Migrants To Europe Missed By Kosher “Alt-Right”

From The Jewish News of North California:

Nearly 5,000 people have become citizens of Spain or Portugal following the passing of laws in both countries on the naturalization of descendants of Sephardic Jews.

In Portugal, where a procedure for naturalization under the law went into effect last year, 292 applicants for naturalization have been approved, Catarina Madeira, a spokeswoman for the Portuguese Justice Ministry, said on Oct. 12.

Spain has naturalized 4,538 applicants for citizenship by Sephardim since the law went into effect last year. However, only three applicants were granted citizenship based on the actual law, the ABC daily newspaper reported on Oct. 16. Others were naturalized by a royal decree and not through the nondiscretionary procedure devised for the law.

According to ABC, the Spanish government in effect blocked the nondiscretionary procedure to avoid mass immigration by an estimated 30 million non-Jewish descendants of Sephardim
eligible under the law.

In both countries, the passing of the laws of return for Sephardim was described as an attempt to atone for the state and church-led mass expulsion, dispossession, torture and forced conversion into Christianity of Jews during the Inquisition — a period that began in the 15th century and ended with the disappearance and dispersion of what used to be one of the world’s largest Jewish communities.”

What that means is that Muslims and non-Muslim refugees fleeing countries bombed and destroyed by the US, Israel and their allies, are considered persona non grata in Europe and considered an “alien invasion.”

But Sephardi-descent Jews alone and no other Sephardi group (not Christians of Sephardi background, for example) are being imported by subverting the existing law and imposing a royal decree, ostensibly to compensate said Jewish imports for grievances they suffered over 500 years ago!

First, there is plenty of historical evidence to suggest that those grievances have been exaggerated and that the alleged perpetrators of the offense – some of the inquisitors, for instance – were themselves crypto-Jewish:

The Judaizing of Spanish Catholicism under the influence of the Marranos explains in part the popularity of Erasmus, precursor of Luther, in that country. At Rome, they seriously feared the emergence of a Jewish kingdom in Spain.17

A second problem superimposed itself on the religious problem. The Marranos had purchased for cash the public offices of several Spanish cities, crushing the old-Christian people under the weight of taxes and usury. There were some popular uprisings against the Marrano power at Toledo and Cuidad Real in 1449. The Marranos regained control of these cities in 1467 and massacred a great number of old-Christians. There were other bloodbaths in Castile (1468) and in Andalusia (1473). Spain was then on the threshold of a racial and religious civil war. This war, which would have been appalling, was avoided, thanks to the Inquisition.

Note that the Jewish converts were not always Marranos. Many among them were sincerely Catholic. Think of St. Teresa of Avila who was the granddaughter of a Marrano who, moreover, had been condemned by the Inquisition.

In fact, the truly converted Jews were the biggest enemies of the Marranos. The former rabbis Salomon Halevi, become bishop of Burgos under the name of Pablo de Santa Maria, and Jehoshua Ha-Lorqui, become Brother Jerome of the Holy Faith, wrote violent works against Judaism.

The historian Henry Kamen notes that the principal anti-Judaic polemicists were themselves ex-Jews. It was they who clamored for a tribunal of the Inquisition to distinguish between the false Jewish Christian converts and the sincere new Christians. The first Spanish Grand Inquisitor, Tomas de Torquemada, was himself a Jewish convert. In addition, it must be noted that many Marranos judaized simply through family tradition or by misappreciation of the Catholic faith. The Inquisition thus had to establish another distinction between the Marranos who willfully altered the integrity of the faith and those who were the victims of an insufficient catechization.”

But don’t hold your breath waiting for any so-called alt-right or libertarian site to talk about this particular state-mandated discrimination on the basis of religion and proscription of the right of movement of non-Jewish people.




Reince Priebus’ Sephardic Roots?


Sally Sherrow, Priebus’ spouse is listed as Jewish on a number of anti-Jewish/Zionist sites. But I couldn’t get anything authoritative for it.  On one site, the name is said to be Irish and derived from the French word for wagon. On another,  it is given as a Scottish occupational name and listed as a variant of Shearer, derived from Scerare.

But, note, there is also a German version – Schearer,  a variant of Scharer, that is also spelt Scherer.

Scherer is both a gentile name and a common German-Jewish (Ashkenazy) name.  Given Priebus’ roots, I think it’s a good guess that Sally L. Sherrow is an Ashekenazy crypto herself.

Preibus went to law school at Miami, head quarters of the Russian Jewish mafia in the US.


From Ethnic Celebs.com, a brief analysis of Trump’s chief of staff’s ethnic descent:

Birth Name: Reinhold Richard Priebus

Place of Birth: Dover, New Jersey, U.S.

Date of Birth: March 18, 1972

*German, 1/8th English (father)
*Greek (mother)

Reince Priebus is an American attorney and political figure. He has been White House Chief of Staff, since January 20, 2017. He was previously Chair of the Republican Party of Wisconsin, from 2007 to 2011, and Chair of the Republican National Committee, from January 14, 2011 to January 19, 2017.

His father is of seven eighths German and one eighth English descent. His mother was born in Sudan, of Greek origin. Reince was raised Greek Orthodox.

Reince’s paternal grandfather was Reinhold W. Priebus (the son of Friedrich/Frederick “Fred” Priebus and Amilia/Amalia Kroll). Reince’s grandfather Reinhold was born in Michigan, to ethnic German parents from Russia. Friedrich was the son of John Priebus and Lesa. Amilia was the daughter of William Kroll and Frazina.

Reince’s paternal grandmother was Evelyn Mimmie Birch (the daughter of Christophe/Chris F. Birch and Ottilia/Ottilie Kugler). Evelyn was born in Wisconsin. Christophe was born in Wisconsin, to a Canadian father, William Birch, whose own parents were English, and to an American mother, Minnie Wirtschieffer, who was born in Wisconsin, to German parents. Reince’s great-grandmother Ottilia was an ethnic German from Russia.”

“Ethnic German from Russia” could well be Ashkenazy Jewish, but for now, let it remain a suspicion, for this is Priebus’ father’s side. It is the mother’s descent that decides Jewish/Khazar ethnicity.

Priebus’s mother is Dimitra Priebus whose original family is on the island of Lesbos. She is Greek, but met Priebus’ father in Sudan, while he was in the US army and stationed in Ethiopia.  Dimitra (nick-named Roula) Priebus had until then spent most of her life in Khartoum, where she worked in the American embassy.  Today, she is a real estate agent in Wisconsin.

Priebus’ father, Richard Priebus,  is described as a (former?) union electrician and in some places also as a real estate agent.

As a young man, Reince Priebus himself interned with the NAACP.

Employee unions and the NAACP sound more liberal than conservative.

Dimitra Priebus’ maiden name is Pitsiladis.

Her family is from Mytilene, the capital of the island of Lesvos and the seat of a metropolitan bishop of the Greek Orthodox church.

According to Wikipedia, in 1170, Benjamin of Tudela established ten small Jewish communities in Lesbos, but by 1930 there were only a hundred or so Jewish people left.

So, while Roula Priebus was born in the Sudan,  which is home a to a number of European expats, her ancestral home was on the island of Lesvos, from which we get the word lesbian. Lesvos is also well-known for the production of the wine, ouzo.

In fact, Roula Priebus’ family name of Pitsiladi is connected with one of several companies involved in the production of the best ouzo, Ouzo plomari.

Is  Roula Priebus from the ouzo-making Pitsiladis family? If so, the chances are she is a crypto-Jew, a donmeh of some kind.

Here’s why.

The word ouzo is itself derived from a Turkish word, uzum, meaning grapes in Turkey.

A more likely explanation however gives Sir G. Clauson in his book “An Etymological Dictionary of Pre-Thirteenth Century Turkish”, Oxford 1972. At page 288 he says that the word “ouzo” derives from the word “uzum”, which means grapes in Turkish.”

The Pitsiladis distillery was founded by one Paniyotis Pitsiladis from Pergamos in Asia Minor, who came to Plomari in the 19th century:

In the middle of the 19th century, Panayiotis Pitsiladis arrived to [sic] Plomari from Pergamos in Asia Minor and founded his first distillery by the river.
In 1892 he received the official operating license from the Turkish state and started to produce Ouzo Plomariou Pitsiladis with his sons.


 Pergamos  is the current Turkish town of  Bergamos.

In pre-Christian and Roman times, it was the site of flourishing and at times debauched cults of the pagan gods, Jupiter, Dionysos, and Venus, as well as of Asklepion, the healing snake-god.

Pergamom was also the seat of imperial power in Asia and later the site of one of several important New Testament churches.

In the Revelation of St. John,  Christ addresses the fledgling church at Pergamos (Pergamum) thus:

Revelation 2:12-17 …..’And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These things saith he which hath the sharp sword with two edges; I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan’s seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.”

In 92 AD, Antipas, the saintly bishop of Pergamum, was roasted alive  in a bronze bull at the top of a 40-ft altar to Jupiter, as I previously blogged.

In that same blog post I explained why I thought that Jesus’ phrase “seat of Satan” referred to the imperial cult that saw the Roman emperor as god and demanded the submission of Christians to him.

I argued that a study of the types of Satan in the Bible (Nimrod, the King of Tyre, Antiochus Epiphanes, Herod)  showed that it was power aspiring to Godhead, rather than simply worship of other gods, that was dubbed Satanic.

According to wikipedia:

The name Mytilene itself seems to be of Hittite origin. According to Homer‘s Iliad, however, Lesbos was part of the kingdom of Priam in what is now Turkey. Much work remains to be done to determine just what was happening and when. In Middle Ages, it was under Byzantine and then Genoese rule. Lesbos was conquered by the Ottoman Empire in 1462. The Ottomans then ruled the island until the First Balkan War in 1912, when it became part of the Kingdom of Greece.”

With such a history, there would be widespread Turkish and most likely donmeh Jewish descent among  Greeks in Mytilene. The Hittites were one of several people who intermarried with the Edomites, as the descendants of the Biblical Esau, were known.  From this Edomite strain descends the “mixed multitude” that is now inaccurately termed Jewish.

If Roula Priebus does belong to the ouzo-making family of Pitsiladis, the US would have a “white nationalist” president who is really of Ashkenazy extraction, descended from the Drumpfs from the wine-making heart of Germany… and we would have a chief-of-staff also apparently of Sephardic (maternal) heritage, descended from a crypto-Jewish/Turkish (donmeh) family, from the  wine-making heart of the Aegean.



Breast Cancer Report Suggests Khazarian Link To Ashkenazim?

Michael Hoffman:

Proceeding from early findings in books such as Arthur Koesltler’s The Thirteenth Tribe and Paul Wexler’s The Ashkenazic Jews: A Slavo-Turkic People in Search of a Jewish Identity, scientists like Dr. Elhaik have traced the origins of most “Jews” in the West to a Turkic people who converted to Judaism in the eighth century, lived in the Eurasian state of Khazaria, and then migrated to Eastern Europe in the 12th and 13th centuries where gullible churchmen accepted them as the Jews, God’s wayward but chosen people.

In Khazaria the word “Kagan” (also spelled Khagan) denoted ruler or emperor. Observe some of the fake “Jews” who rule over us and who have that moniker or prefix: Robert Kagan, neocon architect of the Iraq war (co-founder of the Project for the New American Century with William Kristol); Elena Kagan, Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court; Lazar Kaganovich, Bolshevik Commissar of the propaganda department of the Red Army, destroyer of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior and Secretary of the Moscow Branch of the Communist Party under Stalin; Rabbi Meir Kagan, Polish-born author of the Talmud-derived law book Mishnah Berurah that rules the lives of hundreds of thousands of Khazar adherents of Orthodox Judaism.

The Zionist-dominated American media typically surround pioneering scientific data like that of Dr. Elhaik with a plethora of extreme skepticism, conflicting reports and disputation from contrary sources, so as to sow doubts among those who might otherwise be willing to accept the data as credible. Such acceptance would completely undermine the Israeli justification for appropriating Palestinian land and extruding the indigenous population. It would also expose the diabolic bankruptcy of the doctrine of recent popes and Protestant Fundamentalists, which insinuate that having rejected Christ, Israelis will nevertheless be granted eternal life as a result of an “irrevocable covenant” based on their alleged carnal descent from the Biblical patriarchs.

In the case of the following New York Times article of Nov. 27, 2013, the propaganda mechanisms usually in place are absent. This is an unguarded study of hereditary breast cancer genes occurring among Khazar women who are identified as “Ashkenazi” (of course we sympathize with the Khazar ladies —and all women afflicted with breast cancer  — and we advise that all married women have many children and breast feed them, because statistically, mothers of large, breast-fed families often have significantly lower rates of breast cancer).

No attempt has been made in this Times report on Ashkenazi breast cancer to explain how millions of so-called Jews occupying Palestinian land are shown in scientific and medical literature to have an east European rather than a Middle Eastern origin.

Substitute the word “Khazar” for “Ashkenazi” in the Times report: “In Israel, a Push to Screen for Cancer Gene Leaves Many Conflicted,” and you’ll have the true racial identity of half the population of “Jews” in counterfeit “Israel,” and most of the population of “Jews” in the USA, Canada, Australia and Europe.

It is for this reason that we never call these people Jews. Instead we have coined the term “Judaics” to describe them, based on their religious/nationalist affiliation with or nostalgia for Talmudic Judaism and/or the folk culture of Yiddishkeit, the medieval ghetto, and the accompanying legends of tribal solidarity during persecution. An equally or even more appropriate term would simply be Khazar, but this word remains at present too opaque to be widely recognized as a synonym for those who say they are Jews and are not, although hopefully that will change in the near future.”

Dieudonne Mocks Holocaust Inc., Not Holocaust

In this interview on Iranian TV, Dieudonne describes how he and his wife and children have been physically assaulted by Zionists for his satire.

None of that harassment has been reported widely. While the world has been forced to listen to endless nonsense about the faux-martyrdoms of operatives like Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, someone who really gets beaten up for his political views gets no sympathy.

The comedian also explains why breaking the  taboo against criticizing Zionism is indispensable to releasing the West from the psychic prison in which it lives.

He explains the difference between mocking the political and commercial manipulation of the Holocaust (which he admits to doing)

and mocking the Holocaust itself (which he denies doing).

He points out that in France, in recent  years, the Crucifixion has been forcibly and intentionally displaced by the Holocaust as a symbol deserving public veneration.

[See my post on Pope Francis and the Marc Chagall painting of Christ.]

Indeed, the increasing proliferation of laws supporting the inviolability of Holocaust history in France and elsewhere coincides with the increasing denigration and displacement of Christian symbols.

That displacement is nothing less than cultural imperialism.

Is one human race to replace divinity itself in the public consciousness of another?

If so, by whose will? At whose expense?

In another post I will explain why I still wonder if Dieudonne is yet another face of controlled opposition, but, in regard to the question of whether he is guilty of incitement, the answer is no.

One last point. He was convicted not of “inciting violence,” which is at least a crime, even if  he didn’t commit it.

No, he was charged with something quite different, nebulous, and trumped up “inciting hate.”

Quite apart from the astounding hypocrisy of  such a statement from the West – always boiling over with barbaric ‘two-minute-hates’ (here and here  for instance) directed at this or that unfortunate people who get in the way of its imperial ambitions –  what does inciting hate even mean?

Really, what does it mean?





White Phosphorus Used On Raqqa Civilians

The Independent (UK) reports:

Known as WP, use of the highly flammable chemical is accepted under international law in order to light up the battlefield and provide cover for ground troops.

But it is banned for use in densely populated areas or when directly targeted at infantry because it is highly toxic and can burn through skin and bone.

Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently, a network of citizen journalists which represents the primary source for information from inside the Isis-held city, said there were reports “that air strikes targeted Raqqa today (Sunday) with phosphorus” munitions……

On 13 November, witnesses in the opposition-controlled city of Idlib in north-western Syria told The Timesdozens of civilians had suffered “horrific injuries” following two attacks using WP.

Ahmed, an activist based in Idlib, told the newspaper: “We knew it was phosphorus because the entire sky lit up and when it settled it set everything on fire.”

This illustrates the reasoning behind false-flag terror attacks. They allow the military to conduct illegal forms of combat against civilians, because domestic opinion has been inflamed so much that it will tolerate and even applaud.

The false “war ON terror” enables the real “war OF terror.”

Hosein Mortada: Mossad Trained Paris Attack Perps

A reader tipped me off the day before yesterday about a report on NBN TV, Lebanon, by Syrian war reporter Hosein Mortada that there were five Paris attackers and they were

trained near the Golan Heights by Mossad.

Here is the original interview.

I couldn’t track down the original interview, but noticed today that the same information is being reported at Activist Post.

[Note that Activist Post has claimed that this information was personal information relayed to the writer of the article by Hosein Mortada. There is no reference to the NBN Lebanon TV interview. Note also that the writer mentions only one attacker.]

NOTE: What follows is a personal report I received from Hosein Mortada, Lebanese journalist and director of the Information Center for Studies and Documentation.

Hosein Mortada has provided details about one of the individuals who carried out the Paris attack on Saturday November 13th with the rest of his crew of jihadists. His name is Abo Talha Al Jazaeri (Aljazaeri means ‘Algerian’).

Abo Talha, a French national, has been trained in the Occupied Golan Heights, along with his crew who carried out Paris attack operation.

All of the terrorists involved with the Paris attacks were European nationals, previously fighting in Syria alongside Al Nusra Front and then moved to Al Raqqa to join the so-called ISIS, Islamic State in Syria and the Levant.

Finally they moved to Quneitra, Daraa, and their last station was in the Zionist entity, Israel, at a site called Bait Zorah where they have been trained by Israeli Mossad.

They were then sent to France, just six months before the Paris attack incident.The questions here are:

  1. How could such a terrorist group violate secured places like stadiums or concert halls without any assistance with foreign intelligence?
  2. Is France ready to designate those fighters as moderate rebels, as it is their title in Syria?

The USA started training these terrorists in Jordan, calling them the Syrian Democratic Army at the time, as Hosein has been informed by his source.

The Syrian Arab Army (SAA), backed by Lebanese resistance Hezbollah and Russian aerial support, have made great progress all over Syria and this progress on the part of the Syrian Arab Army makes Israel worried. Thus, Israel needs more involvement on the part of the USA and its allies (including France) in Syria in order to prevent this advance of the Syrian Arab Army even further.

Now, France and the USA have more pretext as a result of the attack in Paris to escalate their interference in Syria.”

Afraa Dagher is a political analyst currently residing in Syria. She has made numerous media appearances commenting on the current state of affairs inside Syria as well as the nature of the current crisis. She has appeared on RT, PRESS TV, and is a regular guest on Activist Post writer Brandon Turbeville’s Truth on the Tracks radio program. Her website is www.SyrianaAfrona.wordpress.com.

Here is what my reader told me two days ago:

Hosein Mortada had a one-hour NBN TV (Lebanon) interview in which he gave this information publicly.
He said there were FIVE attackers, all Algerians and Tunisians, with French citizenship.
They have been in Syria since 2012 and were trained by the Israelis near the Golan Heights and in Quneitra.
They are NOT ISIS but Al Nusra, an offshoot of Al Qaeda – that is, of AQ in Syria.

I still cannot find the link, but I am going ahead and posting it as is….and will correct it later, as I get more information.

Yossi Gurvitz: Eliminationism On The Rise In Israel

From Mondoweiss in 2012, more from former yeshiva student Yossi Gurvitz on why he became radicalized:

Meantime, in Israel we are seeing the Jehovahiztion of the Israeli public. Ignorant, radical Jews are turning more to symbols of Jewish superiority than actual Jewish values. It’s getting harder to be a liberal except in Tel Aviv. Everyone is thinking about a second passport.

This is a spiral that will leave Israel more fanatic, more religious, less able to communicate with the western world– and ironically more part of the extremism of the Middle East. I’ve been writing about the Jewish Brotherhood. Unlike the Muslim Brotherhood, our extremists have never had to face reality and soften. Because even when they wield power they claim that the real power is the hands of the liberal elites.

Unlike the US, we have no constitution. No Basic Law grants equality. The Israeli religious right has blocked that. The only reason we have freedom of the press is because of the Supreme Court decisions. The right is already using this as a way of attacking the Supreme Court, which is becoming more fearful, less willing to use its power.

Unless something drastic changes, and it could happen– I’m betting on the J14 movement– liberal Israel is dying, and it won’t be in existence in 5, or 10 years. Some elements will be kept as a figleaf, for the Zionist Jehovahist regime. The liberals will leave, those who can.

When that happens, the liberal part of the US will no longer be so willing to defend Israel and its policies. Then without the US, Israel will be hanging by its threat to use nuclear weapons. It will become a second North Korea.

There’s a history here. In 2004 a Maariv columnist demanded that the government nuke France. Because France is an enemy of Israel, and about to collapse into a Muslim Republic, a supporter of Iran– so we should nuke them first. The editor was fired for publishing it after the French ambassador made an official protest. The Foreign Minister [Avigdor Lieberman] suggested when he was in the opposition, that Israel nuke the Aswan dam. So there’s a reason the Egyptians won’t meet him.

[Mondoweiss: Gurvitz also suggests Israel could lose the American right.]

Four days ago a church was desecrated in Jerusalem. As part of a pricetag attack. This happens all the time. When the pricetag people run out of Muslim targets, they will concentrate more on Christian targets. When that happens, the American Christian right will realize that the Israeli right is hostile to Christianity.

Why is all this inevitable?

Zionism as a force is dead. The people who are actually speaking in the name of Zionism are speaking in religious and metaphysical and mystical truths. They are not speaking in the secular Zionist tradition. A poll two weeks ago—about 70 percent consider themselves to be the chosen people. American Jews think we as Jews are chosen to carry out tikkun olam [social justice]. Israeli Jews think something different—we are the chosen people of God, we are chosen to do anything we damn well please. To take people’s land. Take peoples lives. There is actually no mainstream force standing against the Jewish brotherhood.

This is not just the religious people, it’s a large part of the secular people buying into it. Israel’s Jews refuse to accept the legitimacy of the marriage of Jews and non-Jews. You American Jews really don’t understand us. They think we’re gutsier… American Jews… think of Zionist liberals. They’re older, they’re still thinking about the late 70s, early 80s, the golden age of Israel’s liberalism.

You have to understand what the religious right means when they say of leftists, the multitude, they are the erav rav. This means the ones who left Egypt, the mixed multitude. It is a concept in Kabbalah– the Amalekite Jew. A Jew who isn’t really a Jew. He looks like a Jew, thinks he’s a Jew, but he’s an enemy of God. It’s been used in the Knesset, the word erav rav.

If you think this Judaism is the wisdom of Israel, it’s not. This is the Judaism forced underground by the Christian regimes, censored time and again. It’s coming to the surface. Just about everyone knows this code here. What may change the picture is the J14 movement. It’s alive. It will be coming back after Passover. J14 has its faults, but it is the only movement that has put Israeli Arabs speakers out front. Many Palestinian Israelis are not quite happy with the result, but…. once Israelis realize that inequality harms everyone in Israel aside from the 1 percent, then they will begin to see the Palestinian as a partner in struggle. We’ve seen it in the north, if the movement isn’t crushed.

Liberals are dead, socialists are coming up. Most socialists are poised toward equality.

[Mondoweiss:  Tell us your story, Yossi.]

I was born in January 1970 in Petah Tikva. My parents are National Orthodox. My father is an electrical contractor who is in real estate. My mother is a housewife. I studied in the Yeshiva till I had a personal crisis and left the Yeshiva for the army in 1989. It looked like a liberation, strangely enough.

I started to do my bit for leftist ideology and got transferred to the Gaza Strip so I could stop the atrocities. That didn’t work very well. They hid them from me. I did manage to get my commander tried for slapping a Palestinian child. And one day they tried to abandon me in a refugee camp. [An officer] drove me to a refugee camp and told me to step out of the car, “your brother’s over there, go join him.” I cocked the gun, putting a bullet in the chamber. I didn’t point it at him, but he got the message, and he told me to drive back.

Everything I did was supportive of the occupation in every waking moment. I’m still doing penance. That’s the liberal trap. They say to you, You want to change the world, go there, be there. But it’s always compromising. It’s much bigger than you. You will go to prison if you don’t order the bulldozers to demolish the house.

I’m in the Meretz party. Meretz used to embody this liberal thinking. If you want to prevent atrocities, join the fighting units, serve in the territories where you can see atrocities, prevent them. That simply doesn’t happen.

I went to the university and got a degree in history. I had a personal crisis about not getting a master’s degree. I spent several years working in a chemical factory [in a clerical position]. I started blogging in 2002. I was writing on various forums in the 90s. Even before. In 2006 I stared my own blog. Friends of George. It is mainly a Hebrew blog. It quickly gathered steam. During the Second Lebanon war I started writing critically in ways that were not common. That attracted a lot of readers, also including a few death threats.

Recently I had my run in with the law. I was investigated for incitement two months ago.

Tell us about the radicalization of the left.

We see a radicalization on both sides. The leftists are becoming more radical and the right wingers, too. When I radicalized—and I did—I attracted more radicals. I’m going to the demonstrations; that’s the definition of a radical around here. Bil’in is basically a reenactment of the first intifada. Everyone is playing a part. No Palestinian is trying to throw a grenade, and generally in Bilin the soldiers don’t use lethal force….

I have really high hopes for what will happen in the next few months. I’m doing what I’m doing because I think it’s the right thing to do, but the Israeli government is using us to legitimize itself. ‘You see, we’re a democracy.’ The protests have very little influence on the general public. But they’re important because solidarity is important and it gets international coverage, which is always important.

[Mondoweiss: You say we American Jews don’t understand this Judaism. Elaborate.]

Rambam [Maimonides in the 12th century] writes, If a Jew has intercourse with a gentile child three years old and a day, the child should be executed for misleading the Jew, making him sin. Those texts are still valid. We don’t understand them, but they are valid.

These Jews …  took the elements of the religion that were nationalistic and have been slumbering for 100s of years and awakened it. They took the hatred of mankind which had persisted in Judaism for millennia and gave it voice and force. [In the former rabbinical tradition] the rabbis tried to housetrain Jewish messianism. The old way of thinking was, the messiah will lead Jews to victory. The rabbis made the messiah a supernatural being capable of talking to birds and animals. This mystical being was a dam against Jewish messianism in Ashkenazi Judaism, and the eliminationist elements against Christianity were held down by this teaching.

But once Israel was created, many Jews saw it as the end of the three oaths, the Shloshet Ha’Shvuot. Two of these oaths enjoin the Jews not to mass-emigrate to Eretz Yisrael and not to provoke the gentiles. The third orders the gentiles not to treat the Jews too badly.

Now Israel has the right to use force, and every demon that was pushed into the basement is up and has an M16.

– See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2012/03/the-radicalization-of-yossi-gurvitz#sthash.BPCHaub9.dpuf

When Israel Is Mighty

Transcript of a revealing interview with Israeli writer, Yossi Gurvitz, translated by Dena Shunra. He describes how Talmudic Jews view the non- Jewish world and what Christians should expect in a world where “Israel is mighty.”

[Bolding, paragraphs, and headers are mine. Note that I use the more appropriate word Judaist, rather than Jew.]

Now, we all know what the rabbis say is the origin of Judaism: Moshe passed the torah down to the elders, the elders passed the torah down to the prophets, etc…all the way down to the Talmud, and there were no changes. The central motif of the Jewish understanding of history is that there were no changes (in the religion). In other words, what the rabbis are saying now are merely minor refinements of what the rabbis had said during the time of the ‘Elders’ – the time of the Mishnah and the Talmud.
Now, first of all, the problem with this version of history is that it is completely baseless.
And second of all, that it has a few historical problems and these historical problems continue to this day, due to the fact that Judaism, as a religion, has been frozen in time for the last 1800 years.
Generally speaking, Rabbinical Judaism, as it appears in the Talmud – unlike what is generally taught in secular schools – the source of Judaism is not the Bible.
The source of Judaism is the Talmud.
The people who wrote the Talmud are the ones who decided what books would be included in the Biblical canon. What they decided wouldn’t go in – didn’t go in.
So, for example, while the Catholic Church included the Books of the Maccabees in its version of the canon, Judaism did not preserve them, and in fact only the Greek version of them was preserved.
Whether there were Hebrew or Aramaic versions of them is an interesting question, but only Christianity preserved them. The Book of Judith. The Book of Tobias. Many other books, mostly dealing with the Jews of the Diaspora didn’t make it into the Jewish Biblical canon, and were only preserved by Christianity.
Now, the Judaism that preceded Rabbinical Judaism was pretty much erased from history. In other words, there’s not enough information to know what happened then. We know there were Sadducees, there were Pharisees – the Pharisees are the rabbinical Jews – there were Essenes – we don’t know anything about them for certain, and the reason we don’t know anything about them for certain is, that when their enemies were victorious, the Pharisees established more than 10 religious holidays to celebrate their victories over the Sadducees, they simply erased them from history. So you have to eke out a fragment [of information] out of a fragment [of information], so you can say, “Maybe it was like this” or “Maybe it was like that” – its impossible to know what really happened.
What we do know is this: from very early on, Rabbinical Judaism is a Judaism that hates humans. It defines only Jews as humans – only Jews who believe in the religion as humans. Okay, lets get this exactly right: it defines only Jews who believe in the religion and are men – as full humans. And everyone else is some level of ‘other’, that must be pushed aside, or, in extreme cases, destroyed. Rabbinical Jewish law does not prohibit – okay, that’s not accurate. Rabbinical Jewish law prohibits the killing of a non-Jew, but it does not punish a person for doing so. In other words, if you kill a Jew, even a Jewish woman, even the slave of a Jew – and here it’s important to note that Orthodox Judaism has never abolished slavery – then there’s a penalty you have to pay. It could come to execution or it could be a fine. They didn’t have jails. But if you kill a non-Jew then you’re guilty, but there is no penalty. God will punish you. And that is – how shall I put it? – a bit problematic. When you say something is a crime, but there’s no punishment for committing it, then it’s not really a crime. That’s the Talmud.
When you come to the writers of later exegesis, especially the Shulhan Aruch, by that point, he is already saying that there are situations where you can kill a non-Jew with impunity. Of course, it’s written in the 16th century, after the expulsion [of all Jews] from Spain [in 1492 C.E.] so he has to write what he wants to say in coded language. So he calls them “idolaters”. But just so you know, there weren’t any [pagans] left in that part of the world [by that point] – not in Europe, and not in the Muslim world. So he calls them “idolaters” or other such terms, but everyone knows who he’s talking about [non-Jews].
The worst case, in my opinion, is the case of Maimonides, who decrees – first of all, he decrees that it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a 3-year-old girl. That age of consent is – problematic [?!].
And second of all, he decrees that if a Jew rapes a three-year-old non-Jewish girl, then she must be executed. Her, not him – because she tempted him to sin. [See this.] And for this reason, you have to treat her like an animal that puts obstacles in a person’s way, and he quotes some verse about a bull or something like that.
And the Rabbis know that the parts of the religion that are misanthropic, that are discriminatory to non-Jews – pose a problem for them. Because if they try to implement them – there are some rules that are very unpleasant, like that 3 year-old girl we were talking about. If they try to implement them, there will be a pogrom. So to avoid that situation, the Talmud defines two different states of reality. There is one called “Darkei Shalom” (Peaceful Ways). In other words, “This is the actual religious law, this is how you are supposed to act.” “However, because it would cause a huge mess, and people will die, so due to ‘Peaceful Ways’, you don’t act that way. ”
Now, until what point does the “Peaceful Ways” rule still apply? Just as long as the other situation does not exist, which is “When Israel is Mighty.” That’s when there is a Jewish regime. It is independent, and it is merciless, it can do what it likes. Under those circumstances – its all over, you go back to the letter of the law. No more “Peaceful Ways”, no more nothing. Now, when you think of Jewish history, lots of people talked about the Hasmonean Wars, which is pretty much the only time that Jews wielded weapons, and they think about what the Hasmoneans did to the Hellenized Jews (who assimilated Greek culture) – which was to make them extinct, to destroy them. A small genocide. And I remind people of this frequently, every time Hanukah rolls around. But they didn’t stop there. They embarked on campaign of looting and conquest, and at the beginning, during their first 20 years, wherever they arrived, they would destroy the local temples. It was prohibited for a place that was under Jewish rule to have a Pagan temple. That’s what we’re talking about. They also forced the Edomites to convert to Judaism on pain of death. It was a forced conversion. Something we learn the [Spanish] Inquisition did later on. They took people and told them: ” Either you’re dead, or you’re converting to Judaism”. And things only got worse from there.
Now, when religious Zionists look at reality, they say: “We’ve got a state. We’ve got weapons. We’ve got a Jewish army. This hasn’t happened for 2000 years”. “What this means is that God wants us to bring about the Messiah, that God wants us to build the temple”. They skip over all the conditions that are imposed by the Talmud on what a Messiah must be, and they go back to Maimonides. And they go back to Maimonides. And Maimonides says, “There is no difference between our time and the time of the Messiah, other than the subordination to kingdoms.” In other words, the only difference between the time of Maimonides – he died in 1204 – and the time of the Messiah, is who is subordinate to whom. Are the Jews subordinate to “kingdoms”, to other nations? Or can they subordinate other nations? And that is how Maimonides begins his Book of Kings. He explains what the rules are for a king, what a king can do. It emerges from the belief that, yes, there can be a king. You don’t have to first have a temple. You don’t need God to come down from the sky and point at someone and say, “That’s the Messiah”. You can have a king, and if he is victorious, then he’ll also be the Messiah. And then you look at what religious Zionists are doing about this. They want a Messiah. They want him now. There must be cleansings. Religious law prohibits contact with non-Jews. Of course, the Kosher laws prohibit you from eating with them. Other laws prohibit you from treating them fairly. You are forbidden to return a lost item to a non-Jew – except in order to “keep the peace.” There is no prohibition from stealing from a non-Jew – except in order to “keep the peace.” You can’t say “hello” to them – unless there is no alternative. And so on and so forth.
There are all kinds of prohibitions that are entirely psychotic, that are based on a religion of vengeance. Religious Zionists have a serious problem with the fact that there are non-Jews here. The Land of Israel is supposed to be only for Jews. So, ironically, they would manage to get along with the Muslims, more or less, if we weren’t involved in a military conflict with them. Because according to Judaism, Muslims are not idolaters. Muslims believe in one God. They don’t have idols, they don’t have statues, they don’t have anything like that. So ironically, during the Medieval Era, Jews got along better with Muslims than with Christians. But what can you do? We conquered a territory populated mainly by Muslims, and the Muslims are fighting us – so those defenses fall away. And look, now they are starting to talk about genocide. You have the (book) Torat Hamelech (King’s Torah), which tells you that you can kill children if there is a reason to believe that one day they could cause harm. Now, if you killed someone’s entire family and left only him alive, he will indeed have a reason to cause harm. If you stole his lands, turned him into a refugee, tossed him to Jordan or Lebanon – he will indeed have a reason to cause harm. Many people have said that the book’s arguments are not sound according to religious law, and so on and so forth – but no one really tackled it head-on. And it’s no wonder that it became a best-seller. Because in general, what religious Zionists want is for the Land of Israel to be for Jews only.
Now the situation for the Christians, on the other hand, will be really bad, (according to Judaism) they are idolaters, and you will have to kill them, even if they do not resist Jewish rule. In Jerusalem, religious seminary students have a despicable habit: they urinate and defecate on Churches. If you go and talk to the Church staff, you will hear it from every Church. Spitting on clergymen in the street is something that happens every day. If the Priest has the gall to hit the person back, to slap him or something similar, then he is deported, quietly. They cancel his residence permit in the country. If you want to justify a pogrom, all you have to do is say the words “Missionary Threat”. And from that perspective, Christianity, which is the historical arch-enemy of Judaism, is going to get a serious beating once the religious Zionists are in power. The Christian Fundamentalists who send them money apparently don’t understand what they are dealing with. But you know, it’s really a case of “a pox on both your houses”.

Martyrdom At Jacob’s Well

The martyrdom in 1979 of Father Philoumenos at the monastery of Jacob’s Well near ancient Samaria:

What a good shepherd he was, more worthy than some of the episcopate! Yet the policies and needs of the patriarchate saw Father Philoumenos assigned to other positions. Whenever Palestinian faithful were scandalized by some unworthy priest, whenever Orthodox neglect or European money drove the faithful to wonder whether they would not receive better pastoral care from Uniates, it was Father Philoumenos that the Patriarch of Jerusalem sent as the true defender of the Faith, a man of more than blameless life, a man from whom no one could even imagine any immodest or improper word, a man whose faith and integrity were a model for all………

Three things were most remarkable about the blessed martyr. The first might have been partly from nature, but assuredly aided by Grace: this was his soft sweet voice, which I can still hear today. The second was a meticulous fidelity to small things, but specifically to the Divine Service. He never omitted one word of any day’s service. When we were alone in some remote monastery, particularly for Matins, he slowly and carefully chanted each word of every psalm and canon. Not even at the Monastery of St. Sabba was the reading done so well. But when there were pilgrims for the Divine Liturgy and vespers, he made the usual abridgements lest the service be too long and some be tempted to leave. Later on, privately, he would read every word that had not been chanted in the church. Those who stayed with him for some time saw the copies of the menaion, horologion, synaxarion, etc. and noticed that the markers were always in place and the volumes never dusty, which earned the Divine Promise, Well done thou good and faithful servant, because thou hast been faithful over little things, I will set thee over great things Enter thou into the joy of the Lord (Matt. 25:21).

Third, and as unobtrusive, almost secret, was his humility. What a perfect patriarch he would have made, and were the election by the Palestinian faith fill he might well have been. Instead, God gave him an eternal crown and throne among the elders who offer incense before the throne of the Lamb (Rev. 5:8)……..

The glorious martyrdom of this servant of God came to pass in November,1979. The week before, a group of fanatical Zionists came to the monastery at Jacob’s Well, claiming it as a Jewish holy place and demanding that all crosses and icons be removed. Of course, our father pointed out that the floor upon which they were standing had been built by Emperor Constantine before 331 A.D. and had served as an Orthodox Christian holy place for sixteen centuries before the Israeli State was created, and had been in Samaritan hands eight centuries before that, (The rest of the original church had been destroyed by the invasion of the Shah Khosran Parvis in the seventh century, at which time the Jews had massacred all the Christians of Jerusalem.) The group left with threats, insults and obscenities of the kind which local Christians suffer regularly. After a few days, on November 16/29, during a torrential downpour, a group broke into the monastery; the saint had already put on his epitrachelion for Vespers. The piecemeal chopping of the three fingers with which he made the Sign of the Cross showed that he was tortured in an attempt to make him deny his Orthodox Christian Faith. His face was cloven in the form of the Cross. The church and holy things were all defiled. No one was ever arrested.

His body was buried on Mt. Zion, and when it was exhumed after four years, as is customary, It was found to be substantially incorrupt…”

Correction: The Israeli government did finally arrest a mentally disturbed Jewish man, who was not a settler, for this and other crimes. However, nothing was done about the dozens of other people who’d called and made violent threats for weeks to the Archimandrite, before his murder.

Did Medieval Rabbi Forecast Future Of Jerusalem?

The internet is circulating a prediction about Israel, supposedly made by Judah Ben Samuel, a 12th century rabbi:

Ben Samuel was often called “Light of Israel.” Even bishops came to him for advice. If anyone asked him where his wisdom came from he would answer, “The prophet Elijah, who will precede the Messiah, appeared to me and revealed many things to me and emphasized that the precondition for answered prayer is that it is fueled by enthusiasm and joy for the greatness and holiness of God.”

But to recap the astonishing predictions: In AD 1217 this scholarly and pious rabbi prophesied that the Ottoman Turks would rule over the holy city of Jerusalem for eight Jubilees. Now, keep in mind, he made this prediction 300 years before the Ottoman Turks seized control of Jerusalem in 1517. If indeed 1217 and 1517 were jubilee years as Judah Ben Samuel believed, then his prophecy was exactly right, because exactly 400 years after the Turks took control of Jerusalem they were driven out of the city and the holy land in 1917 by the Allied forces under the command of General George Allenby – on Hanukkah, by the way.

But it gets more interesting still.

The rabbi also prophesied that during the ninth Jubilee Jerusalem would be a “no-man’s land.” This is exactly what happened from 1917 to 1967, due to the fact that the Holy Land was placed under British Mandate in 1917 by the League of Nations and literally “belonged” to no nation.

Even after Israel’s war of independence in 1948-49, Jerusalem was still divided by a strip of land running right through the heart of the city, with Jordan controlling the eastern part of the city and Israel controlling the western part of the city. That strip of land was considered and even called “no-man’s land” by both the Israelis and the Jordanians.

It was not until the Six Day War in 1967 when the entire West Bank of the Holy Land was conquered by the Israeli army that the whole city of Jerusalem passed back into the possession of Israel. So once again the prophecy made by the rabbi 750 years previously was fulfilled to the letter.

It certainly would be significant if both 1917 and 1967 were Jubilee years, considering the significance of what happened in Jerusalem on those years. But it gets even more interesting, because Judah Ben Samuel also prophesied that during the 10th Jubilee Jerusalem would be under the control of the Jews and the Messianic “end times” would begin. If he’s right, the 10th Jubilee began in 1967 and will be concluded in 2017.”

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/12th-century-rabbi-predicted-israels-future/#3FaZmsvhvW9GtlOy.99

Trying to figure out where and when this “ancient prophecy” emerged as yet another spin-off from Jubilee year prognostications, I came across this skeptical analysis by another end-timer:

Since Jack Van Impe has broadcast this “prophecy”, and has also put his own ending on the “prophecy” for all the world to believe, I thought a little more balance was needed on the Internet about this “prophecy”. Otherwise, the next crop of turnips may just sell the farm and rot on a hilltop waiting for the Rapture.

I am not going to just repeat everything said in the “prophecy” like everyone else. Read the Israel Today article that I linked to if you want to read the original source. Basically, the “prophecy” is based on Jubilees and the land of Israel. The claim of those referring to this “prophecy” is that two prophecies were already fulfilled as written, so the third prophecy falling on 2017 AD would also take place.

The last Jubilee fulfilled is said to be 1967 and the next Jubilee in the prophecy would take place in 2017. We know what happened in 1967, it is when Jerusalem was returned to the Jews. Ludwig Schneider, actually only said in his article, that it is possible that 2017 or 2018 could be a decisive year for Israel. Joseph Farah said he would leave what would happen in 2017 to our imagination. F. M. Riley thought it meant that Jesus would return in 2017 and the tribulation would start in 2010 (apparently we are missing it). Jack Van Impe thinks it means the 70th week of Daniel and tribulation start in 2017. However,  no where in the Israel Today article is the speculation of Riley or Van Impe even suggested.

I have come up with six criticisms of the prophecy and what Van Impe suggests. (I think the criticisms made in the article that I linked to above are better researched and are better than the criticisms that I list, so you might read that article.)

1.  Other than what Schneider wrote, I have no reason to believe that Rabbi Judah Ben Samuel ever even gave such a prophecy. Should I just believe that this Pentecostal pastor even saw and could even translate such a document from the 13th century? Where is the document and any peer review of such a significant fulfilled prophecy?

I would not even be able to translate English properly from 800 years ago, so how does this pastor translate whatever language this was written into modern English with any accuracy? There are over 5000 ancient manuscripts of the Bible, most dating from near the same era and they do not totally agree with each other, but I should just believe that one document from one Rabbi of the 13th century was recorded and has been translated without error?

Why do I have the sneaky feeling that pastor Riley constructed his thesis in hindsight to make whatever it is that he may have read to come out the way he thought it should be? This Pentecostal pastor may have just thought that he had divine help that makes his translation and backdating inerrant. We can’t be sure what was said by Rabbi Judah Ben Samuel, without the documentation, and pastor Riley offers none in his article. I am surprised that Israel Today even published something that could not be documented.

2. We really do not even know that a Jubilee is 50 years. Many scholars believe the Jubilee cycle is 49 years because they believe the 50th year is also the first year of the next Jubilee cycle. If a Jubilee cycle is 49 years all the claims of fulfillment would be false.

3. Why would God reveal to someone who rejects Jesus as the Messiah the prophetic timing of the end? For what purpose? What good will this 13th century “prophecy” do for the Jews living in the past or for the Jews existing just prior to the last seven years? If the “prophecy is for the Church to know the timing of the end, than why use an unbeliever to give revelation to the Church?  It simply is not logical that God would reveal the future to an unbeliever blinded by Satan. And as I implied before, Satan does not know the timings set by God.

4. In one of my searches, I read that Rabbi Judah Ben Samuel claimed to have talked directly with Elijah and he claimed to have received his information from Elijah. I do not know if that is actually documented somewhere or not as coming from Rabbi Ben Samuel, but if Ben Samuel talked to Elijah you would think that this Rabbi would have converted to Christianity. Instead, there is a claim that this Rabbi afterward prevented a child from being baptized into Christianity and that this has been documented by the Roman Catholic Church.

5.  The “prophecy” says that 2017 is a Jubilee. Jack Van Impe says he believes this Jubilee year will start the tribulation. It seems to me that the second coming and the thousand-year reign starts with a Jubilee. Therefore, there cannot be a 2017 Jubilee and just seven years later a 2024 Jubilee as well. The concept of a God determined Jubilee starting the tribulation does not even make sense. Some Jubilee!

6. If Jesus announced a Jubilee year around 26 to 30 AD, with the start of His ministry when he announced the acceptable year of the Lord in the Temple (Lk 4 19-21), how can the dates mentioned in this “prophecy” be Jubilee years? For example, forty Jubilees that are fifty years each from about 26 to 30 AD would be fulfilled about 2026 to 2030 AD, not 2017. Likewise, the prior dates in this “prophecy” also would not fit.

Edom vs. Israel = Athens vs. Jerusalem

A scholar [I incorrectly assumed the writer was a Rabbi] lets the Kabbalistic cat out of the bag in the piece below.

Unfortunately, Patrick Buchanan and other “third-world armageddon” pontificators don’t seem to get the message.

Or maybe it’s just much easier to kick at another set of victims than to address themselves to the real Masters of the Universe…yes, the guys who pull Goldman’s strings.

“Chanukah is an eight-day annual Jewish holiday. But it also lays claim as the start of western civilization. Not Jewish civilization, which was already old at the time of the first Chanukah in the second century before the common era, and not Hellenic (ancient Greek) civilization, which was also ancient. But the encounter of the West with Judaism, of reason with revelation, of Athens with Jerusalem: that began on Chanukah.

“Man,” said an ancient Greek philosopher, “is the measure of all things.” The Bible disagrees: “the fear of the Lord,” it says, “is the beginning of wisdom.” Who is right? A great debate about G?d and man lies at the heart of the West. From Sinai to Babylon, from the lions to the Crusaders, from the Wars of Religion to the Age of Reason–and of Revolution, from Stalin to John Paul II, from eugenics to a belief that life is sacred, and from globalism to a respect for individual states – even Israel! — it remains the central question. Athens and Jerusalem still are what they always were, the struggling twins of the West.

[ Lila: That would be Esau/Edom versus Israel. Jesus/Christianity is Esau, Paganism is Edom.]

Chanukah commemorates a miraculous victory in a war in 167 B.C.E. A Greco-Macedonian kingdom, centered in what is today Syria, had tried to outlaw the Jewish religion in its homeland in Judea and to replace it with Hellenic culture. Many Jews, in fact, supported that goal. But that is no surprise, because Hellenism had enormous appeal.

Hellenism seemed to have everything going for it. It was up-to-date, sophisticated, and intellectually satisfying. It offered wealth, health, art, and glamour. It represented the entrance ticket to an imperial civilization. Hellenism offered the opportunity to think big.

Judaism sat at the opposite end of the scale. It was old, small, and poor. It had no empire. It had nothing to offer except faith, trust, love, and strength. But those things, it turns out, are items that the human heart cannot do without.

So the miraculous happened. A small band, burning with faith, went on to defeat an empire.

There is, of course, a rational explanation; there always is. “The Syrian-Greek state had passed its prime.” “The Jews had short lines of communication.” “They mastered guerrilla tactics.” “The Greeks overplayed their hand.” “Judea wasn’t worth the bones of a Macedonian grenadier anyhow.” If rational explanations are enough for you, then take your pick.

But if you think that “the heart has its reasons that reason knows not of,” if you think that there is more to life than shifting particles, if you respect science without worshipping it – in short, if you doubt that man is G?d, then wonder at the light of a miracle burning in the dark days of winter.”

Of course, this is an insightful and rich statement taken in simply literary terms. But it is, like Cahn’s Shemitah prophecy, both superficial and misleading.

And, taken literally, it is the very essence  of what it condemns: It is a masterpiece of hubris.

And that is a Greek pagan word that translates very roughly to “the beginning of wisdom is the fear of the gods.”

Germany Reinstates Passport Checks At Border

Germany, as part of the Schengen regime of Europe, did not have passport checks at its borders, making it easy for EU residents and nationals to move freely among Schengen members.

With the influx of Syrian refugees, Merkel has now found the unassailable pretext to reintroduce checks at the Austrian border to prevent “chaos,” chaos that could entirely have been predicted…and probably was:

 Germany is to reinstate controls at the border with Austria as Europe’s top economy struggles to cope with a record influx of refugees, according to media reports Sunday.”

The prospect of European demographic decline coupled with an influx of  high-fertility Muslims from the surrounding regions has been the staple of European nationalist nightmares, from which the notion of Eurabia emerged – a Europe created by Franco-Islamic conspiracy that is hostile equally to the United States and to Israel, or rather, in some views, to Christianity and Judaism.

What is omitted from “Eurabian” style analysis is the rather obvious point that the version of “Christianity” that holds political center-stage in America today is one so thoroughly Judaized as to be a heresy that traditionalist Christians might consider worth opposing.

The same could be said of the liberal Judaism of American Jews, let alone the thoroughly anti-Christian secular spirit of  most cultural Jews and cultural Christians.

On the other side of the equation, “France” and  “Islam” too can be deconstructed:

They  too are golems of the Zionist entity.

As for Islamicization, the chances are much greater that enforced proximity of  Islamic immigrants to European native will give rise to further restraints on speech and thought.

Those restraints, combined with the dissolution of traditional mores, will create nihilism and moral ennui.

In the end, neither Muslim nor Christian will be profited…. nor even the ordinary religious Jew.

This deracinated Europe will only benefit the ruling Sanhedrin.


If we had one hundredth of the frankness that we devote to sexual matters to give to politics, we would call it Eunuch-rabia.


The Return Of The Star Of Bethlehem ?

I missed this while I was away this summer:

CNN, July 1, 2015:

Tuesday night, Jupiter and Venus will culminate a month-long dance with what astronomers say will be a dazzling display, appearing just a fraction of a degree apart from one another in the night sky — a show that some astronomers say could account for the “Star of Bethlehem” mentioned in the Bible.

“To the eye they’ll look like a double star,” Sky & Telescope editor Kelly Beatty said on the magazine’s website.

To see the lineup, look to the west-northwest shortly after sunset.

This isn’t a particularly rare event; such conjunctions are fairly frequent, thanks to how Earth and the two planets line up in the solar system, according to Sky & Telescope.

iReporter Lonna Ours took these photos of Venus and Jupiter on June 21. The two planets are moving closer together throughout the month of June and will eventually appear to converge.

But the combination of how close the planets will appear — one-third of a degree — the viewing angle at many latitudes and the time of day make this a particularly special event that ranks “very highly” among conjunctions, Rice University astronomer Patrick Hartigan wrote on his website.

Although the planets will appear to draw near one another in August and again in October, the next such event to rival Tuesday night’s won’t happen until 2023, he said.”

This report was plastered all over the Internet in July, along with the “Shemitah” judgment on America.

But pay attention to the “wiggle-room” words in the article: “some astronomers says could.….”

Pay attention also to the admission – tucked away deep in the article- that this phenomenon is not uncommon and not extraordinary at all.

That’s also true of the much-hyped “blood- moons,” that, along with the “Shemitah” cycle, is being used to scare American Christians into going along with the various New World Order charades being enacted on the national and international stage.

Even more tellingly, the real Star of Bethlehem that heralded the birth of Jesus, was not simply a Jupiter-Venus conjunction.

The Jupiter-Venus conjunction was only one of many powerful and unusual astrological events that took place in the time before and after  September 11, in 3 BC, when, by the preponderance of historical, astronomical, and prophetic evidence, Jesus was born.

[9/11 – ring a bell?]

Besides a conjunction of Jupiter and Venus, there were also multiple conjunctions of Jupiter (the planet of kings) with Regulus (the star associated with rulership) in the constellation of Leo (the sign associated with the House of Judah).  Every one of the planets were involved in some unusual event in the time around Christ’s birth.

The most revealing astrological evidence is actually already in the Biblical text, in the Book of Revelation.

Contrary to the belief of many Christians, Revelation is not solely a prophetic or forward-looking scripture.

It is a prophetic revelation.

Revelation indeed is the meaning of the word, apocalypse (which is the sub-title of the book).

And what is revealed is not only the future, but the past and the present as well.

In Revelation, the birth of Jesus is described in terms of the configuration of the stars (including the planets).

Here is the relevant passage, Rev. 12: 1:

And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars.”

At the time of the birth of Jesus in the month of September, the constellation of stars on the horizon would have been Virgo, a sign depicted as a young woman.

The sign of Virgo would have been the twelfth part of the zodiac in which the sun would have risen, hence the text says,  “a woman clothed with the sun.”

The woman also has the “moon under her feet” and a crown of twelve stars to give us a more accurate picture of the exact configuration in the sky at the time of Jesus’ birth.

The arguments back and forth about the exact time and date are too many to include here, but there are multiple “signs in the skies,” of overwhelming aesthetic and spiritual significance.

In contrast, the relatively common “Jupiter-Venus”  conjunction that took place at the end of June 2015 is very far from a return of the “Star of Bethlehem.”



Trump: Front For Israeli Money-Laundering

Christopher Bollyn, once again proves his worth and shows that Trump is a front for the Sanhedrin:

“Within the political establishment and controlled mass media, the ban on discussing 9-11 truth is universal. A good example can be seen in how two journals described how presidential candidate Donald Trump responded to a very simple question about the events of 9-11.

The first is from David Weigel of The Washington Post:

After his main speech, and after a quick address to his overflow room, Trump stood for 28 minutes of reporter questions. He referred to producers who had covered him before by their first names. He even took two questions from a 9/11 Truth activist, Rick Shaddock, who had somehow made it into the press conference. “As a builder of many skyscrapers, you know they’re built to be strong,” said Shaddock. “Many people have questions about how those towers came down.”

“The World Trade Center?” asked Trump.

“Yeah,” said Shaddock. As he continued, Trump narrowed his eyes, then asked the other three dozen reporters in the room – “Is this guy some kind of conspiracy guy?”


In today’s tightly controlled political discourse, it is forbidden to discuss what really happened on 9-11. Why is that and who does it benefit?

An editor at Mother Jones, a left-leaning magazine from California, which is supported by George Soros, took the exact same position as Donald Trump, calling Shaddock an “outrageous conspiracy theorist” for simply asking an important common-sense question about the explosive “collapses” of the Twin Towers, unexplained events which took the lives of some 2,800 innocent people on 9-11.

Inae Oh, in her article entitled “Want to Meet a 9/11 Truther? Go to a Donald Trump Event,” wrote about Trump’s response to Shaddock, saying, “But he shouldn’t have been all too surprised by Shaddock’s presence. After all, if you’re going to peddle outrageous conspiracy theories, you’re going to attract outrageous conspiracy theorists.”

But, why is discussing 9-11 truth taboo and what does it say about our political predicament? “

More below:

In my recent video, “The Revolution Begins with 9-11 Truth,” I explain why our political leaders will not touch the subject of 9-11 truth:

The government and media have lied about what happened on 9-11, and through their treasonous deceit, our nation was hijacked and taken into two very costly wars, which in reality were wars of aggression. As we slide into the next presidential campaign, with the leading candidates chosen from America’s most notorious criminal families, 9-11 truth is the one issue that is not open for discussion. Our politicians avoid 9-11 truth because the criminal cabal that is behind the 9-11 atrocity and cover-up also controls our mass media and sham elections.”

“So, what does this say about Donald Trump? Trump seems willing to take on all kinds of thorny political issues but won’t go near 9-11 truth. Why won’t he? Why won’t Trump address the most serious political issue of our time? Is he also under the control of the criminal cabal that pulled off 9-11?

Unfortunately, that seems to be the case. Trump is playing a role, apparently the role of the wrecker, but the question remains: why does he avoid 9-11 truth?

One has to remember that Donald Trump has very close business ties with Israelis. There are several high-rise towers that bear his name in Sunny Isles Beach in North Miami that were developed with the Israeli Michael Dezertzov (or Dezer). These obscene high-rise towers were built with Donald Trump being the frontman for Michael Dezertzov, a veteran of the Israeli Air Force who came to the United States in the 1960s. (For more details, see my article, “The Florida Connection”.)

Donald Trump is the frontman for the Israeli Michael Dezertzov (left) and his son Gil (right). Why is Trump working with Israelis and what does that say about his ability to speak freely about what happened on 9-11?


A PACT WITH THE DEVIL? Donald Trump and his Israeli partners staged a hellish act to burn the mortgage for the Trump towers they had built in North Miami.

The first question that comes to mind when we look at the properties of Dezertzov is: where does the money come from? How does an Israeli come to America and become a wealthy developer without having any visible source of wealth?

Where do all the ill-gotten gains of the Israeli drug cartel go, anyway?

Secondly, the Trump towers in Sunny Isles Beach are right across the street from the Wings store, the Israeli owners of which met with with Israel’s deputy prime minister Ehud Olmert in New York City on September 10, 2001 – the day before 9-11. The logo of the Wings store is the “wings” of the Israeli Air Force. Although Ehud Olmert was then mayor of Jerusalem, the sister city of New York City, his visit was kept secret and out of the news. Why?


If Trump were truly a free and patriotic American, he wouldn’t balk or be afraid to address the unanswered questions about 9-11. The fact that he doesn’t discuss 9-11 indicates that he is under the influence/control of those who carried out the false-flag atrocity of 9-11. It seems that his Israeli connections are the most reasonable explanation for his anti-truth position about 9-11.

Sources and Recommended Reading:

“5 things I learned by spending four hours in The Donald Trump Experience” by David Weigel, The Washington Post, July 27, 2015

“The Florida Connection” by Christopher Bollyn, May 21, 2008

“The Revolution Begins with 9-11 Truth” by Christopher Bollyn, YouTube, July 26, 2015

“Want to Meet a 9/11 Truther? Go to a Donald Trump Event” by Inae Oh, Mother Jones, July 27, 2015


Fall Of Jerusalem Was Biblical “End-Times”

Christian Zionists need to study Biblical prophecies in the light of 1st century politics in the Roman Empire, rather than 21st century politics under the American empire.

If they did, they would quickly realize that the textual and historical evidence points overwhelmingly to the Fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD as the “end-time” and “Day of the Lord.”

From Preterist Central.com:

Let’s survey some of the many passages whose characters and events tie the second coming to the fall of Jerusalem. 

Gen. 49:1, 10“And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days…the scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.” 

This passage, spoken by the patriarch Jacob upon his deathbed, ties the “last days” to events bound up with Biblical Israel and the coming of Christ. Since the “last days” are tethered by this prophecy to Biblical Israel, when the nation terminated and ceased to exist so did the last days.     Indeed, the “last days” are coterminous with the last end and closing days of the Jewish state. Jacob does not directly describe the destruction of the Jewish nation, but his saying “what will befall you in the last days” certainly carries ominous overtones suggesting that event. In saying that the monarchical power would not depart from Judah until Shiloh (Christ) had come, Jacob alludes to the political end and existence of the nation. With the appearance of Christ, a new dynasty and world epoch would begin, in which the government would devolve upon Christ, who now reigns [sic] earth’s nations from his throne in heaven. In transferring the government to heaven, Christ removed the mantel of authority from national Israel upon earth. And since the Jews murdered Christ and persecuted his church, Jesus sent and destroyed the nation by the armies of Rome.

Num. 24:14-25 – “And now, behold, I go to my people: come therefore, and I will advertise thee what this people shall do to thy people in the latter days…I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but now nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab and destroy all the children of Sheth. And Edom shall be a possession, Seir also shall be a possession for his enemies; and Israel shall do valiantly.”

This is Balaam’s prophecy of events that would occur in the latter days. Like Jacob’s prophecy, Christ was to appear in the latter days while Biblical Israel still existed. Jesus is referred to under the imagery of a “Star” and “Sceptre,” and “he that shall have dominion.”     Christ’s “possessing Edom and Seir” should be compared with the prophecy of Amos about the restored tabernacle (house/throne) of David, “that they may possess the remnant of Edom” (Amos 9:11, 12). James said the prophecy of Amos was fulfilled in the apostles’ day, as Christ reigned from heaven and the Gentiles came into the church (Acts 15:16, 17). As Balaam’s prophecy treats of the same events, it too was fulfilled in the first century. The last prediction in Balaam’s prophecy states (Num. 24:24):

“And ships shall come from Chittim and shall afflict Asshur, and shall afflict Eber, and he also shall perish for ever.”

The prophet Daniel mentions “Chittim” in a context that makes unmistakable reference to Rome (Dan. 11:30), and is witnessed by the Septuagint version of the Qumran community and the Vulgate in this place, both of which render “Chittim” “Romans.”[1]     “Asshur” is Assyria and represented the extreme eastern border of the Roman Empire. “Eber” was the forebear of Abraham (Gen. 10:21; 11:17, 26), and is believed to be the root of the word “Hebrew.” In saying “he also shall perish for ever,” Balaam’s prophecy becomes the first direct prediction the A.D. 70 destruction of Jerusalem by Rome. Spiritual Israel (the church) would do valiantly and conquer the world, but national Israel would be destroyed.”

Rabbi’s Shemitah Prophecy Is NWO Fraud

Some Christian web-sites are skeptical of Jonathan Cahn’s Shemitah theory and his attempt to make America the duplicate of ancient Israel:

The Berean Call says:

This imposed Shemitah judgment was very specific and involved  only the nation of Israel . Since no Gentile nations were ever obligated to keep the Shemitah, there is no scriptural basis for suggesting that any other nation would ever experience an imposed Shemitah judgment. Yet, this is precisely what Jonathan Cahn suggests that America has experienced.

Cahn also wrongly implies that the Shemitah is essentially a universal  principle  that is somehow integrated into the order of the universe. Cahn makes the following assertion in his book:

[KAPLAN] “Seven years—the biblical period of time that concerns a nation’s financial and economic realms.” [This and all quotes are taken from: Jonathan Cahn,  The Harbinger  (Lake Mary, FL: Frontline, Charisma Media/Charisma House Book Group, 2011)]

Although Israel was on a seven-year economic cycle, no biblical passages support Cahn’s idea that natural economic cycles of seven years exist for nations in general. Furthermore, financial experts have not identified any seven-year economic cycle. —http://www.thebereancall.org/content/october-2014-extra-shemitah

If anything happens during The Shemitah (September 2015), it’s not because of God and a connection to Isaiah 9:10, it’s because the Freemasons who control this world are pushing the buttons and they are making things happen (in cycles of 7 as it’s a ‘magic’ number) for their own purposes to further the progress of a New World Order.”

ISIS Blows Up 2000 Yr Old Temple Of Baal Shamin

ISIS has just blown up the 2000 year old Temple of Baal Shamin in the UNESCO world heritage site of Palmyra in Syria.

Apparently, this was done to erase “idolatry”.

Baal Shamin  (Baal Hadad) was a North-West Semitic god popular among the Canaanites and Phoenicians.

Baal Shamin was equated with Zeus Helios (Zeus as Sun God) by the Nabateans, a mysterious people who are supposed to have been the ancestors of the Bedouin, but also had an admixture of  Edomite/Esau descent.

ISIS recently decapitated a leading Syrian archaeologist, 82-year-old Khaled el As’ad, who specialized in Palmyra’s antiquities.

El As’ad was an expert in the cult of Baal Shamin. His dead body was displayed with the caption “heretic” displayed over it.

Earlier in the year, ISIS destroyed several major Christian and Muslim shrines, as well as ancient towns like Nimrud,  on a quest to wipe out anything that offends its purist Sunni sensibilities.

However, it seems rather obvious by now that the only group that would have such a keen interest in wiping out both Muslim and Christian shrines and populations, would not be Muslims in all likelihood, but extremist Zionists, enacting historical revenge on their rivals/enemies, while creating the gap into which, inevitably, Anglo-Zionist rule will be inserted. ISIS is a Zionist golem.

It is an example of preemptive terrorism CREATED by the West to create instability and a pretext for further intervention. I wrote about it in 2005:

Recall that in 2002 the Pentagon’s Defense Science Board (DSB) urged an increase in ?human intelligence (HUMINT) forward/operational presence and . . . new clandestine technical capabilities.? (3) Translated from Pentagon-speak, that reads: we need more spies in foreign countries equipped with secret spy technology.” And from where would these new spies be drawn? From a ?robust, global cadre of retirees, reservists and others who are trained and qualified to serve on short notice, including expatriates.? Selected from among this group, a master spy agency, the Proactive Preemptive Operations Group (P2OG), would launch secret operations aimed at instigating terrorism as a pretext for attacks by US forces.”



Israeli Rabbi: Jewish Messiah Arriving Sept. 12, 2015

From Breaking Israel News:

After a lifetime of immersing himself in classical Jewish texts, Rabbi Kanievsky’s study partner informed various media sites that the Rabbi is talking about the messiah “all the time.” Since last summer’s war in Gaza, the Rabbi has been spreading this message of imminent return…….

When asked about the timing of the Messiah’s arrival, Rabbi Kanievsky answered, “At the end of the Sabbatical year.” Several people have asked the Rabbi to verify this and he has given the same answer each time. This year is the Sabbatical year and it will be ending on the 29th day of Elul, which, by the Gregorian calendar falls on Saturday, September 12, 2015.

In answer to Rabbi Kanievsky’s call, the Jews of France have begun to arrive in Israel in blessed droves. The impetus is certainly a reaction to increasing anti-Semitic and Islamic fueled violence across Europe……

Last year, 7,000 French Jews made aliyah to Israel, making it the number one country of origin for new immigrants. The Jewish Agency and the Ministry for Aliyah and Immigrant Absorption are expecting more than 3,000 French Jews to immigrate to Israel this summer alone, many of them families with children who want to arrive and integrate before the beginning of the school year.

It should be noted that it is considered a positive trait to always be anticipating the Messiah. The Chofetz Chaim, Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan, a great Torah sage, is  told to have said that any time he heard a loud noise, he would say, “Perhaps the Messiah has arrived?” Similar stories have also been told of the leading Moroccan Kabbalist, the Baba Sali, Rabbi Israel Abuhaseira.”
Read more at http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/44534/leading-israeli-rabbi-messiah-imminent-jewish-world/#gZQFjwYySQ88p6ii.99

Is Jehovah Satan?

Is Jehovah Satan?

That was what many Gnostics, both medieval and modern, believed.

Gnosticism is the idea that liberation from the world of matter (believed to be sinful) is available to someone who cultivates esoteric wisdom that the masses cannot easily grasp.

The particular form of gnosis might vary – it might involve chanting mantras, or contemplating mystical visions, or inquiring into the nature of the self.  The main notion is that liberation from the world of the senses requires some kind of  knowledge inaccessible to the hoi polloi.

The early Gnostics were antagonistic to the early Christians. They thought the religion was simple-minded and ant-intellectual.

Many leading Gnostics were part of the Jewish emigre population in Alexandria, one of the great centers of learning in antiquity.

This was the Syro-Egyptian Gnostic school.

There was also a Persian school, but that was regarded as a distinct religion – Manicheanism.

The Jewish-Christian conflict of those days was reflected in the anti-Gnostic polemics of Church leaders and the Gnostics have had a bad reputation among Christians ever since, sometimes unfairly.

Many beliefs that Christians now regard as heretical, such as, Arianism – the notion that Jesus is not divine, but only a man –  began with the Gnostics.

But Gnosticism is increasingly understood to be rooted not in heretical Christianity but in heretical Judaism.

One of the most typical of the Gnostic beliefs was that from the original creator of the universe who is an impersonal monad, emanations issued, each more remote from divinity than the one before.

Among the lowest of these divine emanations was a demiurge or a lesser/false god, to whom the creation of the physical world is attributed.

The demiurge was seen as imperfect, even evil.

Yaldabaoth, Yahweh in the Bible, Satan, Ahriman (in the Persian tradition) were all regarded as demiurges.

It is this conflation of Satan and Yahweh among the Alexandrian gnostics that was revived in the 18th century by William Blake, the English poet, that underlies the tension of such famous lines as

Tyger, tyger, burning bright
In the forests of the night
What immortal hand or eye
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?”

Blake’s Tiger suggests a darker deity than the benign Father of orthodox Christian belief.

So, when you see  websites springing up all over the Internet, equating Yahweh with Satan, it’s a continuation of this ancient Gnostic and neo-Gnostic error.

Error, because Yahweh is not Satan.

And Satan is not the same as Saturn, despite the visual resemblance of the two words.

Saturn is an Indo-European term.

Satan is Semitic (HaSatan in Hebrew) and it is not a proper but a common noun. It should be translated “the adversary.” From its root (S-T-N), the Arabs get Shai-tan.

A closer equivalent to Satan in the West is the Egyptian Set, the murderous brother of Osiris.

Although at one period considered a “good” God,  Set was later seen as evil, perhaps by association with the Semitic Hyksos rulers of Egypt in the early part of the 2nd millenium before Christ.

The Hyksos linked Set with the Phoenician god, Baal.

[Baal only means “lord” and was used to denote a variety of deities. There was Baal Hadad and there was Baal Hamon, to whom child sacrifices were offered.]

Because Baal is also known as El (Lord, singular), and the term Elohim (plural) is often used to refer to God in the Old Testament, the Gnostics in turn equated Baal with Yahweh.

The Gnostic equation was:


It ought to have read:





Strong’s Concordance

The best way to study the Bible at first hand is to use the King James Version (which is not without its flaws) in conjunction with Strong’s Concordance, which gives the Greek and Hebrew meanings relevant to the text.

(Note: I first linked by mistake to something called Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, which at first glance, seems like a highly politicized version of the famous resource. It dispensed the familiar end-times narrative of political Zionism. Stick with the original Strong’s).

The Old Testament texts that Jesus read were in Greek (in the supranational Koine form), because the Greek version (Septuagint or LXX) was the most authoritative one at the time.

Here is an online version of the Septuagint with the Greek text next to the English.

It was called the Septuagint  because, at least anecdotally, 70 (or 72)  of the most important Hebrew scholars  compiled it.

The Septuagint predates Jesus by a couple of centuries and was widely used in Alexandria in Egypt, where there was a very large Jewish diaspora.

This was the text used by the Church fathers when Christian doctrine was formulated in the first few centuries of the millenium.

The other authoritative Old Testament text, the Masora, was compiled over several centuries by Rabbinical scholars (Masoretes)  between the 6th century and 10th century AD (that is, almost a 1000 years after the Septuagint).

It was a product of Rabbinical schools that were actively attacking and responding to Christianity and it should be understood in that light.

[Note: It isn’t necessary to ascribe a malicious motive to the Masoretes, although many Christian scholars do. From the Masoretes’ point of view, the Christians were simply reading things into the Hebrew text and they were taking a more neutral position. Both sides probably had some valid points.]

The Masoretic texts are the Old Testament texts used in the Talmud, which is the Rabbinical commentary on the Bible.

The Talmud, not the Torah, is the true core of modern Judaism.

Since the Talmud in both its Palestinian and its more famous Babylonian version were written down only in 200 AD (Mishnah) and 500 AD (Gemarah), the written records of modern Rabbinical (Talmudic) Judaism post-date those of Christianity.

Even the oral traditions of modern Judaism stem only from the Babylonian captivity, around the 6th century BC.

Consider that the earliest manuscript of the Talmud is the 1342 AD Munich Talmud.

By contrast, the first full manuscript of the New Testament, the Codex Sinaiticus, dates back to the middle of the 4th century AD or around 350 AD (a thousand years earlier).

In addition, there are fragments of the New Testament that go back much earlier, to the second half of the 1st century AD.

Altogether, there are over 25,000 early copies or fragments of the New Testament, not including quotations by the Church Father.

The New Testament is the most well preserved and well-documented piece of writing from antiquity.

Even so, understanding how the original Hebrew or Greek words have been translated into English is essential to understanding how meanings have been changed, either  accidentally or intentionally.

In that respect, Strong’s Concordance is an invaluable resource.


Political Zionism Is Esau

Back to Esau and Jacob.


Recently, famed Johns Hopkins neuro-surgeon Dr. Ben Carson has come out with the risible statement that the rationale for Isis is to be found in Genesis, in the tale of Esau and Jacob.

Indeed it is, only not in the way Dr. Carson intends it.

Anyone who has studied the matter with any integrity will immediately identify Esau in today’s world, because no less than the Jewish Encyclopedia has made the identification explicitly.


It admits that Esau (under the name of Edom, which means Red) is in Jewry.

That is to say, by the time of Jesus, the descendants of Esau were living as Judeans and Judahites, even though they were neither Jews nor Israelites by birth.


The word Jew when used to refer to a single ethno-religious community is a coinage from the nineteenth century.

There were no Jews, as we know them, before that time.

When the word Jew is inserted into the Bible, it is an anachronism.

At the time of Jesus, there were only Judahites (those who belonged to the tribes of Judah, one of the twelve tribes descended from Jacob’s twelve sons) and Judeans, people who lived in the kingdom of Judea.

Judea was the southern Israelite kingdom, which had split from its northern half and had gone into and captivity and returned, like its northern sister.

The word Judean does not identify a race any more than the word New Yorker identifies a race.

A New Yorker may be Chinese or African or Italian in ethnic origin. He gets his name from where he lives, not from his racial identity.

So also, the term Judean included people of all kinds of racial make-up, including many who had nothing to do with the original Israelites or Judahites and who were often sworn enemies of them.


One such enemy was Idumea, which is the Greek rendering of the word Edom.

Edom/Idumea is the region where the descendants of Esau lived and dominated  – a strong-hold in the mountains that includes the great city of Petra in Jordan.

As a nation, the Idumeans of Biblical times were the vicious and unrepentant enemies of the sons of Jacob, sacking, looting and attacking them at every turn.


God had given foreknowledge of this generational enmity to Rebecca, when Esau and Jacob were still twins in her womb.

He had let her know that the two would engender nations that would struggle with each other and that her second-born would eventually rule over her first-born.

This was prophetic knowledge, however, not predetermination, as Calvinists teach. God in no way forced Esau to play this unfortunate role.


From birth, Esau was marked for his carnal role.

He was covered with hair all over and reddish (Edom).

He was a hunter, fond of venison, fleshly in appetite, and careless of family tradition and piety.

From the New Testament, we learn that he was also sexually immoral and idolatrous.

From the Book of Jasher, an apocryphal text quoted by Jewish authorities, we learn that Esau was so great a hunter that he killed King Nimrod of Babylon and seized from him the garments that God wove for Adam and Eve when they found themselves naked.

These magical vestments had been passed down from the first family, through Seth, to Noah, to Ham, Cush and then to Nimrod and they bestowed the power of conquest on their possessor.


In Genesis, Nimrod is the legendary warrior-king of Babylon who seeks to challenge the heavens with his mighty tower of Babel.

He is a type of anti-Christ and thus of Satan.

[I will explain in another post why I think the equation with Esau and Satan/Serpent is misleading and dangerous and is one often made by people who have a racist agenda – either against Gentiles (if they are Jews) or against Jews/non-whites (if they are Aryan supremacist) or against whites (if they are black supremacists).

Each of the groups I’ve mentioned likes to equate Esau with whichever group they want to claim is genetically Satanic.

But Esau is not descended from Satan (however he is conceived and with whatever validity).

All of mankind today is descended from Noah, who was considered perfect by God, drunkenness and all.

Esau is  DELUDED by Satan, which is quite a different thing.]

Thus, by association and by the possession of the magic garments, Esau becomes an anti-Christ type (repeat, TYPE) as well.

[Note: The notion that there is a single “anti-Christ” who will oppose God at the end is not even in the Bible, which mentions the anti-Christ spirit, and also, Satan, a red dragon, a beast (two, actually) and a whore (of Babylon), but really doesn’t posit a figure called Anti-Christ, in the modern sense.]


According to the Book of Jasher – which, keep in mind, is apocryphal and part of Rabbinical lore and not canonic – it is after the slaying of Nimrod that Esau sells his birthright for the red pottage (lentils), because, believing absolute power to be in his grasp, he has no use for the mere birth-right.

Not knowing (or caring) that the birth-right includes the honor of siring the Messiah, he chooses instead worldly power and his belly, proving himself unworthy, as God had predicted to Rebecca.

Genesis tells us that Esau disobeyed God’s covenant with his forefathers and intermarried with Hittite women. [The Hittites were the descendants of Heth.]

Esau also intermarried  with the family of Ishmael and with the Canaanites, who practiced such vile customs as child sacrifice and ritual prostitution.

Genesis mentions how much sorrow Esau’s disobedience and his foreign wives caused Isaac and Rebecca. They did not want all they had striven for to be dissipated and lost in the houses of inimical in-laws.

This is no doubt the reason the anxious mother used such wiles to deprive her unworthy first-born of the primogeniture.


Jacob, her second-born, was no saint, of course.

He allowed his mother to manipulate him into cheating his father and then engaged in trickery himself against her brother, Laban, also a wily man.

But Jacob, who is described as a “mild” man, was true to his father’s traditions and to the Abrahamic covenant.

He didn’t practice idolatry or intermarry with the vicious Canaanites. So God was able to shape him to his destiny and eventually make him Isra-el – a prince (Isra) of God (El), or by virtue of God.


The story of Jacob and Esau is used by St Paul to reprimand Jews who did not want to admit Gentiles into the company of believers in Jesus.

Jacob, he said, was a type of the Gentile believer. Esau was a type of the Jewish unbeliever.

Just as the Jews had the law and racial descent on their side, Esau had the law of primogeniture on his. Yet, Esau was indifferent to his privilege, just as unbelieving Jews were indifferent to the privilege of birthing the Messiah.

Thus, God had given salvation to the “second-born” – the Gentiles, as he had given the birth-right to the second-born, Jacob.


But, in a more literal way too, Esau is in Jewry.

By the first and second century before Christ, the Edomites/Idumeans had been forcibly converted to Judaism from their Canaanitish ways.

Many had been circumcised and were indistinguishable from Jews by external appearance.

However,  they were not true Israel, either by tribal descent, nor in their hybrid customs.

They worshiped “they know not what,” as Jesus put it, preferring their own customs and “traditions of men” over the true teachings of Torah.

Many of the Pharisees and Sadducees who attacked Jesus were not Jews by birth, as he himself noted.


Remarkably, Jesus was not a Judahite either.

[I have corrected this statement below]

Jesus was a Levite (a descendant of Jacob’s son Levi) on his mother’s side  (since Mary was the cousin of Elizabeth, wife of Zacharaiah, the Levitical priest).

And he was grafted onto the house of Judah (the most famous of Jacob’s twelve sons) on his father’s side.

Thus, he was an Israelite by descent on both accounts.

[Added: Researching this a bit more, I find that the two genealogies – in Mark and in Luke – are taken to be genealogies of Mary, not Joseph, even though Joseph’s name is inserted into them.

This is because Joseph was adopted by Mary’s father, Heli, since he had no sons to inherit his property.

This makes Jesus descend from BOTH the Levitical line (the priestly line) and the Judahite (the kingly line).]

On the other hand, was Jesus NOT a Judean. He lived in Galilee, not Judea.

[Added: However, the Gospels note that he was born in Bethlehem of Judea, which is connected to David and the messianic prophecy.]

IMPORTANT CORRECTION (added 10/8/2015): The House of Judah (as opposed to the tribe of Judah) included Judah, Levi, and Benjamin, so that Jesus DOES belong to both the priestly and the ruling line of Israel, through his mother, which is the descent that makes him a Jew legally.]


Jesus’s unclear parentage and his residence in Nazareth and Galilee were the reasons why many Judeans did not see Jesus as the Jewish messiah.

Ironically, these skeptics were often not Judahites or Israelites themselves.

They were often Samaritans, Idumeans, and Canaanites.

For instance, the Herodians and Zealots were Idumeans with Idumea’s violent, revolutionary spirit.

It was these Edomite-Jewish rebels who, in the century after Jesus’ crucifixion, provoked Rome into crushing the Jews and destroying the Temple of Jerusalem (Herod’s temple) in 70 AD.

With the end of Temple worship, the Old Testament Jewish world was destroyed once and for all.

This was the judgment of the last days (of the Old Covenant) that Jesus predicted so accurately.


The descendants of these pseudo-Jewish Edomites are arguably a major (or substantial) part of the modern Talmudic/Rabbinal tradition that is now regarded, erroneously, as the rebirth of Biblical Israel.

This being the case, since the Idumeans do not descend from Jacob, contemporary Ashkenazy Jews at least cannot be direct genetic descendants of ancient Israel.

Of course, genetics is beside the point.


Biblical Israel was always a nation of “promise” and “faith,” first and foremost.

In so far as modern Zionists are either Kabbalists/Talmudists who reject Jesus as a blasphemer and reprobate or communists who consider religion a fraud they cannot by definition be true “Israel,” even if they were descended directly from Abraham.


Jesus made that very point to his enemies when he called them children of the Serpent.

[This term has had its own malign legacy.

Christian Identity and some other groups have taken this to mean that contemporary Jews – a mixed-race of  Euro-Turco-Mongolic people with genetic affinity to the Idumeans – are descended from Satan/the Serpent, which is surely a thoroughly racist and dangerous notion.

But, as I will show in other posts, the imprecations Jesus pronounced on his critics had NOTHING  to do with racial/genetic descent.

They had to do with the absence of faith in the unseen/spiritual kingdom to which he was trying to lead them. 

By accusing them of descent from “their father, the devil,” he was accusing them of moral affinity/moral descent, not a blood-line connection.

It was a moral pronouncement, not a thesis on DNA.

Esau, after all  was a child of Abraham. What did that get him?]

In short, contemporary “Israel” with its blood-line claim is a religious imposter, credible only to people who choose to ignore the very texts from which “Israel” claims authority.


Zionist Anglo-Israel and the Sanhedrin that has orchestrated her rise to world dominion are Esau incarnate.

They are his spiritual (and likely, genetic) descendants.

They are heirs only in name and not in truth to the religion whose mantle they ostentatiously wear.

Nonetheless, because Isaac did in the end give Esau one blessing, their charade has been allowed its moment in history.

It will collapse soon.

Just as that ancient blessing that Esau cadged was an empty one because its substance had already been taken by the one who knew its worth, Jacob, so also political Zion is an empty spectacle.

The kingdom it seeks today has already met its true ruler…. two thousand years ago.



Jacob and Esau

Of all the Old Testament patriarchs, Jacob has always been the hardest one for me to like.

Although Jacob was renamed Isra-el or Prince of God by Jahweh himself, he has never appealed to me.

But there must be something wrong in my response, for Jesus honored the same deity who honored Jacob. So can Jacob be as bad as he seems to be?

Not that the other Patriarchs haven’t caused me problems.

Take Abraham. Abraham advertised his wife (and half-sister) Sara as his sister, hoping that this deception would stop the Egyptians from murdering him him, should they desire her.

As it turns out, the Egyptians were far more decent than he thought. They were actually aghast at Abraham’s lie, which might have made adulterers out of them unwittingly.

Then there’s King David, whom I actually like, much against my better judgment.

True, it was fairly standard in those days for kings to grab any good-looking woman in the vicinity for themselves.

But David not only grabbed Bathsheba (then in her teens) but sent her husband, poor Uriah the Hittite, to his death. Why did he need to do that?

I haven’t found a good enough excuse for David yet.

Perhaps, by killing Uriah he was protecting Bathsheba from being cast off by society.

That’s a  possibility.

But surely murder is a bit worse than dishonor, especially dishonor justly earned.

Yet, David’s sins don’t bother me half as much as Jacob’s.

Jacob was the son of Isaac and the father of the 12 tribes of Israel. Jacob is the man who is supposed to have wrestled with God.

I say “supposed to,” because I’ve always understood from the Bible that no one can see the face of Jahweh and live.

But Jacob did. So how could he have wrestled with God?

Then again, it was night when Jacob wrestled with the “angel” and maybe Jacob never really saw his celestial antagonist’s face.

Be that as it may, it’s not this encounter that bothers me about the Patriarch.

It’s Jacob’s infamous theft of his older brother Esau’s birthright and blessing.

Everyone knows the story.

Esau comes home exhausted and hungry from hunting and Jacob cleverly makes use of the moment to entice him to sell his birthright (as the oldest son) for a “mess of pottage.”

So says Genesis.

Later, Jacob’s mother Rebecca conspires with her favorite son to deceive the aging and blind Isaac into giving his blessing mistakenly to the younger son.

No amount of white-washing of this episode has ever been able to make me think well of Jacob.

How on earth could he have been chosen as the father of the elect priesthood of people into whom Jesus Christ, the “light of the world,” would be born?

Was I missing some crucial element?

This summer, after thumbing through Genesis repeatedly, I found the answer.

Jacob was not a common cheat by any means.
Esau was not blameless.

To understand the full story, you need to pay close attention to the Biblical text, as well as to what is written about the two in other parts of the Bible and outside the Bible.

This is no ordinary religious story, after all. It pays to think about it deeply, if we intend to understand all the passions and preconceptions at work in the Middle East, the heart of the world’s problems.

Jacob/Israel is the ancestor of Jesus Christ, who is accepted as Divinity Incarnate by billions of Christians all over the world.

Over the identity of Jacob/Israel and his descendants rivers of blood have been shed in this century and through the ages.

The greatest revanchist claim for land was staked on the basis of promises made to Jacob/Israel.

Surely we need to know why this man was chosen for such a momentous place in history.

Surely he was not the confidence man he seems to be in the Genesis story.

(To be continued)

Another View Of The Olivet Discourse

The end-time prophecies of Jesus –  in the passages (Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21)  referred to as the Olivet Discourse – are very controversial.

Even noted Christian apologists like C.S. Lewis have felt constrained to admit that Jesus must have made an error when he promised his disciples that he was going to return in judgment before “this generation” had passed away.

Preterists get around the problem by arguing that much of the Olivet Discourse was actually fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem some 40 years after Jesus’ death.

Full Preterists believe that everything Jesus predicted has already happened, but they are heretical.

I subscribe to a version of partial Preterism (which is orthodox), but an article I came across recently obviates even the need for Preterism to defend Jesus’ words.

It analyzes Jesus’ language in the Olivet Discourse and concludes that the phrase “this generation,” as it is written in the original Greek, does not necessarily have to mean the life-spans of the people He was addressing – his disciples.

It can also mean “variety” or “type” or “species” or “off-spring.”

All those interpretations would leave a much broader time-span for the fulfillment of Jesus’ words, for “this generation” can now refer to the off-spring of the believers or even to the species of humanity, the Jews, that will not pass away until Christ returns.

Things to come.org:

“Genea  hautey can mean “this offspring,” “this generation I just mentioned,” “this generation I am talking to,” or “this contemporaneous generation,” depending on the context. It is not other contexts, but the context of Matthew 24:34 that should be the determining factor as to what Jesus meant by the word genea. The context of the Olivet Discourse leads us to believe that Jesus was speaking either of the offspring of Jacob (the Jews), the generation of God’s children, or of a future generation among us he had just addressed.

[Lila: It could also straight-forwardly refer to “the generation which sees the “abomination of desolation.” And that, just there, proves that the Muslim “Dome of the Rockcannot be the “abomination of desolation,” as Zionists like to claim. First, it is not built on the ruins of the Temple of Herod (the Second Temple), but on the ruins of the Roman Fort Antonia, so there is no abomination involved; second, the generation that saw its building (in the 7th century) has long passed away and will not be around to see the Second Coming, however you conceptualize it.]

Alternatively, genetai may be translated “begin to happen” in Matthew 24 34.

Therefore, we are not forced into difficult aspects of the Partial Preterist view, which allegorize and spiritualize important portions of the Olivet Discourse. Nor must we resort, as Full Preterists do, to asserting that the Second Coming and the Resurrection must have happened invisibly in 70 AD, when it is plain to everyone that church history records none of these events, and the bodies of all men who have died, except that of our Lord Jesus (and possibly those mentioned in Mt 27:53), remain within the earth. Nor need we despair at finding a solution, as CS Lewis did. Despite his remarkable intellect and his usual able defenses of the Christian faith, he was quite wrong in thinking that the facts force us to admit Jesus made an embarrassing error.

Instead, we find not just one, but four reasonable, scriptural, and orthodox alternatives to the assertion of critics of the Christian faith that Jesus was referring to the contemporaneous generation in Matthew 24:34. All four permit us to confidently accept the full import of the other words of Jesus in the Olivet Discourse!”


The Fruit of Peace

Ann Diener writes about an early collaboration between Palestinians and Israelis:

According to Wikipedia, “Jewish immigrants to Palestine adopted the Jaffa orange variety from Arab farmers. Partnerships in growing and exporting these oranges was an example of Arab-Jewish cooperation despite rising political tensions.

“By 1939, Jewish and Arab orange orchards in Palestine covered 75,000 acres (300 km2), employed over 100,000 workers, and their produce was a primary export. During World War II (1939–1945) citrus-growing declined, but recovered after the war with the vigorous assistance of the British Mandate authorities.”

“Jaffa oranges are harvested in Israel between November and March, with the marketing season beginning in September and extending through until April. More than half the annual crop is exported, and Israel is a main provider of other citrus fruits to the European Union.”

The Jaffa orange groves were a sign of success of cooperation post the writing of the “Iron Wall.”

Currently, more attention is paid towards the failures that include rockets in Israel and destruction of Arab society in Palestine through warlike activities potentially based on the “Iron Wall” thinking and isolation of Israeli society with the premise that the wall will keep them safe and force the Palestinians into submission with the threat of “enormous suffering.”

What if the solution was found in the exact opposite tactic, one of cooperation to produce success for both sides, like that of the Jaffa orange?

According to the Hope Simpson Royal Commission Report of 1930, “The cultivation of the orange, introduced by the Arabs before the commencement of Jewish settlement, has developed to a very great extent in consequence of that settlement. There is no doubt that the pitch of perfection to which the technique of plantation and cultivation of the orange and grape-fruit have been brought in Palestine is due to the scientific methods of the Jewish agriculturist.”

Therefore, maybe after over sixty years of conflict, the government of Israel should consider former President Ronald Reagan’s famous line, “Tear down this wall,” in their mindset. and try a new, more positively based strategy. Then, maybe we will see a better headline like “Jewish Agriculturalist and Arab Products Create Perfection with Orange,” rather than “Children Terrified and Burnt to Death in Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.”

The Tel Dan Stele

From BibleArcheology.org:

“The nation of Israel was in conflict with the Arameans for about 300 years, from the time of David, ca. 1000 BC, until Assyria annexed the Aramean city-states at the end of the eighth century BC. Most of the conflict was with the city-state of Damascus that, under Hazael, dominated Israel in the second half of the ninth century. A recently discovered inscription, the Tel Dan Stela, takes us back to those days.

Discovery and Significance of the Tel Dan Stela

The largest fragment of the Tel Dan Stela, Fragment A, was discovered at Tel Dan in northern Israel in July 1993 (Biran and Naveh 1993; Wood 1993). Then, in June 1994, two additional joining fragments, labeled Fragment B, were found (Biran and Naveh 1995). Together, Fragments A and B represent only a fraction of a much longer inscription. The language is Aramaic and it celebrates the victory of a king of Aram over Israel and Judah. It is the first royal inscription from the kingdom period to be found in Israel.

The most stunning aspect of the document is the reference to Judah as the “House of David.” For the first time, it was thought, the name David appeared in an extra-Biblical document. At about the same time, however, two French scholars, André Lemaire (1994) and Émile Puech (1994), independently recognized the same phrase in the Mesha Inscription, which has been around for well over 100 years (Wood 1995). It now likely that the name David is in a third inscription. Egyptologist K.A. Kitchen believes that the phrase “highland of David” appears in the Shishak inscription in the Temple of Amun at Karnak, Egypt (1997: 39–41). All this at a time when a number of scholars were challenging the existence of the United Monarchy and a king name David!

Unfortunately, the beginning of the Tel Dan Stela is missing. This is where the name of the king who commissioned the memorial, and the event which occasioned it, would have been recorded. With the discovery of Fragment B, however, we can assign the stela’s place in history with near certainty. Parts of the names of two kings are preserved in Fragment B: Joram, son of Ahab, king of Israel from 852 to 841 BC, and Ahaziah, son of Jehoram, king of Judah (the House of David) in 841 BC. With this new information it is possible to assign the stela to Hazael, king of Aram-Damascus, who undoubtedly set it up in Dan to commemorate his victory over Joram and Ahaziah at Ramoth-Gilead in ca. 841 BC (2 Kgs 8:28–29).”

Rothschild Behind Young Turks & Genocide

Iamthewitness.com traces the hand of Edmund James de Rothschild behind the deposing of the Ottoman Sultan, Abdul Hamid II,  in  1908; the rise of the secular nationalist government of the Young Turks;  and the genocide of Armenian Christians by the Young Turks, most of whom were Sephardic Jewish Sabbateans and/or Freemasons.

Less well-known is the savage massacre of Assyrian Christians, also at the hand of the Young Turks.

R. J. Rummel and several of the authors above cite  Mevlan Zadeh Rifat’s “The Inner Facet of the Turkish Revolution,”  Rifat also seems to be one of the main sources for the following claims,

So where do we need to look to find the thread that will bring us to the real powers behind these Young Turk scenes? We will start to move in the right direction if we go back to Caraso and his position of Lodge grandmaster. How does one become grandmaster of a Lodge, it is not the type of role that gets advertised in the job centre. The answer is that freemasons are supposed to ‘work their way up in the craft’ and advance from spiritual stage to spiritual stage. As they grow they are raised in rank and degree. Each degree has its own practices, known as rites. A major Lodge with several thousand members would have masons at all different levels (degrees) but there is only ONE master mason for the Lodge.

Therefore, for Caraso to have reached the position of Lodge grandmaster, the Lodge which granted and therefore OWNS the charter for his Macedonia Rissorta Lodge, is the Lodge that will have given him this appointment. In this case the charter was granted by the Grand Orient of Italy, through and not by the Istanbul Italia Lodge. This means that the grandmaster of the Istanbul Italia Lodge would have been at a similar rank to the grandmaster of the Macedonia Rissorta.  Therefore in this case ‘head office’ in Turin must have appointed Caraso.

We now have to ask the question, who was the power behind the Grand Orient Lodge of Italy at that time? We should start by looking at who was the founder of the Grand orient Lodge and who was its first grandmaster. The answer is surprising, in that we find the Lodge was established by no less a person than Napoleon Bonaparte, at the time that he conquered Italy. We find that after founding a chivalric order called The Order of the Iron Crown, Napoleon and his advisers continued. “Furthermore, a Grand Orient Masonic lodge was founded on 20 June, 1805; Eugène was its Grand Master and Marescalchi the Grand Conservator. In the kingdom, for certain higher levels of responsibility, membership of Free Masonry was almost obligatory. On the other hand, a modern administration had been formed, and the young Italian agents (average age of under forty in), were soon integrated.” (See http://www.napoleon.org/en/reading_room/biographies/files/marescalchi_melzi.asp for the fuller story)

Summing up this state of affairs we find that the charter for the Grand Orient of Italy (in Turin) was in fact granted its charter by the Grand Orient of France (in Paris). The first grandmaster named above, Eugene, is in fact Napoleon’s stepson, Eugene Beauharnais (biography at http://www.napoleonguide.com/soldiers_eugene.htm). The appointment of Eugene was made by the grandmaster of the Grand Orient of France.

At this time, 1805, no Jews were accepted into Lodges anywhere in Europe. In fact the first Jew to be accepted into any significant position within European Lodge, was a man by the name of Isaac Adolphe Cremieux (biography at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolphe_Cr%C3%A9mieux). He was very much seen as an assimilated Jew by his contemporaies and as a result managed to gain access and prominence in many important french institutions. According to the Encyclopedia Judaica however, his crowning achievement was in freemasonry. “Adolphe Cremieux was not only a freemason from his early youth but in 1869 became the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of the Scottish Rite in Paris”.

Cremieux was the first Jewish grandmaster of a Grand (charter issuing) Lodge, and one which was international, being the charter issuer and therefore owner of several Grand Orient Lodges, including of course the Italian.

The Return of Mehmet Cavit

These apparently separate pieces come together when we re-visit Mehmet Cavit at the time of his death. Alexandre Jevakhoff further informs us that when Ataturk had decided on the death penalty for Cavit in 1926, for an alleged attempt on Ataturk’s life, an important aspect of Cavit comes to life. “He had connections with French financial circles. And both the French government and the house of Rothschild appealed to Ankara on his behalf.”

Cavit was openly a Zionist and he had major connections into Paris, so high that the French government intervened for his life.

Who could this connection have been? Given the year was 1926 there were only 9 members of the Rothschild dynasty that would have been of an adult age and of them only one was openly a rabid Zionist, namely Edmond James de Rothschild. (Biography at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmond_James_de_Rothschild). It is worth noting that his wife was Adelheid and that she was born in Naples, given the importance of the Italian freemasonic influence.

Given that Caraso made his own personal fortune AFTER the revolution of 1908, the question arises as to who put the money up for this entire operation? The answer lies in the FACT that Rafik Bey was present in Paris in 1908 and therefore able to give an interview to Le Temps about his activities. He was part of the Zionist cabal that was working over and through the Young Turk movement, receiving instructions and financing directly from Edmond James de Rothschild, who supported the movement as part of Rothschild’s plan to acquire the land of Palestine.”

Rabbis Believe Messiah Must Rebuild Temple

“Into a world prepared to receive him, the Messiah will then be born. He will be a mortal human being, born normally of human parents.…Now, imagine a charismatic leader greater than any other in man’s history.

Imagine a political genius surpassing all others. With the vast communication networks now at our disposal, he could spread his message to the entire world and change the very fabric of our society….One possible scenario could involve the Middle East situation. This is a problem that involves all the world powers. Now imagine a Jew, a Tzadik, solving this thorny problem….such a demonstration of statesmanship and political genius would place him in a position of world leadership.

The major powers would listen to such an individual….Thus, the Rambam (Maimonides) writes, ‘If he is further successful in rebuilding the Temple on its original site and gathering the dispersed of Israel, then his identity as the Messiah is a certainty’….these accomplishments are a minimum for our acceptance of an individual as the Messiah.”

— Rabbi Kaplan, The Real Messiah, 1976,

“Wailing Wall” is actually Roman fort

For hundreds of years it’s been received opinion in the West that the “Wailing Wall” where Rabbis come to pray with the swaying characteristic of traditional “davening” is indeed the site of the ancient temple of the Israelite kingdom.

Thus Aish.com:

“The Western Wall is a surviving remnant of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, which was destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE.”

A central tenet of the Zionist ideology is that the Muslim place  of worship that currently stands there, the Al Aqsa mosque,  must be removed so that the future third temple can be rebuilt and the priestly sacrifices of ancient Israel restored.

It is an extraordinarily powerful belief, to which millions of Christian Zionists also subscribe.

In the end-times theology of many of these Christians, it is not until the temple is rebuilt that Christ can come again.

It is within the temple that Anti-Christ, according to these theologies, will enthrone himself, before demanding that the world submit to him.

But, the strange thing is the “Wailing Wall” is neither a remnant of the destroyed Jewish temple, nor its site.

It is, instead, the remnant of a Roman fort, Fort Antonia, where Roman troops were garrisoned to subdue the rebellions of the Jews.

There is absolute proof that the present site of the Jewish “Wailing Wall” in Jerusalem is NOT any part of the Temple that existed in the time of Herod and Jesus. In fact, that particular location that the Jewish authorities have accepted represents the Western Wall of an early Roman fortress (finally built and enlarged by Herod the Great). King Herod called it Fort Antonia, after the famous Mark Anthony who lived at the end of the first century before Christ.”

and this:

But in the time of Benjamin of Tudela (1169 C.E.), some Jews decided to reposition the Temple from that southeastern section of Jerusalem up to the Dome of the Rock. They also invented a new “second” Western Wall as a part of the supposed Holy of Holies by identifying it with that ruined balustrade at the western entrance to the Dome of the Rock. During this time (in 1169 C.E. and for the next 380 years), the Jewish people paid NO ATTENTION whatever to the “Western Wall” of the Haram esh-Sharif which is now called their “Wailing Wall.” Until the 16th century of our era, that western area produced NO INTEREST in the minds of the Jewish authorities or laity. Indeed, from the Crusades until the rise of the Ottoman Empire in 1517 C.E., the Jews customarily assembled in the very opposite direction — at the EASTERN side of the Haram on the Mount of Olives (or, at the EASTERN wall itself at what they called the Gate of Mercy if the Muslim authorities would allow them to get that close).”

As the author, Dr. Ernest L. Martin, goes on to show, the adoption of the current Wailing Wall as the site of the future third temple was an early modern development stemming from the mistaken belief of Rabbi Isaac Luria.

Luria’s  Kabbala mysticism was to soon become the most influential theme in Judaism over the next few centuries.

It was out of Lurianic Kabbala that the heretical teachings of  Sabbatai Zevi arose in the 17th century.

Zevi is the self-styled Jewish Messiah whose descendants and followers include the Rothschilds.

So, the first point is that the Wailing Wall has nothing to do with the  earlier Jewish temples.

The second point is a theological one.

The belief in a “remnant” of the temple subverts Jesus’ own prophetic words in the Gospel, fulfilled completely within a generation of his death.

And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said

As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”

– Luke 21: 5-6, King James Version. See also Matthew 24: 1-2, KJV.

Jesus also wept over the city of Jerusalem and predicted her destruction at the same time.

In 70 AD, some thirty years after the crucifixion, both prophecies were fulfilled when the Roman army under Titus sacked and  utterly destroyed the city in one of the greatest blood-baths of the ancient world.

The Christians in the city, being warned by Jesus’ prophecy, did in fact flee and save their lives.

Not so the others. The Jewish historian Josephus Flavius provides an eye-witness account:

Then, when the flames suddenly shot up from the interior, Caesar and his generals withdrew, and no one was left to prevent those outside from kindling the blaze. Thus, in defiance of Caesar’s wishes, the Temple was set on fire.

While the Temple was ablaze, the attackers plundered it, and countless people who were caught by them were slaughtered. There was no pity for age and no regard was accorded rank; children and old men, laymen and priests, alike were butchered; every class was pursued and crushed in the grip of war, whether they cried out for mercy or offered resistance.

Through the roar of the flames streaming far and wide, the groans of the falling victims were heard; such was the height of the hill and the magnitude of the blazing pile that the entire city seemed to be ablaze; and the noise – nothing more deafening and frightening could be imagined.”

Even more terrifying is this account of portents before the destruction, also by Josephus:

“A supernatural apparition was seen, too amazing to be believed. What I am now to relate would, I imagine, be dismissed as imaginary, had this not been vouched for by eyewitnesses, then followed by subsequent disasters that deserved to be thus signalized. For before sunset chariots were seen in the air over the whole country, and armed battalions speeding through the clouds and encircling the cities.”  (rendered in Chilton)

The Roman historian Tacitus adds his own testimony to the paranormal phenomena:

In the sky appeared a vision of armies in conflict, of glittering armour. A sudden lightning flash from the clouds lit up the Temple. The doors of the holy place abruptly opened, a superhuman voice was heard to declare that the gods were leaving it, and in the same instant came the rushing tumult of their departure.”

In the following century, several attempts were made to rebuild the temple, with no success.

The most famous was that by Emperor Julian, called the Apostate for his adoption of paganism and his virulent hatred for Christianity. Attempting to curry favor with the Jews in his campaign against the Christians, he determined to rebuild the temple at Jerusalem.

What happened then is treated as credulous embellishment by secular historians or, at best, a strange coincidence.

Contemporary testimony, however, is unambiguous:

“But though this Alypius pushed the work on with vigor, aided by the governor of the province, terrible balls of fire kept bursting forth near the foundations of the Temple and made the place inaccessible to the workmen, some of whom were burned to death; and since in this way the element persistently repelled them, the enterprise halted.”

The “embellishments” dismissed by secular historians were the multiple accounts of the appearance of images of the cross, both in the sky and on the clothes of  the builders and the spectators.

One wonders if Rabbi Luria, with his subtle powers, knew exactly what he was doing when he made his “mistake” and picked a place removed from the real site of the unfortunate temple of Herod.

Website corrects error in post of 2011 piece

Shoah.org,  a site supporting the Palestinian cause, reprinted  a piece I posted at Veterans Today in 2011, the deleted chapter from my first book.

It uses language and holds positions that I do not, although of course I endorse its support for the Palestinians and its exposes of extreme Zionism.

Unfortunately, someone has added several lines to the original piece, to make me endorse a certain interpretation of the events of 9-11, bolstered by the context of the site, Shoah.org.

It’s a delicate matter, because in a time of repression of serious dissent and forceful speech, I don’t want to distance myself to make myself  “look good” at someone else’s expense.

But my positions are different and it’s just as wrong to allow distortions of my position to replicate themselves, whether intentionally or not.

I hadn’t seen the post before and just noticed it when I clicked on one of the images popping up on top of a Google search of my name.

I wrote to the editors to correct it and they seem to have, which was very nice of them.

I much appreciate the courtesy.

Here’s my comment, which they didn’t publish:

Lila Rajiva says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
May 18, 2014 at 5:31 pm


I notice that you have published a piece of mine and altered my writing, without my permission.


I did not write these lines:

“I am posting them here at Veterans Today to be read in conjunction with Jonathan Azaziah’s “9-11: Israel’s Grand Deception.”

They have been inserted by someone at your site, perhaps accidentally, as you can see from the original link.

To clarify, I stopped posting at Veterans Today, because I did not agree with the writing of several of the people posting there, including some whom I consider war-criminals, as I have stated on my blog.

I also do not equate Kashmir as an issue with Palestine, nor am I in favor of general economic sanctions against Israel, as I have also repeatedly stated on my blog, since I am against general economic sanctions against any nation.

Targeted boycotts are a different matter.

I appreciate your sympathy for the Palestinians and criticisms of extreme Zionism, but I believe that you are unwittingly misrepresenting my position by adding those lines.

I would much appreciate a correction and removal of those lines.

Thank you very much.

Lila Rajiva



Tamil Eelam Chauvinism Fostered By Mossad/Rothschilds

From Tamil Nation.co

“What shocked the Sinhalese ruling establishment and the journalists (including the editor of Lanka Guardian, Mervyn de Silva) was the revelation of Ostrovski that Mossad had trained the Sinhalese military personnel and “a group of Tamil guerrilla factions” simultaneously. Based on the meagre details provided by Ostrovski, these power-brokers and opinion-makers had identified LTTE as the beneficiary of Mossad’s patronage. Ostrovski had written on this topic.”


“Around 1983, a group of Tamil guerrilla factions, collectively known as the Tamil Tigers, began an armed struggle to create a Tamil homeland in the north called Eelam – an on-going battle that has claimed thousands of lives on both sides”. This is the only sentence in the book, where a vague reference is made to the Tamil Tigers.

The time-frame Ostrovski had written about was “mid-July 1984”, when he was still a trainee at the Mossad Academy. He had not mentioned LTTE by name anywhere in the book. At that time, all the militant groups fighting for Eelam (LTTE, TELO, EPRLF, EROS and PLOTE) were identified as “Tamil Tigers”. This point need be stressed.

The authors of Broken Palmyra also clearly state this fact in page 72 of their book; “Up to this time (April 1985), the Tamil population had hardly differentiated between rival groups. They were all referred to as boys and even Tigers” Again the fact is that as reported in the Economist of August 3, 1985, in its coverage on the five Tamil militant groups, LTTE was identified as receiving training from the PLO in Lebanon.

Ostrovski has noted that in mid-July 1984, “nearly 50” Sri Lankan army personnel arrived for training in Israel. These training sessions were not offered free. According to Ostrovski, “A unit of 60 trainees would cost about $300 each day (per trainee), for a total of $18,000. For a three-month course, that would be $1.6 million.

On top of that, they would be charged $5,000 to $6,000 an hour for helicopter rental, and as many as 15 helicopters could be used in a training exercise. Add to that the cost of special ammunition used in training: a bazooka shell, for example, cost about $220 a unit, while heavy mortars were about $1000 each…”

Ostrovsky should be credited for exposing the deals Sri Lankan government had with Mossad, through the Mahaveli River Diversion Project. Apart from exposing how the Sri Lankan authorities diverted foreign-aid funds they received from unsuspecting donors, Ostrovski also has pricked the bloated egos of the Sri Lankan military personnel by divulging how Mossad had fooled them.

Mitt Romney: Jerusalem Is Zionist and Jewish, not Christian Or Muslim

itt Romney lands in his favorite country and declares for it (“In Israel, Romney declares Jerusalem to be capital,” AP, July 29):

“On Israeli soil, U.S. presidential candidate Mitt Romney on Sunday declared Jerusalem to be the capital of the Jewish state and said the United States has “a solemn duty and a moral imperative” to block Iran from achieving nuclear weapons capability.

“Make no mistake, the ayatollahs in Iran are testing our moral defenses. They want to know who will object and who will look the other way,” he said. “We will not look away nor will our country ever look away from our passion and commitment to Israel.”


“Since when do Presidential candidates stand on foreign soil and pledge to conduct U.S. foreign policy in accordance with the desires of the foreign government on whose soil they are standing?” asks the DailyKos correctly (https://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/29/1114809/-You-re-not-President-yet-Mitt).

You’ll notice this is the same position that Ron Paul has recently taken (“Ron Paul shocks campaign staff with new position on Israel,” Business, April 13, 2012).…. albeit for constitutional reasons.

Does that bother me? Yes, I admit it does, even though Dr. Paul’s reasoning is perfectly valid….if you use strictly ideological arguments and forget politics,  history, and prudence.

It’s one more piece of evidence that Dr. Paul’s non-interventionism is weighted in favor of  Zionism.

I blogged as much last year – Ron Paul’s Zionist non-interventionism.

The whole thing bothers me, even though the campaign manager quoted in the piece, Douglas Wead (here he is blogging on the subject) has a tendency, reportedly, to put his own spin on Paul’s statements or actions.

It also bothers me that Ron Paul’s chief legal advisor is Bruce Fein, who has an extensive background as a lobbyist for foreign governments ( “Def(e)ining choice: Bruce Fein, the Turkish Lobby, and the Ron Paul campaign,” Nanour Barsoumian, The Armenian Weekly,January 20, 2012) that is completely at odds with Paul’s rhetoric against special interests.

I’ve blogged about Bruce Fein before and commented about him at other sites.

It was Bruce Fein who lobbied in support of US recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, instead of as an international city, belonging equally to Islam, Christianity, and Judaism — which has been the position taken by the US State Department these many years (http://jerusalem.usconsulate.gov/about_the_embassy.html).

Sure, the State Dept. is left-leaning. But the left gets many things right, and I’m neither ideologically rigid enough nor partisan enough not to recognize when they do..

Last year, there was a seminal case that centered on whether a young Israeli-American dual citizen born in Jerusalem should have Jerusalem listed as his place of birth on his passport, or Israel. (“Court may rule on US stand on Jerusalem,” Barbara Ferguson and Tim Kennedy, Arab News, May 12, 2011)

The State Department  resisted all appeals from the parents and the case went to the Supreme Court, which decided in favor of having Israel on his passport, thereby setting a precedent for any judge who wants to overthrow US foreign policy from the bench.

That’s how the New World Order Works. Through judicial fiat.

The red-herring that constitutionalists dangle before everyone is the overweening power of the President and the constitutional limits that need to be set on it. That’s all very well and perfectly true,  except, again, the devil is in the details.

Who sets limits on Congress and the judiciary, both bribed and bought by  Zionists?

The media?

Also owned by Zionists.

It’s Zionists all the way down.

While the Paul/Rothbard anarcho-capitalist philosophy rails against secretive government and  executive over-reaching, you’ll notice that it also equates all commercial advertising and political donations with free speech.

Murray Rothbard, the principal intellect behind the hybrid movement,  also defended the decriminalization of bribery and blackmail. See M.N. Rothbard, Man, Economy and State, 443 n. 49, 1993, (http://mises.org/books/mespm.pdf).

Whom does that help? The Zionist financiers who buy  Congress and bribe and bully the Judiciary.

So, what the left hand (constitutionality) giveth, the right hand (anarcho-capitalism) taketh away.

Using the letter of the law to circumvent its spirit is legalism.

Depending on which sect of conspiracy theory you favor, you can blame this on Jesuitical or Talmudic casuistry… or on perfidious Albion.

I prefer more academic terminology. Like, phony-baloney.

You notice I didn’t use the politically correct terminology, which would be “pro-Israeli” Congress and “pro-Israeli” President.  Because Israel, the nation-state, is only one part of this and because nation-states seem to be slated for demolition in the near future.

Israel  is the cockpit, but not the whole plane.

If the Zionists want something, they can get it equally through extra-legal means or the most snow-white constitutionality. Paul’s constitutionalism, however well-meaning, has acted as nothing more than window-dressing.

I don’t think he can be blamed for it. It may not be something he or anyone can really help.

But it’s lesson should be clear.

Politics is not only not the answer. At this point, it is a diabolical diversion.

Rand Paul: Welshing On No Aid To Israel?

If I were a young libertarian who’d emptied my wallet into Rand Paul’s campaign, I’d  be painting his face on the basement wall and throwing darts at it, especially after the recent revelation at Liberty Fight about Rand Paul’s apparent silence on the $9 billion dollars in aid guarantees to Israel.

That’s after Rand spent the whole of 2011 (just google) swearing he’d cut aid to Israel. It’s not 100 percent clear what happened with the vote, some are making excuses and giving plausible explanations,  but at this stage of the game,  it doesn’t look good.

Also, one thing that seems to have missed comment is that the Senate summary of the bill specifies support for Israel as a “Jewish state,” not just once, either. Delete Israel and substitute, say, “Malaysia as a Muslim state,” and then you’ll get how just preposterous business-as-usual in DC is.

Not only is this vast sum of tax-payer money going to a foreign government (that’s all aid is anyway), it’s going to a form of government that runs counter to something the Constitution stands for – the US is against a state establishment of religion.

Meanwhile, the same people who applaud “Israel as a Jewish state” every day of the week will foam at the mouth and bark like rabid dogs if someone suggests that the US is a Christian state or that India is a Hindu state.

The h*** with Rand.

Mitt Romney’s Foreign Policy Team

Joseph Sarkissian analyzes the foreign policy team to which Rand Paul, heir-apparent to his father’s flock, delivered the libertarian faithful (they-who-do-not-question-but-yet-know-all-the-answers) when, this summer, he endorsed Mr. Wall Street Mitt Romney.

1. Eliot Cohen – Special adviser, author of Romney’s foreign policy white paper.

At least Eliot Cohen doesn’t pull any punches. He has overtly called for the removal of the Iranian regime by all means necessary, sans force. Good to know, but how do we pull that off? Cohen believes soft power would do the trick, but how long before that soft power necessitates hard power once the Iranian regime begins ramping up attacks against U.S. and Israeli assets? No regime like Iran’s will stand by idly as it is picked apart from the outside, and once the retaliatory bombings, assassination attempts, and other counter-intelligence measure are begun by Iran, the U.S. and Israel won’t be able to stand by either.

2. Dov Zakheim – Special adviser

Aside from also being hawkish on Iran and Iraq, Zakheim has a proven track record of sketchy behavior. Aside from the highly controversial disappearance of a massive amount of money while comptroller of the Pentagon, he runs Foreign Policy’s “Shadow Government” blog where he argues for even more aggressive drone strikes and rails against Obama’s foreign policy. Zakheim is a staunch supporter of the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a lobbying group that pushes hard for intervention in Iran and was adamant about the push for war in Iraq.

3. John Bolton – Trusted personal policy adviser, potential cabinet appointee

Mitt Romney once said of John Bolton that, “John’s wisdom, clarity and courage are qualities that should typify our foreign policy.” If this is true, be very afraid. Bolton could be the most hawkish of Romney’s advisers. He is a signatory to numerous letters to presidents past and present, including one to Bill Clinton in 1998 from the defunct Neocon think tank, “Project for a New American Century (PNAC)” urging Clinton to get rid of Saddam. In a March letter to President Obama from Romney’s foreign policy team, Bolton signed off on statements saying the president is too soft on Iran, not supportive enough of Israel’s interests, should have left troops in Iraq, and has potentially crippled the U.S. military with budget cuts.

4. Robert Kagan, Special adviser

Who’s ready for some good old-fashioned regime change? If Robert Kagan gets his way, that’s what you can expect. Aside from wanting to oust Iranian leadership and cause massive conflict, Kagan is on the board of directors for the Foreign Policy Initiative, or as I like to call it, PNAC 2.0, where he served as a project director. A quintessential Neocon, Kagan has time and time again steadfastly supported the war in Iraq, saying that the war was a good idea, that Iraq was getting more secure in 2004, and that the Arab Spring can be attributed to U.S. efforts in Iraq. It’s hard to find someone more disillusioned in the policy community.

While some could chalk up all of Romney’s rhetoric to early election cycle hogwash, his advisers haven’t changed their tunes. Given that Mitt is about as informed as a table lamp on foreign policy, I shudder to think of the consequences of his team having carte blanche. Whether they suffer from groupthink – since many of them have worked and continue to work in the same place –or just a lack of ability to see the errors of their predictions, something has to balance them out. Hopefully that something is a loss at the polls in November.”

Jeff Blankfort Deconstructs Chomsky On America and Israel


I should make it clear that, as a libertarian, I don’t support sanctions against any country. I wouldn’t have supported sanctions against South Africa, didn’t support them on Iraq, and don’t support them on Israel. However, targeted boycotts against specific, responsible parties (journalists, academics, government officials, businessmen or military officials directly involved in genocidal crimes or in their cover-up) would be defensible under international law. General sanctions only impoverish people and undermine resistance.

So my problem here is less with Chomsky’s position on divestment – whatever it is – so much as his apparent double-standards on the issue – one standard for South Africans…… and another for Israel.One for Israel…and another for Palestine. One for the US…and another for Israel.

If the Jews deserved a homeland, and they did, the Palestinians surely deserved land that was already their home and had been their home for centuries…

Original Post [all varieties of emphasis –  underlines, capitals, and italics – are mine, not Blankfort’s]:

The indefatigably brave and honest Jeff Blankfort analyzes Noam Chomsky’s writings on Israel and Palestine. I’ve  been very conflicted about Chomsky’s blind-eye on  9-11 for some time now. What to think about it? This analysis convinces me finally that Chomsky’s bias is not simply an emotional blind-spot, but a deliberate obfuscation that in such a prominent, sophisticated, and powerful voice, must be called out and questioned closely.

“His reluctance to label Israel’s control of the Palestinians as “apartheid” out of concern that it be seen as a “red flag,” like describing it as “inflammatory,” was a red flag itself and raised questions that should have been asked by the interviewer, such as who would be inflamed by the reference to ‘apartheid’ as a “red flag” in Israel’s case and what objections would Chomsky have to that?

A more disturbing exchange occurred later in the interview when Chomsky was asked if sanctions should be applied against Israel as they were against South Africa. He responded:

“In fact, I’ve been strongly against it in the case of Israel. For a number of reasons. For one thing, even in the case of South Africa, I think sanctions are a very questionable tactic. In the case of South Africa, I think they were [ultimately] legitimate because it was clear that the large majority of the population of South Africa was in favor of it.

Sanctions hurt the population. You don’t impose them unless the population is asking for them. That’s the moral issue. So, the first point in the case of Israel is that: Is the population asking for it? Well, obviously not.”

Obviously not. But is it acceptable to make such a decision on the basis of what the majority of Israelis want? Israel, after all, is not a dictatorship in which the people are held in check by fear and, therefore, cannot be held responsible for their government’s actions. Israel has a largely unregulated, lively press and a “people’s army” in which all Israeli Jews, other than the ultra-orthodox, are expected to serve and that is viewed by the Israeli public with almost religious reverence. Over the years, in their own democratic fashion, the overwhelming majority of Israelis have consistently supported and participated in actions of their government against the Palestinians and Lebanese that are not only racist, but in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

Chomsky made his position clear:

“So calling for sanctions here, when the majority of the population doesn’t understand what you are doing, is tactically absurd-even if it were morally correct, which I don’t think it is. The country against which the sanctions are being imposed is not calling for it.”

The interviewer, Lee, understandably puzzled by that answer, then asked him, “Palestinians aren’t calling for sanctions?

Chomsky: “Well, the sanctions wouldn’t be imposed against the Palestinians, they would be imposed against Israel.”

Lee: “Right… [And] Israelis aren’t calling for sanctions.”

That response also disturbed Palestinian political analyst, Omar Barghouti, who, while tactfully acknowledging Chomsky as “a distinguished supporter of the Palestinian cause,” addressed the issue squarely:

Of all the anti-boycott arguments, this one reflects either surprising naiveté or deliberate intellectual dishonesty. Are we to judge whether to apply sanctions on a colonial power based on the opinion of the majority in the oppressors community? Does the oppressed community count at all? [7]

For Chomsky, apparently not……

………In an exchange with Washington Post readers, Chomsky was asked by a caller:

Why did you sign an MIT petition calling for MIT to boycott Israeli investments, and then give an interview in which you state that you opposed such investment boycotts? What was or is your position on the proposal by some MIT faculty that MIT should boycott Israeli investments?

Chomsky replied:

As is well known in Cambridge, of anyone involved, I” was the most outspoken opponent of the petition calling for divestment, and in fact refused to sign until it was substantially changed, along lines that you can read if you are interested. The “divestment” part was reduced to three entirely meaningless words, which had nothing to do with the main thrust of the petition. I thought that the three meaningless words should also be deleted… On your last question, as noted, I was and remain strongly opposed, without exception — at least if I understand what the question means. How does one “boycott Israeli investments”? (Emphasis added). [10]

I will assume that Chomsky understood very well what the caller meant: investing in Israeli companies and in State of Israel Bonds of which US labor union pension funds, and many states and universities have purchased hundreds of millions of dollars worth. These purchases clearly obligate those institutions to lobby Congress to insure that the Israeli economy stays afloat. This isn’t something that Chomsky talks or writes about.

The caller was referring to a speech that Chomsky had made to the Harvard Anthropology Dept. shortly after the MIT and Harvard faculties issued a joint statement on divestment. It was gleefully reported in the Harvard Crimson by pro-Israel activist, David Weinfeld, under the headline “Chomsky’s Gift”:

MIT Institute Professor of Linguistics Noam Chomsky recently gave the greatest Hanukkah gift of all to opponents of the divestment campaign against Israel. By signing the Harvard-MIT divestment petition several months ago—and then denouncing divestment on Nov. 25 at Harvard—Chomsky has completely undercut the petition.

At his recent talk for the Harvard anthropology department, Chomsky stated: “I am opposed and have been opposed for many years, in fact, I’ve probably been the leading opponent for years of the campaign for divestment from Israel and of the campaign about academic boycotts.”

He argued that a call for divestment is “a very welcome gift to the most extreme supporters of US-Israeli violence… It removes from the agenda the primary issues and it allows them to turn the discussion to irrelevant issues, which are here irrelevant, anti-Semitism and academic freedom and so on and so forth.” [11] …….


Chomsky’s rationalization of Israel’s criminal misdeeds in The Fateful Triangle should have rung alarm bells when it appeared in 1983. Written a year after Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, in what would become a sacred text for Middle East activists, he actually began the book not by taking Israel to task so much as its critics:

In the war of words that has been waged since Israel invaded Lebanon on June 6, 1982, critics of Israeli actions have frequently been accused of hypocrisy. While the reasons advanced are spurious, the charge itself has some merit. It is surely hypocritical to condemn Israel for establishing settlements in the occupied territories while we pay for establishing and expanding them. Or to condemn Israel for attacking civilian targets with cluster and phosphorous bombs “to get the maximum kill per hit.” When we provide them gratis or at bargain rates, knowing that they will be used for just this purpose. Or to criticize Israel’s ‘indiscriminate’ bombardment of heavily-settled civilian areas or its other military adventures, while we not only provide the means in abundance but welcome Israel’s assistance in testing the latest weaponry under live battlefield conditions... .In general, it is pure hypocrisy to criticize the exercise of Israeli power while welcoming Israel’s contributions towards realizing the US aim of eliminating possible threats, largely indigenous, to American domination of the Middle East region.[ 21]

First, the PLO was seen as a threat by Israel, not by the United States in 1982, particularly since it had strictly abided by a US-brokered cease-fire with Israel for 11 months, giving it a dangerous degree of credibility in Israeli eyes. Second, whom did Chomsky mean by “we?” Perhaps, President Reagan and some members of Congress who gently expressed their concern when the number of Palestinians and Lebanese killed in the invasion and the wholesale destruction of the country could not be suppressed in the media. But he doesn’t say. It certainly wasn’t those who took to the streets across the country to protest Israel’s invasion. Both political parties had competed in their applause when Israel launched its attack, as did the AFL-CIO which took out a full page ad in the NY Times, declaring “We Are Not Neutral. We Support Israel!” paid for by an Israeli lobbyist with a Park Avenue address. The media, in the beginning, was also supportive, but it is rare to find an editorial supporting US aid to Israel. It is rarely ever mentioned and that’s the way the lobby likes it. So is Chomsky creating a straw figure? It appears so.

If we follow Chomsky’s “logic,” it would be an injustice to bring charges of war crimes against Indonesian, El Salvadoran, Guatemalan, Haitian, or Filipino officers, soldiers, or public officials for the atrocities committed against their own countrymen and women since they were funded, armed and politically supported by the US. Perhaps, General Pinochet will claim the Chomsky Defense if he goes to trial.

He pressed the point of US responsibility for Israel’s sins again in his introduction to The New Intifada, noting that as one of the High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions, “It is therefore Washington’s responsibility to prevent settlement and expropriation, along with collective punishment and all other measures of violence… .It follows that the United States is in express and extreme violation of its obligations as a High Contracting Party.” [22]

I would agree with Chomsky, but is the US refusal to act a more “extreme violation” than the actual crimes being committed by another signatory to the Conventions, namely Israel? Chomsky would have us believe that it is.

It is a point he made clear at a talk in Oxford in May, 2004, when he brought up the killing a week earlier of the Hamas spiritual leader, Sheik Ahmed Yassin by the Israeli military as he left a Mosque in Gaza. “That was reported as an Israeli assassination, but inaccurately” said Chomsky. “Sheikh Yassin was killed by a US helicopter, flown by an Israeli pilot. Israel does not produce helicopters. The US sends them with the understanding that they will be used for such purposes, not defense, as they have been, regularly.”

Chomsky is correct to a point. What is missing from his analysis is any reference to the demands from Congress, orchestrated by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Israel’s officially registered lobby, to make sure that the US provides those helicopters to Israel to use as its generals see fit. (In fact, there is not a single mention of AIPAC in any one of Chomsky’s many books on the Israel-Palestine conflict). What Chomsky’s British audience was left with was the conclusion that the assassination of Sheik Yassin was done with Washington’s approval.

While its repeated use of helicopters against the Palestinian resistance and civilian population has been one of the more criminal aspects of Israel’s response to the Intifada, absolving the Israelis of blame for their use has become something of a fetish for Chomsky as his introduction to The New Intifada [23] and again, in more detail in Middle East Illusions, illustrates:

On October 1, [at the beginning of the Al-Aksa Intifada] Israeli military helicopters, or, to be more precise, US military helicopters with Israeli pilots, sharply escalated the violence, killing two Palestinians in Gaza… . The continuing provision of attack helicopters by the United States to Israel, with the knowledge that these weapons are being used against the civilian Palestinian population, and the silence of the mainstream media is just one illustration of many of how we live up to the principle that we do not believe in violence. Again, it leaves honest citizens with two tasks: the important one, do something about it; and the second one, try to find out why the policies are being pursued. (Emphasis added) [24]

What to do Chomsky again doesn’t say, but he does try to tell us why:

“On that matter, the fundamental reasons are not really controversial… It has long been understood that the gulf region has the major energy sources in the world… ” [25]

Chomsky then goes on for two pages explaining the importance of Middle East oil and the efforts by the US to control it. It is the basic explanation that he has repeated and republished, almost verbatim, over the years. What it has to do with the Palestinians who have no oil or how a truncated Palestinian state would present a threat to US regional interests is not provided, but after two pages the reader has forgotten that the question was even posed. In his explanation there is no mention of the lobby or domestic influences.

Chomsky does acknowledge that “major sectors of American corporate capitalism, including powerful elements with interests in the Middle East [the major oil companies!]” have endorsed a “two-state solution” on the basis that

the radical nationalist tendencies that are enflamed by the unsettled Palestinian problem would be reduced by the establishment of a Palestinian mini-state that would be contained within a Jordanian-Israeli military alliance (perhaps tacit), surviving at the pleasure of its far more powerful neighbors and subsidized by the most conservative and pro-American forces in the Arab world… .This would, in fact, be the likely outcome of a two-state settlement.” [26]

Such an outcome would have little direct influence on regional Arab politics, except to demoralize supporters of the Palestinian struggle in the neighboring countries and around the world, a development that would clearly serve US interests. It would, however, curb Israel’s expansion, which is critical to Israel’s agenda, not Washington’s. Chomsky also fails to recognize a fundamental contradiction in his argument. If the support of Israel has been based on its role as protector of US strategic resources, namely oil, why does not that position enjoy the support of the major oil companies with interests in the region?…”

(Lila: My emphasis)

Helen Thomas: An Appreciation

Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration, at Foreign Policy Journal, (via Counterpunch), June 16, 2010:

“The propagandists for the Israel Lobby, who occupy the Wall Street Journal editorial page while pretending to be journalists, are determined to remove Helen Thomas from the annals of journalism. In case you have already forgotten, a few days ago the distinguished career of Helen Thomas, the 89-year-old doyen of the White House Press Corps, was ended by the Israel Lobby, which made an issue about her opinion that immigrant Jews should leave Palestine and go back to their home countries. Continue reading

Indian versus Israeli Reactions To Provocation

The Great Bong on the difference between the Indian and the Israeli approach to provocation:

“As someone primarily interested in sub-continental politics, what is most interesting for me however, more than the role of Turkey, is the difference between India and Israel in their reactions to provocation, being in similar boats—– — democratic countries with strong militaries, surrounded by antagonistic countries on many sides, eager to provoke them to conflict over disputed territories. Continue reading

Alleged Israeli Agent Arrested Over January Killing Of Hamas Leader

Raf Sanchez at Times Online June 12, 2010:

“An alleged Israeli agent wanted in connection with the killing of a Hamas leader in Dubai has been arrested in Poland.

A man using the name of Uri Brodsky is suspected of having supplied a fake German passport to a member of the Mossad assassin squad that was said to responsible for the slaying of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in January. German authorities issued a European-wide arrest warrant and he was picked up by Polish authorities earlier this week, said a spokesperson for the German federal prosecutor’s office which is seeking his extradition.”

Read the rest of this article at The Time Online (UK)

Mad Dogs Alert: Saudis To Give Israelis Airspace To Attack Iran

Hugh Tomlinson at The Times Online, June 12, 2010:

“Saudi Arabia has conducted tests to stand down its air defences to enable Israeli jets to make a bombing raid on Iran’s nuclear facilities, The Times can reveal.

In the week that the UN Security Council imposed a new round of sanctions on Tehran, defence sources in the Gulf say that Riyadh has agreed to allow Israel to use a narrow corridor of its airspace in the north of the country to shorten the distance for a bombing run on Iran.

To ensure the Israeli bombers pass unmolested, Riyadh has carried out tests to make certain its own jets are not scrambled and missile defence systems not activated. Once the Israelis are through, the kingdom’s air defences will return to full alert.”

Read the rest of this article at The Times Online

Israel: Future Turkish Defense Of Aid Ships Will Be Act Of War

Antiwar’s Jason Dietz writes:

“Israeli Army commander and top Likud member Uzi Dayan today warned on Israeli Army Radio that Israel would consider any attempt by the Turkish military to protect future aid ships from attack an “act of war.” With Israeli protesters already condemning Erdogan, is war on the table? Continue reading

Esau And Jacob In The Middle East

From Rabbi Brian’s Blog:

“In one of the most poignant moments in the Torah, after Isaac tells Esau, his son, that his brother Jacob has stolen the blessing, Esau burst into wild and bitter sobbing and said to his father,

“Have you but one blessing? Bless me too, my father” (Genesis 26:38) Continue reading

Glenn Greenwald: US No Different From Israel

Glenn Greenwald:

“One can express all sorts of outrage over the Obama administration’s depressingly predictable defense of the Israelis, even at the cost of isolating ourselves from the rest of the world, but ultimately, on some level, wouldn’t it have been even more indefensible — or at least oozingly hypocritical — if the U.S. had condemned Israel?  After all, what did Israel do in this case that the U.S. hasn’t routinely done and continues to do? Continue reading

Spilling The Wrong Blood

From Lynda Brayer, a human rights lawyer living in Haifa, Palestine, who is an active participant in the One State in Palestine movement and supports the Return of Palestinian Refugees to Palestine.

“Furthermore, what exacerbates the image problem for the Israeli government is that it is no longer Arab blood that has been spilt, but nice “white” or “European” blood that, in the West, is different from Arab or Muslim blood. The international reverberations and the trial against Israeli officials in the case of Rachel Corrie, who was deliberately murdered by an Israeli bulldozer driver for attempting to stop the demolition of a Palestinian home, should have provided sufficient warning to the Israeli regime of what is now about to unfold. Having chosen to confront the flotilla, it has now fallen into the proverbial biblical pit of its own making! Continue reading

Gaza Flotilla Like Jewish Refugees In Exodus Says Former Mossad Agent

Victor Ostrovsky in SpyTalk at The Washington Post:

“The Israeli commando attack on a civilian flotilla was “so stupid it is stupefying,” says former Mossad agent Victor Ostrovsky. Ostrovsky spent six years in the Israeli navy, rising to the rank of lieutenant commander before Mossad recruited him in 1982. He quit after four years and in the 1990s he wrote two highly critical, first-person books about the intelligence service. Continue reading