The Global Handwringers over the Jewish Nazis’ Maelstrom in Gaza

The biggest single handwringer over the jewish nazis’ maelstrom over gaza, the efforts to make gaza uninhabitable and the massacre of unarmed, innocent palestinians, was john kerry who at the end of july created the impression of working assiduously to foster a peace agreement between the palestinians and what netanyahu refers to as “the one and only-jewish state”. Only this magnanimous act of compassion isn’t quite what it seems.

Firstly, and most importantly, the so called peace agreement he proffered on friday august 01, 2014 wasn’t a peace agreement at all since it allowed the jews-only state to continue with their military operations inside gaza to remove hamas’s network of tunnels. Under the peace agreement these operations were deemed to be purely defensive in nature but not surprisingly hamas couldn’t see the difference between defensive military actions and the continued carnage of palestinians. “In announcing the brief ceasefire, Kerry said its terms authorized Israeli forces to carry out “defensive” operations against tunnels. He seemed unaware of the ramifications of such an agreement, or what Israel’s attacks on tunnels actually entailed. A glimpse at Human Rights Watch’s bracing report on the Israeli army’s brutal assault on Rafah in 2004, “Razing Rafah,” which it conducted under the auspices of anti-tunnel operations, would have offered a glimpse of what was to come. (American activist Rachel Corrie was killed by an Israeli bulldozer during the 2004 attack on Rafah).” (Max Blumenthal and Allison Deger ‘Who broke the ceasefire? Obama blames Hamas against the evidence’ http://mondoweiss.net/2014/08/ceasefire-against-evidence.html August 2, 2014).[i]

Secondly, kerry wanted the negotiations to take place not in turkey or qatar but egypt. President sisi has a vehement hatred of hamas and has been pursuing the blockade of gaza with as much gusto as the racist state so any members of hamas in the palestinian delegation would have had to be concerned about being terminated by a member of egypt’s murderous military junta who’d spent too much time in their country’s prisons torturing thousands of innocent supporters of the moslem brotherhood.

Thirdly, “On July 31, 2014, Mr. Brian Wood, Head of Arms Control and Human Rights at Amnesty International, (stated) that, “It is deeply cynical for the White House to condemn the deaths and injuries of Palestinians, including children, and humanitarian workers, when it knows full well that the Israeli military responsible for such attacks are armed to the teeth with weapons and equipment bankrolled by US taxpayers.” (Quoted in Franklin Lamb ‘(A Nail in Zionism’s Coffin?’ http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/08/01/a-nail-in-zionisms-coffin/ August 1-3, 2014).

There were, however, no traces of handwringing in the american congress that voted unanimously to support the jewish maelstrom over gaza. Members of congress, funded and groomed by the jewish lobby, gave total support to what the jews-only state calls its right to defend itself. But no impartial witness to the scenes of devastation in gaza could possibly believe this was anything other than a full scale, belligerent military offensive. “Meanwhile, U.S. politicians and policymakers continue to back a brutal military campaign whose primary purpose is not to defend Israel but rather to protect its longstanding effort to colonize the West Bank.” (Stephen M. Walt ‘AIPAC Is the Only Explanation for America's Morally Bankrupt Israel Policy’ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-m-walt/aipac-americas-israel-policy_b_5607883.html?utm_hp_ref=tw July 22, 2014). However, this latest military offensive seemed to be about more than the continued colonization of the west bank. The jewish nazis claimed to be using precision guided weapons to take out specific targets such as hamas fighters, rocket launching sites, and so-called terror tunnels and yet they have also been flattening whole neighbourhoods in order to create a three mile buffer zone inside gaza. The jews-only state has in effect stolen 40% of gaza’s land area in what can only be called another act of lebensraum in the long historical process of jewish colonialism whose ultimate goal is the creation of greater israel. The jews are literally pushing gazans towards the beaches of the mediterranean.

In Britain, the conservative government, just like the jewish quislings in the american congress, stood shoulder to shoulder with benyamin netanyahu. On a recent visit to the apartheid state phillip hammond, the newly appointed foreign secretary, stood on the podia alongside netanyahu regurgitating the likudniks’ war propaganda basically indicating he would raise no objections to whatever scale of military offensive netanyahu chose to carry out in gaza. Hammond wasn’t going to ruffle the feathers of the conservative party’s jewish neocon/zionist/likudnik funders and its massed ranks of fanatical zionist supporters – virtually every single conservative member of parliament is also a member of conservative friends of the jewish apartheid state. The tory government’s line on the massacre has been “a willingness to describe the deaths of Palestinians as horrifying or appalling. They have refused, however, to describe the toll as disproportionate, and Cameron has continued to argue that Hamas is primarily responsible, saying next to nothing about the long-term situation in Gaza. Those who accompanied the prime minister to the Middle East were struck by his unequivocal support for Israel in his speech to the Knesset, promising to be with the country "every step of the way".” (Patrick Wintour ‘Lady Warsi's symbolic status may prove crucial loss for Tories’ http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/05/lady-warsi-symbolic-status-tories-resignation-gaza August 05, 2014).

Cameron envisages the jews-only state as a western style open, liberal, democratic state which deserves close political ties to the european union and nato. From this perspective there is nothing morally reprehensible about the nazi members of netanyahu’s government, the apartheid nature of the jews-only state, the zionist military occupation of the west bank, the seven year siege of gaza, nor the jews-only state’s continual theft of palestinian land. Thus the apartheid state was right to defend itself by attacking and invading gaza; it did not use disproportionate violence; it committed no war crimes; and hamas is responsible for killing its own people. There is, therefore, no reason to stop selling the weapons the jews-only state needs to slaughter innocent people and palestinians have to be stopped from submitting their claim for justice to the international criminal court.

The government’s supposed review of weapons’ sales to the racist state is just a sop to public anger over the attack on gaza which will quietly be dropped once the issue gets pushed down the political agenda. “Britain is reviewing all arms export licenses to Israel in response to the Jewish state's escalating conflict with Hamas in Gaza, a government spokeswoman said on Monday. "We are currently reviewing all export licenses to Israel to confirm that we think they are appropriate," a spokeswoman for Prime Minister David Cameron told reporters. The decision to conduct the review was taken last week, she said.” (Britain says reviewing arms exports to Israel over Gaza conflict’ http://news.yahoo.com/britain-says-reviewing-arms-exports-israel-over-gaza-113559410--business.html August 4, 2014).[ii]

The only tory member of the cabinet who resigned over the government’s obsequiousness to the apartheid state was sayeeda warsi, a senior foreign office minister dealing with the united nations. “Sayeeda Warsi, a senior minister in Britain's Foreign Office, resigned on Tuesday, accusing Prime Minister David Cameron's government of taking a "morally indefensible" approach to the conflict between Israel and Hamas. "Our approach and language during the current crisis in Gaza is morally indefensible, is not in Britain's national interest and will have a long term detrimental impact on our reputation internationally and domestically," Warsi, 43, said.” (William James and Kylie MacLellan ‘UK minister quits over 'morally indefensible' Gaza policy’ http://news.yahoo.com/uk-minister-sayeeda-warsi-says-resigns-over-government-083711423--business.html August 05, 2014).

Warsi did not resign quietly but highlighted some aspects of the conservative government’s slavish devotion to the jews-only state. “Lady Warsi revealed that senior foreign office officials and ministers were overruled by David Cameron who decided that the Government would not take a stronger line on Israel's incursion into Gaza. She suggested that senior Tory figures may have been overly influenced by pro-Israeli lobbying groups such as Conservative Friends of Israel. "What does concern me is that when you have senior officials and you have ministers within the Foreign Office saying we are in the wrong place on this policy, yet somehow that view is not being reflected. I certainly don't think the decisions were being made in the Foreign Office." She went on to say: "One of the advantages we have in the Conservative Party is that the relationships between the Israeli government and the leadership of the Conservative Party is incredibly close. People like George Osborne and Michael Gove are very, very close to the Israeli leadership. What is the point of having that relationship if you can't use it to move them to a position which is in their interest and our interest?" Asked if she believed that the amount of funding from wealthy pro-Israeli donors might have influenced the Government's stance on Gaza, she replied: "I hope that how the Conservative Party raises its funds does not have an impact in relation to its policy in Government. The national interest should never be subject to the chequebooks of anybody."” (Oliver Wright ‘Baroness Warsi turns on 'public school' Tories’ http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/baroness-warsi-turns-on-public-school-tories-9659495.html August 10, 2014).

Warsi hit back at chancellor george osborne who refused to depict the jewish slaughter of palestinians as being disproportionate and criticized her resignation for being unnecessary. “She said: "George is a very good friend of the Israeli government and therefore he, more than anybody else, should have been saying quite frankly to the Israeli government that what you are doing is not in your interest. This is probably the biggest single act of self-harm that the Israeli government has done over the last few years. What he should have been saying to the Israeli government is that it is unnecessary for you to kill innocent civilians, to displace a quarter of the Gazan population, for you to flatten schools, hospitals and power supplies and water supplies to achieve your end. Had George done that, I agree with him that it would not have been necessary for me to resign."” (Rowena Mason and Patrick Wintour ‘Warsi hits back at Osborne: 'George is a good friend of the Israeli government' http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/05/lady-warsi-osborne-israel-gaza-conflict August 05, 2014). She knows full well that george isn’t going to go into the lions’ den to tell them that meat is bad for their health.

The most explosive of warsi’s attacks on the tory government was that by disregarding the views of millions of british people cameron was going to suffer defeat at next year’s general election. In effect what she was saying was that cameron would rather lose at the next general election than change its servile support for the racist state. Support for the racist state was more important than the views of a substantial minority of the british electorate. However, whilst the cameron government seemed incapable of appreciating the domestic political consequences of its indifference over the devastation of gaza, boris johnson could see the writing on the wall for his party. After years of speculation about his political ambitions he suddenly announced his decision to try and stand for parliament because he wanted to position himself as a leadership candidate after cameron’s electoral defeat at the next general election. If the tory government was being held hostage by its neocon funders then the party had to be rescued by a more populist leader who would take into account the views of the wider british public.

Whilst the tory government followed the lead of the american congress in giving wholehearted support to the jews-only state, many other mainstream british politicians followed in kerry’s wake and have been throwing their arms in the air in mock despair over the decimation of gaza whilst upholding the racist state’s transparent right to protect itself.

Ed miliband criticized cameron’s indifference to the jewish maelstrom inflicted on gaza. “He needs to break his silence and say that Israel’s actions have been unjustified and indefensible. He needs to show that he can be even-handed and, without fear or favour, argue for the long-term solution that we need to this tragic conflict.”” (Patrick Wintour and Rowena Mason ‘Lady Warsi resigns over UK’s ‘morally reprehensible’ stance on Gaza’ http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/05/lady-warsi-resigns-government-gaza-stance August 05, 2014). Miliband then proceeded to demonstrate what he meant by being “even-handed and, without fear or favour.” "David Cameron … is right to say that Hamas is an appalling, terrorist organisation. Its wholly unjustified rocket attacks on Israeli citizens, as well as the building of tunnels for terrorist purposes, show the organisation's murderous intent and practice towards Israel and its citizens.” (Mark Leftly ‘Israel-Gaza conflict: David Cameron is 'in the wrong' over Gaza, says Ed Miliband’ http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/israelgaza-conflict-david-cameron-is-in-the-wrong-over-gaza-says-ed-miliband-9644670.html August 03, 2014). Miliband would never say the jews-only state is a terrorist state and that its serial massacres of palestinians over the last 55 years shows a murderous intent and practice towards palestine and its citizens.

In april 2014 miliband visited the apartheid state, met some of its leading jewish nazis and paid a visit to sderot in the front line of hamas’s rocket fire. Sderot used to be a palestinian village before jewish ethnic cleansers slaughtered many of the villagers and drove out the rest. They then completely rebuilt the village in their own likeness eradicating all traces of palestinian life. His visit to sderot was presented to an ignorant british public as an act of sympathy for its vulnerable inhabitants in order to win the jewish vote in britain but, to those who knew the history of jewish colonization of palestine, he was in effect legitimizing the zionists’ policy of ethnic cleansing. This expression of his solidarity with jewish nazism was fortunate because when, a few months later, the apartheid state started massacring palestinians in gaza, like shooting fish in a barrel, he didn’t have to reiterate his support for the jews-only state amongst media images of hundreds of palestinian corpses – denounced as “telegenically dead” by the ever humane benjamin netanyahu.[iii] Needless to say the labour leader’s visit to the jews-only state didn’t include a visit to gaza. “Miliband visited Sderot to meet people who are subject to rocket attacks from Gaza. Notice that several tweets ask why Miliband isn’t visiting people under occupation in Gaza.” (Philip Weiss ‘For Miliband, the road to 10 Downing Street runs through Jerusalem and Sderot’ http://mondoweiss.net/2014/04/miliband-through-jerusalem.html April 11, 2014). Thus the labour leader publicly opposes jewish settlements whilst standing in solidarity with them, “I do believe the growth in settlements is a serious issue for the peace process and needs to be addressed,” he said, adding that they were illegal under international law.” (Ed Miliband quoted in Philip Weiss ‘For Miliband, the road to 10 Downing Street runs through Jerusalem and Sderot’ http://mondoweiss.net/2014/04/miliband-through-jerusalem.html April 11, 2014).

Miliband is also opposed to a boycott of the racist state. “I think the boycotts of Israel are totally wrong," he said. "We should have no tolerance for boycotts. I would say that to any trade union leaders.” (Quoted in JTA ‘British Labor leader Miliband pledges to oppose Israel boycott’ http://www.jta.org/news/article/2013/03/08/3121551/british-labour-leader-miliband-pleadges-to-oppose-israel-boycott March 8, 2013). The author of this jta article describes miliband as, “the leader of the British opposition, who is Jewish ,,,” Does this mean the jta believes miliband is jewish rather than british seemingly implying he is loyal to the jews-only state rather than to britain? Miliband was born and raised in this country and yet the jta deems him to be jewish not british, let alone a british jew. Perhaps the jta believes his jewishness manifests itself in his views over the jewish colonization of palestine?

Nick clegg, leader of the liberal democrats and deputy prime minister in the coalition government, also sought to distance himself from cameron’s stance over gaza by stating “I believe it is right for Britain to be unambiguous in our condemnation of Hamas’s indiscriminate firing of rockets but also very forceful and outspoken about Israel. The bombing of three UN schools is a complete outrage.”” (Patrick Wintour and Rowena Mason ‘Lady Warsi resigns over UK’s ‘morally reprehensible’ stance on Gaza’ http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/05/lady-warsi-resigns-government-gaza-stance August 05, 2014). So here again we have the perverted moral inversion between “unambiguous condemnation of Hamas’s rockets” and “very forceful and outspoken about Israel” as if hamas was inflicting on jews what the racist state was doing to palestinians.

So, whilst most tories couldn’t even be bothered to indulge in any handwringing gesture over the jewish slaughter of palestinians, other prominent political leaders registered some minor protests over the slaughter in gaza whilst refusing to condemn the ongoing jewish colonization of palestine. No political leader in britain has denounced the incarceration of 1.8 million palestinians in the gazan open prison as a war crime.[iv] None have denounced the jewish nazis in the netanyahu government. None have denounced the jews-only state as a racist, apartheid state. They all support the jews-only state’s right to defend itself but refuse to support palestinians’ right to defend themselves. They all insist that palestinians must recognize the jewish state (“the one and only-jewish state”) whilst refusing to insist that jews must recognize palestinians’ right to a state (netanyahu’s cabinet is totally opposed to such a right). No matter how they try and pretend they are impartial over the palestinian issue their bigotry manifests itself through their refusal give palestinians the same rights as jews. They are in other words, facilitators of jewish racism. None of them are going to stop selling weapons to the racist state that will then be used to slaughter palestinians in pursuit of jewish colonial expansionism. Warsi has revealed the tories don’t even want the palestinians to get any justice for the expropriation of their land and property. “However, he (william hague) did not support a Palestinian appeal to the international criminal court.” (Editorial ‘The Guardian view on Lady Warsi’s resignation: a double whammy’ http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/05/guardian-view-lady-warsi-resignation August 05, 2014).

When the massed ranks of labour friends of israel, conservative friends of israel, and liberal democratic friends of israel, get together in the chambers of the house of commons the moral, and political distinctions between them vanish into thin air – with a few outstanding exceptions. It becomes a tea party of tweedledee, tweedledum and tweedlebollocks feasting on jewish supremacism whilst ignoring the consequences: the disproportionate number of zionist funders of the country’s three main political parties, the neocon domination of the british media, the apartheid nature of the jews-only state, the racist beliefs of netanyahu’s cabinet and continual jewish colonialism in palestine. It takes lots of shekels to buy such mass conformity amongst the country’s political and media elite. Many people in this country believe that politicians’ expenses’ row is over but it’s still ongoing in terms of party funding and politicians all expenses paid trips to the racist state.

Given that british political parties are so obsequious to american power and given that congress is so obsequious to the jews-only state (more accurately described as the american knesset) then in effect the british government is obsequious to the jews-only state and is perfectly happy selling weapons and ammunition to jewish nazis so that they can carry on slaughtering palestinians in pursuit of jewish expansionism. By selling weapons to the jews-only state, british politicians are just indulging in moral handwringing whenever they utter words of gentle criticism to their likudnik partners.

Whilst the jewish nazis were slaughtering unarmed palestinians, the british government was helping to boost islamophobia in the country by issuing a report written by a counter terrorist officer suggesting there was a radical islamic plot to take over schools in birmingham and that what was needed was to teach our kids some good old fashioned british values i.e. promoting military slaughters against innocent people in afghanistan, iraq, lebanon, libya and gaza and of course obsequiousness to the racist state. But this is not the end of such hypocrisy in british education. Whilst denouncing alleged islamic extremism, british politicians have been funding the establishment of schools run by christian fundamentalists teaching british kids that the bible, or more precisely the old testament, is infallible and that all science is a lie. But then british politicians, zionists to their core, are not bothered about such bigotry being taught in british schools because christian dispensationalists are implacable supporters of jewish colonialism.

British politicians and the media sustain their pro-zionist bigotry by promoting islamophobia. Thus people who go abroad to fight alongside moslem fundamentalists face prosecution on their return to britain whereas those who go to fight for the racist state face no such penalties. Jewish fundamentalists are a mirror image of moslem fundamentalsts. Thankfully this country has not yet seen the emergence of the jewish defence league who are jewish terrorists but they have existed in america and have recently started emerging in france. Does this country really want idf trained jewish terrorists taking the law into their own hands by targeting islamic fundamentalists thereby triggering off retaliatory actions?

Saudi arabia’s petro fascist, royal rulers have been the biggest handwringers over the carnage in gaza. Supposedly a friend of the palestinians they have detested hamas ever since it won palestinian national elections in 2006. They have done everything they could to undermine hamas’s democratic governance of gaza. King abdullah condemned the war in gaza as a "collective massacre" and a crime against humanity but blamed hamas for the carnage rather than the jews-only state. Golda meir once lamented she hated palestinians for forcing her military to slaughter palestinian children and, likewise, king abdullah condemned hamas for forcing the racist state to slaughter palestinians in gaza. “Unlike past Gaza wars, including the devastating 2008 offensive, the Saudi monarch did not condemn Israel outright for the conflict, which officials say has killed at least 1,500 Palestinians, mainly civilians, since it began on July 8. Israel says 63 of its soldiers and three civilians in Israel have been also killed. Abdullah warned that the fighting in Gaza will lead to a generation of children who will grow up knowing nothing but the language of violence. "We all see the blood of our brothers in Palestine bleeding out in collective massacres that do not spare anyone, and war crimes against humanity without humane or moral reservations," said the brief five-minute statement read on state TV.” (Abdullah Al-Shihri and Aya Batrawy ‘Saudi King Condemns Gaza War but Not Israel’ http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/saudi-king-gaza-war-crime-humanity-24803459?singlePage=true August 01, 2014).[v] The saudi elite had been financing the islamic state of syria and the levant to carry out gruesome, cold bloodied, mass murders in syria until it realized it had created a frankenstein monster that might eventually threaten its survival. The saudi government banned saudis who had gone to fight in syria from returning to their country so isil fighters had no option but to invade iraq and create their own state, the islamic state.

It has to be concluded about the handwringing of western and middle eastern political leaders over the maelstrom in gaza. “The stark reality is that Israel’s ‘continuing moral embattlement’ is an attribution only for those still possessing a morality gene and thus prone to outrage. Israel holds all the aces. It possesses near absolute power, for the reasons outlined above. None of the key pillars that underpin that power – nation states, national lobbies – have cracked under the escalating Gaza death count one iota. There have been no mea culpas amongst longtime supporters. The Hasbara is going full bore, with the mainstream media on tap and the foot soldiers flooding social media.” (Evan Jones ‘The Pariah State’ http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/08/01/the-pariah-state/ August 1-3, 2014).

In the face of this nazi like barbarity inflicted on gaza, let’s be honest about what is happening throughout the western world. The likudniks possess too much influence over western governments. The overwhelming military firepower that the jewish state brings to bear on palestinians is similar to the political firepower that the jewish state imposes on western governments through its likudnik lobbies. The jewish military’s pyrotechnics over gaza should be seen as a metaphor for the political pyrotechnics that likudnik lobbies are inflicting on western politicians and societies.

In america, “The US cannot serve as honest broker in Israel-Palestine negotiations because its government is overwhelming committed to and identified with Israel, including in this war. That is why President Obama keeps mouthing propaganda like that Israel has a right to defend itself (it doesn’t enjoy an absolute right of that sort– its defense has to be proportionate and within international law). The US political system is the most corrupt in the industrialized world, and our representatives have simply been bought and paid for by Israel fanatics like Sheldon Adelson or Haim Saban (the latter has also taken over Middle East analysis at Brookings, which used to have an independent editorial line). It is scary since the Likud took over, since it is just as though a Serbian Lobby in the 1990s had bribed Congress to support Slobodan Milosevic.” (Juan Cole ‘Top 5 Ways the US is Israel’s Accomplice in War Crimes in Gaza’ http://www.juancole.com/2014/08/israels-accomplice-crimes.html August 04, 2014). Evan jones puts it more bluntly, “Israel owns the U.S., lock stock and barrel. On 17 July, all 100 Senators voted for a resolution supporting Israel ‘as it defends itself against unprovoked (sic) rocket attacks’. Beyond abject servility, it is a treasonous and criminal act. Beyond the armaments flowing from the U.S. for the continuation of the slaughter, mendicant Israel continues to enjoy billions of dollars each year courtesy of the hapless U.S. taxpayer. Vocal Congressional critics of Israel (Cynthia McKinney, Paul Findley, etc.) lose office with the Lobby funding their opponents, providing a clear warning to any hopeful seeking office to purportedly represent (a quaint idea) the American public interest.” (Evan Jones ‘The Pariah State’ http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/08/01/the-pariah-state/ August 1-3, 2014). The british, canadian, and australian, political systems are no different.

Robert fisk provided an example of how netanyahu bullies france’s political leaders. “In France, there’s been derision at the way the government has reacted to Gaza’s calvary. François Hollande wanted Israel to “correct” its aim “a bit” (un peu)! He criticised Hamas’s aggression and Israel’s reprisals. But then an angry Benjamin Netanyahu came on the blower to the Elysée. Change of tune. Hollande uttered the usual mantra. “Israel has the right to take all measures to protect its people.” But then French Assembly members became so sickened by the “collective punishment” of the Palestinians that Hollande urged an end to the “escalation” in violence. Phew.” (Robert Fisk ‘Dress the Gaza situation up all you like, but the truth hurts’ http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/dress-the-gaza-situation-up-all-you-like-but-the-truth-hurts-9641240.html July 31, 2014).

Perhaps the most significant political revelation during this latest outbreak of jewish warmongering was netanyahu ordering western leaders i.e. obama, cameron, hollande, etc not to second guess him. More precisely, “never” to second guess him as if he were the ruthless head of a mafia organization putting the frighteners on his flunkies to reinforce his power and authority. “Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu summoned US Ambassador Dan Shapiro after yesterday’s Gaza ceasefire crumbled just 90 minutes in, lashing the US policy and warning them to not “ever second guess me again on Hamas.” He went on to insist the US should just trust him to handle things.” (Jason Ditz ‘Netanyahu to US: Don’t ‘Second Guess Me Again’ on Hamas August 02, 2014).[vi] And netanyahu’s flunkies is exactly what they are. The neocons’ hero is winston churchill and leaders of the western world look to netanyahu as churchill’s reincarnation. The jewish state, through its likudnik lobbies in the western world, has been the primary instigator of the west’s wars and sanctions over the last twenty five years.

Ironically the only western democracy that hasn’t been completely corrupted by neocon financial and ideological manipulation is russia where president putin allows the country’s jewish oligarchs to pursue their business interests as long as they do not interfere in the country’s political system. Western oligarchs find this intolerable and want their fellow oligarchs in russia to be returned to power so they can pilfer the russian economy and the country’s vast natural resources as they did in the 1990s. As a consequence they have been pushing western, zionist funded, politicians and the western, zionist dominated, media into demonizing putin – just as they did with saddam hussein, mohammad ahmadinejad, gaddafi, and bashar al-assad. For the first time in over two decades, the western world’s likudnik flunkies are once again thinking the unthinkable – war with russia.

If western politicians allow the jewish nazis in the apartheid state to obtain an outright victory over palestinians in gaza then western oligarchs, western neocon funded politicians, and the western likudnik dominated media, will be inspired into provoking further wars against either russia or iran or both. The jews-only state in palestine does not care about how much such wars would damage the world economy because all they care about is boosting their dominance over the greater middle east. Such wars will transform the western world into carbon copies of libya, syria and iraq. “The only country on earth that needs war is Washington, and that is because Washington’s goal is the neoconservative one of exercising hegemony over the world. Who is so gullible that he cannot recognize that Washington’s lies about Ukraine are like Washington’s lies about Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, Iranian nukes, and Assad’s use of chemical weapons? Do you think that the neoconservative influence that prevails in Washington, regardless of the political party in office, is too dangerous to be tolerated?” (Paul Craig Roberts ‘Washington Threatens the World’ http://www.unz.com/proberts/washington-threatens-the-world/ August 08, 2014).

The flares used by the jewish military in lighting up the battlefield over gaza also sheds light on the gross political imbalance of power throughout the western world - the dominance of likudnik lobbies and their funding of politicians, political parties and the mainstream media. What stephen walt says about the role of the zionist lobby in america is also true of virtually every other western country from canada to britain and australia. “The explanation for America's impotent and morally bankrupt policy is the political clout of the Israel lobby. Barack Obama knows that if he were to side with the Palestinians in Gaza or criticize Israel's actions in any way, he would face a firestorm of criticism from the lobby and his chances of getting Congressional approval for a deal with Iran would evaporate.” (Stephen M. Walt ‘AIPAC Is the Only Explanation for America's Morally Bankrupt Israel Policy’ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-m-walt/aipac-americas-israel-policy_b_5607883.html?utm_hp_ref=tw July 22, 2014). Western governments are seriously undermining their national interests because of the moral, political and military, support they are giving to the jewish colonial state and yet they persist in such policies because the likudnik lobbies in these countries have become too big to fail. David cameron remained loyal to the jews-only state even though it put his party’s electoral prospects at risk. He’d also sacrifice his country’s national interest if it meant boosting jewish colonialism.

---

[i] A contrary view is that, “The first notion is that Hamas violated the ceasefire, when in fact the ceasefire terms explicitly did not give Israel any permission to attack tunnels, and the “violation” was actually Hamas fighters inside a tunnel responding to an Israeli attack.” (Jason Ditz ‘Netanyahu to US: Don’t ‘Second Guess Me Again’ on Hamas’ http://news.antiwar.com/2014/08/02/netanyahu-to-us-dont-second-guess-me-again-on-hamas/ August 02, 2014).

[ii] The latest news is that 12 export licenses are being put under review.

[iii] “Appearing on CNN a few days into the current offensive in Gaza, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described Hamas as “the worst terrorists, genocidal terrorists.” He said they want to “pile up as many civilian dead as they can,” and, he added, to “use telegenically dead Palestinians for their cause.”” (Rémi Brulin ‘How the Israeli discourse on terrorism seeks to justify blatant war crimes’ http://mondoweiss.net/2014/08/discourse-terrorism-blatant.html August 9, 2014).

[iv] “In the Geneva convention of 1949 on the treatment of occupied populations by the military occupier, civilian non-combatants are called “protected persons”: “ARTICLE 33 - No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited. That is why the Israeli blockade of the civilians of Gaza since 2007 is and has all along been a war crime, contravening the Geneva Conventions.” (Juan Cole ‘Israel Still Holding Gaza Civilians Hostage, Doesn’t Get Geneva Conventions’ http://www.juancole.com/2014/08/holding-civilians-conventions.html August 06, 2014).

[v] “The attack on Gaza comes by Saudi Royal Appointment. This royal warrant is nothing less than an open secret in Israel, and both former and serving defense officials are relaxed when they talk about it. Former Israeli defense minister Shaul Mofaz surprised the presenter on Channel 10 by saying Israel had to specify a role for Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in the demilitarization of Hamas. Asked what he meant by that, he added that Saudi and Emirati funds should be used to rebuild Gaza after Hamas had been defanged.” (Attack on Gaza by Saudi Royal Appointment’ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-hearst/attack-on-gaza-by-saudi-r_b_5603735.html July 20, 2014).

[vi]  “Sources familiar with conversations between Netanyahu and senior U.S. officials, including Secretary of State John Kerry, say the Israeli leader advised the Obama administration "not to ever second guess me again" on the matter. The officials also said Netanyahu said he should be "trusted" on the issue and about the unwillingness of Hamas to enter into and follow through on cease-fire talks.” (Matthew Lee ‘Netanyahu Tells U.S. 'Not To Ever Second Guess Me Again' On Hamas’ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/02/netanyahu-hamas_n_5643852.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular August 02, 2014).

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’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,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’ http://gowans.blogspot.com/2008/02/stephen-zunes-and-struggle-for-overseas.html 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 Uruknet.com) 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...

http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/2008/03/gilad-atzmon-freedom-of-speech-right-to.html

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’ http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1204546391279&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull March 4, 2008).