ThereAreNoSunglasses

American Resistance To Empire

Anarchists Against Apartheid

Anarchists Against Apartheid

eileen fleming

Anarchy is best understood as Rebellion against UNJUST laws. The Yang [male positive force] of anarchy resists authority and causes disorder and is socially and politically incorrect by the norms of the status quo for it seeks the higher ground of justice.

The Yin or feminine passive force of anarchy births a new order out of the chaos and chaos is creativity in action.

In 2004 the International Court of Justice ruled that The Wall is a violation of International Law because it cuts through the West Bank appropriating Palestinian land and destroying Palestinian villages and economy to make way for further Israeli settlements, all of which are illegal under international law.

Negligently unreported by corporate media are the thousands of indigenous Palestinians and hundreds of Israelis and internationals who have been waging a major grassroots nonviolent campaign of resistance to the route of Israel’s Wall.

In November 2005, this reporter attended the Gainesville, Florida, Anarchist’s Against the Wall Power Point Lecture by Ayed Morrar from the West Bank village of Budrus and Jonathon Pollak, an intense young Israeli and committed activist and organizer for Anarchists Against the Wall/AAtW.

Pollak: “I was six years old at my first demonstration and active on my own at thirteen. I am 23 now. When they started to build the Apartheid Wall in the West Bank I would go a few times a week and watch them deceive the world. The Israeli government successfully marketed the Apartheid Wall as a security barrier. But it is all about segregation, separation and ethnic cleansing. The Apartheid Wall has put 76% [of what had been the village of] Jayous on the Israeli side of the Wall.”

“Not such a great shock when government lies to you.

“Civilian uprising and non-violent activism is not like the Gandhi movie. It’s not carrying posters and saying we don’t like your wall, go away. We stand in front of Caterpillar’s knowing we will be shot and arrested. I was shot five times in the last two years by rubber bullets which are 1/2 inch steel bullets covered with plastic. I have been shot in the head and the more I experience I have the scarier it is. One learns to recognize the ritual of it all: when the IDF will begin using the billy clubs, when the tear gas will come, when the bullets will come…..We are not a dialogue group, AAtW is an Israeli organization and we are not colonial liberators. All the strategy is done by Palestinians, we are with them seeking justice and giving support. There is no price to high to pay for freedom, equality and universal rights. Without justice there can be no peace.

“Although Israel marketed the Wall as a security barrier, logic suggests such a barrier would be as short and straight as possible. Instead, it snakes deep inside the West Bank, resulting in a route that is twice as long as the Green Line, the internationally recognized border. Israel chose the Wall’s path in order to dispossess Palestinians of the maximum land and water, to preserve as many Israeli settlements as possible, and to unilaterally determine a border.

“In order to build the Wall Israel is uprooting tens of thousands of ancient olive trees that for many Palestinians are also the last resource to provide food for their children. The Palestinian aspiration for an independent state is also threatened by the Wall, as it isolates villages from their mother cities and divides the West Bank into disconnected cantons [bantusans/ghettos]. The Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem conservatively estimates that 500,000 Palestinians are negatively impacted by the Wall.

“We believe that, as with Apartheid South Africa, Americans have a vital role to play in ending Israeli occupation – by divesting from companies that support Israeli occupation, boycotting Israeli products, coming to Palestine as witnesses, or standing with Palestinians in nonviolent resistance.” [1]

According to a UN report, Haaretz columnist Danny Rubinstein admitted that “Israel today was an apartheid State with four different Palestinian groups: those in Gaza, East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Israeli Palestinians, each of which had a different status…even if the wall followed strictly the line of the pre-1967 border, it would still not be justified. The two peoples needed cooperation rather than walls because they must be neighbors.” [2]

“An apartheid society is much more than just a ‘settler colony’. It involves specific forms of oppression that actively strip the original inhabitants of any rights at all, whereas civilian members of the invader caste are given all kinds of sumptuous privileges.” [3]

On May 14, 1948, The Declaration of the establishment of Israel affirmed that, “The State of Israel will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel: it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion it will guarantee freedom of religion [and] conscience and will be faithful to the Charter of the United Nations.”

However, reality intrudes, for “The truth which is known to all; through its army, the government of Israel practices a brutal form of Apartheid in the territory it occupies. Its army has turned every Palestinian village and town into a fenced-in, or blocked-in, detention camp.”- Israeli Minister of Education, Shulamit Aloni quoted in the popular Israeli newspaper, Yediot Acharonot on December 20, 2006.

How could a state founded on “equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants” come to be such a state of hypocrisy?

A Little History:

On July 5, 1950, Israel enacted the Law of Return by which Jews anywhere in the world, have a “right” to immigrate to Israel on the grounds that they are returning to their own state, even if they have never been there before. [4]

On July 14, 1952: The enactment of the Citizenship/Jewish Nationality Law, results in Israel becoming the only state in the world to grant a particular national-religious group—the Jews—the right to settle in it and gain automatic citizenship. In 1953, South Africa’s Prime Minister Daniel Malan becomes the first foreign head of government to visit Israel and returns home with the message that Israel can be a source of inspiration for white South Africans. [IBID]

In 1962, South African Prime Minister Verwoerd declares that Jews “took Israel from the Arabs after the Arabs had lived there for a thousand years. In that I agree with them, Israel, like South Africa, is an apartheid state.” [IBID]

On August 1, 1967, Israel enacted the Agricultural Settlement Law, which bans Israeli citizens of non-Jewish nationality- Palestinian Arabs- from working on Jewish National Fund lands, well over 80% of the land in Israel. Knesset member Uri Avnery stated: “This law is going to expel Arab cultivators from the land that was formerly theirs and was handed over to the Jews.” [IBID]

On April 4, 1969, General Moshe Dayan is quoted in the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz telling students at Israel’s Technion Institute that “Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You don’t even know the names of these Arab villages, and I don’t blame you, because these geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either… There is not one single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population.”[IBID]

On April 28, 1971: C. L. Sulzberger, writing in The New York Times, quoted South African Prime Minister John Vorster as saying that Israel is faced with an apartheid problem, namely how to handle its Arab inhabitants. Sulzberger wrote: “Both South Africa and Israel are in a sense intruder states. They were built by pioneers originating abroad and settling in partially inhabited areas.” [IBID]

On September 13, 1978, in Washington, D.C. The Camp David Accords are signed by Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and witnessed by President Jimmy Carter. The Accords reaffirm U.N. Resolutions 242 and 338, which prohibit acquisition of land by force, call for Israel’s withdrawal of military and civilian forces from the West Bank and Gaza, and prescribe ‘full autonomy’ for the inhabitants of the territories. Begin orally promises Carter to freeze all settlement activity during the subsequent peace talks. Once back in Israel, however, the Israeli prime minister continues to confiscate, settle, and fortify the occupied territories. [IBID]

On September 13, 1985, Rep. George Crockett (D-MI), after visiting the Israeli-occupied West Bank, compares the living conditions there with those of South African blacks and concludes that the West Bank is an instance of apartheid that no one in the U.S. is talking about. [IBID]

In July 2000, President Bill Clinton convenes the Camp David II Peace Summit between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat. Clinton—not Barak—offers Arafat the withdrawal of some 40,000 Jewish settlers, leaving more than 180,000 in 209 settlements, all of which are interconnected by roads that cover approximately 10% of the occupied land. Effectively, this divides the West Bank into at least two non-contiguous areas and multiple fragments. Palestinians would have no control over the borders around them, the air space above them, or the water reserves under them. Barak called it a generous offer and Arafat rightly refused to sign. [IBID]

August 31, 2001: Durban, South Africa. Up to 50,000 South Africans march in support of the Palestinian people. In their Declaration by South Africans on Apartheid and the Struggle for Palestine they proclaim: “We, South Africans who lived for decades under rulers with a colonial mentality, see Israeli occupation as a strange survival of colonialism in the 21st century. Only in Israel do we hear of ‘settlements’ and ‘settlers.’ Only in Israel do soldiers and armed civilian groups take over hilltops, demolish homes, uproot trees and destroy crops, shell schools, churches and mosques, plunder water reserves, and block access to an indigenous population’s freedom of movement and right to earn a living. These human rights violations were unacceptable in apartheid South Africa and are an affront to us in apartheid Israel.” [IBID]

October 23, 2001: Ronnie Kasrils, a Jew and a minister in the South African government, co-authors a petition “Not in My Name,” signed by some 200 members of South Africa’s Jewish community, reads: “It becomes difficult, from a South African perspective, not to draw parallels with the oppression expressed by Palestinians under the hand of Israel and the oppression experienced in South Africa under apartheid rule.” [IBID]

Three years later, Kasrils will go to the Occupied Territories and conclude: “This is much worse than apartheid. Israeli measures, the brutality, make apartheid look like a picnic. We never had jets attacking our townships. We never had sieges that lasted month after month. We never had tanks destroying houses. We had armored vehicles and police using small arms to shoot people but not on this scale.” [IBID]

April 29, 2002: Boston, MA. South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu says he is “very deeply distressed” by what he observed in his recent visit to the Holy Land, adding, “It reminded me so much of what happened in South Africa.” The Nobel peace laureate said he saw “the humiliation of the Palestinians at checkpoints and roadblocks, suffering like us when young white police officers prevented us from moving about. Referring to Americans, he adds, “People are scared in this country to say wrong is wrong because the Jewish lobby is powerful—very powerful. Well, so what? The apartheid government was very powerful, but today it no longer exists.” [IBID]

From an email received from the AAtW on July 20, 2008:

The mounting legal costs of the joint Palestinian-Israeli struggle against the occupation, and the heightening legal persecution of Palestinian activists, are forcing us to send this urgent appeal for funds. We are asking for your support to continue the work of the Israeli group Anarchists Against the Wall (AATW), and perhaps even more importantly, to allow us to expand our legal fund in an attempt to also cover the legal costs of our Palestinian partners arrested at demonstrations.

Since 2003, the group has supported the Palestinian struggle against Israeli occupation and specifically against Israel’s segregation wall. Week after week, AATW joins the Palestinian popular resistance against the wall, in diverse areas of the West Bank, including the villages of al-Ma’asara, south of Bethlehem, Beit Ummar, north of Hebron, Bil’in and recently, almost on a daily basis, Ni’ilim (http://www.awalls.org/topics/niilin) west of Ramallah. There, the army is taking extreme steps to suppress the demonstrations, such as occasionally firing live ammunition and imposing siege and curfew.

Hundreds of activists have been arrested and dozens indicted for their participation in the struggle. Fortunately, the group is represented by a dedicated lawyer, Adv. Gaby Lasky. [who] has tirelessly worked to defend activists arrested at demonstrations or direct actions in the West Bank and in Israel. Though the legal defense she provides AATW is almost a full-time job, she has agreed to be paid only a token fee. However, even despite a successful fundraising campaign last year, AATW still owes Adv. Lasky approximately $15,000.

Recently, we have seen an increase in the legal persecution of our Palestinian partners. In solidarity we are now fundraising to expand AATW’s existing legal fund to also cover defense costs for Palestinian arrestees. This is in addition to covering the existing aforementioned debt, and operational expenses such as communications and transportation.

We urge you to read this article in The Nation http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080804/gordon about the recent struggle in Ni’ilin, and to please make a donation that will enable us to continue this struggle.

In appreciation and solidarity.
Anarchists Against the Wall

For more information about AATW, our actions and how to make a donation, visit our website: http://www.awalls.org/donations or contact us at donate @awalls.org.

“From Moses to Jeremiah and Isaiah, the Prophets taught…that the Jewish claim on the land of Israel was totally contingent on the moral and spiritual life of the Jews who lived there, and that the land would, as the Torah tells us, ‘vomit you out’ if people did not live according to the highest moral vision of Torah. Over and over again, the Torah repeated its most frequently stated mitzvah [command]: “When you enter your land, do not oppress the stranger; the other, the one who is an outsider of your society, the powerless one and then not only ‘you shall love your neighbor as yourself’ but also ‘you shall love the other.’” [5]

[1] Eileen Fleming, Memoirs of a Nice Irish-American ‘Girl’s’ Life in Occupied Territory, pages 55-56
[2] http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3444320,00.html
[3] Apartheid Ancient, Past, and Present Systematic and Gross Human Rights Violations in Graeco-Roman Egypt, South Africa, and Israel/Palestine, By Anthony Löwstedt. Page 77.
[4] The Link, “About That Word Apartheid”, April-May 2007, Published by Americans for Middle East Understanding, Inc.
[5] Rabbi Lerner, TIKKUN Magazine, page 35, Sept./Oct. 2007

Met with silence

Met with silence

Recent Israeli army aggressions against Palestinian charities, beauty salons and shops show unequivocally that Israel is morally lost, writes Khaled Amayreh in Nablus

If you still think there are red lines that Israel has not crossed with regard to its treatment of Palestinians, don’t be too sure. In recent days and weeks, the Israeli army has been vandalising, ransacking and confiscating Palestinian civilian institutions in the West Bank’s largest towns and cities, including Ramallah, the seat of the so-called Palestinian government.

Frustrated eyewitnesses and tearful victims spoke of “unprecedented brutality” and “Gestapo-like behaviour” as Israeli occupation forces moved throughout the central and northern West Bank to destroy what was left of the Palestinian charity sector upon which thousands of impoverished Palestinian families depend for their livelihood.

Israel had been targeting orphanages and boarding schools as well as soup kitchens and sewing workshops serving orphans in the Hebron region. The campaign of terror, with many hair- raising scenes of cruelty and moral callousness, has seriously raised the level of hostility and hatred for Israel.

Palestinian livelihood, like Palestinian lives, appears irrelevant to Israel. It is, after all, the tormentor, murderer, and perpetual oppressor of the Palestinian people.

The latest savagery occurred last week when dozens of Israeli army vehicles, including armoured personnel carriers, stormed the main business district in Nablus, 90 kilometres north of Jerusalem. Nablus is one of the cities the Palestinian Authority (PA) had declared “sovereign”, especially after the deployment of hundreds of US-trained and well armed “security forces”.

When Israeli soldiers violated the city last week, Palestinian security forces were nowhere to be seen. The invading Israeli troops stormed schools, commercial malls, sports clubs, cultural centres, a key medical centre, a TV station, beauty salons as well as numerous NGO offices, ransacking and destroying equipment. In one instance, educational aides — including human skeletons, microscopes and school furniture — were smashed and thrown into the street.

Moreover, soldiers stole computers and many electrical and electronic appliances from the targeted buildings, all declared “property of the Israeli” army. At the Afaq TV station in downtown Nablus, the Israeli army confiscated all its equipment and furniture, “then they left on the front door a military order of its closure for one year,” said station owner and director Issa Abul-Ezz in a statement sent to Al-Ahram Weekly.

The most draconian barbarity, however, targeted a commercial mall consisting of dozens of shops. The Israeli army closed the premises, warning that any Palestinian entering the multi-storey building would be arrested and imprisoned for five years.

In Ramallah, Israeli soldiers stormed the municipal council building of Al-Bireh, Ramallah’s twin-town, located a few hundred metres from the headquarters of PA President Mahmoud Abbas and the office of his Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. The Israeli soldiers, with sledgehammers and welding equipment, forced open offices, confiscating computers and destroyed furniture.

Again, PA forces remained confined to their barracks “in honour of agreements and understandings” with Israel. PA officials, including Prime Minister Fayyad, have argued forcefully that all social, cultural, educational, athletic and commercial institutions targeted by Israel functioned according to the law and were involved in nothing of concern to Israel whatsoever.

“These are legitimate Palestinian institutions, and targeting them is aimed at weakening and humiliating the Palestinian Authority,” said Fayyad while inspecting the targeted buildings. He added that he would complain to the United States as well as to Tony Blair, the Quartet’s envoy to the Palestinian-Israeli peace process. Neither has uttered a word criticising the latest Israeli savagery.

The Israeli occupation authorities claimed the targeted institutions were owned or run by religious individuals who might be sympathetic to Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic resistance movement. However, the Israeli army, and its intelligence arm, Shin Bet, failed to produce any evidence whatsoever linking the institutions to acts of violence.

Ironically, it is provocative actions like these that seriously weaken the image of the PA while strengthening Hamas. Fayyad said the Israeli onslaught on Palestinian charities and other institutions would radicalise Palestinian society and deepen hatred for Israel. It is evident, however, that Israel is indifferent to the long-term effects of its vindictive actions against Palestinians. Drawing satisfaction at seeing Palestinians suffer seems to be the main Israeli motive.

The harsh onslaught on the city of Nablus, and the embarrassment this onslaught has caused to Israel’s peace partner, the PA, has drawn few reactions from an international community that appears to have lost hope of restraining Israel’s wild savagery against virtually helpless Palestinian victims.

The most outspoken response came from Louisa Morgantini, vice- president of the European Union, who called the Israeli raids “a clear violation of international law”.

“The ongoing raids, closures, and confiscations by the Israeli army against institutions, associations and evens schools in Nablus are illegal actions, representing not only a clear violation of international law and more suffering and injustice against the Palestinian population, but also a direct attack on the Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad’s government.

“Incursions, arrests, closures, sound bombs exploding during nightly invasions, and now also the order to close the Nablus mall, including 50 shops and offices, threatening anyone who enters the mall to be imprisoned for five years: these orders by the Israeli military are illegal and invalid.”

On 10 July, Fayyad toured Nablus and urged shopkeepers and residents to reopen their stores and to resist non-violently. The Israeli army responded to Fayyad’s “defiant posture” by re-entering Nablus and sealing additional premises and by renewing warnings that violators of Israeli military orders would be imprisoned and have their homes blown up.

Fayyad, infuriated and clearly embarrassed by the audacity of the Israeli raids, called on Hamas to work towards the formation of a national unity government, because “this is the only way to present a united Palestinian front in the face of the Israeli aggression.”

Israeli society, which has been drifting stridently towards Talmudic fundamentalism and jingoistic fascism, generally ignored its army’s shameful behaviour in the West Bank. There were two exceptions. First, the small but noted Israeli peace group, Gush Shalom, published a statement in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz entitled “Orphans and widows”.

The statement read as follows: “As part of the actions against Hamas, the Olmert government is destroying orphanages, schools and charities in the West Bank. There are no other institutions to take their place. Orphans, widows and poor people will be thrown into the street. Will this isolate Hamas? On the contrary.”

The other exception was an article written by the non-conformist columnist Gideon Levy, also published in Haaretz. Levy spoke of the horrific oppression the Israeli army is meting out to the Palestinians. “Thus the occupation proves once again that there is no place in Palestinian lives that it cannot reach, and that it has no boundaries.”

“An army that closes a school, library, bakery and boarding school; soldiers who raid a licensed commercial television station, confiscating its equipment and threatening its closure, as happened recently at the Afaq TV station in Nablus… These operations broadcast a message loud and clear: the occupation has lost all moral inhibitions and any shred of wisdom.”

“How wretched is an army,” Levy continued, “that empties storerooms of food and clothing for the needy; how ridiculous that the army signs orders to close hairdressing salons; how pathetic is a military raid on bakeries and how cruel is an occupation that shuts down clinics on any pretexts.”

It is important to keep in mind that these views in no way reflect the collective conscience of Israel’s overtly racist society. Therein, the dominant response to the occupation’s atrocities is silence.

© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved

Secrets of CIA

Secrets of CIA

more about “Secrets of CIA.avi“, posted with vodpod

Documentary – “Code name Artichoke”

U.S. Foreign Policy – Secret Wars of the CIA

Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA,

Afghanistan, and Bin Laden

more about “Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the…“, posted with vodpod

The Silence of the Jews

The Silence of the Jews

By Bob Finch
After the collapse of the Soviet empire, a group of Zionists in Russia seemingly steeped in ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’, lied, cheated, stole, and murdered, their way into virtually all positions of power throughout the country. They used gangs (some of which probably included mossad agents) to intimidate and murder their opponents in order to gain control of between 70-85% of Russia’s industries including most of its natural resources. They also took control of Russia’s media which they then used to elect Boris Yeltsin as President of Russia despite the fact that he was a brain-dead, vodka soaked, alcoholic. Within a matter of years these Russian traitors had become billionaires having stolen vast quantities of Russian assets. They exported as much as possible of their ill-gotten wealth to the Zionist state in Palestine just in case the Russians might ask for their money back.
In the beginning, there were reputedly only seven Russian oligarchs – of whom 6 were Zionists. By the end of 2003 it was estimated there were seventeen, “Khodorkovsky is one of Russia’s “oligarchs,” a group of 17 billionaires who acquired sudden wealth in the 1990s after the Soviet Union collapsed and they bought government properties at fire-sale prices. Polls show that most Russians deeply resent the oligarchs. Most of them are young; Khodorkovsky is 40. And many of them, including Khodorkovsky, are Jewish.”” (William Schneider

‘Putin’s Arresting Move’); “As the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz explains: “In recent years Russian authorities began investigating (Yukos), its managers and major stockholders, many of whom are of Jewish origin. The probes caused several of the managers to flee to Israel, and resulted in Khodorkovski’s (Yukos CEO) arrest and a Kremlin attack on Yukos.” (Alison Weir ‘Russia, Israel and Media Omissions’). Most of these seventeen billionaires are Zionists. These billionaires are frequently referred to as Russian oligarchs but, in reality, they are overwhelmingly Israeli oligarchs in Russia.One might have thought that such an outrageous political scandal in a country still bristling with nuclear weapons, would have been front page news in America and Britain for many years. This was not the case. On the contrary, the scandals were rarely mentioned in the media. Alison Weir has argued that one of the main reasons for this was that Associated Press refused to investigate what the Zionists were doing in Russia. This was important because “AP is the major news source for the thousands of news outlets around the country (America) who cannot afford to have their own foreign correspondents. When AP chooses not to cover something, its omission is felt throughout the nation. When national news networks and others leave out the same facts, the cover-up is almost total.” (Alison Weir

‘Russia, Israel and Media Omissions’).Weir makes an even more specific allegation when she points out that, since the late 1990s, much of the responsibility for this pretense about the Israeli oligarchs in Russia has been due to Judith Ingram, Associated Press’s bureau chief in Moscow. “For example, a few months ago in a typical AP story on this power struggle, “Report: Russia again charges Berezovsky,” Judith Ingram makes no mention anywhere that Berezovsky is an Israeli citizen, or of his many connections to Israel. When … Ingram was asked about Berezovsky’s Israeli citizenship, she claimed to know nothing about it, a curious contention for someone who has been an AP news editor in Moscow since 1999. When Ingram was queried further, she hung up the phone. An examination of Ingram’s reporting on the Berezovsky story cited above raises serious questions. Though she is located in Moscow, Ingram interviewed only two people for her news story: Berezovsky, who is in London, and Berezovsky associate Alex Goldfarb, in New York. One wonders why she interviewed none of the Russians residing around her. Similarly, one wonders why not a single AP story has identified Berezovsky’s considerable connection to Israel. Further, nowhere does Ingram’s article convey the ruthlessness of the oligarchs’ actions, or the significance of their holdings, including control of its media. Unnoted in Ingram’s report is the fact that her subject and fellow oligarch Vladimir Gusinsky have been two of Russia’s most powerful media tycoons. (Alison Weir

‘Russia, Israel and Media Omissions’). In effect, Judith Ingram has turned Russia’s Israeli oligarchs into invisible Jews. What Judith Miller did to help push America into a Zionist proxy war against Iraq, Judith Ingram is doing to cover up Jewish efforts to take control of Russia. The reason that Ingram chose to ignore the Israelis’ roles in Russia is because she knew that the Israeli dominated American media didn’t want any publicity being given to what the Israeli thieves were doing in Russia. She was just doing what her Israeli masters wanted her to do.Weir laments that as a consequence of the American media’s silence about Zionist activities in Russia most Americans know little about what has been happening there. “Such omissions by AP and large swaths of the American media leave Americans seriously disadvantaged in deciphering what is going on in Russia, and its profound significance for the world.” (Alison Weir

‘Russia, Israel and Media Omissions’).The silence of the Zionist owned media in America about what their Zionist countrymen have been doing in Russia shows that, at the very least, they have been acting in concert with, if not deliberately colluding with, these Israeli traitors in Russia. (Weir does not mention that the Zionist owned media in Britain also kept quiet about these events and were thus also guilty of colluding with these criminals). Zionists around the world, whether Robert Maxwell, Joseph Conrad, Marc Rich, etc, etc, know that they can carry out whatever crimes they want around the world because the Jewish owned media in America, and Britain, will never publicize their crimes. (The even bigger bonus for Jewish crooks is that it doesn’t matter what crimes they commit, the Zionist state in Palestine will always give them refuge). The jewish owned media in America, and Britain, are actually providing Jewish criminals around the world with an incentive to carry out crimes because they will never reveal Zionists’ criminal exploits. (Wasn’t it amazing how Robert Maxwell was able to raid the pension funds of dozens of companies without anyone pointing out his criminal activities?). The criminal exploits of Zionist traitors around the world are common knowledge only within the hallowed confines of the Zionist state in Palestine. What an irony that the truth can be spoken only in an illegal, rogue, state created through, and built on, violence and theft. The thieves who run the Zionist state in Palestine give Jewish thieves the right to boast openly of their criminal exploitation of the goyim.

The Israelis who own and control the media in America (and Britain) were not in the slightest bit morally disturbed let alone outraged that their fellow countrymen were filching Russia’s wealth or acting in such a treacherous way to the country in which they had lived for most of their lives. They were much too pre-occupied with a far more serious world historical event – Monica Lewinsky wrapping her pretty, lip-stick coated, lips around Bill Clinton’s willy. Of course, if Bill had been a complete shabbat goy and given the Zionist state in Palestine all that it wanted, then the Zionist media in America would probably have given him their seal of approval and his affair would never have been mentioned.

Such is the power of the Israeli owned media in America that the president of the United States can invite members of the Zionists’ global criminal fraternity to meet with him in the white house, presumably to talk about how to spread Zionist-dominated democracies to all countries around the world, without fearing that the media will expose his criminal associates. “You would think it would be hot news when wanted men being hunted by European police suddenly pop up in the US particularly on Capitol Hill and at events attended by the US president. Yet, there was not a single AP story in the US on any of this. Not a single national network television or radio news program even mentioned these facts. In fact, Google and LexisNexis searches four days after these events took place turned up only three newspaper articles on them anywhere in the entire country.” (Alison Weir

‘Russia, Israel and Media Omissions’). “Prosecutors in Russia have been searching the world for a pair of oil tycoons who got on president Vladimir Putin’s bad side. Maybe they should have asked Putin’s friend President Bush. There in the audience joining Bush at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington on Thursday were two partners of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the billionaire imprisoned after defying the Kremlin. The two partners, Mikhail Brudno and Vladimir Dubov, were allowed into the United States – and the president’s company – despite Interpol notices filed at the request of the Russians. Dubov, who will turn 47 on Monday, and Brudno, 45, were major shareholders in Yukos along with Khodorkovsky, each holding about 7 percent of the firm, making them billionaires as well. When prosecutors targeted Khodorkovsky, Dubov and Brudno fled to Israel, where they obtained dual citizenship. Russian prosecutors asked Interpol, the Paris-based international police agency, to issue “red notices” for Dubov and Brudno, alerting member states that they are wanted on fraud charges. But U.S. officials said they saw no reason to honor the Interpol red notices and noted that the United States has no extradition treaty with Russia. Traveling on Israeli passports with long-term U.S. visas, Dubov and Brudno were not stopped when they landed.” (Peter Baker ‘Prayer Breakfast Includes Russian Fugitives’ Washington Post).One of the main reasons the Israelis who own and control the media in America never exposed what their colleagues and business associates were doing in Russia is because of the obvious parallels between Zionists’ control of Russia and Zionists’ control of America. In both Russia and America, the Zionists control the media, parliament/congress, and even to a large degree the presidency. If the Israeli owned American media started discussing the Zionists take-over of Russia even the most retarded Americans, many of whom have adopted Zionism as their religious ideology but yet bitterly resent accusations that they’ve been indoctrinated by Zionists, might start wondering if Israelis had already done to America what they had just done to Russia. This might even lead them to question whether it is right for Israelis to control not only Palestine but Russia and America. It might lead them to wonder whether the view promoted by the Israeli traitors in the Bush administration that ‘what is good for the Zionist state in Palestine is good for America’ could possibly be true when Zionist traitors in the Yeltsin government were arguing that ‘what is good for the Zionist state in Palestine is good for Russia’. Even worse is that American goyims might begin to feel as much contempt for their Zionist masters as Russian goyims have for their Jewish masters, “In Russia, the oligarchs are deeply loathed, considered villains who worked to bleed the country dry; during their reign many Russian citizens saw their life savings disappear overnight. (Alison Weir

‘Russia, Israel and Media Omissions’). But it would be wrong for American goyims to believe that the Israeli oligarchs in Russia were anything like as mendacious and murderous as America’s ziocon traitors. Sure, Russia’s Zionist traitors are a lot richer than their American neocon counterparts but America’s Zionist traitors are far more professional when it comes to lying, cheating, stealing, and murdering.The Israeli owned media in America has also been keeping quiet about another dirty secret they know about what their fellow countrymen are doing in American politics. “For years, the neocons’ push for war against Iraq was largely uncovered by the US media. For even longer, the neocons’ close connections to Israel have gone largely unmentioned in mainstream American news reports. As a result, very few Americans know to what degree many of those responsible for the tragic US invasion and occupation of Iraq have been motivated by Israeli concerns. The omission in coverage of Iraq has been profoundly disastrous, both for the Middle East and for Americans. In fact, it is quite likely that only history will show the true extent of this disaster. It is deeply troubling to see the same kind of omission occurring on Russia.” (Alison Weir

‘Russia, Israel and Media Omissions’). The Israeli owned media in America doesn’t want American goyims being worried about the loyalties of the Israelis who have forced American administrations into adopting Zionist policies from the Ford administration onwards.It is commonly appreciated that it is not politically kosher to explore the thesis concerning Jewish world domination. But, given Zionists’ control of America and Britain, and the Zionist takeover of Russia, what other theory fits the facts so precisely?

If a leftist Israeli historian such as Benny Morris, a “paragon of dispassionate Israeli scholarship” argues, “The Arab world as it is today is barbarian,” and believes that Islamic and Arab culture is “a world in which human life doesn’t have the same value as it does in the West,” and that Palestinians are barbaric, “a very sick society,” and should be treated “the way we treat individuals who are serial killers. . . . Something like a cage has to be built for them.”” (Kathleen Christison

‘American Jewish sensitivities to criticism of Israel’) then what does this say about the utter barbarity and depravity of the more extreme Zionists in the illegal Zionist state in Palestine?Christison concludes, “Morris’s blunt soul-bearing has lifted the last barrier of propriety to the open expression of raw Arab hatred. One longs for some gigantic outcry of opposition or disgust over this confession of deep bigotry, but there has been none. Except for a few letters to the editor of Ha’aretz from American Jews, the interview has aroused little attention in the Jewish-American community: no denunciation, no shock, little or no discussion on any but the most progressive Jewish e-mail lists. You have to assume that, however awkward Morris’s blunt language may be, he is speaking for a large segment of American Jews who say they oppose the occupation, say they hate Sharon, say they hate Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians, but who do nothing about any of these things and who in the end would not grieve, either for the Palestinians or for the Jewish soul, if Israel wiped the Palestinians off the map.” (Kathleen Christison

‘American Jewish sensitivities to criticism of Israel’).What makes all of this amusing is that in the over-industrialized world, liberals, leftists, greens, and progressives, regard the use of such phrases as Zionist world domination or Zionist controlled media as having no relationship to empirical realities. But what this chorus of denunciations indicates of course is the pervasiveness of Jewish world domination. Liberal/lefty/greenie/progressives seem to be suffering from Zionist indoctrination almost as much as, right wing Christians i.e. the people they disdain for supposedly suffering from political naivety.

Thankfully Russian president Putin managed to wrested a lot of control away from the Jewish oligarchs in Russia, something that George Bush wouldn’t even contemplate doing in America.


How could Jews acquire World Domination?Jewish world domination is a remarkable feat. Many find it difficult to understand how 14 million jews could control 6 billion non-jews. Perhaps if the issue is taken stage by stage it should become more comprehensible.

Firstly, Jewish power to control America has built up slowly since the second world war. At first America’s Jewish lobbies seemed to have no desire to try and control American policies on a day to day, policy by policy basis. The power of the Jewish lobby to force American administrations into adopting policies that were beneficial to the Jewish state in Palestine but detrimental to American interests was used sparingly. The most blatant example of this came in 1973 when Arab armies were gaining the upper hand against the illegal Jewish state in Palestine. President nixon had to decide whether he would intervene and on which side. After all, America relied on Arab oil just like the rest of the world. According to the oil theory of politics this decision should have been a no brainer. Firstly, Arabic/Islamic countries had vast quantities of oil while the Zionist state had none. Secondly, there was nothing that the Zionist state could do for America that one or other of the American sponsored Arab/Islamic dictators could not do. Thirdly, geopolitically, America also needed to lure Arab countries from the clutches of the Soviet empire. And yet, Nixon choose to support the Zionist state. “When Israel faced defeat before the united armies of Egypt and Syria, Sec. Of State Henry Kissinger ordered America armaments flown into the Israel-occupied Sinai Peninsula, giving Israel a pivotal advantage against her Arab foes. The ensuing Arab outrage produced the great oil embargo of 1973, sending the U.S. into a debilitating recession for the better part of a decade.” (Mark Green with Wendy Campbell

‘Exit Neo-Conservatives, Enter Neo-Liberals’). In other words, the Zionist lobby was powerful enough even in the 1970s to force America into supporting the illegal Zionist state in Palestine even though this meant massive oil price rises that seriously damaged the American, and the global, economy and could have permanently alienated the Arab world pushing it further into the arms of the Soviet Union.Since the second world war, Zionists have acquired more and more of the American media until they are now its dominating force. They have majority control, verging on a monopoly, over the American media. As a consequence, they are able to pump out Zionist propaganda to tens of millions of Americans who, not surprisingly, have come to support the Zionist media’s views on the Middle East.

Secondly, Israeli lobbyists in America fund both American political parties and thereby control the American congress. The Republican and Democratic parties are simply the international branches of the Likud party governing Palestine.

Thirdly, Jews in America would not have such enormous political power without the support of non-Jews – some are shabbat goys who work for Israeli owned companies while others are the victims of Zionist indoctrination i.e. Zionization. In the late 1970s the Israeli neocons set out to win mass support for the Republican party by winning over America’s so-called Christian moral majority. In general, it can be argued that if one group of people manages to persuade a second group of people to follow their ideas then plainly the first group is in a dominant position over the second group. And this is exactly what has happened in America. Zionists have managed to persuade, or financially entice, non-Jews to uphold Zionist values.

Most commentators look at the size of America’s Christian movement and put 2 and 2 together to make 23. They conclude that Christian evangelicals are the country’s dominating political influence. It is true that Christian evangelism has grown considerably in political power since the 1970s but the particular strain of evangelism that has flourished has been one which has been groomed, supported, and financed, by the Zionist lobby because it promotes Zionist objectives. The Jewish neocons succeeded in transforming the Republican party into a popular political party which supports Zionist values. Much more critically, if Christian evangelists really dominated American politics they would concentrate on pursuing domestic campaigns to turn America into a Christian state i.e. ending the constitutional separation of church and state in America. But this is not the case. Christian evangelists give absolute political priority to the racist Zionist state in Palestine even over campaigns concerning domestic issues. Christian evangelists spend more time, effort, and money, campaigning for total Jewish control over Palestine than they do in campaigning for a Christian control over America.

Zionists in America are implacably opposed to the abolition of the separation between church and state and have deterred American Christians from campaigning to create a Christian state in America – while at the same time using American Christians to promote a racially pure, Jewish state in Palestine where there is little separation between church and state. In other words, in the power battle between America’s Zionists and Christian evangelicals, the former are plainly more politically powerful than the latter. In america, the continued constitutional separation of Christian churches from the state symbolizes the dominate position of the Zionist lobby over Christian evangelism.

America’s Christian evangelists are better described as de-Christianized Zionists. Firstly, they believe in the Jewish god of revenge rather than the christian god of forgiveness: they believe in the old testament more than they do the new testament with the exception of the book of revelations. Secondly, they give priority to a Judaic state in Palestine rather than a Christian state in America. Given that these victims of Zionist ideology are more concerned about foreign, rather than domestic, issues they could be referred to as de-Americanized, de-Christianized Zionists. America’s political leaders are not true Christians or even true Americans but Zionist traitors who use Christianity to win elections solely in order to promote foreign policies supporting the illegal Zionist state in Palestine.

Fourthly, in the early 1990s a group of American politicians, who happened to be Jewish, wrote a book entitled ‘Project for a New American Century’ in which they advocated new policies for the Jewish state in Palestine that would undermine what little political power that America has over the Jewish state. In general, when politicians in one country write books advocating policies to boost the powers of a second country over their country then this is treason. The Jewish authors of the PNAC are traitors to America. The ‘Project for a New American Century’ is better understood as an updated version of the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion’.

Fifthly, much more remarkable than the Jewish take-over of American politics which happened over a period of many decades, was the Jewish take-over of Russia in a way which is remarkably similar to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Because they possessed vast fortunes from the usurpation of virtually all of Russia’s natural resources, they were able to take control of the Russian media and use it to persuade tens of millions of Russians to vote for Boris Yeltsin who was virtually on his death bed – indeed, the day after his election he suffered a heart attack and took no further part in politics.

America is the world’s only hyperpower. But Israelis control America’s media and political system which ipso facto makes them the world’s rulers. The Zionist state in Palestine is not an American colony since there are few Americans in the Knesset or in Zionist administrations. On the contrary, America is a colony of the Jewish state in Palestine because there are so many Jews in American politics and American administrations.

%d bloggers like this: