Image: “On the 16th of March We Choose”: neo-Nazi Ukraine “Or” Russia?
Media reports acknowledge that 83.1 percent of eligible Crimean voters cast their ballot in the March 16th referendum.
The final tally of the vote was 96.77 percent in favor of joining the Russian Federation, and 2.51 percent against.
The Western media has underscored that both the Crimean Tatars as well as the Ukrainian population of Crimea were against joining the Russian Federation. The Non-Russian population constitutes 41.7 percent of the Crimean population.
According to official data, Russians constitute 58.32% of the population of Crimea, 24.32% are Ukrainians and 12.10% are Crimean Tatars.
The Guardian, in a slither of media disinformation intimated that the Tatars feared a wave of repression if Crimea were to join the Russian Federation:
Now, as Crimea faces a referendum that is likely to seal its fate as a province or satellite of Russia, ethnic tensions are reaching boiling point. In a chilling echo of history, Tatar houses in the Crimean city of Bakhchisarai have been marked with an ominous X, just as they were before the Soviet-era deportations. On Monday two Tatar businesses were firebombed.
Contrary to the reports of 135 international observers from 23 countries, the Western media in chorus has suggested without a shred of evidence that the elections were rigged and that Crimea was under Russian military occupation.
The observer mission reports which include members of theEuropean Parliament have been casually ignored by the mainstream Western media:
Mateus Piskorkski, the leader of the European observers’ mission and Polish MP: “Our observers have not registered any violations of voting rules.”
Ewald Stadler, member of the European Parliament, dispelled the “referendum at gunpoint” myth: “I haven’t seen anything even resembling pressure… People themselves want to have their say.”
Pavel Chernev: Bulgarian member of parliament: “Organization and procedures are 100 percent in line with the European standards,” he added.
A woman is reflected in a mirror as she casts her ballot during voting in a referendum at a polling station in Simferopol March 16, 2014.(Reuters / Thomas Peter)
Johann Gudenus, member of the Vienna Municipal Council: “Our opinion is – if people want to decide their future, they should have the right to do that and the international community should respect that. There is a goal of people in Crimea to vote about their own future. Of course, Kiev is not happy about that, but still they have to accept and to respect the vote of people in Crimea”.
Serbian observer Milenko Baborats“People freely expressed their will in the most democratic way, wherever we were… During the day we didn’t see a single serious violation of legitimacy of the process,”
Srdja Trifkovic, prominent and observer from Serbia: “The presence of troops on the streets is virtually non-existent and the only thing resembling any such thing is the unarmed middle-aged Cossacks who are positioned outside the parliament building in Simferopol. But if you look at the people both at the voting stations and in the streets, like on Yalta’s sea front yesterday afternoon, frankly I think you would feel more tense in south Chicago or in New York’s Harlem than anywhere round here,” he said. (For more details see Crimean ‘Referendum at Gunpoint’ is a Myth – International ObserversBy Global Research News, March 17, 2014)
Yet according to Time Magazine, without acknowledging the reports of the international observers,the ballot had to have been rigged and the vote was held under the gun of the Russian military:
“95 percent voted in favor of becoming a part of Russia. That may seem like an impossible result, the mark of a rigged election. And in some ways it was. The vote was held during a Russian military occupation of Crimea and the ballot did not offer voters the option of keeping their current status in Ukraine. ( Time, March 17, 2014)
In chorus, Western media reports have stated that both Ukrainians and Tatars were firmly against seceding from Ukraine. They also intimated that the Tatar community had decided not to vote.
According to the Washington Post, “a vote in favor of seceding” was inevitable because “ethnic Russians make up 60 percent of Crimea’s population”.But the result was not 60 percent in favor, it was 97 percent in favor, indicating that all major ethnic groups in the Crimea voted in favor of seceding from Ukraine.
The figures do not add up: The Russians constitute 58 percent of Crimea’s population, yet 97 percent of the vote was in favor of joining Russia. If Ukrainians and Tatars had refused to participate in the referendum, voter participation would have been substantially less that 83.1.
The referendum was also a vote against the US-EU sponsored Coup d’etat.
The results confirm that the Tatars and Ukrainians who did cast their ballot, also voted overwhelmingly in favor of joining Russia.
What this 97 percent vote also indicates is a rejection of the illegal Neo-Nazi government in Kiev. The Election poster (image above) reads:
16 марта мы выбираем или
“On the 16 of March we choose”: neo-Nazi Ukraine “Or” the Russian Federation?
The Russian made S-300 Missile, which is about to be delivered to Iran, can strike inside Israel. In Geneva, the 5+1 nations were only concerned about limiting Iran’s missile range in Europe. Photo Credit: Press TV Kenneth Waltz was the founder of the Neorealism Theory of International Politics, which holds that when it comes to nuclear proliferation, the more the better. The more countries that have nuclear weapons the more peaceful our planet is likely to be. And so, while the G5+1 were peacefully ‘Waltzing’ away in Geneva, behind the scenes a war dance was going on regarding the delivery of Russian S-300 ground to air missiles to Iran. Game Theory as it applies to the Israel-Iran conflict is relatively simple. The premise assumes that if Iran gets the bomb it’s an end game scenario that Israel cannot permit, and therefore the question is not whether, but when will Israel preempt. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Russian President Vladimir Putin, in May of 2013 that delivery of the S-300 (which would greatly undermine Israeli Air Force superiority) to Syria, “is likely to draw us into a response, and could send the region deteriorating into war.” The S-300 is referred to as a game changer. It is a mobile land-based system designed to track multiple aircraft simultaneously from a long distance, and to shoot down enemy planes within a radius of 150 km (93 miles). The Russians have been playing the S-300 missile as pawns in their global chess game, in particular against the deployment of U.S. missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic. This game has been ongoing (in one form or another) since President Ronald Reagan first proposed the U.S. anti-missile system known as the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), the “Star Wars” program, back in 1983. The $800,000,000 Russian-Iran deal for the delivery of the S-300 system was concluded in 2007. In May, 2010, Western intelligence services reported that Iranian Revolutionary Guards S-300 crews were training at Russian missile bases. When Israeli President Shimon Peres raised the issue during talks with then Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in Moscow, he was told sharply that no other government could tell Russia to whom it may give military training. By 2010, Iran’s refusal to halt uranium enrichment led the UN to pass resolution 1929, imposing sanctions against Iran and banning the sale of missiles to Iran. As a result, early in September of 2010, President Medvedev signed a resolution banning the delivery of S-300 missile systems. In reality, Israel’s agreement to sell Russia surveillance drones that would narrow Russia’s technological military gap with Georgia in return for killing the S-300 deal with Iran and Syria may have had a lot to do with Russia scrapping the sale. As a result of the cancellation, Iran brought a lawsuit (that’s still pending) against Russia in a Swiss court, to the tune of $4 billion. On July 5, 2013, just two months after the Netanyahu – Putin meeting in which the former warned about a possible war, a Syrian military arms depot in Latakia containing Russian Yakhont P-800 surface to sea missiles was attacked and destroyed. The Yakhont missile, like the S-300, is also considered by Israel to be a game changer. The attack was initially reported as having been carried out by Israeli war planes in an air to ground attack (against which the S-300 would have been a credible deterrent), but it was later reported that the attack that destroyed some 50 Yakhont missiles was actually carried out from Israeli Dolphin-class submarines. The attack delivered a triple message: Israel will not tolerate game changers (a lesson Israel learned and paid dearly for in the 1973 Yom Kippur War). The second message was to Iran and Russia, saying that ground-to-air S-300 will not prevent an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, and Israel can carry out such an attack in multiple ways. The third message was directed at Washington and Moscow: missile pawn-moves made on the European chess board have no relevance to the backgammon platform of the Middle East. While the cooperation between the U.S. and Russia has led to the dismantling of Syria’s chemical weapons, and to the Geneva accords, Russia has been playing the S-300 card behind the scenes and to its own advantage. It may have actually been the trump card that convinced Iran to agree to an accord with the West. On September 5, Putin reached a decision to end the ban on the sale of S-300 missiles to Iran, on condition that Teheran drop the $4 billion lawsuit against Rosoboronexport, the state intermediary that oversees Russian defense imports and exports. The Kommersant (a prestigious Russian daily newspaper), reported the news several days later. It appears that Putin’s decision was part of a Russian effort to prevent U.S. military intervention in Syria and an enticement for the ayatollahs of Iran. By September 26, the world was cheering the peaceful resolution of the Syrian problem, and just two months later, on November 24, it was elated again with the conclusion of Geneva accord. Not three weeks later, on Wednesday, Dec. 11, 2013, during the course of a lecture to students at the Imam Sadegh University in Tehran entitled “Islamic Revolution against Global Arrogance,” Iran’s Revolutionary Guards chief, Maj. General, Mohammad Ali Jafari, is reported to have made the following statement: “We are still increasing the range of our missiles, but currently the Supreme Leader has commanded that we limit the range of our missiles to 2,000 km (1,240 miles).” It was a strange, oxymoronic response to a student’s question about Iran’s missile development. Yes, the Iranians were working on increasing the range of their missiles, but no, they were limiting them to a range that can only reach Israel (and Saudi Arabia). During the Geneva accords discussions, the G5+1 expressed concerns over Iran’s and North Korea’s cooperation in the development of the Shehab-6 missile, which has a range of 3,000-5,600 km (1,850-3480), long enough to reach most of Europe. They made it clear that they would like to extend the six-month nuclear freeze agreed upon in Geneva to include a freeze on Iran’s development of long range ballistic missiles. No objections were raised, however, to Iran retaining the shorter range Shehab missiles capable of striking Israel. Some of the sanctions have been lifted, the six months count is yet to begin, and the game changing S-300 shipment is almost en route. As the saying goes,
On Wednesday, a Red Cross blood clinic at the Israeli parliament rejected adonationfrom a Black member, left. The law allows Ethiopian Jews to immigrate and marry otherJews. Nevertheless, they are the most discriminated against, more than the Arab Muslim and Christian Israelis based strictly on their dark skin. Illuminati Jewry and Freemasonry impose
diversity, multiculturalism and political
correctness on us but practise racial and ethnic discrimination in the “Jewish homeland.” In the NWO, people of European origin do not have a “homeland”.
While Zionists discriminate against all non-Jews, a rigid hierarchy exists within Jewish ranks as well.
As an American-Jewish immigrant to Israel, I witness a blatant and ugly racism.
In America, the Jewish community has long championed the rights of other minorities as a strategic gambit. Sadly, in Israel, where Jews are the majority, the Jewish population is extremely race-conscious.
While Judaism is considered a religion, it acts like a race. Within that race, there is a hierarchy of privilege. Israelis can be broken down into two main categories: European “Ashkenazi” Jews and Middle Eastern “Mizrahi” Jews.
These two distinct subgroups also observe two distinct types of Judaism. Ashkenazi Judaism and Sephardic Judaism.
Every Israeli Prime Minister has been a European, lighter skinned, Ashkenazi Jew. Only one figurehead President of Israel has been a darker skinned Mizrahi Jew, and he is currently in prison for raping one of his secretaries.
The “white” Ashkenazi Jews are the elite in Israel. The “darker” Mizrahi, or Arab Jews are a slightly lower caste. Mizrahi Jews look identical to their Arab Muslim and Christian cousins.
Israeli police and military are not politically correct. They racially profile people at every checkpoint, supermarket, movie theater, etc. Thus, Mizrahi Jews are given a closer look and only their Hebrew accent confirms them as Jews.
There is a large population of supposedly Russian Jews in Israel. But how did the Russians get into Israel if they’re not really Jewish?
After Natan Sharansky(left) escaped from Russia, he persuaded the Israeli government to bend the rules for the Russian “Jews.” Unlike from all other countries of origin, Russian “Jews” can immigrate without the necessity of a Jewish mother — the proof of Jewishness under religious law. A Jewish father? Ok. An illegitimate Jewish father? Ok. A Jewish grandparent? Ok.
In fact, since the late 1980’s Israel is actually in the business of fooling Russians into immigrating to Israel when they want to go elsewhere. The religious courts are starting to exert pressure on the government, even suggesting Russian immigrants undergo DNA tests to prove they are racially Jews!
Russians are generally considered lower than the elite racially European Ashkenaz and slightly higher than the racially Middle Eastern (Arabic) Mizrahim. Avigdor Lieberman is an example of a racial Russian who has elevated himself within the Zionist political structure thanks to his hard-right militarism. The Russians are “whiter” than the Mizrahim, so some rise to higher levels within this racist society.
RACISM IS THE NORM
Israelis unabashedly describe people by their skin color, religion, race or country of origin. It’s simply the culture.
In America my children were raised differently. They would never call a person of color “nigger” in America. Yet here in Israel they quickly learned Ethiopians are called “cushy” in reference to the biblical Cushites. Israelis also use the term “nigger”. They don’t recognize these terms to be racist. Zionists don’t realize Jewish-only land, Jewish-only immigration, Jewish-only marriage are racist. They simply accept their racism as normal.
It’s a caste system, plain and simple, and what kids learn in childhood carries over into adulthood. That’s the culture.
Going “down” the ladder, you have your Arab Muslim and Arab Christian Israelis. They’re not Jewish. But more important, they aren’t trusted. Israelis consider them a fifth column, ready and willing to rise up at a moments notice in rebellion. It’s comical to me, because it is the inherent racism that oppresses the Arab Israeli population and they have good reason to be disgruntled and unhappy.
All Israeli boys and girls must serve a mandatory military duty. They are conditioned to follow orders and to be desensitized to the “enemy.” While Israeli schools, and even Jewish schools abroad, rely heavily on emotional manipulation of the Holocaust, the Germans are no longer the hated enemy here. The Arabs are.
Thus, children are manipulated to turn their anger and hatred of Nazi Germany towards Arabs. In the words of my Israeli ex-wife, “A good Arab is a dead one.”
There is outright fear and hostility to the Palestinians living in the autonomous zones. It is a culture of racism and war, and there is no arguing it.
A strange phenomena exists within the Filipino community in Israel. Most work as caregivers for Israel’s aging population. Without question these are master – servant relationships. It’s akin to the pre-civil war South in America, the way Israelis treat their Filipino caregivers. Well, they are the hired help after all, and they are “goy.”
Do you expect anyone here to treat them as equals? Of course not. For the most part they are ignored, as if they were the family dog perhaps. A brief greeting, and then they can go curl up in a corner until needed.
It’s pretty sad if you ask me, but a fact of life I guess. These people know they will be treated like the servants they are. They need the money. They miss their families. And Israeli Jews, if they are anything, it is unsympathetic and privileged.
The African migrant workers are treated the worst by far. They are truly the untouchables. In fact, I’ve never seen an African, other than an Ethiopian Jew, inside any Israeli home, mall or major supermarket.
They almost invariably live in one area near the Central Bus Station in Tel Aviv, many homeless, most crowded in small rooms. The Israeli government doesn’t know what to do with them, and it’s a big problem. They live in slums, are treated terribly, and looked at as feral cats or rats. They are called names, they are heavily discriminated against.
And Israel is nothing like America in terms of “anchor babies.” Being born in Israel does not guarantee one citizenship unless the baby is Jewish. For non-Jews born to non-citizens, the child is not a citizen and is subject to deportation.
I will conclude with a comment that might surprise you. I am not anti-Israel or anti-Jew. I am a Jew. I am Israeli. I am anti-racism and anti-Zionist. There’s a difference. Israel does not have to be an Apartheid state. She chooses to be. She is ruled by racist Zionists who believe in separatism, colonialism, and militarism. I believe in another, more open and humane Israel.
I do not believe any people is spiritually inherently superior to another people. However, there are racial differences. Acknowledging racial differences, which stem from nature, and directed by nurture, is not racist. The Jewish people have a right their own nation, just as others have a right to their own nation. Ashkenazim Jewry are in fact more intelligent at tests and academic ON AVERAGE than Mizrahi Jewry, who are of a very different racial history. The Mizrahi Jewry only had to be smarter than the local Arabs, whose IQ averages around 80, while the Ashkenazim had to be smarter than the Germans, who IQ averages in urban areas at above 104.
The behavior of an ethnic group is in large part due to its genetics. Please see this article, titled “”Differences in educational achievement owe more to genetics than environment”:
Ashkenazim, having the highest concentration of administrative and financial skills of any group on the planet, have a right to maintain their group, and are right to be untrustworthy of out-marriage to Mizrahi Jews.
Additionally, European Sephardic Jews are not the same as Mizrahi Shephardic Jews. Please see this article be Steve Sailer on “Ashkenazi vs. ‘Shephardic’ Intelligence”, where he breaks down the notion that European Shephardic Jews should even be classed with Shephardic Jews from Arab lands. The truth is that our societies DO have castes, which are separated by ability to function in a highly-developed world. There is nothing “racist” about desiring to maintain the advantages and uniqueness of your own racial group. Because of differences in average intelligence, and then subsequent cultural intelligence, there will be societal differences. The only “racist” thing to do to a person would be to demand more quotas and spots in administration for Shephardim or Blacks, regardless of the fact that the Ashkenazim are more qualified.
As to Blacks in Israel, Israelis have every right to be suspicious of them. Africans, due to their long racial incubation in the uncivilized, chaotic environment of Africa, are genetically far more prone to committing crime and causing disorder. The local Israelis do not want Africans among their people, because thin far larger numbers, Africans harass women, rob people, and leave trash.
No, African crime is not caused by “lack of employment opportunities”. The lack of employment opportunities for Africans is caused by their average of lower IQ, far lower impulse control, and tendency to promote and bring in their own ethnic group. An exploration of the story of “Ham” is instructive, as they are the descendants of Ham, who shamed Noah, and was cursed.
Jews deserve a nation of their own. Every nation on earth deserves a nation of their own, and this includedWhite European nations. This perspective will help settle all the disputes, we need to drop this “racism” nonsense..
“All this bluff and corruptibility which came into the Israeli political life in an attempt to form a narrow government failed not only tactically but also conceptually”-Yitzhak Rabin, 1992
Four catchy phrases ruined Shimon Peres political life, relegating him to the simple formalities of Israel’s Presidency. “Yes and No” was coined by Sefy Rivlin, and cost Peres the 1981 and 1984 elections. A Peres puppet was shown answering “yes and no” to every question asked. Before that, in 1977, Yitzhak Rabin called Peres an “indefatigable conspirator.” Since this article is in English, I won’t analyze the brilliance of the Hebrew saying; in the feat of his lifetime, Rabin ruined Peres with three words. The other two phrases are related to Shimon Peres attempt in 1990 to replace Shamir’s government—of which he was Minister of Finances—by a narrow government led by Labor and supported by ultra-Orthodox parties. Peres failed, and Rabin hit again. He called the affair the “Dirty Trick” (literally “The Stinking Exercise”). In the popular protests that followed, the fourth slogan appeared: “Mush’hatim, nim’astem!” (roughly “corrupt people, we’re fed up with you!”). Rabin used it as the Labor slogan for the 1992 election, which he won. It was obvious that he included Peres in the culprits at whom the slogan was aimed.
Rabin and Peres
Aryeh Deri and Ovadia Yosef
The Unbearable Stench of the Dirty Trick
At the beginning of March 1990, Peres drafted a secret agreement with Aryeh Deri from the Haredi-Mizrahi Shas party to support the dissolution of the government. Subsequently Peres issued a motion of no confidence against the government, and Shamir fired Peres. On March 15, the government was dissolved by a vote of 60 to 55; it was the first time in Israeli history that a government lost a confidence vote. Shas—the partner to the conspiracy to remove Shamir—oddly abstained in the vote; this was the first sign something went wrong in the plan. Agudat Yisrael—the second Haredi party involved in the Dirty Trick—supported the vote. In the aftermath, President Chaim Herzog chose Peres to form the new government; however, Peres found it difficult to sign an agreement. The most humiliating issue was that potential partners requested from him cash-securities in order to secure the political agreement. Nobody trusted Peres. Rabbi Ovadia Yosef—Shas mentor—refused to allow its party members to join such a government. Rabbi Elazar Shach, the spiritual leader of a third Haredi party called “Degel HaTorah” called not to tolerate a coalition with the secular “eaters of hares and swine.”
The new government was to be approved on April 11. In the closest thing to a public execution in the Israeli political life, Peres lost the vote at the Knesset after two members of his proposed coalition disappeared without explanations. Later it was discovered that Eliezer Mizrahi and Avraham Verdiger, both from Agudat Yisrael, were absent due to Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson’s ruling not to support any concession of an Israeli territory. Following a long saga, Shamir presented a new government on June 11. Peres had proved truth his “indefatigable conspirator” image.
Twenty-two years later the saga is still alive. Two of the Dirty Trick Affair leaders are running in the upcoming elections after a long absence from political life. Aryeh Deri from Shas—who had closed the deal with Peres without the approval of Rabbi Yosef—returned to the party’s leadership. Eliezer Mizrahi—one of the disappeared Knesset members during the vote—announced on November 8 that he is running again; he is conducting negotiations with various parties of the extreme right. Following the elections, Peres may get an almost daily unpleasant reminder of his own questionability. Over the years, participants of the Dirty Trick said in interviews that nothing was evil because it was a legal political move. There are no doubts on the legality; however, it is considered illegitimate because Peres conspired against the government of which he was a senior member. As said, he proved being an “indefatigable conspirator;” after that he served as Prime Minister for a short period after Rabin’s assassination but his political career was over.
Dirty Tricks | Israel’s Only Truth
Dirty Trick 2012
This long introduction was essential. It shows an intrinsic pattern of the Israeli society and its political echelons. Dirty Tricks are the norm there, regardless specific party affiliations. Given the dramatic characteristics of the Dirty Trick, one would expect from all political players to study the case and avoid similar errors. Netanyahu obviously learned its details because he replicated them in 2012. However, instead of acting against his own government, he acted against the American one by purposely intervening in the 2012 elections. I analyzed in Obama’s Victory Shocks Israel how Netanyahu openly supported Romeny in a variety of ways. This was an unusual intervention in another country’s elections, especially considering that the USA is Israel’s main ally. Netanyahu may win the upcoming elections, but he has publicly lost his own version of the Dirty Trick and may become a serious competitor for the position of president, the Siberia of Israeli politics. Should Obama’s Administration consider Israel a hostile country?
Emphasizing the wild reaction of the Hebrew media and Israel’s upper echelon of politicians to Obama’s victory, Mossad opened on the same day a recruiting campaign over the internet. Its ads appeared next to pictures illustrating the victory, creating an eerie image. Is Mossad about to gear up sinister old plans for a presidential assassination? Beginning this article in such a fashion is justifiable due to the violent reactions voiced in Israel. One of the softest belonged to Yedioth Aharonot—Israel’s largest newspaper—which read “An Ugly Victory.” The most quoted reaction belonged to Likud Knesset Member Danny Danon, who said “the State of Israel will not surrender to Obama. We have no one to rely on but ourselves.”
Netanyahu – Obama
Mossad Recruiting Ad
This was the unsuccesful end of Netanyahu’s open campaign for Republican candidate Mitt Romney. The support included a well-advertised visit to Jerusalem, supporting articles in the Israeli and Jewish media, the disclosure of their old personal friendship which dates back to 1976 (see Romney, Obama, and the Israeli Vote), and the inclusion of Netanyahu in Romney’s adds. Moreover, the main financial supporter of Netanyahu is Sheldon Adelson, an American Jew who is among America’s richest men, his businesses are centered on the Chinese gambling industry. He openly endorsed Romney and contributed at least $40 million to his presidential elections campaign. This unusual intervention in other country’s elections was aimed at placing in the White House a president that will be more receptive to Israel’s plans to attack Iran (see Romney’s Key in Israeli Attack on Iran). On August 30, 2012, the International Atomic Energy Agency published a report on the nuclear program of Iran. The report claims that Iran is speeding up its uranium enrichment program, having placed more than three quarters of the centrifuges it needs for completing it in a practically impenetrable underground installation, beneath a mountain outside Qum. This means that Iran is close to crossing what Israel had defined as its red line: the capability to produce nuclear weapons in a safe location. With Obama in the White House, Israel’s belligerency is likely to be blocked.
Netanyahu’s campaign was more successful at home. Israeli Channel 2 performed a poll just before the elections in the USA; 50% of all Israelis backed Romney, versus 26% for Obama. A similar poll conducted by the ultra-Orthodox Channel 10 showed that 50% of secular Jews favored Obama, and 50% Romney; however, religious Jews favored Romney, giving him 85% of their voices. Unluckily for Romney, neither group could vote in the USA.
Mossad Recruiting Ad | “Anger in the USA on Rabbis who supported Obama”
Panic in Jerusalem
The reason why abovementioned Danny Danon became the main politician quoted on the issue despite his relative obscurity was that Netanyahu panicked after the first reactions were published. Interior Minister Eli Yishai, Chairman of Shas Party, said “This is probably not a very good morning for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.” The reason for this statement is clear; if until now the relations between Netanyahu and Obama were not particularly friendly, from now onwards, Netanyahu can count on open hostility. Netanyahu was fast to react, ordering all of his party’s ministers and Knesset members to avoid commenting on Obama’s re-election without coordinating their statements with the Prime Minister’s Bureau. “Don’t talk about Obama,” Netanyahu was quoted by local media.
In parallel, a witch hunt begun among American Jewry. the picture above was taken from the settler Channel 7. It shows the abovementioned Mossad ad next to the main reaction of the channel to the elections. The headline reads “Anger in the USA on Rabbis who supported Obama.” The article brings an analysis of David Badin (English spelling may vary), director of a news agency and of a political research center active in Boston and Jerusalem. He explains how his organizations approached hundreds of rabbis all over the US, trying to convince them to endorse Romney and to “teach how much Obama is dangerous to Israel, this would have change the picture, and Romney would have won.” He claims that the rabbis could have changed the situation in several key states. He ends his analysis claiming that if these American Jews “put tfilin (while praying), pray three times a day (in weekdays), but vote Obama, there are serious questions on their ways.” He continues “there was here a president who made terrible things. He put anti-Semites in senior positions. He supported Islam… All this must force us to consider the relations between religious-Jews in Israel and America, and why there is such a disconnection between them.” This is the closest thing to a formal statement of the settlers on their position. It is unlikely they will find any sympathy in Obama’s next term.
Netanyahu is under serious political pressure, due to the upcoming elections on January 22, 2013. He is facing serious social protests at home and needs a war to distract the electorate. It always works. A war with Iran is not possible right now. Yet, Obama’s victory may have provided him with a poorman’s war. Danny Danon’s statement opening this article was not random, and probably was coordinated with Netanyahu. From now until the elections Netanyahu will claim that the USA has become unfriendly and thus the people must unify and brace themselves for hard times. A words’ war with America is almost as good as one with Iran.
A man went unto Pharaoh, and say unto him, “Thus saith the Lord, Let my people go, that they may serve me.” He was rep
eating the words Moses had said do many years before while warning Pharaoh of the plagues. Yet, the situation was the inverse. Not for the people; they suffered now as harsh restrictions on their freedom as in Ancient Egypt. The different was in the source of the plagues. In Biblical times, they had been sent by God; nowadays, the uncrowned pharaoh was their source. Most of his ingenious plagues would have been unthinkable in ancient times. In its obsession to control, evil knew no boundaries.
Methodically, the man presented the plagues’ shortlist.
“Let my people go,” the man repeated and added “because people have the right to eat cottage cheese without going broke.” This was an unconvincing beginning. Cottage was a staple food there; thus, he got pharaoh’s attention immediately. Encouraged, the man continued.
“Let my people go,” the man repeated and added “because people have the right to be governed by a fair, clear, and properly disclosed law system.” The Speaker of the Knesset had confirmed that the Israeli government acted according to secret protocols, never allowed by law. Years before, it had been made public that Israel routinely performed illegal medical experiments on its population without the latter being warned. Moreover, the Israeli government routinely violated the rule of law, by recognizing its official precognition capabilities. In contradiction to the Criminal Law, which formally defined the country’s legal system, these officials could act on their feeling that an individual was to commit a crime.
Plagues of Israel
“Let my people go,” the man repeated and added “because people have the right to purchase a house without paying an enslaving mortgage for the rest of their lives.
“Let my people go,” the man repeated and added “because people deserve to live without being threatened with imminent wars. Governments ruling by fear, are unrighteous.”
“Let my people go,” the man repeated and added “because people have the right to choose their religion and spouses in complete freedom.”
“Let my people go,” the man repeated and added “because people deserve a system of justice which does not favor the rich.” Shortly before, Israel had deleted $360 million debt from one of its richest citizens, on the grounds of his control of the local energy market.
“Let my people go,” the man repeated and added “because people deserve the security of knowing that they are not surrounded by provocateurs of the secret police.” Years before, it had been proven in the Israeli court that the assassin of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin had been provoked by a secret police agent. Inexplicably, the latter was sent free by the court. Without stopping to breathe, the man continued:
“Let my people go,” the man repeated and added “because people deserve an honest leadership, one which is not busy accusing others of crimes it also commits. You accuse Nazi Germany of atrocities; yet, you defended Jewish Mr. Morel until his death in 2007. He had left Poland in 1994, when he became an Israeli citizen. That was the result of inquiries that began for was his war crimes during WWII and right after it. His crimes were backed by over a hundred witnesses, including 58 former inmates; compare that with the very questionable evidences–possibly forgeries–and no witnesses in the case of John Demjanjuk. The main event refers to the period in which he was commander of the Zgoda camp in Poland, between March and November 1945. Between 1500 and 2000 inmates were tortured to death. It seems Morel took special joy in the perpetration of these murders. Justice cannot be relative.”
“Hey! These are not ten plagues. I declare your argument invalid for failing to meet Biblical standards,” Pharaoh summarized smugly. Rising his impressive voice, he called his Minister of Defense. He urgently needed a war to silence this fool.
Fifth Plague of Egypt by J. M. W. Turner, 1800 | it depicts the Seventh Plague – Hail and Fire | at the Indianapolis Museum of Art
Standing up to evil, the man continued. “All these are bad and terrible. Yet, pharaoh could repent, correct the situation and be forgiven. Yet, in your ungodly kingdom, one disturbing topic can’t be forgiven. Instead of sacrificing yourselves for the sake of your sons, you sacrifice your sons for the sake of your profits.” Pharaoh Netanyahu jumped to attention.
“I will mention only two examples, but innumerable cases exist,” the man said and continued “In 2006, Israel was defeated in Lebanon. The army commander back then was Dan Halutz. In the morning of the Israeli attack, he gave the order and then he found time to contact his broker and sell his stocks in the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange. Then, you, Pharaoh Netanyahu, transformed the affair of bringing your captive son—Gilad Shalit—into a business. You let him suffer for years after the negotiations had ended for political profit considerations. You are not better than General Halutz. A key event in your history is the Binding of Isaac (Genesis 22:1-24) in which Abraham is requested by God to sacrifice his son Isaac. After Abraham’s Faith is successfully tested, an angel of God stops the event before Isaac is sacrificed. Somehow, even this simple event is twisted by the Jews. Based on this, the sacrificing of the young is defined by you as a righteous event. It has become a role-model for Jews along history. Is this a true teaching? Even if you don’t know what’s going on in the Middle East, you can correctly judge a violent event there. Who is right: a nicely dressed general explaining his crimes on television or his victims? Jesus said: (John 10:11) I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. The general didn’t die for his sheep: he sent others to die in order for him to survive. You are a bad shepherd, misinterpreting the Bible and abusing innocents for your own convenience and profit.” The man ended his speech when Netanyahu raised in his seat in clear protest.
Pharaoh was smiling; his smile deformed that old scar on his fat lip, creating a grotesque image. “Bring here the torturer,” he commanded. Appearing out of nowhere, guards seized the man. “Let my people go,” the man repeated before being strangled.
After last week’s Obama-Romney love-fest for Israel, the Arabs have been slowly deciding which of the two men would be best for the Middle East. It looks like Barack Obama is their man; but the problem – as always – is the sad, pathetic and outrageously obvious fact that it doesn’t make the slightest bit of difference.
George Bush invaded Iraq after giving Ariel Sharon permission to go on colonising the occupied West Bank. Obama got out of Iraq, increased drone strikes on the Pakistan-Afghan border and then behaved like a dog when Benjamin Netanyahu told him there would be no discussion about Israeli withdrawal to 1967 borders. Instead of saying, “Oh yes there will”, like a strong and independent president, Obama sat cowed in his White House seat as the Israeli prime minister effectively told him that UN Security Council resolution 242 – the very basis of the non-existent “peace process” – was a non-starter.
Since then, of course, Mitt Romney, who seems to have as much understanding of the Middle East as the Texas preacher who burned a Koran, has said the Palestinians “have no interest whatsoever in establishing peace” and has still not satisfactorily explained why, back in 2005 as governor of Massachusetts, he appeared rather keen on wire-tapping mosques. So good luck to the Arabs.
The truth, however, is that the next president is not going to have the freedom to decide his policy on the Middle East. The old love affair with Israel will continue – unless Israel attacks Iran and drags America into another Middle East war – but for the first time in American history, a successful presidential candidate is going to have to deal with a new Arab world; indeed, a new Muslim world.
The critical point is that the Arab Awakening (please let’s forget the “Spring” bit) represents a people calling for dignity. It includes non-Arab Muslims as well – what else was the mini-green revolution after the last Iranian elections? – and it means that the millions who live in the part of the world we still like to call the Middle East – it doesn’t feel very “middle” when you live there – now intend to make their own decisions, based on their wishes, not on those of their former satrap presidents and – in turn – their masters in Washington. La Clinton still seems not to have grasped this. Maybe Obama does. Romney? I bet he couldn’t draw a map of the nations in the area, except for one, of course.
Contrary to the Western belief that the Arabs are all struggling for “democracy”, the battle and the tragedy of the Middle East today – whether in the aftermath of the “soft” revolution in Tunisia or the butchery of Syria – is about that word dignity, about the right as a human being to say what you like about whomever you want and not to let a despot take personal ownership of a whole country (as long as he has the permission of the United States) and treat it as his private property.
Yes, revolutions are messy. The Egyptian revolution didn’t go quite the way we thought it would. Libya can easily break apart. Syria is a cataclysm. But the Arab people are speaking out at last and they will now ensure that their presidents and prime ministers abide by their wishes, not by the word of Washington or Moscow. Contrary to the Romney-style belief that there is a lack of civilisational values among the Arabs – viz his extraordinary remarks on Israel’s civilisation – the people of the Middle East are demonstrating quite the opposite. It is a slow business: every reader of this article will be dead of old age before the Arab “revolution” is complete.
But the days when US presidents instruct the potentates of the Middle East what to say and do are coming to an end. It will be a long time before the Saudi regime crumbles, along with all the other gas stations in the Gulf. And I suppose it must be said that the tragedy of the Palestinians probably lies at the heart of the Arab Awakening.
Alas, the Palestinians are the only ones not to benefit from the Arab revolutions. There is not enough land left for them to have a state. This is a fact beyond peradventure (as Enoch Powell used to say). Anyone doubting these words should book a flight to Israel and take a look at the West Bank. There is no place left for Palestine; this is the real tragedy that US presidents must face in the coming years.
A slightly edited version of this article, with pictures, captions and additional commenary by Lasha Darkmoon
“If everyone who claims to be a Holocaust survivor actually is one,who did Hitler kill?” — Norman Finkelstein’s mother, quoted in Norman Finkelstein’s The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering.
The energy crisis is causing worry. However, Iran, which possesses huge reserves of oil and gas, wishes to exploit them better, with our help, and sell us the products, a procedure that would lead to a marked softening of worldwide petrol, diesel, fuel oil and gas prices. A good many nations have an eye on this great potential wealth and would be apt to respond favorably to Tehran’s business proposals. But the United States has decreed the boycott of Iran and, up to now, the world’s policeman has generally been obeyed.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can make all the proposals he likes: he still finds himself considered a criminal. His request for a collaboration that would let him fully re-equip the country’s drilling, production and processing operations is refused. He goes so far as to suggest that countries using the single European currency pay in euros and no longer in dollars, but to no avail. People turn their back to him. Some threaten him. Even the Pope refuses to receive him.
In many countries, President Ahmadinejad’s embassies and diplomatic staff are deprived of contact with the local authorities and foreign delegations; they have ended up with pariah status.
One may well ask oneself where such radical behavior towards the Iranians ever originated and why the international community acts so obviously against its own economic interests.
Three grounds are usually brought up to explain this policy of boycott and open hostility toward Iran:
1) The Iranian president is perhaps trying to arm his country with nuclear weapons.
2) It seems he wants to exterminate the Jews in Israel.
3) He holds the extermination of the European Jews during the Second World War to be a myth.
The first two grounds do not make much sense; only the third is serious and, for that reason, instructive.
In reply to the first ground, it’s fitting to observe that if Ahmadinejad’s accusers possessed the slightest evidence that Iran was trying to acquire nuclear weapons, such evidence would long since have been brandished before the world; however, up to now, they have supplied no real evidence.
In any case, if Iran had a nuclear bomb at her disposal, she could not launch it towards a geographic zone populated by as many Palestinians as Jews, since her bomb would kill or maim both populations without distinction.
The second bone of contention against Iran — that it seeks the extermination of the Jews in Israel — is without foundation. It rests on the absurd manipulation of a text. Ahmadinejad has had, and continues to have ascribed to him, an incendiary statement according to which the Jewish State is to be “wiped off the map”, words taken to mean the extermination of the Jews in Israel.
Actually, Ahadminejad had merely repeated (in 2005) Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1979 declaration that “the regime occupying Jerusalem” would one day “vanish from the page of time”. This was the repetition of someone else’s prediction, not a threat.
Ahmadinejad took care to spell out his phrase by specifying that, if all the inhabitants of the land of Palestine – Moslems, Jews and Christians – had the right one day to vote freely and opt for a regime of their choice, the Zionist regime would disappear from Palestine just as, for example, the Communist regime disappeared from Russia. The Western media, as a whole, have reported neither the exact wording nor the explanation.
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD’S EXACT WORDS:“Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad.” — “The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time“.
A literal word-for-word translation of the Farsi: Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).
Note that the word MAP (nagsheh in Farsi) occurs nowhere in Ahmadinejad’s speech; nor do the words ISRAEL or WIPE OUT. The English translation “I want to wipe Israel off the map” is therefore much more than a mischievous mistranslation. It is a complete fabrication. [LD]
The third ground is the true one: if the Iranian president causes so much fear, it’s owing to his revisionism. He has wielded the sole weapon that can deeply worry the Jewish State and its ally, the United States.
He possesses what I’ve called the poor man’s atomic bomb. In the findings of historical revisionism, he effectively holds a “weapon of mass destruction” that would kill no one but could neutralize Israel’s number one political weapon: the Great Lie of the alleged Nazi gas chambers and the alleged genocide of Europe’s Jews.
Raised in the religion of “the Holocaust”, the peoples of North America and Europe generally believe in this Great Lie and see Ahmadinejad as a heretic. Thus they dare not defend any policy of rapprochement with Iran, or call for a lifting of the boycott, although therein lies the only chance of seeing their energy costs decrease. Doubtless some of these peoples’ leaders desire an understanding with Iran, but they back away at the prospect of being criticized as accomplices of the new Satan, of the “denier”, the “negationist” who “kills the Jews once again by denying their death”.
The news of the international “Holocaust” conference in Tehran (December 11th—12th 2006) rang out like a warning shot. By no means reserved to revisionists, that conference was open to all. Confrontation of opposing views was allowed, and it took place. The rout of the anti-revisionists was dramatic. And President Ahmadinejad, already fully apprised of revisionist argumentation, was thus able to restate that “the Holocaust” was a myth.
Bush, Blair, Chirac, who know nothing of revisionism, responded by making a terrible fuss. As for the Israelis, they are aware of the Jewish authors’ utter inability to answer revisionist arguments on the scientific level; they now uphold their Great Lie only with Elie Wiesel-style fake testimony or cinematic guff in the manner of Claude Lanzmann, when they don’t resort to novels, drama or even sham museum exhibitions like those at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem or the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington.
“SOME EVENTS DO TAKE PLACE BUT ARE NOT TRUE; OTHERS ARE, ALTHOUGH THEY NEVER OCCURRED.”
— Elie Wiesel, the world’s most famous Holocaust survivor and — some would claim — the world’s most widely acclaimed liar. “In Buchenwald they sent 10,000 persons to their deaths each day,” he lied. “I was always in the last hundred near the gate. They stopped. Why?”
Concerning Babi Yar, a place in Ukraine where the Germans executed Soviet citizens, Wiesel wrote of Jews being killed: “For month after month, the ground never stopped trembling; from time to time, geysers of blood spurted from it.” (Reporting another witness to this miraculous event).
In 2007, Wiesel stated that President Ahmadinejad of Iran had openly admitted he wanted to nuke Israel into oblivion. “When he says he wants nuclear weapons to destroy the state of Israel, I must believe him,” Wiesel said.
The late Christopher Hitchens had no time for Wiesel and was not impressed by his Nobel Peace prize or his 76 honorary doctorates. “Is there a more contemptible poseur and windbag than Elie Wiesel?” he asked rhetorically. (The Nation, February 11, 2001).
Holocaust revisionism — i.e., any doubts about the official version of the Holocaust as laid down by the Zionists and their camp followers — is illegal in many parts of the world. Questioning the magic six million figure is now a “thought crime” which can get you sent to prison for several years in the following 17 countries: Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, and Switzerland.
Here are two photos of the author of this article, Dr Robert Faurisson, after he was savagely beaten up by three Jewish fanatics for daring to question the sacred tenets of the Holocaust: namely, that 6 million Jews were killed in gas chambers on the orders of Hitler. To this day, not a single gas chamber has actually been seen by anyone. [LD]
The Zionists and their friends are getting more and more alarmed at the diffusion of revisionism over the Internet. They make many attempts, cynical or veiled, to strengthen Internet censorship but, up to today at any rate, they have not yet achieved their aims. Throughout the Western world repression of revisionism is worsening, but it’s all a waste of effort so far. The holocaustic propaganda and Shoah Business grow ever more deafening, but henceforth they tend to annoy or tire people.
The Zionists have therefore seized the occasion to draw up a bill in the Knesset that would let the State of Israel demand that any revisionist, wherever in the world he might be, be delivered to its own courts!
When there’s no proof to show, the cudgel is used.
Herman Rosenblatt and his wife Roma, smirking contentedly after having conned the world into accepting their fake Holocaust memoir Angel at the Fence. TV celeb Oprah Winfrey was taken in by their touching concentration camp romance and gushed breathlessly, “This is the single greatest love story we’ve ever told on the air!” Asked why he had lied, Mr Rosenblatt explained, “I wanted to bring happiness to people.” Despite the book being a proven fake, a $25 million blockbuster movie is now being made by Jewish producer Harris Salomon.
Rosenblatt’s fake memoir is one in a long series of Holocaust hoaxes, some of them even more flamboyantly absurd. e.g., the case of Misha the Wolf Girl who was raised by wolves and fed on raw meat like a wolf cub — a story that netted her over $20 million and was also made into a movie. Nor are matters made any better when we learn that Holocaust scams are frequent, with thousands of fraudulent claims being made every year by bogus “survivors”, costing Germany and other countries tens of millions of dollars. In one case alone, Germany was cheated out of $42 million. All this blatant dishonesty by unscrupulous Jews — to quote a Jewish friend of mine — “only brings the Holocaust into disrepute and gives ammunition to the Holocaust deniers.”
This, then, is the “secret weapon” against Israel that Iran wields so effectively — a weapon far deadlier than all of Israel’s 200-300 nuclear warheads: Holocaust truth. If the truth about the Holocaust should ever turn out to be what historical revisionists and millions of other increasingly skeptical people think it is — a spectacular hoax to prop up Zionism and give the Jewish state a semblance of legitimacy — Israel’s days are numbered.
It is for this reason that Israel is perhaps so desperate to destroy Iran: to silence it before the truth gets out. (LD)