March 2, 2008

Neo-lefties supporting World War Three

The jewish lobby in britain has been intimidating anyone in the country who criticizes, let alone condemns, the illegal state in palestine and its racist warmongering policies. The same is true in america as it is in the rest of the western world. The greater the social status, media prominence, or political position, of those criticizing the jewish apartheid state, the greater the jewish intimidation perpetrated against them.

A noticeable feature of british politics is the political support that jewish left wingers give to the jewish lobby even though it is run by jews on the extreme right of the political spectrum. Jewish left-wingers are closer politically to their extreme, right wing, jewish counterparts than they are to non-jewish lefties just as members of ‘labour friends of israel’ are closer to their colleagues in ‘conservative friends of israel’ and ‘european friends of israel’ than they are to members of their own party. The converse is also true: those in ‘conservative friends of israel’ are closer to their colleagues in ‘labour friends of israel’ than they are to non-jewish conservatives. This ethnic identification between left and right is far from being historically unique given that in america many jewish neocons originated on the extreme left. In america the neo-cons are a group of primarily jewish, extreme right wing, warmongering islamophobics. Their direct counterparts are the neo-lefties, the neo-libs, and the neo-greenies. The same is true in britain and is probably true in the rest of the western world.

In britain, the allegation of a common cause between left and right might seem preposterous. After all, neo-lefties claim to oppose jewish racism, the jews-only state in palestine, and jewish warmongering. However, they defend their beloved jewish apartheid state in two main ways.

Firstly, by refusing to even debate the evidence that america’s invasions of afghanistan and iraq, and its military threats against iran, were ‘wars for the jews’. They insist these invasions were ‘wars for oil’ to prevent the zionist state and its jewish lobby allies from being blamed for the political, economic, and military, disasters that have befallen britain and america as a result of these invasions. And yet it is nonsense to believe these invasions had anything to do with oil. Western oil companies did not campaign for these invasions and, as they well knew, they have singularly failed to gain any control over these countries’ oil resources. Just how politically insane would oil company executives have to be to demand a war against iran, to steal its oil, after the chaos that has ensued from the invasions of afghanistan and iraq?

Secondly, neo-lefties are blaming america’s growing economic crises on arab oil producers instead of america’s ruling jewish elite which pushed america into proxy zionist invasions of afghanistan and iraq.

In britain, neo-lefties claim they are opposed to jewish racism but in practice surreptitiously defend it. They start off by insisting they have the right to determine who should or should not be allowed to criticize the apartheid state in palestine and its allies in jewish lobbies around the world. They argue it would be wrong to give extreme right wing racists a platform to join in criticisms/protests against the zionist state. Whilst this argument might initially seem to have some merit, on closer inspection it is entirely bogus. Firstly, it is a red-herring since britain’s biggest right wing party is reportedly being funded by jews and has now adopted a pro-jewish stance, just like britain’s mainstream political parties. Secondly, once the neo-lefties have established some street cred for prohibiting extreme right wingers from the debate about the jews-only state, they then try to deny radicals a political platform by smearing them as extreme right wingers. Neo-lefties smear radicals by arguing that they are talking to extreme right wingers or that they are allowing their articles to be posted on extreme right wing websites or that if they support anti-immigration policies then they must in reality be extreme right wingers. Basically if any radical goes within a hundred miles of an extreme right winger, neo-lefties believe this is sufficient grounds for smearing them as right wingers and denying them a political platform. Some british neo-lefties are so determined to protect their beloved jews-only state from criticisms they are now hinting at blackmailing opponents of jewish racism with allegations of child abuse.

The assumption that neo-lefties are making here in denying the extreme right a political platform is that right wing parties/individuals are the most politically dangerous group in britain. This is no longer true. Since the turn of the millenia, the most dangerous group of extreme right wingers in britain is the jewish lobby. The jewish lobby in britain supported the invasions of afghanistan and iraq. It supported the jews’ attack on lebanon in 2006 in which they deliberately attempted to drive hundreds of thousands of civilians out of southern lebanon. Jonathan sacks, one of the leaders of the jewish lobby, was proud of the jews’ grossly disproportionate attacks on lebanese civilians. "Britain's chief rabbi, Sir Jonathan Sacks, for telling a pro-Israeli rally in London last year: "Israel, you make us proud."" (Julian Borger ‘Prominent Jews call for open debate on Israel’,,2005881,00.html February 5, 2007). The british jewish lobby supported the jews’ attack on syria. It supports the jews’ imprisonment of palestinians in the gaza concentration camp and their efforts to starve 1,5 million men, women and children, to death. It supports an illegal and pre-emptive attack on iran. But not even this is enough blood and destruction. The british jewish lobby supports a third world war against the entire moslem world. There is no other sector of society that is demanding world war three than the jewish lobby.

There are of course all shades of opinion on the right of british politics as there are on the left. But, on the whole, there are few british right wingers who have anything like the same record of serial warmongering as britain’s jewish lobby. There is no other group of people in britain who are as extreme as the jewish lobby which is demanding a third world war that will cause death, destruction and starvation to hundreds of millions of people around the world. The neo-lefties are demonizing british right wingers as a terrifying political bogey firstly, because this enables them to smear radicals as extremists in order to deny them a platform to condemn the apartheid state. And, secondly, because this provides a cloak of respectability to their warmongering colleagues in the jewish lobby. If the neo-lefties can persuade people that britain’s right wingers are the country’s biggest political danger this condones the extreme right wing warmongering exterminism of the country’s jewish lobby.

It has to be suggested that there is something obscene about britain’s neo-lefties picketing political radicals to stop them from criticizing the jews-only state whilst doing nothing to protest about members of the jewish lobby who regularly appear in britain’s mainstream media pumping out vile examples of islamophobia. Right wing jewish racism is rampant in britain’s mainstream media and yet the neo-lefties spend their time picketing radicals seeking to protest about such racism and its privileged position in the british media.

In britain, neo-lefties pretend they’re opposed to the racism of the jews-only state in palestine and yet they organize themselves in the same way as the apartheid state. Firstly, just like the jews-only state, they form themselves into jews-only organizations: presumably in order to keep their racially pure political views from being contaminated by non-jews. This separatist tendency amongst left wing jews is a mirror image of the separatist and supremacist tendency of the jews-only state in palestine. The following is a cursory list of jews-only peace organizations.

Jews Against the Occupation.
Jewish Peace Alliance for Justice and Peace.
Jewish Voice for Peace.
Rabbis for Human Rights
Jewish Peace Fellowship
Jews Against Zionism
Jewish Socialists Group
Jews for a Just Peace
Jewish Voices Against the Occupation.
Jews for Justice for Palestinians
Jews Against Zionism.
Jewish Committee on the Middle East.
Jews for Peace in Palestine and Israel.
Jews for Justice for Palestinians.

Secondly, having set up their racist jews-only peace organizations, they start acting like jewish police manning roadblocks to check on palestinians’ identity cards to determine who should be allowed to carry on with their journey and who should be kept waiting in the burning sun for hours on end. The neo-lefties, in their jews-only organizations, set themselves up as a political police force manning political roadblocks to ensure only those with the correct political credentials should be given a platform to protest about the jews-only state. In reality they deny a platform to anyone else but themselves.

The neo-lefties are clearly working closely with their neo-con, neo-lib, and neo-greenie, allies to deny all sections of society any political platform from which they might condemn the jews-only state and jewish racism. The role of the neo-lefties is to erect roadblocks against all those on the fringes of society whilst the role of their wealthier, and more politically powerful, neocon colleagues do the same against the more respectable members of society who might dare to condemn jewish racism. Between them they try to stop any anti-zionist from appearing in public thereby preventing any challenge to the jewish lobby’s use of the mainstream media to pour out their racist demands for world war three.

The jewish lobby is britain’s most extreme right wing, traitorous, and anti-british, organization. It bribed and pressured the blair regime into supporting the invasions of afghanistan and iraq which have resulted in britain suffering economic, political, and military, disasters. And now the jewish lobby not only wants britain to attack iran but to start world war three. World war three would be a calamity for this country in terms of the loss of lives, treasure, and political reputation.

If neo-lefties were really concerned with condemning jewish racism in palestine, and in jewish lobbies around the world, they would get on with the job of building support against the jews-only state not undermining the support given to palestinians demanding liberation from their jewish oppressors.

There are also plenty of historical examples of neo-lefties defending jewish racism. During the anti-apartheid campaigns of the 1970s neo-lefties were responsible for ensuring that these campaigns remained focussed exclusively on the south african apartheid system rather than also highlighting the jewish apartheid system. One of the most remarkable consequences of the british anti-apartheid movement’s success in helping to vanquish the south african apartheid system was that it disappeared from the political scene. It might have been thought that after this huge political success the movement would then go on to challenge the jewish apartheid state in palestine. But this did not happen. On the contrary, the movement disintegrated because the neo-lefties in the movement had no intention of allowing it to become a political platform for criticisms of the jews-only state. The political decline of peter hain symbolizes the political degeneracy of the british anti-apartheid movement. In the 1970s, he more than any other individual popularized the campaign against apartheid in south africa but after apartheid had been abolished he carved out a career for himself in the labour party. This recently culminated in him accepting a £5,000 donation from one of the leaders of britain’s jewish lobby signifying that his political views were now acceptable to the jews-only state in palestine!

Neo-lefties in britain and america are as much part of their country’s jewish lobbies as their right wing counterparts. One of america’s most important neo-lefties, stephen zunes has recently been exposed for his links to the neo-cons. "Although he boasts of having impeccable progressive and anti-imperialist credentials, Zunes chairs the board of academic advisors for the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict (the ICNC), a Wall Street-connected organization that promotes nonviolent activism in the service of destabilizing foreign governments, the same ones the U.S. State Department (and Zunes) likes to discredit by calling them dictatorships. The ICNC’s founding chair is New York investment banker Peter Ackerman, who is also a member of the board of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), an organization dominated by directors of major U.S. corporations, corporate lawyers and CEOs. The CFR brings together executives, government and military officials and scholars to provide policy advice to the U.S. State Department. Its key members circulate between the council, corporate board appointments and State Department positions. The CFR has never been particularly concerned about promoting peace, freedom and democracy, but has had a single-minded focus on promoting the overseas profit-making interests of U.S. corporations and investors." (Stephen Gowans ‘Stephen Zunes and the Struggle for Overseas Profits’ February 18, 2008).

In palestine, the jews are not merely oppressing palestinians they are trying to starve them into submission or death whichever comes first. Jewish elites in america, britain, and the rest of the western world, are trying to pressure the west into supporting world war three which will be even more catastrophic than the disasters the west has already suffered as a result of its invasions of afghanistan and iraq. The global political struggle of our time is not left or right but anti-zionists against zionists. In other words, those who support world war three and those who are opposed to continual zionist warmongering. Radicals have to build a political movement to stop the jews-only state in palestine and its allies, the neo-lefties, the neo-liberals, the neo-greenies, the neo-cons, in jewish lobbies around the world from pushing the west into another world war.

Comments and Responses.
From Anonymous, March 03, 2008
This is a totally brilliant article, Bob. So perceptive. Please send it out to as many alternative news sites (such as as possible, everyone should read this. It throws a lot of light for me on what has been happening to Gilad Atzmon for the last few years. As you may know he has been hounded non-stop by the JAZ group (and friends :), attempting to portray him as an anti-semitic extremist, when he is in fact a very outspoken supporter of radical solidarity with the Palestinians.

From Anonymous, March 04, 2008
Response to Anonymous: Thanks for your comments. I know nothing about the events you’ve mentioned but i’ll look up the references you’ve provided and use anything interesting in the update. I’m trying to keep my arguments about neo-lefties on a general level rather than focus on a few individuals. Neo-leftism is such a widespread phenomenon it would be good to engage with as many as possible who hold such attitudes rather than getting stuck with its most irrational defenders.

From Anonymous, March 06, 2008
Will keep an eye out for more of your writing, Bob... and on the same subject, here is a great piece about political correctness, freedom of thought, freedom of speech, and the right to equate Gaza with Auschwitz...

Response to Anonymous: Whoever you might be thank you very much indeed for this reference. It’s another superlative essay from gilad atzmon, britain’s foremost political philosopher. I’ve been reading his articles for the last four years and have never once doubted his intellectual integrity. In stark contrast, here’s the latest dose of neo-leftism.

Alan rusbridger, the guardian's editor "was also taken to task by (former Haaretz editor David) Landau over his publication's explanation of the word "shoah" in an edition last week, in reference to Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilna'i's comments that the Palestinians would be "bringing a greater shoah because we will use all our strength in every way we deem appropriate, whether in air strikes or on the ground." Landau said that he could not accept that the Guardian would choose to use a headline with the word "Holocaust." "I can't accept that the correspondent or sub-editor, or whoever was involved in the story, seriously thought that they could justify the use of the word Holocaust, with uppercase 'H,' in the headline attributed to the Israeli minister, and that with all sincerity and with no disingenuousness reflecting it as honestly meaning what the man said," Landau said. The second paragraph of the article says that the word "shoah" is almost invariably used to mean the Holocaust; Landau questioned whether that was meant to imply that the deputy minister had that in mind. The former Haaretz editor said that as someone who has been speaking Hebrew for the past 40 years, he knew that it was not always the case. Rusbridger conceded that Landau "may be right" and talked about the difficulties in news reporting and the way in which writing has changed over the years, with the Internet pulling information out of context. He also said that Israel is a "moral necessity" and reaffirmed The Guardian's position that it supports a two-state solution and is against any boycott of Israel. The two respected journalists also talked about the infamous series of articles written by a former Guardian correspondent to South Africa and Israel. In 2006, Chris McGreal published a special report comparing Israel to apartheid South Africa. Speaking on Sunday night, Rusbridger said the word "apartheid" may not have been the best term to use." (Jonny Paul 'Guardian' editor apologizes for Jenin editorial’ March 4, 2008).

Labels: , , , , , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home