their subsequent special relationship with European elites and with capitalism itself.

The organic development of finance and class divisions in Europe is demonstrated in the evolution of feudalism as a result of the adoption of heavy cavalry by the Franks in the eighth century, with other, non-military, aspects of continental feudalism arising as the inevitable social repercussions of this change in military organization. [19] Ibid .
(For an excellent summary in relation to this process in feudalism, see R. Allen Brown, Origins of English Feudalism, (New York: Barnes and Noble Books, 1973).)
Since knights needed money, horses, servants, attendants, and freedom from all other non-military occupations, like tilling the soil, knighthood gradually became an upper-class affair. Increasing technological sophistication then made mounted warfare more and more expensive and caused knights to become more sharply distinguished from the ordinary peasant. It also caused free peasants to become less and less valuable as soldiers, and they therefore declined towards mere servitude. It was, therefore, in a sense inevitable that the new class of knights should become a landed aristocracy, and its members were thus in a sense destined to low-level jurisdiction of a semi-agricultural kind over their peasants. This situation really was, in a sense, a "harmonious social edifice" to the extent that it followed a clear logic and permitted these communities and their territories to be competitive in a rapidly changing military and geopolitical context. The ruling classes were obliged to adopt paternalistic practices in relation to the peasantry, and outright exploitation was rare since it could be dangerous and counterproductive in that it could provoke a mass uprising and thus damage militarily-valuable social cohesion. The social edifice was thus indeed "harmonious" in the sense that it was coordinated and balanced, and was generally beneficial to the organic national community.

The arrival of Jews in Europe undoubtedly created an imbalance in these class relations, and between the ruling class and the lower orders. Evidence of this imbalance in medieval Europe can be obtained both from surviving documentation and artefacts, and from analogous modern situations such as the the Great Romanian Peasant Revolt of 1907, during which Jewish intrusion into the existing quasi-feudal social arrangement ended in widespread rebellion and societal collapse due to the specific excesses of Jewish exploitation. The arrival of the Jews in Western Europe as a financial and geopolitical power can be dated to their ascent under the Carolingians in the ninth century, and possibly earlier in the Narbonne where they were noted as an extraordinarily wealthy class. In this development, the birth of formal, symbiotic relationships between Jews and self-interested European elites, we see a crucial fissure in European class relations. Jewish financiers entered into the harmonious social edifice as privileged and protected outsiders whose sole purpose was to accelerate and distort resource transfer between European classes, rendering internal class division less about communal efficiency than about personal gain. In this system, paternalism gave way to such situations as the permitted Jewish trade in Christian slaves (a key reason for the agitations for Agobard of Lyons) and widespread exploitative tax farming.

One of the great modern myths, a stroke of Jewish revisionist genius, is that Jews were forced into such practices by restrictive laws on the ownership of land, and certain other local contexts. This is historicist relativism at its most bankrupt and, thankfully, modern scholarship is slowly eroding such misrepresentations and outright falsehoods. Take, for example, the most recent edition of The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Religion , which states the "remarkable" fact that Jews

whether in Narbonne in 899 or Gironne in 922, in Trier in 919 or Worms in 1090, in Barcelona in 1053 or Toledo in 1222, or in early medieval England, were permitted to acquire and own land if they wished. Not only were Jews legally permitted to own land, they could acquire significant amounts (especially in Italy, southern Spain, southern and east-central France, and Germany); possessed fields, gardens, and vineyards; and owned, transferred, and mortgaged land holdings. They preferred to hire tenants, sharecroppers, and wage laborers to work their lands. For themselves, they chose the most skilled and profitable occupations, foremost money lending. [20] R. M. McCleary (ed), The Oxford Handbook of the Economics of Religion (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011, 68.

Essentially then, we see the immediate and deliberate entrance of the Jews into European society at the level of knight, if not higher, but without any of the logic or benefits of the position of knight within the organic social edifice. The Jew in this new social order existed for no logical reason other than the personal enrichment of certain elites and the communal enrichment of the Jews themselves. This may be regarded as the first perversion of capitalism and the first true exploitation (excessive or unfair use of workers with no reason other than greed) of the serving class within this system.

Again, dispensing with historicist relativism, we can demonstrate the pattern of Jewish disruptive behaviors within capitalism with reference to analogous modern conditions. For example, the arenda system of late nineteenth- and early twentieth century-eastern Europe (especially Poland, Ukraine, and Romania) was remarkably similar to the feudal system of medieval Western Europe. The arenda system can be regarded as broadly harmonious until the mass influx of Jewish arendasi during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, which saw the Jews increasingly operate as tax farmers, property agents, customs agents, and loan merchants. Jewish monopoly in these roles prompted both the rapid commercialization of land and the expansion of Big Capital, both of which were intended by Jews to exclusively benefit their in-group. Since the existence of entire Jewish communities depended on exploitative capitalism, Jews fiercely contended for monopolies in key areas. For example , The Va'ad Medinat Lita (Lithuanian Jewish Council) twice passed a resolution supporting the lease of customs and taxes by Jews, stating: "We have openly seen the great danger deriving from the operation of customs in Gentile hands; for the customs to be in Jewish hands is a pivot on which everything (in commerce) turns, since thereby Jews may exert control."

Crucially, high Jewish position in the social hierarchy was not accompanied by paternalism of any kind. In fact, Jews are notable throughout history for their incredibly hostile and exploitative behaviors towards non-elite Europeans. Philip Eidelberg, a historian of the Great Romanian Peasant Revolt of 1907, describes how Jewish arendasi " exploited the estates more ruthlessly than the native Rumanian arendasi ." He continues by explaining that Jews were not interested in the long-term prosperity of estates or their workers, and often hiked rents to breaking point "even at the risk of eventually exhausting the available land and inventory." [21] P. G. Eidelberg, The Great Rumanian Peasant Revolt of 1907: Origins of a Modern Jacquerie (), 39. In Rumania, Jews enjoyed monopolies, with Eidelberg demonstrating that Jewish bankers would decline to grant capital to any non-Jew wanting to enter this form of finance. [22] Ibid , 120.
(P. G. Eidelberg, The Great Rumanian Peasant Revolt of 1907: Origins of a Modern Jacquerie (), 39.)
Thus, the Jews competed for profit solely with each other, ever-increasing the chokehold on their European peasantries. Eidelberg writes that "the result was a bidding spiral in which the peasant was the loser. In fact, it was just such a competition between the two greatest Jewish arendas families -- the Fischers and the Justers -- which was to help spark the 1907 revolt." [23] Ibid, 39.
(P. G. Eidelberg, The Great Rumanian Peasant Revolt of 1907: Origins of a Modern Jacquerie (), 39.)

Jews, of course, continue to occupy conspicuous roles in the worst and most exploitative aspects of capitalism. Jews have also continued to acquire land for exploitative purposes, the most interesting example being the Argentinian activities of the British Jewish oligarch Joe Lewis , a tax avoider and currency speculator who made his billions alongside George Soros when both gambled on the British pound sterling crashing out of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1992. As one commentator explains, "Soros' and Lewis' bet against the pound actually led to the pound crashing, after Soros ordered his hedge fund to " go for the jugular " and aggressively trade against the currency, thereby prompting its sharp devaluation. Though Soros is often called "the man who broke the Bank of England" as a result of the $1 billion in profits he made on that fateful day, Lewis is said to have made an even larger profit than Soros." While these Jews made billions, the British public suffered a rapid economic recession. Lewis didn't mind. He repeated the experiment in Mexico, causing the Mexican peso crisis , which "led to a massive jump in poverty, unemployment and inequality in Mexico and left its government beholden to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) through a loan package arranged by then-U.S. President Bill Clinton."

Growing extravagantly rich from parasitic currency speculation, Jewish oligarchs Soros and Lewis, together with co-ethnic Big Capitalists Eduardo Elsztain and Marcelo Mindlin, started buying massive tracts of Argentine real estate, particularly in Patagonia, where they pooled resources to take over local banks, the regional water supply, oil and gas wealth, and the area's largest energy supplier. Lewis then set about buying tens of thousands of hectares, declaring his wish to create "his own state in Patagonia." Some locals were willing to sell their land. One, Irineo Montero, had refused, and he, along with his wife María Ortiz and their employee José Matamala, were all found dead under mysterious circumstances. Lewis' land consolidation was then made complete, and paved the way for a Zionist enclave that has exploited locals so thoroughly that there have been regular massive demonstrations ("March for Sovereignty) against this new Jewish ruling class, attracting 80 percent of the local population. According to the research of former French intelligence officer turned journalist Thierry Meyssan, Lewis is much more amenable to his fellow Jews, and has been inviting thousands of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers to his territory annually. In late 2017, former French intelligence officer turned journalist Thierry Meyssan alleged : "Since the Falklands War, the Israeli army has been organizing 'holiday camps' in Patagonia for its soldiers. Between 8,000 and 10,000 of them now come every year to spend two weeks on Joe Lewis' land."

What we see here is just a very modern example of the millennia-old Jewish pattern of establishing full-scale operations for extracting a nation's riches and exploiting its people. We must earnestly ask of Slavoj Žižek: Has Big Capital and the establishment ruling class not been, and does it not remain, significantly Jewish


Digital Samizdat , says: November 21, 2019 at 6:37 pm GMT

Another ringer from Andrew Joyce! We are so lucky to have him. He is helping us all to recover our collective racial memory (as Jung might call it) as White Gentiles.

In April 2019, Žižek and Jordan Peterson sold out the Sony Centre in Toronto for their debate titled "Happiness: Capitalism vs. Marxism"

And who, pray tell, was invited to defend the honor of National Socialism?

In a 2009 lecture at the European Graduate School titled "Anti-Semitism, Anti-Semite and Jew," Žižek argued that anti-Semitism places Jews in "impossible Otherness"

Judaism places Jews in "impossible Otherness." Their bizarre 'chosenness' is the root of their collective pathology. (Notice how all their theories concerning our supposed ethno-centrism are just so much projection!)

It is a matter of special irony that Marxists should present their own contradictions in relation to anti-Semitism and the supposed psychosocial aspects of the anti-Semite.

Have these self-described Marxists never read Karl Marx's own scathing treatment of the Jews in Zur Judenfrage ? Here's a well-known passage:

"Let us consider the actual, worldly Jew – not the Sabbath Jew but the everyday Jew. Let us not look for the secret of the Jew in his religion, but let us look for the secret of his religion in the real Jew. What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist. Money degrades all the gods of man – and turns them into commodities . The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange . The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of money in general.[ ] The Jew has emancipated himself in a Jewish manner, not only because he has acquired financial power, but also because, through him and also apart from him, money has become a world power and the practical Jewish spirit has become the practical spirit of the Christian nations. The Jews have emancipated themselves insofar as the Christians have become Jews. [ ] In the final analysis, the emancipation of the Jews is the emancipation of mankind from Judaism."

Pretty frickin' harsh, eh! I guess if old Karl were still around to hear the pathetic maunderings of post-modern Communists like Žižek, he would just shake his head and say, 'I am not a Marxist.'

According to the research of former French intelligence officer turned journalist Thierry Meyssan

That's interesting, Dr. Joyce. I've been following him over at Voltaire-net on and off for nearly a decade, and I had no idea that Meyssan had been an intelligence officer. Neither Wikipedia nor Infogalatic ever mention it. Good to know

israel shamir , says: November 21, 2019 at 10:02 pm GMT
I wrote about Zizek

http://www.unz.com/ishamir/slavoj-zizek-and-freedom-flotilla/

Slavoj Zizek went "full Monty" during his recent visit to Tel Aviv at the invitation of some sincerely dissident Israelis. They expected words of encouragement, but instead he informed them that fighting anti-Semitism is more important than defending Palestinians. The Slovenian philosopher spoke kindly of the swindler Bernie Madoff, who was "a scapegoat who was easy to blame, when in fact the real problem is the system that allowed and even pushed Madoff to commit his crimes." Indeed, it must have been 'the system' that pushed poor Mr. Madoff into crime, just as it was 'the system' that pushed Shylock to enter into money-lending and Jack the Ripper into the business of carving.

Sam J. , says: November 23, 2019 at 11:13 am GMT
" Rubin wrote that all anti-Semites see Jews as both:

Moronic, brilliant.
All-powerful, weakling.
Cosmopolitan, provincial.
Cunning, naïve.
Extraordinarily sensitive, calloused.
"Nigger-lovers," "worst bigots."
Richest, poorest.
Artistic, tasteless.
Money-lovers, intellectual snobs.
Socially pushy, exclusively clannish.
"

Some of the above are correct but there's a much more succinct and accurate description. There's one idea that describes the Jews perfectly. It describes their parasitism, their lying, their chameleon like behavior, their sense of superiority and belief that they are different from everyone else. There's a simple explanation for why the Jews are hated so much that also explains their behavior and success. The Jews are a tribe of psychopaths. Not all, maybe not even the majority, but a large number. All of the Jews ancient writings are nothing more than a manual for psychopaths to live by. The Talmud is nothing but one psychopathic thought after another. The Talmud "great enlightenment" basically says that everyone not Jewish is there to serve Jews. All their property is really the Jews. No one is really human unless they're Jews and their lives don't matter. A psychopathic religion for a psychopathic people.

Even if I'm wrong thousands of years of history show a bunch of Jews moving into your territory in in no way distinguishable from a tribe of psychopaths moving into your country

They've been thrown out of every single country that they've been to in any numbers.

COMPLETE LIST OF JEWISH EXPULSIONS (1,030)

https://archive.is/8Uvx5

Psychopaths having no empathy themselves can only go by the feedback they get from the people they are exploiting. So they push and push to see what they can get away with. The normal people build up resentment towards them. Thinking "surely they will reform or repent" like a normal person who does wrong. Of course the Jews do not. They don't have the mental process for reform. Then in a huge mass outpouring of hate for the Jews, fed up with the refusal to reform their behavior, they attack and/or deport them. In this stage of the cycle the Big/Rich Jews escape and the little Jews are attacked.

Start over.

Even if it's wrong if you assume the Jews are a tribe of psychopaths you will never be surprised and Jew's behavior will make sense.

In order to predict Jews behavior read the great book on Psychopaths by Hervey Cleckley, "The Mask of Sanity". Here's a chapter you should read. It's about the psychopath Stanley. Who does all kinds of manic bullshit and spends all his time feeding people the most outrageous lies. Look at the astounding array of things he's able to get away with. Maybe it will remind you of a certain tribe. New meme. "They're pulling a Stanley". The whole book is on the web and worth reading.

http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/cleckley.pdf

or

http://docplayer.net/21248949-Young-man-induces-five-teen-age-girls-to-shave-their-heads.html#tab_1_1_2

Here's another link but the graphics are a bit odd.

http://www.energyenhancement.org/Psychopath/psychopath-Hervey-Cleckley-the-mask-of-sanity-SECTION-TWO-THE-MATERIAL-Part-1-The-disorder-in-full-clinical-manifestations-19-Stanley.html

" In the course of his European Graduate School lecture, Žižek comments that "the real mystery of anti-Semitism is why it is a constant "

This is not a mystery at all. NO ONE can stand psychopaths over the long term. They're fucked up. You even hear Jews leaving Israel because the culture is so fucked up. Even psychopaths don't want to live with psychopaths.

The only know recipe to living with psychopaths recommended by psychiatrist is don't live with them at all. The sooner we realize that the Jews are a damaged, evil, twisted tribe of psychopaths and there's no reasoning, dealing, co-opting or living with them the better we will be. The only 100%. guaranteed, tried and true, tested with 100% satisfaction of dealing with the Jews is to get rid of them. Peacefully if we can get it but by any means necessary get them away from you and leave them no control of any sort over your country or any other aspect of your and your countrymen's lives.

John Gruskos , says: November 23, 2019 at 11:59 pm GMT
@israel shamir

the real problem is the system that allowed and even pushed Madoff to commit his crimes

The slovenly Slovene succinctly summarizes Marxism.

John Gruskos , says: November 24, 2019 at 12:16 am GMT

Žižek copying, almost verbatim, a review of MacDonald's book by Stanley Hornbeck that appeared in the March 1999 issue of The American Renaissance.

What a damning indictment of American Renaissance!

Slavoj Zizek, the uttermost dregs of human intellectual depravity, agrees so utterly with an Amren article he feels comfortable copying it word for word as it it were his own!

Fidelpoludo , says: November 24, 2019 at 8:22 am GMT
@Digital Samizdat

Have these self-described Marxists never read Karl Marx's own scathing treatment of the Jews in "Zur Judenfrage"?

This "well-known (pretty frickin' harsh) passage" is permanently cited by anti-marxists to denunciate "Karl" as "antisemite" and with the intention to subsequently ignore his analysis of capital (for being founded in his "antisemitism").
By the way, it is not necessary to imagine "old Karl" to be "still around" or "to turn in his grave" to enlighten us with the word "I am not a Marxist". If we can trust in the words of Engels he said it in reality: "What is certain is that I myself am not a Marxist" (a remark cited by Engels in his letter to Bernstein of 2-3 November 1882).

Robert Dolan , says: November 25, 2019 at 5:23 am GMT
Yeah .they are a horrible people to be sure and they've cucked the entire western world.

Thomm is a low IQ degenerate, but he's right about one thing ..it truly is astonishing that such a small group could engineer so much destruction.

neutral , says: November 25, 2019 at 9:09 am GMT
Regarding this whole "jews are both for communism and capitalism, and thus anti semites are full of contradictory nonsense", one needs to point the obvious fact that these jewish inventions are meant for consumption for the gentiles and not the jews.

Some will think that Ayn Rand and Karl Marx are polar opposites, but this is not true, both preached a universal ideology, and both would not think it is problem at the same time that jews are immune from this ideology (because Marx would no doubt support Israel if it existed at his time).

Irish Savant , says: Website November 25, 2019 at 10:57 am GMT
A car-wreck of logic indeed. What absolute rubbish Zizek comes up with. JM Keynes observed that economics exists only to give astrology a good name. Judging by today's 'philosophers' the same could be said about them.
anon [138] Disclaimer , says: November 25, 2019 at 12:48 pm GMT
@israel shamir It's the system that has allowed Slavoj Zizek to showcase his theory . System works with usual laziness who knows who and not what .

If Maddoff were a victim may be Epstein was , then so were Hitler and Polpot
System around them allowed them to reach mass appeal and inflict severe damages .
Abusing system is not self-victimization . Prince Andrew did not hurt self .

It's the system one works to prevent undesirable products . We undermine the system .

When you side with proponents of right for Palestinian or the victims of usury banking , financialization or against penchant for military budget or eternal war you bring normal perspective , you restore balance between cause and effect and you remove artificial false intellectual reasoning g like existence of antisemitism or American responsibility or America being the beacon to humanity or America being a mystic abstract concept of higher values .
Allowing and worshipping these kinds of ideas
we make inroads by the parasites possible

Abstract concept is easy target for corruption distortion emotional manipulation .

Antisemitidm should be described and that description should be applied to other anti -ism ( anti black anti Arab anti Iran anti Chinese anti Vietnamese anti Russian etc ) epidemiological survey should be conducted along those detailed descriptive points not like -the way ADL puts out questionnaires .

It is time for Slavoj Zizek. to go to a library and get hold of the books by Herzl just to get started .

anon [153] Disclaimer , says: November 25, 2019 at 1:27 pm GMT
@anon masonry is clear example of this they tricked british and french people that let jews play an important paper in the ideological foundation ,germans understanding the danger but recon¡gnizing that the ilustration was the way of the future adapted his own version of masonry with greek symbols and pure european myths and of course mantaining jews out of the inner circle of power more or less like in scandinavia .
spanish people simply banned the masonry .

its curious how italian and iberians and their colonies were able to crush any jewish resistance and asimilate the rest of them in the new world even if they arent the smartest europeans .

i think we need a fusion of german and latin character to face this new era

Greg Bacon , says: Website November 25, 2019 at 1:39 pm GMT
There's around 200 nations in the world and if I may be so bold–since this is going against the Cultural Marxists agenda that race is a social construct–4 main races that contain around 30 subgroups.
In other words, lots of stories to pick from for the MSM.

Yet, day after day after day, we usually only hear about ONE nation and ONE race, Israel and the Jews.
It's gotten all so tiresome to have these human peacocks constantly parading around, demanding that us Goyim worship them or else.
And if we fail–in their minds–to show them the proper adoration, we get accused of anti-Semitism.

Does this insanity ever stop?

Verymuchalive , says: November 25, 2019 at 1:42 pm GMT
@HammerJack Andrew Joyce's work would never appear in American Renaissance. Taylor and his cohorts prevent any criticism of Jewish involvement in White dispossession.
anon [138] Disclaimer , says: November 25, 2019 at 1:51 pm GMT
https://medium.com/@rosselson/theodor-herzl-visionary-or-antisemite-97bfbe92980

Herzl did not like Jews , celebrated possible future conversion of his son , thought en masse conversion to Christianity , did not think of allowing Hebrew as state language and did not conceive Shabbat a holiday

But also thought sneak attack on local Arab , planned deceptive discussions and ploys to make them leave Palestine without arousing immediate large scale protests , he offered the service of new state to be a barrier between uncivilized Asia and developed Europe , he promised Balfour of protecting British interest

He wanted no Arab in the midst and eagerly and glowingly promised his visions of equal democratic society .

Above all he can't pull it off himself . He needed help . He needed money that he by threat and persuasion got from rich Jew . What about other nations shedding their non Jews blood to erect a pure Jews nation ????

His minions got there also by lying false promising misrepresenting and bribing They also used religious hatred of Christianity to Islam and racial hatred of European to Arab and Turkey .
Britain pod in blood and money Now its Germany and USA .

-- -- --

But there are antisemite thinking or musing that. A-gentile never be able to get rid of , so said the Slovenian

The paradoxes Mr Slovenian sees in antisemite argument is what litter the philosophy of Zionism .

Verymuchalive , says: November 25, 2019 at 2:11 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat Meyssan is a leftist of North African origin. Earlier in his career, he was involved in harassing the National Front and other parties of the right.

From 1996 to 1999, he worked as substitute coordinator of the National Committee of Surveillance against the extreme right, which held weekly meetings with the 45 major political parties, unions and associations belonging to the French left-wing in order to draw up a common response to escalating intolerance

I think Dr Joyce mistakes Meyssan's involvement in the above committee with that of performing intelligence functions. Meyssan was an enthusiastic supporter of Hate Speech laws to be used against the Right. Except later he fell foul of them himself and no longer lives in France.

tumi , says: November 25, 2019 at 2:33 pm GMT
Indeed, for an anti-segregation organization, the early NAACP was essentially divided between the Jews who ran it, and the Blacks who went along for the ride. As Hasia Diner puts it in In the Almost Promised Land: American Jews and Blacks, 1915–1935, many in the NAACP's Jewish leadership "worked most intensely with other Jews."[7]"

Muslim has replaced Blacks . Muslim "leaders " seek in Israel the conduit to power or pipeline to something ( usually end up getting less scornful hateful mutterings in Fox and WSJ ) . In return they attend interfaith meeting to be lectured ,open up discussing Koran with ideas of dropping some pages ,and agreeing to hate Shia ,agreeing to start propaganda against Iran Syria and Muslim Brotherhood ,spreading the FDD orchestrated fear of Iran, imbibing hook line and slinkier the narrative against Iran Syria Hizbullah Libya Houthi and Taliban or Qatar . Add to that Russia and china also. And they start discussing direct flight from Tel Aviv to Medina from where their prophet once banned the Jews after decades of deceptive behaviors of the Jewish clan.

What does muslim get ? The same stuff the blacks got- violence drugs sex trafiiciking, destruction of community, shuttering down of school college and enrichment of few who sing Hosana to the Jews .
For the time it is ;limited mostly to ME S Asia and N Africa . But I won't be supposed to see it get into a more permanent footing in USA ,Canada,Australia. For a back on the back Muslim will hurt themselves the way Afroamerican were taken for a ride.

Anon [409] Disclaimer , says: November 25, 2019 at 2:56 pm GMT
Nice, that the Oxford Handbook cited sells for $429 over at Amazon. I hadn't liked Joyce's articles particularly, but this one is helpful because it shows not just history, but the link to current events. Particularly useful the info about Joe Lewis, (never heard about him before). Doubly so in view of the fact that South America seems very unstable now, with a migrant expulsion towards Mexico/US that is as bad as the Syria-to-Europe a few years back. But much more under the radar.. no "color this" or "spring that" hashtags this time.
jack daniels , says: November 25, 2019 at 3:00 pm GMT
@neutral Capitalism and communism have materialism in common. Various schemes based on religious principles vary from both.

Secondly, a capitalist can favor communism so long as it doesn't damage his own interests.
1) He may be able to make money trading with a foreign communist government e.g. Kaiser, Ford.
2) He may favor communism as a means of destroying the old Christian order, which was the case with US capitalists who funded the Bolsheviks e.g. Schiff, Warburg, Hammer.
3) A corrupt communist regime may allow selected friendly capitalists to flourish with in effect a state subsidy. Most regimes of any kind are corrupt.

The idea that a capitalist can't be a communist is childishly simplistic, really just a slogan.

Germanicus , says: November 25, 2019 at 3:48 pm GMT
@Fidelpoludo

"Karl" as "antisemite" and with the intention to subsequently ignore his analysis of capital (for being founded in his "antisemitism").

Nonsense, Moses Mordechai Levi advocated for the establishment of a privately owned central bank, and never criticized interest/usury.

anonymous [307] Disclaimer , says: November 25, 2019 at 4:16 pm GMT
@israel shamir [Slavoj Zizek went "full Monty" during his recent visit to Tel Aviv at the invitation of some sincerely dissident Israelis. They expected words of encouragement, but instead he informed them that fighting anti-Semitism is more important than defending Palestinians. ]

Who were these 'sincerely dissident Israelis' who didnot' know Zizek is a zionist charlatan?
They are not 'sincere' but they are like him zionist jews.

This fact is obvious many years now and he showed himself as a zionist racist anti Palestinians and non Jew many years ago in Israel. Who are these dummies that they don't know who is Zizek.

Zizek like Trump is a charlatan zionist racist. He is a fraud like Henry Bernard Levy

You should see the video when he appeared at 'charlie Rose program' – a womanizer and racist American exceptionalism, to see how this 'communist' clown was admiring Jewish capitalism to please another clown charlie rose.

[Nov 22, 2019] Avigdor Liberman, leader of Israael's far right secular party Yisrael Beytenu has failed in his attempts to form a government of national unity and is now denouncing the ultra orthodox parties as "anti-semitic!"

Nov 22, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com

johnf , 21 November 2019 at 02:26 AM

...Avigdor Liberman, leader of Israael's far right secular party Yisrael Beytenu has failed in his attempts to form a government of national unity and is now denouncing the ultra orthodox parties as "anti-semitic!"

... ... ...

https://www.timesofisrael.com/left-and-right-unite-in-denouncing-libermans-anti-semitic-speech/

[Nov 12, 2019] John Hannah is IMO a shill for Israel - Sic Semper Tyrannis

Nov 12, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com

John Hannah is IMO a shill for Israel

At about 3 minutes into the TeeVee show tape linked below. the news host lets Hannah begin to talk about Iraq and then Iran. Hannah was Cheney's foreign policy staffer during the run up to Desert Storm. He worked for Libby who worked for Cheney. He was one of the architects of the war hungry strategy that led to that endless war, a war that has never really ended. Someone urged me to go talk to Hannah before Desert Storm. I went. We met in his closet sized office in the OEB. I am usually annoyed by people who talk to you from behind their desks but this space was tiny. He clearly had his mind made up about the wonderfulness of an invasion and wanted to talk about the size force to be used.

Our deliberate destruction of the existing social order in Iraq unleashed the forces of Sunni rebellion against the occupation and the Shia government that we created through our farcical purple thumb elections. These were held in the aftermath of the occupation government having openly stated to Sunni leaders that their time had ended. Now we have the Shia fighting each other over the division of power in Iraq. John Hannah said on this program that this is because some Shia (the "good" Shia?) are resisting the "control" of Iraq by the government of Iran.

Iran is the major theme of the rest of Hannah's statements to the interviewer. Hannah is upset at the prospect of "a land bridge" (road connection) from Iran to a Syrian port. To prevent such a connection the US keeps troops in Syria at al-Tanf just where Israel wants them. Hannah is upset because Iran "seeks regional hegemony" (to frustrate Israeli ambitions for the same thing?), etc., etc, ad nauseam. IMO this is tribalism at its worst.

IMO Hannah is merely a mouthpiece for Israeli policy. He is taken seriously as an AMERICAN policy talking head? He was one of the leading architects of the disastrous Iraq policy and war. This interview should call into question the basis for his advocacy of that war, a war which the Israelis urged the US to fight. pl


catherine , 09 November 2019 at 04:07 PM

The Fifth Column controls the MSM, the think tanks and most of the press. The public and the politicos are only going to see and hear Zionist Neocon propaganda for Israel.

https://www.irmep.org/11-3-2009AIPACFARA.pdf

Senator Fulbright 1963 Senate Hearings on ZOA propaganda in US.

FINDING: Israel's payments to US academics, new media, and Israel lobby operatives in the three month sample filing were classified and not made available in the FARA section public files. This violated FARA's disclosure mandate.
FINDING: During Senate investigations the American Zionist Council was found to be investing heavily in US media outreach and "think tanks" with Israeli government funding. This think tank and media influence effort has been renewed outside the purview of FARA from the AZC's new shell organization, the AIPAC.
FINDING: AIPAC's influence with the establishment media means that warranted law enforcement efforts or investigations are often quickly whipped into spurious allegations of anti‐Semitism, threats against freedom of speech, or any number of well framed public relations campaigns. The capability has been
built with clandestine Jewish Agency/Israeli government funding in the 1960's and has reached maturity.

Transcripts of the Senate Hearings

https://www.israellobby.org/Senate/default.asp

''Between 1962-1963 the Senate Foreign Relations Committee subpoenaed internal reports of the American Zionist Council during its investigation into the activities of registered agents of foreign principals. They discovered that more than $5 million in tax exempt (and possibly overseas donations) had been laundered through the Jewish Agency's American Section into the American Zionist Council. The Jewish Agency functioned as a quasi-branch of the Israeli government, received Israeli government funding, and was able to review legislation before it went to the Knesset under its Covenant Agreement.

The following reports detail how the American Zionist Council used the funding in a sophisticated campaign to cajole and intimidate news media, subvert open debate about Israel and undermine reporting about key issues of the day such as Israel's Dimona nuclear weapons facility, operation Susannah terror attacks on the United States, and the return of Arab refugees to their homes. The AZC tracked and targeted professors and engaged in covert operations obliquely referred to in the following internal reports.

After the Justice Department ordered the American Zionist Council to register as a foreign agent in late 1962, it transferred responsibilities to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which refuses to register as a foreign agent of the Israeli government.''

JerseyJeffersonian -> catherine... , 09 November 2019 at 10:45 PM
Thanks for these links. They don't make 'em like Sen. Fulbright any more. Republic now defended by the old with memories, & young with eyes to see, & skin in the game.
Elora Danan , 09 November 2019 at 04:40 PM
Found an old interview where you said that what was needed in Iraq, to amend the disaster created by the erroneous US intervention in the country, was a huge diplomatic effort to bring in all the factions and political players in Iraqi society together to build a project for peace and development which could please all major players in the region...which seems similar to the effort the Russians and SAA are trying in Syria...after US erroneous intervention...

Now, Elora wonders whether the Russians read you too...

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/10/colonel-w-patrick-lang-retired-us-military-intelligence/

MJ: What do you think a prudent course of action in Iraq would be?

WPL: I tend to believe on the military side we're doing the right thing. I have advocated what we're doing in Anbar and Diyala for the last two or three years. That is to strip off the non-jihadi insurgents from the Al Qaeda ones and get them to fight the jihadis. They have every reason to do so because the AQ guys come in and they want to disrupt your entire way of life and make you live differently, by a form of Islam that is a pain in the ass. What I've advocated is to go around and solve this thing diplomatically, seeking a political solution that is agreed upon by the major players in the region. The administration seeks a solution based on its own image of peace, which is of a region waiting to be westernized, which it is not. History says their vision of the Middle East is incorrect, but they still insist that they're going to change the whole place instead of trying to bring these people together so that everyone can live in relative peace and calm. I think they're presenting the wrong goal. You need to push the military thing the way they're doing now while at the same time conducting a massive diplomatic offensive.

P.S: Elora got greatly surprised to know...although she regrets you did not publish her anthropological comparative compilation of characters from Caucassus, Hunza Valley and the Basque Country...Well, the links were way too long....Elora guesses....

turcopolier -> Elora Danan... , 10 November 2019 at 12:15 AM
Elora Danan

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/10/colonel-w-patrick-lang-retired-us-military-intelligence/

This is actually a rather interesting article. Thanks for bringing it up. There is a lot more in it than the part you quote.

Vegetius , 09 November 2019 at 04:46 PM
I am afraid that connecting the dots between why US foreign policy is run for the benefit of an alien nation, how it got that way, and what is to be done about it is a bridge way WAY too far for most Americans, at least anyone over 50.

Yet I have been told repeatedly that the leadership of China and Russia (among others) see it clearly and pursue their own interests accordingly.

artemesia said in reply to Vegetius... , 10 November 2019 at 03:38 AM
I worry more about the young people.

Catherine should have added Public schools and universities to the list of US institutions controlled by Fifth Column.

catherine said in reply to artemesia... , 10 November 2019 at 06:06 PM
Yes, its a huge problem and Trump (or his handlers) made it worse with his appointment of Kenneth Marcus, who is a raging, fanatical Zionist He has promised to defund all universities and schools that don't teach about the holocaust and expel students guilty of anti semitism. He is reopening past cases against schools that Zionist lawsuits lost and retrying them.

Education Dept. Reopens Rutgers Case Charging ...

https://www.nytimes.com › politics › rutgers-jewish-education-civil-rights

Sep 11, 2018 - Kenneth L. Marcus, the Education Department official who reopened the ... a definition of anti-Semitism that targets opponents of Zionism, and it explicitly ... And it comes after the Trump administration moved the American

Elora Danan , 09 November 2019 at 05:12 PM
While here is raining as if there was no tomorrow, after this article and just discovered interview, Elora felt you should be awarded at least a song...with Portuguese subtitles.... to celebrate Lula´s liberation...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuKMx1PRcoc

I never meant to cause you any sorrow I never meant to cause you any pain I only wanted to one time to see you laughing I only wanted to see you Laughing in the purple rain....

Honey, I know, I know
I know times are changing
It's time we all reach out
For something new, that means you too...

turcopolier , 09 November 2019 at 05:29 PM
ED

you were surprised because you are prejudiced against non-communist soldiers.

Elora Danan said in reply to turcopolier ... , 09 November 2019 at 05:38 PM
Will not be the other way around?

Liked the song?

Charlie Wilson , 09 November 2019 at 06:46 PM
Don't know colonel. This guy looks like he couldn't sell me a toaster. And yet...
Babak Makkinejad , 09 November 2019 at 08:28 PM
Col. Lang:

Ambassadors Ross and Indyk fit the bill as well, in my opinion.

J , 10 November 2019 at 06:03 AM
Colonel,

John Hannah outside his NEOCON roles in the U.S. Government (i.e. Cheney, et. al.), Hannah used to be with Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), now he's a 'Senior Counselor' with The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.

Hannah claims to be an xzert in Arab Politics, Gulf States, Iran, Iran Global Threat Network, Iran-backed Terrorism, Israel, Jihadism, Kurds, Military and Political Power, Syria, The Long War, Turkey, U.S. Defense Policy and Strategy. Hannah's 'projects' are Turkey Program, Center on Military and Political Power.

https://www.fdd.org/team/john-hannah/

Based on the above, it jumps right out that John Hannah is an Israeli Shill.

[Nov 08, 2019] Who has Trump kept his promise to?

Nov 08, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jackrabbit , Nov 8 2019 17:31 utc | 8

Who has Trump kept his promise to?

Tea Party foot soldiers?

Repeal and replace Obamacare on day one
Nope. Quietly dropped coverage for prior conditions.

Build a Wall - and Mexico's gonna pay for it!

Not really. Building sections of a wall that USA will pay for.

Drain the swamp

Nope - unless by "swamp" Trump means the Democratic Party.

"Lock her up!"

Nope. He says they're good people who have been thru a lot. Aww . . .
America?
End the "threat" from NK "Rocket man"
Nope. No follow-thru on the (sham) Summit.

End the new Cold War

Nope. Increased military spending; ended treaties; militarized space.

End "forever wars", bring the troops home

Nope.

Bring jobs home

Uncertain: trade War with China doesn't necessarily mean jobs coming back US.

= = = = = = = =

Republican Party?

Cut taxes
YES!

Cut regulations on business

YES!

Israel?

Move Embassy to Jerusalem
YES!

Recognize Golan Heights as part of Israel

YES!

End aid to Palestinians

YES!

Don't give up on Syrian regime-change

YES!

US MIC, Netanyahu, MbS?

End US participation in the JCPOA
YES!

McCain: "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran"

"locked and loaded"
!!

[Nov 04, 2019] A Window into Jewish Guilt by Gilad Atzmon

Nov 04, 2019 | www.unz.com

... ... ...

As the White House seems to turn its back on the Neocons' immoral interventionism, some Jews may be discomfited by the fact that the Neocon war mongering doctrine has been largely a Jewish project. As Haartez writer Ari Shavit wrote back in 2003: "The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish " Maybe some Jews now understand that the Zionist shift from a 'promised land' to the Neocon 'promised planet' doesn't reflect well on the Jews as a group.

I am trying to point out the possibility that the overwhelming fear of 'anti-Semitism,' documented however poorly by the AJC, might well be the expression of guilt. American Jews may feel communal guilt over the disastrous politics and culture of some sections of their corrupted elite. They might even feel guilty as Americans about the brutal sacrifice of one of America's prime values, that of freedom of speech as guaranteed by the 1st Amendment, on the altar of 'antisemitsm.' .

Obviously, I would welcome AJC's further investigation of this. It would be interesting to learn about the correlation between the Jewish fear of anti Semitsm and Jewish guilt. It would also be fascinating to find out how Jewish anxiety translates into self-reflection. In that regard, I suggest that instead of blaming the American people, Jews try introspection. US Jews may want to follow the early Zionists, such as Theodor Herzl, who turned guilt into self-examination. Herzl was deeply disturbed by anti Semitism but this didn't stop him from digging into its causes. "The wealthy Jews control the world, in their hands lies the fate of governments and nations," Herzl wrote. He continued, " They set governments one against the other. When the wealthy Jews play, the nations and the rulers dance. One way or the other, they get rich." Herzl, like other early Zionists, believed that Jews could be emancipated from their conditions and even be loved globally by means of a cultural, ideological and spiritual metamorphosis with the aspiration of 'homecoming.' Herzl and his fellow early Zionists were clearly wrong in their proposed remedy for the Jewish question, but were absolutely spot on in their adherence to self-reflection and harsh self-criticism.

American Jews have much to learn from Herzl and other early Zionists. They should ask themselves how their American 'Golden Medina' their Jewish land of opportunities, has turned into a 'threatening' realm. What happened, what has changed in the last few years? Was it the constant cries over anti-Semitism and the desperate and institutional attempts to silence critics that turned their Golden Medina into a daunting space?


AaronB , says: October 29, 2019 at 2:35 pm GMT

Anti-Semitism is a subset of class warfare, and thus perfectly natural in any society with high inequality and large numbers of Jews. Because Jews always ally themselves with the rulers and higher classes, as a survival strategy, and also because their talents naturally place them in the higher classes.

The intelligent anti-Semitism of people like Chesterton and Belloc are of this type. These people are perfectly capable of having honorable respect for Jews and deep appreciation for Jewish culture while believing Jews may not be a good fit for their host society. Its nothing personal. Just realism.

Unlike Gilad Atzmon, who sees no problem with other groups who compete and pursue self interest but finds Jews doing so uniquely unacceptable and a cause for "guilt", they are generally self-aware and honest enough to not blame Jews for competing on the world stage – for being human – and realize Europeans were far harsher towards those foreign peoples they competed against.

There is another kind of anti-Semitism that just reflects mankind's propensity to hate anyone who is different, and comes from the same place as the vicious cruelties against all manner of heretics and dissenters, including genocides, that was such a pronounced characteristic of Christian Europe, and the racism of European society.

This generally has to do with pent up frustrations and resentments, which because of special aspects of European culture, were uniquely intense in that part of the world ( Europeans were/are uniquely frustrated and unhappy with existence). Most anti-Semites on Unz are of this kind, like commenters Colin Wright and utu, for instance, and authors Linh Dinh and Kevin Barrett, Andrew Joyce, and Guyenot, and others.

These kinds of anti-Semites despise Jewish culture and anything Jewish, and often feel compelled to invent elaborate grotesque mythologies using selective sources and distorted interpretations to "prove" that Jewish culture and religion is unlike any other and uniquely evil. Completely un-selfaware and lacking in introspection or historical perspective, they are are not honest enough and emotionally stable enough to see group competition as the historic norm, and their own group as no angels in this regard.

In their reading of history, no group competes except Jews, and the whole world would be a paradise of harmony if not for these devilishly evil Jews.

Needless to say, this kind of infantile anti-Semitism is more of an emotional cri de ceour of personal anguish, from an unbalanced mind, than anything to be taken seriously. And these people today are effectively marginalized.

The Jewish "problem" in Europe is simply that of normal group competition among a host population that by world standards, has always been uniquely intolerant of other ways of life and thought, and uniquely imperialistic about its own values and standards, and uniquely addicted to trying to control its environment (which ended up in science and technology). Jews in China, India, and to some extent the Muslim world, hardly posed a comparable "problem".

Zionism has obviously been an almost complete success in shifting Jewish group competition away from within societies more towards the more normal pattern of national competition, as Gilad Atzmon prefers as "healthy".

Jewish influence today outside of Israel is primarily directed to the current Imperial center, America. Empires, by nature, always have foreign factions vying for favor and influence. Rome was of course the same way. This is quite natural for empires. So Jewish attempts to influence America – the self-designated policeman of the world – is quite naturally a part of any imperial system, as the world policeman, one naturally needs to have him on your side, of course.

So the Jewish "problem" has largely been solved through Zionism – but of course, as more Jews move to Israel, the situation will get even better. And if imperial power shifts away from America, the new imperial center will, obviously, become the site for various foreign factions to vie for influence.

Gilad Atzmon , says: Website October 29, 2019 at 3:03 pm GMT
@AaronB no one has a problem with Jews being gifted or being part of the elite,, but ppl do have problems with Madoffs, Binary options, Weinstein, Epstein, Aipac, ADL interfering with elementary freedoms do you really need me to explain all of that? for the record, by the time the Jewish problem was solved by Zionism, Zionism was defeated by Jewishness and Israel became the Jewish State ,,, my next book is all about that
Colin Wright , says: Website October 29, 2019 at 3:18 pm GMT
' So the Jewish "problem" has largely been solved through Zionism – but of course, as more Jews move to Israel, the situation will get even better. And if imperial power shifts away from America, the new imperial center will, obviously, become the site for various foreign factions to vie for influence.'

but as power shifts away from America, she becomes less able to nurture Israel and shield her from the consequences of her actions, and then what?

You talk about moving back there. Would you do that if your standard of living there would be, say, a quarter of what it is now, and if, to please the world, you had to accept that the judge you were going to appear before might well be Muslim?

I doubt it. As US power declines, Israel will be abandoned. So we won't have gotten anywhere at all.

Chu , says: October 29, 2019 at 3:34 pm GMT
Antisemitism is useful component of the rabbinate to generate internal group cohesion. It forms a separation barrier, like an eruv, between goyim and Jew.
SolontoCroesus , says: October 29, 2019 at 4:15 pm GMT
@Gilad Atzmon imo your essay misses the point of why Jews should feel guilt, therefore AaronB's comment also fails to address a critical issue.

I can't cite chapter and verse, but it has to be the case in the course of human events that plenty of individuals and even groups have engaged in behavior as objectionable as Madoff, Weinstein, Epstein, and the the numerous swindles Israel engages in.

I don't think those offenses are exclusive to Jews. Atzmon's essay here may amount to a limited hangout.
AaronB's comment is braggadocio; Although I agree w/ AaronB that the power-center will shift from USA to the East, and that if Jews follow the pattern of their ancient myths and last 120 years of history, they will destroy USA on their way out; nevertheless Jews will have to share power with Russia and China, Arabs/Muslims will have a say, and Iran should not be counted out -- they've dealt with Jews longer than any other people and know well their treachery.
It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings , AaronB, and there's a whole cast of divas just warming up.

I do believe that the creation of zionist Israel may be unique in the known history of the world: Jews not only dispossessed a native people in Palestine -- USAians did pretty much the same -- Jews got other nation-states to do their killing for them.

But even more significantly, Jews killed -- genocided, really -- non-Jews in the countries that had hosted them -- American colonists did not genocide the British in British homeland -- once again, Jews arranged for the killing to be carried out by another state, in the case of the genocide of Germany, American and British Christians became Jewish weapons to kill their own fellow-Christians.

At the same time, Jews needed to cull their own herd: the elite that Atzmon and AaronB gloat over -- the "remnant," is a relatively recent phenomenon; it may be that the vaunted 6 million were dead wood; impoverished, filthy, inbred: Jabotinsky found them disgusting and Nordau called them "Degenerate." Worse: they were a drag on the mean. Russia and Poland were crawling with Jews of "unsuitable human material" for the "new Jew" that was to populate the zionist utopia. They had to be got rid of; just as Moses delegated Levites to kill fellow Jews at Mt. Sinai, so Louis Brandeis, Frankfurter etc. fell upon Hitler, Churchill, Stalin and FDR to kill surplus, degenerate Jews. Saddam & el Baghdadi are minor replicas of a similar mold employed to kill inconvenient challengers or competitors to zionist Jews.

Jews killed -- or arranged for the killing -- of their own undesireables. In addition, Jews killed or arranged for the killing of "the best gentiles;" and then, the master stroke: Jews proclaimed themselves the victims and psychologically manipulated those shattered peoples -- Germans and other Western Europeans– to the extent that those populations paid and continue to pay Jews for "Jewish suffering," while also punishing themselves out of existence with their own Jewish-induced, psychologically-manipulated guilt.

This systemic program -- patterned on the mythic flight from Egypt, and conquest of Canaan but worked out in real time, is, I believe, unique in all the world.

Jewish holocaustism is why Jews are hated.

Maybe some Jews realize what they have done.

Jews are correct to feel "guilty" and fearful of a "rise in antisemitism."

No statistics or polls to cite, just hazarding a guess: "antisemitism" will rise in lockstep with realization among non-Jews that the holocaust is a hoax.
I am not sure the possibility exists for Jews to be forgiven for what they have done.

It ain't gonna be pretty.

Kratoklastes , says: October 29, 2019 at 4:44 pm GMT
@AaronB

as more Jews move to Israel [ sic ]

Even with activist groups trying to spook Jews and cajole them into making aliyah , fuck-all of them do – and an almost-offsetting number leave.

The net migration rate (all religions) for Occupied Palestine is 0.2%/yr – a rounding error – and inwards-migration is overwhelmingly 'economic refugee' in character (almost half of annual Jewish in-migration is from former Soviet countries).

As guys like Sassoon, Shlomo Sand, and others have noted: Western European Jews have every opportunity to go live in Palestine, but have always exhibited fuck-all interest in doing so. In this they echo Maimonides: after the Almohad conquest of Cordoba and the abolition of dhimmi status for non-Muslims, the Rambam spent almost all of his life in Egypt and Morocco – he had every opportunity to settle in Palestine but chose to live and work elsewhere.

And so it is to this day: affluent, educated Western Jews would rather eat their own dicks that move to Palestine. And that's even true of arch-Zionists like Adelson and Dershowitz – neither of whom are 'Western' in any real sense (they're pretty obvious of Lithuanian or other- Osteuropäische ). descent.

Given the Exodus (LOL) of secular Jews, and the pattern of in-migration and reproduction, it's pretty clear that Palestine will become a third-world nation in a couple of generations: having emerged from the hovels of Eastern Europe, the Ashkenazim are remaking Palestine in its image.

There are good signs though: the huge-and-rising proportion of datlashim among the children of "box-heads" (Ultra-Orthodox), for a start. Even when everyone around them is trying to fill their heads with primitive supremacist tribal drivel, almost a third of children of box-heads are secular by the time they finish high school.

There is a well-understood (outside the US) bifurcation of Jewish communities into " People Like Us " and Eastern Europeans.

In Australia the dividing line can be drawn at around 1920: "People Like Us" are integrated, and for the most part they politely and quietly ignore the rabbit-eaters – those are the ones howling all the time about how at-risk they are, but who somehow can't find a way to get to the Jewish 'safe space' in Palestine unless there is a warrant out for their arrest, in which case it's " Tomorrow Morning in Jerusalem! ".

AaronB , says: October 29, 2019 at 4:48 pm GMT
@Gilad Atzmon But that's ridiculous. Every group has its criminals and the more ambitious and talented, the worse. You can't have the talented Jews who contribute to science, technology, culture, and philanthropy without some of that energy getting corrupted.

It's like that will all groups. When Europe was very energetic and vital it produced tremendous sinners and corruption while also people of tremendous benefit to society and the world.

Saints go along with sinners. Its because when you have a certain quantum of energy, you cannot control where all of it goes. Some of it had to get corrupted. Only way to avoid this is to neuter people.

So again .what does this have to do with Jewishness specifically? How this is different from the Robber Barons of the 19th century, the rapacious and deceptive imperialists, the current day Chinese oligarchs, etc? Umm, European and world history is littered with bad actors a million times worse than, wet, Bernie Madoff and the ADL, lol

That Jews also produce bad actors proves that there is something uniquely wrong with Jewishness per se? Are you nuts? This is what I mean by complete lack of self awarness and historical literacy

Pick up a history book. You are so self absorbed in your fantasy world its as if no other people produces bad actors or have ever, and we must search for the utterly mysterious fact that some Jews act in the unique characteristics of Jewishness

AaronB , says: October 29, 2019 at 4:53 pm GMT
@Colin Wright US support has always acted as much as a restraint as a benefit. Israel's most contested wars were won without US support, and in fact the US only became heavily involved with Israel only after it firmly established itself and demonstrated its capacity for self reliance, and it thought it could use it as an ally in the Cold War.

While certainly appreciated, US support is hardly crucial to Israel's survival lol. Your historical illiteracy and wishful thinking causes you to completely misunderstand it and vastly overrate it.

cyrusthevirus , says: October 29, 2019 at 4:56 pm GMT
@Colin Wright Bullshit –accept your own stupidity if you like but dont deign to speak for anyone else !! Take any large city bedevilled by organised crime -- are the ORGANISED criminals successful at least temporarily –yes ! Are they smarter than anyone else –NO !! If the Jews are so smart why do they eventually always eff up??

They are organised with rat like cunning no doubt but seem to create misery wherever they go and are so effin smart they are astounded that they are hated !! What could have caused it –we are so smart why cant we figure it out !!

AaronB , says: October 29, 2019 at 5:03 pm GMT
@Colin Wright What are you talking about. I just said there is a perfectly reasonable type of anti-Semitism that is a natural response to group competition – the actions of Jews themselves.

Obviously no ones hands are clean when it comes to group competition. This is an "innocent" phenomenon of history that characterizes all groups without exception.

What Jews object to is not normal criticism, which we engage in ourselves in a very spirited manner, but the singling out of Jewish competitive behavior in the struggle for life as somehow uniquely evil and bad. I won't even go into the horrific crimes Europeans and Asians have committed in this struggle and compare them to, err, Bernie Maddow, but accept for the sake of argument all groups are equally guilty.

So a sane criticism of Jews that places it in the normal context of group competition, which is always horrific, is perfectly ok. But the kind of singling out for special stigma and opprobrium the Jewish part in the universal human struggle for survival – when if anything it is milder than that of other groups which are truly horrific – is indeed sinister and justifies terms like anti-Semitism.

Now because so many people single out Jews for special criticism, as if they alone are not allowed to compete to live, some Jews have become hypersensitive and see in even innocent and justified criticism the seeds of the kind of sinister anti-Semitism that so often rears its ugly head. Thats perfectly understandable, although I condemn it.

Anonymous [127] Disclaimer , says: October 29, 2019 at 5:33 pm GMT

I, for one, can't think of another people who invest so much energy in measuring their unpopularity.

This is perfectly logical. No other group sees their hosts as dangerous cattle which has to be exploited and undermined at every opportunity. Feeling the pulse of the herd – before these actions create another blowback – is just part of the chosenite's job.

I don't see much guilt among the Jews. It's mostly (justified) fear that certain elements of the Tribe are moving too aggressively and spoiling it for the rest.

Fran Taubman , says: October 29, 2019 at 5:38 pm GMT
@SolontoCroesus This is what you have wrought Gilad. A philosophy of yours about Judaism and Jews and this is where it ends up. With guys like this writing about.

But even more significantly, Jews killed -- genocided, really -- non-Jews in the countries that had hosted them -- American colonists did not genocide the British in British homeland -- once again, Jews arranged for the killing to be carried out by another state, in the case of the genocide of Germany, American and British Christians became Jewish weapons to kill their own fellow-Christians.

anaccount , says: October 29, 2019 at 5:43 pm GMT
@AaronB If you knew your history you would know about Operation Nickel Grass: 22,325 tons of tanks, artillery, ammunition per Wikipedia. This was US aid during one of Israel's most contested wars (Yom Kippur) and unsurprisingly, we don't get any appreciation for it. I bet I could find an article criticizing the US for not doing it fast enough.
AaronB , says: October 29, 2019 at 6:09 pm GMT
@Colin Wright I have no doubt you're smarter than me, Colin. Your'e a pretty smart dude. I don't know about Fran Taubman, though.

Statistically, there are far more smart whites than Jews by a huge margin. And I am not even sure Jews are smarter than whites – I think the advantage in Jewish ways of thinking are cultural. We don't buy into simple binary thinking like whites do, so remain more intellectually supple and dextrous.

Anyways, one of the great things about Israel is that we can be more physical and don't have to be so smart anymore. Oh sure, Israeli Jews are smart. They make good technology and produce lots of great army officers and tactics and techniques, great conpanies, etc. But the kind of cunning needed by diaspora Jews isn't so necessary anymore, and I've always been struck by how maladroit and clumsy Israelis seemed on tv presenting defending Israel and the like.

Hopefully, when I move to Israel ill lose another 10 IQ points or so, if I'm lucky. Bliss.

Colin Wright , says: Website October 29, 2019 at 6:15 pm GMT
@cyrusthevirus 'What are you talking about. I just said there is a perfectly reasonable type of anti-Semitism that is a natural response to group competition – the actions of Jews themselves '

virtually all of said actions being perfectly reasonable -- according to you. Just group competition.

Oh wait, you mentioned Bernie Madoff. How about, say, those actions that drove the previously rather amiable Lithuanian peasantry into a murderous frenzy in the summer of 1941?

Colin Wright , says: Website October 29, 2019 at 6:26 pm GMT
@AaronB ' It's like that will all groups. When Europe was very energetic and vital it produced tremendous sinners and corruption while also people of tremendous benefit to society and the world '

This is your typical glib generalization -- upon inspection, it seems to have absolutely no basis in fact.

Several small communities have managed to produce people who notably helped mankind without any concomitant output of villains. Norway comes to mind; how about Switzerland. Conversely, other groups notoriously produce bad actors in abundance without ever offering much of anything good at all in compensation -- Gypsies, for example.

So it's the purest nonsense to assert that Jewish villains are the necessary flip side to Jewish saints. There's no rational reason to accept this statement.

That's one of the things that irritates me about you. You simply dream up and write whatever sounds good -- without any apparent concern as to whether it's actually so or not. It's like you could announce that in Israel, Jews grow to be an average of seven feet tall. If it sounded good to you, you'd say it. It would never occur to you to check.

[Nov 01, 2019] PODCAST Cynthia McKinney on Zionist Power -- and the "Jewish Question" by Kevin Barrett

Nov 01, 2019 | www.unz.com

Truth Jihad / Kevin Barrett October 27, 2019 7 Comments Reply
Dr. Cynthia McKinney got elected to Congress six times -- and soon found herself under attack by the Israel lobby when she refused to sign the "pledge of allegiance to Israel" demanded of all representatives!

The Lobby was able to eject Rep. McKinney from Congress twice, once in 2002 and again in 2006, by fabricating a primary opponent backed by the vast fortunes of the Zionist oligarchs and the tireless energy of the 500,000-footsoldier "Zionist Power Configuration" or ZPC. (For information about the ZPC, read Dr. James Petras's The Power of Israel in the United States alongside Walt and Mearsheimer , and then check out the documentary film The Lobby .)

Israel, with its immense power in the USA, defines itself as a "Jewish state" -- a state of by and for all of the world's (racially-defined) Jewish people, but NOT a state for any of the 20% of its residents who aren't Jewish . It is the world's only remaining officially racist, apartheid nation.

So are we allowed to discuss what "Jewish state" means? Can we explore the historical, psychological, and cultural factors that led to the Zionist colonization of Palestine? The Zionist Power Configuration says "no way!"

According to the ZPC and its attack-dog ADL, anyone who talks about such things is an "anti-Semite" and should muzzled, deplatformed, and persecuted.

In this interview Dr. McKinney bravely goes where few if any former Congressional representatives have gone before, speaking frankly about Israel's control of the US Congress and other centers of power, and raising the taboo issue of the so-called "Jewish question."

[Oct 24, 2019] If motives can signal the future, the present convulsions in the US government signal that America has been taken over by the Zionists who populate all avenues of US power structures.

Oct 24, 2019 | www.moonofalabama.org

CarlD , Oct 23 2019 23:37 utc | 21

if motives can signal the future, the present convulsions in the US government signal that America has been taken over by the Zionists who populate all avenues of US power structures.

It is inconceivable that Trump who has been up to now catering to AIPAC and the Israeli lobbies and actors would be subjected to ignominy because he seems to want to abandon Syria. But. let's face it, Israel wants mayhem to engulf Syria, an ally of Iran and the Hezbollah.

American troops' withdrawal from Syria is seen as anathema by Zionists and Israeli likewise.
The Jewish interests can pull numerous strings in America to prevent this from happening. Trump is caught between a hammer and a nail. He wants to be reelected so he has to fulfill his promises
to his bases. Bring the troops home and all this nice stuff.

But his Israeli masters will make life difficult for him as long as he is not pandering to Israel's wishes.

There is a subtle game whereas the MSM assaults Trump but his actions are all in favor of his MSM detractors. Actor or puppet remains to be elucidated. No tax on the rich, Jerusalem, Golan Heights, the West Bank,, the Jordan Valley, all gifts to the criminal state of Israel.

And then, sanctions on China? If Trump wants to return the industrial jobs to America, he has to put tariffs on all imported goods, regardless of origin. Not only from Germany and China because they are successful exporters to America.

He would also have to put a stop on the expatriation of capital to other countries in view of reducing the ability of Wall Street to export jobs.

We do not see any of these actions from the WH so DJT is not the angel he wants to project himself to be.

For the time being, his orders of withdrawal are freeing some of the Syrian territories recently under US watch. The best thing for Syria is that it now has control over most of its territory. Much to the disgust of Israel.

I can see that Israel's greatest wish is to see a conflagration between Iran and the USA. There will be more false flags until one is so painful that Israel will be destroyed.

The Samson option is anti-Jewish. Will Israel bomb The City, New York and other great congregations of Zionists?

Remains to be seen.

[Oct 24, 2019] Joltin' Jack Keane wants your kids to fight Russia and Syria over Syrian oil by Colonel Patrick Lang

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Whilst the are absorbing that part of their country the battle of Iblib will restart. After that they can move their attention south and southeast, al-Tanf and the oilfields. I can't see how the US will be able to stop them but at least they will have time to plan their exit. ..."
"... At the moment the Syrian Government has enough oil, it is getting it from Iran via a steady stream of SUEZMAX tankers. The cost, either in terms of money or quid pro quo, is unknown. ..."
"... For those who have wondered as to why the DC FedRegime would fight over the tiny relative-to-FUKUS's-needs amount of oil in the Syrian oilfields. It is clearly to keep the SAR hobbled, crippled and too impoverished to retake all its territory or even to restore social, civic and economic functionality to the parts it retains. FUKUS is still committed to the policy of FUKUSing Syria. ..."
"... This President appears at times to recognize the reality of nation states and the meaning of national sovereignty. He needs to understand that on principle, not merely on gut instinct. President Trump's press conference today focused in one section on a simple fact -- saving the lives of Americans. Gen. Jack Keane, Sen. Lindsay Graham, and other gamers who think they are running an imperial chessboard where they can use living soldiers as American pawns, are a menace. Thanks Col. Lang for calling out these lunatics. ..."
"... During the 2016 election, Jack Keane and John Bolton were the two people Trump mentioned when asked who he listens to on foreign affairs/military policy. ..."
"... The crumbling apart is apparent. I don't know in what delusional world can conceive that 200 soldiers in the middle of the desert can deny Syria possession of their oil fields or keep the road between Bagdad and Damascus cut. All the West's Decision Makers can do is threaten to blow up the world. ..."
"... Corporate Overlords imposed austerity, outsourced industry and cut taxes to get richer, but the one thing for certain is that they can't keep their wealth without laws, the police and the military to protect them. ..."
"... Latin America is burning too - although the elites here have plundered and imposed structural plunder for too long. No matter where you are it .. Chile poster of the right, or Ecuador, Peru, etc ..."
"... Did you notice the Middle East Monitor article on October 21 reporting that the UAE has released to Iran $700 million in previously frozen funds? ..."
"... Yet in early September, Sigal Mandelker, a senior US Treasury official, was in the UAE pressing CEOs there to tighten the financial screws on Iran. The visit was deemed a success. During this visit she was quoted as saying that the Treasury has issued over 30 rounds of curbs targeting Iran-related entities. That would include targeting shipping companies and banks. ..."
"... It depends on who will be the democratic ticket .. will it mobilize the basis? I think the compromise candidate is Warren, but she looks to me a lot like John Kerry, Al Gore.. representing the professional, college educated segment of society, and that doesn't cut it. ..."
"... Trump is far from consistent. This is the man who attacked Syria twice on the basis of lies so transparent that my youngest housecat would have seen through them, and who tried and failed to leave Syria twice, then said he was "100%" for the continued occupation of Syria. ..."
"... He could have given the order to leave Syria this month, but Trump did not. Instead, he simply ordered withdrawal to a smaller zone of occupation, and that under duress. ..."
"... The Great Trumpian Mystery. I don't pretend to understand but I'm intrigued by his inconsistent inconsistencies. https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/03/17/trump-mysteries-inconsistent-inconsistencies/ ..."
"... It probably should come as no surprise to us that Trump is having small, but not no, success in getting the ship to alter course - too many deeply entrenched interests with no incentive to recognize their failures and every incentive to stay the course by removing, or at least handicapping the President who was elected on a platform of change. ..."
"... Whether the country elected the right man for the job remains to be seen. At times he appears to be his own worst enemy and his appointments are frequently topsy-- turvy to the platform he ran on but he does have his moments of success. He called off the dumb plan to go to war with Iran, albeit at 20 minutes to mid night and he is trying hard against the full might of the Borg to withdraw from Syria in accord with our actual interests. Trumps, alas, assumed office with no political friends, only enemies with varying degrees of Trump hate depending on how they define their political interests. ..."
"... Keane manipulated Trump by aggravating his animosity towards Iran, more specifically, his animosity towards Obama's JCPOA. I doubt Trump can see beyond his personal animus towards Obama and his legacy. He doesn't care about Iran, the Shia Crescent, the oil or even the jihadis any more than he cares about ditching the Kurds. This administration doesn't need a national security advisor, it needs a psychiatrist. ..."
"... IMO Trump cares about what Sheldon Adelson wants and Adelson wants to destroy Iran: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sCW4IasWXc Note the audience applause ..."
"... The difference between the reality that we perceive and the way it is portrayed in the media is so stark that sometimes I am not sure whether it is me who is insane or the world - the MSM and the cool-aid drinking libtards whose animosity against Trump won't let them distinguish black from white. Not that they were ever able to understand the real state of affairs. Discussions with them have always been about them regurgitating the MSM talking points without understanding any of it. ..."
"... "This administration doesn't need a national security advisor, it needs a psychiatrist." I think TTG speaks the truth. ..."
"... On Monday, 21 October, president Trump "authorized $4.5 million in direct support to the Syria Civil Defense (SCD)", a/k/a the White Helmets, who have been discussed here on SST before-- https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-press-secretary-89/ ..."
"... TTG IMO you and the other NEVER Trumpers are confused about the presence in both the permanent and appointed government of people who while they are not loyal to him nevertheless covet access to power. A lot of neocons and Zionists are among them. ..."
"... ANDREW BACEVICH: First of all, I think we should avoid taking anything that he says at any particular moment too seriously. Clearly, he is all over the map on almost any issue that you can name. I found his comment about taking the oil in that part of Syria, as if we are going to decide how to dispose of it, to be striking. And yet of course it sort of harkens back to his campaign statement about the Iraq war, that we ought to have taken Iraq's oil is a way of paying for that war. So I just caution against taking anything he says that seriously. ..."
"... That said, clearly a recurring theme to which he returns over and over and over again, is his determination to end what he calls endless wars. He clearly has no particular strategy or plan for how to do that, but he does seem to be insistent on pursuing that objective. And here I think we begin to get to the real significance of the controversy over Syria in our abandonment of the Kurds ..."
"... the controversy has gotten as big as it is in part because members of the foreign policy establishment in both parties are concerned about what an effort to end endless wars would mean for the larger architecture of U.S. national security policy, which has been based on keeping U.S. troops in hundreds of bases around the world, maintaining the huge military budget, a pattern of interventionism. Trump seems to think that that has been a mistake, particularly in the Middle East. I happen to agree with that critique. And I think that it is a fear that he could somehow engineer a fundamental change in U.S. policy is what really has the foreign policy establishment nervous. ..."
"... we created the problems that exist today through our reckless use of American military power. ..."
"... He let them roll him, just like Obama and so many others. Just a different set of rollers. ..."
Oct 24, 2019 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"Joltin" Jack Keane, General (ret.), Fox Business Senior Strategery Analyst, Chairman of the Board of the Kagan run neocon "Institute for the Study of War" (ISW) and Graduate Extraordinaire of Fordham University, was on with Lou Dobbs last night. Dobbs appears to have developed a deep suspicion of this paladin. He stood up to Keane remarkably well. This was refreshing in light of the fawning deference paid to Keane by all the rest of the Fox crew.

In the course of this dialogue Keane let slip the slightly disguised truth that he and the other warmongers want to keep something like 200 US soldiers and airmen in Syria east of the Euphrates so that they can keep Iran or any other "Iranian proxy forces" from crossing the Euphrates from SAG controlled territory to take control of Syrian sovereign territory and the oil and gas deposits that are rightly the property of the Syrian people and their government owned oil company. The map above shows how many of these resources are east of the Euphrates. Pilgrims! It is not a lot of oil and gas judged by global needs and markets, but to Syria and its prospects for reconstruction it is a hell of a lot!

Keane was clear that what he means by "Iranian proxy forces" is the Syrian Arab Army, the national army of that country. If they dare cross the river, to rest in the shade of their own palm trees, then in his opinion the air forces of FUKUS should attack them and any 3rd party air forces (Russia) who support them

This morning, on said Fox Business News with Charles Payne, Keane was even clearer and stated specifically that if "Syria" tries to cross the river they must be fought.

IMO he and Lindsey Graham are raving lunatics brainwashed for years with the Iran obsession and they are a danger to us all. pl

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/graham-fox-news-star-showed-trump-map-change-his-mind-n1069901

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_industry_in_Syria


Fred , 23 October 2019 at 04:54 PM

If only General Keane was as willing to defend America and America's oil on the Texas-Mexico border. Or hasn't anyone noticed that Mexico just a lost a battle with the Sinaloa drug cartel?
Harlan Easley , 23 October 2019 at 05:35 PM
I view them as selling their Soul for a dollar. Keane comes across as dense enough to believe his bile but Graham comes across as an opportunist without any real ideology except power.
JohninMK , 23 October 2019 at 05:43 PM
Its probably one step at a time for the Syrians, although the sudden move over the past couple of weeks must have been a bit of a God given opportunity for them.

Whilst the are absorbing that part of their country the battle of Iblib will restart. After that they can move their attention south and southeast, al-Tanf and the oilfields. I can't see how the US will be able to stop them but at least they will have time to plan their exit.

As I posted in the other thread, the Syrian Government is the only real customer for their oil and the Kurds already have a profit share agreement in place, so the US, if they allow any oil out, will effectively be protecting the fields on behalf of Assad. Surely not what Congress wants?

At the moment the Syrian Government has enough oil, it is getting it from Iran via a steady stream of SUEZMAX tankers. The cost, either in terms of money or quid pro quo, is unknown.

walrus , 23 October 2019 at 06:42 PM
I think this might be President Putin's next problem to solve. As far as I know, there is no legal reason for us to be there, not humanitarian, not strategic not even tactical. We simply are playing dog-in-the-manger.

My guess is that we will receive an offer to good to refuse from Putin.

different clue , 23 October 2019 at 06:54 PM
For those who have wondered as to why the DC FedRegime would fight over the tiny relative-to-FUKUS's-needs amount of oil in the Syrian oilfields. It is clearly to keep the SAR hobbled, crippled and too impoverished to retake all its territory or even to restore social, civic and economic functionality to the parts it retains. FUKUS is still committed to the policy of FUKUSing Syria.

Why is the Champs Elise' Regime still committed to putting the F in UKUS?
(I can understand why UKUS would want to keep France involved. Without France, certain nasty people might re-brand UKUS as USUK. And that would be very not nice.)

prawnik said in reply to different clue... , 24 October 2019 at 11:25 AM
Because France wants to be on the good side of the United States, and as you indicate, the United States is in Syria to turn that country into a failed state and for no other reason.
Decameron , 23 October 2019 at 07:03 PM
A good antidote for Joltin' Jack Keane's madness would be for Lou Dobbs and other mainstream media (MSM) to have Col Pat Lang as the commentator for analysis of the Syrian situation. Readers of this blog are undoubtedly aware that Col. Lang's knowledge of the peoples of the region and their customs is a national treasure.

This President appears at times to recognize the reality of nation states and the meaning of national sovereignty. He needs to understand that on principle, not merely on gut instinct. President Trump's press conference today focused in one section on a simple fact -- saving the lives of Americans. Gen. Jack Keane,
Sen. Lindsay Graham, and other gamers who think they are running an imperial chessboard where they can use living soldiers as American pawns, are a menace. Thanks Col. Lang for calling out these lunatics.

Stephanie , 23 October 2019 at 07:06 PM
In WWI millions of soldiers died fighting for imperial designs. They did not know it. They thought they were fighting for democracy, or to stop the spread of evil, or save their country. They were not. Secret treaties signed before the war started stated explicitly what the war was about.

Now "representatives" of the military, up to and including the Commander in Chief say it's about conquest, oil. The cards of the elite are on the table. How do you account for this?

Babak Makkinejad -> Stephanie... , 23 October 2019 at 08:48 PM
Men are quite evidently are in a state of total complete and irretrievable Fall, all the while living that particular Age of Belief.
Jackrabbit , 23 October 2019 at 07:39 PM
During the 2016 election, Jack Keane and John Bolton were the two people Trump mentioned when asked who he listens to on foreign affairs/military policy.
VietnamVet , 23 October 2019 at 07:47 PM
Colonel,

The crumbling apart is apparent. I don't know in what delusional world can conceive that 200 soldiers in the middle of the desert can deny Syria possession of their oil fields or keep the road between Bagdad and Damascus cut. All the West's Decision Makers can do is threaten to blow up the world.

Justin Trudeau was elected Monday in Canada with a minority in Parliament joining the United Kingdom and Israel with governments without a majority's mandate. Donald Trump's impeachment escalates. MbS is nearing a meat hook in Saudi Arabia. This is not a coincidence. The Elites' flushing government down the drain succeeded.

Corporate Overlords imposed austerity, outsourced industry and cut taxes to get richer, but the one thing for certain is that they can't keep their wealth without laws, the police and the military to protect them. Already California electricity is being cut off for a second time due to wildfires and PG&E's corporate looting. The Sinaloa shootout reminds me of the firefight in the first season of "True Detectives" when the outgunned LA cops tried to go after the Cartel. The writing is on the wall, California is next. Who will the lawmen serve and protect? Their people or the rich? Without the law, justice and order, there is chaos.

Mk-ec said in reply to VietnamVet... , 24 October 2019 at 07:40 PM
Latin America is burning too - although the elites here have plundered and imposed structural plunder for too long. No matter where you are it .. Chile poster of the right, or Ecuador, Peru, etc
Harper , 23 October 2019 at 07:49 PM
No doubt that Keane and his ilk want endless war and view Trump as a growing obstacle. Trump is consistent: He wanted out of JCPOA, and after being stalled by his national security advisors, he finally reached the boiling point and left. The advisors who counseled against this are all gone. With Pompeo, Enders and O'Brien as the new key security advisors, I doubt Trump got as much push back. He wanted out of Syria in December 2018 and was slow-walked. Didn't anyone think he'd come back at some point and revive the order to pull out? The talk with Erdogan, the continuing Trump view that Russia, Turkey, Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia should bear the burden of sorting out what is left of the Syria war, so long as ISIS does not see a revival, all have been clear for a long time.

My concern is with Lindsey Graham, who is smarter and nastier than Jack Keane. He is also Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and may hold some blackmail leverage over the President. If the House votes up impeachment articles, Graham will be overseeing the Senate trial. A break from Trump by Graham could lead to a GOP Senate stampede for conviction. No one will say this openly, as I am, but it cannot be ignored as a factor for "controlling" Trump and keeping as much of the permanent war machine running as possible.

Thoughts?

Babak Makkinejad -> Harper... , 23 October 2019 at 08:52 PM
Trump has committed the United States to a long war against the Shia Crescent. He has ceded to Turkey on Syrian Kurds, but has continued with his operations against SAR. US needs Turkey, Erdogan knows that. Likewise in regards to Russia, EU, and Iran. Turkey, as is said in Persian, has grown a tail.
Tidewater said in reply to Babak Makkinejad... , 24 October 2019 at 01:14 PM
Did you notice the Middle East Monitor article on October 21 reporting that the UAE has released to Iran $700 million in previously frozen funds?

Yet in early September, Sigal Mandelker, a senior US Treasury official, was in the UAE pressing CEOs there to tighten the financial screws on Iran. The visit was deemed a success. During this visit she was quoted as saying that the Treasury has issued over 30 rounds of curbs targeting Iran-related entities. That would include targeting shipping companies and banks.

It was also reported in September that in Dubai that recent US Treasury sanctions were beginning to have a devastating effect. Iranian businessmen were being squeezed out. Even leaving the Emirates. Yet only a few days ago--a month later-- there are now reports that Iranian exchange bureaus have suddenly reopened in Dubai after a long period of closure.

Also, billions of dollars in contracts were signed between Russia, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE during Putin's recent visit to the region. It seems to me that this is real news. Something big seems to be happening. It looks to me as if there could be a serious confrontation between the Trump administration and MBZ in the offing.

Do you have an opinion on the Iranian situation in Dubai at the moment?

Lars said in reply to Harper... , 23 October 2019 at 09:10 PM
I have my doubt that Sen. Graham will lead any revolt, but if it starts to look like Trump will lose big next year, there will be a stampede looking like the Nile getting through a cataract.

They will not want to go down the tube with Trump. I still maintain that there is a good reason for him to resign before he loses an election or an impeachment. It will come down to the price.

Jack said in reply to Lars... , 24 October 2019 at 09:30 AM
Lars,

Lose big to whom in the next election? Biden got 300 people to show up for his rally in his hometown of Scranton and he is supposedly the front runner. Bernie got 20,000 to show up at his rally in NY when he was endorsed by The Squad and Michael Moore. Do you think the Dem establishment will allow him to be the nominee?

Trump in contrast routinely can fill up stadiums with 30,000 people. That was the indicator in the last election, not the polls. Recall the NY Times forecasting Hillary with a 95% probability of winning the day before the election.

As Rep. Al Green noted , the only way the Democrats can stop him is for the Senate to convict him in an impeachment trial. Who do you believe are the 20 Republican senators that will vote to convict?

Lars said in reply to Jack... , 24 October 2019 at 02:05 PM
Trump barely won the last time and while he currently has wide support in the GOP, it is not nearly as deep as his cultists believe. When half the country, and growing, want him removed, there is trouble ahead. Republicans are largely herd animals and if spooked, will create a stampede.

You can tell that there are problems when his congressional enablers are not defending him on facts and just using gripes about processes that they themselves have used in the past. In addition to circus acts.

I realize that many do not want to admit that they made a mistake by voting for him. I am not so sure they want to repeat that mistake.

Mk-ec said in reply to Lars... , 24 October 2019 at 08:20 PM
It depends on who will be the democratic ticket .. will it mobilize the basis? I think the compromise candidate is Warren, but she looks to me a lot like John Kerry, Al Gore.. representing the professional, college educated segment of society, and that doesn't cut it.
Jack said in reply to Lars... , 24 October 2019 at 09:29 PM
Lars,

It's not a question if he barely won. The fact is he competed with many other Republican candidates including governors and senators and even one with the name Bush. He was 1% in the polls in the summer of 2016 and went on to win the Republican nomination despite the intense opposition of the Republican establishment. He then goes on to win the general election defeating a well funded Hillary with all her credentials and the full backing of the vast majority of the media. That is an amazing achievement for someone running for public office for the first time. Like him or hate him, you have to give credit where it's due. Winning an election for the presidency is no small feat.

There only two ways to defeat him. First, the Senate convicts him in an impeachment trial which will require at least 20 Republican senators. Who are they? Second, a Democrat in the general election. Who? I can see Bernie with a possibility since he has enthusiastic supporters. But will the Democrat establishment allow him to win the nomination?

Diana C said in reply to Harper... , 24 October 2019 at 08:37 AM
We're no longer having to listen to Yosemite Sam Bolton. His BFF Graham is left to fight on his own. I don't think Trump feels the need to pay that much attention to Graham. He didn't worry about him during the primary when Graham always seemed to be on the verge of crying when he was asked questions.
prawnik said in reply to Harper... , 24 October 2019 at 11:28 AM
Trump is far from consistent. This is the man who attacked Syria twice on the basis of lies so transparent that my youngest housecat would have seen through them, and who tried and failed to leave Syria twice, then said he was "100%" for the continued occupation of Syria.

He could have given the order to leave Syria this month, but Trump did not. Instead, he simply ordered withdrawal to a smaller zone of occupation, and that under duress.

Congratulations are hardly in order here.

Patrick Armstrong -> prawnik... , 24 October 2019 at 05:06 PM
The Great Trumpian Mystery. I don't pretend to understand but I'm intrigued by his inconsistent inconsistencies. https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/03/17/trump-mysteries-inconsistent-inconsistencies/
Flavius said in reply to Harper... , 24 October 2019 at 01:21 PM
What the Colonel calls the Borg is akin to an aircraft carrier that has been steaming at near flank speed for many years too long, gathering mass and momentum since the end of Cold War I.

With the exception of Gulf War I, none of our interventions have gone well, and even the putative peace at the end of GUlf War I wasn't managed well because it eventuated in Gulf War Ii which has been worst than a disaster because the disaster taught the Borg nothing and became midwife to additional disasters.

It probably should come as no surprise to us that Trump is having small, but not no, success in getting the ship to alter course - too many deeply entrenched interests with no incentive to recognize their failures and every incentive to stay the course by removing, or at least handicapping the President who was elected on a platform of change.

Whether the country elected the right man for the job remains to be seen. At times he appears to be his own worst enemy and his appointments are frequently topsy-- turvy to the platform he ran on but he does have his moments of success. He called off the dumb plan to go to war with Iran, albeit at 20 minutes to mid night and he is trying hard against the full might of the Borg to withdraw from Syria in accord with our actual interests. Trumps, alas, assumed office with no political friends, only enemies with varying degrees of Trump hate depending on how they define their political interests.

With that said, I doubt very much whether the Republicans in the Senate will abandon Trump in an impeachment trial. Trump's argument that the process is a political coup is arguably completely true, or certainly true enough that his political base in the electorate will not tolerate his abandonment by Republican politicians inside the Beltway. I think there is even some chance that Trump, were he to be removed from office by what could be credibly portrayed as a political coup, would consider running in 2020 as an independent. The damage that would cause to the Republican Party would be severe, pervasive, and possibly fatal to the Party as such. I doubt Beltway pols would be willing to take that chance.

The Twisted Genius , 23 October 2019 at 11:33 PM
I don't think Keane or Trump are focused on the oil. Keane just used that as a lens to focus Trump on Iran. That's the true sickness. Keane manipulated Trump by aggravating his animosity towards Iran, more specifically, his animosity towards Obama's JCPOA. I doubt Trump can see beyond his personal animus towards Obama and his legacy. He doesn't care about Iran, the Shia Crescent, the oil or even the jihadis any more than he cares about ditching the Kurds. This administration doesn't need a national security advisor, it needs a psychiatrist.
Fourth and Long -> The Twisted Genius ... , 24 October 2019 at 12:01 PM
In case you missed this piece in Newsweek: https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-us-has-plan-send-tanks-troops-secure-syria-oil-fields-amid-withdrawal-1467350

No idea here who the un-named pentagon "official" might be, but sounds as thought Gen Keane may not be all alone in his soup.

Artemesia said in reply to The Twisted Genius ... , 24 October 2019 at 04:17 PM
IMO Trump cares about what Sheldon Adelson wants and Adelson wants to destroy Iran: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sCW4IasWXc Note the audience applause
Decepiton , 24 October 2019 at 04:40 AM
We massacred two hundred ruskies in the battle of khasham. What can they do.
MSB said in reply to Decepiton... , 24 October 2019 at 03:21 PM
And in response, Russia killed and captured hundreds of US Special forces and PMC's alongside SAS in East Ghouta . It is said that the abrupt russian op on East Ghouta was a response to the Battle of Khasham.

http://freewestmedia.com/2018/04/11/skripal-affair-real-reason-is-capture-of-200-sas-soldiers-in-ghouta/
https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201805211064652345-syrian-army-foreign-military-presence/
http://www.newsilkstrategies.com/news--analysis/a-real-h-o-t-war-with-russia-is-underway-right-now

http://www.newsilkstrategies.com/news--analysis/confirmation-that-us-uk-special-ops-are-in-syria-some-captured

ancientarcher , 24 October 2019 at 11:19 AM
Colonel, thanks for spelling it out so clearly.

The difference between the reality that we perceive and the way it is portrayed in the media is so stark that sometimes I am not sure whether it is me who is insane or the world - the MSM and the cool-aid drinking libtards whose animosity against Trump won't let them distinguish black from white. Not that they were ever able to understand the real state of affairs. Discussions with them have always been about them regurgitating the MSM talking points without understanding any of it.

While it will always be mystifying to me why so many people on the street blindly support America fighting and dying in the middle east, the support of the MSM and the paid hacks for eternal war is no surprise. I hope they get to send their children and grandchildren to these wars. More than that, I hope we get out of these wars. Trump might be able to put an end to it, and not just in Syria, if he wins a second term, which he will if he is allowed to contest the next election. There is however a chance that the borg will pull the rug from under him and bar him from the elections. Hope that doesn't come to pass.

Larry Kart , 24 October 2019 at 11:39 AM
"This administration doesn't need a national security advisor, it needs a psychiatrist." I think TTG speaks the truth.
David said in reply to Linda... , 24 October 2019 at 04:39 PM
No, they just have to sit there and be an excuse to fly Coalition CAPs that would effectively prevent SAA from crossing the Euphrates in strength. Feasible until the SAA finishes with Idlib and moves some of its new Russian anti-aircraft toys down to Deir Ezzor.
robt willmann , 24 October 2019 at 12:46 PM
On Monday, 21 October, president Trump "authorized $4.5 million in direct support to the Syria Civil Defense (SCD)", a/k/a the White Helmets, who have been discussed here on SST before-- https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-press-secretary-89/
turcopolier , 24 October 2019 at 01:34 PM
TTG IMO you and the other NEVER Trumpers are confused about the presence in both the permanent and appointed government of people who while they are not loyal to him nevertheless covet access to power. A lot of neocons and Zionists are among them.
The Twisted Genius -> turcopolier ... , 24 October 2019 at 02:54 PM
Colonel Lang, I am well aware of the power seekers who gravitate towards Trump or whoever holds power not out of loyalty, but because they covet access to power. The neocons and Zionists flock to Trump because they can manipulate him to do their bidding. That fact certainly doesn't make me feel any better about Trump as President. The man needs help.
turcopolier -> The Twisted Genius ... , 24 October 2019 at 05:15 PM
TTG

you are an experienced clan case officer. You do not know that most people are more than a little mad? Hillary is more than a little nuts. Obama was so desperately neurotically in need of White approval that he let the WP COIN generals talk him into a COIN war in Afghanistan. I was part of that discussion. All that mattered to him was their approval. FDR could not be trusted with SIGINT product and so Marshall never gave him any, etc., George Bush 41 told me that he deliberately mis-pronounced Saddam's name to hurt his feelings. Georgie Junior let the lunatic neocons invade a country that had not attacked us. Trump is no worse than many of our politicians, or politicians anywhere. Britain? The Brexit disaster speaks for itself, And then there is the British monarchy in which a princeling devastated by the sure DNA proof that he is illegitimate is acting like a fool. The list is endless.

The Twisted Genius -> CK... , 24 October 2019 at 05:21 PM
CK, the people surrounding Trump are largely appointees. Keane doesn't have to be let into the WH. His problem is that those who wou