Israel’s outrageous fabrications about the immigration of Arab Jews to Israel in the 1940s and 50s are an attempt to mask the injustices meted out to Palestinians
Israeli propaganda about the “expulsion” of Arab Jews from Arab countries in the late 1940s and early 1950s continues without respite.
Earlier this month, Israel’s UN ambassador, Gilad Erdan, informed UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres that he “intends to submit a draft resolution requiring the international body to hold an annual commemoration for the hundreds of thousands of Jews exiled from Arab countries due to the creation of the State of Israel,” according to a report in Ynet.
The history of Arab Jewish immigration to Israel is not one of expulsion by Arab regimes, but rather one of Israeli criminal actions and conspiracies
Israel’s fabrications about the immigration of Arab Jews to Israel are so outrageous that the country holds a commemoration on 30 November each year.
This date just happens to coincide with the ethnic cleansing by Zionist gangs of Palestine, which began on 30 November 1947, a day after the UN General Assembly adopted the Partition Plan.
The choice of date seeks to implicate Arab Jews in the conquest of Palestine, when most had no role in it.
Erdan alleges that, after the establishment of the Israeli settler-colony, Arab countries “launched a widespread attack against the State of Israel and the thriving Jewish communities that lived within [the Arab world]”.
Israeli fabrications, with which Israel always hoped to force Arab countries into paying Israel billions of dollars, have a second important goal: to exonerate Israel from its original sin of expelling Palestinians in 1948 and stealing their land and property.
In December 1948, the UN General Assembly mandated that Palestinian refugees be allowed to return home and that they be compensated for the destruction and theft of their property by Israel.
Israel not only wants to hold on to all of those lands, but to extort Arab countries to pay out billions more.
These ideological pitfalls aside, the history of Arab Jewish emigration to Israel is not one of expulsion by Arab regimes, but rather one of Israeli criminal actions that forced Jews in Yemen, Iraq, Morocco, Egypt and other countries to leave for Israel.
In 1949, the Israeli government was working assiduously with British colonial authorities in Aden and with Yemeni officials to airlift Yemeni Jews to Israel.
While the League of Arab States had resolved to ban the emigration of Arab Jews to Israel, Yemen’s imam allowed Jews to leave as early as February 1949, with the help of Zionist emissaries and Israeli bribes to provincial Yemeni rulers, according to prominent Israeli historian Tom Segev’s book: 1949: The First Israelis.
Some provincial rulers asked that at least 2,000 Jews remain, as it was the religious duty of Muslims to protect them, but the Zionist emissary insisted that it was a Jewish religious “commandment” for them to go to the “Land of Israel”.
The fact that Israel’s prime minister at the time was David Ben Gurion also suggested to many that Israel “was the kingdom of David,” according to Segev and other sources.
Tens of thousands of Jews were urged to leave their homes and travel to Israel.
As for the Jews who opted to stay, the Jewish emissary in Aden, Shlomo Schmidt, asked permission to propose that Yemeni authorities expel them, but Yemeni authorities did not.
Some of the luggage of the departing Jews, including ancient Torah scrolls, jewellery and embroidered garments, which they were encouraged to bring with them, disappeared en route and mysteriously “made their way to antique and souvenir shops in Israel,” according to Segev and other sources.
About 50,000 Yemeni Jews were essentially removed from Yemen by the Israelis in 1949 and 1950 to face institutionalised Ashkenazi discrimination in Israel.
This included the abduction of hundreds of Yemeni children from their parents, who were told the children died; the children were then allegedly handed over for adoption to Ashkenazi couples.
Arab rulers and Israel’s leaders: A long and secret history of cooperation
Zionists were also active in bringing about the emigration of Morocco’s Jews to Israel. Morocco was under French colonial occupation at the time, so the Jewish Agency had to strike an agreement with the French governor of Morocco to bring about the emigration of Moroccan Jews, who had to face horrific conditions on Israeli ships, according to Segev and other sources.
Some of the 100,000 Jews who left, according to the Jewish Agency emissary, had to be virtually “taken aboard the ships by force”.
Meanwhile, the Iraqi government of Nuri al-Said, Britain’s strongman in the Arab east, was maligned by Israeli propaganda that it was persecuting Jews, when in fact these were Israeli fabrications. Zionist agents had been active in Iraq, smuggling Jews through Iran to Israel, which led to the prosecution of a handful of Zionists.
Then, attacks on Iraqi Jews began, including at the Masuda Shemtov synagogue in Baghdad, killing four Jews and wounding around a dozen more.
Some Iraqi Jews believed that this was the work of Mossad agents, aiming to scare Jews into leaving the country. Iraqi authorities accused and executed two activists from the Zionist underground.
Amid Israel’s global campaign to pressure Iraq into allowing Jews to leave – which led to Israeli attempts to block a World Bank loan to Iraq, accompanied by American and British pressure – the Iraqi parliament relented and issued a law permitting Jews to leave.
Zionist agents in Iraq telegraphed their handler in Tel Aviv: “We are carrying on our usual activity in order to push the law through faster.” Iraq’s 120,000 Jews were thus soon transferred to Israel.
Targeting western interests
Among Egypt’s relatively small Jewish community, an even smaller number were Ashkenazi (mostly from Alsace and Russia) who arrived since the 1880s.
The larger community consisted of Sephardi Jews who arrived during the same period from Turkey, Iraq and Syria, in addition to the tiny community of Karaite Jews.
Zionist activism among the small community of Ashkenazi Jews in Egypt led some to go to Palestine before 1948.
However, it was after the establishment of Israel that many of Egypt’s upper-class Jews began to leave to France, not Israel.
Nonetheless, the community remained essentially intact until Israel intervened in 1954, recruiting Egyptian Jews for an Israeli terrorist cell that placed bombs in Egyptian cinemas, the Cairo train station as well as American and British educational institutions and libraries.
The Israelis hoped that by targeting western interests in Egypt, they could sour the then-friendly relations between Egypt’s president and the Americans.
Egyptian intelligence uncovered the Israeli terrorist ring and tried the accused in open court.
The Israelis mounted an international campaign against Egypt and president Gamal Abdel Nasser, who was dubbed “Hitler on the Nile” by the Israeli and western press, while Israeli agents shot at the Egyptian consulate in New York, according to David Hirst’s book The Gun and the Olive Branch and other sources.
When Israel joined the British-French conspiracy to invade Egypt in 1956, and after its military occupation of the Sinai Peninsula, public rage ensued against the settler-colony
Combined with the new socialist and nationalist campaign of Egyptianizing investments in the country, many rich businessmen began to sell their businesses and leave.
By the time nationalization began in the late 1950s and early 1960s, most of the nationalized businesses were in fact owned by Egyptian Muslims and Christians, not Jews. It was in this context, and in the context of public rage against Israel, that many Egyptian Jews got scared and left after 1954 to the US and France, while the poor ended up in Israel (as recounted in Joel Beinin’s Dispersion of Egyptian Jewry).
When Israel joined the British-French conspiracy to invade Egypt in 1956, and after its military occupation of the Sinai Peninsula, public rage ensued against the settler-colony. The Egyptian government detained about 1,000 Jews, half of whom were Egyptian citizens, according to Beinin, and Egypt’s small Jewish community began to leave in droves. On the eve of Israel’s second invasion of Egypt in 1967, only 7,000 Jews remained in the country.
Despite Israeli culpability in bringing about the exodus of Arab Jews from their countries, the Israeli government continues to blame it on Arab governments.
As for the property of Arab Jews, indeed, they should be fully entitled to it and/or to compensation – not on account of some fabricated expulsion narrative that serves the interests of the Israeli state, but on account of their actual ownership.
Contrary to Israeli propaganda that there was a population swap, it is notable that while European and Arab Jews who emigrated to Israel were given the stolen land and properties of expelled Palestinians free of charge, according to Israeli historian Benny Morris and other sources, the Palestinians did not receive the property of the Arab Jews who migrated to Israel.
Indeed, the Palestine Liberation Organization, which in 1974 received recognition by the Arab League and the UN as “the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people,” was very aware of this Israeli strategy.
Understanding that the emigration of Arab Jews to Israel was a boon to the Israeli settler-colony, the PLO demanded, in a much-publicised 1975 memorandum to the Arab governments whose Jewish populations had left to Israel, that they issue formal and public invitations for Arab Jews to return home.
Notably, none of the governments and regimes in power in 1975 were in office when the Jews left between 1949 and 1967.
Neither Israel nor its Arab Jewish communities heeded the calls.
All this aside, there is the matter of Israel’s unceasing attempts to equate the financial losses of Arab Jews with those of Palestinian refugees.
A conservative official Israeli estimate comparing Palestinian property losses to Arab Jewish property losses gave a ratio of 22 to one in favour of Palestinians – despite Israel’s gross overestimation of Arab Jewish losses and even grosser underestimation of Palestinian losses.
How the Arab League helped dissolve the Palestinian question
Researchers’ conservative estimates of Palestinian refugee losses amount to more than $300bn in 2008 prices, excluding damages for psychological pain and suffering, which would raise the total substantially.
This excludes the losses in confiscated land and property for Palestinian citizens of Israel since 1948, and the losses incurred by Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem since 1967.
Whereas none of the Arab regimes in power when Arab Jews emigrated to Israel exists today, the same Israeli colonial-settler regime that expelled the Palestinian people and engineered the exodus of Arab Jews from their countries remains in power.
Yet, in his letter, Erdan complains that “it is infuriating to see the UN mark a special day and devote a lot of resources for the issue of ‘Palestinian refugees,’ while abandoning and ignoring hundreds of thousands of Jewish families deported from Arab countries and Iran”.
The irony of Erdan’s letter is that it demands that the Israeli regime be financially and morally rewarded for the crimes it has committed over the last seven decades.
Palestine: Actions by Israeli governments may amount to international crimes-Independent Commission
These Israelis in the audience are there to protest the topic of Palestine. Period. Something personal for me..Israelis look stupid, sound stupid and ask rhetorical questions to waste time and disrupt the meeting.
Speakers: Ms. Navanethem Pillay (Chair), along with members, Mr. Miloon Kothari and Mr. Chris Sidoti.
After presenting the report of the Independent Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem ad in Israel to the General Assembly today (27 Oct), the Chair of the Commission, Navanethem Pillay, told reporters in New York that “the policies and actions by Israeli governments may amount international crimes.”
Pillay, a former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights said these crimes include “transferring, directly or indirectly, part of one’s own civilian population into the occupied territory, and the crime against humanity, of deportation and forcible transfer.”
She said, “some of Israel’s policies and actions in the West Bank are only cosmetically intended to address the so called security concerns, and that security is often used as a pretext by Israel to justify territorial expansion.”
Asked about statements made by Israel’s Ambassador Gilad Erdan, Pillay said, “I am not antisemitic, let me make that clear.
And then to add insult to injury, they said that the report is also antisemitic.
Now, there isn’t a word in this report that can even be interpreted as antisemitic.
So, of course, it’s not new to us that this is always raised as diversion.”
Asked about including apartheid into the scope of the Commission’s investigations, the Chair said, “in this report, we are focusing on the root cause as we see it, which is the occupation.
And of course, part of it is lies in the apartheid and discrimination.
We will be coming to that.
That’s the beauty of this open ended mandate.
It gives us a scope to go in depth on too many issues and apartheid would be one of them.”
Miloon Kothari, a member of the Commission of Inquiry, said, “there’s a number of immediate steps that could be taken,” but added that “in fact, in our report, we say clearly that there are no sign of the occupation, being, you know, either slowed down or reversed, if anything, Israel has taken the decision that it’s that’s how it’s going to be, it’s going to be permanent.”
Responding to a journalist, another member of the Commission, Chris Sidoti, said, “our report in June did refer to the Hamas rocket attacks.
Indiscriminate firing of rockets into civilian population areas is a war crime.
We said that.
And there is no doubt about that, as a fact.
The obligations under international humanitarian law and international human rights law, bind all those exercising some form of state authority in Israel, the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and Gaza, and we will deal with it.”
Earlier today, in her address to the General Assembly’s Third Committee, Pillay said, “after 55 years, Israel is treating the occupation as a permanent fixture, and has for all intents and purposes annexed part of the West Bank, while seeking to hide behind a fiction of temporariness.
This permanence and annexation, including the purported de jure annexation, of East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights have led this permission to conclude that Israel’s occupation is now unlawful.”
Before her interventions, Erdan gave a statement outside the Security Council referred to the Commission of Inquiry’s report as “a vicious compilation of lies, bashing the only liberal democracy in the Middle East” He said, “this time the UN and its bodies have hit a new low.
The Commission of Inquiry Report being presented is a one-sided, terror-whitewashing, and morally bankrupt document that does nothing, nothing remotely productive for the Palestinians or the region.
In fact, it only makes matters worse, he chose the terrorists of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the true oppressors of the Palestinian people, that terror pays off.”
Erdan said, “the sole purpose of this report, its authors and the very commission itself is to demonize and delegitimize the one and only Jewish state. You know, there is a word for the racist hatred of Jews, antisemitism.”
Hamas conducted a large-scale rocket attack from southern Lebanon into Israel on April 6 possibly as part of the larger pattern of escalation between Iran and Israel occurring throughout 2023.
Palestine is an Arab country located in Asia on the eastern Mediterranean coast, which is known also as the Levant. It is bordered by Jordan to the east, Lebanon to the north, and the Red Sea and Sinai, Egypt to the south. In the west, the Mediterranean Sea acts as a bridge connecting Africa, Asia, and Europe.
APRIL 6, 2023
Hamas and other unidentified Palestinian militants launched at least 34 rockets into northern Israel, with four landing in Israeli territory and injuring at least three people.
Israeli forces intercepted around 25 rockets, and several more fell short of the border. Hamas launched an additional two rockets into Israel several hours later.
Hamas spokesperson Hazem Qassem framed the attacks as retaliation for Israeli raids and mass arrests inside the Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem on April 4-5.
Palestinian Islamic Jihad militants launched as many as 15 rockets from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip on April 5 in response to the raids, as CTP previously reported.
Lebanese Hezbollah (LH) likely had advance knowledge of the attacks and may have even greenlighted it.
Hamas Political Bureau Chairman Ismail Haniyeh traveled to Lebanon on April 5, as CTP previously reported, visiting Beirut and southern Lebanon.
 Haniyeh reportedly met with senior LH officials, such Hassan Nasrallah, and Hamas militants during the visits, possibly to discuss and prepare for the attacks.
The fact that Hamas was able to conduct a second rocket attack several hours after the first one without LH intervening to prevent it further indicates that LH may have been complicit in the operation. Iranian leaders would have been presumably aware of the planned attacks as well if Hamas did, in fact, coordinate with Nasrallah.
Iran and LH may have encouraged or tacitly approved the rocket attacks in retaliation for a series of Israeli airstrikes in Syria in recent weeks.
Israel conducted airstrikes around Damascus on March 30, killing two IRGC officers.
Iranian leaders have acknowledged that Israel killed these officers and have vowed publicly in recent days to retaliate, as CTP previously reported.
Iranian leaders could portray the attacks as at least part of their retaliation regardless of whether they had any meaningful role in the planning and execution of the operation.
If Iran and LH were, in fact, involved in the attack, it signifies them expanding the geographic scope of their escalation pattern with Israel.
The ongoing cycle of violence between Tehran and Tel Aviv has occurred primarily in Syria throughout 2023 thus far.
Tehran may be expanding the geographic scope of the conflict to deter further Israeli action against Iranian interests in Syria.
Involving Lebanon and Palestine in the escalation cycle threatens Israel with spreading the conflict further to involve additional crises.
Conducting the rocket attacks from Lebanon has the added effect of raising the cost of certain Israeli responses given that retaliatory airstrikes into Lebanon would risk triggering an intensifying conflict with Lebanese Hezbollah and the Palestinian militant groups.
‘It’s time to end the puppet theater of the fake regime’; adds his country is approaching nuclear ‘peak’
Iran is approaching the “peak” in its nuclear program and will not yield to Western pressure to halt its activities, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Wednesday.
Ahmadinejad was speaking in the southwestern town of Bushehr near the site of Iran’s planned first nuclear power plant, being built with Russian help, and predicted the country would have nuclear electricity by this time next year.
Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki says Jewish state’s ballistic missile capability won’t help it in confrontations with Islamic republic; meanwhile, Iranian-Egyptian rapprochement in the works
“If you (Western powers) imagine that the Iranian nation will back down you are making a mistake,” he said in a televised speech.
“On the nuclear path we are moving towards the peak,” he said without elaborating.
Turning his attention to Israel, Ahmadinejad said, “The religious Palestinian people will bring down the last screen with its powerful hand on the Zionists’ puppet theater. It’s time to end the puppet theater of this fake regime.”
The Iranian president noted that Israel’s days were numbered and that it has reached its end.
Turning to the Western powers supporting Israel, he said, “Those who remain silent in light of this regime’s crimes and support it should know that they are taking part in the bloodshed of the Palestinian people and will be tried in the future.
“The world’s states will never forget these crimes,” the Iranian president was quoted as saying by the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA).
Defying international pressure, Iran has been working on producing its own nuclear fuel, technology the West fears will be used to make atomic bombs.
Tehran says its work is peaceful and has refused to stop.
He was speaking two days after Iran received the eighth and final consignment of nuclear fuel from Russia for the Bushehr plant.
Tehran has said the plant will start in mid-2008, though past deadlines have slipped.
“Next year at this time … nuclear electricity should flow in Iran’s electricity network,” he told the crowd.
Russia delivered the first shipment of uranium fuel rods on December 17 and urged Tehran to scrap its efforts to produce nuclear fuel.
Tehran says its work is peaceful and has refused to stop.
Iran, the world’s fourth-largest crude producer, says it wants to build a network of nuclear plants so it can preserve more of its oil and gas for export.
It says it wants to make nuclear fuel itself to guarantee its supplies.
World powers last week agreed the outline of a third UN sanctions resolution against Iran which calls for mandatory travel bans and asset freezes for specific Iranian officials and vigilance on banks in the country.
Today, January 27th is International Holocaust Remembrance Day.
It is a day we remember the victims of the Holocaust and Nazi persecution.
It is a day designated by the United Nations General Assembly and commemorates the anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration and extermination camp.
The Secretary General of the Council of Europe noted in 2020, that it is a day when we renew our commitment to do “our duty to ensure that such things can happen never again: that we do everything possible to prevent and to counter the hatred and prejudice that breeds violence and discrimination”.
There are those who seek to falsify history and deny or distort understanding of what occurred.
The spread of Holocaust misinformation, particularly online, is a threat not only to memory, but to the commitment against the spread of hatred and prejudice.
It is often inspired by a desire to glorify and repeat that dark past.
The Online Hate Prevention Institute (OHPI) is proud to be represented in Australia’s delegation to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) and to contribute to that inter-government organisation’s work in remembrance, education, and research.
This year, on the 20th of January 2022, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution which rejects and condemns without any reservation any denial and distortion of the Holocaust as a historical event.
A spokesperson for the UN Secretary General issued a statement saying, “we can never let down our guard in the face of increasing attempts to deny, distort or minimize the Holocaust.
We must also adapt and respond to new forms of antisemitism fueled by ignorance or conspiracy theories, also circulating online.
Today’s resolution, adopted by consensus, makes it clear that all Member States must condemn and actively combat Holocaust denial.”
In a recent briefing we discussed the UN resolution and the way it highlights the danger of misinformation and disinformation, particularly online, and how this can lead to hate and violence.
Online Hate Prevention Institute
The Online Hate Prevention Institute’s s CEO has been leading the fight against the spread of Holocaust denial and distortion on social media since 2008, including a 2011 call to Facebook to ban Holocaust denial (see Appendix B).
The Online Hate Prevention Institute took on this work when we were established in 2012.
Our very first report in 2012 started with an investigation into a video by a Holocaust denier which was banned repeatedly from YouTube.
We have now been working on the problem of Holocaust denial and distortion online for over a decade.
Holocaust denial, distortion, and misinfomation continues to spread online. Gab, for example, has a large number of explicit neo-Nazi individuals and groups that glorify Nazism.
Despite changes in policy, Holocaust denial and distortion also continue to exists on mainstream social media platforms.
Changes in policy do, however, make it easier to get the content removed.
Today we are releasing a collection of 17 items of Holocaust denial content that, as of this week, was still Facebook.
The content is documented below and we are working with Meta (Facebook) to secure its removal.
You can support this work tracking and removing Holocaust denial material like that below by making a donation to the Online Hate Prevention Institute’s campaign on Antisemitism and Holocaust denial below.
Monthly donations and donations for other areas of our work can be made via our donations page.
The documented examples of Holocaust denial can be seen below.
European and Israeli officials were brimming with outrage and sanctimony on Wednesday over comments made by Mahmoud Abbas during a visit to Germany.
Standing next to Chancellor Olaf Scholz a day earlier, the Palestinian Authority leader accused Israel of committing “50 holocausts” against the Palestinians.
Scholz took to Twitter to declare himself “disgusted by the outrageous remarks” made by Abbas.
“For us Germans in particular, any relativization of the singularity of the Holocaust is intolerable and unacceptable,” Scholz said. “I condemn any attempt to deny the crimes of the Holocaust.”
Armin Laschet, a prominent right-wing German politician and failed candidate for chancellor, even claimed that Abbas’ words were the “most disgusting speech” ever heard in the German Chancellery – apparently elevating the PA leader to a place in history worse than Hitler.
Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid – no doubt eager to distract what little international attention there is to Israel’s latest murder spree – quickly chimed in.
“Mahmoud Abbas accusing Israel of having committed ‘50 Holocausts’ while standing on German soil is not only a moral disgrace, but a monstrous lie,” the man who recently said Israel wouldn’t apologize for killing children in Gaza, stated.
“Six million Jews were murdered in the Holocaust, including one and a half million Jewish children,” Lapid added. “History will never forgive him.”
Even German state media is not claiming that Abbas “denied” the Holocaust – as Scholz charged.
Abbas himself later clarified – undoubtedly in an attempt to appease the PA’s enraged European paymasters – that his comment in Germany was “was not intended to deny the singularity of the Holocaust that occurred in the last century.”
Rather, Abbas said wanted to highlight “the crimes and massacres committed against the Palestinian people since the Nakba at the hands of the Israeli forces.”
“These crimes have not stopped to this day,” the PA leader added, accurately.
It is legitimate to debate whether such comparisons are useful, but they are not rare.
The words of Lapid’s father
Indeed, a few years ago Yair Lapid’s own father, the late Yosef “Tommy” Lapid, compared the daily persecution of Palestinians by Israeli Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank city of Hebron to the persecution of Jews in Europe just before the Holocaust.
“It was not crematoria or pogroms that made our life in the diaspora bitter before they began to kill us, but persecution, harassment, stone-throwing, damage to livelihood, intimidation, spitting and scorn,” the elder Lapid, then chair of the advisory council of Israel’s Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial, said in 2007.
In a similar spirit, Israeli general Yair Golan compared Israel to Nazi Germany during a Holocaust remembrance day speech six years ago.
“If there is one thing that frightens me about the memory of the Holocaust, it is identifying the revolting trends that occurred in Europe as a whole, and in Germany in particular, some 70, 80 and 90 years ago, and finding evidence of those trends here, among us, in 2016,” the general said.
Presumably learning the lessons of history – as Holocaust memorialists insist we do – means examining and debating contemporary events in the light of Germany’s crimes.
As United Nations cultural agency UNESCO states, Holocaust education “provides a starting point to examine warning signs that can indicate the potential for mass atrocity.”
But according to Scholz, this is verboten – at least for Palestinians. Indeed, the German chancellor’s insistence on the “singularity” of the Holocaust only seems to be deployed when it is useful to shield Israel.
Ukrainian leader minimizes Holocaust
In April, for instance, and not for the first time, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky asserted that the Russian invasion of his country was worse even than the Nazi occupation during World War II.
On another occasion, speaking to Israeli lawmakers, Zelensky claimed Russia was carrying out a “final solution” against Ukraine, using a term usually reserved for the Nazis’ plans for the murder of millions of Jews.
I don’t recall torrents of outrage from German or EU leaders about Zelensky’s shameless minimization of the German and Ukrainian genocide of Ukrainian Jews and Poles.
If anyone is trivializing the Holocaust, it is European and Israeli leaders, and Zionist organizations who weaponize the memory of murdered Jews to justify Zionist colonization and occupation of Palestine, and the relentless murder of Palestinians that goes with it.
As Columbia University professor Joseph Massad observes, “Israeli Zionists have appropriated events in Jewish history, including the Holocaust, for propagandistic purposes to assert their ‘right’ to Palestine – a land to which they had laid their suspect colonial claim half a century before the genocide.”
“By appropriating the Holocaust, Israel asserts that any acknowledgment of the genocide is an acknowledgment of Israel’s ‘right to exist as a Jewish state,’ while any attempt to deny this right is to deny the Holocaust,” Massad adds.
Historically, Massad notes, the Palestine Liberation Organization “always made a point of demonstrating its sympathy with the Jewish victims of the Holocaust and condemning the Nazis.”
But Israel and its backers rejected this solidarity because at the time the PLO refused to recognize and accept Israel’s claims to the land of the Palestinians.
Germany’s “get out of jail free” card
To this day, Israel and its supporters reject as insincere any recognition of the Holocaust or solidarity with its Jewish victims that is not explicitly accompanied by support for the brutal Zionist ethnic cleansing and colonization of Palestine.
That’s exactly the process at play in Scholz’s condemnation of Abbas – which the German chancellor’s office made sure to tweet in Hebrew as well as English and German.
This was Scholz’s indirect way of saying that the memory of the Holocaust belongs to Israel and Zionists to use politically as they see fit.
For German elites, unconditional support for Israel’s occupation, murder, persecution and dispossession of the Palestinian people for almost eight continuous decades serves as an easy “get out of jail free” card.
They feign pious atonement, while it is Palestinians whose lives and land are stolen – supposedly in compensation for German crimes.
Joining the attacks on Abbas, EU vice president Margaritis Schinas asserted that “the Holocaust is an indelible stain on European history; it erased Jewish life and heritage in many parts of our continent.”
He’s absolutely right about that. So if territory is the appropriate compensation for genocide, why has no European country, especially Germany, offered its own land for a “Jewish state?”
Just a year ago, the US was in the ascendant when it came to Middle East politics, working to isolate Iran by helping to normalize relationships between Israel and the Mideast Gulf states. The reality just changed — literally overnight — after China successfully brokered a reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Iran which, if consummated, will radically transform regional and global geopolitics.
“Saudi-funded political and economic elites in Lebanon could now be empowered to broker national reconciliation with Iran-backed Hezbollah.”
Brics and Beyond
What makes the Chinese-brokered détente between Saudi Arabia and Iran even more of a tectonic shift is the overall trajectory of global geopolitics.
Whereas in 2016, the tide was pushing against Iran, today it is pushing more against the US and the West, which seeks the maintenance of the “rules-based international order,” and toward alternative alignments such as Brics.
China is the “C” in the Brics group, the new global economic forum whose GDP, when adjusted for purchasing power parity, now surpasses that of the US-dominated G7 economic bloc.
Iran has already has submitted an application to join China and the other Brics nations (Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa), and Saudi Arabia has indicated that it will do the same soon. Other nations, such as Argentina and Egypt, are lining up as well.
With China providing infrastructure-generating investment capital through its Belt and Road Initiative, the new Iran-Saudi détente could evolve into a regional economic relationship that supplants the US-led defense relationships that have defined Middle East politics for decades.
And if Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi follows through on a reported invitation from Saudi Arabia’s King Salman to visit the kingdom, it will be the US and Israel who are left on the outside, watching a region they once controlled slip from their grasp.
As global power dynamics continue to shift, Israel’s close western alignment could limit its ability to engage with emerging powers in the east.
Arch-rival Iran, which has established ties with Russia and China, will be better positioned to gain from the shifting geopolitical landscape.
March 21 2023
Israel’s ability to leverage its western connections for geopolitical gain has shrunk considerably while its rivals race ahead to establish themselves comfortably in West Asia’s new multipolarity.
Great-power competition has the potential to significantly impact the future of Israel.
As a key player in West Asia, Israel is likely to be affected by the actions and strategies of major powers such as the US, China, and Russia.
The US has historically been a strong ally of Israel, providing significant military and economic aid.
However, Washington’s current strategy of thwarting growing Chinese and Russian political and economic influence around the world may lead to increased pressure on Israel, a western-creation, to align with US interests in the region.
At the same time, China and Russia are rapidly expanding their stakes in West Asia, which may set back Israel’s recent rapprochement progress with neighboring states.
In the past few years, Tel Aviv has offered itself to Arab states as a strong regional replacement for waning US presence, and a buffer against Iran’s rise.
Will they need that Israeli military buffer if global power China – or Russia – can troubleshoot conflict and usher in peace?
Furthermore, as great-power competition intensifies, Israel, like other small states, will come under pressure to align with one side.
This could impact Israel’s ability to maintain its independence and pursue its own interests in the region.
Great Power competition: a heavy burden on Israel
In recent years, Israel has developed multifaceted relationships with both China and Russia, which have reaped both economic and political benefits for Tel Aviv.
China has been one of the top global investors in West Asia and North Africa, with Israel ranking eighth on the list of beneficiary states since 2005 and receiving just over $12 billion in Chinese investments since 2010.
In the past, Washington has given Israel some leeway in its foreign policy initiatives, but since the Ukraine conflict, US flexibility has been abruptly halted
Senior analyst on Israeli affairs at Al-Akhbar newspaper, Ali Haidar, told The Cradle that “Israel has a specific margin to preserve its interests.
This is something that the United States understands and considers.”
“At the same time, there are red lines that Israel cannot cross, but it can, through its relations and contacts with the US administration and influential parties, contribute to adapting and circumventing them to some extent.”
As the competition between the US, on the one hand, and Moscow and Beijing on the other, intensifies, Israel’s ability to maneuver is becoming increasingly limited, and Washington’s pressure is mounting.
This pressure demands that Tel Aviv take positions more aligned with US interests, which in turn constrain cooperation between Israel and Russia, and China.
“The increasing pressure on Israel to pivot in this context presents it with weighty dilemmas, and a policy change in the wake of that could significantly reduce its space for political-security maneuvering.”
This was exemplified by Israel’s attempts to mediate the conflict in Ukraine, which were quickly abandoned under coercion from Washington to take a clear position in support of the west and against Moscow.
This US pressure was also reflected in Israel’s military aggressions against Syria.
In March 2022, the number of Israeli strikes targeting Syria decreased to only one strike from four the month before, suggesting that Tel Aviv was apprehensive of a Russian reaction.
As a result, any imbalance in the relationship between Israel and Russia may have direct consequences for Israel’s interests – if Moscow decides to take action.
China’s presence in West Asia and North Africa
In the early 2010s, China began to expand its presence in the West Asia-North Africa (WANA) regions.
One of the major milestones of China’s modern foreign policy was the announcement of its ambitious, multi-continent Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in 2013.
To date, at least 17 countries from the region have joined the initiative:
China also signed bilateral partnership agreements with 13 countries in the region between 2014 and 2022.
Notably, Israel has not entered into any association agreement with China and has not joined the BRI.
By brokering the Iran-Saudi deal in the aftermath of high-profile visits to Tehran and Riyadh by Chinese President Xi Jinping, Beijing has now signaled that it intends to play a more active role in resolving conflicts and disputes in the region, much to Washington’s alarm.
US reaction to this game-changing agreement has been hyper-focused on the geopolitical ramifications of China bringing the two parties to the table, rather than discussion about the agreement itself.
As China’s influence in the region continues to grow, Israel remains constrained by “American concerns,” preventing it from deepening its relations with China, while other regional states are lining up to strike deals with Beijing.
Analyst Haidar has noted that “the US’s obstruction of Israeli engagement with China will limit Tel Aviv’s ability to forge strong economic and political ties with Beijing,” adding, “This is a practical example of Israel’s commitment to what the United States regards as its vital interests, which Israel is prohibited from crossing.”
In 2019, in order to protect Washington’s interests, the Israeli government established a committee to evaluate the national security implications of foreign investments – with a specific focus on China.
Furthermore, the US and Israel have agreed to tighten control over the export of advanced technologies to China.
That noose will further tighten as the economic competition between Washington and Beijing intensifies, and Israel – a major recipient of US technologies – may well be forced into this confrontation with China.
Iranian cooperation with Russia and China
After Argentina and Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt also show interest in joining BRICS
One significant consequence of the intensifying competition between great powers is China and Russia’s efforts to strengthen their cooperation with key states, particularly those that oppose aggressive western hegemony.
Their alignment of interests has led to a palpable warming in relations between Iran, Russia, and China, and some concrete steps forward.
Hostile US policies aimed at Russia and China have encouraged them to seek out and establish supportive multilateral institutions such as the BRICS and Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).
Tehran has, in turn, applied for membership in both organizations, which led to Iran’s formal ascension to the SCO last year – making it the organization’s ninth member state and its first West Asian participant.
In this context, Haidar points out that “One of the most important concepts that resonate on the tongues of officials and experts in Israel is the seriousness of the repercussions of the intensification of the international conflict on the region and Israel.”
This, he argued, is “centered on Iran’s openness to Asian powers and the implications of that.”
He also contends that “rapid international changes” could present new opportunities for Iran, which is currently facing an economic assault from the west.
These changes, Haidar explains, may enable Iran to counter the sanctions pressures, which undermines Israel’s multi-pronged strategy for confronting Iran.
Today, Israel’s position in the western axis limits its ability to keep up with Iran’s geopolitical expansion eastward.
As the Global Power conflict intensifies and the opposing poles become more defined, Israel’s maneuvering room will shrink, while the Islamic Republic – never reliant on the west – will have a wider range of options available to it.
Last month, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s former national security adviser, Meir Ben-Shabbat, argued that Iran occupies an important place in the process of reshaping the axis of countries hostile to the US and the west:
“The Iranian regime is positioning itself as an active player in the confrontation with the liberal democratic camp led by the US. It identifies the West’s weakness and is exploiting it as far as possible.”
Israel’s shrinking geopolitics
According to the latest annual intelligence estimate of the Israeli military’s Intelligence Directorate, global trends, the Iranian and Palestinian theaters form Tel Aviv’s 2023 threat triangle.
“At the center of this triangle will be the international tendencies that affect Israel and its security; the global instability that stems mainly from the conflict between the United States and China will continue and intensify.”
Today, Israel faces some momentous challenges to its future, not only from extreme domestic polarization but particularly from the intensification of global conflict and the decline of western hegemony.
Iran’s growing international engagement, and the solidification of its relations with Asian powers, are unfolding as Tel Aviv’s options are shrinking.
There is also a correlation between the strength of US deterrence and influence in the region and Israel’s ability to exercise its own deterrence capabilities.
As US power weakens, it is likely to have a negative impact on Israel’s ability to deter its enemies.
Moreover, the growing number of states “oscillating” between east and west, and maneuvering to take advantage of great-power competition, is another challenge for Israel.
Even staunch US allies in the Persian Gulf – once scrambling to normalize relations with Israel – are looking for room to maneuver with the rising east, as seen with Riyadh’s readiness for Chinese mediation in negotiations with Iran.
While Israel may have some margin to distance itself from direct confrontation with China and Russia, the repercussions of the Great Power conflict are likely to buoy the fortunes of the region’s Axis of Resistance – in Iran, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, and Iraq – with any balance of power shift away from US and Israeli hegemony.
In short, Israel’s ability to leverage its western connections for geopolitical gain has shrunk considerably while its rivals race ahead to establish themselves comfortably in West Asia’s new multipolarity.
That ratty Jew came to America – and he still refused to put on a shirt!
He was in the Congress speaking in a green sweatshirt!
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy told the U.S. Congress on Wednesday that the tens of billions of dollars of aid it had approved to help it fight a Russian invasion was not charity, but an investment in global security.
In his first visit out of his country since the war began in February, Zelenskiy told lawmakers in the soaring House of Representatives chamber that he hoped they would continue to support Ukraine on a bipartisan basis – a major point as Republicans are due to take the majority in the House on Jan. 3.
“Your money is not charity,” Zelenskiy said, clad in the khaki fatigues that have been his public uniform throughout the 300 days of conflict. “It is an investment in the global security and democracy.”
Following a meeting at the White House with Democratic President Joe Biden, Zelenskiy’s speech needed to resonate with House Republicans, who have voiced increasing skepticism about continuing to send so much aid to Ukraine.
Zelenskiy’s arrival was greeted with multiple raucous ovations in the nearly full chamber. Three members held up a large Ukrainian flag as he walked in.
“It is a great honor for me to be at the U.S. Congress and speak to you and all Americans.
Against all doom and gloom scenarios, Ukraine did not fall. Ukraine is alive and kicking,” said Zelenskiy.
“We defeated Russia in the battle for the minds of the world,” he said.
This is literally not true.
Neither India nor China support this war, and when you combine that with the Third World countries opposing it, you have an overwhelming majority of the world calling bullshit on this stupid hoax.
He’s also not winning the battle on the battlefield. The “gains” he made were at the cost of completely destroying his own military.
He pushed the goyim into a meat-grinder.
The Jewish neo-Nazis are doing press-gangs, showing up at night clubs force-conscripting goyim.
Remember: Jews were allowed to leave the country after Zelensky said the goyim had to go fight his war.
Virtually the entire Ukrainian military has been wiped out, and most of the fighters are now Poles, Americans, and others.
They did this for political reasons so they could point to lines on a map. Russia, conversely, kept their army totally intact and is consistently strengthening their forces.
Hoholistan is headed for a massive and overwhelming crushing defeat when this rape really gets started.
That sickening Jew dwarf Zelensky also did a fireside meeting with Brandon, where they discussed the agenda for endless war for no reason.
These two freaks literally did an Avengers photoshoot.
Zelensky looked very happy meeting his Jew cousin Antony Blinken.
We say “cousin” just to mean “kinsman,” but there is a 100% chance these two share an ancestor who lived in the last 200 years.
Zelensky appears to have brought drugs with him.
What a wreck.
This country is a joke.
Notice that top Jews Victoria Nuland and Merrick Garland are also in attendance at his dinner.
Why would you even bring the Attorney General to a foreign policy meeting like this – other than because he’s a Russian Jew?
This Ukraine thing is all just complete fantasy land and it doesn’t even make any sense.
The amount of lies surrounding it literally surpasses the amount of lies surrounding the coronavirus hoax.
It’s difficult to comprehend that it is actually happening – that they can go out there and say this stuff about how Russia is committing a genocide against democracy, but the Ukrainians are winning.
There is not one thing they say about the war that is not a lie. I have not seen one single thing.
The reality situation is, point by point, the diametric opposite of what they say.
The Ukraine is not a democracy, the Ukraine is committing atrocities beyond anything we’ve ever seen in the modern age, Ukraine Jewish neo-Nazi groups are calling for a genocide of Russians, and the Ukraine is losing the war.
Russia, meanwhile, has their hands tied behind their backs trying to fight the friendly war – and they are still winning by a lot. They completely destroyed the entire Ukraine military.
When Ursula von der Leyen accidentally told the truth about the casualty count; they edited it out of the official copy of the speech.
It’s beyond the pale that this dwarven Jew comes to my country and the leaders of my country welcome him, inviting him to do even more begging while promoting his campaign of atrocities.
Following Russia’s announcement of Iran & Argentina’s BRICS membership bids, the alliance president reveals that Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, a NATO member, have the same plans
AMLO responds to the US’s invasion threats: “Mexico must be respected. We are not a protectorate of the US nor a colony of the US. Mexico is a free, independent, sovereign country. We do not receive orders from anyone. Here, the people of Mexico rule.”pic.twitter.com/mRgiHsCRk9
The Russia-Ukraine conflict accelerated a global trend aimed at creating an economic and financial universe parallel to the existing system.
We have in the past highlighted the possibility of the GCC countries joining the BRICS grouping of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, whose population together constitute 41 per cent of the world.
These countries also account for 23 per cent of the global economy and 18 per cent of trade, which reflects their relative importance to the global economy as a whole.
Recently, Saudi Arabia applied to join the group, a move warmly welcomed by existing members.
Discussions are also being held about the prospect of the UAE and Turkey joining as well, which will lead to a fundamental change in the global power dynamics and help create a more balanced order.
The likely accession of the three countries means a huge change that will tip the balance in favor of the East.
Saudi Arabia, with its enormous potential in energy, the UAE as a global commercial and financial center, and Turkey, with its location, industrial and technological growth will add significant influence to the group and redistribute power between East and West.
More than tuned to geography
It goes without saying that a stronger BRICS means further dividing the world into two large blocs.
The first will be led by the Western camp, which currently controls the levers of the global economy.
The bloc includes Japan and Australia, while the Eastern power base is formed through the BRICS economies, despite the presence of Brazil in their midst.
This means an intensified geopolitical competition ahead.
The accession of oil-producing countries would mean the group dominates with 31 per cent of global oil production, in itself a dramatic development that will have fundamental effects on international relations.
Simply because the world will see an integration in BRICS the most important producers and consumers of energy.
Further, the presence of key commercial and logistical centers within the group means greater control over global trade.
With its capabilities closely tracked by the global defence industry, Israel has become one of the largest drone operators in the Middle East and a net exporter, according to the Royal United Services Institute, a London think tank.
The Israeli officer, not identified in line with military requirements given the sensitivity of the subject, said any sales of bomb-capable drones would be government-to-government, negating the need for publicity.
All the drone munitions are Israeli-made, the officer said, and “come down in free-fall, and can reach the speed of sound”.
Such bombs, unlike the Hellfire missiles sometimes fired by U.S. drones, would not have propulsion systems that generate the tell-tale noise and smoke of fuel afterburners.
The officer declined to give further details on the munitions, saying only that, by design, when an armed drone attacks “no one will hear it, no one will see it coming”.
An example of a drone target could be fast-moving guerrillas, spotted and attacked before they can launch a rocket, other Israeli officials have said.
Yet this would assume enough altitude so that the drones’ propeller engines cannot be clearly heard on the ground.
In winter wars, like Israel’s in Gaza in 2008-2009, the drones have to be flown below the clouds for their targeting cameras to work, meaning they might be audible.
“You lose the element of surprise,” the officer said.
Despite deploying sophisticated armed drones, the majority of Israel’s UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) inventory is unarmed given the main function of intelligence for ground forces, the RUSI think tank said in an online report.
Right Cold War mindsets
The West is attempting to hold onto its historical positions, which it greatly bolstered after World War II, and attempting to resist any change in the structure of the global economy.
At the same time making mistake after mistake by ignoring and failing to take into account the significant changes.
Consequently, it has lost significant supporters who have considerable political and economic clout.
As for the opposing pole, it acts cleverly with an open-mind and equitable interactions with other nations and embracing the dictum of shared interests.
More are likely to join BRICS in years to come if the Western bloc does not alter its antiquated ideologies and practices.
Two opposing economic and financial poles will eventually emerge.
The BRICS states announced the creation of a parallel bank with a $150 billion capital as a competitor to the IMF.
Additionally, the Ukrainian crisis has significantly strengthened economic and trade ties between group members, making them more dependent on one another.
Numerous businesses and institutions withdrew from the markets of the BRICS countries, and export restrictions were put in place on some high-tech goods to Russia and China.
Work towards an equitable global order
An expansion of BRICS may greatly contribute to the establishment of equitable relations based on the interests of many countries rather than on discord between countries in either pole.
All of which requires a thorough understanding of global events and outcomes.
The existing economic system and its components, founded 80 years ago, are no longer feasible owing to massive changes in the economic and geopolitical balance of power, the emergence of new economic powers and the downfall of other.
This truth should be properly understood if the world needs to avoid further conflicts getting in the way of an equitable global order.
Five years ago, I wrote an article entitled “America’s Jews Are Driving America’s wars.”
It turned out to be the most popular piece that I have ever written and I was rewarded for it by immediately being fired by the so-called American Conservative magazine, where I had been a regular and highly popular contributor for fourteen years.
I opened the article with a brief description of an encounter with a supporter whom I had met shortly before at an antiwar conference.
The elderly gentleman asked “Why doesn’t anyone ever speak honestly about the six-hundred-pound gorilla in the room?
Nobody has mentioned Israel in this conference and we all know it’s American Jews with all their money and power who are supporting every war in the Middle East for Netanyahu?
Shouldn’t we start calling them out and not letting them get away with it?”
In my article I named many of the individual Jews and Jewish groups that had been leading the charge to invade Iraq and also deal with Iran along the way.
They used fake intelligence and out-and-out lies to make their case and never addressed the central issue of how those two countries actually threatened the United States or its vital interests.
And when they succeeded in committing the US to the fiasco in Iraq, as far as I can determine only one honest Jew who had participated in the process, Philip Zelikow, in a moment of candor, admitted that the Iraq War, in his opinion, was fought for Israel.
There was considerable collusion between the Israeli government and the Jews in the Pentagon, White House, National Security Council and State Department in the wake of 9/11.
Under President George W. Bush, Israeli Embassy staff uniquely had free access to the Pentagon office of Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, not being required to sign in or submit any security measures.
It was a powerful indication of the special status that Israel enjoyed with top Jews in the Bush Administration.
It should also be recalled that Doug Feith’s Office of Special Plans was the source of the false WMD information used by the Administration to justify invading Iraq, while that information was also funneled directly to Vice President Dick Cheney without any submission to possibly critical analysts by his chief of Staff “Scooter” Libby.
Wolfowitz, Feith and Libby were of course Jewish as were many on their staffs and Feith’s relationship with Israel was so close that he actually partnered in a law firm that had a branch in Jerusalem.
Feith also served on the board of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), which is dedicated to nurturing the relationship between the US and Israel.
Currently, the top three State Department officials (Tony Blinken, Wendy Sherman and Victoria Nuland) are all Zionist Jews.
The head of the Department of Homeland Security, which is hot on the trail of domestic “terrorist” dissidents, is also Jewish as is the Attorney General and the president’s chief of staff.
They and their boss Joe Biden do not seem concerned that their client Ukraine is no democracy.
The nation’s current government came into power after the 2014 coup engineered by President Barack Obama’s State Department at an estimated cost of $5 billion.
The regime change carried out under Barack Obama was driven by State Department Russophobe Victoria Nuland with a little help from international globalist George Soros.
It removed the democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovych who was, unfortunately for him, a friend of Russia.
Ukraine is reputedly both the poorest and most corrupt country in Europe, witness the Hunter Biden saga.
The current President Volodymyr Zelensky, who is Jewish and claims to have holocaust victims in his family tree, is a former comedian who won election in 2019.
He replaced another Jewish president Petro Poroshenko, after being heavily funded and promoted by yet another fellow Jew and Ukraine’s richest oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskyi, who is also an Israeli citizen and now lives in Israel.
It all sounds like deja vu all over again, particularly as many of the perpetrators are still around, like Nuland, priming the pump to go to war yet again for no reason.
And they are joined by journalists like Bret Stephens at the New York Times, Wolf Blitzer and Jake Tapper at CNN, and also Max Boot at the Washington Post, all of whom are Jewish and can be counted on to write regular pieces both damning and demonizing Russia and its head of state Vladimir Putin, which means it is not only about the Middle East anymore.
It is also about weakening and even bringing about regime change in nuclear armed Russia while also drawing some lines in the sand for likewise nuclear armed China.
And I might add that playing power games with Russia is a hell of a lot more dangerous than kicking Iraq around.
To put it bluntly, many US government and media Jews hate Russia and even though they benefited substantially as a group by virtue of their preeminent role in the looting of the former Soviet Union under Boris Yeltsin and continue to be among the most prominent Russian oligarchs.
Many of the oligarch billionaires, like Boris Berezovsky, self-exiled when Vladimir Putin obtained power and began to crack down on their tax avoidance and other illegal activity.
Many moved to Western Europe where some bought up football teams while others went south and obtained Israeli citizenship.
Their current grievances somewhat reflect their tribe’s demand for perpetual victimhood and the deference plus forgiveness of all sins that it conveys, with the self-promoted tales of persecution going back to the days of the Tsars, full of allegations about pogroms and Cossacks arriving in the night, stories that rival many of the holocaust fabrications in terms of their lack of credibility.
Many Jews, particularly younger Jews, are finding it difficult to support apartheid Israel and the constant wars being initiated and fought for no particularly credible reason by both Democratic and Republican parties when in power, which is a good thing.
But Jewish power in Washington and across the US is difficult to ignore and it is precisely those Jewish groups and individuals who have been empowered through their wealth and connections who have been the most vocal leading warmongers when it has come to the Middle East and to Russia.
Interestingly, however, some pushback is developing.
The Jewish peace group Tikkun has recently published a devastating article by Jeffrey Sachs on the Jews who have been agitating for war.
It is entitled “Ukraine Is the Latest Neocon Disaster” and describes how “The war in Ukraine is the culmination of a 30-year project of the American neoconservative movement.
The Biden Administration is packed with the same neocons who championed the US wars of choice in Serbia (1999), Afghanistan (2001), Iraq (2003), Syria (2011), Libya (2011), and who did so much to provoke Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
The neocon track record is one of unmitigated disaster, yet Biden has staffed his team with neocons.
As a result, Biden is steering Ukraine, the US, and the European Union towards yet another geopolitical debacle…”
Tikkun explains how “The neocon movement emerged in the 1970s around a group of public intellectuals, several of whom were influenced by University of Chicago political scientist Leo Strauss and Yale University classicist Donald Kagan.
Neocon leaders included Norman Podhoretz, Irving Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz, Robert Kagan (son of Donald), Frederick Kagan (son of Donald), Victoria Nuland (wife of Robert), Elliott Abrams, and Kimberley Allen Kagan (wife of Frederick).”
It might be added that Kimberley Kagan heads the Institute for the Study of War, which is often cited in media coverage and even in Congress to explain why we must fight Russia.
It has long been recognized by many that a particular antipathy directed against Russia permeates the so-called neoconservative world view.
The neocons are hugely overrepresented at the top levels of government and, as noted above, a number of them are running the State Department while also holding high level positions elsewhere in the Biden Administration as well as in the foreign policy think tanks, including Richard Haass at the influential Council on Foreign Relations.
Likewise, the intensely Russophobic US and Western media, foundations and social networking sites are disproportionately Jewish in their ownership and staffing.
And beyond that, Ukraine is to a certain extent a very Jewish-identified place.
The Jewish media in the US and elsewhere has been showering Zelensky with praise, referring to him as a genuine “Jewish hero,” a modern Maccabee resisting oppression, a David versus Goliath.
T-shirts bearing his image are being sold that read “Resisting tyrants since Pharaoh” while the largely Orthodox Jewish community in New York City has already been raising millions of dollars for Ukrainian aid.
The Jewish Telegraphic Agencyreports that a “2020 demographic survey estimated that besides a ‘core’ population of 43,000 Jews, around 200,000 Ukrainians are technically eligible for Israeli citizenship, meaning that they have identifiable Jewish ancestry.
The European Jewish Congress says that number could be as high as 400,000.”
If that is true, it is one of the largest Jewish communities in the world and it includes at least 8,000 Israelis, many of whom have returned to Israel.
As US-Russian negotiations leading up the current fighting were clearly designed to fail by the Biden Administration, one therefore has to wonder if this war against Russia is largely a product of a long enduring ethno-religious hatred coupled with a belief in the necessity for a strong American military applied as needed to dominate the world and thereby protect Israel.
The neocons are most visible, but equally toxic are the Jews who would prefer to describe themselves as neoliberals or liberal interventionists, that is liberals who promote a strong, assertive American leadership role to support the basically phony catchwords “democracy” and “freedom.”
Both neocons and neoliberals inevitably support the same policies so they have both ends of the political spectrum covered, particularly concerning the Middle East and against Russia.
They currently dominate the foreign policy thinking of both major political parties as well as exercising control over media and entertainment industry coverage of the issues that concern them, largely leaving the American public with only their viewpoint to consider.
There is plenty of other evidence that prominent Jews both inside and outside the Administration have been stirring things up against Russia with considerable success as President Biden has now declared insanely that his Administration is engaged in “a great battle for freedom.
A battle between democracy and autocracy. Between liberty and repression.”
He has confirmed that the US is in Ukraine’s war against Russia until we “win.”
How else does one explain the ridiculous trip by Attorney General Merrick Garland to Kiev in late June to help set up a war crimes investigation directed against Russia?
As Garland is supposed to be the US Attorney General, it might first be useful to investigate crimes relating to the United States.
He might start with American war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan or Israeli war crimes using Washington provided weapons in Lebanon and Syria, not to mention the human rights violations using those same weapons that occur on a daily basis directed against the Palestinians.
Some conservatives are also wondering why the Attorney General spends his time pursuing “white supremacists” and has failed to investigate the rioting, looting and killing that rocked the nation in the BLM Summer of 2020.
Nevertheless, an undeterred and fearless Garland announced while in Kiev that Eli Rosenbaum, Jewish of course, and a 36-year veteran of the Justice Department who previously served as the director of the Office of Special Investigations, which was primarily responsible for identifying, denaturalizing and deporting Nazi war criminals, will lead a War Crimes Accountability team made up of DOJ experts in investigating Russian human-rights abuses.
After the obligatory photo op sucking up to Zelensky, the diminutive but steely eyed Attorney General declared that “There is no hiding place for war criminals.
The US Justice Department will pursue every avenue of accountability for those who commit war crimes and other atrocities in Ukraine.
Working alongside our domestic and international partners, the Justice Department will be relentless in our efforts to hold accountable every person complicit in the commission of war crimes, torture and other grave violations during the unprovoked conflict in Ukraine.”
And if any further evidence required to demonstrate the Jewishness of that week in Kiev, actor Ben Stiller, also a Jew, visited Zelensky and gave him a big hug.
If Eli Rosenbaum is still seriously interested in finding Nazis he will find many more of them in Ukraine than within the Russian Army.
So, one has to ask “Whose war is it and who is making it happen?” Can you please explain Joe Biden? Or, given your perpetual blank look, should I ask Merrick Garland or Tony Blinken or maybe even Victoria Nuland?
In America, we have an oligarch problem, and it’s much bigger than the oligarch problem that Putin faced when he became president in 2000.
The entire West is now in the grips of billionaire elites who have a stranglehold on the media, the political establishment and all of our important institutions.
In recent years we have seen these oligarchs expand their influence from markets, finance and trade to politics, social issues and even public health.
The impact this group has had on these other areas of interest, has been nothing short of breathtaking.
Establishment elites and their media not only stood foursquare behind Russiagate, the Trump impeachment, the BLM riots and the January 6 fiasco, they also had a hand in the Covid hysteria and the host of repressive measures that were imposed in the name of public health.
What we’d like to know is to what extent this group is actively involved in the shaping of other events that are aimed at transforming the American Republic into a more authoritarian system?
In other words, are the mandated injections, the forced lockdowns, the aggressive government-implemented censorship, the dubious presidential elections, the burning of food processing plants, the derailing of trains, the attacks on the power grid, the BLM-Antifa riots, the drag queen shows for schoolchildren, the maniacal focus on gender issues, and glitzy public show-trials merely random incidents occurring spontaneously during a period of great social change or are they, in fact, evidence of a stealthily orchestrated operation conducted by agents of the state acting on behalf of their elite benefactors?
We already know that the FBI, the DOJ and the intel agencies were directly involved in Russiagate –which was a covert attack on the sitting president of the United States.
So, the question is not “whether” these agencies are actively involved in other acts of treachery but, rather, to what extent these acts impact the lives or ordinary Americans, our politics and the country?
But before we answer that question, take a look at this quote from from a recent interview by Colonel Douglas MacGregor:
I was reading a document that was authored by George Soros over 10 years ago in which he talks specifically about this all-out war that would ultimately come against Russia because he said this ‘was the last nationalist state that rests on a foundation of orthodox christian culture with Russian identity at its core.
That has to be removed.
So I think that the people who are in charge in the west and the people in charge in Washington think they have successfully destroyed the identities of the European and American peoples, that we have no sense of ourselves, our borders are undefended, we present no resistance to the incoming migrants from the developing world who essentially roll over us as though we owe them a living and that our laws do not count.
Thus, far I would say that is an accurate evaluation of what we’ve been doing. And I think that’s a great victory for George Soros and the globalists, the anti-nationalists; those who want open borders what they call it an “Open Society” because you end up with nothing, an amorphous mass of people struggling to survive who are reduced to the lowest levels of subsistence …
(Soros) even goes so far as to talk about how useful it would be if it was east Europeans whose lives were expended in this process and not west Europeans who simply won’t take the casualties.
This is not a minor matter.
This is the kind of thinking that is so destructive and so evil, in my judgement, that that’s what we’re really dealing with in our own countries and I think Putin recognizes that.” (Douglas Macgregor – A Huge Offensive”, You Tube;, 11:20 minute)
The reason I transcribed this comment from MacGregor was because it sums up the perceptions of a great many people who see things the same way.
It expresses the hatred that globalist billionaires have toward Christians and patriots, both of which they see as obstacles to their goal of a borderless one-world government.
MacGregor discusses this phenom in relation to Russia which Soros sees as “the last nationalist state that rests on a foundation of orthodox Christian culture with Russian identity at its core.”
But the same rule could be applied to the January 6 protestors, could it not?
Isn’t that the real reason the protestors were rounded up and thrown into the Washington gulag.
After all, everyone knows there was no “insurrection” nor were there any “white supremacists”.
The protestors were locked up because they’re nationalists (patriots) which are the natural enemy of the globalists.
The MacGregor quote lays it out in black and white.
Elites don’t believe that nationalists can be persuaded by propaganda,.
They must be eradicated through incarceration or worse.
Isn’t that the underlying message of January 6?
The other underlying message of January 6, is that ordinary people are no longer allowed to challenge the authority of the people in power.
Again, political legitimacy in the US has always been determined by elections.
What January 6 indicates, is that legitimacy no longer matters.
What matters is power, and the person who can have you arrested for questioning his authority, has all the power he needs.
Check out this excerpt from a post on Substack by political analyst Kurt Nimmo:
“Klaus Schwab, a student of the war criminal Henry Kissinger, is a mentor to power-hungry and narcissistic sociopaths.
The WEF “Great Reset” is designed to turn the world into an impoverished social concentration camp, where destitute serfs “own nothing” and this, in true Orwellian fashion, will set them free…
I challenge people to investigate the WEF’s Global Redesign Initiative.
According to the Transnational Institute in the Netherlands, this “initiative” proposes
a transition away from intergovernmental decision-making towards a system of multi-stakeholder governance.
In other words, by stealth, they are marginalizing a recognized model where we vote in governments who then negotiate treaties which are then ratified by our elected representatives with a model where a self-selected group of ‘stakeholders’ make decisions on our behalf. (Emphasis added.)
In other words, large transnational corporate “stakeholders” will be deciding where you live, what you eat (insects and weeds), how you reproduce (or not reproduce; children produce carbon emissions), and what you can “rent” from them, or not be allowed to rent if you complain about an unelected globalist “economic” cartel driving humanity into serfdom, worldwide poverty, and depopulation.”
What Nimmo is saying is that these billionaire elites are now so powerful, that they can openly say they’re going to “transition away from intergovernmental decision-making” (ie– representative government”) to a system of “multi-stakeholder governance.”
If I’m not mistaken, that is a pretty unambiguous declaration of a new form of supra-national government, in which only the billionaire stakeholders have a vote in what policies are implemented.
But isn’t that the way things work already?
On any number of topics from ESG, to digital currencies, to vaccine passports, to AI, to gain-of-function research, to 15-minute cities, to transhumanism, to war with Russia; the decisions are all being made by a handful of people of whom we know every little and who were never voted into office.
And that brings us back to our original question: How many of these oddball events (in recent years) were conjured up and implemented by agents of the deep state to advance the elitist agenda?
This seem like an impossible question since it’s hard to find a link between these dramatically divers events.
For example, what is the link between a Drag Queen Children’s Hour and, let’s say, firebombing a food processing plant in Oklahoma?
Or the relentless political exploitation of gender issues and the January 6 public show trials?
If there was a connection, we’d see it, right?
Not necessarily, because the link might not have anything to do with the incident itself, but instead, with its impact on the people who experience it.
In other words, all of these events could be aimed at generating fear, uncertainty, anxiety, alienation and even terror.
Have the intelligence agencies launched such destabilizing operations before?
Indeed, they have, many times. Here’s an excerpt from an article that will help you to see where I’m going with this.
It’s from a piece at The Saker titled Operation Gladio: NATO’s Secret War for International Fascism.”
See if you notice any similarities with the way things have been unfolding in America for the last few years:
Yves Guerin-Serac: the Black Ops Grandmaster behind Operation Gladio…. wrote the basic training and propaganda manuals which can be fairly described as the Gladio order of battle.”…
Guerin-Serac was a war hero, agent provocateur, assassin, bomber, intelligence agent, Messianic Catholic, and the intellectual grandmaster behind the ‘Strategy of Tension’ essential to the success of Operation Gladio.
Guerin-Serac published via Aginter Press the Gladio manual, including Our Political Activity in what can aptly be described as Gladio’s First Commandment:
“Our belief is that the first phase of political activity ought to be to create the conditions favoring the installation of chaos in all of the regime’s structures…
In our view the first move we should make is to destroy the structure of the democratic state under the cover of Communist and pro-Soviet activities…
Moreover, we have people who have infiltrated these groups.”
“Two forms of terrorism can provoke such a situation [breakdown of the state]: blind terrorism (committing massacres indiscriminately which cause a large number of victims), and selective terrorism (eliminate chosen persons)…
This destruction of the state must be carried out under the cover of ‘communist activities.’
After that, we must intervene at the heart of the military, the juridical power and the church, in order to influence popular opinion, suggest a solution, and clearly demonstrate the weakness of the present legal apparatus.
Popular opinion must be polarized in such a way, that we are being presented as the only instrument capable of saving the nation.”
Anarchic random violence was to be the solution to bring about such a state of instability thus allowing for a completely new system, a global authoritarian order.
Yves Guerin-Serac, who was an open fascist, would not be the first to use false-flag tactics that were blamed on communists and used to justify more stringent police and military control from the state….”
Repeat: the first phase of political activity ought to be to create the conditions favoring the installation of chaos in all of the regime’s structures…
This destruction of the state must be carried out under the cover of (communist) activities….
Popular opinion must be polarized in such a way, that we are being presented as the only instrument capable of saving the nation.”
In other words, the objective of the operation is to completely disrupt all social relations and interaction, cultivate feelings of uncertainty, polarization and terror, find a group that can be scapegoated for the wide societal collapse, and, then, present yourself (elites) as the best choice for restoring order.
Is this what’s going on?
It’s very possible. It could all be part of a Grand Strategy aimed at “wiping the slate clean” in order to “transition away from intergovernmental decision-making” to a system of “multi-stakeholder governance.”
That could explain why there has been such a vicious and sustained attack on our history, culture, traditions, religious beliefs, monuments, heroes, and founders.
They want to replace our idealism with feelings of shame, humiliation and guilt.
They want to erase our past, our collective values, our heritage, our commitment to personal freedom, and the very idea of America itself.
They want to raze everything to the ground and start over.
That is their basic Gameplan writ large.
The destruction of the state is being carried out behind the cover of seemingly random events that are spreading chaos, exacerbating political divisions, increasing the incidents of public mayhem, and clearing the way for a violent restructuring of the government.
They can’t build a new world order until the old one is destroyed.
THANKS TO THE ONGOING conflict in Ukraine, we indeed seem to be rushing headlong into a major war—possibly a World War Three, possibly the world’s first (and perhaps last) nuclear war.
Ukraine leadership and their Western backers seem hell-bent on fighting to the last man, and Vladimir Putin, as an old-school Cold Warrior, seems equally determined to press ahead until achieving “victory.”
The cause seems hopeless for Ukraine, who cannot reasonably expect to prevail in an extended conflict with one of the largest militaries on Earth.
At best, they may bleed Russia over a period of months or years, but only at the cost of massive blood-letting themselves.
It seems that Ukraine will be the loser in this struggle, no matter what comes.
In the Western media, we are presented with a remarkably simplified storyline: Putin is an evil warmonger who simply wants to extend Russian territory; to this end, he is exploiting events in Ukraine, deploying his military ostensibly to support the Russian-speaking districts of Luhansk and Donetsk in the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine.
But this is just cover, they say, for his mad quest to rebuild the Russian empire.
In pursuit of his goal, he is willing to inflict any amount of material damage and kill any number of civilians.
Fortunately, say our media, Putin has thus far been largely contained; the brave Ukrainian fighters are constantly “reclaiming” land, Russia’s advance has “stalled,” and indeed, Russia seems to be in danger of losing.
Consequently, the US and its allies must do all they can to “aid” and “support” the brave Ukrainians and their beleaguered but heroic leader, Volodymyr Zelensky.
No amount of money, no assortment of deadly weaponry, no military intelligence, is too much.
Like World War Two, this “war” is an unconditional struggle of Good versus Evil; therefore the West, as the moral paragon of the world, must step up, undergo sacrifice, and ensure that Good prevails.
And indeed, the financial support from just the United States is breathtaking: As of early May, Congress has approved $13.6 billion in aid, much of it for direct Ukrainian military support.
And yet this would only cover costs through September.
Thus, president Biden recently called for an additional package of $33 billion, which would include over $20 billion in military and security aid, and, surprisingly, $2.6 billion for “the deployment of American troops to the region,” in order to “safeguard NATO allies.”
Incredibly, Congress responded by approving $40 billion, bringing the total aid thus far to $54 billion.
For perspective, this represents over 80% of Russia’s annual defense budget of $66 billion.
(By contrast, America allocates well over $1 trillion—that is, $1,000 billion—annually in direct and indirect military expenditures.)
Notably, such unconditional support and defense of Ukraine is a virtually unanimous view across the American political spectrum, and throughout Europe.
Right and left, conservative and liberal, working class or wealthy elite, all sectors of society are apparently united in opposition to the evil Putin.
In an era when virtually no issue garners unanimous support, the Ukrainian cause stands out as an extremely rare instance of bipartisan, multi-sector agreement.
The rare dissenters—such as Fox News’ Tucker Carlson and a handful of alt-right renegades—are routinely attacked as “Russian assets” or “tools of Putin.”
There is no room for disagreement, no space for debate, no opposing views allowed.
In fact, though, this is yet another case of what I might call the “unanimity curse”: when all parties in American society are united on a topic, any topic, then we really need to worry.
Here, it seems that the reality is of a potent Jewish Lobby, exerting itself (again) in the direction of war, for reasons of profit and revenge against a hated enemy.
There is, indeed, a Jewish hand at work here, one that may well drive us into another world war, and even a nuclear war—one which, in the worst case, could mean the literal end of much of life on this planet.
The unanimity comes when all parties are subject, in various ways, to the demands of the Lobby, and when the public has been misled and even brainwashed by a coordinated Jewish media into believing the standard narrative.
The best cure for this catastrophic situation is unrestricted free speech.
The Lobby knows this, however, and thus takes all possible measures to inhibit free speech.
Normally, such a struggle ebbs and flows according to the issue and the times; but now, the situation is dire.
Now more than ever, a lack of free speech could be fatal to civilized society.
Context and Run-Up
To fully understand the Jewish hand in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, we need to review some relevant history.
Over the centuries, there have been constant battles over the lands of present-day Ukraine, with Poles, Austro-Hungarians, and Russians alternately dominating.
Russia took control of most of Ukraine in the late 1700s and held it more or less continuously until the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1991; this is why Putin claims that the country is “part of Russia.”
For their part, Jews have experienced a particularly tumultuous relationship with Russia, one that ranged from disgust and detestation to a burning hatred.
As it happened, Jews migrated to Russia in the 19th century, eventually numbering around 5 million.
They were a disruptive and agitating force within the nation and thus earned the dislike of Czars Nicholas I (reign 1825 to 1855), Alexander II (1855 to 1881, when he was assassinated by a partly-Jewish anarchist gang), and especially Nicholas II (1894 to 1917)—the latter of whom was famously murdered, along with his family, by a gang of Jewish Bolshevists in 1918.
Already in 1871, Russian activist Mikhail Bakunin could refer to the Russian Jews as “a single exploiting sect, a sort of bloodsucker people, a collective parasite”.
The assassination of Alexander initiated a series of pogroms that lasted decades, and which set the stage for a lingering Jewish hatred of all things Russian.
For present purposes, though, we can jump to the 2004 Ukrainian presidential election (I note that Ukraine also has a prime minister, but unlike most European countries, he typically has limited powers).
In 2004, it came down to “the two Viktors”: the pro-Western V. Yushchenko and the pro-Russian V. Yanukovych.
The first round was nearly tied, and thus they went to a second round in which Yanukovych prevailed by around three percentage points.
But amid claims of vote-rigging, Western Ukrainians initiated an “Orange Revolution”—backed by the Ukrainian Supreme Court—that annulled those results and mandated a repeat runoff election.
The second time, the tables were turned, and the pro-West Yushchenko won by eight points.
The West was elated, and Putin naturally mad as hell.
The following years witnessed financial turmoil and, unsurprisingly, constant harassment from Russia.
By 2010, Ukrainians were ready for a change, and this time Yanukovych won handily, over a Jewish female competitor, Yulia Timoshenko—notably, she had “co-led the Orange Revolution.” Russia, for once, was satisfied with the result.
But of course, in the West, Europe and the US were mightily displeased, and they soon began efforts to reverse things yet again.
Among other strategies, they apparently decided to deploy the latest in high tech and social media.
Thus in June 2011, two of Google’s top executives—Eric Schmidt and a 30-year-old Jewish upstart named Jared Cohen—went to visit Julian Assange in the UK, then living under house arrest.
It is well-known, incidentally, that Google is a Jewish enterprise, with Jewish founders Sergei Brin and Larry Page running the ship.
The nominal purpose of the trip was to conduct research for a book that Schmidt and Cohen were working on, regarding the intersection of political action and technology—in plain words, how to foment revolutions and steer events in a desired direction.
As Assange relates in his 2014 book When Google Met Wikileaks, he was initially unaware of the deeper intentions and motives of his interviewers.
Only later did he come to learn that Schmidt had close ties to the Obama administration, and that Cohen was actively working on political upheaval.
As Assange wrote, “Jared Cohen could be wryly named Google’s ‘director of regime change’.” Their immediate targets were Yanukovych in Ukraine and Assad in Syria.
By early 2013, the American Embassy in Kiev was training right-wing Ukrainian nationalists on how to conduct a targeted revolt against Yanukovych.
It would not be long until they had their chance.
In late 2013, Yanukovych decided to reject an EU-sponsored IMF loan, with all the usual nasty strings attached, in favor of a comparable no-strings loan from Russia.
This apparent shift away from Europe and toward Russia was the nominal trigger for the start of protest actions.
Thus began the “Maidan Uprising,” led in large part by two extreme nationalist groups: Svoboda and Right Sector. Protests went on for nearly three months, gradually accelerating in intensity; in a notable riot near the end, some 100 protestors and 13 police were shot dead.
As the Uprising reached its peak, at least one American Jew was highly interested: Victoria Nuland.
As Obama’s Assistant Secretary of State (first under Hillary Clinton, and then under the half-Jew John Kerry), Nuland had direct oversight of events in eastern Europe.
And for her, it was personal; her father, Sherwin Nuland (born Shepsel Nudelman), was a Ukrainian Jew.
She was anxious to drive the pro-Russian Yanukovych out of power and replace him with a West-friendly, Jew-friendly substitute.
And she had someone specific in mind: Arseniy Yatsenyuk. On 27 January 2014, as the riots were peaking, Nuland called American Ambassador to Ukraine, Jeff Pyatt, to urgently discuss the matter.
Nuland pulled no punches: “Yats” was her man. We know this because the call was apparently tapped and the dialogue later posted on Youtube. Here is a short excerpt:
Nuland: I think Yats is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience. He’s the… what he needs is Klitsch and Tyahnybok on the outside. He needs to be talking to them four times a week, you know. I just think Klitsch going in… he’s going to be at that level working for Yatseniuk, it’s just not going to work.
Pyatt: Yeah, no, I think that’s right. OK. Good. Do you want us to set up a call with him as the next step? […]
Nuland: OK, good. I’m happy. Why don’t you reach out to him and see if he wants to talk before or after.
Pyatt: OK, will do. Thanks.
It was clear to both of them, though, that the EU leadership had other ideas.
The EU was much more anxious to be a neutral party and to avoid direct intervention in Ukrainian affairs so as to not unduly antagonize Russia.
But in time-tested Jewish fashion, Nuland did not give a damn.
A bit later in the same phone call, she uttered her now-famous phrase: “F___ the EU.” So much for Jewish subtlety.
But there was another angle that nearly all Western media avoided: “Yats” was also Jewish.
In a rare mention, we read in a 2014 Guardian story that “Yatsenyuk has held several high-profile positions including head of the country’s central bank, the National Bank of Ukraine…
He has played down his Jewish-Ukrainian origins, possibly because of the prevalence of antisemitism in his party’s western Ukraine heartland.”
For some reason, such facts are never relevant to Western media.
As the Maidan Uprising gave way to the Maidan Revolution in February 2014, Yanukovych was forced out of office, fleeing to Russia.
Pro-Western forces then succeeded in nominating “Yats” as prime minister, effective immediately, working in conjunction with president Oleksandr Turchynov.
This provisional leadership was formalized in a snap election in May 2014 in which the pro-Western candidate Peter Poroshenko won.
(The second-place finisher was none other than Yulia Timoshenko—the same Jewess who had lost to Yanukovych in 2010.)
It was under such circumstances that Putin invaded and annexed Crimea, in February 2014.
It was also at this time that Russian separatists in Donbass launched their counter-revolution, initiating a virtual civil war in Ukraine; to date, eight years later, around 15,000 people have died in total, many civilians.
With this American-sponsored coup finished, Ukrainian Jews began to reach out to the West to increase their influence.
Thus it happened that just a few months after Maidan, the wayward son of the American vice president got in touch with a leading Ukrainian Jew, Mykola Zlochevsky, who ran a large gas company called Burisma.
In this way, Hunter Biden incredibly found himself on the board of a corporation of which he knew nothing, in an industry of which he knew nothing, and which nonetheless was able to “pay” him upwards of $500,000 per year—obviously, for access to father Joe and thus to President Obama.
Hunter carried on in this prestigious role for around five years, resigning only in 2019, as his father began his fateful run for the presidency.
Despite a rocky tenure, Yatsenyuk managed to hold his PM position for over two years, eventually resigning in April 2016.
His replacement was yet another Jew, Volodymyr Groysman, who served until August 2019. The Jewish hand would not be stayed. All this set the stage for the rise of the ultimate Jewish player, Volodymyr Zelensky.
This situation is particularly remarkable given that Jews are a small minority in Ukraine.
Estimates vary widely, but the Jewish population is claimed to range from a maximum of 400,000 to as low as just 50,000.
With a total population of 41 million, Jews represent, at most, 1% of the nation, and could be as small as 0.12%.
Under normal conditions, a tiny minority like this should be almost invisible; but here, they dominate.
Such is the Jewish hand.
Enter the Jewish Oligarchs
In Ukraine, there is a “second government” that calls many of the shots.
This shadow government is an oligarchy: a system of rule by the richest men.
Of the five richest Ukrainian billionaires, four are Jews: Igor (or Ihor) Kolomoysky, Viktor Pinchuk, Rinat Akhmetov, and Gennadiy Bogolyubov.
Right behind them, in the multi-millionaire class, are Jews like Oleksandr Feldman and Hennadiy Korban.
Collectively, this group is often more effective at imposing their will than any legislator.
And unsurprisingly, this group has been constantly enmeshed in corruption and legal scandals, implicated in such crimes as kidnapping, arson and murder.
Of special interest is the first named above. Kolomoysky has long been active in banking, airlines and media—and in guiding minor celebrities to political stardom.
In 2005 he became the leading shareholder of the 1+1 Media Group, which owns seven TV channels, including the highly popular 1+1 channel.
(The 1+1 Group was founded in 1995 by another Ukrainian Jew, Alexander Rodnyansky.)
Worth up to $6 billion in the past decade, Kolomoysky’s current net wealth is estimated to be around $1 billion.
Not long after acquiring 1+1, Kolomoysky latched on to an up-and-coming Jewish comedian by the name of Volodymyr Zelensky.
Zelensky had been in media his entire adult life, and even co-founded a media group, Kvartal 95, in 2003, at the age of just 25.
Starring in feature films, he switched to television by the early 2010s, eventually coming to star in the 1+1 hit show “Servant of the People,” where he played a teacher pretending to be president of Ukraine.
Then there was the notable 2016 comedy skit in which Zelensky and friends play a piano with their penises—in other words, typical low-brow scatological Jewish humor, compliments of Zelensky and Kolomoysky.
[Zelensky also appeared in a trashy “music” video in which he simulates a grotesque homosexual “come on.” — Ed.]
By early 2018, the pair were ready to move into politics.
Zelensky registered his new political party for the upcoming 2019 election, and declared himself a presidential candidate in December 2018, just four months prior to the election.
In the end, of course, he won, with 30% of the vote in the first round, and then defeating incumbent Poroshenko in the 2nd round by a huge 50-point margin.
Relentless favorable publicity by 1+1 was credited with making a real difference.
Notably, the third-place finisher in that election was, yet again, the Jewess Yulia Timoshenko—like a bad penny, she just keeps coming back.
His Kvartal 95 media company earned him some $7 million per year.
He also owns a 25% share of Maltex Multicapital, a shell company based in the British Virgin Islands, as part of a “web of off-shore companies” he helped to establish back in 2012.
A Ukrainian opposition politician, Ilya Kiva, suggested recently that Zelensky is currently tapping into “hundreds of millions” in funding that flows into the country, and that Zelensky himself is personally earning “about $100 million per month.”
A Netherlands party, Forum for Democracy, recently cited estimates of Zelensky’s fortune at an astounding $850 million.
Apparently the “Churchill of Ukraine” is doing quite well for himself, even as his country burns.
In any case, it is clear that Zelensky owes much to his mentor and sponsor, Kolomoysky.
The latter even admitted as much back in late 2019, in an interview for the New York Times.
“If I put on glasses and look back at myself,” he said, “I see myself as a monster, as a puppet master, as the master of Zelensky, someone making apocalyptic plans.
I can start making this real” (Nov 13). Indeed—the Kolomoysky/Zelensky apocalypse is nearly upon us.
Between rule by Jewish oligarchs and manipulations by the global Jewish lobby, modern-day Ukraine is a mess of a nation—and it was so long before the current “war.”
An international corruption-ranking agency had recently assessed that country at 142nd in the world, worse than Nigeria and equal to Uganda.
As a result, Ukraine’s economy has suffered horribly.
Before the current conflict, their per-capita income level of $8700 put them 112th in the world, below Albania ($12,900), Jamaica ($9100), and Armenia ($9700); this is by far the poorest in Europe, and well below that of Russia ($25,700 per person).
Impoverished, corrupt, manipulated by Jews, now in a hot war—pity the poor Ukrainians.
Hail the American Empire
Enough history and context; let’s cut to the chase.
From a clear-eyed perspective, it is obvious why Zelensky and friends want to prolong a war that they have no hope of winning: They are profiting immensely from it.
As an added benefit, the actor Zelensky gets to perform on the world stage, which he will surely convert into more dollars down the road.
Every month that the conflict continues, billions of dollars are flowing into Ukraine, and Zelensky et al. are assuredly skimming their “fair share” off the top.
Seriously—who, making anywhere near $100 million per month, wouldn’t do everything conceivable to keep the gravy train running?
The fact that thousands of Ukrainian soldiers are dying has no bearing at all in Zelensky’s calculus; in typical Jewish fashion, he cares not one iota for the well-being of the White Europeans.
If his soldiers die even as they kill a few hated Russians, so much the better. For Ukrainian Jews, it is a win-win proposition.
Why does no one question this matter?
Why is Zelensky’s corruption never challenged?
Why are these facts so hard to find?
We know the answer: It is because Zelensky is a Jew, and Jews are virtually never questioned and never challenged by leading Americans or Europeans.
Jews get a pass on everything (unless they are obviously guilty of something heinous—and sometimes even then!).
Jews get a pass from fellow Jews because they cover for each other.
Jews get a pass from media because the media is owned and operated by Jews.
And Jews get a pass from prominent non-Jews who are in the pay of Jewish sponsors and financiers.
Zelensky can be as corrupt as hell, funneling millions into off-shore accounts, but as long as he plays his proper role, no one will say anything.
So the “war” goes on, and Zelensky and friends get rich.
What does Europe get from all this?
Or rather, worse than nothing: They get a hot war in their immediate neighborhood, and they get an indignant Putin threatening to put hypersonic missiles in their capital cities in less than 200 seconds.
They get to deal with the not-so-remote threat of nuclear war.
They get to see their currency decline—by 10% versus the yuan in a year and by 12% versus the dollar.
They get a large chunk of their gas, oil, and electricity supplies diverted or shut off, driving up energy prices.
And they get to see their Covid-fragile economies put on thin ice.
But perhaps they deserve all this.
As is widely known, the European states are American vassals, which means they are Jewish vassals.
European leaders are spineless and pathetic lackeys of the Jewish Lobby.
Judenknecht like Macron, Merkel, and now Scholz, are sorry examples of humanity; they have sold out their own people to placate their overlords.
And the European public is too bamboozled and too timid to make a change; France just had a chance to elect Le Pen, but the people failed to muster the necessary will.
Thus, Europe deserves its fate: hot war, nuclear threat, cultural and economic decline, sub-Saharan and Islamic immigrants—the whole package.
If it gets bad enough, maybe enough Europeans will awaken to the Jewish danger and take action. Or so we can hope.
What about the US? We could scarcely be happier.
Dead Russians, the hated Putin in a tizzy, and the chance to play “world savior” once again.
American military suppliers are ecstatic; they don’t care that most of their weapons bound for Ukraine get lost, stolen or blown up, and that (according to some estimates) only 5% make it to the front.
For them, every item shipped is another profitable sale, whether it is used or not.
And American congressmen get to pontificate about another “good war” even as they approve billions in aid.
And perhaps best of all, we get to press for an expansion to that American Empire known as NATO.
We need to be very clear here: NATO is simply another name for the American Empire.
The two terms are interchangeable.
In no sense is NATO an “alliance among equals.”
Luxembourg, Slovakia, and Albania have absolutely nothing to offer to the US.
Do we care if they will “come to our aid” in case of a conflict?
That is a bad joke, at best.
In reality, what such nations are is more land, more people, and more economic wealth under the American thumb.
They are yet more places to station troops, build military outposts, and run “black sites.”
NATO always was, and always will be, the American Empire.
The push for Ukraine to join NATO by the West-friendly Zelensky was yet another blatant attempt at a power grab by the US, this one on Russia’s doorstep.
Putin, naturally, took action to circumvent that.
But of course, now the push moves to Sweden and Finland, both of whom are unwisely pursuing NATO membership in the illusory quest for security, when in reality they will simply be selling what remains of their national souls to the ruthless Judeo-American masters.
For their sake, I hope they are able to avoid such a future.
And all the while, American Jews and a Jewish-American media play up the “good war” theme, send more weapons, and press ever further into the danger zone.
Ukrainian-American Jews like Chuck Schumer are right out front, calling for aid, for war, for death.
“Ukraine needs all the help it can get and, at the same time, we need all the assets we can put together to give Ukraine the aid it needs,” said Schumer recently, eager to approve the next $40 billion aid package.
As Jews have realized for centuries, wars are wonderful occasions for killing enemies and making a fast buck.
Perhaps it is no coincidence that the present proxy war against Jewish enemies in eastern Europe began not long after the 20-year war against Jewish enemies in Afghanistan ended.
Life without war is just too damn boring, for some.
If more than a minuscule fraction of the public knew about such details, they would presumably be outraged.
But as I mentioned, the Jewish-controlled Western media does an excellent job in restricting access to such information, and in diverting attention whenever such ugly facts pop up.
The major exception is Tucker Carlson, who is able to reach some 3 million people each night; this is by far the widest reach for anything like the above analysis.
But Carlson falls woefully short—pathetically short—in defining the Jewish culprit behind all these factors.
Jews are never outed and never named by Carlson, let alone ever targeted for blame.
This crucial aspect is thus left to a literal handful of alt-right and dissident-right websites that collectively reach a few thousand people, at best.
And even if, by some miracle, all 3 million Tucker viewers were enlightened to the Jewish danger here, this still leaves some 200 million American adults ignorant and unaware.
The mass of people believe what they see on the evening news, or in their Facebook feeds, or Google news, or on CNN or MSNBC, or in the New York Times—all Jewish enterprises, incidentally.
This is why, when polled, 70% of the American public say that current aid to Ukraine is either “about right” or even “too little.”
This, despite the fact that around 50% claim to be “very concerned” about nuclear war; clearly they are unable to make the necessary connections.
And for many, it is even worse than this: around 21% would support “direct American military intervention” against Russia, which means an explicit World War Three, with all the catastrophic outcomes that this entails.
Our Jewish media have done another fine job in whipping up public incitement.
In sum, we can say that our media have cleverly constructed a “philo-Semitic trap”: Any mention or criticism of the Jewish hand in the present conflict is, first, highly censored, and then, if necessary, is dismissed as irrational anti-Semitism.
Sympathy toward the (truly) poor, suffering Ukrainians is played up to the hilt, and Putin and the Russians relentlessly demonized.
Leading American Jews, like Tony Blinken and Chuck Schumer, are constantly playing the good guys, pleading for aid, promising to help the beleaguered and outmanned Ukrainian warriors.
Who can resist this storyline?
Thus, we have no opposition, no questioning, no deeper inquiries into root causes.
Jews profit and flourish, Ukrainians and Russians suffer and die, and the world rolls along toward potential Armageddon.
The reality is vastly different.
Global Jews are, indeed, “planetary master criminals,” as Martin Heidegger long ago realized.
They function today as they have for centuries: as advocates for abuse, exploitation, criminality, death and profits.
This is self-evidently true: If the potent Jewish Lobby wanted true peace, or flourishing humanity, they would be actively pushing for such things and likely succeeding.
Instead, we have endless mayhem, war, terrorism, social upheaval and death, even as Jewish pockets get ever-deeper.
And the one possible remedy for all this—true freedom of speech—recedes from our grasp.
On the one hand, I fear greatly for our future.
On the other, I feel that we get what we deserve.
When we allow malicious Jews to dominate our nations, and then they lead us into war and global catastrophe, well, what can we say?
Perhaps there is no other way than to await the inevitable conflagration, exact retribution in the ensuing chaos, and then rebuild society from scratch—older and wiser.
Most Zionist diplomacy takes place in secret, through corruption and blackmail (euphemistically called “lobbying”).
Most Zionist diplomacy takes place in secret, through corruption and blackmail (euphemistically called “lobbying”).
But sometimes it is deemed appropriate that some statement be written down by some government representative in support of Zionism.
The Goyim who write these statements may think them of little consequence, but Zionists know very well how to capitalize on them.
The most famous such document is the short letter written by the British Foreign Minister Lord Arthur Balfour to Lord Lionel Walter Rothschild, president of the Zionist Federation, on November 2, 1917. Prime Minister Lloyd George later explained the deal in those terms:
“Zionist leaders gave us a definite promise that, if the Allies committed themselves to give facilities for the establishment of a national home for the Jews in Palestine, they would do their best to rally Jewish sentiment and support throughout the world to the Allied cause.
They kept their word.”
Less known than the Balfour Declaration is the letter obtained by Nahum Sokolow, head of the World Zionist Organization, from the French Foreign minister Jules Cambon.
Dated June 4, 1917, it not only anticipated the Balfour Declaration but cleared the way for it.
It states that the French government “feels sympathy for your cause, the triumph of which is linked to that of the allies.”
The cause in question is “the development of the Israeli colonization in Palestine” and “the renaissance of the Jewish nationality in that land from which the people of Israel were exiled so many centuries ago.”
Back in London, Sokolow deposited the Cambon letter at the Foreign Office, where it stimulated a spirit of competition.
In January 1918, he returned to Paris, this time with the aim of securing a public French declaration in support of the Balfour Declaration.
A magnificent example of the efficiency of Zionist transnational diplomacy for war profiteering.
If Balfour thought that, after the war, his letter, cautiously worded and typed on unmarked paper, would be of little consequence, he was wrong.
Zionists made it a cornerstone to their project.
When the British government proved reluctant to deliver after the Versailles Treaty, they invested on the ambitious, unscrupulous and bankrupt Winston Churchill (1874-1965), whose thoughts were, in his own words, “99 percent identical” with Chaim Weizmann’s.
During WWII, Churchill and Weizmann conspired to repeat the winning strategy of the Balfour declaration in WWI, attempting to monetize Jewish influence to bring the United States into the war.
In a letter to Churchill dated September 10, 1941, Weizmann wrote: “I have spent months in America, traveling up and down the country […].
There is only one big ethnic group which is willing to stand, to a man, for Great Britain, and a policy of ‘all-out-aid’ for her: the five million American Jews. […]
It has been repeatedly acknowledged by British Statesmen that it was the Jews who, in the last war, effectively helped to tip the scales in America in favor of Great Britain.
They are keen to do it—and may do it—again.”
As soon as he had become Prime Minister in May 1940, Churchill instructed his War Cabinet member Arthur Greenwood to craft a document assuring the Jewish elites that a winning Britain will give them not only Palestine but a major share in the “new world order” to compensate for “the wrongs suffered by the Jewish people.”
Although it is little known, this “Greenwood Pledge” is, according to Zionist Rabbi Stephen Wise, “of wider and farther reaching implications” than the Balfour declaration.
The New York Times published it in its October 6, 1940 edition, under the amazing title “New World Order Pledged to Jews” (reproduced here and here).
The recipient of the declaration, here presented as Dr. S.S. Wise, was a major player in Zionist deep politics since the time of Theodor Herzl, and a close collaborator of Louis Brandeis, Felix Frankfurter, and Samuel Untermeyer.
He was the founder of the New York Federation of Zionist Societies in 1897, the first seed for the Zionist Organization of America, of which he was president.
In 1917 he participated in the effort to convince President Woodrow Wilson to approve the Balfour declaration.
In 1936, he was a co-founder of the World Jewish Congress, dedicated to rallying world Jewry against Hitler.
Here is the full text of the New York Times, introducing the “Greenwood Pledge”:
New York Times, October 6, 1940
NEW WORLD ORDER PLEDGED TO JEWS;
Arthur Greenwood of British War Cabinet Sends Message of Assurance Here
RIGHTING OF WRONGS SEEN
English Rabbi Delivers to Dr. S.S. Wise New Statement on Question After War
In the first public declaration on the Jewish question since the outbreak of the war, Arthur Greenwood, a member without portfolio in the British War Cabinet, assured the Jews of the United States that when victory was achieved an effort would be made to found a new world order based on the ideals of “justice and peace.”
Mr. Greenwood, who is Deputy Leader of the British Labor party, declared that in the new world the “conscience of civilized humanity would demand that the wrongs suffered by the Jewish people in so many countries should be righted.”
He added that after the war an opportunity would be given to Jews everywhere to make a “distinctive and constructive contribution” in the rebuilding of the world.
The message was delivered last week to Dr. Stephen S. Wise, chairman of the executive committee of the World Jewish Congress, by Rabbi Maurice L. Perzweig, chairman of the British section of the congress. Rabbi Perizweig arrived from England Monday evening.
Intention to Right Wrongs
Comparing the statement with the Balfour Declaration of 1917, D. Wise declared that in a sense it had “wider and farther reaching implications,” as it dealt with the status of Jews throughout the world.
He said that Mr. Greenwood’s message could be interpreted as a statement of England’s firm intention to help right the wrongs which Jews have suffered and continue to suffer today because of Hitler’s “disorder and lawlessness.”
Mr. Greenwood, sending the Jews of America a message of “encouragement and warm good wishes,” wrote: “The tragic fate of the Jewish victims of Nazi tyranny has, as you know, filed us with deep emotion.
The speeches of responsible statesmen in Parliament and at the League of Nations during the last seven years have reflected the horror with which the people of this country have viewed the Nazi relapse into barbarism.
“The British Government sought again to secure some amelioration of the lot of persecuted Jewry both in Germany itself and in the countries which were infected by the Nazi doctrine of racial hatred.
Today the same sinister power which has trampled on its own defenseless minorities, and by fraud and force has temporarily robbed many small peoples of their independence, has challenged the last stronghold of liberty in Europe.
New World Order Forecast
“When we have achieved victory, as we assuredly shall, the nations will have the opportunity of establishing a new world order based on the ideals of justice and peace.
In such a world it is our confident hope that the conscience of civilized humanity would demand that the wrongs suffered by the Jewish people in so many countries should be righted.
“In the rebuilding of civilized society after the war, there should and will be a real opportunity for Jews everywhere to make a distinctive and constructive contribution; and all men of good-will must assuredly hope that in new Europe the Jewish people, in whatever country they may live, will have the freedom and full equality before the law with every other citizen.”
In an interview at the Hotel Astor, Rabbi Perlzweig declared he was certain Mr. Greenwood “speaks for England.”
There is a clear realization, he added, that freedom and emancipation for the Jewish people are tied up with emancipation and freedom for people everywhere.
The message, Rabbi Perlzweig remarked, was the subject of earnest consideration by the British Government.
“This is a declaration on behalf of the whole world,” he observed. “Here the British Government expresses clearly what it hopes will take place after the war is won.”
Nobody is pushing” the conflict in Ukraine more than US State Department official Victoria Nuland, Twitter CEO Elon Musk said on Wednesday. Nuland, who helped to orchestrate the pro-Western coup in Kiev in 2014, has backed military strikes on the Russian territory of Crimea.
Nuland’s declaration last Thursday that Russian military bases in Crimea are “legitimate targets” for Ukrainian forces was interpreted by the Kremlin as proof of “US involvement in the Ukraine conflict.”
In a post on Telegram, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev warned that Moscow would respond to such attacks “using weapons of any kind.”
“Nobody is pushing this war more than Nuland,” wrote Musk, who has previously warned that nuclear war could break out unless Ukraine abandons its claims to Crimea and both sides agree to peace talks.
As assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian Affairs in 2014, Nuland helped organize the coup that saw Ukraine’s democratically-elected president, Viktor Yanukovich, replaced with the pro-Western Pyotr Poroshenko, who then began a campaign of military repression against the people of Donetsk and Lugansk.
The latest conjoining of the two is the ADL’s policy proposals to be included in the Democratic & Republican platforms.
Particularly pernicious and alarming is the ADL’s relentless targeting of the Internet.
Here is a Brave New ‘Zionist‘ World policy proposal the ADL wants on both party’s platforms:
“The ADL believes the US must mobilize government efforts to confront anti-Semitism and all forms of hatred and bigotry.
Anti-Semitic propaganda is disseminated throughout the world via the Internet.
The US must use inter-governmental forums to encourage legislative and judicial action to fight anti-Semitism and encourage the improvement of data collection of all anti-Semitic activities”Here.
The ADL’s persistent power in U.S. politics has been strangely unaffected by its history, probably because that history is so little known.
The Ilhan Omar debate should be shaped by at least two aspects of it.
The first is that the ADL has consistently sought to undermine the left, leveling a charge akin to dual loyalty: that the American left’s calls for redistribution of power, its solidarity with global movements, and its prioritization of people over states threaten the very concept of the state.
Indeed the ADL, in addition to its stated mission of shoring up U.S. support for Israel, is deeply loyal to the U.S. state.
The second is that the ADL has waged a long, vigorous, and successful campaign, alongside AIPAC, specifically to characterize Arab American political organizing as dual loyalty.
The Zionists were keeping the Palestinians under wraps from the international community and the general public until the Palestinians made themselves known threw Intifada. Before then hardly anyone knew there Palestinians and what was being done to them!
Last Friday, the State Department announced the nomination of James Cavallaro, a widely respected human rights attorney, to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.
But earlier this week, the State Department withdrew Cavallaro’s nomination after reports emerged that he had described Israel as an apartheid state and had criticized House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries’s close ties to AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
Defending the withdrawal of Cavallaro’s nomination, State Department spokesperson Ned Price said, “His statements clearly do not reflect U.S. policy.
They are not a reflection of what we believe, and they are inappropriate to say the least.”
The decision has sparked outrage within the human rights community.
Cavallaro joins us to explain that this move by the Biden administration is particularly troubling because the role he was nominated for does not have any authority over U.S.-Israel relations and is an independent position.
In 2015, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu joined world leaders in a rally in Paris after the horrific attacks on satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and a kosher supermarket claimed by the Islamic State group.
Afterward, Netanyahu proclaimed, “I went to Paris not just as the prime minister of Israel but as a representative of the entire Jewish people.”
It is this conflation between Israel and Judaism, one that is baked into the foundation of Israel and perpetuated by its leaders, that leads to a problematic tautology: Israel’s leaders represent all Jewish people, and thus by definition any criticism of Israel must be criticism of all Jewish people — and hence antisemitic.
The fact that Greene, despite her own record, felt comfortable weaponizing antisemitism as an alleged defense of Israel while spewing antisemitic remarks shows how cynical the discourse about this heinous form of racism has become.
“How can Syria ask for help from an entity that killed and participated in killing Syrians over the past decades and years?”
Israeli law, organs to be harvested without the family’s consent. The fact is, that Israeli organ harvesting—sometimes with Israeli governmental funding and the participation of high Israeli officials, prominent Israeli physicians, and Israeli government ministries—has been documented for many years. Among the victims have been Palestinians.
Israelis have been caught in the lucrative illegal trade of human organ harvesting in Kosova, India, Haiti, Chad, Belarus, Nicaragua. Peru, Nicaragua, Philippines, Turkey, Ukraine, China and Occupied Palestine.
While at least 45 other countries have offered to assist Turkey, relatively few have publicly committed to aiding Syria.
Now, Israel says it’s offering to admit Syrians to Israeli hospitals in the country’s north while reports in Syria deny reaching out to the enemy state for help.
A Syrian official source has categorically denied Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s claims that Damascus has requested earthquake relief aid from Tel Aviv, Al-Watan newspaper reported.
The paper quoted the unnamed official source as saying that if Netanyahu had received such a request, it is certainly from his allies and friends in Daesh, Jabhat Al-Nusra and terrorist organisations, adding: “The [Israeli] occupation entity is the cause of woes, wars and tensions in the region, and it is the last person who has the right to talk about providing aid and assistance.”
“It is disgraceful that Netanyahu exploits the earthquake catastrophe that had struck Syria to mislead public opinion and cover up the occupation’s expansionist and aggressive policies,” the source added.
Multiple Syrian official sources also denied Netanyahu’s claims. They told Al-Watan that everything published in the Israeli media is a “propaganda campaign” by Netanyahu.
“How can Syria ask for help from an entity that killed and participated in killing Syrians over the past decades and years?” the sources said.
In a speech yesterday, Netanyahu said he had ordered aid to be sent to Turkiye, the epicentre of yesterday’s earthquake. “Since a request was also received to do this for many victims of the earthquake in Syria, I instructed to do this as well,” he said.
At least 3,600 people have been killed by the 7.8 magnitude earthquake that struck Turkiye and Syria yesterday. The quake was so strong, residents in Lebanon, the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Israel and Cyprus could also feel the ground shake.
Israel’s very first, historic heart transplant used a heart removed from a living patient without consent or consulting his family.
In December 1968 a man named Avraham Sadegat (the New York Times seems to give his name as A Savgat)2 died two days after a stroke, even though his family had been told he was “doing well.”
After initially refusing to release his body, the Israeli hospital where he was being treated finally turned the man’s body over to his family.
They discovered that his upper body was wrapped in bandages; an odd situation, they felt, for someone who had suffered a stroke.
When they removed the bandages, they discovered that the chest cavity was stuffed with bandages, and the heart was missing.
During this time, the headline-making Israeli heart transplant had occurred.
After their initial shock, the man’s wife and brother began to put the two events together and demanded answers.
The hospital at first denied that Sadegat’s heart had been used in the headline-making transplant, but the family raised a media storm and eventually applied to three cabinet ministers.
Finally, weeks later and after the family had signed a document promising not to sue, the hospital admitted that Sadagat’s heart had been used.
The hospital explained that it had abided by Israeli law, which allowed organs to be harvested without the family’s consent.3 (The United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime includes the extraction of organs in its definition of human exploitation.)
Indications that the removal of Sadagat’s heart was the actual cause of death went unaddressed.
Nikki Haley will soon become the second major candidate, after former President Trump, to enter the race for the Republican Party’s 2024 presidential nomination.
From left to right: President Joe Biden, former President Donald Trump, Florida GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis, and former Vice President Mike Pence. (Kevin Dietsch, Spencer Platt, Giorgio VIERA/AFP, Scott Olson)
Also a US presidential candidate for 2024. Israel would love her the best, she is insanely devoted.
I promised to be the most pro-Israel Governor in America and our bold agenda for my upcoming Business Development Mission to Israel includes many historic firsts and strengthens Florida’s ties with Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East.
Christian Zionists managed, through the positioning of Mike Pence and fellow believers in the White House, an incredible measure of influence over the most powerful nation on earth.
Zionism is a Jewish political ideology that zealously promotes the existence of Israel as their religious homeland.
Since the Balfour declaration in 1917 signed Israel over to Baron de Rothschild, Jewish Zionists have been committing perpetual genocide against the non-Jewish (mostly Muslim) native Palestinians and have all but wiped them out.
Nowadays Israel has accumulated incredible financial/political clout, and many have rightly pointed out that modern America and Great Britain act as mere satellites of Israel and Israeli policy.
“The Jews rule this world by proxy.
They get others to fight and die for them.
They have now gained control of the most powerful countries … this tiny community heave become a world power.” -Malaysian Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamed
“There is only one power which really counts: The power of political pressure.
We Jews are the most powerful people on earth, because we have this power, and we know how to apply it” -Ze’ev Jabotinsky, Jewish Daily Bulletin, July 27, 1935
The biggest banks including the Federal Reserve enslaving the world to debt-based currencies are all run by Zionist Jews: Rothschild’s of London and Berlin, Lazard Brothers of Paris, Israel Moses Seaf of Italy, Kuhn, Loeb & Co. of Germany and New York, Warburg & Co. of Germany, Lehman Brothers of New York, Goldman Sachs of New York, Rockefeller Brothers of New York, and many more.
The biggest and most influential lobby in America is none other than AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, and the majority of Congress has long been bought out by Israeli interests.
Former US congresswoman Cynthia McKinney exposed and blamed the American pro-Israeli lobby including AIPAC, ADL, AJC, and ZOA for ruining her political career.
In 2009 she told an interviewer that “more than 99% of Congress works for Pro Zionist Israeli interests.”
Because of her pro-Palestinian stance McKinney was ousted from Congress by the influence of Jewish lobbies funding and supporting her political opponents.
Another former US congressman, Jim Trafficant was also targeted and imprisoned on trumped-up corruption charges when he openly opposed the Israelis.
After serving 7 years in prison he came out in a television interview saying, “Israel has a powerful stranglehold on the American government.
They control both members of the House and the Senate.
They have us involved in wars in which we have little or no interest.
Our children are coming back in body bags.
Our nation is bankrupt over these wars.
And if you open your mouth, you get targeted.
And if they don’t beat you at the poll, they’ll put you in prison … They’re controlling much of our foreign policy.
They’re influencing much of our domestic policy.
Joe Biden and his vice president Kamala Harris are clearly members of the Democratic Party’s pro-Israel wing. We must remember that Harris was the one who led the Senate against then-U.S. President Barak Obama’s choice to abstain during the UN vote on Resolution 2334 condemning Israel for its settlements in the West Bank.
Wolfowitz as undersecretary of defense manipulated President Bush number two back into Iraq.
They’ve pushed definitely to try to get Bush before he left to move into Iran.
We’re conducting the expansionist policy of Israel and everybody’s afraid to say it.
Zionist occupation jail authorities assaulted Palestinian women prisoners on Tuesday morning amid a push to enforce strict new measures against Palestinian inmates introduced by Israel’s far-right Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir.
The Palestinian Prisoners’ Society said in a statement that Israeli forces beat women prisoners in Damon jail, fired tear gas at them and used pepper spray.
The far right minister of security says Palestinian prisoners getting fresh bread every day is an ‘absurdity’
The IPS had cut electricity in the Negev prison, barred prisoners’ families from visits, and stopped serving them meals.
Dozens of Palestinian prisoners in Ketziot, Ofer and Megiddo prisons were put in solitary confinement over the weekend, allegedly for celebrating the killing of seven Israeli settlers by a Palestinian man in a shooting in occupied East Jerusalem on Friday.
Palestinian prisoners said they will also stop agreeing to security checks by the IPS as part of their protests against the growing crackdowns.
Strike in East Jerusalem
The rise in prison tensions follows a week of violence across the occupied Palestinian territories.
Israeli forces killed 10 Palestinians in a large-scale raid on Jenin in the occupied West Bank on Thursday which sparked nationwide anger.
Jenin’s bereaved residents left in a ‘war zone’ following Israeli raid
A Palestinian man opened fire at Israeli settlers in occupied East Jerusalem on Friday, killing seven.
The shooting prompted harsh crackdowns by Israeli forces on Palestinians in East Jerusalem.
On Tuesday, residents of Jabal al-Mukaber and Sheikh Saad, towns in southern Jerusalem, staged a general strike against what they called collective punishment by Israeli authorities against them, which included threats to demolish dozens of houses.
Hundreds of Palestinian homes in Jabal al-Mukaber are threatened by Israeli demolition orders for not having building permits.
Israeli authorities make it nearly impossible for Palestinians to get building permits in the city which forces many to build without them.
According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), Israeli demolished 666 Palestinian homes in the West Bank and East Jerusalem in 2021, displacing 958 people, a 38 percent increase from the previous year.
Middle East Eye delivers independent and unrivalled coverage and analysis of the Middle East, North Africa and beyond. To learn more about republishing this content and the associated fees, please fill out this form. More about MEE can be found here.
That includes the financial system, security apparatus, Pentagon, politicians, courts, judges, police, schools, intellectual property, natural resources, utilities, media, big corporations, technology, and whatever else I failed to mention.
It implies the existence of nation-state governance.
Today’s US is an amalgamation of corporations and parasitic financial institutions largely run by Rothschild Zionists.
America isn’t a nation, it’s a corporate empire, or more accurately- ZioCorp.
First a disclaimer.
When I use terms like “ZOG” or “ZioCorp,” I am not referring to “Fiddler on the Roof” Jews or Moe, Larry, and Curly.
I mean a global criminal banking syndicate headed by satanic usurer Jews and their eugenics-obsessed Rockefeller crime family associate who employ Rothschild Zionists and globalists of all stripes to prop up a business model that rests on the pillars of debt slavery, spiritual/physical destruction, and planetary rape.
I harbor no ill will toward any race, religion, ethnic group, consenting adult orientation, or gender. In Tao, internal transcends external.
Second disclaimer (or notice).
I sometimes use colorful language.
This article is not suitable for delicate ladies or children. If that’s you, stop reading.
ZioCorp owns everything.
That includes the financial system, security apparatus, Pentagon, politicians, courts, judges, police, schools, intellectual property, natural resources, utilities, media, big corporations, technology, and whatever else I failed to mention.
ZioCorp holds full spectrum dominance over its subjects.
Neoliberal capitalism enabled ZioCorp to commoditize everything- including human beings.
Not content with owning every grain of sand and drop of water, global finance wants the proprietary rights to your DNA, internal organs, blood and lymphatic systems, and thought processes.
They changed the name of the personnel department to human resources.
That wasn’t by accident. You are a harvestable resource.
ZioCorp isn’t like the traditional dictatorship run by a mustachioed strong man.
Decisions are made in boardrooms by people you will never see or know.
It’s what political philosopher Sheldon Wolin called “inverted totalitarianism.”
ZioCorp’s loyal servants come from all races, genders, and religions.
Don’t think because you are White or Black, and you get a White or Black judge, he or she will go easier on you.
It’s like the NWA “F*ck the Police” rap song says: “But don’t let it be a Black and a White one.
Cause they’ll slam ya down to the street top.
Black police showin’ out for the White cop.”
The song’s point being the Black cop beats down the Black arrestee harder to gain approval from his White partner.
Your racial brethren will kick your face in twice as hard to prove their loyalty to ZioCorp.
See Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, etc.
To understand ZioCorp, we need to explore capitalism, and more importantly, the inherent flaws within it that made the current situation possible.
Some people freak over any critique of capitalism, as they regard it as an attack on American patriotism.
After all, America was founded as a capitalist country
Someone from the reactionary right is reading this and thinking: “Criticize capitalism?!
You Antifa pinko communist Marxist Jew.
You just want to take my money and give it to some #BLM crack ho and her kids.
F*ck you and the menorah you rode in on.”
Easy sheriff. To quote American Psycho’s Patrick Bateman, “Cool it with the anti-semitic remarks.”
Pretend you’re at one of those 5-star luxury ashrams frequented by rich White broads and the Maharishi’s at the head of the class telling you to go ommmmm. Breathe baby, breathe.
I recognize that capitalism contains positive aspects.
It can take the selfishness and egotism found within human nature and channel those traits into productive outcomes.
Ethical entrepreneurs produce amazing things.
Some people express their creativity through small business ownership.
Because it focuses on “the individual,” capitalism gave us the Bill of Rights.
Millennia of buying and selling have ingrained market thinking into the human psyche.
Even non-technological societies use beads and bird feathers to conduct transactions.
I’m not suggesting eliminating money.
Imagine buying a car on Craigslist if you needed to show up with a herd of sheep to take home a Camry.
However, capitalism also destroys the “collective.”
Unchecked, it devours everything in its path.
It eats the poor, working class, middle class, and eventually the upper middle class.
It also destroys the environment, leaving us with radioactive oceans and poisoned rivers.
In end-stage capitalism, oligarchs fight each other for the last slice of cherry pie while the masses drown in a sea of economic and social chaos. Sound familiar?
Of all the nations, China seems most willing to experiment with different economic paradigms.
They may eventually lead humanity to a post-scarcity Star Trek economy where people work for their purpose rather than a paycheck.
Whether they succeed or not is indeterminate at this juncture.
City of London bankers plan on turning China into corporate headquarters after the US collapses.
Global finance has an impressive track record with national infiltration and takeover.
Never underestimate their capabilities.
The former United States republic now US Anglo-Zionist Empire stands as the textbook model for banker takeover.
How’d it happen?
For the sake of brevity, I’ll provide the sped-up Dr. Morell B12- cocaine-amphetamine elixir version.
The Founding Fathers “American Experiment” sought to replace monarchical rule with rule by the “Invisible Hand of Capitalism.”
As per their guru John Locke, the cornerstone of the new republic became economics and private property.
Being wealthy landowners gave the Founding Fathers a huge advantage.
Their willingness to commoditize African slaves to save on labor costs demonstrates their religious devotion to capitalism.
To get the hoi polloi to fight for the new system, the nouveau plutocrats promised them constitutional rights and fat land grants.
Why else would the soldiers freeze their asses off at Valley Forge? While the average White male gained some groovy civil liberties, the founding Fathers reneged on the land grants and other promised perks.
George Washington’s crushing of the farmers’ “Whisky Rebellion” laid the foundation for an IRS police state and oligarchic rule.
In the 1800s, French political philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville observed that Americans were obsessed with getting rich.
A money-driven nation becomes an easy mark for Central Bankers.
The US Civil War allowed the Rothschilds to get their intractable foot in the bank vault door.* (*Sarah E.V. Emery, “Seven Financial Conspiracies Which Have Enslaved The American People.”)
This was followed by the unconstitutional Federal Reserve Act of 1913 which turned over US money creation to the international financiers.
A move that resulted in the theft of hundreds of trillions of dollars.
After the US became the bankers’ central hub, it needed a permanent war machine to keep the global grift going.
In his prescient farewell address, Eisenhower warned about the dangers of a runaway Military Industrial Complex.
The Wall Street-inflicted Great Depression almost sank capitalism.
FDR instituted bank reforms and social safety nets to save his fellow plutocrats and the flailing system.
In their insatiable greed, the banker class started chipping away at the policies that both rescued them and created a stable middle class.
Bit by bit, the hued-out spaces were filled with corporate cement.
Saint Ronald Reagan’s eyedropper “trickle-down economics” deregulated the banks and corporations and laid the finishing girders for the corporatist dystopia skyscraper.
Reagan’s firing of the striking air traffic controllers destroyed organized labor, and the standard of living previously enjoyed by the working class.
Bill Clinton completed the edifice with NAFTA, repeal of Glass-Steagall banking rules, outsourcing of the manufacturing base, and steroidal Mr. Universe corporate deregulation.
Many Americans went along with these policies in hopes they’d become rich enough to garner an invite to the Donald Trump-P Diddy-Miss America contestant hot tub party.
A big problem with making money the cornerstone of a society is that you get a Ralph Kramden population forever searching for the next “no money down” get-rich-quick infomercial scheme.
If that doesn’t work, play the lottery.
“You’ve got to be in it to win it.”
After the 9/11 zio-attack, George W. Bush told Americans to “go shopping.”
The oligarchy kept the serfs hoofing it by dangling dreams of solid gold Trump toilet bowls and oil sheik mega yachts coupled with fear of death by predatory capitalism.
However, even Rush Limbaugh devotee ding dongs are beginning to realize the game is rigged.
The glass ceiling of upward mobility has turned to lead.
This revelation tends to upset people. “Fight Club’s” Tyler Durden said it best: “We’ve all been raised on television to believe that one day we’d be millionaires, movie gods, and rock stars.
But we won’t.
We’re slowly learning that fact.
And we’re very very pissed off.”
Damn straight b!tch.
Give us our free sh!t or burn this motherf*cker to the ground. Lindsey Graham, Chuck Schumer, and their corporate donors are stealing whatever’s not welded to the floor.
If you’re middle/working class, take anything and everything from the “government” that you can, and use it to stock up on ammo, freeze-dried food, and Johnny Walker Blue Label.
Fight for your share of the loot before the Central Bankers install their NWO digital currency.
Then the faucets get superglue tightened.
In the meantime, fly in the helicopter money you child-raping globalist scum.
Riot for UBI or let the old lady work so you can stay home and practice your tiger claw thrust and flying tortoise shell trachea strike.
Civil war and economic crash ahead. Let the robots flip the burgers.
AI can man the call centers.
Employers broke the social contract when they forced workers to get the DARPA vax.
If you succumbed because you dislike sleeping in the street then hopefully you received your dose from the control or low-concentration batch.
If they injured you or ruined the DNA your ancestors fought saber tooth tigers to give you, you’d need to put in serious work to make that right.
That could include some weekends and holidays.
While not easy, leveling that karma would be better than Norma Jean’s sweet cherry pie.
As a side note- I’m not an anti-vax zealot.
If an adult wants to take the mRNA vaccine, that’s their business.
Just don’t mandate it.
And stop releasing “gain of function” bioweapons on the public.
Back to “free government cheese.”
Mention universal healthcare, UBI, or free college, and the Ben Shapiro ziotarian kicks out his “we can’t afford it” auto-response.
We can’t afford universal healthcare but the 2008 29 trillion dollar banker bailout (CNBC Money) was totally doable.
And so was the 6 trillion dollar Iraq War that Shapiro pushed.
And the hundreds of billions in corporate subsidies.
And the trillions we send to Israel either directly or through fighting their wars.
According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, it would take 20 billion dollars to end homelessness in the US.
That’s half of one Ukraine War installment payment.
In controlled scarcity capitalism, they don’t want to end homelessness.
The homeless guy scrounging the trash for bottles reminds you that you can never quit your sh!t job- even if it means submitting to medical experimentation.
Ziocapitalism is a scam.
Not only could we have universal healthcare (medical bills are the leading cause of bankruptcy in the US- American Journal of Public Health), but that stolen loot could provide every American with a 100 grand check and a gold-plated Cadillac.
It’s not that the average American wouldn’t mind breaking a few bucks off their paycheck so Billy the Orphan could get his leukemia treatments, but once the wallet cracks a little, the government inserts its tire jack and cranks it all the way open.
Then the bread gets funneled to the pig trough where Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea stick their snouts in it. Or it gets turned into rainbow flag bombs that get dropped on Middle East kids.
Big corporations and oligarch billionaires don’t pay taxes.
Even if a few sometimes pay “for show taxes,” that money is looped back to them via the Central Bankers.
If you can’t afford an army of tax lawyers and offshore corporation setups, you pay.
If you get snared in an IRS audit, you could get fisted harder than a twink in a Gay pride parade S&M float.
Taxation is a ZioCorp scam. Advances in monetary technology make taxation obsolete.
Public banking as advocated by economists like Ellen Brown along with new high-tech financial tools would allow Billy to get his cancer medicine and you to hold on to your bread.
ZioCorp keeps the IRS around to smash small businesses and the middle class.
Taxation is a police state tool that allows the parasites to strip you of your assets and throw you in prison.
Step on a crack, and the IRS charges you with breaking your momma’s back.
If we don’t raise taxes, does that mean the Fed cartel should print even more Ponzi digital dollars to pay for social safety nets?
Absolutely. The stated US debt is 30 trillion.
According to Forbes, the actual debt is 200 trillion.
It doesn’t matter if it hits 500 gazillion. It’s unpayable. When it pops, it pops.
From a theoretical perspective, if a society evolves technologically, robots and AI (or machine learning) replace human labor.
If it comes down to Universal Basic Income or Davos depopulation- I choose UBI.
It’s going to take some real Jimmy Hoffa UBI teamsters to make it happen.
In my unscientific estimate, 80 percent of ‘Murican men are either weak p*ssy momma whores, zipper brains, or in most cases, both.
About 20 percent are solid cats with 1-5 percent of those being psycho-warriors. The 20 percent determine how it goes.
The political class are criminals.
They understand your wanting cash.
That’s not subversive, like asking for free speech or an end to the zio-wars.
They might cough up a few bucks out of self-interest with the proper application of pressure.
The Hollywood celebrity “c*ntessa” with 50 million Instagram followers means nothing to me.
It’s the working man (and woman) who ships food to my table and keeps the lights on.
They deserve their cut.
As does the orphan and widow.
As for Hollywood- keep Sean Penn.
While I liked him in “The Falcon and the Snowman,” Bill Gates pumped so much mRNA jizz up his ass, it shot out his nose like milk during a laughing fit.
I think the high force pressure caused brain damage.
Capitalism creates billionaires.
Billionaires destroy civil society. I can live with millionaires.
Billionaires buy your government, e.g., Citizens United v FEC. I don’t care how many “checks and balances” get put in place, at some point they bribe the gatekeepers.
I think the best solution is to impose a 5 million dollar per year personal wealth cap.
If an ethical entrepreneur makes more than that, let him put it in trust for his kids (who have the same cap), reinvest in new ventures, or donate the surplus to Sister Mary’s orphanage.
No Bill Gates fake philanthropic foundations please.
If you can’t live the good life on an annual 5 million tax-free salary, you’re what “Scarface” called a “haza” (chazzer).
What’s a haza?
Like Tony Montana explained to his former boss Frank Lopez, “You remember what a haza is Frank?
It’s a pig that don’t fly straight.”
The rentier capitalism parasite FIRE economy is a haza system.
When it comes to billionaire-bought political systems, the US has no rival.
I’m amazed people still vote. Dominion should install a seat with an electric cattle prod dildo in their rigged voting booths.
That would provide Americans with a more authentic voting experience.
Keep jerking off to hope porn and Marjorie Taylor Greene pics.
I prefer Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
To help cover the congressional pay raise, MTG and AOC could star together in a girl-on-girl pay-per-view special.
Highrollers could book private sessions. Caligula put the senators’ wives to work in the imperial brothel.
I think that sister f*cker was on to something.
Even if you remove the zio from capitalism, it contains fundamental flaws.
Take the Apple iPhone.
I don’t know how often Apple comes out with a new model, but for the sake of this exercise, pretend it’s once a year.
Apple probably has all the “bells and whistles” that they’re going to install over the next ten years.
However, if Apple sells you an indestructible iPhone with the next ten years of bells and whistles on it, the company loses money.
They would have sold you one iPhone instead of ten.
To maximize Apple’s profits and meet consumer demand, the CIA overthrows reformist governments to keep the lithium flowing and the planet turns into a toxic waste dump.
The GDP endless growth/consumption model is crashing hard.
The globalist oligarchs who created the problem have come up with the solution- and a final one at that.
People are tired of the “Capitalism is Jesus” Ayn Rand rap.
So am I. Full disclosure- I liked “Atlas Shrugged” and “The Fountainhead.”
As for Jesus, his program was a lot closer to pre-2016 Bernie Sanders’ than Milton Friedman’s.
However you view capitalism, or socialism, or Rosicrucianism, or purple flying unicorns named Mandy- it doesn’t really matter.
We’ve entered end-stage capitalism/Great Reset/Tribulation, with no return bus to Mayberry.
ZioCorp’s opted for the controlled collapse business model.
Will it remain on top after the freakshow carnival tent folds in on itself?
I don’t know. I’m stupid. That’s why I follow Tao.
Evidence that came to light after Israel removed its gag order on information regarding the June 12 kidnapping and murder of three Jewish Israeli students suggests that it was an Israeli government operation that was intentionally used to punish Hamas and break up the new Palestinian unity government.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had immediately accused Hamas of the kidnapping — without presenting any evidence — and proceeded to “conduct a search” throughout the entirety of the West Bank until the bodies were reportedly found on June 30th.
The “search” entailed arresting and beating up about 600 Hamas members (including legislators) and trashing about 2100 homes; Israeli forces killed at least 7 Palestinians.
Israel also heightened its daily air strikes on the Gaza Strip, which has been under the Israeli blockade since Sept. 2006.
The Gaza government appealed to the UN for relief, which responded by condemning the kidnappings rather than the massive abuse of the Palestinian population. And then urging “all parties” to show restraint.
On July 1, Israel removed a gag order on information about the kidnapping that revealed shocking facts:
The Israeli government had informed members of the press around June 15th that it was aware that the students had been killed (1) but placed a gag order on that information: the government must thus have known where the bodies were. The brutal “search” was merely cover for punishment of members of Hamas, the democratically-elected party of Palestinians throughout the occupied territories. The Israeli media played along with the pretext for the abuse.
The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) were only called in 8-9 hours after the first call to report the kidnapping.One of the students placed a call to the police emergency hotline 10 minutes after they accepted a hitchhiking ride home, with the message that he was being kidnapped. The statement was followed by what sounded like several gunshots, groans and silence; the call lasted for 49 seconds. Police ignored the call. The teen’s father called police 5 hours later, at 3:30 am, to report his son missing. “Several hours” after that, after an exchange of 54 phone calls, the IDF and Shin Bet finally became involved. (2)
Despite possession of all of the evidence of the kidnappings and murders, the Israeli government has offered no evidence that indicates responsibilityfor the acts. Those with any direct connection to the phone calls or the finding of the bodies have remained unidentified.
Prime Minister Netanyahu has used this event for huge political gain:
to create divisions within the new “unity government” of Fatah and Hamas,
to physically punish Hamas members and the cause of Palestinian resistance,
to get legislation passed through the Knesset to block the return of East Jerusalem to Palestinians (1),
to try to foment a third intifada to legitimate further attacks on Palestinians (1) and
to whip up such hatred of Palestinians that it has become dangerous for them to be seen on Israeli streets.
The Israeli government is continuing to harass and attack Palestinians until it supposedly finds the killers.
The two young Hebron men named as the accused have been missing since June 12th.
The uncovering of this deception should arouse world condemnation.
The Link interviewed Naeim Giladi, a Jew from Iraq, for three hours on March 16, 1998, two days prior to his 69th birthday.
For nearly two other delightful hours, we were treated to a multi-course Arabic meal prepared by his wife Rachael, who is also Iraqi.
“It’s our Arab culture,” he said proudly.
In our previous Link, Israeli historian Ilan Pappe looked at the hundreds of thousands of indigenous Palestinians whose lives were uprooted to make room for foreigners who would come to populate confiscated land.
Most were Ashkenazi Jews from Eastern Europe.
But over half a million other Jews came from Islamic lands.
Zionist propagandists claim that Israel “rescued” these Jews from their anti-Jewish, Muslim neighbors.
One of those “rescued” Jews-Naeim Giladi-knows otherwise.
write this article for the same reason I wrote my book: to tell the American people, and especially American Jews, that Jews from Islamic lands did not emigrate willingly to Israel; that, to force them to leave, Jews killed Jews; and that, to buy time to confiscate ever more Arab lands, Jews on numerous occasions rejected genuine peace initiatives from their Arab neighbors.
I write about what the first prime minister of Israel called “cruel Zionism.” I write about it because I was part of it.
Of course I thought I knew it all back then. I was young, idealistic, and more than willing to put my life at risk for my convictions.
It was 1947 and I wasn’t quite 18 when the Iraqi authorities caught me for smuggling young Iraqi Jews like myself out of Iraq, into Iran, and then on to the Promised Land of the soon-to-be established Israel.
I was an Iraqi Jew in the Zionist underground.
My Iraqi jailers did everything they could to extract the names of my co-conspirators.
Fifty years later, pain still throbs in my right toe-a reminder of the day my captors used pliers to remove my toenails.
On another occasion, they hauled me to the flat roof of the prison, stripped me bare on a frigid January day, then threw a bucket of cold water over me.
I was left there, chained to the railing, for hours. But I never once considered giving them the information they wanted. I was a true believer.
My preoccupation during what I refer to as my “two years in hell” was with survival and escape.
I had no interest then in the broad sweep of Jewish history in Iraq even though my family had been part of it right from the beginning.
We were originally Haroons, a large and important family of the “Babylonian Diaspora.”
My ancestors had settled in Iraq more than 2,600 years ago-600 years before Christianity, and 1,200 years before Islam.
I am descended from Jews who built the tomb of Yehezkel, a Jewish prophet of pre-biblical times. My town, where I was born in 1929, is Hillah, not far from the ancient site of Babylon.
The original Jews found Babylon, with its nourishing Tigris and Euphrates rivers, to be truly a land of milk, honey, abundance-and opportunity.
Although Jews, like other minorities in what became Iraq, experienced periods of oppression and discrimination depending on the rulers of the period, their general trajectory over two and one-half millennia was upward.
Under the late Ottoman rule, for example, Jewish social and religious institutions, schools, and medical facilities flourished without outside interference, and Jews were prominent in government and business.
As I sat there in my cell, unaware that a death sentence soon would be handed down against me, I could not have recounted any personal grievances that my family members would have lodged against the government or the Muslim majority.
Our family had been treated well and had prospered, first as farmers with some 50,000 acres devoted to rice, dates and Arab horses.
Then, with the Ottomans, we bought and purified gold that was shipped to Istanbul and turned into coinage.
The Turks were responsible in fact for changing our name to reflect our occupation-we became Khalaschi, meaning “Makers of Pure.”
I did not volunteer the information to my father that I had joined the Zionist underground.
He found out several months before I was arrested when he saw me writing Hebrew and using words and expressions unfamiliar to him.
He was even more surprised to learn that, yes, I had decided I would soon move to Israel myself.
He was scornful. “You’ll come back with your tail between your legs,” he predicted.
About 125,000 Jews left Iraq for Israel in the late 1940s and into 1952, most because they had been lied to and put into a panic by what I came to learn were Zionist bombs.
But my mother and father were among the 6,000 who did not go to Israel.
Although physically I never did return to Iraq-that bridge had been burned in any event-my heart has made the journey there many, many times.
My father had it right.
I was imprisoned at the military camp of Abu-Greib, about 7 miles from Baghdad.
When the military court handed down my sentence of death by hanging, I had nothing to lose by attempting the escape I had been planning for many months.
It was a strange recipe for an escape: a dab of butter, an orange peel, and some army clothing that I had asked a friend to buy for me at a flea market.
I deliberately ate as much bread as I could to put on fat in anticipation of the day I became 18, when they could formally charge me with a crime and attach the 50-pound ball and chain that was standard prisoner issue.
Later, after my leg had been shackled, I went on a starvation diet that often left me weak-kneed.
The pat of butter was to lubricate my leg in preparation for extricating it from the metal band.
The orange peel I surreptitiously stuck into the lock on the night of my planned escape, having studied how it could be placed in such a way as to keep the lock from closing.
As the jailers turned to go after locking up, I put on the old army issue that was indistinguishable from what they were wearing-a long, green coat and a stocking cap that I pulled down over much of my face (it was winter).
Then I just quietly opened the door and joined the departing group of soldiers as they strode down the hall and outside, and I offered a “good night” to the shift guard as I left.
A friend with a car was waiting to speed me away.
Later I made my way to the new state of Israel, arriving in May, 1950. My passport had my name in Arabic and English, but the English couldn’t capture the “kh” sound, so it was rendered simply as Klaski.
At the border, the immigration people applied the English version, which had an Eastern European, Ashkenazi ring to it. In one way, this “mistake” was my key to discovering very soon just how the Israeli caste system worked.
They asked me where I wanted to go and what I wanted to do.
I was the son of a farmer; I knew all the problems of the farm, so I volunteered to go to Dafnah, a farming kibbutz in the high Galilee.
I only lasted a few weeks.
The new immigrants were given the worst of everything.
The food was the same, but that was the only thing that everyone had in common.
For the immigrants, bad cigarettes, even bad toothpaste. Everything. I left.
Then, through the Jewish Agency, I was advised to go to al-Majdal (later renamed Ashkelon), an Arab town about 9 miles from Gaza, very close to the Mediterranean.
The Israeli government planned to turn it into a farmers’ city, so my farm background would be an asset there.
When I reported to the Labor Office in al-Majdal, they saw that I could read and write Arabic and Hebrew and they said that I could find a good-paying job with the Military Governor’s office.
The Arabs were under the authority of these Israeli Military Governors.
A clerk handed me a bunch of forms in Arabic and Hebrew.
Now it dawned on me.
Before Israel could establish its farmers’ city, it had to rid al-Majdal of its indigenous Palestinians.
The forms were petitions to the United Nations Inspectors asking for transfer out of Israel to Gaza, which was under Egyptian control.
I read over the petition.
In signing, the Palestinian would be saying that he was of sound mind and body and was making the request for transfer free of pressure or duress.
Of course, there was no way that they would leave without being pressured to do so.
These families had been there hundreds of years, as farmers, primitive artisans, weavers.
The Military Governor prohibited them from pursuing their livelihoods, just penned them up until they lost hope of resuming their normal lives.
That’s when they signed to leave.
I was there and heard their grief.
“Our hearts are in pain when we look at the orange trees that we planted with our own hands.
Please let us go, let us give water to those trees.
God will not be pleased with us if we leave His trees untended.”
I asked the Military Governor to give them relief, but he said, “No, we want them to leave.”
I could no longer be part of this oppression and I left.
Those Palestinians who didn’t sign up for transfers were taken by force-just put in trucks and dumped in Gaza.
About four thousand people were driven from al-Majdal in one way or another.
The few who remained were collaborators with the Israeli authorities.
Subsequently, I wrote letters trying to get a government job elsewhere and I got many immediate responses asking me to come for an interview.
Then they would discover that my face didn’t match my Polish/Ashkenazi name.
They would ask if I spoke Yiddish or Polish, and when I said I didn’t, they would ask where I came by a Polish name.
Desperate for a good job, I would usually say that I thought my great-grandfather was from Poland.
I was advised time and again that “we’ll give you a call.”
Eventually, three to four years after coming to Israel, I changed my name to Giladi, which is close to the code name, Gilad, that I had in the Zionist underground.
Klaski wasn’t doing me any good anyway, and my Eastern friends were always chiding me about the name they knew didn’t go with my origins as an Iraqi Jew.
I was disillusioned at what I found in the Promised Land, disillusioned personally, disillusioned at the institutionalized racism, disillusioned at what I was beginning to learn about Zionism’s cruelties.
The principal interest Israel had in Jews from Islamic countries was as a supply of cheap labor, especially for the farm work that was beneath the urbanized Eastern European Jews.
Ben Gurion needed the “Oriental” Jews to farm the thousands of acres of land left by Palestinians who were driven out by Israeli forces in 1948.
And I began to find out about the barbaric methods used to rid the fledgling state of as many Palestinians as possible.
The world recoils today at the thought of bacteriological warfare, but Israel was probably the first to actually use it in the Middle East.
In the 1948 war, Jewish forces would empty Arab villages of their populations, often by threats, sometimes by just gunning down a half-dozen unarmed Arabs as examples to the rest.
To make sure the Arabs couldn’t return to make a fresh life for themselves in these villages, the Israelis put typhus and dysentery bacteria into the water wells.
Uri Mileshtin, an official historian for the Israeli Defense Force, has written and spoken about the use of bacteriological agents.
According to Mileshtin, Moshe Dayan, a division commander at the time, gave orders in 1948 to remove Arabs from their villages, bulldoze their homes, and render water wells unusable with typhus and dysentery bacteria.
Acre was so situated that it could practically defend itself with one big gun, so the Haganah put bacteria into the spring that fed the town.
The spring was called Capri and it ran from the north near a kibbutz. The Haganah put typhus bacteria into the water going to Acre, the people got sick, and the Jewish forces occupied Acre.
This worked so well that they sent a Haganah division dressed as Arabs into Gaza, where there were Egyptian forces, and the Egyptians caught them putting two cans of bacteria, typhus and dysentery, into the water supply in wanton disregard of the civilian population.
“In war, there is no sentiment,” one of the captured Haganah men was quoted as saying.
My activism in Israel began shortly after I received a letter from the Socialist/Zionist Party asking me to help with their Arabic newspaper.
When I showed up at their offices at Central House in Tel Aviv, I asked around to see just where I should report.
I showed the letter to a couple of people there and, without even looking at it, they would motion me away with the words, “Room No. 8.”
When I saw that they weren’t even reading the letter, I inquired of several others.
But the response was the same, “Room No. 8,” with not a glance at the paper I put in front of them.
So I went to Room 8 and saw that it was the Department of Jews from Islamic Countries. I was disgusted and angry.
Either I am a member of the party or I’m not.
Do I have a different ideology or different politics because I am an Arab Jew?
It’s segregation, I thought, just like a Negroes’ Department.
I turned around and walked out.
That was the start of my open protests.
That same year I organized a demonstration in Ashkelon against Ben Gurion’s racist policies and 10,000 people turned out.
There wasn’t much opportunity for those of us who were second class citizens to do much about it when Israel was on a war footing with outside enemies.
After the 1967 war, I was in the Army myself and served in the Sinai when there was continued fighting along the Suez Canal.
But the cease-fire with Egypt in 1970 gave us our opening.
We took to the streets and organized politically to demand equal rights.
If it’s our country, if we were expected to risk our lives in a border war, then we expected equal treatment.
We mounted the struggle so tenaciously and received so much publicity that the Israeli government tried to discredit our movement by calling us “Israel’s Black Panthers.”
They were thinking in racist terms, really, in assuming the Israeli public would reject an organization whose ideology was being compared to that of radical blacks in the United States.
But we saw that what we were doing was no different than what blacks in the United States were fighting against-segregation, discrimination, unequal treatment.
Rather than reject the label, we adopted it proudly. I had posters of Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Nelson Mandela and other civil rights activists plastered all over my office.
With the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and the Israeli-condoned Sabra and Shatilla massacres, I had had enough of Israel.
I became a United States citizen and made certain to revoke my Israeli citizenship.
I could never have written and published my book in Israel, not with the censorship they would impose.
Even in America, I had great difficulty finding a publisher because many are subject to pressures of one kind or another from Israel and its friends.
I ended up paying $60,000 from my own pocket to publish Ben Gurion’s Scandals: How the Haganah & the Mossad Eliminated Jews, virtually the entire proceeds from having sold my house in Israel.
I still was afraid that the printer would back out or that legal proceedings would be initiated to stop its publication, like the Israeli government did in an attempt to prevent former Mossad case officer Victor Ostrovsky from publishing his first book.
Ben Gurion’s Scandals had to be translated into English from two languages.
I wrote in Hebrew when I was in Israel and hoped to publish the book there, and I wrote in Arabic when I was completing the book after coming to the U.S.
But I was so worried that something would stop publication that I told the printer not to wait for the translations to be thoroughly checked and proofread.
Now I realize that the publicity of a lawsuit would just have created a controversial interest in the book.
I am using bank vault storage for the valuable documents that back up what I have written.
These documents, including some that I illegally copied from the archives at Yad Vashem, confirm what I saw myself, what I was told by other witnesses, and what reputable historians and others have written concerning the Zionist bombings in Iraq, Arab peace overtures that were rebuffed, and incidents of violence and death inflicted by Jews on Jews in the cause of creating Israel.
The Riots of 1941
If, as I have said, my family in Iraq was not persecuted personally and I knew no deprivation as a member of the Jewish minority, what led me to the steps of the gallows as a member of the Zionist underground?
To answer that question, it is necessary to establish the context of the massacre that occurred in Baghdad on June 1, 1941, when several hundred Iraqi Jews were killed in riots involving junior officers of the Iraqi army.
I was 12 years of age and many of those killed were my friends. I was angry, and very confused.
What I didn’t know at the time was that the riots most likely were stirred up by the British, in collusion with a pro-British Iraqi leadership.
With the breakup of the Ottoman Empire following WW I, Iraq came under British “tutelage.” Amir Faisal, son of Sharif Hussein who had led the Arab Revolt against the Ottoman sultan, was brought in from Mecca by the British to become King of Iraq in 1921.
Many Jews were appointed to key administrative posts, including that of economics minister.
Britain retained final authority over domestic and external affairs.
Britain’s pro-Zionist attitude in Palestine, however, triggered a growing anti-Zionist backlash in Iraq, as it did in all Arab countries.
Writing at the end of 1934, Sir Francis Humphreys, Britain’s Ambassador in Baghdad, noted that, while before WW I Iraqi Jews had enjoyed a more favorable position than any other minority in the country, since then “Zionism has sown dissension between Jews and Arabs, and a bitterness has grown up between the two peoples which did not previously exist.”
King Faisal died in 1933. He was succeeded by his son Ghazi, who died in a motor car accident in 1939.
The crown then passed to Ghazi’s 4-year-old son, Faisal II, whose uncle, Abd al-Ilah, was named regent.
Abd al-Ilah selected Nouri el-Said as prime minister. El-Said supported the British and, as hatred of the British grew, he was forced from office in March 1940 by four senior army officers who advocated Iraq’s independence from Britain.
Calling themselves the Golden Square, the officers compelled the regent to name as prime minister Rashid Ali al-Kilani, leader of the National Brotherhood party.
The time was 1940 and Britain was reeling from a strong German offensive.
Al-Kilani and the Golden Square saw this as their opportunity to rid themselves of the British once and for all.
Cautiously they began to negotiate for German support, which led the pro-British regent Abd al-Ilah to dismiss al-Kilani in January 1941.
By April, however, the Golden Square officers had reinstated the prime minister.
This provoked the British to send a military force into Basra on April 12, 1941.
Basra, Iraq’s second largest city, had a Jewish population of 30,000.
Most of these Jews made their livings from import/export, money changing, retailing, as workers in the airports, railways, and ports, or as senior government employees.
On the same day, April 12, supporters of the pro-British regent notified the Jewish leaders that the regent wanted to meet with them.
As was their custom, the leaders brought flowers for the regent.
Contrary to custom, however, the cars that drove them to the meeting place dropped them off at the site where the British soldiers were concentrated.
Photographs of the Jews appeared in the following day’s newspapers with the banner “Basra Jews Receive British Troops with Flowers.”
That same day, April 13, groups of angry Arab youths set about to take revenge against the Jews.
Several Muslim notables in Basra heard of the plan and calmed things down.
Later, it was learned that the regent was not in Basra at all and that the matter was a provocation by his pro-British supporters to bring about an ethnic war in order to give the British army a pretext to intervene.
The British continued to land more forces in and around Basra.
On May 7, 1941, their Gurkha unit, composed of Indian soldiers from that ethnic group, occupied Basra’s el-Oshar quarter, a neighborhood with a large Jewish population.
The soldiers, led by British officers, began looting.
Many shops in the commercial district were plundered.
Private homes were broken into.
Cases of attempted rape were reported.
Local residents, Jews and Muslims, responded with pistols and old rifles, but their bullets were no match for the soldiers’ Tommy Guns.
Afterwards, it was learned that the soldiers acted with the acquiescence, if not the blessing, of their British commanders.
(It should be remembered that the Indian soldiers, especially those of the Gurkha unit, were known for their discipline, and it is highly unlikely they would have acted so riotously without orders.)
The British goal clearly was to create chaos and to blacken the image of the pro-nationalist regime in Baghdad, thereby giving the British forces reason to proceed to the capital and to overthrow the al-Kilani government.
Baghdad fell on May 30. Al-Kilani fled to Iran, along with the Golden Square officers.
Radio stations run by the British reported that Regent Abd al-Ilah would be returning to the city and that thousands of Jews and others were planning to welcome him.
What inflamed young Iraqis against the Jews most, however, was the radio announcer Yunas Bahri on the German station “Berlin,” who reported in Arabic that Jews from Palestine were fighting alongside the British against Iraqi soldiers near the city of Faluja. The report was false.
On Sunday, June 1, unarmed fighting broke out in Baghdad between Jews who were still celebrating their Shabuoth holiday and young Iraqis who thought the Jews were celebrating the return of the pro-British regent.
That evening, a group of Iraqis stopped a bus, removed the Jewish passengers, murdered one and fatally wounded a second.
About 8:30 the following morning, some 30 individuals in military and police uniforms opened fire along el-Amin street, a small downtown street whose jewelry, tailor and grocery shops were Jewish-owned.
By 11 a.m., mobs of Iraqis with knives, switchblades and clubs were attacking Jewish homes in the area.
The riots continued throughout Monday, June 2.
During this time, many Muslims rose to defend their Jewish neighbors, while some Jews successfully defended themselves.
There were 124 killed and 400 injured, according to a report written by a Jewish Agency messenger who was in Iraq at the time.
Other estimates, possibly less reliable, put the death toll higher, as many as 500, with from 650 to 2,000 injured.
From 500 to 1,300 stores and more than 1,000 homes and apartments were looted.
Who was behind the rioting in the Jewish quarter?
Yosef Meir, one of the most prominent activists in the Zionist underground movement in Iraq, known then as Yehoshafat, claims it was the British.
Meir, who now works for the Israeli Defense Ministry, argues that, in order to make it appear that the regent was returning as the savior who would reestablish law and order, the British stirred up the riots against the most vulnerable and visible segment in the city, the Jews.
And, not surprisingly, the riots ended as soon as the regent’s loyal soldiers entered the capital.
My own investigations as a journalist lead me to believe Meir is correct.
Furthermore, I think his claims should be seen as based on documents in the archives of the Israeli Defense Ministry, the agency that published his book.
Yet, even before his book came out, I had independent confirmation from a man I met in Iran in the late Forties.
His name was Michael Timosian, an Iraqi Armenian.
When I met him he was working as a male nurse at the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company in Abadan in the south of Iran.
On June 2, 1941, however, he was working at the Baghdad hospital where many of the riot victims were brought.
Most of these victims were Jews.
Timosian said he was particularly interested in two patients whose conduct did not follow local custom.
One had been hit by a bullet in his shoulder, the other by a bullet in his right knee.
After the doctor removed the bullets, the staff tried to change their blood-soaked cloths.
But the two men fought off their efforts, pretending to be speechless, although tests showed they could hear.
To pacify them, the doctor injected them with anesthetics and, as they were sleeping, Timosian changed their cloths.
He discovered that one of them had around his neck an identification tag of the type used by British troops, while the other had tattoos with Indian script on his right arm along with the familiar sword of the Gurkha.
The next day when Timosian showed up for work, he was told that a British officer, his sergeant and two Indian Gurkha soldiers had come to the hospital early that morning.
Staff members overheard the Gurkha soldiers talking with the wounded patients, who were not as dumb as they had pretended.
The patients saluted the visitors, covered themselves with sheets and, without signing the required release forms, left the hospital with their visitors.
Today there is no doubt in my mind that the anti-Jewish riots of 1941 were orchestrated by the British for geopolitical ends.
David Kimche is certainly a man who was in a position to know the truth, and he has spoken publicly about British culpability.
Kimche had been with British Intelligence during WW II and with the Mossad after the war.
Later he became Director General of Israel’s Foreign Ministry, the position he held in 1982 when he addressed a forum at the British Institute for International Affairs in London.
In responding to hostile questions about Israel’s invasion of Lebanon and the refugee camp massacres in Beirut, Kimche went on the attack, reminding the audience that there was scant concern in the British Foreign Office when British Gurkha units participated in the murder of 500 Jews in the streets of Baghdad in 1941.
The Bombings of 1950–1951
The anti-Jewish riots of 1941 did more than create a pretext for the British to enter Baghdad to reinstate the pro-British regent and his pro-British prime minister, Nouri el-Said.
They also gave the Zionists in Palestine a pretext to set up a Zionist underground in Iraq, first in Baghdad, then in other cities such as Basra, Amara, Hillah, Diwaneia, Abril and Karkouk.
Following WW II, a succession of governments held brief power in Iraq.
Zionist conquests in Palestine, particularly the massacre of Palestinians in the village of Deir Yassin, emboldened the anti-British movement in Iraq.
When the Iraqi government signed a new treaty of friendship with London in January 1948, riots broke out all over the country.
The treaty was quickly abandoned and Baghdad demanded removal of the British military mission that had run Iraq’s army for 27 years.
Later in 1948, Baghdad sent an army detachment to Palestine to fight the Zionists, and when Israel declared independence in May, Iraq closed the pipeline that fed its oil to Haifa’s refinery.
Abd al-Ilah, however, was still regent and the British quisling, Nouri el-Said, was back as prime minister.
I was in the Abu-Greib prison in 1948, where I would remain until my escape to Iran in September 1949.
Six months later-the exact date was March 19, 1950-a bomb went off at the American Cultural Center and Library in Baghdad, causing property damage and injuring a number of people.
The center was a favorite meeting place for young Jews.
The first bomb thrown directly at Jews occurred on April 8, 1950, at 9:15 p.m.
A car with three young passengers hurled the grenade at Baghdad’s El-Dar El-Bida Café, where Jews were celebrating Passover.
Four people were seriously injured.
That night leaflets were distributed calling on Jews to leave Iraq immediately.
The next day, many Jews, most of them poor with nothing to lose, jammed emigration offices to renounce their citizenship and to apply for permission to leave for Israel.
So many applied, in fact, that the police had to open registration offices in Jewish schools and synagogues.
On May 10, at 3 a.m., a grenade was tossed in the direction of the display window of the Jewish-owned Beit-Lawi Automobile Company, destroying part of the building.
No casualties were reported.
On June 3, 1950, another grenade was tossed from a speeding car in the El-Batawin area of Baghdad where most rich Jews and middle class Iraqis lived.
No one was hurt, but following the explosion Zionist activists sent telegrams to Israel requesting that the quota for immigration from Iraq be increased.
On June 5, at 2:30 a.m., a bomb exploded next to the Jewish-owned Stanley Shashua building on El-Rashid street, resulting in property damage but no casualties.
On January 14, 1951, at 7 p.m., a grenade was thrown at a group of Jews outside the Masouda Shem-Tov Synagogue. The explosive struck a high-voltage cable, electrocuting three Jews, one a young boy, Itzhak Elmacher, and wounding over 30 others. Following the attack, the exodus of Jews jumped to between 600–70day.
Zionist propagandists still maintain that the bombs in Iraq were set off by anti-Jewish Iraqis who wanted Jews out of their country.
The terrible truth is that the grenades that killed and maimed Iraqi Jews and damaged their property were thrown by Zionist Jews.
Among the most important documents in my book, I believe, are copies of two leaflets published by the Zionist underground calling on Jews to leave Iraq. One is dated March 16, 1950, the other April 8, 1950.
The difference between these two is critical. Both indicate the date of publication, but only the April 8th leaflet notes the time of day: 4 p.m. Why the time of day? Such a specification was unprecedented. Even the investigating judge, Salaman El-Beit, found it suspicious. Did the 4 p.m. writers want an alibi for a bombing they knew would occur five hours later? If so, how did they know about the bombing? The judge concluded they knew because a connection existed between the Zionist underground and the bomb throwers.
This, too, was the conclusion of Wilbur Crane Eveland, a former senior officer in the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), whom I had the opportunity to meet in New York in 1988. In his book, Ropes of Sand, whose publication the CIA opposed, Eveland writes:
In attempts to portray the Iraqis as anti-American and to terrorize the Jews, the Zionists planted bombs in the U.S. Information Service library and in synagogues. Soon leaflets began to appear urging Jews to flee to Israel. . . . Although the Iraqi police later provided our embassy with evidence to show that the synagogue and library bombings, as well as the anti-Jewish and anti-American leaflet campaigns, had been the work of an underground Zionist organization, most of the world believed reports that Arab terrorism had motivated the flight of the Iraqi Jews whom the Zionists had “rescued” really just in order to increase Israel’s Jewish population.”
Eveland doesn’t detail the evidence linking the Zionists to the attacks, but in my book I do. In 1955, for example, I organized in Israel a panel of Jewish attorneys of Iraqi origin to handle claims of Iraqi Jews who still had property in Iraq. One well known attorney, who asked that I not give his name, confided in me that the laboratory tests in Iraq had confirmed that the anti-American leaflets found at the American Cultural Center bombing were typed on the same typewriter and duplicated on the same stenciling machine as the leaflets distributed by the Zionist movement just before the April 8th bombing.
Tests also showed that the type of explosive used in the Beit-Lawi attack matched traces of explosives found in the suitcase of an Iraqi Jew by the name of Yosef Basri. Basri, a lawyer, together with Shalom Salih, a shoemaker, would be put on trial for the attacks in December 1951 and executed the following month. Both men were members of Hashura, the military arm of the Zionist underground. Salih ultimately confessed that he, Basri and a third man, Yosef Habaza, carried out the attacks.
By the time of the executions in January 1952, all but 6,000 of an estimated 125,000 Iraqi Jews had fled to Israel.
Moreover, the pro-British, pro-Zionist puppet el-Said saw to it that all of their possessions were frozen, including their cash assets.
(There were ways of getting Iraqi dinars out, but when the immigrants went to exchange them in Israel they found that the Israeli government kept 50 percent of the value.)
Even those Iraqi Jews who had not registered to emigrate, but who happened to be abroad, faced loss of their nationality if they didn’t return within a specified time.
An ancient, cultured, prosperous community had been uprooted and its people transplanted to a land dominated by East European Jews, whose culture was not only foreign but entirely hateful to them.
The Ultimate Criminals
From the start they knew that in order to establish a Jewish state they had to expel the indigenous Palestinian population to the neighboring Islamic states and import Jews from these same states.
* Theodor Herzl, the architect of Zionism, thought it could be done by social engineering. In his diary entry for 12 June 1885, he wrote that Zionist settlers would have to “spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it any employment in our own country.”
* Vladimir Jabotinsky, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s ideological progenitor, frankly admitted that such a transfer of populations could only be brought about by force.
* David Ben Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister, told a Zionist Conference in 1937 that any proposed Jewish state would have to “transfer Arab populations out of the area, if possible of their own free will, if not by coercion.”
After 750,000 Palestinians were uprooted and their lands confiscated in 1948–49, Ben Gurion had to look to the Islamic countries for Jews who could fill the resultant cheap labor market.
“Emissaries” were smuggled into these countries to “convince” Jews to leave either by trickery or fear.
In the case of Iraq, both methods were used: uneducated Jews were told of a Messianic Israel in which the blind see, the lame walk, and onions grow as big as melons; educated Jews had bombs thrown at them.
A few years after the bombings, in the early 1950s, a book was published in Iraq, in Arabic, titled Venom of the Zionist Viper.
The author was one of the Iraqi investigators of the 1950–51 bombings and, in his book, he implicates the Israelis, specifically one of the emissaries sent by Israel, Mordechai Ben-Porat.
As soon as the book came out, all copies just disappeared, even from libraries.
The word was that agents of the Israeli Mossad, working through the U.S. Embassy, bought up all the books and destroyed them.
I tried on three different occasions to have one sent to me in Israel, but each time Israeli censors in the post office intercepted it.
British Leaders: Britain always acted in its best colonial interests.
For that reason Foreign Minister Arthur Balfour sent his famous 1917 letter to Lord Rothschild in exchange for Zionist support in WW I.
During WW II the British were primarily concerned with keeping their client states in the Western camp, while Zionists were most concerned with the immigration of European Jews to Palestine, even if this meant cooperating with the Nazis.
(In my book I document numerous instances of such dealings by Ben Gurion and the Zionist leadership.)
After WW II the international chessboard pitted communists against capitalists.
In many countries, including the United States and Iraq, Jews represented a large part of the Communist party.
In Iraq, hundreds of Jews of the working intelligentsia occupied key positions in the hierarchy of the Communist and Socialist parties.
To keep their client countries in the capitalist camp, Britain had to make sure these governments had pro-British leaders.
And if, as in Iraq, these leaders were overthrown, then an anti-Jewish riot or two could prove a useful pretext to invade the capital and reinstate the “right” leaders.
Moreover, if the possibility existed of removing the communist influence from Iraq by transferring the whole Jewish community to Israel, well then, why not?
Particularly if the leaders of Israel and Iraq conspired in the deed.
The Iraqi Leaders:
Both the regent Abd al-Ilah and his prime minister Nouri el- Said took directions from London.
Toward the end of 1948, el-Said, who had already met with Israel’s Prime Minister Ben Gurion in Vienna, began discussing with his Iraqi and British associates the need for an exchange of populations.
Iraq would send the Jews in military trucks to Israel via Jordan, and Iraq would take in some of the Palestinians Israel had been evicting.
His proposal included mutual confiscation of property. London nixed the idea as too radical.
El-Said then went to his back-up plan and began to create the conditions that would make the lives of Iraqi Jews so miserable they would leave for Israel.
Jewish government employees were fired from their jobs; Jewish merchants were denied import/export licenses; police began to arrest Jews for trivial reasons. Still the Jews did not leave in any great numbers.
In September 1949, Israel sent the spy Mordechai Ben-Porat, the one mentioned in Venom of the Zionist Viper, to Iraq.
One of the first things Ben-Porat did was to approach el-Said and promise him financial incentives to have a law enacted that would lift the citizenship of Iraqi Jews.
Soon after, Zionist and Iraqi representatives began formulating a rough draft of the bill, according to the model dictated by Israel through its agents in Baghdad.
The bill was passed by the Iraqi parliament in March 1950. It empowered the government to issue one-time exit visas to Jews wishing to leave the country. In March, the bombings began.
Sixteen years later, the Israeli magazine Haolam Hazeh, published by Uri Avnery, then a Knesset member, accused Ben-Porat of the Baghdad bombings.
Ben-Porat, who would become a Knesset member himself, denied the charge, but never sued the magazine for libel.
And Iraqi Jews in Israel still call him Morad Abu al-Knabel, Mordechai of the Bombs.
As I said, all this went well beyond the comprehension of a teenager.
I knew Jews were being killed and an organization existed that could lead us to the Promised Land.
So I helped in the exodus to Israel. Later, on occasions, I would bump into some of these Iraqi Jews in Israel.
Not infrequently they’d express the sentiment that they could kill me for what I had done.
Opportunities for Peace
After the Israeli attack on the Jordanian village of Qibya in October, 1953, Ben Gurion went into voluntary exile at the Sedeh Boker kibbutz in the Negev. T
he Labor party then used to organize many buses for people to go visit him there, where they would see the former prime minister working with sheep.
But that was only for show.
Really he was writing his diary and continuing to be active behind the scenes.
I went on such a tour.
We were told not to try to speak to Ben Gurion, but when I saw him, I asked why, since Israel is a democracy with a parliament, does it not have a constitution?
Ben Gurion said, “Look, boy”-I was 24 at the time-”if we have a constitution, we have to write in it the border of our country.
And this is not our border, my dear.” I asked, “Then where is the border?”
He said, “Wherever the Sahal will come, this is the border.” Sahal is the Israeli army.
Ben Gurion told the world that Israel accepted the partition and the Arabs rejected it.
Then Israel took half of the land that was promised to the Arab state.
And still he was saying it was not enough. Israel needed more land.
How can a country make peace with its neighbors if it wants to take their land? How can a country demand to be secure if it won’t say what borders it will be satisfied with?
For such a country, peace would be an inconvenience.
I know now that from the beginning many Arab leaders wanted to make peace with Israel, but Israel always refused.
Ben Gurion covered this up with propaganda.
He said that the Arabs wanted to drive Israel into the sea and he called Gamal Abdel Nasser the Hitler of the Middle East whose foremost intent was to destroy Israel.
He wanted America and Great Britain to treat Nasser like a pariah.
In 1954, it seemed that America was getting less critical of Nasser.
Then during a three-week period in July, several terrorist bombs were set off: at the United States Information Agency offices in Cairo and Alexandria, a British-owned theater, and the central post office in Cairo.
An attempt to firebomb a cinema in Alexandria failed when the bomb went off in the pocket of one of the perpetrators.
That led to the discovery that the terrorists were not anti-Western Egyptians, but were instead Israeli spies bent on souring the warming relationship between Egypt and the United States in what came to be known as the Lavon Affair.
Ben Gurion was still living on his kibbutz.
Moshe Sharett as prime minister was in contact with Abdel Nasser through the offices of Lord Maurice Orbach of Great Britain.
Sharett asked Nasser to be lenient with the captured spies, and Nasser did all that was in his power to prevent a deterioration of the situation between the two countries.
Then Ben Gurion returned as Defense Minister in February, 1955.
Later that month Israeli troops attacked Egyptian military camps and Palestinian refugees in Gaza, killing 54 and injuring many more.
The very night of the attack, Lord Orbach was on his way to deliver a message to Nasser, but was unable to get through because of the military action.
When Orbach telephoned, Nasser’s secretary told him that the attack proved that Israel did not want peace and that he was wasting his time as a mediator.
In November, Ben Gurion announced in the Knesset that he was willing to meet with Abdel Nasser anywhere and at any time for the sake of peace and understanding.
The next morning the Israeli military attacked an Egyptian military camp in the Sabaha region.
Although Nasser felt pessimistic about achieving peace with Israel, he continued to send other mediators to try.
One was through the American Friends Service Committee; another via the Prime Minister of Malta, Dom Minthoff; and still another through Marshall Tito of Yugoslavia.
One that looked particularly promising was through Dennis Hamilton, editor of The London Times.
Nasser told Hamilton that if only he could sit and talk with Ben Gurion for two or three hours, they would be able to settle the conflict and end the state of war between the two countries.
When word of this reached Ben Gurion, he arranged to meet with Hamilton.
They decided to pursue the matter with the Israeli ambassador in London, Arthur Luria, as liaison.
On Hamilton’s third trip to Egypt, Nasser met him with the text of a Ben Gurion speech stating that Israel would not give up an inch of land and would not take back a single refugee.
Hamilton knew that Ben Gurion with his mouth had undermined a peace mission and missed an opportunity to settle the Israeli-Arab conflict.
Nasser even sent his friend Ibrahim Izat of the Ruz El Yusuf weekly paper to meet with Israeli leaders in order to explore the political atmosphere and find out why the attacks were taking place if Israel really wanted peace.
One of the men Izat met with was Yigal Yadin, a former Chief of Staff of the army who wrote this letter to me on 14 January 1982:
Dear Mr. Giladi:
Your letter reminded me of an event which I nearly forgot and of which I remember only a few details.
Ibrahim Izat came to me if I am not mistaken under the request of the Foreign Ministry or one of its branches; he stayed in my house and we spoke for many hours. I do not remember him saying that he came on a mission from Nasser, but I have no doubt that he let it be understood that this was with his knowledge or acquiescence….
When Nasser decided to nationalize the Suez Canal in spite of opposition from the British and the French, Radio Cairo announced in Hebrew:
If the Israeli government is not influenced by the British and the French imperialists, it will eventually result in greater understanding between the two states, and Egypt will reconsider Israel’s request to have access to the Suez Canal.
Israel responded that it had no designs on Egypt, but at that very moment Israeli representatives were in France planning the three-way attack that was to take place in October, 1956.
All the while, Ben Gurion continued to talk about the Hitler of the Middle East.
This brainwashing went on until late September, 1970, when Gamal Abdel Nasser passed away.
Then, miracle of miracles, David Ben Gurion told the press:
A week before he died I received an envoy from Abdel Nasser who asked to meet with me urgently in order to solve the problems between Israel and the Arab world.
The public was surprised because they didn’t know that Abdel Nasser had wanted this all along, but Israel sabotaged it.
Nasser was not the only Arab leader who wanted to make peace with Israel.
There were many others.
Brigadier General Abdel Karim Qasem, before he seized power in Iraq in July, 1958, headed an underground organization that sent a delegation to Israel to make a secret agreement.
Ben Gurion refused even to see him.
I learned about this when I was a journalist in Israel.
But whenever I tried to publish even a small part of it, the censor would stamp it “Not Allowed.”
Now, in Netanyahu, we are witnessing another attempt by an Israeli prime minister to fake an interest in making peace.
Netanyahu and the Likud are setting Arafat up by demanding that he institute more and more repressive measures in the interest of Israeli “security.”
Sooner or later I suspect the Palestinians will have had enough of Arafat’s strong-arm methods as Israel’s quisling-and he’ll be killed.
Then the Israeli government will say, “See, we were ready to give him everything.
You can’t trust those Arabs-they kill each other. Now there’s no one to even talk to about peace.”
Alexis de Tocqueville once observed that it is easier for the world to accept a simple lie than a complex truth.
Certainly it has been easier for the world to accept the Zionist lie that Jews were evicted from Muslim lands because of anti-Semitism, and that Israelis, never the Arabs, were the pursuers of peace.
The truth is far more discerning: bigger players on the world stage were pulling the strings.
These players, I believe, should be held accountable for their crimes, particularly when they willfully terrorized, dispossessed and killed innocent people on the altar of some ideological imperative.
I believe, too, that the descendants of these leaders have a moral responsibility to compensate the victims and their descendants, and to do so not just with reparations, but by setting the historical record straight.
That is why I established a panel of inquiry in Israel to seek reparations for Iraqi Jews who had been forced to leave behind their property and possessions in Iraq.
That is why I joined the Black Panthers in confronting the Israeli government with the grievances of the Jews in Israel who came from Islamic lands.
And that is why I have written my book and this article: to set the historical record straight.
We Jews from Islamic lands did not leave our ancestral homes because of any natural enmity between Jews and Muslims.
And we Arabs-I say Arab because that is the language my wife and I still speak at home-we Arabs on numerous occasions have sought peace with the State of the Jews.
And finally, as a U.S. citizen and taxpayer, let me say that we Americans need to stop supporting racial discrimination in Israel and the cruel expropriation of lands in the West Bank, Gaza, South Lebanon and the Golan Heights.
How can Israelis close their eyes to the violent abuses inflicted by Israel’s military against the Palestinians?
They live in an artificial world of denial — bolstered by a mastery of communications and the dysfunctionality of Palestinian activists — in which abuses against Palestinians such as racism, land theft, physical violence and killings take place every day.
These actions do not even provoke a whimper from the majority of Israel’s Jews.
They have come to accept the fact that their country is one built on the oppression of others, while going to great lengths to separate its viciousness from that which fueled the Holocaust, which brought many of them into the initially welcoming arms of Palestine’s Christians and Muslims.
They may argue that not all Jews in Israel have turned their backs on righteousness. But that was also the response of populations in Germany and in Poland during the Second World War. Not everyone hated Jews, but very few spoke out until it was too late.
That is where Israelis are headed: Toward a fate in which one day they will have to answer for the atrocities that have taken place against Palestinians.
The newly announced investigation by the International Criminal Court in The Hague, which was itself founded on principles defined by the postwar trials of the Nazis, is just the beginning.
Every day, Palestinian lands are being confiscated for the sole purpose of expanding the existing and building new Jewish-only settlements.
The best farmlands are taken from Palestinians with impunity.
Reports frequently make it through the Israeli government-throttled mainstream news media about Palestinians who are attacked, brutalized and killed by Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank.
And yet Israeli Jews still manage to go about their business in places like West Jerusalem, where they openly refer to the big houses built using Jerusalem stone as “Arab homes.”
There is absolutely no shame, especially as Israeli Jews lead the campaign to recover land and property stolen from them during the Holocaust.
As they do so, land and property is being stolen from the Palestinians in their name. And their major institutions don’t seem to care.
For Palestinians, March is a special month, during which they commemorate “Land Day.”
This commemoration reflects on when — March 30, 1976 — the Israeli government passed a law allowing the expropriation of lands from non-Jews.
Protests by Palestinian citizens of Israel raged from Nazareth to the Negev.
It was the first time that Israel’s non-Jewish population had stood up to the racism on which Israel is based.
B’Tselem, an organization of Israelis of all backgrounds who embrace human rights, this month released a scathing report on how extensive the theft of land is.
It argues: “The fact that the West Bank has not been formally annexed does not stop Israel from treating it as if it were its own territory, particularly when it comes to the massive resources Israel invests in developing settlements and establishing infrastructure to serve their residents.”
The report adds: “This policy has enabled the establishment of more than 280 settlements and outposts now populated by more than 440,000 Israeli citizens (excluding East Jerusalem).
Thanks to this policy, more than 2 million dunams of Palestinian land have been stolen, by official and unofficial means.
The West Bank is crisscrossed with roads linking the settlements to one another and to Israel’s sovereign territory, west of the Green Line; and the area is dotted with Israeli industrial zones.”
These industrial areas produce stolen products that are then disguised and sold to markets around the world — a process that the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement seeks to expose.
Israel may be able to change the face of the West Bank, just as it has meticulously erased much of the Arab identity from areas throughout Israel, but it cannot erase the truth, which will always stand as a testament to its cruelty.
Israelis are accountable for the horrors from their government.