HISTORY: How Jew/zionist murderers/criminals manipulate US Congress

Apollonian

Guest Columnist
Zionism and the United States Congress

Link: http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2013/07/30/225365-zionism-and-the-united-states-congress/


NETANYAHU BEFORE CONGRESS!

The locus of the present day conflict in Palestine may not be in Palestine but in Washington, DC, and in the US Congress, because the US Congress supports, probably unwittingly for the most part, the ethnic cleansing and destruction of the Palestinian people.

When the US Congress in 2011 gave Israel’s Netanyahu 29 standing ovations, was it aware it was applauding a genocidaire, asks William James Martin



by William James Martin



The ideology, or political project of Zionism, which underlies the creation of the state of Israel, had in fact a Christian origin rather than a Jewish one, as writings can be found dating from the 1500s written by Christian clergymen in England advocating the migration of Jews to the Holy Land.

The migration of Jews to Palestine was also advocated by Napoleon Bonaparte.

The first Jewish presentations of Zionism were written by Moses Hess in 1862 and 20 years later by Leo Pinsker, both of the Russian pale, with each writer advocating a separate state for Jews.

Twentieth century Zionism was initiated by Theodore Herzl who, likewise, advocated a separate state for Jews in his book, Der Judenstaat, written in 1896. One year later he formed the World Zionist Congress that held its first meeting in Basel, Switzerland, in that same year.

What to do with the Arabs present in the prospective Jewish state dominated the thoughts of the founders of Israel from Herzl up until the actual expulsion of the Palestinians in 1948.

Thus Herzl stated: “[We shall] spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly.”

Thus the concept of the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians was introduced.

It is not rocket science; if you want to create a state exclusively of Jews, mostly European, in the heart of the Middle East, then you must first get rid of the Arabs.

In 1928, Vladimir Jabotinsky, founder of the Revisionist wing of the Zionist movement, which advocated the revision of the British Mandate for Palestine to include the east bank of the Jordan and some of present-day Egypt, Jordan and Syria, and which was the progenitor of the present-day Lukud Party, wrote of the Palestinians in his booklet, The Iron Wall, that no people were ever willing to give up their land to another people through mutual agreement and that the colonization by European Jews of Palestine must be prosecuted by force and against the will of the indigenous people. It must be executed behind an iron wall of bayonets, using his metaphor.

By the 1930s, “transfer” of the Arabs was the unanimous preference of the founders of Israel. So-called transfer committees, headed by Joseph Weitz, director of land management for the Jewish Agency, were set up explicitly for the purpose of studying ways of “transferring” the Arabs out of Palestine.

At the beginning of 1948, despite 50 years of land purchases, Jews only owned six per cent of the land of Palestine. By the year’s end, the Israeli army controlled 78 per cent of Palestine in a process of ethnic cleansing that saw the destruction of 531 Arab towns or villages and 11 Arab urban areas, with massacres, large or small, at almost all of those towns or villages, the almost complete looting of Palestinian property and wealth, including looting of banks, confiscation of Palestinian homes and property, businesses, fields and orchards.

The Palestinian people lost everything. Those who survived the massacres lost their careers, their means of livelihood, only to find refuge in tent cities set up by the United Nations that were later to become squalid refugee camps of cinder block buildings dotted around the Middle East.

By just checking the timeline, one quickly disposes of the 60-year-old Israeli propaganda myth that the pre-state of Israel was innocently minding its own business when it was attacked by five armies of surrounding Arab states.

The ethnic cleansing of Palestinians began 30 November 1947 in Haifa when the Jewish army under David Ben-Gurion, along with the Jewish terrorist group, the Irgun, under Menachem Begin, began shelling Arab sections of that city. The ethnic cleansing of the Arabs of Haifa was completed by April 1948 when shelling by Jewish forces obliged Haifa’s Arab residents to flee toward the harbour where they attempted to board boats in order to escape. Thus the Arabs of Haifa were literally “pushed into the sea” by Jewish forces. Many of those fleeing were drowned when the boats were overloaded and capsized.

In March of 1948, Ben-Gurion finalised and distributed Plan D to his officers, which was a programme for destroying and depopulating Arab villages and eliminating any resistance. Already, by that date, 30 Arab villages had been depopulated of Arabs.

One revealing paragraph of this document states: “These operations can be carried out in the following manner: either by destroying villages (by setting fire to them, by blowing them up, and by planting mines in their rubble), and especially those populations centres that are difficult to control permanently; or by mounting combing and control operations according to the following guidelines: encirclement of the villages, conducting a search inside them. In case of resistance, the armed forces must be wiped out and the population expelled outside the borders of the state.”

The massacre at the Arab village of Deir Yassin, only one of many, but possibly the most famous, occurred 9 April 1948. Israel declared itself a state 14 May 1948, and it was the next day that the first regular soldier of an Arab army set foot in Palestine. By then, about half of the 750,000 to 800,000 Palestinian refugees had been generated and all of Palestine’s urban centres and been depopulated of Arabs.

Let me be clear: the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians began six months before the entrance into Palestine of any regular member of the surrounding Arab armies. And further, the intent of the Zionist movement to displace the Arab population had been in place for half a century.

One cannot understand the natural anger and resentment of the Arab people, and particularly the Palestinian people, towards Israel, and also to the West for supporting their oppressors and for being blind to their own suffering, without coming to a full understanding of the catastrophe, which the Palestinian people call the Nakba, that befell them in 1948. One cannot understand the same if one accepts the lie that the pre-state of Israel was just innocently defending itself, which is the fiction, I suspect, most members of the US Congress accept.

Nor can one understand the futility of the exalted “peace process”, ongoing now for the last 24 years, concurrent with the further erosion of Palestinian rights and freedom, and migration of new Jewish settlers into the West Bank and East Jerusalem, without understanding that Israel acquired its present status as a state not by negotiation with Palestinians, but by brute force and very much against the will of the indigenous people.

For the Arab people, Israel is an alien implant, imposed by Western powers, in the heart of the Arab world against the will of the Arab people.

The Palestinians living under occupation have been living in that situation for 45 years, deprived of basic human rights, abused and, more often than not, humiliated, suffering degradation on a daily basis, as their land and property and resources are hour-by-hour confiscated by the state of Israel, which also winks at settler violence and looks the other way as settlers, who have built their settlements on hilltops, dump their sewage onto Palestinian farmland, as they also cut down their olive trees, burn their fields and poison or otherwise kill their livestock, in order to make way for more settlers and settlements, as well as to make life as miserable as possible for the Palestinians with the intention of making their migration from Palestine more attractive than their continuing presence.

The Palestinian refugee population now stands at about five million — the largest refugee population in the world and the longest standing refugee population. There are no prospects on the horizon for any change in their situation.

Zionism is a political programme of clearing Palestine of Palestinian Arabs in order to create the space for an exclusive Jewish state. As such, its goal is to destroy the Palestinians as a people with an identity, as a people and with an attachment to the land of their births and the births of their ancestry. Such a project meets the definition of genocide under international law. Genocide is a crime against humanity was well as against its immediate victims. Genocide is a crime in which all of humanity is degraded.

When the US Congress gave 29 standing ovations to the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, in his most recent appearance before this body, they were applauding a man whose has dedicated his entire life to the destruction of the Palestinian people and their ethnic cleansing.

The US Congress does not seem to know, or to care: Those who came to Palestine in the 20th century for the purpose of ethnically cleansing the indigenous people in order to establish a racially or ethnically pure Jewish state are the victimisers, not the victims; those who are being ethnically cleansed are the victims, not the victimisers. The US Congress has it backwards.

Did it not occur to the members of this august group that Netanyahu, after receiving 29 standing ovations, would return to Israel with an imprimatur from the US Congress to continue, or even accelerate, the disenfranchise of the Palestinians?

The day that the Knesset endorsed Oslo II by a majority of one, in 1993, thousands of demonstrators gathered in Zion Square in Jerusalem. While the demonstrators displayed an effigy of Rabin in SS uniform, Netanyahu delivered an inflammatory speech calling Oslo II a surrender agreement and accused Rabin of “causing national humiliation by accepting the dictates of the terrorist Arafat”. A month later, in November 1995, Rabin was assassinated by a religious-nationalist Jewish fanatic with the explicit aim of derailing the peace process. Rabin’s demise, as his murderer expected, dealt a serious body blow to the entire peace process.

There is a YouTube video, from 2002, of Netanyahu seated on a couch in the home of an Israeli family, unwittingly on camera, and bragging that he was able to destroy Oslo, and that he deceived the US president at that time, Bill Clinton, into believing he was helping implement the Oslo Accords by making minor withdrawals from the West Bank while actually entrenching the occupation. He boasts that he thereby destroyed the Oslo process.

He dismisses the US as “easily moved to the right direction” and calls high levels of popular American support for Israel “absurd”.

He also suggests that, far from being defensive, Israel’s harsh military repression of the Palestinian uprising was designed chiefly to crush the Palestinian Authority led by Yasser Arafat so that it could be made more pliable to Israeli diktat.

Netanyahu is playing the US Congress for fools.

Days before he received 29 standing ovations in Washington, Netanyahu sat in the Oval Office with the US president and told him that he would not accept 1967 borders as the basis of a solution. The 1967 borders basis for a settlement has been the consistent American position since the 1967 war (ie for 45 years), and under both Democrat and Republican presidents.

Netanyahu told the US president that Israel needed most of the West Bank because otherwise Israel would be militarily vulnerable, and also an indefinitely long presence in the Jordan Valley, because otherwise Israel would be militarily vulnerable. Of course, Netanyahu has a consistent policy of ethnically cleansing Jerusalem of Palestinians because it was given to Jews by God, or because it is the Jewish birth right. That leaves very little for the Palestinians, does it not? The original inhabitants of Palestine, the Palestinians, were promised statehood by the British Mandate for Palestine.

It is not true, by the way, that Jews were building the city of Jerusalem 3000 years ago, as Netanyahu repeatedly claims, and even if it were, it would not override international law’s injunction against ethnic cleansing. The archaeologists tell us that Jerusalem was an abandoned village 3000 years ago surrounded by a small agrarian population. This is during the purported time of David and Solomon and the purported United Kingdom. Jerusalem did not achieve any significance until the eighth century BC and then as the continuous development of a Palestinian settlement from which artefacts have been discovered representing a variety of Palestinians deities of which Yahweh was only one of several. There is not one shred of evidence for a Jewish temple dating from 3000 years ago, or any other significant engineering structures from that time.

Furthermore, it is unlikely that Netanyahu, or any other Israeli who claims to be derived from God’s Chosen People, possesses any genetic connection to the ancient Judeans. The burden of proof is on Netanyahu to produce a verifiable pedigree or genealogical tree stretching back 3000 years into the Iron Age. In fact, no living person is able to do that.

Netanyahu derives from European Jewish ancestry, who, in turn, derive mostly from the Russian Khazars, those living near the Volga and Don Rivers, who converted en masse to Judaism in the ninth century AD bringing a much larger population to Judaic belief than any population of Judeans of the ancient world, or their descendants.

Paul Wexler, a philological archaeologist at Tel Aviv University, in his book, The Non-Jewish Origin of the Sephardic Jews, writes that Hebrew and Aramaic made their appearance in European Jewish text only in the 10th century AD, and were not products of earlier linguistic developments. During the first millennium AD, Jewish believers in Europe knew no Hebrew or Aramaic. Only after the religious canonisation of Arabic in Islam and Latin in Christianity did Judaism adopt and propagate its own religious language as a high cultural code.

It is as likely that Adolf Hitler is a descendant of the ancient Judeans as is Netanyahu, for all anyone knows.

The locus of the present day conflict in Palestine may not be in Palestine but in Washington, DC, and in the US Congress, because the US Congress supports, probably unwittingly for the most part, the ethnic cleansing and destruction of the Palestinian people.

Source : Dissident Voice


William James Martin has written many articles on the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Middle East. He can be reached at : wjm20@caa.columbia.edu.

Read more by William
■Zionism for Dummies
 
Trump Welcomes Israel’s Illegal Plan to Annex West Bank Amid Growing Anger

Link: https://www.globalresearch.ca/trump...an-annex-west-bank-amid-growing-anger/5711649

By The New Arab
Global Research, May 04, 2020
The New Arab 28 April 2020

The US announced it is willing to recognise and support Israel’s annexation of parts of the occupied West Bank shortly after Israel announced its illegal plan.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday vowed to go ahead with controversial annexations that analysts say takes Israel’s illegal occupation of the West Bank a step further.

The step was welcomed by the Trump administration, which has a track record for supporting Israel’s illegal settlements and plans for annexation.

“As we have made consistently clear, we are prepared to recognise Israeli actions to extend Israeli sovereignty and the application of Israeli law to areas of the West Bank that the vision foresees as being part of the State of Israel,” a US State Department spokesperson said on Monday.

The spokesperson added that the illegal annexation will be “in the context of the government of Israel agreeing to negotiate with the Palestinians along the lines set forth in President Trump’s Vision.”

The annexation plan comes after Netanyahu and his political rival Benny Gantz signed a deal for a unity government that could accelerate the premier’s plans to annex parts of the West Bank in the coming months.

In response, the Arab League will host an emergency meeting on Thursday to discuss how to galvanise opposition to the plan.

Track record of Israel support

Palestinians have deplored Washington’s approach, saying the Trump administration acts overtly favourable to Israel since the US recognised Jerusalem as the so-called capital of Israel.

Last month, the US described East Jerusalem Palestinians as “Arab residents” or “non-Israeli citizens” in an annual global human rights report, changing from the previously used “Palestinian residents” description.

After unilaterally recognising Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in December 2017 and its annexation of the Golan from Syria in March 2019, Trump in late January 2020 unveiled a peace plan for the Middle East that included many concessions to Israel.

The peace plan says it would let Israel annex a third of the West Bank, inside which are hundreds of illegal settlements along with the Jordan Valley.

It would give the Palestinians limited autonomy in a small archipelago of territory with a capital on the outskirts of Jerusalem, but only if they meet the near impossible conditions set out by Trump.

Under the plan, Israel would retain control of the disputed city of Jerusalem as its “undivided capital”, and annex settlements on Palestinian lands. Palestinians however want all of east Jerusalem to be the capital of any future state.

*

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.

Featured image is from Abiyamo

READ MORE:US Smooths Israel’s Path to Annexing West Bank
 
Israel Wins U.S. Election

Congress and White House work together to reward the Jewish state

By Philip Giraldi

Link: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/55820.htm

November 03, 2020 "Information Clearing House" - The U.S. election will end today, more or less, and we Americans will suffer another four years of putting up with serial nonsense out of a White House and Congress that could care less about us no matter who is elected. Whether the party where everything changes or the party where everything remains the same wins the inevitable result will be further aggrandizement of authoritarian power combined with increased distancing of government from the people who are ruled.

Amidst all the gloom, however, there is one great success story. That is the tale of how Israel and its friends in politics and financial circles have been able to screw every possible advantage out of both major parties simultaneously and apparently effortlessly. Israel might be the true undisputed winner in the 2020 election even though it was not on the ballot and was hardly mentioned at all during the campaign.

Jewish billionaires with close ties to Israel have been courted by the two major parties, both to come up with contributions and to urge their friends in the oligarch club and media to also respond favorably. The Democrats’ largest single donor is entertainment mogul Haim Saban while the Republicans rely on casino multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson. It is estimated that 60% of the political contributions for the Democrats comes from Jewish sources and Saban is the single largest contributor. He is also an Israeli holding dual citizenship. Adelson, who may also hold dual citizenship and is married to an Israeli, is the major supporter of the Republicans, having coughed up more than $100 million in recent elections.

Both Saban and Adelson have not been shy about supporting Israel as their first priority. Saban is on record as supporting Joe Biden “because of his track record on supporting Israel and its alliance with the United States.” Adelson, who was drafted into the U.S. Army in the 1950s, has said that he would much rather have served in the Israel Defense Force. Saban and Adelson are joined in their love fest with Israel by a number of Israel-firsters in Congress and the Administration, all eager to shower unlimited political support, money and weapons on the Jewish state.

In the latest manifestation of noblesse oblige, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper stopped off in Israel last week to present his counterparts with a significant bit of assistance, all funded by the American taxpayer, of course. According to sources in Washington and Jerusalem, the U.S. “will grant Israel direct access to highly classified satellites such as the missile detection birds known as SBIRS and ensure Israel gets critical defense platforms in a very short time by using production slots planned for the U.S armed forces.” Israel will also be given “deeper access to the core avionic systems” of the new F-35 fighter that it has been obtaining from Washington.

The claimed rationale for the upgrade is the Congressionally mandated requirement for the U.S. to maintain Israel’s “qualitative military edge” in light of the impending sale of the F-35 to Arab states that have recently established diplomatic relations with Israel. At the time, Israeli sources were suggesting that the Jewish state might need $8 billion in new military hardware upgrades to maintain its advantage over its neighbors. It is presumed that the American taxpayer will foot the bill, even though there is a serious financial crisis going on in the U.S.

The satellite detection system operates from aerial platforms that are deployed on helicopters. The astute reader will notice that no U.S. security interest is involved in the latest giveaway to Israel. On the contrary, Israel will be receiving material from “production slots planned for the U.S. armed forces,” reducing America’s own ability to detect incoming missiles. And there will also be considerable damage to American defense interests in that Israel will inevitably steal the advanced F-35 technology that they will be given access to, re-engineer it for their own defense industries and sell it to clients in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. They have done so before, selling U.S. developed missile technology to China.

Congress is also doing its bit. A bill, the so-called “U.S.-Israel Common Defense Authorization Act,” is making its way through the House of Representatives and will authorize the provision of U.S. manufactured bunker buster bombs to Israel. As the bombs would only be useful in Israel’s neighborhood to bomb hardened sites in Iran, the message being sent is obvious. The Massive Ordnance Penetrator weighs 30,000 pounds and is capable of destroying targets located deep underground. Oddly, Israel doesn’t have a plane capable of carrying that weight so the presumption is that the White House will also have to provide the bomber. The bill is co-sponsored by two leading Israel firsters in Congress Democrat Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey and Republican Brian Mast of Florida.

Israel is also seeking an upgrade of some of its other fighter aircraft. It reportedly has approached the Pentagon seeking to buy the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor, a single-seat, twin-engine, all-weather stealth tactical fighter aircraft that was originally developed for the United States Air Force (USAF). Its stealth capability, top speed, maneuverability combined with advanced air-to-air and air-to-ground weapon systems, makes it the best air superiority fighter in the world.

Unfortunately for Israel, the F-22 is not currently available and is only operated by the USAF. Current U.S. federal law prohibits the export of the plane to anyone to protect its top secret advanced stealth technology as well as a number of advances in weaponry and situational awareness. But if deference to Israel’s wishes is anything to go by, one might safely bet that the Jewish state will have received approval to acquire the plane by inauguration day in January. And it is a safe bet that Israeli defense contractors will have reverse engineered the stealth and other features soon thereafter.

The U.S. government has been pandering to Israel in other ways, to include labeling, and sanctioning, prominent human rights groups that have criticized the Jewish state as anti-Semitic. It has also strengthened existing sanctions against Iranian financial institutions , reportedly in an attempt to make it more difficult for a President Biden to reinstate the suspended Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) that sought to monitor the Iranian nuclear program. The sanctions come on top of other moves to destroy the Iranian economy, to include “…that the U.S., along with Israel, has in recent months carried out sabotage attacks inside Iran, destroying power plants, aluminum and chemical factories, a medical clinic and 7 ships at the port of Bushehr…”

Other recent developments favoring Israel include Congress’s legislating Israeli government veto authority over U.S. sales of weapons to any other Middle Eastern nation. The bill is called “Guaranteeing Israel’s QME [Qualitative Military Edge] Act of 2020” (H.R. 8494). There has also been the expansion by Executive Order of U.S. funded illegal West Bank Jewish settlements’ science development projects that will eventually compete with American companies.

In truth, the United States has become Israel’s bitch and there is hardly a politician or journalist who has the courage to say so. Congress and the media have been so corrupted by money emanating from the Israeli lobby that they cannot do enough to satisfy America’s rulers in Jerusalem. And for those who do not succumb to the money there is always intimidation, career-ending weaponized accusations of holocaust-denial and anti-Semitism. It is all designed to produce one result: whoever wins in American elections doesn’t matter as long as Israel gets what it wants. And it almost always gets what it wants.
 
Senior Trump Official: Politicians Get ‘Very Rich’ by Supporting Israel

 Alison Weir  November 14, 2020

Link: https://israelpalestinenews.org/sen...liticians-get-very-rich-by-supporting-israel/

Retired Army Col. Douglas Macgregor in a meeting with Israeli army officials. (Ha’aretz)

Col.Douglas Macgregor, one of several Trump loyalists recently installed at the Pentagon, says the pro-Israeli lobby in the United States is trying to drag America into war

By Amir Tibon, reposted from Ha’aretz

Senior U.S. Defense official Douglas Macgregor, who was recently installed at the Pentagon by partisan loyalists of President Donald Trump, has come under fire for saying that American politicians become “very, very rich” by supporting Israel, with pro-Israeli organizations calling his remarks “antisemitic.”

In 2019, Washington was rattled after Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN) virtually made the exact same remark, tweeting that support for Israel in the United States was “all about the Benjamins,” referring to Benjamin Franklin, whose image appears on $100 bills.

Omar was denounced by members of Congress from both parties, and was accused of spreading antisemitism by Jewish American organizations, as well as by Trump.

However, as of Saturday morning, leading Republican senators, who denounced Omar’s comments almost immediately in 2019, had all remained silent about Macgregor’s comments.

Macgregor, a retired Army Col., went even further than Omar, bluntly claiming that politicians who support Israel are only driven by money, and that the pro-Israeli lobby in the U.S. is trying to drag America into war.

Macgregor was appointed adviser to Trump’s new acting secretary of defense, Christopher Miller. His appointment is part of a purge of professional, non-partisan leaders in the Department of Defense, and their replacement by fervent Trump loyalists, which has been taking place since Trump was projected to have lost the presidential election to Joe Biden last week.

Macgregor’s remarks regarding the influence of the pro-Israeli lobby in the U.S. were first reported on Friday by CNN. The network quoted an interview Macgregor gave last year, in which he said Secretary of State Mike Pompeo “has his hands out for money from the Israeli lobby, the Saudis and others.”

Speaking about Trump’s former national security adviser, John Bolton, who like Pompeo is a strong supporter of the Israeli right-wing and the settlements enterprise, Macgregor said: “Mr. Bolton has become very, very rich and is in the position he’s in because of his unconditional support for the Israeli lobby. He is their man on the ground, in the White House.”

When asked whether politicians who are known for their support for Israel, such as Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), want to go to war with Iran, Macgregor replied: “You have to look at the people that donate to those individuals.”

He added that AIPAC has “enormous quantities of money that over many years have cultivated an enormous influence in power in Congress.”

Earlier this year, Trump had nominated Macgregor as U.S. ambassador to Germany, but his nomination was stalled after media outlets reported on statements that he made in which he criticized the German government.

It remains unclear why Trump has pushed in recent days for a complete leadership overhaul at the Pentagon. One possible explanation suggested by several leading U.S. media outlets is that the defeated Trump wants to complete the withdrawal of all American forces out of Afghanistan, and potentially also out of Syria, before leaving office. Macgregor has expressed support for such moves in the past.

Slamming Macgregor’s remarks, Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL), one of the most prominent Jewish members of Congress, wrote on Twitter: “The only appropriate response from this White House to these antisemitic comments from someone with a distorted idea of the Holocaust must be a swift firing and complete condemnation.”

Echoing Deutch’s sentiments, Jonathan Greenblatt of the Anti-Defamation League warned that “There is no place in our government for these ugly, antisemitic conspiracy theories that wealthy Jews are controlling the government.”

AIPAC, considered the most powerful pro-Israel lobby in the U.S., called Macgregor’s comments “ill-informed and illegitimate” and said that his words will not deter the organization from continuing its work.

Editor’s note: The Times of Israel reports:

“In a 2012 interview with the Russian state outlet RT, Macgregor said the pro-Israel lobby had “enormous influence” and wanted military action to be taken against Iran.

“I think the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee [AIPAC] and its subordinate elements or affiliated elements that represent enormous quantities of money that over many years have cultivated an enormous influence in power in Congress,” he said.

“I think you’ve got a lot of people on the Hill who fall into two categories — one category that is interested in money and wants to be reelected, and they don’t want to run the risk of the various lobbies that are pushing military action against Iran to contribute money to their opponents,” Macgregor said.


Amir Tibon is the assignments editor and U.S. news editor for Haaretz


RELATED:
•Israel played ‘key role’ in pushing war against Iraq
•Oil for Israel: The Truth about the Iraq War, 15 Years Later
•Wilkerson says ‘Israel’s security’ was motive for Iraq war– though not in NYT op-ed
•How pro-Israel neocons pushed for war in Iraq [VIDEO]
•The Transparent Cabal: The Neoconservative Agenda, War in the Middle East, and the National Interest of Israel
•Questionable Israeli intelligence sparks dangerous crisis with Iran
•NPR misleads public in report on AIPAC vs Ilhan Omar
•Yet Another Senator from Israel: Cory Booker shines at AIPAC
 
During 1957 Suez Crisis Eisenhower Lamented U.S. Middle East Policy Was Already ‘Controlled By Jewish Influence’

November 25, 2020 By CFT Team —10 Comments

Link: https://christiansfortruth.com/duri...y-was-already-controlled-by-jewish-influence/

Like all U.S. presidents inevitably come to realize, during the ‘Suez Crisis’ of 1957 when Israel — aided and abetted by England and France –invaded Egypt, Dwight Eisenhower learned the hard way that it was Jewish power in the U.S. that dictated foreign policy in the Middle East, not “principles” or even his own State Department:

“Former President Eisenhower has revealed in his new book, “The White House Years: Waging Peace 1956-1961,” that, in order to pressure Israel into withdrawal from the Sinai in 1957, he preferred “a resolution which would call on all United Nations members to suspend not just governmental but private assistance to Israel.”

Mr. Eisenhower said “such a move would be no hollow gesture. As we discussed it, George Humphrey, then Secretary of the Treasury, put in a call to W. Randolph Burgess, Under Secretary of the Treasury for monetary affairs, who gave a rough estimate that American private gifts to Israel were about $40, 000, 000 a year and sales of Israel bonds in our country between $50, 000, 000 and $60, 000, 000 a year. His information was in part based on Treasury figures on income tax deductions.”

Mr. Eisenhower revealed that Secretary of State John Foster Dulles “strongly expressed the view that we had gone as far as possible to try to make it easy for the Israelis to withdraw. To go further, he said, would surely Jeopardize the entire Western influence in the Middle East, and the nations of that region would conclude that United States policy toward the area was, in the last analysis, controlled by Jewish influence in the United States. In such event, the only hope of the Arab countries would be found in a firm association with the Soviet Union.”

A charge was made by the former President that Congressional leaders who met with him on the Israeli withdrawal issue were motivated by “politics.” He recalled that both Lyndon B. Johnson, then Senate Majority Leader, and William F. Knowland, then Minority leader, argued that, in “cracking down” on Israel we are using a double standard–following one policy for the strong and one for the weak.” They contrasted the Administration’s pressure on Israel with its failure to act strongly on Hungary.

(When President Eisenhower communicated his plan for sanctions against Israel to Senate leaders, the then Sen. Johnson called on Mr. Eisehower and bluntly informed him that the Senate would not approve economic sanctions against Israel. The outspoken Texan told the Eisenhower Administration that threats to impose sanctions on Israel were unwise and unfair, and that he was against “pressure on one side in a two-sided dispute.” Deploring the attempted “coercion” of Israel as a “method of settlement,” Mr. Johnson told the Eisenhower Administration it had lost sight of the basic facts in the Israel-Arab dispute.)

A White House staff member termed the meeting with the Congressional leaders “a can of worms,” Mr. Eisenhower said. He “reflected on the pettiness” of those reluctant to sanction Israel. He found it “somewhat disheartening that partisan considerations could enter.” The “question of principle,” in Mr. Eisenhower’s thinking was: “Should a nation which attacks and occupies foreign territory in the face of United Nations disapproval be allowed to impose conditions on its own withdrawal?”

Six years later — in Dallas in November 1963 — Lyndon Johnson saw first-hand just how “unwise” it was for a sitting U.S. president to attempt to impose sanctions on Israel — after John F. Kennedy strictly forbade Israel from acquiring nuclear weapons.

But LBJ owed his entire political career to being a bagman for American Jewry — first helping illegally smuggle eastern European Jews into America through the port of Galveston, Texas, when he worked as legislative assistant of Congressman Richard M. Kleberg, a wealthy Jewish merchant and landowner.

Like Johnson, Eisenhower had also made his career under the tutelage of the powerful Bernard Baruch — and ensured his presidential aspirations by imposing “peace” terms on Germany pleasing to international Jewry which had orchestrated the war from its beginnings.

That same year — 1957 — Eisenhower, clearly at the behest of his Jewish backers — asked the U.S. Congress to change U.S. immigration policy to allow the U.S. to be flooded by Jewish ‘refugees” intent on escaping communism in Eastern Europe — after creating it themselves.

But even after a lifetime doing the unprincipled bidding of Jewry, Eisenhower found out in just how quickly they would cut him off at the knees if he dared cross them — his “questions of principle” be damned.

Some relevant quotes:

“I’ve never seen a President — I don’t care who he is — stand up to the Jews. They always get what they want. If the American people understood what a grip these people have got on our government, they would rise up in arms.
—Admiral Thomas Moorer, Chairman, U.S.. Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1970-74

Above all, propaganda here [in the U.S.A.] is entirely in Jewish hands. When bearing public ignorance in mind, their propaganda is so effective that people have no real knowledge of the true state of affairs in Europe. President Roosevelt has been given the power to create huge reserves in armaments for a future war which the Jews are deliberately heading for.
—Count Jerzy Potocki, Polish Ambassador to the U.S.A., 1934

I believe now that Hitler and the German people did not want war. But we declared war on Germany, intent on destroying it, in accordance with our principle of balance of power, and we were encouraged by the Jews around Roosevelt. We ignored Hitler’s pleadings not to enter into war. Now we are forced to realize that Hitler was right.
—Sir Harley Shawcross, British Attorney General, Senior Nuremberg Prosecutor, March 16, 1984

While the Zionists try to make the rest of the World believe that the national consciousness of the Jew finds its satisfaction in the creation of a Palestinian state, the Jews again slyly dupe the dumb Goyim. It doesn’t even enter their heads to build up a Jewish state in Palestine for the purpose of living there; all they want is a central organization for their international world swindler, endowed with its own sovereign rights and removed from the intervention of other states: a haven for convicted scoundrels and a university for budding crooks.
—Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

“How does it feel, in the light of all that’s going on , to be the father of terrorism in the Middle East?”
“In the Middle East?” Begin bellowed, in his thick cartoon accent, “In all the world!”
–Menachem Begin to Russell Warren Howe, interview Jan. 1974

The Jews have no sense of proportion nor do they have any judgment on world affairs….The Jews, I find, are very, very selfish. They care not how many Estonians, Latvians, Finns, Poles, Yugoslavs or Greeks get murdered or mistreated as D[isplaced] P[erson]s as long as the Jews get special treatment. Yet when they have power, physical, financial or political neither Hitler nor Stalin has anything on them for cruelty or mistreatment to the under dog.
—Harry Truman, 1947 diary entry, concerning Henry Morgenthau, Jr. about Jewish refugee ship ‘Exodus’
 
Vast majority of Dem voters support McCollum bill promoting Palestinian rights, but less than 13% of House Dems back it

A recent survey shows 72% of Democrats support Rep. Betty McCollum's bill promoting Palestinian human rights. However, the legislation is supported by just 28 of the 220 Democrats in the House.

By Michael Arria - June 15, 2021

 Link: https://mondoweiss.net/2021/06/vast...ghts-but-less-than-13-of-house-dems-back-it/

Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN) during hearing on the Department of Agriculture Budget Request for Fiscal Year 2020 at the Rayburn House Office Building, in Washington, D.C., April 9, 2019. (USDA photo by Preston Keres)
Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN) during hearing on the Department of Agriculture Budget Request for Fiscal Year 2020 at the Rayburn House Office Building, in Washington, D.C., April 9, 2019. (USDA photo by Preston Keres)

A recent survey shows that a sizable majority of Democratic voters support Rep. Betty McCollum’s (MN-D) recent bill promoting Palestinian human rights. However, the legislation currently has just 26 cosponsors in the House.

In April, McCollum introduced H.R.2590, the Defending the Human Rights of Palestinian Children and Families Living Under Israeli Military Occupation Act. The bill, which is endorsed by over 75 human rights organizations, aims to block any U.S. funding that would be used by Israel to detain Palestinian children, demolish homes, or annex land. “Congress must stop ignoring the unjust and blatantly cruel mistreatment of Palestinian children and families living under Israeli military occupation,” said McCollum at the time. “I strongly believe there is a growing consensus among the American people that the Palestinian people deserve justice, equality, human rights, and the right to self-determination.”

“Yesterday, congresswoman Betty McCollum introduced a historic groundbreaking bill that demands accountability for Israel’s human rights abuses. pic.twitter.com/OQotEvvQKj
— IMEU (@theIMEU) April 16, 2021

A new poll from Data for Progress indicates that McCollum was correct about the growing consensus. Last month the group explained the details of the bill to 2,100 likely voters and asked them whether they supported or opposed the legislation. They found that 55% of likely voters and 72% of Democrats support the bill. McCollum’s effort is even backed by 36% of Republican voters.

“NEW POLL: 55% of likely voters and 72% of Democrats support @BettyMcCollum04's bill, co-sponsored by @IlhanMN, to restrict Israel’s use of U.S. military aid funding in order to prevent violations of Palestinian human rights.

Toplines: https://t.co/Vka6zfnGnB pic.twitter.com/8qIsgk04zq
— Data for Progress (@DataProgress) June 12, 2021

These findings line up with other recent polls showing that support for Israel is decreasing in the United States, especially among Democrats:

Subscribe to The Shift, a weekly newsletter from Michael Arria tracking the politics of Palestine in the U.S.

•A 2019 Data for Progress poll found that 65% of Democratic voters want to condition U.S. military aid to the country.
•When the Center for American Progress asked voters about the same issue, 71% of Democrats said they wanted aid conditioned.
•A 2020 University of Maryland Critical Issues Poll found that, of the Democrats who had heard of BDS, 48% of them support support the movement.
•Gallup carries out an annual survey of U.S. attitudes towards the Middle East and this year, for the first time, a majority of Democrats said that the U.S. should apply pressure on Israel, not Palestine.

These trends certainly haven’t led to wide support for H.R.2590 among Democratic lawmakers. The worldwide protests over the forced eviction of Palestinians in Sheikh Jarrah and subsequent attack on Gaza did seem to increase the bill’s popularity, with nine House members signing on since May. However, the legislation is supported by just 28 of the 220 Democrats in the House.

Notable members of the Progressive Caucus have yet to back the bill. Including its Deputy Chair Rep. Katie Porter (D-CA), Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-NY), Rep. Andy Levin (D-MI), Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA). The caucus’ only Senator, Bernie Sanders, also hasn’t introduced a companion bill in the upper chamber of congress.

A new petition calling on Congress and Biden to pass H.R. 2590 has already been signed by over 25,000 people.
 

Anti-boycott laws are a dystopian nightmare​

Link: https://mondoweiss.net/2022/10/anti...ian-nightmare/?ml_recipient=68127412378929006

The right to boycott was once enshrined by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1982, but the recent passing of anti-BDS laws in several U.S. states shows how fragile basic civil rights have become.

BY HAMZAH KHAN OCTOBER 4, 2022 2

right-to-boycott.jpg
PROTEST AGAINST THE ISRAEL ANTI-BOYCOTT ACT, 2019. (PHOTO VIA ACLU)
Few things have as much bipartisan support in the U.S. as unconditional support for Israel. Ironically, while criticisms of the U.S. government are protected by the First Amendment, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have made it nearly impossible to criticize Israel without facing tangible consequences like public smearing, and even financial loss. Across the U.S., 34 states — from “blue” states like California and New York to “red” states like Texas and South Carolina — have passed some form of legislation that makes it illegal for the state to contract with businesses and individuals who participate in Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS), a grassroots movement founded by Palestinian civil society that seeks to pressure Israel to abide by international law.

Boycotting now carries a price​

Under the various iterations of anti-boycott laws across the U.S., individuals and businesses that do partake in the BDS movement risk financial retaliation, like Unilever did in New Jersey, or public smear campaigns and accusations of antisemitism. Proponents of the anti-boycott law claim that it combats antisemitism, but most of the laws explicitly target the BDS movement, which condemns antisemitism. These anti-BDS laws have been wielded to disastrous effect, with state governments targeting individuals and companies alike who seek to exercise their right to boycott an apartheid state. By punishing boycotts of Israel, U.S. legislators encroach on Americans’ First Amendment rights.
Many of the state anti-BDS laws require anyone contracting with the state or any federal employees to sign a non-boycott pledge. Just weeks ago, in June, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an anti-BDS law in Arkansas, the first and most senior court to do so thus far.
A local newspaper, The Arkansas Times, was required to sign a pledge not to boycott Israel in order to run ads with the University of Arkansas, a state-funded public university. The newspaper refused to sign the pledge on grounds that it violated free speech. Initially, The Arkansas Times won their case in the district court. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, however, reversed the decision and upheld the law. If the Supreme Court agrees to hear the Arkansas case or even a similar one in the next few years, there is a high probability that the conservative majority will concur with the conservative Eighth Circuit’s opinion and uphold these laws, permanently crippling free speech in this country.
In Georgia, just a few states east of Arkansas, journalist Abby Martin was required to sign a non-boycott pledge in order to speak at a public university, which she refused. And in Arizona, Dr. Hatem Bazian and the American Muslims for Palestine, a grassroots advocacy group dedicated to educating the American public on Palestine, were required to sign a non-boycott pledge in order to hold an event at Arizona State University. The Council on American Islamic Relations filed separate lawsuits on behalf of both plaintiffs. In both cases, the courts struck down the anti-BDS laws on free speech grounds.

In Kansas and Texas, individuals contracting with public schools were also required to sign the pledge.

One Kansas woman, Esther Koontz, sued Kansas Commissioner of Education Randall Watson after she was required to sign a pledge to not participate in boycotts of Israel. The state refused to contract with her when she did not sign the pledge.

In Texas, victims of Hurricane Harvey were required to sign the anti-BDS pledge in order to receive aid from the government. Phil King, the Republican lawmaker who sponsored the bill, later apologized for the way the law was implemented, calling it a “misunderstanding.” But just about a year later, Bahia Amawi, a child language pathologist, lost her job after nine years of employment when she refused to sign a new contract that included an addendum that would prohibit her from boycotting Israel.
Both Kansas and Texas later amended their laws: in Kansas, the anti-boycott certification requirement no longer applies to individuals or sole proprietors — now only applying to companies if they conduct more than $100,000 worth of business with the state.
However, companies that conduct more than said amount of business with the state are required to sign a certification stating that they are “not engaged in a boycott of goods or services from Israel that constitute an integral part of business conducted or sought to be conducted with the state.” Similarly in Texas, the anti-boycott law now excludes companies with nine or fewer full-time employees and contracts under $100,000. Both CAIR and its Houston chapter sued the state of Texas last year to expand the definition of a “company” to “between a governmental entity and a company with 10 or more full-time employees, and has a value of $100,000 or more that is to be paid wholly or partly from public funds of the governmental entity.” The state has appealed the temporary injunction granted, and it is now up to the Fifth Circuit this November.
Many states have also passed laws that pose financial burdens on organizations that allegedly boycott Israel through the creation of blacklists, pension fund divestments, and prohibition of business contracts. Most of the laws target companies that states deem to be engaged in a boycott of Israel, regardless of whether they actually are. In Illinois, the state created blacklists of companies, not only for boycotting Israel on political grounds, but for even refusing to do business with Israel for commercial reasons. Many of the companies on the list were perplexed as to why they could no longer contract with the state as they held no political positions against Israel.
In New Jersey and New York, both states divested state pension funds from Ben & Jerry’s parent company, Unilever, after the ice cream maker announced that it would no longer operate in illegal Israeli settlements. Interestingly, this action was considered a boycott of Israel despite the fact that Ben & Jerry’s continued to operate in the rest of the country.
In Houston, the Council on American Islamic Relations sued the city and Texas Attorney General, Ken Paxton, on behalf of A&R Engineering, a firm that frequently contracted with the city but refused to sign the anti-BDS pledge. The suit was successful, and they won an injunction against the city to waive the requirement. The fact that this clear political act was punished by so many states shows that the government can use the full force of the state to stifle political dissent and find applause within both parties. The majority of anti-BDS laws prohibit states from investing in companies that boycott Israel, significantly hindering the ability of activists to pressure companies to support human rights.
The fact that so many U.S. states have decided to fall on the side of apartheid is a dystopian foreshadowing of the ease with which fundamental rights can be taken away.
While most of the anti-BDS laws have been struck down in court when challenged, the latest ruling from the Eighth Circuit may represent a disturbing shift towards stricter government enforcement against movements that support Palestinian rights. Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton recently introduced an anti-BDS law in Congress that would make it easier for states to implement stricter anti-BDS laws.
Seeing that anti-BDS laws have broad bipartisan support, the likelihood of this bill becoming law is very high.
The right to boycott was protected by the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark case NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co in 1982, in which the court upheld the right of the NAACP to boycott primarily white institutions that segregated between whites and people of color.
Boycotts have long been instrumental to political movements from the Civil Rights Movement in the U.S. to the anti-apartheid boycotts of South Africa. The fact that so many U.S. states have decided to fall on the side of apartheid is a dystopian foreshadowing of the ease with which fundamental rights can be taken away.
 
American 'Conservatism' Practices a Critical Race Theory of Its Own That Boils Down to Jewish Power Uber Alles — the Myth of Conservatism's Defense of Color-Blind Individualism

JUNG-FREUD • OCTOBER 27, 2022

Link: https://www.unz.com/jfreud/american...vatisms-defense-of-color-blind-individualism/

d11515e6fdcfa6cc.png
The dirty secret of America is that ‘conservatives’ have a Critical Race Theory of their own: Philosemitism and Hypocritical-Cuckery or Hypocruckery. ‘Conservatives’ will say that, unlike the ‘left’, they are not obsessed with race and committed to seeing-and-treating people as individuals with agency and responsibility. So, the ‘left’ is all about Identity Politics(usually anti-white), whereas conservatism is about colorblind treatment of all peoples as individuals deserving of equal respect and protection.
But this is utter BS. ‘Conservatives’ don’t believe in equal treatment and dignity for all peoples, to be judged as individuals. No, they bleat about how Jews are so special in history, culture, values, ability, and etc. and therefore, Jews as an Entire Group are deserving of more respect, support, sympathy, praise, protection, favors, love, awe, and etc. Just ask any Palestinian or Syrian if American ‘conservatism’ is about colorblind treatment of all as equals.
In a way, ‘conservative’ version of Critical Race Theory(premised on Jews Uber Alles) is worse than the ‘leftist’ counterparts. Ironically, the so-called ‘leftist’ ones are actually more right-wing, i.e. they are based on tribal pride and empowerment. For blacks, CRT means more pride and power for blacks. For Jews, it means more pride and power for Jews(as if they don’t have enough). This can be said for other non-white groups as well. It’s about OUR interests vs YOUR interests(usually white-whatever).

In contrast, ‘conservative’ CRT is a wussy version of liberalism, or wiberalism. It’s about white people suppressing white pride and rejecting the concept of white power so as to meekly appeal to Jews, blacks, and nonwhites to adopt colorblind individualism. This might be viable IF Jews, blacks, and nonwhites showed any interest in adopting colorblindness for themselves, but there’s no such sign. Thus, it is utterly useless.
But it’s far worse. If, at the very least, ‘conservatives’ truly promoted colorblind individualism for all, they could in good faith argue that they are opposed to the dynamics of Critical Race Theory, i.e. they defend the rights and liberties of all individuals regardless of color than promote one group at the expense of others. But even this isn’t true given how American ‘conservatism’ favors and sucks up to Jewish Power uber alles. When have ‘conservatives’ been about colorblind equality between Arab-Americans and Jewish-Americans?
And in foreign policy, when has American ‘conservatism’ been about treating all nations with equal respect? No, the GOP foreign policy has been about defaming, demeaning, demonizing, alienating, and even invading/destroying other nations at the behest of Zionist Jewish Supremacists. If ‘leftist’ CRT is about Jews, blacks, and nonwhites propping up their own pride at the expense of others(especially whites), ‘rightist’ CRT is about whites suppressing their own power/pride and cheering on Jewish pride/power as the apex of Western Values, rather funny given that Jewish Power has been most effective in destroying whatever is left of Western Civilization.

So, if ‘conservatives’ claim to oppose Critical Race Theory on grounds that it favors certain groups at the expense of others and rejects dignity premised on colorblind individualism, they have failed miserably with their own words and actions that clearly favor Jews and Zion uber alles. Consider the cuck-governor Abbot of Texas. He claims to be for free speech and against Big Tech censorship, but he cucked to Zionists and waged war on GAB as an ‘antisemitic’ platform even though the site offers free speech to ALL groups. So, in other words, GAB is evil according to Abbot the ‘cuckservative’ because it offers free speech and equal time to both Jews/Zionists and Palestinians(and detractors of Jewish Power). According to American ‘conservatism’, free speech means JEWS GET TO SAY WHATEVER and those who dare to be critical must be silenced with Censchwarzship. And was Donald Trump any better? Even as Jews spat on him and smeared him with feces, all that the orange buffoon ever did was suck up to Jews and demean Palestinians.
And even on the Dissident Right, there is a tendency to name-drop prominent Jews in the hope that, gee whiz, maybe the superior race will see the light and join with whites. It’s all so pathetic the non-stop swooning of how such-and-such Jew is a Fellow Conservative or Fellow Patriot when most Jewish Conservatives are for Jews Uber Alles at the expense of whites. David Mamet is a good example. He claims to be a libertarian who sees the wrongness of statism, but he’s totally for the US using all its might for Jews Uber Alles and Zionism; and his kind of libertarianism is perfectly fine with Jews amassing tons of cash and using it for Jews Uber Alles. It’s all a con-game on his part. It is time to put to rest the dichotomy of capital vs the state because, in the current climate, both deep pockets and the deep state are little more than the two arms of Jewish Power.
Even though ‘conservatives’ are most obsessed with Jews Uber Alles, they also practice a form of CRT with blacks. A black ‘conservative’ is treated like royalty on the basis of the person’s race. What he says carries more weight simply because he’s black. Kanye West has been a sick moron all his life, but he was praised to high heaven by ‘conservatives’ for donning a MAGA hat. Most ‘conservatives’ look the other way on the issue of black-on-white crime or black crime in general… unless it impacts Jews. Oh, Jewish Lives are so precious, and black violence must be condemned ONLY WHEN it hurts Jews. When blacks were attacking cities and rioting, Trump and Maga-tards were more likely to blame the white Antifa for most of the violence(as if innocent blacks were goaded to act badly by ‘leftist’ whites); it was just another variation of blaming bad black behavior on whites. If ‘leftist’ whites blame ‘racist’ whites, ‘rightist’ whites blame ‘leftist’ whites. Apparently, blacks have no agency to act bad on their own.

According to ‘conservatism’, it was an unforgivable sin for Americans to have discriminated against blacks, BUT it’s totally ‘conservative’ to support Zionist apartheid, Jim Crowitz, and mass brutality against Palestinians. It’s so obvious that ‘conservatives’ practice a group-identity politics when it comes to Jews. Even when ‘conservatives’ acknowledge that Zionists can act brutally, they justify such violence on grounds of History. So, Jews are not to be judged as individuals doing bad things to Palestinians but as a group whose tragic history justifies their harsh oppression of Palestinians and wanton destruction of Arab/Muslim nations(even though the Shoah was the doing of Germans, not the Arab-Semites and Persians). What’s the difference between such philosemitic logic and the justification for black mayhem? You see, it’s ‘muh history’. Blacks are right to riot and loot because of ‘muh history’, and Jews are given license to wreck and destroy entire nations(and ruin millions of lives) because of ‘muh history’.
Apparently, crushing Palestinian aspirations for nation liberation is justified by the Never Again cult. But did Palestinians run the Treblinka camps? The notion that the Holocaust Card gives Jews-as-a-group license to commit countless acts of violence against the world is hardly different from the logic at the core of Identity Politics. So, any ‘conservative’ who claims to oppose and denounce CRT should look in the mirror and abandon his own Philosemitic version of CRT that says Jews as a group should be allowed to run amok as they please because… ‘muh history’.
4d198ab298c99c95.png
Financial de-regulation and national legalization of gambling have led to a massive Jewish looting operation. Insider Jews rig the game and rake in gazillions. And Jewish casino monopoly means goyim are turned into degenerate gamblers and hand over their hard-earned money to Jewish oligarchs like Sheldon Adelson and others who used pressure to get Jewish crooks pardoned from jail. It’s no wonder Jews support BLM. Jews get to loot the economy from the top, and blacks get to loot the economy from the bottom. Jews use their loot to finance black looting, and Jewish Power rubs ‘white guilt’ in all this mess. The understanding between Jews and blacks is Jews will fund and defend black pillaging IF blacks used their demigod status to support Jews and Zionism, thus providing moral cover for what Jews do to Palestinians. “Gee, how can Zionism be bad when Jews are allied with the People of MLK?”
And of course, both are protected by ‘muh history’. We can’t denounce Jewish looting because it’d be ‘antisemitic’, and we can’t denounce black looting because it’d be ‘racist’. Jews are forever the holy holocaust people, and blacks are forever the sacred slavery people, as if genocide only happened to Jews and slavery only happened to blacks. But there it is, Jews have effectively monopolized genocide-sanctity and blacks have monopolized slavery-sanctity(with help from Jews, of course). So, whites are robbed from top and bottom, but what do white ‘conservatives’ have to offer? “Uh duh…. it’s the communists and the Chinese! We must protect rich capitalist Jews from socialists!” “Uh duh… white Antifa are making good decent patriotic blacks riots and loot.” “Uh duh, Joe Biden is an Anti-Semite because he might make a deal with Iran. Israel forever!” Ridiculous.
 
Back
Top