Category Archives: Israel-Palestine

Another View Of The Olivet Discourse

Posted on by

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 Rock” cannot 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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

Iamthewitness.com [this blog was deleted under the laws of France]. I did not realize at the time of linking it that it was considered anti-Semitic, however, in looking for the link, I see that they have renounced all association with any form of racist feeling, so I am linking through an archive of the site.

I am the witness 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

Posted on by

“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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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:

http://www.shoah.org.uk/2011/01/01/spy-machine-lie-machine-how-we-were-brainwashed-into-the-war-on-terror/comment-page-1/#comment-295186
Lila Rajiva says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
May 18, 2014 at 5:31 pm

Hi,

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

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/12/31/spy-machine-lie-machine-how-we-were-brainwashed-into-the-war-on-terror/

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

Posted on by

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.”

and

“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

Posted on by

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.”

Comment:

“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?

Posted on by

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.