THE JEWISH FREEMASONIC WAR
ON ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY GETS WORSE!
10 Hours of Walking in NYC as a Woman in Hijab
AreWeFamousNowPARIS CAPITALE DU DAJJAL par Yahia Gouasmi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgw6y3cH7tA&spfreload=10
NON SECTARIAN AND UNIVERSAL CHRISTIANITY (NOT ROMAN
CATHOLICISM) AND ISLAM ALONE CAN SAVE US ALL! BUT, WILL THEY? I CAN'T SEE WHERE TO FIND THESE RARE BIRDS THAT WOULD SAVE US!
I FOUND TOO FEW OF THEM!
I FOUND TOO FEW OF THEM!
My 1727 Holy Bible with 81 Books including the Apocrypha
The Vatican and Roman Catholic Churches have long been
infiltrated by CRIMINAL JEWS, ZIONISTS and FREEMASONS. I
have seen plethora of evidence of it in Godless Zionist Socialist-Communist France
and in the Zionist United Kingdom of Great Britain (Greater Israel of Judah). I have proved beyond the shadow of a doubt
that France has been occupied by Freemasons and criminal Jews at least since the
genocide of the French aristocracy and the murder of the French Catholic
royalties. The corruption in the Vatican
since the Rothschilds had taken over its finances and infiltrated its clergy with
their armies of crypto-Jews and Zionists has gotten worse every year until
finally the Catholic Dogma has been completely destroyed. Not much of Christianity is left in Europe,
and not even in the United States of America, Canada and Australia. We read non stop about the rape of nuns, infanticide, homosexuality, paedophilia, and other abominations within the Vatican and the Churches as well as of sex scandals in Protestant Churches, and even amongts "Jehovah Witnesses" of the Freemasonic Sect! Only Islam and Eastern Christianity have a
chance of making a difference, but only if they unite. But, this is mission impossible because of
the centuries old hatred of Islam and Muslims by both Eastern and Western
Christianity, and also because Muslims Survivors of multiple horrendous
Holocausts are so divided that little hope is left for unity even among
themselves. Christians have all forgotten the millions of Christians murdered by the Bolsheviks! CIA-SAUDI and Secular 'Islam'
has corrupted the minds of most Muslims around the world.
This Earth is replete with degenerates. Some among them are followers, disciples,
adepts, promoters, apologetics and even worshippers of male and female
homosexual ‘marriages’. So, let not
those degenerates try to preach to me and others who have never stopped struggling
for a moral way of life, freedom, truth and justice, at great costs and
personal sacrifice! Jewish manufactured
homosexual sexual orientation is a big lie and they should call it by its right
name - ANAL ORIENTATION! This made the decadent
Vatican happy as it has been running paedophile, Sodomite, infanticide and rape
factories within its walls and the walls of its convents and monasteries for
over a millennium and protecting the degenerates by covering up all cases
reported with total complicity of the Popes and rulers of the lands. When I hear the Vatican praying today to
Lucifer, they call the "Father of Christ" while inviting members of
all religions to join them in prayer with the Anti-Christ Pope, I see no hope
for any unity among Believers of both Christianity and Islam.
Several thousand years ago believers “prayed” to God and
Gods for rain, sun, light, good harvest, safety from danger, enemies, darkness
and natural calamities, for health and even for having babies. The prayers were heard as long as there was
rain, sun, good harvest, and safety and so on, but was it really God or Gods who did all this? Of course not! From History we learn that no God or Gods
ever interfered in human matters except in legends and myths. Yet, today nearly half of humanity believe in
God (including myself!) or Gods and pray to them. Even people who do not believe in them pray
to Buddha who they made into a God and in exactly the same manner as Believers
pray to God and Gods. By the way my
correspondent Paul Guthrie of the World Dhamma Foundation told us that Buddha
was not a “Hindu” Prince and that Dhamma (“Buddhism”) existed well before
“Hinduism”. If you have Dhamma you do
not need either Christianity or Islam – an utter nonsense! It is true that so many lies are being told about
all religions and we all fall into the trap in believing some of them including
those who hate religion and God.
American Christian preachers say Christ (the mythical or legendary
figure) travelled to India and Tibet where he learned the occult and obtained
his power for performing miracles. Most
Christians believe today that Jesus Christ is God and the Creator of the
Universe and quote John 1, Colossians 1 and Hebrews 1 to prove their false claim. How can we make Believers understand and
unite for the common good against the common adversaries when most of them will
believe in practically anything even if it defies the facts, logic and reason.
A lot of evil is happening in the world and Believers of all
religions pray to God or Gods and we are witnesses that no God or Gods are
helping them or listening to their prayers at all except at the individual
level. How at the individual level
only? Well, God does not have to exist
for prayers to be answered at the individual level. The belief and trust in a God or Gods whether
they exist or not provide the motivation, strength and patience necessary for
all individuals finding themselves in impossible or threatening life situations
due to oppression, bad health, and injustice, lack of means to take care of
their families or for any other reason.
And as oppression and injustice are the way of the super military powers
that rule the world, and as the world masses live in economic slavery, and
under a permanent culture of State sponsored terror and an immoral and
destructive way of life, nearly half of the world human inhabitants find solace
only in religion, God and Gods.
The Atheists (in general) hate the One Supreme God and
people who believe in Him, but are not worried about people who worship all
kinds of Gods or Buddha. Many of them
worship Mother Earth! In Islam, the One
Supreme God is above the State, and no despotic and totalitarian system of
government like, for example, western-style democracies, would accept anything
or anybody above itself except the Elite of Freemasons and usurious bankers who
literally own the government, the land, the resources, the utilities, and even
the people, their present and future. Atheists have a religion or religions, but
they do not call it religion in order to separate themselves from people of any
religious system that has to do with an act of worship of a Deity. They thus show they are not only different,
but also superior to those people. Yet,
they too have Gods by the tons and they worship them in their own particular
way. One of their Gods is the
totalitarian fascist, warmongering and Godless State!
Of course people who believe in God or Gods, mainly
Christians and Muslims, will not agree with my position as for them God or Gods
are real interventionist Gods when this is not true in all cases of
contemporary history that we are all witnessing unfolding right before our
eyes, except for the Zombies who hear, see and feel absolutely nothing! Zombies are oblivious or willingly
indifferent to all the sufferings that are happening around them on a daily
basis. They push their stupidity in still
hoping (in the modern and highly advanced world) for a Final Judgement Day, a
Paradise and fearing Hell that cannot exist the way they are being described in
Holy Scriptures, and which cannot and should not be taken literally. They fail to see Paradise and Hell and the
reign of Satan (the symbol of Evil!) right here on Earth and rather live in a
dream, which in fact is a nightmare for most of us. They push their stupidity further by
claiming respectively they are right and all the others are wrong!
People almost never listen and they expect you to listen to
them (like the facebooker narcissist cockroaches or rats), and freedom, truth, justice and morality have
rarely any value in their eyes. They are
rarely students; they are almost always teachers, teachers of ignorance, nonsense
and stupidity! Freedom Fighters, Truth Seekers and Truth Tellers
are being hounded, persecuted, ostracised, beaten up, humiliated, fined, jailed
and even murdered, yet they still are ungrateful and indifferent to other
humans’ dedication, struggle, sacrifice and martyrdom.
Whether God or Gods exist or not, the truth is that God,
more specifically in Christianity (not Roman and Apostolic Catholicism) and
Islam, is a life saver compared to No God at all where the most vulnerable
amongst the non Believers destroy themselves by taking intoxicants, drugs of
all kinds, become addicts of sodomy, paedophilia and rape, and even kill
themselves. They are also cowards
because while they refuse to fight for a just cause many choose to selfishly
end up their lives. Most heavily drugged
American soldier-assassins find it normal to murder innocent and unarmed men,
women, children and babies, and destroy everything during their wars of aggression,
and some of them after committing murder after murder end up taking their own
lives. They destroy their own families
at home and their God is that of plain Evil.
Just think about it for a moment. There is no God or Gods, yet millions worship
them and they find peace and happiness if not at the national, community or
family level, at least at the individual level.
God and Gods whether they exist or not save them from a life of utter
misery where morality has no place and where profits at all costs are the
driving force of the ruling establishment.
Don’t ever get fooled by their human rights, law and justice system,
charity or philanthropic organisations, or even by their so-called public
institutions and royalties. All is owned
and run by bloodthirsty corporations that are bent on drinking the last drop of
our blood, steal everything they can lay their claws on, and exterminate a
maximum of the earth’s human and non human inhabitants (80-90 %), all for
profit.
For people who have nothing or almost nothing, God and Gods
are their Saviours, but Pr Richard Dawkins the Pope of Radical and militant Atheism
would rather see all of them dead or exterminated than cling to God with trust
and hope for a better life even if it is temporary! Only the fittest should survive. The Catholic Church has unfortunately become
secular, Marxist, Socialist, Communist, macro evolutionist and Neo-Darwinist, and
now outright satanic due to its infiltration by Jews, Talmudists and
Freemasons. While the Devils that
terrorise our planet cannot infiltrate Islam, they have prevented Muslims from
uniting and de-Islamised a great number amongst them while screaming because of
their owned invented Islamisation of the West by hordes of “Islamo” fascists,
cut throats, head choppers, wife beaters, polygamists, extremists, radicals,
obscurantists, cockroaches, sand niggers, and what not! They scare Europeans about the 'alarming' birth
rate of Muslims in the West, yet more than twenty years ago Charles Pasqua
announced the figure of SIX MILLION Muslims living in France. I quoted this figure many times in my
essays. Recently I keep hearing and
reading about the figure FIVE MILLION Muslims instead! Recently I read about the figure 4,3 MILLION
French Muslims only! Who is lying? The Islamisation of Europe is a total
fabrication! They simply do not want
Muslims to practice their religion freely.
After having destroyed Christianity they are now hell bent in destroying
not Islam (they can't!) but Muslims.
What both Christians (non Roman and non Apostolic Catholics)
and Muslims, at least, should understand is that they are both on the same boat
and heading towards the same destination even if the routes are different. Christian and Muslim bigotry and racism are
their mortal enemies. Only when they
have understood LIKE I HAVE that God or no God they are responsible for the
well being of their descendants, children, grand children and so on, and without
mutual and reciprocal REAL SPIRITUAL LOVE for each other they will only help
Satan (the Evil ones that rule over us) to rule for ever over the entire
planet. I have known and learned from
life and experience and as an impossible to dispute fact that THERE IS NO SUCH
GOD AS AN INTERVENTIONIST GOD and that all Scriptures have to be read and
understood as a PARABLE DIVINELY INSPIRED and not to be taken LITERALLY, and
that we are all ONE HUMANKIND, ONE HUMANITY except for Frankenstein and his
armies of monsters, Secularists, Talmudist Jews, Zionists, Racists, Fascists,
Freemasons, Rosicrucians, Rotarians, Knights of this and Knights of that, Skull
& Bones, usurious bank gangsters, Neo-Darwinist evolved apes, fanatical,
extremist and militant Atheists, cannibals, etc.
It does not matter if Christ existed or not or that Muhammad
was an impostor or not! They both have
exactly the same Divine Message! Finding
faults in each other's religion is not going to help at all. Let us love our neighbour as Jesus Christ recommends
and come to common terms as Islam advises us to do if we want to stop living in
hell on earth and give our children and grand children a better chance to live
in peace with the religion of their own choice.
If there is God, there can be only ONE GOD for all Creation and He is
Godly!
The First ever Commandment of the “Semitic” Scriptures is
found in Genesis 1:28, but although not a single translation can be trusted as
being an exact translation of the original inspired word or the Word of God, we
do have an idea about what it meant and means in the modern context, bearing in
mind that there was another “Genesis” account that has not been accepted as
canonical in either Judaism or Christianity (including Roman Catholicism), and
also that there were many other Gospels that have been discarded as well as
dozens of other texts.
“And God blessed them (the humans), and said to them, Be fruitful, and
multiply (increase in number), and replenish (fill) the earth, and subdue it:
and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and
over every living thing (creature) that moves (scurry along, crawls, creeps...)
on the earth (ground).”
The spirit is to fill
(a not so full earth) or replenish (an already inhabited earth), and if today
we have an overpopulation of the earth (which we haven’t!) we must use our
knowledge (science) to make sure that it does not become a problem, but only by
using the Scriptures as our Guide and not Godless and anti-God mass murdering
corporations owned by usurious bank gangsters, Freemasons, Satanists and ethnic
cleansing Judaic supremacists that want to depopulate the earth no matter what.
Note that the wealthy own the Earth
thanks to counterfeit money and live in palaces, mansions, and the masses are
forced to live in smaller and smaller houses like rabbits! They own the rivers, the lakes, the beaches,
the seas, the mountains and even the oceans.
They own literally everything.
So many of us believe in God or Gods, yet we follow those
who tell us that our women are free to have sex in brothels and in pornographic
films and outside marriage in order to prevent rape when they are the world’s
and history’s greatest rapists. They
tell us to give them our hard earned money in order to protect us from drugs
and crime, yet they are the greatest drug traffickers, criminals and mass
murderers in the world. They tell us
they are for law and human rights, yet the law never applies to them and their
human rights is the right to invade, bomb, kill, starve, maim, torture, occupy,
steal, deceive, enslave, control, and to have everything including weapons of
mass destruction while depriving other individuals and nations from having
anything of their own except what they will allow them to have, and only when
they cannot do otherwise. They tell us
where to live, where to build our homes, what to drink and eat, and impose upon
us energy and water tariffs while energy and water should be totally free. They tell us we are free and have the freedom
of speech and circulation, yet they enslave us, control every single one of our
movements, impose upon our children their brain washing mind control National
Curricula, and prevent us from expressing ourselves and from circulating
freely. They sell us medicine and
engineered food and even poison that make us sick and rarely cure us of any
ailment. They impose vaccines on our
babies. They murder our dissidents and
their families. They bomb defenceless
countries with their radioactive waste and phosphorus bombs all for the sake of
Israel, the banking cartels and the military industrial complex. And on
and on they tell us to be everything else except ourselves, natural or God
created beings, and to do everything for them that make them richer and richer
and us poorer and poorer.
We already have all the religions and Gods we need to lead a
happy, prosperous and peaceful life, even without religions or Gods, but all we
are doing is work as slaves for those whose religions and Gods are pure
evil. Until we stop this nonsense by
whatever means necessary, there is no hope for a better future for us all. But, first, let us ‘kill’ the usurious bank
gangsters and their media, including Hollywood, Bollywood and their likes, and
then we’ll fight (if necessary) over God or religion like idiots!
BAFS
Saturday 24th of January 2015
Saturday
24th of January 2015
FRENCH "CIVILISATION DE MERDE"!
« Je me sens Charlie Coulibaly » : Dieudonné s’explique ! (22/01/15)
Pour
vivre ensemble il faut savoir aimer 1971
CIVILISATION is not and should not be
the property of any Supremacist entity.
When the racist, fascist, despotic and totalitarian dictatorship
"democratic" West claims a monopoly on Western Civilisation, they are
wrong and that behaviour is one of the greatest crimes against humanity. Islamic civilisation was open to the entire
world and nobody was coerced into accepting it.
Non Muslim nations freely absorbed whatever was compatible with and
would enrich their own civilisation. For
example, Hindustan and Spain. Yet, we
saw Western hordes invading other nations' lands, mass killing the people,
stealing everything, occupying the lands against the will of the inhabitants,
enslaving them and imposing upon them part of the Western civilisation with the
aim to destroy native cultures, languages, religions and to make of the
conquered nations docile slaves that would have to labour for generation and
generation for the profit of Western corporations and their ruling
classes. The majority of the conquered
nations are still today the slaves and nation clients of Western hegemony. Don't they dare to ever raise their voice or
head, they would be mercilessly and ruthlessly dealt with and the West would
never hesitate one second to exterminate entire nations and communities in
order to remain the undisputed masters and Gods of the world.
They do not want the vanquished
nations to live free and in peace as they have set up Courts of Injustice on
their lands and lies, deception and fraud have become the pillars of all their
colonies, neo colonies, and they make sure that those inferior and unarmed
nations remain forever indebted to their bank gangsters of the World Bank and
the International Monetary Fund run by their UNO dictatorship.
The West does not want the inferior
people to live TOGETHER with them because they are racist Supremacists. Several centuries ago usurious Jews were
invited to join them in their Crusade against the other Nations for the
conquest of the World. People like me
were never invited to share Western civilisation but forced to be indoctrinated
by their Churches into the part of that civilisation destined only for slaves
and "house Negroes".
This reminds me of one of my
favourite and haunting French songs ever interpreted by Frida Boccara, a
Moroccan Christian artist, singer and musician.
"To live together we must learn to love
And never take what we have not given".
Yes, France accepted Arab and North
African Jewish and Zionist individuals to live together with them. but never did it accept any
Muslim individual or community to live together with them except as "house
Negroes". Muslim Algerians who
fought for France (traitors) known as Harkis were dumped into French ghettos
after the Algerian genocide and regarded as inferiors and second class citizens
while Algerian, Moroccan and Tunisian Jews (traitors) were hailed as Gods. These Muslims were de-Islamised and kept
under State control for over half a century.
I lived for 13 years in a Jewish Zionist controlled France where
anti-Arab and anti-Muslim racism was institutionalised.
Algerians had to shave their beard in
order to show their slave masters that they were integrated and
assimilated. Head covering for both men
and women was almost unknown. When the
first French Muslim young girls born in France tried to go back to their
Islamic traditions the State intervened immediately and passed laws banning all
"Islamic" head coverings and religious signs. Catholics and Jews were not bothered as they
had the choice of attending confessional schools under contract with the
State. Muslims did not have any contract
as they had no church and no central body that represented them.
In
order to keep 6 million French Muslims (Charles Pasqua's figure) and their
cultural and religious centres under strict State control, the French government
set up a bogus Muslim organisation to federate all Muslim organisations. Charles Pasqua was leading the pack together
with a Zionist Freemason passing for a Muslim, one Dalil Boubakeur, the self or
State appointed "Rector" of the "Great Paris Mosque".
"Two
lovers in the night and during the day two friends
This is how we love for life"
Only
fools and racists will say that Muslims indoctrinated and born in France hate
Western "values". When they
applied for a permit to run a business, they were always obstructed and given
only licences to sell exotic and other foodstuffs, to run liquor houses
(cafés), brothels, and carry out only trade only fit for inferiors while
African and European Jews had a monopoly on almost every major trade: fur, salmon,
diamond, gold, crystal, ready-to-wear, cosmetics, and goods destined for
"collectivités". Jews own or
run all pornographic sex shops, brothels and the homosexual and paedophilia
networks. Like in Britain, the Police
trains Jewish terrorists on tax-payer Police premises to protect Jewish
businesses and interests.
Yes,
we were free to sleep with any French woman (married or not) or young girl, day
and night, and even marry them, but we were not allowed to show our ugly faces
or promote our newly acquired culture on French television and cinema. Although we were now part of French so-called
civilisation, we were never accepted as part of the French culture reserved
strictly for the decadent Whites, Atheists, Homosexuals, Paedophiles, Jews and
Secular Christians (Zionists). Muslims
like Malcom X and Sheikh Ahmed Deedaat were all banned for life from visiting
France! I heard that even Muslim kids
like the African little "Sheikh" Sharifou (an under ten year old
preacher boy!) was not allowed on French soil because France fears its Black
and other citizens may be influenced by them and embrace Islam!
Yes,
we were French lovers in the night and during the day, but Zionist and racist
France never accepted us as its FRIENDS!
Yet, they expect us (hypocritically) to LOVE them unconditionally while
they spend every minute of the day and night in vilifying Islam, Arabs, the
Arab Prophet Muhammad, the Muslim Holy Book, the Qur'ân, and the Muslim and
Islamic culture and customs. I am sure
most Muslims HATE THEM because French hatred for Muslims has spread terror on
French soil where Muslims are no more welcome.
They are terrorised, persecuted, ostracised, hounded, fined, jailed and
even murdered. Muslims are treated as
the Hindus treat their Dalits, and they have nowhere to go as their previous
homelands are all occupied by France and other Western military powers.
"To
live together we must open our hearts"
Zionist
France has no heart and has absolutely no intention whatsoever to live together
with Muslims!
"To
the smile of a child or of a flower
We must fill with sunshine this wonderful world"
Christianity and Islam came to the
world to protect our children, but France and its bastard child known as Eretz
Israel, and the entire Western world are child killers! So, what civilisation are they talking
about? What "Republican
values"?
"To
live together we must learn to love"
Racists
and ethnic cleansers do not love and have no intention to live together with
Arabs, Muslims, sand niggers, cockroaches and stinking Arabs! Everything is for the Jew, the Zionist, not
even for the Christian!
"I look at you and I keep you and everything lightens
The shadow changes into light
I see you live and I feel free and I sing
The rest is unimportant"
When
we, victims of Jewish and French racism and terror look at France, everything darkens on the
contrary. The light changes into ugly
and monstrous shadows. When powerless
we see them rejoice when they blaspheme our religion, vilify and slander our
Prophet, or when they demonise and slander Jesus Christ, we free imprisoned
with nowhere to go. We do not have the
heart to sing or to lament, or even to make people laugh because it is now
against the Zionist Republican Laws, but only to scream! VIVE
LA RÉVOLUTION! LONG LIVE LA FRANCE
LIBRE! Because we are French and part of
that civilisation, that part which is naturally part of us and of our soul and
that we are denied at all levels of the racist establishment. Even the White side of my family hates my
religion and biological type! But, what
has value in the eyes of ALL FRENCH CITIZENS is freedom, truth, justice and a
moral way of life. The rest is
unimportant.
"To
live together we must learn to love
And never take what we have not given"
I
was brought up with British and then French values, and given British and then
French citizenship, but FOR WHAT? For
laïques, Freemasons, pornographers, Jews, fanatics, Zionists,homosexuals,
prostitutes, whores, abortionists, warmongers, thieves, crooks, drug addicts,
racists, paedophiles, rapists, Atheists and God haters to have more rights as
citizens than me just because I refuse to embrace their religions and
ideologies? What makes them more
civilised than humans like me when they themselves are not civilised at all?
VIVE LA FRANCE LIBRE!
BAFS
Ce samedi 24 janvier 2015
[2] http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Tuerie-a-Charlie-Hebdo-Haziza-diffuse-sa-haine-sur-Twitter-30167.html
[3] https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10906482_1588924654672332_8373805246798017756_n.jpg?oh=1eeddd6c40fcd82d8c8b00eee0f8afc2&oe=553AB2E2&__gda__=1429809115_c6b3ea45b76b0b91aa8b2bb9e6666203
[4] http://www.i24news.tv/fr/actu/israel/societe/57340-150111-les-victimes-de-l-attentat-contre-l-hypercacher-seront-enterrees-en-israel
Entretien avec Dominique Baettig sur l’attentat contre Charlie Hebdo
Voir aussi, sur E&R :
Voir aussi, sur E&R :
Published on 7 May 2014
THE
JEWISH GAS CHAMBER HOAX is a Revisionist documentary which provides
revelatory evidence debunking the greatest hoax in human history -
"The Holocaust" -- the fraudulent claim that six million Jews were murdered by Germans, mostly in "Gas Chambers disguised as Shower Rooms."
Never before seen evidence helps prove that Treblinka was a transit camp, far from the "Pure Extermination Camp" myth currently promoted by the Holocaust religion.
In never before seen footage, Jews themselves who were transited through Treblinka describe the process of being transferred from Treblinka to other camps, along with hundreds and thousands of other men women and children. Documentation is presented which affirms that Treblinka was no top secret "pure extermination center", but a simple transit camp where many Jews took real showers in order to keep them alive.
The absurdity of diesel gassings, non-existent mass graves, forced confessions, and more are covered in THE JEWISH GAS CHAMBER HOAX, a new documentary from the filmmaker of THE LAST DAYS OF THE BIG LIE.
www.gaschamberhoax.com
"The Holocaust" -- the fraudulent claim that six million Jews were murdered by Germans, mostly in "Gas Chambers disguised as Shower Rooms."
Never before seen evidence helps prove that Treblinka was a transit camp, far from the "Pure Extermination Camp" myth currently promoted by the Holocaust religion.
In never before seen footage, Jews themselves who were transited through Treblinka describe the process of being transferred from Treblinka to other camps, along with hundreds and thousands of other men women and children. Documentation is presented which affirms that Treblinka was no top secret "pure extermination center", but a simple transit camp where many Jews took real showers in order to keep them alive.
The absurdity of diesel gassings, non-existent mass graves, forced confessions, and more are covered in THE JEWISH GAS CHAMBER HOAX, a new documentary from the filmmaker of THE LAST DAYS OF THE BIG LIE.
www.gaschamberhoax.com
Grandeur de l’Islam, par Gaston Wiet
- Publié le : mercredi 28 janvier
- Mots-clés : Culture; Islam; Religion
- Commentaires : Aucun
- Source : lebreviairedespatriotes.fr
« Il
est impérieux, pour apprécier l’Islam contemporain, de faire appel à
des notions historiques, prises évidemment dans leur développement
schématique. Pour comprendre l’évolution des évènements et surtout
l’attitude des hommes, il importe pour les premiers d’étudier les
antécédents, et pour les seconds de chercher à connaitre les mobiles qui
les font agir. »
C’est ainsi que commence l’ouvrage de Gaston Wiet dont nous allons parler. Cette citation est pleine de bon sens, n’importe qui ayant deux sous de jugeote l’accordera. Pourquoi présenter ce livre ? Tout est dit dans la citation introductive. Parce qu’on entend trop de bêtises innommables sur l’islam (la religion) et sur l’Islam (le peuple et la terre). Parce que trop de gens parlent sans savoir, jugent sans connaitre, regardent mais ne voient pas, écoutent mais n’entendent pas. Parce qu’aujourd’hui et depuis quelques années, l’Islam est présenté comme l’ennemi de l’Occident capitaliste sans raison valable, si ce n’est la propagande américano-israélienne.
Pourquoi l’Islam est-il l’ennemi de l’Occident ? Parce que ce dernier refuse d’admettre que l’Islam est foi et loi, qu’il est utilisé comme rempart à l’impérialisme libéral-libertaire, parce que son modèle économique méprise l’usure et la recherche de profit, antithèse de notre système.
Ce livre, qui n’est pas une thèse islamophile à outrance, mais un ensemble de textes, expliqués, contextualisés, permettant à chacun d’y voir un peu plus clair sur cette question de l’Islam, sans pour autant trouver toutes les réponses. En espérant que cela incitera chacun à aller chercher plus d’informations ailleurs et de son propre chef. Dieu a doté tous les hommes (ou presque) de l’intelligence, il serait péché de ne s’en servir point.
Dans un climat actuel de tensions et d’inquiétude, où les factieux désignent trop vite le coupable idéal pour faire taire toute force de débat ou de critique et cacher ainsi les vraies causes des événements, le citoyen se doit de s’informer et de ne pas se laisser berner par l’émotion. Parce que nous ne devons pas laisser journalistes et politiques penser à notre place, éteignons nos télévisions, et lisons.
Lire l’intégralité de l’article sur lebreviairedespatriotes.fr
C’est ainsi que commence l’ouvrage de Gaston Wiet dont nous allons parler. Cette citation est pleine de bon sens, n’importe qui ayant deux sous de jugeote l’accordera. Pourquoi présenter ce livre ? Tout est dit dans la citation introductive. Parce qu’on entend trop de bêtises innommables sur l’islam (la religion) et sur l’Islam (le peuple et la terre). Parce que trop de gens parlent sans savoir, jugent sans connaitre, regardent mais ne voient pas, écoutent mais n’entendent pas. Parce qu’aujourd’hui et depuis quelques années, l’Islam est présenté comme l’ennemi de l’Occident capitaliste sans raison valable, si ce n’est la propagande américano-israélienne.
Pourquoi l’Islam est-il l’ennemi de l’Occident ? Parce que ce dernier refuse d’admettre que l’Islam est foi et loi, qu’il est utilisé comme rempart à l’impérialisme libéral-libertaire, parce que son modèle économique méprise l’usure et la recherche de profit, antithèse de notre système.
Ce livre, qui n’est pas une thèse islamophile à outrance, mais un ensemble de textes, expliqués, contextualisés, permettant à chacun d’y voir un peu plus clair sur cette question de l’Islam, sans pour autant trouver toutes les réponses. En espérant que cela incitera chacun à aller chercher plus d’informations ailleurs et de son propre chef. Dieu a doté tous les hommes (ou presque) de l’intelligence, il serait péché de ne s’en servir point.
Dans un climat actuel de tensions et d’inquiétude, où les factieux désignent trop vite le coupable idéal pour faire taire toute force de débat ou de critique et cacher ainsi les vraies causes des événements, le citoyen se doit de s’informer et de ne pas se laisser berner par l’émotion. Parce que nous ne devons pas laisser journalistes et politiques penser à notre place, éteignons nos télévisions, et lisons.
Lire l’intégralité de l’article sur lebreviairedespatriotes.fr
Entretien avec Jacob Cohen sur les attentats à Paris
Propos recueillis pour E&R par Alimuddin Usmani le 11 janvier 2015
- Publié le : lundi 12 janvier
- Auteur(s) :
- Mots-clés : Communautés; France; Israël; Judaïsme; Tuerie à Charlie Hebdo
- Commentaires : 44
Suite au massacre de la rédaction du journal Charlie Hebdo,
l’émotion a dominé la ligne éditoriale des médias institutionnels au
détriment de l’analyse. Dans votre blog vous avez choisi de rappeler que
Charlie Hebdo, qui avait été par le passé un journal qui
dénonçait tous les pouvoirs, s’était mué en un organe de presse agissant
au profit du « lobby judéo-sioniste [1] ». Pouvez-vous nous en dire plus ?
Tout a commencé avec Philippe Val, qui avait monté une opération financière pour prendre le contrôle de Charlie Hebdo, faisant ainsi une énorme plus-value financière, avec la bénédiction au moins tacite des pouvoirs publics. Val s’était aussi rapproché à l’époque de BHL. Une amitié qui rapporte puisqu’il avait été nommé directeur de France Inter. Depuis, il avait donné des gages. Soutien absolu de toutes les lois « sociétales ». Célébrations tous azimuts de la Shoah. Condamnation sans appel du Hamas et de toute forme de résistance palestinienne. Analyse plus que compréhensive de la politique israélienne. Et surtout dénigrement systématique de la communauté musulmane pour la stigmatiser, l’humilier, lui faire raser les murs. À ce propos je rappellerai comment Siné (un des fondateurs de Hara Kiri) s’était fait éjecter pour une formulation un peu caustique (« il ira loin ce petit ») sur la conversion au judaïsme du fils de Sarkozy pour pouvoir épouser l’héritière Darty. Pour un journal qui a une grande gueule et qui revendique une liberté totale de critique, ce n’était pas une grande preuve de liberté.
Profitant de la vague d’émotion planétaire, Frédéric Haziza n’a pas hésité à pointer du doigt tous ceux qui avaient osé critiquer Charlie Hebdo par le passé et à faire un amalgame entre ces personnes et des actes terroristes [2]. Si vous aviez l’occasion de vous retrouver face à lui, que lui diriez-vous ?
C’est une perspective qui relève de l’utopie. Donc je lui adresserai un message indirect. Frédéric Haziza est dans son rôle. Le fait qu’il se mue en défenseur constant de Charlie Hebdo corrobore dans une large mesure la conviction qu’avaient les judéo-sionistes que le journal était leur allié et qu’ils pouvaient compter sur lui. Par ailleurs, c’est une de leurs constantes que de faire l’amalgame. Le raccourci « musulman-islamiste-terroriste » permet d’installer dans les esprits l’idée que décidément, les musulmans en France ne peuvent ni évoluer ni s’intégrer. L’idéal en fait serait de les rendre indésirables, incompatibles, et d’en chasser le plus grand nombre. Finkelkraut a bien résumé cet état d’esprit : « L’islamisme n’est pas sans lien avec l’islam. » Donc cette religion serait, en elle-même, problématique pour le « vivre-ensemble » en France. Et l’amalgame de Haziza et d’autres tend à cet objectif ultime.
Certains caricaturistes dissidents, comme l’Artiste Mal Pensant, ont mis l’accent sur la responsabilité du gouvernement Hollande dans cette affaire en rappelant le laxisme lié au départ de nombreux jeunes djihadistes français en Syrie [3]. Quelle est votre analyse à ce sujet ?
Il est certain que les gouvernements français, de Sarkozy à Hollande, ont joué avec le feu en détruisant la Libye, en bombardant l’Irak, et en aidant l’insurrection armée contre le pouvoir syrien. Mais comme souvent, ces calculs ont révélé une faille. Les jeunes qui sont partis en Syrie ont reçu un entraînement qu’ils n’auraient pas pu avoir autrement. Si on prend en compte le fait qu’ils détestent l’Occident et le sionisme, qu’ils ont subi depuis une ou deux générations les discriminations et les harcèlements divers propres aux musulmans, on peut comprendre qu’ils aient envie d’en découdre. On ne peut pas généraliser ce genre de réactions, mais il suffirait de quelques-uns pour déclencher des réactions en chaîne. On peut aussi rappeler que des milliers de jeunes d’origine maghrébine pourraient, pour toutes les raisons que l’on connaît, s’inspirer de ces actions violentes. Il est dramatique de penser que pour complaire à l’Amérique et à Israël le gouvernement français mène une politique irrationnelle et dangereuse.
De nombreux chefs d’État se sont rendus le 11 janvier à Paris pour participer à la « marche républicaine ». Que vous inspire la présence de Benyamin Netanyahou, qui a profité de l’occasion pour appeler les juifs de France à faire leur alya ?
Tout d’abord c’est un ramassis d’hypocrites, de dirigeants sans morale ni intégrité politique. On a assisté à une mascarade qui doit certainement avoir des objectifs inavoués. On ne fait pas tout ce cinéma pour une protestation. C’était un « show » extraordinaire, qui prépare l’opinion, déjà acquise, à des mesures drastiques. La présence de Netanyahou a apporté la touche de cynisme pour compléter le tableau. J’y vois, en dehors du fait que c’est pure abjection qu’un criminel de guerre de cette envergure soit là, une espèce de légitimation du rôle central d’Israël pour combattre « l’hydre terroriste islamique ». Et donc, il ne faudrait plus l’embêter avec les aspects dérisoires de l’occupation et de la colonisation. Qu’il appelle les juifs de France à faire leur alya montre qu’il joue la cassure en toute impunité. Il est sûr de lui. Il vient en France comme en pays conquis.
Les quatre victimes françaises de l’Hyper Cacher seront toutes enterrées en Israëli [4]. Est-ce que cela vous surprend ?
Je reconnais avoir été surpris par la nouvelle, mais beaucoup moins lorsque j’ai appris les modalités par une radio sioniste. En fait, ce n’était pas la volonté des victimes. Ce sont les autorités sionistes qui ont fait pression sur les dirigeants communautaires en France pour qu’ils accèdent à cette exigence. Les sionistes évidemment prenant en charge tous les frais. Mais on peut déjà imaginer une cérémonie en grande pompe, avec les médias et les politiques, pour faire vibrer la corde sensible, le destin tragique des victimes tuées parce que juives, et la nécessité de construire un pays juif solide et invulnérable pour protéger tous les juifs du monde qui se sentiraient en insécurité. Du grand art. Goebbels peut aller se rhabiller. En matière de propagande, les sionistes ont atteint des sommets.
Enfin, croyez-vous qu’il sera plus difficile pour le gouvernement français de s’attaquer à Dieudonné maintenant que le thème de la liberté d’expression a été autant mis en avant à propos de Charlie Hebdo ?
Je ne le crois pas. Ce serait d’ailleurs une erreur de le penser ou de l’espérer. La liberté d’expression, oui, plus que jamais. Mais la liberté dans la dignité et le respect mutuel. Surtout pas la liberté qui appelle à la haine. Vous avez vu ce que cela a donné ? Des attentats monstrueux. Vous voulez que ça recommence ? Pourquoi croyez-vous que les judéo-sionistes, dont l’inénarrable F. Haziza, ont tenté de créer un lien entre les attentats et les leaders de la dissidence ? Ça va être leur cheval de bataille. Il y a deux choses qui ne changeront pas : le cynisme du système et le fameux « deux poids deux mesures ».
Tout a commencé avec Philippe Val, qui avait monté une opération financière pour prendre le contrôle de Charlie Hebdo, faisant ainsi une énorme plus-value financière, avec la bénédiction au moins tacite des pouvoirs publics. Val s’était aussi rapproché à l’époque de BHL. Une amitié qui rapporte puisqu’il avait été nommé directeur de France Inter. Depuis, il avait donné des gages. Soutien absolu de toutes les lois « sociétales ». Célébrations tous azimuts de la Shoah. Condamnation sans appel du Hamas et de toute forme de résistance palestinienne. Analyse plus que compréhensive de la politique israélienne. Et surtout dénigrement systématique de la communauté musulmane pour la stigmatiser, l’humilier, lui faire raser les murs. À ce propos je rappellerai comment Siné (un des fondateurs de Hara Kiri) s’était fait éjecter pour une formulation un peu caustique (« il ira loin ce petit ») sur la conversion au judaïsme du fils de Sarkozy pour pouvoir épouser l’héritière Darty. Pour un journal qui a une grande gueule et qui revendique une liberté totale de critique, ce n’était pas une grande preuve de liberté.
Profitant de la vague d’émotion planétaire, Frédéric Haziza n’a pas hésité à pointer du doigt tous ceux qui avaient osé critiquer Charlie Hebdo par le passé et à faire un amalgame entre ces personnes et des actes terroristes [2]. Si vous aviez l’occasion de vous retrouver face à lui, que lui diriez-vous ?
C’est une perspective qui relève de l’utopie. Donc je lui adresserai un message indirect. Frédéric Haziza est dans son rôle. Le fait qu’il se mue en défenseur constant de Charlie Hebdo corrobore dans une large mesure la conviction qu’avaient les judéo-sionistes que le journal était leur allié et qu’ils pouvaient compter sur lui. Par ailleurs, c’est une de leurs constantes que de faire l’amalgame. Le raccourci « musulman-islamiste-terroriste » permet d’installer dans les esprits l’idée que décidément, les musulmans en France ne peuvent ni évoluer ni s’intégrer. L’idéal en fait serait de les rendre indésirables, incompatibles, et d’en chasser le plus grand nombre. Finkelkraut a bien résumé cet état d’esprit : « L’islamisme n’est pas sans lien avec l’islam. » Donc cette religion serait, en elle-même, problématique pour le « vivre-ensemble » en France. Et l’amalgame de Haziza et d’autres tend à cet objectif ultime.
Certains caricaturistes dissidents, comme l’Artiste Mal Pensant, ont mis l’accent sur la responsabilité du gouvernement Hollande dans cette affaire en rappelant le laxisme lié au départ de nombreux jeunes djihadistes français en Syrie [3]. Quelle est votre analyse à ce sujet ?
Il est certain que les gouvernements français, de Sarkozy à Hollande, ont joué avec le feu en détruisant la Libye, en bombardant l’Irak, et en aidant l’insurrection armée contre le pouvoir syrien. Mais comme souvent, ces calculs ont révélé une faille. Les jeunes qui sont partis en Syrie ont reçu un entraînement qu’ils n’auraient pas pu avoir autrement. Si on prend en compte le fait qu’ils détestent l’Occident et le sionisme, qu’ils ont subi depuis une ou deux générations les discriminations et les harcèlements divers propres aux musulmans, on peut comprendre qu’ils aient envie d’en découdre. On ne peut pas généraliser ce genre de réactions, mais il suffirait de quelques-uns pour déclencher des réactions en chaîne. On peut aussi rappeler que des milliers de jeunes d’origine maghrébine pourraient, pour toutes les raisons que l’on connaît, s’inspirer de ces actions violentes. Il est dramatique de penser que pour complaire à l’Amérique et à Israël le gouvernement français mène une politique irrationnelle et dangereuse.
De nombreux chefs d’État se sont rendus le 11 janvier à Paris pour participer à la « marche républicaine ». Que vous inspire la présence de Benyamin Netanyahou, qui a profité de l’occasion pour appeler les juifs de France à faire leur alya ?
Tout d’abord c’est un ramassis d’hypocrites, de dirigeants sans morale ni intégrité politique. On a assisté à une mascarade qui doit certainement avoir des objectifs inavoués. On ne fait pas tout ce cinéma pour une protestation. C’était un « show » extraordinaire, qui prépare l’opinion, déjà acquise, à des mesures drastiques. La présence de Netanyahou a apporté la touche de cynisme pour compléter le tableau. J’y vois, en dehors du fait que c’est pure abjection qu’un criminel de guerre de cette envergure soit là, une espèce de légitimation du rôle central d’Israël pour combattre « l’hydre terroriste islamique ». Et donc, il ne faudrait plus l’embêter avec les aspects dérisoires de l’occupation et de la colonisation. Qu’il appelle les juifs de France à faire leur alya montre qu’il joue la cassure en toute impunité. Il est sûr de lui. Il vient en France comme en pays conquis.
Les quatre victimes françaises de l’Hyper Cacher seront toutes enterrées en Israëli [4]. Est-ce que cela vous surprend ?
Je reconnais avoir été surpris par la nouvelle, mais beaucoup moins lorsque j’ai appris les modalités par une radio sioniste. En fait, ce n’était pas la volonté des victimes. Ce sont les autorités sionistes qui ont fait pression sur les dirigeants communautaires en France pour qu’ils accèdent à cette exigence. Les sionistes évidemment prenant en charge tous les frais. Mais on peut déjà imaginer une cérémonie en grande pompe, avec les médias et les politiques, pour faire vibrer la corde sensible, le destin tragique des victimes tuées parce que juives, et la nécessité de construire un pays juif solide et invulnérable pour protéger tous les juifs du monde qui se sentiraient en insécurité. Du grand art. Goebbels peut aller se rhabiller. En matière de propagande, les sionistes ont atteint des sommets.
Enfin, croyez-vous qu’il sera plus difficile pour le gouvernement français de s’attaquer à Dieudonné maintenant que le thème de la liberté d’expression a été autant mis en avant à propos de Charlie Hebdo ?
Je ne le crois pas. Ce serait d’ailleurs une erreur de le penser ou de l’espérer. La liberté d’expression, oui, plus que jamais. Mais la liberté dans la dignité et le respect mutuel. Surtout pas la liberté qui appelle à la haine. Vous avez vu ce que cela a donné ? Des attentats monstrueux. Vous voulez que ça recommence ? Pourquoi croyez-vous que les judéo-sionistes, dont l’inénarrable F. Haziza, ont tenté de créer un lien entre les attentats et les leaders de la dissidence ? Ça va être leur cheval de bataille. Il y a deux choses qui ne changeront pas : le cynisme du système et le fameux « deux poids deux mesures ».
Notes
[1] http://jacobdemeknes.blogspot.fr/2015/01/charlie-hebdo-ou-la-trahison-des-clercs.html[2] http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Tuerie-a-Charlie-Hebdo-Haziza-diffuse-sa-haine-sur-Twitter-30167.html
[3] https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10906482_1588924654672332_8373805246798017756_n.jpg?oh=1eeddd6c40fcd82d8c8b00eee0f8afc2&oe=553AB2E2&__gda__=1429809115_c6b3ea45b76b0b91aa8b2bb9e6666203
[4] http://www.i24news.tv/fr/actu/israel/societe/57340-150111-les-victimes-de-l-attentat-contre-l-hypercacher-seront-enterrees-en-israel
|
| Cet article a été vu 51484 fois Popularité : 1 Commentaires : 44 |
| Article précédent Les dessins de la semaine |
Article suivant Je suis Shoarlie |
Entretien avec Dominique Baettig sur l’attentat contre Charlie Hebdo
Propos recueillis pour E&R par Alimuddin Usmani le 24 janvier 2015
- Publié le : dimanche 25 janvier
- Mots-clés : Communautés; Dieudonné; France; Tuerie à Charlie Hebdo
- Commentaires : 6
L’attentat meurtrier contre Charlie Hebdo
a provoqué une émotion considérable en France mais également dans le
monde entier. Qu’est ce qui explique selon-vous l’ampleur de cette
émotion ?
L’attentat contre les journalistes de Charlie Hebdo apparaît comme un événement, un aboutissement, s’inscrivant directement dans une chronique de la « haine annoncée » débutée par l’utilisation de certains propos de Zemmour sur la guerre civile qui vient entre musulmans et Français, le pamphlet La Soumission de Houellebecq, l’effervescence djihadiste de jeunes français islamistes radicaux en Syrie et les avertissements apocalyptiques du gouvernement Netanyahu. Cet événement effrayant apparaît comme une stratégie de la tension, du chaos, redonnant du nerf à la posture néoconservatrice des socialistes français et européens. En termes de propagande, cette action mobilise tous les stéréotypes de la guerre des civilisations thématisés contre les barbares obscurantistes, rétrogrades, non-démocrates, machistes, homophobes, qui sont les épouvantails taillés sur mesure par les propagandistes du nouvel ordre mondial du Marché, de la libre circulation et du monothéisme laïc obligatoire. L’opération est parfaitement réussie, frappant un journal qui fut iconoclaste et anarchiste, bête et méchant, avant de provoquer pour le compte de la Guerre des civilisations que mènent les États-Unis, l’Union européenne et Israël. Et de prétendre incarner, à tort, les valeurs de la civilisation et de la liberté d’expression. Il ne s’agit en fait que des valeurs de « gauche » : communautarisme promu par des minorités en « avant-garde », individualisme forcené des droits de l’Homme, antidémocratisme élitaire, progressisme hostile au bon sens commun et à l’intérêt général, sectarisme totalitaire avec diabolisation ou psychiatrisation de ses adversaires.
Le pape François a défendu la liberté d’expression suite à l’attaque du journal satirique français, mais a également souligné ses limites, affirmant que les religions doivent être traitées avec respect, afin que la foi des autres peuples ne soit pas insultée ou tournée en ridicule. Est-ce que la liberté d’expression doit avoir des limites ?
Il est évident que la liberté d’expression intégrale n’existe pas. Des limites sont posées par les rapports de force des groupes religieux, la situation de dépendance économique, le contrôle politique et ses stratégies de soumission, l’autocensure imposée comme valeur suprême. Sans compter le fonctionnement psychopathologique, paranoïaque de certains porte-paroles autoproclamés de groupes de « victimes de souffrance », qui s’autorisent à sonder les pensées, les propos, les intentions de ceux qui exprimeraient critiques ou points de vue divergents. Et qui terrorisent de manière préventive, dénoncent, excluent socialement, ont le droit de saisir la justice, qui ne peut rester objective (la paranoïa est totalitaire et auto-entretenue sans fin, elle ignore la relativité, le contexte, le pardon, la diversité des points de vue, la différence entre pensée, fantasmes et actes...) La liberté d’expression, de pensée doit être protégée de la folie persécutrice de victimes, ou de représentants minoritaires autoproclamés qui prétendent imposer leur justice unilatérale nombrilique qui n’est pas la Justice. Celle-ci se reconnait d’abord au fait qu’elle tient compte de l’existence de l’Autre et de son point de vue.
Dieudonné a été mis en garde à vue suite à un tweet où il ironisait à propos du fait qu’il soit traité en ennemi public numéro un par le gouvernement alors que sa liberté d’expression peut également s’assimiler à celle de Charlie Hebdo. Il avait écrit : « Je me sens Charlie Coulibaly. » Que pensez-vous de cet épisode ?
On est ici en pleine Inquisition, en plein totalitarisme de l’interprétation paranoïaque des paroles prises au pied de la lettre, sans prise en compte du contexte ou relativisation des croyances et points de vue. Il s’agit d’une régression terrible pour une société soi-disant de libertés fondamentales, où tout est possible mais rien n’est permis. La chasse sur les réseaux sociaux, par une armée d’inquisiteurs, de policiers de la pensée, de groupes « antifa » ou communautaristes, de tout propos ou toute intention critique est effrayante. Big Brother va finir par paraître une douce plaisanterie par rapport à ce qui se met en place comme totalitarisme moraliste. Un tweet humoristique et parodique devient une apologie du terrorisme. C’est délirant, alors qu’on prône comme valeur de civilisation les propos irresponsables, blasphématoires, caricaturaux de Charlie Hebdo. Deux poids, deux mesures, assurément. Chez ces gens-là, on ne rit pas, Monsieur, et on terrorise les dissidents et esprits libres non-conformistes.
En lisant la phrase de Dieudonné, Marine Le Pen a déclaré avoir eu la « nausée » tandis que Jean-Marie Le Pen a défendu la liberté d’expressioni. L’évolution du Front national vous inquiète-t-elle ?
Le procès d’intention est détestable. Marine Le Pen, qui cherche à échapper à la diabolisation médiatique (en ignorant qu’elle peut dire ce qu’elle veut pour être politiquement correcte et acceptable, finalement ce n’est pas elle qui décidera si elle est du bon côté et libérée vraiment du Mal...), se vulnérabilise en rajoutant dans la distanciation, qui est une soumission à la pensée unique. Un esprit libre ou encore enraciné dans les valeurs chrétiennes s’inspirera plutôt de la parabole de la brebis égarée, qui mérite qu’on ne l’abandonne pas et qu’elle ne soit pas transformée en « bouc émissaire ». Jean-Marie Le Pen incarne, lui, au contraire, l’esprit gaulois, rabelaisien, le recours au mot d’esprit, au bon mot qui résiste au totalitarisme et à la paranoïa. L’humour comme antithèse à la paranoïa totalitaire et vrai combat politique pour les libertés. (Relire Umberto Eco et son passionnant Nom de la Rose...)
La nouvelle caricature du prophète Mohammed a provoqué des émeutes dans certains pays musulmans. Au Niger une dizaine de personnes a été tuée et des églises brûlées. De toute évidence les émeutiers semblaient ignorer que Charlie Hebdo avait une tendance anticléricale et qu’il prenait un malin plaisir à offenser les chrétiens. Qui a intérêt à provoquer un choc des civilisations ?
C’est la stratégie de désignation de l’ennemi du Nouvel Ordre mondial, qui doit trouver maintenant un adversaire diabolisé, qui servira à repérer ceux qui critiquent l’immigration sans limite ou l’immigration de peuplement. Les islamophobes deviendront rapidement pires que l’islam pour la gauche moraliste, qui veut la liberté totale de circulation et créer un monde multiculturel utopique où les groupes communautaristes imposeront leur vision manichéenne du Bien et du Mal. Et soumettront l’islam au modèle de la laïcité, par l’obligation de renier certaines valeurs de leur religion en se distanciant sans fin (par culpabilisation) des extrémistes.
L’attentat contre les journalistes de Charlie Hebdo apparaît comme un événement, un aboutissement, s’inscrivant directement dans une chronique de la « haine annoncée » débutée par l’utilisation de certains propos de Zemmour sur la guerre civile qui vient entre musulmans et Français, le pamphlet La Soumission de Houellebecq, l’effervescence djihadiste de jeunes français islamistes radicaux en Syrie et les avertissements apocalyptiques du gouvernement Netanyahu. Cet événement effrayant apparaît comme une stratégie de la tension, du chaos, redonnant du nerf à la posture néoconservatrice des socialistes français et européens. En termes de propagande, cette action mobilise tous les stéréotypes de la guerre des civilisations thématisés contre les barbares obscurantistes, rétrogrades, non-démocrates, machistes, homophobes, qui sont les épouvantails taillés sur mesure par les propagandistes du nouvel ordre mondial du Marché, de la libre circulation et du monothéisme laïc obligatoire. L’opération est parfaitement réussie, frappant un journal qui fut iconoclaste et anarchiste, bête et méchant, avant de provoquer pour le compte de la Guerre des civilisations que mènent les États-Unis, l’Union européenne et Israël. Et de prétendre incarner, à tort, les valeurs de la civilisation et de la liberté d’expression. Il ne s’agit en fait que des valeurs de « gauche » : communautarisme promu par des minorités en « avant-garde », individualisme forcené des droits de l’Homme, antidémocratisme élitaire, progressisme hostile au bon sens commun et à l’intérêt général, sectarisme totalitaire avec diabolisation ou psychiatrisation de ses adversaires.
Le pape François a défendu la liberté d’expression suite à l’attaque du journal satirique français, mais a également souligné ses limites, affirmant que les religions doivent être traitées avec respect, afin que la foi des autres peuples ne soit pas insultée ou tournée en ridicule. Est-ce que la liberté d’expression doit avoir des limites ?
Il est évident que la liberté d’expression intégrale n’existe pas. Des limites sont posées par les rapports de force des groupes religieux, la situation de dépendance économique, le contrôle politique et ses stratégies de soumission, l’autocensure imposée comme valeur suprême. Sans compter le fonctionnement psychopathologique, paranoïaque de certains porte-paroles autoproclamés de groupes de « victimes de souffrance », qui s’autorisent à sonder les pensées, les propos, les intentions de ceux qui exprimeraient critiques ou points de vue divergents. Et qui terrorisent de manière préventive, dénoncent, excluent socialement, ont le droit de saisir la justice, qui ne peut rester objective (la paranoïa est totalitaire et auto-entretenue sans fin, elle ignore la relativité, le contexte, le pardon, la diversité des points de vue, la différence entre pensée, fantasmes et actes...) La liberté d’expression, de pensée doit être protégée de la folie persécutrice de victimes, ou de représentants minoritaires autoproclamés qui prétendent imposer leur justice unilatérale nombrilique qui n’est pas la Justice. Celle-ci se reconnait d’abord au fait qu’elle tient compte de l’existence de l’Autre et de son point de vue.
Dieudonné a été mis en garde à vue suite à un tweet où il ironisait à propos du fait qu’il soit traité en ennemi public numéro un par le gouvernement alors que sa liberté d’expression peut également s’assimiler à celle de Charlie Hebdo. Il avait écrit : « Je me sens Charlie Coulibaly. » Que pensez-vous de cet épisode ?
On est ici en pleine Inquisition, en plein totalitarisme de l’interprétation paranoïaque des paroles prises au pied de la lettre, sans prise en compte du contexte ou relativisation des croyances et points de vue. Il s’agit d’une régression terrible pour une société soi-disant de libertés fondamentales, où tout est possible mais rien n’est permis. La chasse sur les réseaux sociaux, par une armée d’inquisiteurs, de policiers de la pensée, de groupes « antifa » ou communautaristes, de tout propos ou toute intention critique est effrayante. Big Brother va finir par paraître une douce plaisanterie par rapport à ce qui se met en place comme totalitarisme moraliste. Un tweet humoristique et parodique devient une apologie du terrorisme. C’est délirant, alors qu’on prône comme valeur de civilisation les propos irresponsables, blasphématoires, caricaturaux de Charlie Hebdo. Deux poids, deux mesures, assurément. Chez ces gens-là, on ne rit pas, Monsieur, et on terrorise les dissidents et esprits libres non-conformistes.
En lisant la phrase de Dieudonné, Marine Le Pen a déclaré avoir eu la « nausée » tandis que Jean-Marie Le Pen a défendu la liberté d’expressioni. L’évolution du Front national vous inquiète-t-elle ?
Le procès d’intention est détestable. Marine Le Pen, qui cherche à échapper à la diabolisation médiatique (en ignorant qu’elle peut dire ce qu’elle veut pour être politiquement correcte et acceptable, finalement ce n’est pas elle qui décidera si elle est du bon côté et libérée vraiment du Mal...), se vulnérabilise en rajoutant dans la distanciation, qui est une soumission à la pensée unique. Un esprit libre ou encore enraciné dans les valeurs chrétiennes s’inspirera plutôt de la parabole de la brebis égarée, qui mérite qu’on ne l’abandonne pas et qu’elle ne soit pas transformée en « bouc émissaire ». Jean-Marie Le Pen incarne, lui, au contraire, l’esprit gaulois, rabelaisien, le recours au mot d’esprit, au bon mot qui résiste au totalitarisme et à la paranoïa. L’humour comme antithèse à la paranoïa totalitaire et vrai combat politique pour les libertés. (Relire Umberto Eco et son passionnant Nom de la Rose...)
La nouvelle caricature du prophète Mohammed a provoqué des émeutes dans certains pays musulmans. Au Niger une dizaine de personnes a été tuée et des églises brûlées. De toute évidence les émeutiers semblaient ignorer que Charlie Hebdo avait une tendance anticléricale et qu’il prenait un malin plaisir à offenser les chrétiens. Qui a intérêt à provoquer un choc des civilisations ?
C’est la stratégie de désignation de l’ennemi du Nouvel Ordre mondial, qui doit trouver maintenant un adversaire diabolisé, qui servira à repérer ceux qui critiquent l’immigration sans limite ou l’immigration de peuplement. Les islamophobes deviendront rapidement pires que l’islam pour la gauche moraliste, qui veut la liberté totale de circulation et créer un monde multiculturel utopique où les groupes communautaristes imposeront leur vision manichéenne du Bien et du Mal. Et soumettront l’islam au modèle de la laïcité, par l’obligation de renier certaines valeurs de leur religion en se distanciant sans fin (par culpabilisation) des extrémistes.
-
E&R | Février 2014 |43 ImmigrationPolitique Entretien avec le politicien suisse Dominique Baettig sur l’immigration
Propos recueillis pour E&R par Alimuddin Usmani le 23 février 2014
L’acceptation de l’initiative « Contre l’immigration de masse » en Suisse a suscité de nombreuses réactions à travers toute l’Europe. Il y a un réel fossé entre les peuples, qui voient dans leur majorité (...)
-
E&R | Janvier 2014 |13 PolitiqueSociété Entretien avec Dominique Baettig sur l’affaire Dieudonné
Propos recueillis pour E&R par Alimuddin Usmani le 23 janvier 2014
Dieudonné reçoit quelques soutiens de l’étranger, dont celui du politicien suisse de l’UDC, Dominique Baettig. Il a souhaité réagir, en exclusivité pour Égalité & Réconciliation, à l’acharnement du (...)
| E&R | Décembre 2013 |35 | MédiasPolitique |
Dialogues désaccordés vu par un politicien suisse
Entretien avec Dominique Baettig – Exclusivité E&R
Le tout dernier livre d’Alain Soral et d’Éric Naulleau, Dialogues désaccordés. Combat de Blancs dans un tunnel, connaît déjà un succès considérable en France mais également au-delà de ses frontières. (...)
Le tout dernier livre d’Alain Soral et d’Éric Naulleau, Dialogues désaccordés. Combat de Blancs dans un tunnel, connaît déjà un succès considérable en France mais également au-delà de ses frontières. (...)
Un élève de 14 ans jugé pour "apologie du terrorisme" après 24 heures de garde à vue
- Publié le : lundi 26 janvier
- Mots-clés : Éducation; France; Justice; Tuerie à Charlie Hebdo
- Commentaires : 15
- Source : E&R
L’affaire
commence le 9 janvier dernier. Alors qu’un professeur de français en
collège propose à ses élèves « un débat » sur l’attentat de Charlie Hebdo, un
élève intervient et s’exclame : « Ils ont eu raison. » Imputable à
l’ « âge bête », cette réflexion immature va être pour l’enfant le début
de son calvaire.
En lieu et place d’une explication pédagogique, le professeur ordonne : « Si tu penses ça, sors de ma classe. » L’élève se rend chez la conseillère principale d’éducation (CPE), qui lui explique pourquoi on ne peut penser que des terroristes « ont eu raison ». L’affaire aurait pu en rester là. Mais après le week-end, le lundi 13 janvier, le gamin est convoqué, chez le principal cette fois-ci, et exprime ses regrets. Le 14, lors d’une nouvelle convocation chez le principal, ses parents apprennent son exclusion pour une semaine, en attendant un conseil de discipline, souvent synonyme d’exclusion définitive.
Mais le principal, se rêvant sans doute en résistant, ne s’arrête pas là et porte plainte à la police contre l’enfant. Et le lendemain, alors que la famille se rend au commissariat afin d’être entendue, l’adolescent est placé en garde-à-vue pour une durée de vingt-quatre heures. Le 17 janvier au matin, l’adolescent est présenté menotté au juge pour une mise en examen pour apologie de terrorisme. Cette histoire surréaliste, rapportée par Rue89 n’est qu’un énième épisode des dérives de la justice en ce mois de janvier.
Suite à la circulaire du 12 janvier promulguée par Christiane Taubira, appelant les procureurs à la plus grande fermeté, le ministère de la Justice a déjà engagé plus de cent procédures pour « apologie de terrorisme ». C’est ainsi qu’une trentaine de personnes ont déjà été condamnées, parmi lesquels des déficients mentaux, des personnes en état d’ébriété… ou des enfants.
En lieu et place d’une explication pédagogique, le professeur ordonne : « Si tu penses ça, sors de ma classe. » L’élève se rend chez la conseillère principale d’éducation (CPE), qui lui explique pourquoi on ne peut penser que des terroristes « ont eu raison ». L’affaire aurait pu en rester là. Mais après le week-end, le lundi 13 janvier, le gamin est convoqué, chez le principal cette fois-ci, et exprime ses regrets. Le 14, lors d’une nouvelle convocation chez le principal, ses parents apprennent son exclusion pour une semaine, en attendant un conseil de discipline, souvent synonyme d’exclusion définitive.
Mais le principal, se rêvant sans doute en résistant, ne s’arrête pas là et porte plainte à la police contre l’enfant. Et le lendemain, alors que la famille se rend au commissariat afin d’être entendue, l’adolescent est placé en garde-à-vue pour une durée de vingt-quatre heures. Le 17 janvier au matin, l’adolescent est présenté menotté au juge pour une mise en examen pour apologie de terrorisme. Cette histoire surréaliste, rapportée par Rue89 n’est qu’un énième épisode des dérives de la justice en ce mois de janvier.
Suite à la circulaire du 12 janvier promulguée par Christiane Taubira, appelant les procureurs à la plus grande fermeté, le ministère de la Justice a déjà engagé plus de cent procédures pour « apologie de terrorisme ». C’est ainsi qu’une trentaine de personnes ont déjà été condamnées, parmi lesquels des déficients mentaux, des personnes en état d’ébriété… ou des enfants.
| E&R | 26 janvier | |20 | HistoireMédiasPolitique |
Soral répond ! : l’émission spéciale Charlie Hebdo du 11 janvier 2015
Le 11 janvier 2015, en direct sur ERTV, Alain Soral répondait aux
questions des internautes sur l’actualité politique et donnait notamment
son analyse des attentats de Paris.
Ce qu'on vous cache sur les attentats de Charlie Hebdo (N'IMPORTE QUOI!!! QUEL CON!!!)
-
20:34
-
15:27
-
53:33
360,147
Zionist-controlled media seeking to destroy religions: Scholar
The war on Islam is really a war on all religions
Introduction by Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor
The New World Order is a freemasonic plan for a post-religious global dictatorship. It would be a “new” world order for two reasons: (1) It would be the first empire ever to embrace (or strangle) the entire planet. (2) It would be the first civilization to completely abandon religion.It would also be a “new world” order in that it would be ruled from the New World – specifically, from that monstrous maze of freemasonic symbols known as Washington, DC. Once the plan is sufficiently advanced, they may intend to move the capital to Occupied Jerusalem, where a false messiah (antichrist/dajjal) would be installed as global dictator.
Zionism – a diabolical, idolatrous Jewish heresy that worships the State of Israel and the Jewish people rather than God – is a key element of the New World Order plot to destroy humanity.
To understand what is at stake here, read the Grand Inquisitor section of Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov. The New World Order plotters think like the Grand Inquisitor. They want to create a perfect (or perfectly controlled) society in which the hallmarks of humanity – spirituality and free choice – have been erased.
Watch the video at Press TV
The Zionist-controlled media in the United States is seeking to “destroy” Islam and Christianity while promoting a “clash of civilizations,” an American scholar and journalist in Wisconsin says.Radical secularists want to create a new world order in which religions are mocked and freedom of speech is considered sacred, said Dr. Kevin Barrett, a founding member of the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance.
“The Zionist-dominated media here in the United states is helping foment a clash of civilizations against Islam, but which is secretly designed not only to destroy Islam, but also Christianity,” Barrett told Press TV on Wednesday.
A new survey suggests that a relative majority of Americans believe it is acceptable to ridicule Islam, highlighting the depth of anti-Islamic sentiment and widespread Islamophobia in the United States.
According to the HuffPost/YouGov survey, 46 percent of Americans thought it was acceptable to mock Islam, while 44 percent said it was unacceptable to mock Christianity, a consequence of the “Islamophobia project” promoted by US media outlets.
Moreover, 63 percent of Americans said it is more important to protect the freedom of speech than to protect the sanctity of religious beliefs. Only 19 percent said the sanctity of religious beliefs was more important than free speech and 18 percent were not sure.
The survey was taken shortly after 12 people were killed in an attack on the Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris. The French magazine has repeatedly provoked Muslim anger by publishing cartoons of the Prophet of Islam.
The Western media is “spinning this Charlie Hebdo affair, which actually appears to have been a false flag event created to unleash all this propaganda,” Barrett said.
“They’re doing this in order to try to get rid of the sacred from society and to put new sacred values in place of the traditional sacred values of traditional religions,” he noted.
The media is trying to replace sacred religious values in Western societies with immorality, homosexuality, incest, blasphemy and destructive free speech, Barrett concluded.
JFK pronconça ces paroles dans le but de souligner le soutien des USA aux Allemands de l'Ouest contre les Allemands de l'Est.
"Lass' sie nach Berlin kommen" - Laissez-les venir à Berlin, parlant des Allemands de l'Est qui désiraient venir à Berlin Ouest afin de démontrer que les Capitalistes et les Communistes pouvaient travailler ensemble.
Sur les marches de Rathaus Schöneberg, il rappela à une audience de 450,000 personnes présentes, la célèbre formule: civis romanus sum - je suis un citoyen romain! Faisait-il ainsi
À l'époque de JFK, le monde occidental sous contrôle judéo-maçonnique était fier de dire tout haut: Today "Ich bin ein Berliner!" Tous les hommes (pas les femmes!) libres, peu importe où ils habitaient, furent des citoyens de Berlin, et, comme un homme libre (croyait-il), JFK prononça avec une grande fierté ces mots: "Ich bin ein Berliner!" alors que les habitants de Berlin ne se disaient jamais Berlinois. Berliner dans le jargon local voulait tout simplement dire beignet!
Theodore Chaikin "Ted" Sorensen (May 8, 1928 – October 31, 2010), de mère juive de Russie (Annis (Chaikin) Sorensen, écrivit la plupart des discours de JFK, y compris le plagiat du poète mystique chrétien Khalil Gibran qui avait écrit: "Ne demandez pas ce que peut faire le pays pour vous; demandez ce que vous pouvez faire pour votre pays!"
Il est d'usage de dire "Nous sommes tous Palestiniens", et cela ne veut pas dire pour autant que ceux et celles qui disent ces mots font "l'apologie du terrorisme palestinien" ou qu'ils soient des voyous, des brigands, des gangsters, des enfoirés (Jacques Weber) comme veulent nous le faire croire les criminels et 'philosophes' juifs, et les sionistes de France et d'ailleurs!
BAFS
Samedi 4 janvier 2015
FRENCH "CIVILISATION DE MERDE"!
Pour vivre ensemble il faut savoir aimer 1971
http://muhammad-ali-ben-marcus.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/to-live-together-we-must-learn-to-love.html
THE JEWISH FREEMASONIC WAR ON ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY GETS WORSE!
http://muhammad-ali-ben-marcus.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/the-jewish-freemasonic-war-on-islam-and.html
Je suis Shoarlie
« On
va continuer à faire nos bonshommes. Notre boulot de dessinateur est de
mettre le petit bonhomme au coeur du dessin, de traduire l’idée qu’on
est tous des petits bonshommes et qu’on essaie de se démerder avec ça.
C’est ça le dessin. Ceux qu’on a tués étaient juste des gens qui
dessinaient des bonshommes. Et aussi des bonnes-femmes. » Quand Luz déclare sur le site des Inrocks le 12 janvier 2015 que les membres de la bande de Charlie étaient juste de simples dessinateurs qui ne faisaient que croquer des petits bonhommes, il se trompe, et nous trompe.
La dureté des dessins, mal ressentie par les communautés musulmane et catholique qu’on pouvait choquer sans grand risque, vu leurs représentation médiatique quasi nulle, le fut plus encore par les modérés – qui recevaient cette pluie de crachats inexplicable – que par les ultras, preuve qu’un effet d’impact maximal a toujours été recherché. C’était d’ailleurs le credo du tandem Choron/Cavanna, créateur de Charlie Hebdo il y a 45 ans, avant que Choron ne soit dépouillé de son titre au début des années 90 par la trahison des anciens. Dès lors, Charlie prit une tournure différente.
Les accroches de une, qui se doivent d’être vendeuses selon le principe « le scandale c’est la pub du pauvre », étaient de moins en moins motivées par la grosse déconne gauloise, et de plus en plus par la détestation, une détestation politique classique, celle de la gauche contre tout ce qui symbolisait la droite : curés, militaires, bourgeois, patrons, Blancs, tous proclamés racistes, capitalistes, colonialistes, machistes et honteusement antisémites. L’esprit de Vichy ! Un tir groupé plus connu sous le nom de « la connerie ». Un racisme de gauche, en vérité, sûr de lui et dominateur, ne souffrant aucune discussion : discuter, c’était tout de suite se mettre du mauvais côté. Sinon, comment Cabu aurait-il pu injecter dans ses croquis pendant 50 ans autant de mépris de classe sans une hostilité originelle, permanente, magistrale, à l’encontre des beaufs ? Il fallait au moins ça, un réacteur nucléaire à base de cet uranium enrichissant qu’est le dégoût, pour lancer aussi sûrement et aussi prestement dans la même cible autant de flèches, par milliers, par dizaines de milliers. Pour ce travail de sape dans la lignée de Cabu, les néocharlie furent largement récompensés par la socioculture : passages télé, embauches multiples, car si leur trait était libertaire (la ligne dite crade), leurs idées, elles, étaient parfaitement soumises à la ligne du parti dominant.
La disparition progressive de la bienveillance (charrier ses ennemis mais leur accorder malgré tout de l’humanité) explique la désaffection grandissante du public à l’encontre de cette publication. Inversement, le dessinateur Reiser, qu’on taxait pourtant de féroce, et qui a été à l’origine de cette pépinière de talents graphiques, et du style coup de poing dans la gueule, faisait rire dans tous les sens, à gauche et à droite, des uns et des autres, car chacun en prenait pour son grade. Il ne ciblait que l’ignorance (dans ce milieu, on dit « la connerie », ce qui a l’avantage de la rejeter loin de soi), qui endosse tous les habits du monde. Les dessinateurs du dernier Charlie, à force de ne cogner que sur les mêmes, ont fini par être assimilés à cette agressivité obsessive, contrairement à leurs prédécesseurs. Le journal est alors devenu le symbole et le fer de lance de l’exécration politique, déclenchant des réactions… d’exécration politique.
Il y a deux sortes de dessinateurs : les politiques, et ceux qui pratiquent l’humour total, on pense à Vuillemin, absolument inclassable, hors concours, comme l’est Dieudonné en one-man-show. Ceux dont le trait et l’humour servent un dessein politique, et ceux qui ne servent que l’humour, qui n’ont d’autre projet que l’humour. Les prosélytes puritains à la Charb, et les gros déconneurs à la Siné. Deux espèces qui peuvent cohabiter, mais pas longtemps : les vrais rigolos de Charlie, ces « droits communs » que sont Martin, Faujour, Lefred, Siné et compagnie, furent plus ou moins expulsés par les « politiques » Cabu, Charb et leurs soldats bien alignés. Où l’on retrouve hiérarchie et soumission bien militaires au milieu des bouffeurs de militaires ! Croqueurs de flics et de curés, les détenteurs illégitimes de Charlie se posèrent en nouveaux flics et curés : flics de la pensée, et curés d’une église politique bien déguisée sous ses oripeaux islamo-cathophobes et, coïncidence, furieusement compatible avec le sionisme au pouvoir. On ne tue que ce qu’on remplace.
Le drame qui a frappé la tête pensante de Charlie n’est ni la punition, ni la rançon de leur racisme de gauche. Non, c’est un montage de service – ou de services – qui s’est servi du positionnement marketing de ce journal en perdition pour asséner un coup violent au peuple français, qui commençait à dériver quelque peu, politiquement. Non pas vers la droite ou la gauche, ni même vers l’extrême droite ou l’extrême gauche, qui ne font peur à personne dans l’élitosphère, mais vers une lucidité qui menace le pouvoir de contrôle du système médiatico-politique. Le grand rassemblement de peur (on crée la peur par les coups pour que le troupeau resserre les rangs et coure vers l’enclos prévu à cet effet) qui a eu lieu dimanche 11 janvier 2015 porte la marque du Maître, qui a fouetté les brebis qui essaimaient dans les bois, les champs, et la dangereuse liberté de penser. Une reprise en main vigoureuse qui a nécessité de frapper un faux symbole de liberté, qui ne parlait plus à grand monde. De l’atroce realpolitik du pouvoir réel.
Charlie, dont le rôle aurait dû être d’exprimer la vraie, la joyeuse, la saine subversion française, rabelaisienne, antiaméricaine et antisioniste, non par obsession mais parce que ce sont les deux maîtres du moment, a loupé le train du peuple, pour finir dans les décors, c’est-à-dire avec les félicitations du pouvoir (voir la pire homélie funèbre qu’on puisse imaginer, sur France 2, avec Nagui, Lapix et Cohen), et le mépris des lecteurs intelligents. Il n’est, là, pas du tout question d’Islam. Ce n’est pas l’Islam qui a affaibli Charlie, bien au contraire : c’est l’islamophobie et dans une moindre mesure la cathophobie qui ont maintenu ce titre sous respiration artificielle depuis les caricatures de Mahomet en 2006. Et qui l’ont propulsé dans une impasse, celle de la surenchère dans la couv islamophobe et cathophobe, pour ne pas dire sioniste, une surenchère forcément bien vue par l’élite, moins par le peuple lecteur, qui s’est senti trahi, abandonné : Charlie tapait sur les derniers représentants, défenseurs ou consolateurs des pauvres, le Parti communiste mis à part. Mais, dans sa version Pierre Laurent, a-t-on encore le droit de l’appeler comme ça ?
La survie du journal a donc été paradoxalement basée sur un positionnement perdant, un choix éditorial lourd de conséquences, celui de Philippe Val, qui a littéralement tué l’intégrité journalistique et l’humour libre, non soumis à des calculs politiques ou réseautaires, intégrité et déconnade qui faisaient le charme du vrai Charlie. Les amoureux du foutage de gueule jouissif des vrais maîtres le savent, c’est le faux Charlie qui est mort, et désormais mourant, mais avec, ô miracle, les fées du système qui se pressent autour de lui, et se vengent ainsi, avec un délice de perversité gourmande, de la défaite d’un des derniers titres non-alignés. C’est ça qui est révoltant : la récupération morbide.
Si nous ne pleurons pas la mort de Charlie aujourd’hui avec le chœur des pleureuses hypocrites, qui n’ont jamais acheté un Charlie, ni l’ancien ni le nouveau, et que ce vieux batave de Willem a raison de vomir, c’est que nous l’avons pleurée depuis longtemps, depuis 20 ans et sa vassalisation. Et la mort brutale de ses représentants n’y change rien. Ne nous jetez pas la pierre de l’inhumanité, car nous, nous payons chaque jour par l’opprobre le prix de l’honnêteté vis-à-vis de nos lecteurs, et des lecteurs qui ne sont pas nôtres. Nous ne mentons pas. Et puis, nous sommes lucides : personne ne se précipitera, si nous mourons, avec pluie de pleurs et millions, pour sauver notre peau. Elle est mise à prix, car la subversion, qui échappe à toute récupération, a changé de camp. Quand on dit « nous », on ne pense pas uniquement à E&R, mais à tout ce que la Toile comporte d’esprits lucides, non conformes, s’amusant de la dinguerie d’un système aujourd’hui incarné par ce Duce d’opérette de synagogue de Valls, qui réussit le tour de force de faire passer Sarkozy pour un grand chef d’État. Les journalistes du Monde et de Libé disent fachosphère, nous répondons lucidosphère (en évitant tout rapprochement avec Lucifer). Sans haine, ni arme, ni violence.
Passons sur l’horrible récupération des morts-vivants de Charlie par France 2 le soir de la Grande Marche détournée, marche de la paix détournée par les commanditaires du terrorisme mêlés aux prestigieux invités ! On rappelle pour ceux qui n’étaient pas nés en 1934 que la Longue Marche de Mao et de ses troupes commença à 130 000, pour se terminer un an plus tard, 12 000 km et des dizaines d’embuscades plus loin, à 30 000. La Grande Marche parisienne, sans oublier ses petites sœurs de province, fera heureusement moins de victimes. Pas sûr cependant qu’elle mènera à la victoire du peuple de France, totalement trahi dans l’affaire. Mû par son émotion, et sa peur de la Mort assassine et aveugle (pas tant que ça), il a cherché à éviter l’inhibition de l’action en se retrouvant, dans la solidarité, pour resserrer ses liens. Il a alors été coiffé de ses maîtres, qui ont accouru pour mener le troupeau… nulle part, en tout cas pas à l’Élysée ou à Matignon, que les brebis respectent encore, maîtres qui ont fini par communier, sans l’encombrant peuple évidemment, dans la grande synagogue de la Victoire. Là, on transforma, sous les ors de la République Sioniste, le besoin de paix civile de tout en peuple en raffermissement du pouvoir, de son étreinte, de sa strangulation, de sa surveillance, en élargissant SA définition du terrorisme. Désormais, sera déclaré terroriste tout Français qui ne sera pas pour le pouvoir, c’est simple comme bonjour.
Première victime, qui n’a pas attendu les calendes : un certain Dieudonné, d’après les rumeurs humoriste, mais qui ne passe plus à la télé, poursuivi pour apologie du terrorisme, pour avoir commis l’attentat suivant : « Je me sens Charlie Coulibaly. » On croyait nager dans une nouvelle ère de liberté d’expression, pour que « plus jamais ça », la Shoah, Charlie, tout ça. On peut compter sur le nouveau Charlie, troisième ou quatrième du nom, pour ne pas sombrer dans ce terrorisme. Nous, eh bien, il faudra qu’on fasse triplement, quadruplement attention à nos mots.
Cavanna avait raison, on n’imagine pas jusqu’où la connerie de l’animal humain peut tomber. Jusqu’où va-t-on descendre, se demandait un sociologue il y a 12 ans. Réponse : on sait toujours pas, mais on y va.
Un racisme de gauche
La dureté des dessins, mal ressentie par les communautés musulmane et catholique qu’on pouvait choquer sans grand risque, vu leurs représentation médiatique quasi nulle, le fut plus encore par les modérés – qui recevaient cette pluie de crachats inexplicable – que par les ultras, preuve qu’un effet d’impact maximal a toujours été recherché. C’était d’ailleurs le credo du tandem Choron/Cavanna, créateur de Charlie Hebdo il y a 45 ans, avant que Choron ne soit dépouillé de son titre au début des années 90 par la trahison des anciens. Dès lors, Charlie prit une tournure différente.
Les accroches de une, qui se doivent d’être vendeuses selon le principe « le scandale c’est la pub du pauvre », étaient de moins en moins motivées par la grosse déconne gauloise, et de plus en plus par la détestation, une détestation politique classique, celle de la gauche contre tout ce qui symbolisait la droite : curés, militaires, bourgeois, patrons, Blancs, tous proclamés racistes, capitalistes, colonialistes, machistes et honteusement antisémites. L’esprit de Vichy ! Un tir groupé plus connu sous le nom de « la connerie ». Un racisme de gauche, en vérité, sûr de lui et dominateur, ne souffrant aucune discussion : discuter, c’était tout de suite se mettre du mauvais côté. Sinon, comment Cabu aurait-il pu injecter dans ses croquis pendant 50 ans autant de mépris de classe sans une hostilité originelle, permanente, magistrale, à l’encontre des beaufs ? Il fallait au moins ça, un réacteur nucléaire à base de cet uranium enrichissant qu’est le dégoût, pour lancer aussi sûrement et aussi prestement dans la même cible autant de flèches, par milliers, par dizaines de milliers. Pour ce travail de sape dans la lignée de Cabu, les néocharlie furent largement récompensés par la socioculture : passages télé, embauches multiples, car si leur trait était libertaire (la ligne dite crade), leurs idées, elles, étaient parfaitement soumises à la ligne du parti dominant.
« À Charlie, avant qu’on soit embêtés par les musulmans intégristes, on a eu affaire à l’extrême droite catholique. Ça s’est terminé normalement devant les tribunaux, ils ont perdu et voilà. Ils attaquent pour tester en espérant gagner et que la législation change. Les juifs, on doit constater qu’ils ne nous font pas chier. Dans Charlie, on traite surtout de l’Église catholique parce qu’elle est encore très majoritaire. » (Charb à Libé en 2006)Que personne n’y voie la basse tentative de justifier la tuerie de la sorte : il n’y a aucun rapport entre le contenu de Charlie depuis 10 ans, en réalité aussi subversif qu’un magazine féminin branché, puisqu’il n’a jamais ciblé le vrai pouvoir, et le sort terrible qui a été celui de ses animateurs. Disproportion, distorsion absolue, qui est désormais entre les mains de la justice… pour peu qu’on y croie. Les dessins emprunts de bienveillance, pour utiliser le terme à la mode, font moins mal, mais ont moins d’impact. La haine, la détestation sont publicitaires, et nous le savons tous. Dire ou faire du mal est un vecteur très puissant pour un message. Le mal est un medium. Et les auteurs de Charlie, comme tous les extrémistes, ce qu’ils étaient devenus, des barbus à leur façon, touillaient dans la chair de leurs cibles favorites, justifiant une véritable haine en retour, sans mettre les rieurs de leur côté. Rappelons le dessin sur Marine Le Pen, attaquée sur son physique plutôt que sur sa politique, représentée en étron. Degré zéro de l’humour, de l’inspiration, et surtout, de l’empathie. Enlaidir plutôt que caricaturer habilement, salir plutôt que critiquer finement, étaient devenues les deux mamelles du journal. La louve aux multiples tétons aura perdu sa grâce.
La disparition progressive de la bienveillance (charrier ses ennemis mais leur accorder malgré tout de l’humanité) explique la désaffection grandissante du public à l’encontre de cette publication. Inversement, le dessinateur Reiser, qu’on taxait pourtant de féroce, et qui a été à l’origine de cette pépinière de talents graphiques, et du style coup de poing dans la gueule, faisait rire dans tous les sens, à gauche et à droite, des uns et des autres, car chacun en prenait pour son grade. Il ne ciblait que l’ignorance (dans ce milieu, on dit « la connerie », ce qui a l’avantage de la rejeter loin de soi), qui endosse tous les habits du monde. Les dessinateurs du dernier Charlie, à force de ne cogner que sur les mêmes, ont fini par être assimilés à cette agressivité obsessive, contrairement à leurs prédécesseurs. Le journal est alors devenu le symbole et le fer de lance de l’exécration politique, déclenchant des réactions… d’exécration politique.
Il y a deux sortes de dessinateurs : les politiques, et ceux qui pratiquent l’humour total, on pense à Vuillemin, absolument inclassable, hors concours, comme l’est Dieudonné en one-man-show. Ceux dont le trait et l’humour servent un dessein politique, et ceux qui ne servent que l’humour, qui n’ont d’autre projet que l’humour. Les prosélytes puritains à la Charb, et les gros déconneurs à la Siné. Deux espèces qui peuvent cohabiter, mais pas longtemps : les vrais rigolos de Charlie, ces « droits communs » que sont Martin, Faujour, Lefred, Siné et compagnie, furent plus ou moins expulsés par les « politiques » Cabu, Charb et leurs soldats bien alignés. Où l’on retrouve hiérarchie et soumission bien militaires au milieu des bouffeurs de militaires ! Croqueurs de flics et de curés, les détenteurs illégitimes de Charlie se posèrent en nouveaux flics et curés : flics de la pensée, et curés d’une église politique bien déguisée sous ses oripeaux islamo-cathophobes et, coïncidence, furieusement compatible avec le sionisme au pouvoir. On ne tue que ce qu’on remplace.
Un journal de bande décimée
Le drame qui a frappé la tête pensante de Charlie n’est ni la punition, ni la rançon de leur racisme de gauche. Non, c’est un montage de service – ou de services – qui s’est servi du positionnement marketing de ce journal en perdition pour asséner un coup violent au peuple français, qui commençait à dériver quelque peu, politiquement. Non pas vers la droite ou la gauche, ni même vers l’extrême droite ou l’extrême gauche, qui ne font peur à personne dans l’élitosphère, mais vers une lucidité qui menace le pouvoir de contrôle du système médiatico-politique. Le grand rassemblement de peur (on crée la peur par les coups pour que le troupeau resserre les rangs et coure vers l’enclos prévu à cet effet) qui a eu lieu dimanche 11 janvier 2015 porte la marque du Maître, qui a fouetté les brebis qui essaimaient dans les bois, les champs, et la dangereuse liberté de penser. Une reprise en main vigoureuse qui a nécessité de frapper un faux symbole de liberté, qui ne parlait plus à grand monde. De l’atroce realpolitik du pouvoir réel.
Charlie, dont le rôle aurait dû être d’exprimer la vraie, la joyeuse, la saine subversion française, rabelaisienne, antiaméricaine et antisioniste, non par obsession mais parce que ce sont les deux maîtres du moment, a loupé le train du peuple, pour finir dans les décors, c’est-à-dire avec les félicitations du pouvoir (voir la pire homélie funèbre qu’on puisse imaginer, sur France 2, avec Nagui, Lapix et Cohen), et le mépris des lecteurs intelligents. Il n’est, là, pas du tout question d’Islam. Ce n’est pas l’Islam qui a affaibli Charlie, bien au contraire : c’est l’islamophobie et dans une moindre mesure la cathophobie qui ont maintenu ce titre sous respiration artificielle depuis les caricatures de Mahomet en 2006. Et qui l’ont propulsé dans une impasse, celle de la surenchère dans la couv islamophobe et cathophobe, pour ne pas dire sioniste, une surenchère forcément bien vue par l’élite, moins par le peuple lecteur, qui s’est senti trahi, abandonné : Charlie tapait sur les derniers représentants, défenseurs ou consolateurs des pauvres, le Parti communiste mis à part. Mais, dans sa version Pierre Laurent, a-t-on encore le droit de l’appeler comme ça ?
La survie du journal a donc été paradoxalement basée sur un positionnement perdant, un choix éditorial lourd de conséquences, celui de Philippe Val, qui a littéralement tué l’intégrité journalistique et l’humour libre, non soumis à des calculs politiques ou réseautaires, intégrité et déconnade qui faisaient le charme du vrai Charlie. Les amoureux du foutage de gueule jouissif des vrais maîtres le savent, c’est le faux Charlie qui est mort, et désormais mourant, mais avec, ô miracle, les fées du système qui se pressent autour de lui, et se vengent ainsi, avec un délice de perversité gourmande, de la défaite d’un des derniers titres non-alignés. C’est ça qui est révoltant : la récupération morbide.
Si nous ne pleurons pas la mort de Charlie aujourd’hui avec le chœur des pleureuses hypocrites, qui n’ont jamais acheté un Charlie, ni l’ancien ni le nouveau, et que ce vieux batave de Willem a raison de vomir, c’est que nous l’avons pleurée depuis longtemps, depuis 20 ans et sa vassalisation. Et la mort brutale de ses représentants n’y change rien. Ne nous jetez pas la pierre de l’inhumanité, car nous, nous payons chaque jour par l’opprobre le prix de l’honnêteté vis-à-vis de nos lecteurs, et des lecteurs qui ne sont pas nôtres. Nous ne mentons pas. Et puis, nous sommes lucides : personne ne se précipitera, si nous mourons, avec pluie de pleurs et millions, pour sauver notre peau. Elle est mise à prix, car la subversion, qui échappe à toute récupération, a changé de camp. Quand on dit « nous », on ne pense pas uniquement à E&R, mais à tout ce que la Toile comporte d’esprits lucides, non conformes, s’amusant de la dinguerie d’un système aujourd’hui incarné par ce Duce d’opérette de synagogue de Valls, qui réussit le tour de force de faire passer Sarkozy pour un grand chef d’État. Les journalistes du Monde et de Libé disent fachosphère, nous répondons lucidosphère (en évitant tout rapprochement avec Lucifer). Sans haine, ni arme, ni violence.
Je suis Shoarlie
- Allez les hyènes, le cadavre est encore chaud !
Passons sur l’horrible récupération des morts-vivants de Charlie par France 2 le soir de la Grande Marche détournée, marche de la paix détournée par les commanditaires du terrorisme mêlés aux prestigieux invités ! On rappelle pour ceux qui n’étaient pas nés en 1934 que la Longue Marche de Mao et de ses troupes commença à 130 000, pour se terminer un an plus tard, 12 000 km et des dizaines d’embuscades plus loin, à 30 000. La Grande Marche parisienne, sans oublier ses petites sœurs de province, fera heureusement moins de victimes. Pas sûr cependant qu’elle mènera à la victoire du peuple de France, totalement trahi dans l’affaire. Mû par son émotion, et sa peur de la Mort assassine et aveugle (pas tant que ça), il a cherché à éviter l’inhibition de l’action en se retrouvant, dans la solidarité, pour resserrer ses liens. Il a alors été coiffé de ses maîtres, qui ont accouru pour mener le troupeau… nulle part, en tout cas pas à l’Élysée ou à Matignon, que les brebis respectent encore, maîtres qui ont fini par communier, sans l’encombrant peuple évidemment, dans la grande synagogue de la Victoire. Là, on transforma, sous les ors de la République Sioniste, le besoin de paix civile de tout en peuple en raffermissement du pouvoir, de son étreinte, de sa strangulation, de sa surveillance, en élargissant SA définition du terrorisme. Désormais, sera déclaré terroriste tout Français qui ne sera pas pour le pouvoir, c’est simple comme bonjour.
Première victime, qui n’a pas attendu les calendes : un certain Dieudonné, d’après les rumeurs humoriste, mais qui ne passe plus à la télé, poursuivi pour apologie du terrorisme, pour avoir commis l’attentat suivant : « Je me sens Charlie Coulibaly. » On croyait nager dans une nouvelle ère de liberté d’expression, pour que « plus jamais ça », la Shoah, Charlie, tout ça. On peut compter sur le nouveau Charlie, troisième ou quatrième du nom, pour ne pas sombrer dans ce terrorisme. Nous, eh bien, il faudra qu’on fasse triplement, quadruplement attention à nos mots.
Cavanna avait raison, on n’imagine pas jusqu’où la connerie de l’animal humain peut tomber. Jusqu’où va-t-on descendre, se demandait un sociologue il y a 12 ans. Réponse : on sait toujours pas, mais on y va.
-
RDP | 10 janvier | |19 Médias Rappel – Qui a créé et à quoi sert Charlie Hebdo ?
Thierry Meyssan, Sahar Report, 1er janvier 2013
-
bourgoinblog.wordpress.com | 10 janvier | |51 MédiasPolitique Pourquoi la liberté d’expression s’arrête à Dieudonné
Certains hasards de calendrier en disent long. Un an presque jour pour jour après l’interdiction du spectacle de Dieudonné à Nantes, qui mettra un terme à sa tournée, une grande marche républicaine est (...)
| E&R | 7 janvier | |207 | Médias |
Attentat contre Charlie Hebdo : Omar m’a tuer ?
Au-delà de cet acte de guerre, contre des innocents, contre une
rédaction, contre un journal, et finalement contre la paix civile dans
notre pays, le premier devoir du journaliste, comme de (...)
Kevin Barrett
Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist, is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror.
Dr. Barrett has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications.
Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin, where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host.
Dr. Barrett has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications.
Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin, where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host.
Charlie Hebdo bombshell! Suicided officer’s family denied access to autopsy
Something is rotten in Paris
by Hicham Hamza, translated by Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor
1/25/2015 8:48 pm Paris time
The mother of Helric Fredou, “suicided” Charlie Hebdo investigator
Exclusive! Panamza has contacted the mother of Helric Fredou – the Police Commissioner charged with preparing a report on the family background of Charlie Hebdo – who was found dead with a bullet in the head just hours after the attack.
I asked for the autopsy report and was told: “You won’t get it.”
Friday, January 16, Panamza published the disturbing testimony of the sister of police officer Helric Fredou, whose mysterious “suicide” continues to be ignored by the national media. Nine days later, it was the mother’s turn to bring new revelations.
Fredou’s Mother
Contacted by the author, she said that at first she was “enormously shocked” that Minister of the Interior Bernard Cazeneuve had not passed her his condolences. The Interior Minister maintained, she said, an excellent relationship with his deceased son. From 2010 to 2012, the two men were brought together to work at Cherbourg, one as deputy mayor of the city, the other in his capacity as chief commissioner. “I hope one day I cross paths with him to tell him how very disappointed I was,” she added.
The Elysee was also (oddly) unresponsive. Helric Fredou had been responsible for – among other localités – Corrèze including Tulle, historic stronghold of Francois Hollande.
Panamza will soon return with the entirety of her testimony, collected through a telephone interview recorded Saturday, January 24. In the meantime, here are seven key points:
* 1 According to the mother of Helric Fredou, police officers with whom she spoke expressly advised that she would not have access to the autopsy report. The Code of Criminal Procedure, however, provides that in any case of legal autopsy (for suicide or suspicious death), any member of the family can make a request to the prosecutor. “Give it up” is the message being sent to a bereaved mother who “wants to know the truth.”
2 * Helric Fredou’s service weapon was not equipped with a silencer. Her mother has asked a basic question to his colleagues: “Why didn’t you hear anything when he was shot at about midnight?” Laconic reply: “His office was well insulated.”
3 * According to his mother, Helric Fredou wanted to make an important phone call after doing two things: debriefing “three investigators” who went out to question the immediate family of a victim of the attack on Charlie Hebdo (in this case, the relatives of Jeannette Bougrab – Charb’s self-styled girlfriend – as was discovered and disclosed by Panamza) and then checking “social networks.” It is at this point that Fredou would have made such an important deduction that he “wanted to keep working.” Important point: the unidentified “commander” in the office that night wanted to take charge of debriefing investigators and writing the report, but Fredou insisted “It’s my job.” The direct superior of Helric Fredou is Gil Friedman, director of the Regional Criminal Police, Limoges.
4 * According to police, Helric Fredou raised the barrel of his revolver to his forehead and the bullet remained inside the skull.
5 * Helric Fredou’s attending physician, with whom his mother spoke Thursday, January 22, refuses to accept the picture sketched by the handful of articles about Freidou’s death that cited his alleged “depression” and supposed “burn-out”.
* 6 The mother wanted to know who made the last call to her son. Police reportedly retorted “We are unable to say” before finally claiming that no such call had been made.
7 * “Four Directors” of the police, specifically from Paris, met Helric Fredou’s mother to offer condolences and try to convince her that her son was a “suicide”.
Finally, another odd fact deserves to be reported here: apart from the author of these lines, NO journalist has contacted – from January 8th onward – the mother or sister Helric Fredou to try to shed light on the case.
HICHAM HAMZA
CIA-MOSSAD ISIS TRAVELLING UNDER COVER!
HALLELUIAH: WE ALSO HAVE WAHHAABI JEWS
(MALES not FEMALES!!!)
in Tel Aviv airport (No spam-no joke!)
There are no limits to stupidity,
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
-- Albert Einstein the Zionist Plagiarist
-- Albert Einstein the Zionist Plagiarist
This is the airport in Tel Aviv - Men in burkas
All forms of religious fanaticism lead to the same extremist obscurantism ........ THIS IS THE CASE
All forms of religious fanaticism lead to the same extremist obscurantism ........ THIS IS THE CASE
Israeli Ultra-Orthodox Males Wear Burqa-Type Veils To Prevent Lusting After Women
C'est à l'aéroport de Tel-Aviv - Hommes en burkas
Tous les extrêmismes mènent au même obscurantisme ........ C'EST le CAS de le dire
A pagan Church that approves (directly or indirectly) of usury, racism
(like the one practiced by the Royals), agressive and genocidal wars,
ape evolution into man, prostitution, homosexuality, pornography,
paedophilia, drugs, incest, blasphemy and other abominations is capable
of anything!
This is Christianity down the drain by decadent Christendom itself!
QUESTION: "She is married to another vicar and is a mother of two" ???
BAFS
Vicar tries to stop Rev Libby Lane being consecrated as Church of England's first female bishop
Telegraph.co.uk - 3 hours ago
A protesting vicar has interrupted the service to consecrate the Church of England's first woman ... Rev Libby Lane becomes first female bishop.
Libby Lane: First female Church of England bishop consecrated
BBC News - 10 hours ago
Libby Lane formally appointed first woman bishop by Church Of England as protester shouts: 'No. Not in my name'
The Independent - 58 mins ago
More news for Protest as Bishop Libby Lane is consecrated as first female bishop
Libby Lane: Britain's first female bishop consecrated at York ...
www.express.co.uk › News › UK
4 hours ago - 'Not in my name' Vicar protests as Britain's first female bishop Libby Lane is ... Reverend Libby Lane arrived at York Minster to be consecrated.
Protest at bishop libby ordination | Daily Mail Online
www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article.../
1 hour ago - The Church of England's first female bishop has been consecrated in a ... The Reverend Libby Lane was ordained as the eighth Bishop of ...
Libby Lane: First female Church of England bishop ...
www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-30974547
2 hours ago - Libby Lane: First female Church of England bishop consecrated ... He said: "He's got the right to protest but the contrast was between a lone ...
Libby Lane becomes Church of England's first female bishop
www.nydailynews.com/.../libby-lane-churc
35 mins ago - Lane was consecrated as eighth Bishop of Stockport after the congregation at ... Libby Lane becomes Church of England's first female bishop ... moment, a man raised a voice of protest against her consecration, saying "No.
Man 'stages protest' at first female bishop consecration - ITV ...
www.itv.com/.../man-stages-protest-at-fi
3 hours ago - A man has reportedly staged a protest in York Minster during the consecration of the Church of England's first woman bishop, Libby Lane.
Protest at Bishop Libby ordination - Yahoo News UK
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/c-e-greets-......
3 hours ago - The Church of England's first female bishop has been consecrated in a ... The Rev Libby Lane during a service at York Minster where she was ...
First female Church of England bishop consecrated in York ...
www.theguardian.com › World › Anglicanism
2 hours ago - Libby Lane made bishop of Stockport, despite interruption of Paul Williamson, who has history of opposing ... First female Bishop consecration Libby Lane .... Female bishop row deepens as priest refuses promotion in protest.
Missing: protest
First female bishop for Church of England | Sudbury Star
www.thesudburystar.com/.../after-turmoil
2 hours ago - After turmoil, Church of England consecrates first woman bishop 0 ... The Reverend Libby Lane reacts during a service where she was consecrated as the first female Bishop in the Church of England at York Minster ... opposition from traditionalists - one of whom briefly shouted a protest during the service.
Rev Libby Lane: Protest interrupts ordination of Church of ...
www.ibtimes.co.uk/rev-libby-lane-protest
2 hours ago - The service to consecrate Rev Libby Lane as the Church of England's first female bishop was interrupted by a sole male protester. The man ...
Lobaczewski, a Polish psychiatrist, diagnosed psychopathic symptoms among the Communist-era leadership. He argued that individuals with personality disorders, especially psychopathy, tend to gravitate to positions of power, which can set off a contagion in which the entire regime takes on psychopathic characteristics.
In a brand-new article, translated and published here for the first time, Laurent Guyénot argues that Israel (and the international Zionist movement surrounding and empowering it) is a textbook case of political psychopathy. Naturally the Zio-psychopaths, who always have to be 100% right and cannot accept the slightest bit of criticism, will not respond well to this article. Their reaction will offer yet another item of evidence that Dr. Guyénot’s thesis is correct.
Laurent Guyénot is an Engineer (National School of Advanced Technology, 1982) and medievalist (PhD in Medieval Studies at Paris IV-Sorbonne, 2009). He has authored numerous books; the latest is JFK-9/11: 50 Years of Deep State. My recent interview with him on the Charlie Hebdo affair is archived here.
-KB
ISRAEL, THE PSYCHOPATHIC NATION
by Laurent Guyenot
“Judeophobia is a psychosis. As a psychosis, it is hereditary and as a disease transmitted for two thousand years, it is incurable.” (Leo Pinsker, Auto-Emancipation, 1882)
Jewishness is a notoriously ambivalent notion. On the one hand, Judaism is a religion; on the other, Jews are a people, an ethnic group or race. It all depends on the circumstances. But in both cases, Jewishness may legitimately be subjected to psychological analysis. If Judaism is a religion, we may turn to Freud, who addressed the relationship between religion and neurosis in three books: Totem and Taboo, Civilization and Its Discontents and The Future of an Illusion, in which he calls “religion” (referring mainly to Catholicism) a “universal obsessional neurosis of humanity.” If, conversely, the Jews are a people, then we can base our analysis on common sense, which admits that every people has a national character forged by history – or a collective memory, which is to say, its own representation of its history. Concerning the character of the Jewish nation, there is no shortage of opinions from Jewish intellectuals.
The
hypothesis presented in this paper can be summarized as follows: The
Jewish nation, as a state, but also as an organized world community,
acts collectively towards other nations and other human communities in
the way a psychopath acts towards his fellow men. I will first describe
psychopathy as a cognitive and behavioral structure and show how the
ideology and methods of the chosen people are related to it. It goes
without saying that I do not intend to imply that “the Jews” are
psychopaths, but instead that they are the first victims of a mental
straitjacket imposed by their elites, who through veritable intellectual
terrorism, make of them, to the extent that they comply, the
instruments of the collective psychopathy of Israel.
What is a psychopath?
Psychopathy is a syndrome of traits classified among the personality disorders. Canadian psychologist Robert Hare (1) in the wake of Hervey Cleckley’s The Mask of Sanity (1941), has defined its diagnostic criteria on the basis of a cognitive model that is now widely adopted, though some behaviorally-oriented psychiatrists prefer the term sociopathy. In an effort to get everyone to agree, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual on Mental Disorders, the American psychiatric bible, suggested antisocial personality disorder; but the term psychopathy is still in use.
The
most striking traits of the psychopath are lack of empathy and
conscience. Other traits are common to narcissism: psychopaths have a
grand vision of their own importance. In their minds, everything is owed
to them because they are exceptional. They are never wrong, and
failures are always the fault of others. They often show megalomania,
but some learn to hide their arrogance under false modesty. If the
psychopath pretends to rise to the universal level, it is because he
confuses it with his personal interests, and the truth with his own
opinions. However, the psychopath is distinguished from the simple
narcissist by his appetite for power, which makes him much more
destructive. Moreover, his capacity for harm is not inhibited by any
scruples or remorse: he is incapable of feeling guilt. Although he
imagines himself a hero, and in some cases looks like a hero, the
psychopath is, on the human spectrum, the polar opposite of the hero who
sacrifices himself for his community; he will not hesitate to sacrifice
the people around him, and when he knows he is lost, he consoles
himself by causing as many people as possible to fall.
Basically,
the psychopath perceives others as objects. He has a mechanical view of
people and human relationships (and, in some way, of himself as well).
Although devoid of conscience, he often has a keen perception of the
law, which he, as a mechanic of the social engine, overestimates. He has
not internalized moral law and in this sense is not socialized, but he
has mastered the rules of the game and cheats without qualms if he can.
For the same reason, the psychopath almost always develops an immoderate
taste for money; he idealizes it as the epitome of power, the very
essence of the social; he thinks that people can be bought and sold like
things, and life often proves him right.
The diagnostic criteria for psychopathy also include pathological lying, deception (cunning) and manipulative behavior. The psychopath feels only very superficial emotions and has no real feelings for anyone; but he has developed a great ability to deceive. He can be charming to the point of being charismatic. He typically shows highly-developed verbal intelligence and lies with disconcerting aplomb. He is unable to empathize, but learns to simulate it, sometimes with a tendency to histrionics (Latin histrio, “theater actor”). The psychoanalyst Helène Deutsche makes this trait the mark of “as-if personalities” endowed with purely mimetic “pseudo-emotions,” devoid of inner experience, “a little like an actor with good technique, but not animated by any actual life.” (2) But the psychopath is more than that: he is a manipulator. It is through his extraordinary ability to feign, trick, trap, and capture that the psychopath draws his power. Although he himself is immunized against guilt, he becomes a master in the art of using guilt to dominate others.
In
any situation, the psychopath projects a persona, which can vary
according to circumstances. The opinions he wears in public are all
disguises that he tailors to his own advantage. However, lying is so
deeply embedded in his nature that the question of his “sincerity” is
almost irrelevant: the psychopath can beat a lie detector. The truth has
no value in his eyes, or merges with the version of events that suits
him. The psychopath is unable to put himself in the place of others, and
thus to view himself critically. Confident in any circumstance of being
right and innocent (and superior), he considers the resentment of his
victims as irrational and pointless.
Although those close to the psychopath – at least those who learn the hard way his true nature – can judge him raving mad, the psychopath is not “sick” because he does not “suffer.” He is innocent of neurosis, and never requests psychiatric care (except as a strategic calculation). He is not psychotic, and cannot be regarded as maladapted to social life. On the contrary, he is, in a certain sense, over-adjusted. That is why the real mystery, from a Darwinian point of view, is not the existence of psychopaths, but their low proportion in the population.
Jewishness and selective empathy
The most optimistic low-end estimate of the proportion of psychopaths in the Western population is 1%. This 1% should not be confused with the famous 1% who own half the world’s wealth; but a study of senior executives of large companies, published under the title Snakes in Suits, shows that psychopathic traits are widespread among them (3). This is not surprising; modern society values psychopathic traits and favors the upward mobility of psychopaths.
The fact that Jews today are disproportionately represented among the elite (they form half of billionaires in the United States, while representing only 2.4% of the population) (4) does not allow us to conclude that psychopathy is more prevalent among the chosen people. In a way, quite the opposite is the case: Jews demonstrate among themselves an extraordinary capacity for empathy, or at least familiarity that breeds exceptional solidarity to the point of self-sacrifice. But the selective nature of this empathy suggests that it is addressed less to the humanity of others than to their Jewishness. In Nomads. Essay on the Jewish Soul (1929) we learn what transpires when two Jews meet. “We have never met before, but I instantly know him. One look, one phrase, and I know where he grew up, how he grew up, where he got his drive and his sense of humor. He is New York. He is Jewish. He looks like my uncle Louis, his voice is my uncle Sam. I feel we’ve been together at countless weddings, bar mitzvahs, and funerals. I know his genetic structure. I’m certain that within the last five hundred years—perhaps even more recently—we shared the same ancestor.” (5)
This is a comment from Robert Reich, Secretary of Labor, about his meeting with Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Council of the Federal Reserve, two very influential Americans, about whom we would like to believe that such familiarity does not affect their judgment of the nation’s interest. Kadmi Isaac Cohen described Judaism as “the spiritualized deification of the race […]. Thus the divinity in Judaism is contained in the exaltation of the entity represented by the race.” (6) It is as if the Jews felt united by a collective or ethnic soul, which occupies more or less of their individual soul according to individuals and circumstances.
This is indeed how many Jews recall their Jewishness. “Being Jewish
to me,” says Alain Finkielkraut, “is to feel involved, concerned,
sometimes compromised by what other Jews do. It’s a feeling of
belonging, affiliation; and in this affiliation, there is, for example,
the tortured link to Israel.” (7) Every Jew experiences himself as part
and parcel of the chosen people; everything he is doing reflects on the
community. When a Jew is a victim, all Jewish people are victimized. (By
contrast, if he is a torturer, his Jewishness is repressed because it
would implicate the whole people in his guilt.) Jewishness is in some
sense a latent sentiment capable of being activated by the slightest
alarm. “The feeling of Jewishness remains in me something dark, abyssal,
and above all, unstable. Both powerful and labile. Nothing is as
important to me as my Jewishness which, however, in many respects, has
so little importance in my life,” writes Jacques Derrida. (8)
Jewish ethnocentrism
In contrast to the empathy it shows for itself, the Jewish community as a whole, to the extent it submits to its representative elites, tends to behave towards the mass of Gentiles in a psychopathic rather than empathic manner. This is why a goy observer, Werner Sombart, despite his reputation as a Semitophile, highlights features of Jewish collective psychology that are similar to psychopathic tendencies including a temperament that is “coldly utilitarian” and “calculating,” alongside a propensity to mimicry, combined with a mechanical conception of human relations. (9) The founder of sociology Emile Durkheim (1858-1917), very critical of his Jewish community, noticed among Jewish intellectuals a pragmatic and self-interested notion of truth, which can be compared with that of the psychopath: “The Jew . . . seeks to learn not in order to replace his collective prejudices by reflective thought, but merely to be better armed for the struggle. . . . [H]e superimposes this intellectual life upon his habitual routine with no effect of the former upon the latter”. (10) Many Jewish historians, for example, seem to value History less as a pursuit of truth than as a means of power.
The
hypothesis of a form of “collective psychopathy” with narcissistic
tendencies makes it possible to deconstruct the universalism in which
Judaism is draped. At the first level, Jewish universalism is a fable
intended to obfuscate reality and confuse the goy. But it is not only
this, as it also appears in the literature internal to the Jewish
community, where it amounts to an expression of limitless ethnic
narcissism. The Jewish people are “the seed that is germinating the
humanity of the future” (Jacob Kaplan, Chief Rabbi of France); “the
living ladder that meets the sky” (Emmanuel Levinas); “Israel equals
humanity” (Levinas) (11); “The Jew is closer to humanity than any
other,” so that “the enemy of the Jews is the enemy of humanity” and
therefore killing Jews is “murdering all mankind” (Elie Wiesel) (12).
Worse, “Hitting a Jew is hitting God Himself,” according to Cardinal
Aron Jean-Marie Lustiger (13), taken almost verbatim from the Talmud
(Sanhedrin 58b: “Hitting a Jew is like slapping the face of God himself
“). This is why the strange notion of “crimes against humanity” was
created specifically in 1945 at the Nuremburg Trials to describe the
massacre of Jews, while the term “genocide” was coined for the same
purpose by Raphael Lemkin in 1944. These terms having since been
generalized to other victims of history, the copyrighted term Holocaust
was coined — hard to beat.
This equation between Jewishness and humanity, which is the height of ethnocentrism, is the real meaning of Judaism’s claim to embody humanism. Though Israelis are “the most separatist people in the world” according to Nahum Goldman (former president of the World Jewish Organization and founder of the World Jewish Congress), he adds: “The Israelis have the great weakness of thinking that the whole world revolves around them .” (14) So there is not necessarily a contradiction in their minds between universalist discourse and the practice of tribalism. If the Jew is the essence of humanity, what is good for the Jews is good for humanity, on principle. And although fundamentally racist, Jewishness cannot see itself as such: “Judaic ethics […] by definition deny racism. A Jew cannot be racist.” (Elie Wiesel) (15). This does not prevent the same Elie Wiesel from stating that “Jewish history describes an ongoing conflict between us and the others. Since Abraham, we are on one side and the whole world is on the other.” (16)
It has often been
said that Jews have an ethnocentric conception of universal history,
which has no meaning in their eyes except in relation to the Jewish
people. Josef Kastein acknowledges this in his book History and Destiny of the Jews
(1936): “Because it accepted the idea of the chosen people and
salvation, the Jewish world was Judeocentric, and Jews could interpret
everything that happened according to a single point of view, with
themselves as the center.” (17) Joshua Jehouda illustrates this
perfectly in Antisemitism, Mirror of the World: “He who plumbs
the depths of universal history, to gain an overall vision, finds that
from ancient times until today two opposing currents are fighting over
history, penetrating and shaping it constantly: the messianic current
and the anti-Semitic current […] Because messianism and anti-Semitism
are the two opposite poles of the journey of humanity.” (18)
In
his megalomania, the psychopath is convinced that when he uses others,
it is for their own good. Similarly, according to rabbinical logic, it
is to enlighten humanity that the Jewish community must preserve itself,
prosper, and eventually dominate humanity: “Judaism considers only the
salvation of the house of Israel, which alone will permit the salvation
of the seventy nations of the universe” (Rabi, Anatomy of French Judaism,
1962) (19). This is where the double ethno-religious nature of Judaism
helps streamline the paradox that the Jews should remain a separate
people in order to spread their universal religion. Such Jewish
intellectuals as Felix Adler (1851-1933) have defended the paradoxical
idea that the Jewish people must remain ethnically united to accomplish
their mission: To spread the universalism that will dissolve ethnicity
from the rest of humanity. Only when the mission is completed will the
Jewish people disappear. In this way has the most ethnically oriented
community manages to impersonate the champions of universalism. (20)
Thus when Martin Buber called for a state for the Jews, it was so they
could serve humanity. For it is only by fulfilling his messianic dream
of a national home, he said, that the Jewish religion can lead humanity
towards the messianic age. (21) This argument, developed by Reform
Judaism, is intended primarily for goyim but also for “soft” Jews, in
order to convince them that their commitment in favor of the group is a
service to humanity.
The Innocent Victim
The
psychopath is unable to see the other person’s point of view, and
criticism strikes him as irrational aggression. This is the reaction of
the Jewish elites to criticism: To them it can be nothing other than the
expression of visceral anti-Semitism, an atavistic goyish disease.
“Judeophobia is a psychosis,” wrote Leo Pinsker, a founding father of
Zionism, “a hereditary demonic madness,” “a congenital perversion of
human mentality,” “passed down for two thousand years,” “incurable.”
(22)
The psychopath does not know the feeling of guilt; he constantly plays innocent. Those who get in his way, or even cast a shadow over his path, are solely responsible for their own destruction. Their accusations are baseless fabrications, their anger an irrational hatred. “One thing that Judaism has which other spiritualities lack is innocence,” explains André Neher, one of the leaders of “the Jewish school of thought of Paris” (with Emmanuel Levinas and Leon Ashkenazi). “We are innocent, and we feel even more deeply that we are innocent when we are accused. […] It is this innocence that we must be aware of at present, and that we must never deny, never, in any circumstance.” (23) And it works: “You will understand nothing of anti-Semitism,” wrote Jean-Paul Sartre, “if you fail to remember that the Jew, that object of so much hatred, is perfectly innocent, nay harmless.” (Anti-Semite and Jew, 1946). The Jewish question is thus reduced to the question of anti-Semitism, which, thanks to the mythology of the Holocaust, is elevated to the status of metaphysical Evil. “The hatred of the Jews is the enigma of enigmas …” (André Glucksmann, Hate Speech, 2004) (24). It is a necessary enigma, without which the Jewish people could dissolve. Towards the end of his life, the Jewish writer Ilya Ehrenburg repeated that he would consider himself a Jew “as long as there was a single anti-Semite left on earth.” (25) Persecution is the central theme of the Passover holiday, Hanukkah, Purim and Yom Kippur, and Jewish history as taught to Jewish children, according to Michael Walzer, is one long tale of exile and persecution – Holocaust history read backwards. (26) According to historian Zygmunt Bauman, Israel uses the Holocaust “as the certificate of its political legitimacy, as a safe-conduct pass for its past and future policies, and, above all, as advance payment for the injustices it might itself commit.” (27)
Israel, Psychopath State
The State of Israel is now in the international scene what the psychopath is in a human community. With regard to the Palestinians, “Israeli Jews’ consciousness is characterized by a sense of victimization, a siege mentality, blind patriotism, belligerence, self-righteousness, dehumanization of the Palestinians, and insensitivity to their suffering,” in the words of journalist Akiva Eldar (“Operation Cast Lead against Gaza in 2008-2009″). (28) As noted by the Deputy Director of Military Intelligence Yehoshafat Harkabi: “Dazzled by its self-righteousness, Israel cannot see the case of the other side. Self-righteousness encourages nations no less than individuals to absolve themselves of every failing and shake off the guilt of every mishap. When everyone is guilty except them, the very possibility of self-criticism and self-improvement vanishes…” (29) The Israeli journalist Gideon Levy wrote in Haaretz in 2010 that “Only psychiatrists can explain Israel’s behavior.” However, the diagnosis he offers, including “paranoia, schizophrenia and megalomania,” (30) is in my opinion insufficient. It must take into account Israel’s extraordinary manipulative capacity on the world stage via corruption and propaganda, that is to say, the Bank and the Press.
Israel’s
relationship to the United States is that of a typical psychopath to an
influential and impressionable man he has decided to use to accomplish
his misdeeds. The golden rule of manipulation formulated by Colonel
Mandell House (who was the intermediary between the Zionist network and
President Woodrow Wilson) applies generally to Israel’s manipulation of
the United States: “With the President […] it was invariably my
intention to always to make him believe that ideas he derived from me
were his own.” (31) Indeed, Israel has managed to lead America into a
Middle East policy that only serves Israeli interests, by pretending to
the American people that it serves their interests. The psychopath tries
to interfere in all the human relationships of his prey, so as to
prevent any alliance that could allow him to be unmasked. Isolate and
divide-and-rule are the essence of this strategy. This is exactly what
Israel and its neoconservative moles have done, by trying to split the
United States from its historic allies in the Middle East, with the aim
of one day remaining the only ally of the United States in the area; the
demonization of all heads of state in the Arab world is part of this
strategy.
The power of the Zionist manipulation of the United States, based on quasi-total control of the mainstream media alongside large-scale psychological operations such as September 11th, is truly bewildering. But it becomes understandable in light of the cognitive mechanisms of psychopathy. It even becomes predictable to some extent, if we keep in mind that the psychopath has no ability to question, no limits to his appetite for power, and no remorse about leading humanity into ruin to save his skin. Nothing better illustrates the psychopathic nature of Zionism than the apocalyptic nuclear blackmail Israel perpetually exercises over the West under the name “the Samson Option.” In 1974 Golda Meir summed it up as “Israel’s willingness in a doomsday situation to take the region down with it” (32) in the event of looming defeat.
And remember: there is no limit to the psychopath’s thirst for power, because he does not seeks power for the comfort it can bring him, but instead loves power for the sake of power.
Conclusion
By drawing a parallel between psychopathy as a personality disorder and the attitude of Israel, I do not mean, of course, the Jews in general. They are the first to be manipulated by their elites, and they are part of this collective psychopathy only to the extent of their submission to those elites. Jewishness, do not forget, is whatever idea the Jews make of it; and the idea the Jews make of it is, almost entirely, the one imposed on them by their elites.
What
is at issue is the prevailing ideology of Israel, and (more discreetly)
of the organized Jewish community. Dominant discourse is always shaped
by the elite. Sometimes a strong current of popular thought emerges to
challenge the dominant way of thinking, but nothing of this kind is yet
observable in the Jewish community; it is overwhelmingly docile to its
elite, which currently dominates the media and the entertainment
industry and therefore enjoys considerable mind-control powers. Their
ruse is to maintain in the Jews an absolute conviction of the immaculate
innocence of their people, and simultaneously to inculcate a paranoid
fear of anti-Semitism, this “disease transmitted for two thousand years,
incurable.” (Leon Pinsker) (33)
In The Corporation: the Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power (Free Press, 2005), Joel Bakan noted that those “legal persons” that are large companies behave like psychopaths, insensitive to the suffering of those they crush in their pursuit of profit: “Corporate behavior is very similar to that of a psychopath.” That company culture, which involves every employee to one degree or another, is driven by its ruling elite. The Enron case has shown the world the tremendous damage that can be done by a company run by people of high intelligence and perverse ideology. (34) My analysis here of the Jewish community is based on exactly the same reasoning. Like it or not, the character of a nation is as much determined by its legitimate leaders than the reverse. Until proven otherwise Benjamin Netanyahu is as much Israel as Vladimir Putin is Russia.
And since Israel has New York as its second capital, we must also
count among its elites the neoconservatives (“neo” here means “crypto”
and “conservative” means “Likudnik”), whose leaders define themselves as
disciples of Leo Strauss, therefore implicitly as super-Machiavellian.
(In his Thoughts on Machiavelli, in fact, Strauss claims he is the only
one who understands what Machiavelli never dared to write). This
hyper-Machiavellianism of the neoconservatives, to which they admit when
speaking amongst themselves, must be taken very seriously. In an
article in the Jewish World Review of June 7, 1999, the neoconservative
Michael Ledeen defends the thesis that Machiavelli was a “secret Jew”
since “If you listen to his political philosophy you will hear Jewish
music.” (35) According to Strauss, Machiavelli is the super-patriot who
understands that only the nation has an eternal soul, and that,
therefore, the best leader is one who has no fear of losing his soul,
since he has none. In practice, the art of the Machiavellian prince is
to terrorize while diverting popular resentment toward his enemies. I
believe that the admission of Ledeen sheds light on the psychopathic
nature of Israel. From the Judeo-Machiavellian (i.e. neoconservative)
point of view, the current leaders of Israel from Tel Aviv to New York –
from Benjamin Netanyahu to Larry Silverstein – are super-patriots.
This article is in no way anti-Semitic; it is a severe criticism of “Jewishness” as a system of thought, a representation of the world and the self. We are critiquing an idea by exposing its dangerous irrationality, nothing more. Even if it is as old as the world, an idea still deserves critique. Since the first victims of a toxic idea are the men and women it inhabits, they are likewise the first we would help liberate. This article is basically a fraternal message to all Jews: Jews of all countries, disunite! Break away from your elites and their pathological ideology! Rejoin humanity!
Likewise,
not all elites deserve to be put in the same bag. Many are the Zionist
leaders who have had the courage to confront the monster they created,
and to try to undo the damage. Moshe Sharett, Foreign Minister from 1948
to 1956 and Prime Minister from 1954 to 1955, advocated a moderate
Zionism respectful of international rules, in contrast to the methods of
Ben Gurion, Pinhas Levon, Moshe Dayan and Shimon Peres, the clan
determined “to set the Middle East on fire,” “to frighten the West into
supporting Israel’s aims,” by raising “terrorism to the level of a
sacred principle” according to Sharett (36). The Zionist leader Nahum
Goldman, quoted above, was in favor of a genuine dialogue with the Arabs
and was deeply disillusioned by the attitude of Ben Gurion, whom he
described as “organically incapable of compromise” and blinded by
self-righteousness. After 1967 he became an outspoken critic of illegal
occupation of Palestinian territories. During the government of Begin,
he advised President Carter to “break the back” of the Zionist lobby
that he had long headed, which he believed had become a “negative
factor” afflicting American foreign policy. (37)
Why
have men like Sharett and Goldman never managed to overcome the
psychopathic ideological power machine of Zionism? Could it be because
it – like Jewishness itself – is rooted deeply in the Bible? In the
final analysis does not the Zionist manipulation go back to the creation
by those ancient priests, the Levites, of a tribal god by the name of
Yahweh, who usurped the title of the Creator of the Universe and Father
of Humanity? Ultimately, is not Zionism the logical outcome of Yahwism?
This is a question that I will reserve for another article.
1) Robert Hare, Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us, The Guilford Press, 1993.
2) Helene Deutsche, Les «comme si» et autres textes, 1933-1970 (1992), Seuil, 2007, p. 55, cited in Roland Gori, La Fabrique des Imposteurs, Le Lien qui Libère, 2013, p. 232.
3) Paul Babiak et Robert Hare, Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work, HarperCollins, 2007. Theme expressed in documentary film I am Fishead (2011) : www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXFmo6WipNk
4) Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State, University of Chicago Press, 1993 ; J.J. Goldberg, Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment, Basic Books, 1997.
5) Robert Reich, Locked in the Cabinet, Scribner, 1997, cited in Kevin MacDonald, Culture of Critique: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements, Praeger 1998, kindle edition 2013, e. 9222-27.
6) Cited in André Pichot, Aux origines des théories raciales, de la Bible à Darwin, Flammarion, 2008, p. 418-419.
7) www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Alain-Soral-commentaires-de-l-actualite-et-conseils-de-lecture-25711.html, à 15:12.
8) Cité dans Hervé Ryssen, Les Espérances planétariennes, Éditions Baskerville, 2005, p. 183.
9) Werner Sombart, Les Juifs et la vie économique (1902), KontreKulture, 2012, p. 482 et 158.
10) Cited in Kevin MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism, Praeger, 1998, édition kindle 2013, e. 5403-10.
11) Cited in Hervé Ryssen, La Guerre eschatologique, Éditions Baskerville, 2013, p. 23-24 et Les Espérances planétariennes, Éditions Baskerville, 2005, p. 184-189.
12) Cited in Roger Garaudy, Le Procès du sionisme, 1998, p. 17 et dans Hervé Ryssen, Les Espérances planétariennes, Éditions Baskerville, 2005, p. 184-189.
13) Jean-Marie Lustiger, La Promesse, Parole et Silence, 2002.
14) Nahum Goldman, The Jewish Paradox, Fred Jordan Book, 1978, p. 8 et 56-57.
15) Cited in Hervé Ryssen, Les Espérances planétariennes, Éditions Baskerville, 2005, p. 191.
16) Hervé Ryssen, La Guerre eschatologique, Éditions Baskerville, 2013, p. 25.
17) Josef Kastein, History and destiny of the Jews, Garden City publishing, 1936, cited in Douglas Reed, La Controverse de Sion (1956), Kontre Kulture, 2012, p. 163.
18) Josué Jehouda, L’Antisémitisme, miroir du monde, Éditions Synthesis, 1958, p.185, cited in Léon de Poncins, Les Juifs et le Concile Vatican II, Kontre Kulture, 2014, p. 173.
19) Cited in Martin Peltier, L’Antichristianisme juif. L’enseignement de la haine, Diffusion Internationale Édition, 2014, p. 250-252.
20) Kevin MacDonald, Culture of Critique, Praeger, 1998, Kindle edition 2013, e. 9983-10008 ; see also Separation and Its Discontents, Praeger, 1998, Kindle edition 2013, ch. 7.
21) Cited in Kevin MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents, Praeger 1998, Kindle edition 2013, e. 5485-91.
22) Léon Pinsker, Autoémancipation, Lettre d’un juif russe à ses frères (1882), Éditions Mille et Une Nuits, 2006, p. 17 et 21.
23) Cited in Hervé Ryssen, Les Espérances planétariennes, Éditions Baskerville, 2005, p. 319.
24) Cited in Hervé Ryssen, Psychanalyse du judaïsme, Éditions Baskerville, 2006, p. 205.
25) Kevin MacDonald, Culture of Critique, Kindle 2013, e. 3176-78.
26) Michael Walzer, “Toward a New Realization of Jewishness,” Congress Monthly n° 61, 1994, p.4, cited in MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents, Kindle 2013, e. 4675-86.
27) Kevin MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents, Kindle 2013, e. 4674-86.
28) Cited in Max Blumenthal, Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel, Nation Books, 2013, p. 16.
29) Alan Hart, Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, Volume 2: David Becomes Goliath, p. 42-49.
30) Gideon Levy, “Only psychiatrists can explain Israel’s behavior,” Haaretz, January 10, 2010, www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/only-psychiatrists-can-explain-israel-s-behavior-1.261115
31) Arthur Howden Smith, The Real Colonel House (1918), Bibliographical Center for Research, 2010, citd in Aline de Diéguez, Aux Sources du chaos mondial actuel, on line at: http://aline.dedieguez.pagesperso-orange.fr/mariali/chaos/house.html.
32) Alan Hart, Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, vol. 2: David Becomes Goliath, Clarity Press, 2009, p. 194.
33) Léon Pinsker, Auto-émancipation, 1882, cited in Jean Daniel, La Prison juive, Odile Jacob, 2005, p. 133.
34) See the documentary The Smartest Guy in the Room (2005), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxzLX_C9Z74
35) Michael Ledeen, “What Machiavelli (A Secret Jew?) Learned from Moses,” Jewish World Review, 7 juin 1999, www.jewishworldreview.com/0699/machiavelli1.asp
36) Livia Rokach, Israel’s Sacred Terrorism: A Study Based on Moshe Sharett’s Personal Diary and Other Documents, Association of Arab-American University Graduates, 1986, p. 42-49.
37) Alan Hart, Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, Volume 2: David Becomes Goliath, p. 42-49.
'No. Not in my name'
This is Christianity down the drain by decadent Christendom itself!
QUESTION: "She is married to another vicar and is a mother of two" ???
BAFS
Published on 26 Jan 2015
watch this now it showsVicar tries to stop Rev Libby Lane being consecrated as Church of England's first female bishop
Telegraph.co.uk - 3 hours ago
A protesting vicar has interrupted the service to consecrate the Church of England's first woman ... Rev Libby Lane becomes first female bishop.
Libby Lane: First female Church of England bishop consecrated
BBC News - 10 hours ago
Libby Lane formally appointed first woman bishop by Church Of England as protester shouts: 'No. Not in my name'
The Independent - 58 mins ago
More news for Protest as Bishop Libby Lane is consecrated as first female bishop
Libby Lane: Britain's first female bishop consecrated at York ...
www.express.co.uk › News › UK
4 hours ago - 'Not in my name' Vicar protests as Britain's first female bishop Libby Lane is ... Reverend Libby Lane arrived at York Minster to be consecrated.
Protest at bishop libby ordination | Daily Mail Online
www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article.../
1 hour ago - The Church of England's first female bishop has been consecrated in a ... The Reverend Libby Lane was ordained as the eighth Bishop of ...
Libby Lane: First female Church of England bishop ...
www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-30974547
2 hours ago - Libby Lane: First female Church of England bishop consecrated ... He said: "He's got the right to protest but the contrast was between a lone ...
Libby Lane becomes Church of England's first female bishop
www.nydailynews.com/.../libby-lane-churc
35 mins ago - Lane was consecrated as eighth Bishop of Stockport after the congregation at ... Libby Lane becomes Church of England's first female bishop ... moment, a man raised a voice of protest against her consecration, saying "No.
Man 'stages protest' at first female bishop consecration - ITV ...
www.itv.com/.../man-stages-protest-at-fi
3 hours ago - A man has reportedly staged a protest in York Minster during the consecration of the Church of England's first woman bishop, Libby Lane.
Protest at Bishop Libby ordination - Yahoo News UK
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/c-e-greets-......
3 hours ago - The Church of England's first female bishop has been consecrated in a ... The Rev Libby Lane during a service at York Minster where she was ...
First female Church of England bishop consecrated in York ...
www.theguardian.com › World › Anglicanism
2 hours ago - Libby Lane made bishop of Stockport, despite interruption of Paul Williamson, who has history of opposing ... First female Bishop consecration Libby Lane .... Female bishop row deepens as priest refuses promotion in protest.
Missing: protest
First female bishop for Church of England | Sudbury Star
www.thesudburystar.com/.../after-turmoil
2 hours ago - After turmoil, Church of England consecrates first woman bishop 0 ... The Reverend Libby Lane reacts during a service where she was consecrated as the first female Bishop in the Church of England at York Minster ... opposition from traditionalists - one of whom briefly shouted a protest during the service.
Rev Libby Lane: Protest interrupts ordination of Church of ...
www.ibtimes.co.uk/rev-libby-lane-protest
2 hours ago - The service to consecrate Rev Libby Lane as the Church of England's first female bishop was interrupted by a sole male protester. The man ...
Historic day' for Church of England as its first female bishop is ordained in landmark ceremony at York Minster
- Rev Libby Lane, 48, was today consecrated as the Bishop of Stockport
- Service at York Minster was led by the Archbishop of York, John Sentamu
- Dissident priest Rev Paul Williamson interrupted the service shouting 'Not in the Bible'
- CoE spokesman said he was 'serial protester expected to attend'
- Mrs Lane's appointment came after years of furious argument over the possibility of female bishops
- She is married to another vicar and is a mother of two
The
first woman bishop in the history of the Church of England was today
officially consecrated - but the ceremony at York Minster was disrupted
by a protester.
The Reverend Libby Lane became the Bishop of Stockport in a service conducted by the Archbishop of York, John Sentamu.
The
historic event was briefly interrupted by the appearance of an
ultra-conservative priest shouting 'Not in the Bible' as she was
presented to the congregation.
Scroll down for video
Joy: Rev Libby Lane with the Archbishop of York after being consecrated as Bishop of Stockport
Disruption: Rev Paul Williamson, circled, shouted 'Not in the Bible' during the consecration service
Historic: Mrs Lane, centre, entering York Minster for a service consecrating her as Bishop of Stockport
First: Rev Libby Lane today became a bishop in the Church of England, overturning five centuries of tradition
A
Church of England spokesman identified the man as Rev Paul Williamson,
and described him as a 'serial protester' who had been expected to
attend.
He said: 'He's got the right to protest but the contrast was between a lone voice protesting and a sea of voices affirming.'
Married pastor quits after running off with school governor:...
Prince reveals injury to his ear as he attends church for...
Share this article
Mrs
Lane, an Oxford-educated mother of two, was appointed as a bishop last
month, in a historic move which ends five centuries of all-male
leadership in the church.
That
announcement came just weeks after the General Synod formally adopted
legislation allowing women to take the role, following years of furious
debate on the issue.
Emerging: Mrs Lane comes out of the church after being officially consecrated as a bishop
Gathered together: Mrs Lane with the Archbishops of York and Canterbury after the service
Congratulations: The new bishop hugs another priest during the ceremony
At
today's service - described by the new bishop as 'an occasion of prayer
and of party' - Mrs Lane, 48, was greeted by the ringing bells of the
medieval Minster as a congregation of 2,000 awaited her arrival.
She entered the cathedral through the south door in a procession with other ministers and members of the clergy.
The
Archbishop of York introduced the service and welcomed Mrs Lane and her
family before she was presented to be ordained and consecrated by the
Bishops of Exeter and Chester.
She
spoke to affirm her faith and swore oaths of allegiance and canonical
obedience, followed by hymns, Bible readings and psalms.
As
Dr Sentamu asked the congregation if they wanted Ms Lane to be
ordained, Mr Williamson stepped forward to the altar and shouted: 'No.
Not in the Bible,' demanding to speak to the prelate.
Support: The Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, gives a thumbs-up sign outside the cathedral
Shepherd: Mrs Lane with other female priests outside York Minster following the service
Archbishop: Dr Sentamu, centre, oversaw the service which was attended by 2,000 people
The
Archbishop read out a pre-prepared legal statement then repeated his
question, 'Is it now your will that she should be ordained?'
The congregation replied, 'It is,' and the service continued despite the disruption.
After
the litany and an ordination prayer, Rev Lane knelt before the
Archbishop while he and 100 other bishops present laid their hands on
her head.
Dr
Sentamu presented the new bishop with a Bible and anointed her head.
The congregation applauded as she was officially presented as the Bishop
of Stockport.
Mr
Williamson, the vicar of St George's, Hanworth in south-west London, is
a well-known campaigner against female priests who tried to launch a
lawsuit stopped Prince Charles from marrying Camilla Parker Bowles.
Unprecedented: Mrs Lane is the first woman ever to become a bishop in the Church of England
Service: The new bishop looks straight ahead during the service of her consecration
Procession: Dozens of church officials attended the service at York Minster today
Speaking
after her consecration, Mrs Lane said: 'Archbishop Sentamu has
observed, "The way that we show our faith and our love for one another
is with two simple things, prayer and parties."
'Today is an occasion of prayer and of party and I am thrilled that so many want to share in both.
'I
cannot properly express how encouraged I have been in the weeks since
the announcement of my nomination, by the thousands of messages I have
received with words of congratulation, support and wisdom.
'Thank you to all who are praying for me and partying with me today.'
The
bishop added: 'I cannot possibly live up to everyone's expectation. And
so today, at my consecration, I hold on to words of promise from the
Bible, a reassurance that all this does not depend on me.
'My
consecration service is not really about me. With echoes of practice
which has been in place for hundreds of years in the church, it is a
reminder that what I am about to embark on is shared by the bishops
around me, by those who have gone before me and those who will come
after.'
Authority: The Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby was in York today for Mrs Lane's consecration
Embrace: Kate Bottley, a priest who features in TV's Gogglebox, greets a friend outside the church
Excitement: Two members of the clergy run into York Minster ahead of the service
On duty: TV presenter Adrian Chiles, who was sacked as ITV's football anchor last week, was in attendance
At
the time of her appointment, Mrs Lane said it was a 'great honour' to
be the first female bishop - but insisted that she would not simply be a
token face.
'This moment is significant, but it is not simply a gesture,' she said. 'I'm the first, but I won't be the only.
'And I follow in the footsteps of women across the Anglican Church and globally.'
The
announcement prompted fears that it could lead to a split in the
Anglican community, as traditionalists have long fought against the
prospect of women becoming bishops.
However, Mrs Lane said she wanted to 'heal and not to hurt, to build up and not to destroy'.
Capturing the moment: A priest takes a photograph as he waits for the start of the ceremony
Service: Many of those attending were dressed in their formal ecclesiastical vestments
Her husband George is also a reverend, while the couple have two children - Connie, 20, and Benedict, 18.
Mrs
Lane, originally from the Peak District, was already a pioneer as one
of the first female priests in the Church of England, having been
ordained in July 1994 after studying theology at St Peter's College,
Oxford.
Her
last job was as vicar of St Peter's, Hale and St Elizabeth's, Ashley -
both in the North-West - and she was appointed to her new post after
initially serving on the committee trying to find a bishop.
In
her spare time she is an avid Manchester United supporter who has
learned to play the saxophone and enjoys solving cryptic crosswords.
FROM SUPPORTING MANCHESTER UNITED TO DOING CRYPTIC CROSSWORDS: HOW REV LIBBY LANE MADE CHURCH OF ENGLAND HISTORY
Rev Lane said she was excited by the possibilities
Rev
Libby Lane comes from an Anglican, but not particularly church-going,
family. She became interested in the church after attending a small
Anglican church community in rural Derbyshire.
Rev
Lane studied theology at St Peter's College, Oxford, where she met her
husband and trained for the ministry at Cranmer Hall, Durham.
The
48-year-old was ordained as a deacon in 1993 and a priest in 1994 - the
first year that women were ordained into the priesthood. Mrs Lane was
ordained with her husband and they were one of the first married couples
to do so.
She has held a number of roles in the north of England in the dioceses of Blackburn, York and Chester.
She was team Vicar in the Stockport South West Team and Assistant Diocesan Director of Ordinands in the Diocese of Chester.
Rev Lane has been vicar at Hale in Greater Manchester and Ashley in Cheshire since 2007.
She
is married to the Rev George Lane, coordinating chaplain at Manchester
Airport. They were one of the first married couples in the Church of
England to be ordained together.
The couple have two children, Connie, 20, and Benedict, 18.
Her
interests include being a school governor, encouraging social action
initiatives, learning to play the saxophone, supporting Manchester
United, reading and doing cryptic crosswords.
Mrs
Lane was originally part of a committee tasked to find a candidate for
the bishopric but was invited to apply herself following the vote in the
Synod last month.
Her position at the Bishop of Stockport makes her an assistant in the Chester Diocese.
But because the post is fairly junior she will not be allowed to sit in the House of Lords.
Meet Val Gruener and his inseparable lioness sidekick SirgaNetanyahu defies French pleas to push Zionist agenda
The
Israeli prime minister was asked to avoid Sunday’s march in Paris, out
of a fear he would use the occasion to exploit divisions in French
society
Al-Araby – 12 January 2015
It was hardly surprising that France’s president, Francois Hollande, is understood to have implored Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu not to participate in Sunday’s mass march in solidarity with the victims of last week’s killings in Paris.
Netanyahu was probably the least welcome of the 40 world leaders who participated in the rally in the French capital to demonstrate their outrage at an attack that left 17 people dead, including four French Jews.
According to Israeli media, Hollande’s advisers had urged Netanyahu not to come, concerned that he would exploit the visit – and the deaths – to increase divisions in French society.
They had good grounds for concern. Shortly before he set off for Paris, Netanyahu issued a statement saying Israel would welcome with “open arms” any French or European Jews choosing to move to Israel.
Earlier, he tweeted: “To all the Jews of France, all the Jews of Europe, Israel is not just the place in whose direction you pray, the state of Israel is your home.”
Netanyahu also declared on Saturday that he would be convening a special ministerial committee this week to investigate ways to encourage Jewish migration from France and from other European countries.
Meanwhile, in a coup for the Israeli prime minister, it was announced that four Jewish men killed at the HyperCacher supermarket in Paris on Friday were being flown to Israel for burial in Jerusalem on Tuesday. None of them were Israeli citizens.
The four will be officially recognised as “terror victims”, possibly entitling their relatives to large payments from the Israeli government.
On that occasion, Netanyahu called on Jews to leave France for Israel and then burst into a rendition of the Zionist anthem “Am Yisrael Chai”, or “The people of Israel live”. Hollande was reportedly incensed, saying Netanyahu had used the event “as an election rally”.
This time, presumably in response to Hollande’s rebuke, Netanyahu did slightly temper his language during his speech at the Great Synagogue in Paris. Conceding that Jews had a right to live in France, he also averred: “Jews today have been blessed with another right, a right that didn’t exist for previous generations: The right to join their Jewish brothers in our historic homeland – the land of Israel.” Hollande had, by then, left the building.
The clear implication of Netanyahu’s statements has been that France and other western states are not doing enough to protect their Jewish populations from violent extremism, and that Israel is the only safe haven for Jews.
But it would be wrong to view this as some kind of ideological aberration on Netanyahu’s part. Most other Israeli politicians joined him in urging French Jews to move to Israel.
Yair Lapid, seen as a centrist politician, said: “I don’t want to speak in terms of Holocaust, but … European Jewry must understand that there is just one place for Jews, and that is the State of Israel.”
In fact, the effort to bring Jews to Israel is at the core of Zionist thinking, and widely supported by the Israeli Jewish population. Aliyah, or “ascension”, the Hebrew word for Jewish immigration, connotes an almost-divine obligation on Jews to live in Israel.
Former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, it should be remembered, used even more inflammatory language in 2004, warning that France was in the grip of “the wildest anti-semitism”, and calling on Jews to flee France.
“If I have to advise our brothers in France, I’ll tell them one thing – move to Israel, as early as possible. I say that to Jews all around the world, but there [in France] I think it’s a must and they have to move immediately.”
That was in addition to the inducements Israel offers as standard to Jewish immigrants: large sums of cash, tax breaks, subsidies, as well as special access to grants and loans.
The extraordinary lengths Israel is prepared to go to encourage Jews to come to Israel – including, it seems, even actions designed to fuel anti-semitism – were suggested by Raanan Rein, a history professor at Tel Aviv University, in a book on Israel’s relations with Argentina.
According to Rein, in 1960, David Ben Gurion, Israel’s prime minister, welcomed the possibility that Israel’s kidnapping of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann – in violation of an extradition agreement with Buenos Aires – might fuel hatred of the country’s Jews.
“If there is anti-Semitism,” he told a journalist, “they [Argentina’s Jews] can immigrate to Israel.”
Analysts and observers have pointed out that Netanyahu, Israeli politicians more generally and organisations such as the Jewish Agency, which oversees immigration to Israel, may equally be provoking hatred – inadvertently or otherwise – that strengthens Jewish immigration.
Few deny a connection between Israel’s intensifying belligerency, especially its repeated attacks on Gaza, and verbal and physical attacks on Jews in Europe.
More specifically in France, reports of attacks on Jews over the past decade have been well-publicised, including by the Jewish Agency, even though a significant proportion have turned out to be false.
In hailing her ministry’s successes last month, Landver said the government would continue “to promote the ingathering of the exiles, a vision that has accompanied the people of Israel since the state’s establishment”.
In contrast, Rabbi Menachem Margolin, head of the European Jewish Association, noted that Netanyahu’s efforts risked “severely weakening and damaging Jewish communities that have the right to live securely wherever they are”.
In more graphic terms, Haaretz columnist Chemi Shalev argued: “By encouraging mass emigration, Israeli politicians could very well be helping terrorist fanatics finish the job started by the Nazis and their Vichy collaborators: making France Judenrein.”
Netanyahu’s assumptions, he added, “can only invigorate jihadists and spur them to adopt similar tactics in other European countries”.
So why is Jewish immigration so important to Israel that it is prepared to endanger the very Jews it claims to protect?
The reason is illustrated in the efforts of Netanyahu and the Israeli right to pass a basic law defining Israel as “the nation-state of the Jewish people”.
* To consolidate Israel’s long-standing efforts to claim it is the state of all Jews around the world, conflating Judaism with Zionism and helping to silence critics of Israeli policy as anti-Semites.
* To implicate all Jews in Israeli actions to Judaise territory that was seized from Palestinians, as part of Israel’s efforts to prevent the emergence of a Palestinian state.
* To recruit more Jews to counter the so-called “demographic threat” posed by the Palestinians’ higher natural growth rate, which threatens to create a Palestinian majority in the combined area of Israel and the occupied territories.
* To bolster a self-serving narrative of Israel as being on the frontlines of the clash of civilisations, in which the future of the Judeo-Christian west is threatened by a bloodthirsty Islamic east.
It was therefore entirely predictable that Netanyahu used his speech in Paris on Sunday to again characterise the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas, and Lebanon’s Hizballah as being no different from militant jihadist groups such as al-Qaeda and the Islamic State that were implicated in last week’s attack.
They all, he said, wanted to “impose a dark tyranny on the world”.
“Those who slaughtered Jews in the synagogue in Jerusalem [in November] and those who slaughtered Jews and journalists in Paris belong to the same murderous terror organisation,” Netanyahu claimed.
An analyst on Israel’s Channel 2 news described last week’s attacks in Paris as “France’s 9/11″.
It is worth recalling that Netanyahu let slip in the immediate wake of the attack on the World Trade Centre his real view of that event – it was “very good” for Israel because it would generate sympathy for its war against the Palestinians.
Another Israeli analyst, Orly Noy, took the same view: “This helps Netanyahu promote a worldview in which there is no national conflict, no occupation, no Palestinian people and no blatant disregard for human rights.”
But as Pfeffer further observed, Netanyahu’s narrative that all Jews should come to Israel depends on a central fallacy: that Israel is a safe haven. In fact, statistically Jews are far safer in France than in conflict-plagued Israel.
It also forgets that at least some of Israel’s power on the international stage has depended on the influence of international Jewish lobbies to pressure politicians and the media through their activism.
This was a point Rabbi Margolin alluded to. “The Israeli government must recognise this reality and also remember the strategic importance of the Jewish communities as supporters of Israel in the countries in which they live.”
It might be worth Netanyahu pondering that a United States and a Europe without organised Jewish lobbies aggressively promoting Israel’s interests would be less reliable allies than they have been until now.
- See more at:
http://www.jonathan-cook.net/2015-01-12/netanyahu-defies-french-pleas-to-push-zionist-agenda/#sthash.SWsUnrKm.76XDk3fl.dpufAl-Araby – 12 January 2015
It was hardly surprising that France’s president, Francois Hollande, is understood to have implored Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu not to participate in Sunday’s mass march in solidarity with the victims of last week’s killings in Paris.
Netanyahu was probably the least welcome of the 40 world leaders who participated in the rally in the French capital to demonstrate their outrage at an attack that left 17 people dead, including four French Jews.
According to Israeli media, Hollande’s advisers had urged Netanyahu not to come, concerned that he would exploit the visit – and the deaths – to increase divisions in French society.
They had good grounds for concern. Shortly before he set off for Paris, Netanyahu issued a statement saying Israel would welcome with “open arms” any French or European Jews choosing to move to Israel.
Earlier, he tweeted: “To all the Jews of France, all the Jews of Europe, Israel is not just the place in whose direction you pray, the state of Israel is your home.”
Netanyahu also declared on Saturday that he would be convening a special ministerial committee this week to investigate ways to encourage Jewish migration from France and from other European countries.
Meanwhile, in a coup for the Israeli prime minister, it was announced that four Jewish men killed at the HyperCacher supermarket in Paris on Friday were being flown to Israel for burial in Jerusalem on Tuesday. None of them were Israeli citizens.
The four will be officially recognised as “terror victims”, possibly entitling their relatives to large payments from the Israeli government.
Zionist anthem
Hollande’s concerns were doubtlessly fuelled by Netanyahu’s behaviour at a ceremony for the victims of an attack on a Jewish school in Toulouse in 2012.On that occasion, Netanyahu called on Jews to leave France for Israel and then burst into a rendition of the Zionist anthem “Am Yisrael Chai”, or “The people of Israel live”. Hollande was reportedly incensed, saying Netanyahu had used the event “as an election rally”.
This time, presumably in response to Hollande’s rebuke, Netanyahu did slightly temper his language during his speech at the Great Synagogue in Paris. Conceding that Jews had a right to live in France, he also averred: “Jews today have been blessed with another right, a right that didn’t exist for previous generations: The right to join their Jewish brothers in our historic homeland – the land of Israel.” Hollande had, by then, left the building.
The clear implication of Netanyahu’s statements has been that France and other western states are not doing enough to protect their Jewish populations from violent extremism, and that Israel is the only safe haven for Jews.
But it would be wrong to view this as some kind of ideological aberration on Netanyahu’s part. Most other Israeli politicians joined him in urging French Jews to move to Israel.
Yair Lapid, seen as a centrist politician, said: “I don’t want to speak in terms of Holocaust, but … European Jewry must understand that there is just one place for Jews, and that is the State of Israel.”
In fact, the effort to bring Jews to Israel is at the core of Zionist thinking, and widely supported by the Israeli Jewish population. Aliyah, or “ascension”, the Hebrew word for Jewish immigration, connotes an almost-divine obligation on Jews to live in Israel.
Former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, it should be remembered, used even more inflammatory language in 2004, warning that France was in the grip of “the wildest anti-semitism”, and calling on Jews to flee France.
“If I have to advise our brothers in France, I’ll tell them one thing – move to Israel, as early as possible. I say that to Jews all around the world, but there [in France] I think it’s a must and they have to move immediately.”
Financial inducements
Similarly, Israel has tried to exploit economic crises in countries with significant Jewish populations to encourage them to emigrate. In 2001, when the Argentinian financial system collapsed, Israel offered each Jew there a $20,000 cheque – should they make a new life in Israel.That was in addition to the inducements Israel offers as standard to Jewish immigrants: large sums of cash, tax breaks, subsidies, as well as special access to grants and loans.
The extraordinary lengths Israel is prepared to go to encourage Jews to come to Israel – including, it seems, even actions designed to fuel anti-semitism – were suggested by Raanan Rein, a history professor at Tel Aviv University, in a book on Israel’s relations with Argentina.
According to Rein, in 1960, David Ben Gurion, Israel’s prime minister, welcomed the possibility that Israel’s kidnapping of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann – in violation of an extradition agreement with Buenos Aires – might fuel hatred of the country’s Jews.
“If there is anti-Semitism,” he told a journalist, “they [Argentina’s Jews] can immigrate to Israel.”
Analysts and observers have pointed out that Netanyahu, Israeli politicians more generally and organisations such as the Jewish Agency, which oversees immigration to Israel, may equally be provoking hatred – inadvertently or otherwise – that strengthens Jewish immigration.
Few deny a connection between Israel’s intensifying belligerency, especially its repeated attacks on Gaza, and verbal and physical attacks on Jews in Europe.
More specifically in France, reports of attacks on Jews over the past decade have been well-publicised, including by the Jewish Agency, even though a significant proportion have turned out to be false.
Weakening Jewish communities
France, with half a million Jews, has the largest Jewish population outside the US and Israel. According to figures from the Jewish Agency, 7,000 immigrants arrived from France in 2014, triple the number in 2012. Israel’s minister for immigrant absorption, Sofa Landver, has predicted that more than 10,000 will immigrate this year.In hailing her ministry’s successes last month, Landver said the government would continue “to promote the ingathering of the exiles, a vision that has accompanied the people of Israel since the state’s establishment”.
In contrast, Rabbi Menachem Margolin, head of the European Jewish Association, noted that Netanyahu’s efforts risked “severely weakening and damaging Jewish communities that have the right to live securely wherever they are”.
In more graphic terms, Haaretz columnist Chemi Shalev argued: “By encouraging mass emigration, Israeli politicians could very well be helping terrorist fanatics finish the job started by the Nazis and their Vichy collaborators: making France Judenrein.”
Netanyahu’s assumptions, he added, “can only invigorate jihadists and spur them to adopt similar tactics in other European countries”.
So why is Jewish immigration so important to Israel that it is prepared to endanger the very Jews it claims to protect?
The reason is illustrated in the efforts of Netanyahu and the Israeli right to pass a basic law defining Israel as “the nation-state of the Jewish people”.
Goals of Zionism
The aims of such legislation, echoing the major goals of Zionism, are several and related:* To consolidate Israel’s long-standing efforts to claim it is the state of all Jews around the world, conflating Judaism with Zionism and helping to silence critics of Israeli policy as anti-Semites.
* To implicate all Jews in Israeli actions to Judaise territory that was seized from Palestinians, as part of Israel’s efforts to prevent the emergence of a Palestinian state.
* To recruit more Jews to counter the so-called “demographic threat” posed by the Palestinians’ higher natural growth rate, which threatens to create a Palestinian majority in the combined area of Israel and the occupied territories.
* To bolster a self-serving narrative of Israel as being on the frontlines of the clash of civilisations, in which the future of the Judeo-Christian west is threatened by a bloodthirsty Islamic east.
It was therefore entirely predictable that Netanyahu used his speech in Paris on Sunday to again characterise the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas, and Lebanon’s Hizballah as being no different from militant jihadist groups such as al-Qaeda and the Islamic State that were implicated in last week’s attack.
They all, he said, wanted to “impose a dark tyranny on the world”.
“Those who slaughtered Jews in the synagogue in Jerusalem [in November] and those who slaughtered Jews and journalists in Paris belong to the same murderous terror organisation,” Netanyahu claimed.
An analyst on Israel’s Channel 2 news described last week’s attacks in Paris as “France’s 9/11″.
It is worth recalling that Netanyahu let slip in the immediate wake of the attack on the World Trade Centre his real view of that event – it was “very good” for Israel because it would generate sympathy for its war against the Palestinians.
Fallacy of safe haven
Haaretz columnist Ansel Pfeffer noted this narrative worked to Netanyahu’s benefit, allowing him to refuse “to make meaningful concessions to the Palestinians since Israel is on the frontline facing the onslaught of radical Islam, and any ground given will immediately be used to launch further attacks”.Another Israeli analyst, Orly Noy, took the same view: “This helps Netanyahu promote a worldview in which there is no national conflict, no occupation, no Palestinian people and no blatant disregard for human rights.”
But as Pfeffer further observed, Netanyahu’s narrative that all Jews should come to Israel depends on a central fallacy: that Israel is a safe haven. In fact, statistically Jews are far safer in France than in conflict-plagued Israel.
It also forgets that at least some of Israel’s power on the international stage has depended on the influence of international Jewish lobbies to pressure politicians and the media through their activism.
This was a point Rabbi Margolin alluded to. “The Israeli government must recognise this reality and also remember the strategic importance of the Jewish communities as supporters of Israel in the countries in which they live.”
It might be worth Netanyahu pondering that a United States and a Europe without organised Jewish lobbies aggressively promoting Israel’s interests would be less reliable allies than they have been until now.
http://www.jonathan-cook.net/2015-01-12/netanyahu-defies-french-pleas-to-push-zionist-agenda/
Un concert de Gilad Atzmon annulé au Royaume-Uni en raison de ses déclarations sur les juifs
- Publié le : vendredi 30 janvier
- Mots-clés : Communautés; Judaïsme; Royaume-Uni
- Commentaires : 6
- Source : E&R
Suite a des pressions, un concert du jazzman Gilad Atzmon a été annulé à Nottingham.
Actuellement en tournée au Royaume-Uni avec son groupe The Orient House Ensemble, le jazzman israélien devait se produire au Bonington Theatre de Nottingham, le jeudi 15 janvier dernier.
Or le conseil municipal de l’arrondissement de Gedling, qui gère la salle, a annulé la représentation après avoir reçu un courrier signé par 13 personnes, puis a indiqué dans un communiqué avoir « examiné les préoccupations soulevées par les résidents locaux et partagé leur point de vue ». Les éléments qui semblent avoir déterminé la décision seraient des propos d’Atzmon, retrouvés par le conseil suite à la lettre de dénonciation, comme par exemple : « C’est toujours le mauvais comportement des juifs qui amène sur eux des désastres », ainsi que : « Nuremberg était un faux tribunal, Israël en mérite un vrai. »
Le jazzman aurait par ailleurs qualifié certains juifs de « trolls circoncis ».
Concernant le concert, Gilad Atzmon a expliqué :
Actuellement en tournée au Royaume-Uni avec son groupe The Orient House Ensemble, le jazzman israélien devait se produire au Bonington Theatre de Nottingham, le jeudi 15 janvier dernier.
Or le conseil municipal de l’arrondissement de Gedling, qui gère la salle, a annulé la représentation après avoir reçu un courrier signé par 13 personnes, puis a indiqué dans un communiqué avoir « examiné les préoccupations soulevées par les résidents locaux et partagé leur point de vue ». Les éléments qui semblent avoir déterminé la décision seraient des propos d’Atzmon, retrouvés par le conseil suite à la lettre de dénonciation, comme par exemple : « C’est toujours le mauvais comportement des juifs qui amène sur eux des désastres », ainsi que : « Nuremberg était un faux tribunal, Israël en mérite un vrai. »
Le jazzman aurait par ailleurs qualifié certains juifs de « trolls circoncis ».
Concernant le concert, Gilad Atzmon a expliqué :
« Ma performance à Nottingham n’était pas annoncée comme un discours politique. Il s’agit juste d’une performance musicale. […] Je ne sais pas quoi faire. Je ne m’inquiète pas si les gens s’opposent à mon écriture, mais ma musique n’a rien à voir avec cela. C’est injuste. »Le concert a finalement eu lieu dans une autre salle puis un rassemblement de soutien a été organisé le 22 janvier. Saxophoniste de renommée mondiale (musicien sur le dernier album des Pink Floyd par exemple), Gilad Atzmon a invité ses critiques à venir le défier intellectuellement dans un pub du centre-ville de Nottingham, le Canalhouse, le 2 février prochain à 19h30.
It
was hardly surprising that France’s president, Francois Hollande, is
understood to have implored Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu
not to participate in Sunday’s mass march in solidarity with the victims
of last week’s killings in Paris.
Netanyahu was probably the least welcome of the 40 world leaders who participated in the rally in the French capital to demonstrate their outrage at an attack that left 17 people dead, including four French Jews.
According to Israeli media, Hollande’s advisers had urged Netanyahu not to come, concerned that he would exploit the visit – and the deaths – to increase divisions in French society.
They had good grounds for concern. Shortly before he set off for Paris, Netanyahu issued a statement saying Israel would welcome with “open arms” any French or European Jews choosing to move to Israel.
Earlier, he tweeted: “To all the Jews of France, all the Jews of Europe, Israel is not just the place in whose direction you pray, the state of Israel is your home.”
Netanyahu also declared on Saturday that he would be convening a special ministerial committee this week to investigate ways to encourage Jewish migration from France and from other European countries.
Meanwhile, in a coup for the Israeli prime minister, it was announced that four Jewish men killed at the HyperCacher supermarket in Paris on Friday were being flown to Israel for burial in Jerusalem on Tuesday. None of them were Israeli citizens.
The four will be officially recognised as “terror victims”, possibly entitling their relatives to large payments from the Israeli government.
On that occasion, Netanyahu called on Jews to leave France for Israel and then burst into a rendition of the Zionist anthem “Am Yisrael Chai”, or “The people of Israel live”. Hollande was reportedly incensed, saying Netanyahu had used the event “as an election rally”.
This time, presumably in response to Hollande’s rebuke, Netanyahu did slightly temper his language during his speech at the Great Synagogue in Paris. Conceding that Jews had a right to live in France, he also averred: “Jews today have been blessed with another right, a right that didn’t exist for previous generations: The right to join their Jewish brothers in our historic homeland – the land of Israel.” Hollande had, by then, left the building.
The clear implication of Netanyahu’s statements has been that France and other western states are not doing enough to protect their Jewish populations from violent extremism, and that Israel is the only safe haven for Jews.
But it would be wrong to view this as some kind of ideological aberration on Netanyahu’s part. Most other Israeli politicians joined him in urging French Jews to move to Israel.
Yair Lapid, seen as a centrist politician, said: “I don’t want to speak in terms of Holocaust, but … European Jewry must understand that there is just one place for Jews, and that is the State of Israel.”
In fact, the effort to bring Jews to Israel is at the core of Zionist thinking, and widely supported by the Israeli Jewish population. Aliyah, or “ascension”, the Hebrew word for Jewish immigration, connotes an almost-divine obligation on Jews to live in Israel.
Former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, it should be remembered, used even more inflammatory language in 2004, warning that France was in the grip of “the wildest anti-semitism”, and calling on Jews to flee France.
“If I have to advise our brothers in France, I’ll tell them one thing – move to Israel, as early as possible. I say that to Jews all around the world, but there [in France] I think it’s a must and they have to move immediately.”
That was in addition to the inducements Israel offers as standard to Jewish immigrants: large sums of cash, tax breaks, subsidies, as well as special access to grants and loans.
The extraordinary lengths Israel is prepared to go to encourage Jews to come to Israel – including, it seems, even actions designed to fuel anti-semitism – were suggested by Raanan Rein, a history professor at Tel Aviv University, in a book on Israel’s relations with Argentina.
According to Rein, in 1960, David Ben Gurion, Israel’s prime minister, welcomed the possibility that Israel’s kidnapping of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann – in violation of an extradition agreement with Buenos Aires – might fuel hatred of the country’s Jews.
“If there is anti-Semitism,” he told a journalist, “they [Argentina’s Jews] can immigrate to Israel.”
Analysts and observers have pointed out that Netanyahu, Israeli politicians more generally and organisations such as the Jewish Agency, which oversees immigration to Israel, may equally be provoking hatred – inadvertently or otherwise – that strengthens Jewish immigration.
Few deny a connection between Israel’s intensifying belligerency, especially its repeated attacks on Gaza, and verbal and physical attacks on Jews in Europe.
More specifically in France, reports of attacks on Jews over the past decade have been well-publicised, including by the Jewish Agency, even though a significant proportion have turned out to be false.
In hailing her ministry’s successes last month, Landver said the government would continue “to promote the ingathering of the exiles, a vision that has accompanied the people of Israel since the state’s establishment”.
In contrast, Rabbi Menachem Margolin, head of the European Jewish Association, noted that Netanyahu’s efforts risked “severely weakening and damaging Jewish communities that have the right to live securely wherever they are”.
In more graphic terms, Haaretz columnist Chemi Shalev argued: “By encouraging mass emigration, Israeli politicians could very well be helping terrorist fanatics finish the job started by the Nazis and their Vichy collaborators: making France Judenrein.”
Netanyahu’s assumptions, he added, “can only invigorate jihadists and spur them to adopt similar tactics in other European countries”.
So why is Jewish immigration so important to Israel that it is prepared to endanger the very Jews it claims to protect?
The reason is illustrated in the efforts of Netanyahu and the Israeli right to pass a basic law defining Israel as “the nation-state of the Jewish people”.
* To consolidate Israel’s long-standing efforts to claim it is the state of all Jews around the world, conflating Judaism with Zionism and helping to silence critics of Israeli policy as anti-Semites.
* To implicate all Jews in Israeli actions to Judaise territory that was seized from Palestinians, as part of Israel’s efforts to prevent the emergence of a Palestinian state.
* To recruit more Jews to counter the so-called “demographic threat” posed by the Palestinians’ higher natural growth rate, which threatens to create a Palestinian majority in the combined area of Israel and the occupied territories.
* To bolster a self-serving narrative of Israel as being on the frontlines of the clash of civilisations, in which the future of the Judeo-Christian west is threatened by a bloodthirsty Islamic east.
It was therefore entirely predictable that Netanyahu used his speech in Paris on Sunday to again characterise the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas, and Lebanon’s Hizballah as being no different from militant jihadist groups such as al-Qaeda and the Islamic State that were implicated in last week’s attack.
They all, he said, wanted to “impose a dark tyranny on the world”.
“Those who slaughtered Jews in the synagogue in Jerusalem [in November] and those who slaughtered Jews and journalists in Paris belong to the same murderous terror organisation,” Netanyahu claimed.
An analyst on Israel’s Channel 2 news described last week’s attacks in Paris as “France’s 9/11″.
It is worth recalling that Netanyahu let slip in the immediate wake of the attack on the World Trade Centre his real view of that event – it was “very good” for Israel because it would generate sympathy for its war against the Palestinians.
Another Israeli analyst, Orly Noy, took the same view: “This helps Netanyahu promote a worldview in which there is no national conflict, no occupation, no Palestinian people and no blatant disregard for human rights.”
But as Pfeffer further observed, Netanyahu’s narrative that all Jews should come to Israel depends on a central fallacy: that Israel is a safe haven. In fact, statistically Jews are far safer in France than in conflict-plagued Israel.
It also forgets that at least some of Israel’s power on the international stage has depended on the influence of international Jewish lobbies to pressure politicians and the media through their activism.
This was a point Rabbi Margolin alluded to. “The Israeli government must recognise this reality and also remember the strategic importance of the Jewish communities as supporters of Israel in the countries in which they live.”
It might be worth Netanyahu pondering that a United States and a Europe without organised Jewish lobbies aggressively promoting Israel’s interests would be less reliable allies than they have been until now.
- See more at: http://www.jonathan-cook.net/2015-01-12/netanyahu-defies-french-pleas-to-push-zionist-agenda/#sthash.ul69YWHg.dpuf
Netanyahu was probably the least welcome of the 40 world leaders who participated in the rally in the French capital to demonstrate their outrage at an attack that left 17 people dead, including four French Jews.
According to Israeli media, Hollande’s advisers had urged Netanyahu not to come, concerned that he would exploit the visit – and the deaths – to increase divisions in French society.
They had good grounds for concern. Shortly before he set off for Paris, Netanyahu issued a statement saying Israel would welcome with “open arms” any French or European Jews choosing to move to Israel.
Earlier, he tweeted: “To all the Jews of France, all the Jews of Europe, Israel is not just the place in whose direction you pray, the state of Israel is your home.”
Netanyahu also declared on Saturday that he would be convening a special ministerial committee this week to investigate ways to encourage Jewish migration from France and from other European countries.
Meanwhile, in a coup for the Israeli prime minister, it was announced that four Jewish men killed at the HyperCacher supermarket in Paris on Friday were being flown to Israel for burial in Jerusalem on Tuesday. None of them were Israeli citizens.
The four will be officially recognised as “terror victims”, possibly entitling their relatives to large payments from the Israeli government.
Zionist anthem
Hollande’s concerns were doubtlessly fuelled by Netanyahu’s behaviour at a ceremony for the victims of an attack on a Jewish school in Toulouse in 2012.On that occasion, Netanyahu called on Jews to leave France for Israel and then burst into a rendition of the Zionist anthem “Am Yisrael Chai”, or “The people of Israel live”. Hollande was reportedly incensed, saying Netanyahu had used the event “as an election rally”.
This time, presumably in response to Hollande’s rebuke, Netanyahu did slightly temper his language during his speech at the Great Synagogue in Paris. Conceding that Jews had a right to live in France, he also averred: “Jews today have been blessed with another right, a right that didn’t exist for previous generations: The right to join their Jewish brothers in our historic homeland – the land of Israel.” Hollande had, by then, left the building.
The clear implication of Netanyahu’s statements has been that France and other western states are not doing enough to protect their Jewish populations from violent extremism, and that Israel is the only safe haven for Jews.
But it would be wrong to view this as some kind of ideological aberration on Netanyahu’s part. Most other Israeli politicians joined him in urging French Jews to move to Israel.
Yair Lapid, seen as a centrist politician, said: “I don’t want to speak in terms of Holocaust, but … European Jewry must understand that there is just one place for Jews, and that is the State of Israel.”
In fact, the effort to bring Jews to Israel is at the core of Zionist thinking, and widely supported by the Israeli Jewish population. Aliyah, or “ascension”, the Hebrew word for Jewish immigration, connotes an almost-divine obligation on Jews to live in Israel.
Former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, it should be remembered, used even more inflammatory language in 2004, warning that France was in the grip of “the wildest anti-semitism”, and calling on Jews to flee France.
“If I have to advise our brothers in France, I’ll tell them one thing – move to Israel, as early as possible. I say that to Jews all around the world, but there [in France] I think it’s a must and they have to move immediately.”
Financial inducements
Similarly, Israel has tried to exploit economic crises in countries with significant Jewish populations to encourage them to emigrate. In 2001, when the Argentinian financial system collapsed, Israel offered each Jew there a $20,000 cheque – should they make a new life in Israel.That was in addition to the inducements Israel offers as standard to Jewish immigrants: large sums of cash, tax breaks, subsidies, as well as special access to grants and loans.
The extraordinary lengths Israel is prepared to go to encourage Jews to come to Israel – including, it seems, even actions designed to fuel anti-semitism – were suggested by Raanan Rein, a history professor at Tel Aviv University, in a book on Israel’s relations with Argentina.
According to Rein, in 1960, David Ben Gurion, Israel’s prime minister, welcomed the possibility that Israel’s kidnapping of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann – in violation of an extradition agreement with Buenos Aires – might fuel hatred of the country’s Jews.
“If there is anti-Semitism,” he told a journalist, “they [Argentina’s Jews] can immigrate to Israel.”
Analysts and observers have pointed out that Netanyahu, Israeli politicians more generally and organisations such as the Jewish Agency, which oversees immigration to Israel, may equally be provoking hatred – inadvertently or otherwise – that strengthens Jewish immigration.
Few deny a connection between Israel’s intensifying belligerency, especially its repeated attacks on Gaza, and verbal and physical attacks on Jews in Europe.
More specifically in France, reports of attacks on Jews over the past decade have been well-publicised, including by the Jewish Agency, even though a significant proportion have turned out to be false.
Weakening Jewish communities
France, with half a million Jews, has the largest Jewish population outside the US and Israel. According to figures from the Jewish Agency, 7,000 immigrants arrived from France in 2014, triple the number in 2012. Israel’s minister for immigrant absorption, Sofa Landver, has predicted that more than 10,000 will immigrate this year.In hailing her ministry’s successes last month, Landver said the government would continue “to promote the ingathering of the exiles, a vision that has accompanied the people of Israel since the state’s establishment”.
In contrast, Rabbi Menachem Margolin, head of the European Jewish Association, noted that Netanyahu’s efforts risked “severely weakening and damaging Jewish communities that have the right to live securely wherever they are”.
In more graphic terms, Haaretz columnist Chemi Shalev argued: “By encouraging mass emigration, Israeli politicians could very well be helping terrorist fanatics finish the job started by the Nazis and their Vichy collaborators: making France Judenrein.”
Netanyahu’s assumptions, he added, “can only invigorate jihadists and spur them to adopt similar tactics in other European countries”.
So why is Jewish immigration so important to Israel that it is prepared to endanger the very Jews it claims to protect?
The reason is illustrated in the efforts of Netanyahu and the Israeli right to pass a basic law defining Israel as “the nation-state of the Jewish people”.
Goals of Zionism
The aims of such legislation, echoing the major goals of Zionism, are several and related:* To consolidate Israel’s long-standing efforts to claim it is the state of all Jews around the world, conflating Judaism with Zionism and helping to silence critics of Israeli policy as anti-Semites.
* To implicate all Jews in Israeli actions to Judaise territory that was seized from Palestinians, as part of Israel’s efforts to prevent the emergence of a Palestinian state.
* To recruit more Jews to counter the so-called “demographic threat” posed by the Palestinians’ higher natural growth rate, which threatens to create a Palestinian majority in the combined area of Israel and the occupied territories.
* To bolster a self-serving narrative of Israel as being on the frontlines of the clash of civilisations, in which the future of the Judeo-Christian west is threatened by a bloodthirsty Islamic east.
It was therefore entirely predictable that Netanyahu used his speech in Paris on Sunday to again characterise the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas, and Lebanon’s Hizballah as being no different from militant jihadist groups such as al-Qaeda and the Islamic State that were implicated in last week’s attack.
They all, he said, wanted to “impose a dark tyranny on the world”.
“Those who slaughtered Jews in the synagogue in Jerusalem [in November] and those who slaughtered Jews and journalists in Paris belong to the same murderous terror organisation,” Netanyahu claimed.
An analyst on Israel’s Channel 2 news described last week’s attacks in Paris as “France’s 9/11″.
It is worth recalling that Netanyahu let slip in the immediate wake of the attack on the World Trade Centre his real view of that event – it was “very good” for Israel because it would generate sympathy for its war against the Palestinians.
Fallacy of safe haven
Haaretz columnist Ansel Pfeffer noted this narrative worked to Netanyahu’s benefit, allowing him to refuse “to make meaningful concessions to the Palestinians since Israel is on the frontline facing the onslaught of radical Islam, and any ground given will immediately be used to launch further attacks”.Another Israeli analyst, Orly Noy, took the same view: “This helps Netanyahu promote a worldview in which there is no national conflict, no occupation, no Palestinian people and no blatant disregard for human rights.”
But as Pfeffer further observed, Netanyahu’s narrative that all Jews should come to Israel depends on a central fallacy: that Israel is a safe haven. In fact, statistically Jews are far safer in France than in conflict-plagued Israel.
It also forgets that at least some of Israel’s power on the international stage has depended on the influence of international Jewish lobbies to pressure politicians and the media through their activism.
This was a point Rabbi Margolin alluded to. “The Israeli government must recognise this reality and also remember the strategic importance of the Jewish communities as supporters of Israel in the countries in which they live.”
It might be worth Netanyahu pondering that a United States and a Europe without organised Jewish lobbies aggressively promoting Israel’s interests would be less reliable allies than they have been until now.
- See more at: http://www.jonathan-cook.net/2015-01-12/netanyahu-defies-french-pleas-to-push-zionist-agenda/#sthash.ul69YWHg.dpuf
Pornographic, Racist and Blasphemous Charlie Hebdo OK, but not comic Dieudonné.
Israel, the psychopathic nation
Is Zionism a collective personality disorder?
By Dr. Laurent Guyénot, translated and introduced by Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor
Can a nation be a psychopath?
According to one expert on political psychopathy, Andrzej Lobaczewski, the answer is yes. Whole nations, even international political movements, can exhibit behavior that parallels that of psychopathic individuals.Lobaczewski, a Polish psychiatrist, diagnosed psychopathic symptoms among the Communist-era leadership. He argued that individuals with personality disorders, especially psychopathy, tend to gravitate to positions of power, which can set off a contagion in which the entire regime takes on psychopathic characteristics.
In a brand-new article, translated and published here for the first time, Laurent Guyénot argues that Israel (and the international Zionist movement surrounding and empowering it) is a textbook case of political psychopathy. Naturally the Zio-psychopaths, who always have to be 100% right and cannot accept the slightest bit of criticism, will not respond well to this article. Their reaction will offer yet another item of evidence that Dr. Guyénot’s thesis is correct.
Laurent Guyénot is an Engineer (National School of Advanced Technology, 1982) and medievalist (PhD in Medieval Studies at Paris IV-Sorbonne, 2009). He has authored numerous books; the latest is JFK-9/11: 50 Years of Deep State. My recent interview with him on the Charlie Hebdo affair is archived here.
-KB
ISRAEL, THE PSYCHOPATHIC NATION
by Laurent Guyenot
“Judeophobia is a psychosis. As a psychosis, it is hereditary and as a disease transmitted for two thousand years, it is incurable.” (Leo Pinsker, Auto-Emancipation, 1882)
Jewishness is a notoriously ambivalent notion. On the one hand, Judaism is a religion; on the other, Jews are a people, an ethnic group or race. It all depends on the circumstances. But in both cases, Jewishness may legitimately be subjected to psychological analysis. If Judaism is a religion, we may turn to Freud, who addressed the relationship between religion and neurosis in three books: Totem and Taboo, Civilization and Its Discontents and The Future of an Illusion, in which he calls “religion” (referring mainly to Catholicism) a “universal obsessional neurosis of humanity.” If, conversely, the Jews are a people, then we can base our analysis on common sense, which admits that every people has a national character forged by history – or a collective memory, which is to say, its own representation of its history. Concerning the character of the Jewish nation, there is no shortage of opinions from Jewish intellectuals.
The
hypothesis presented in this paper can be summarized as follows: The
Jewish nation, as a state, but also as an organized world community,
acts collectively towards other nations and other human communities in
the way a psychopath acts towards his fellow men. I will first describe
psychopathy as a cognitive and behavioral structure and show how the
ideology and methods of the chosen people are related to it. It goes
without saying that I do not intend to imply that “the Jews” are
psychopaths, but instead that they are the first victims of a mental
straitjacket imposed by their elites, who through veritable intellectual
terrorism, make of them, to the extent that they comply, the
instruments of the collective psychopathy of Israel.What is a psychopath?
Psychopathy is a syndrome of traits classified among the personality disorders. Canadian psychologist Robert Hare (1) in the wake of Hervey Cleckley’s The Mask of Sanity (1941), has defined its diagnostic criteria on the basis of a cognitive model that is now widely adopted, though some behaviorally-oriented psychiatrists prefer the term sociopathy. In an effort to get everyone to agree, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual on Mental Disorders, the American psychiatric bible, suggested antisocial personality disorder; but the term psychopathy is still in use.
The
most striking traits of the psychopath are lack of empathy and
conscience. Other traits are common to narcissism: psychopaths have a
grand vision of their own importance. In their minds, everything is owed
to them because they are exceptional. They are never wrong, and
failures are always the fault of others. They often show megalomania,
but some learn to hide their arrogance under false modesty. If the
psychopath pretends to rise to the universal level, it is because he
confuses it with his personal interests, and the truth with his own
opinions. However, the psychopath is distinguished from the simple
narcissist by his appetite for power, which makes him much more
destructive. Moreover, his capacity for harm is not inhibited by any
scruples or remorse: he is incapable of feeling guilt. Although he
imagines himself a hero, and in some cases looks like a hero, the
psychopath is, on the human spectrum, the polar opposite of the hero who
sacrifices himself for his community; he will not hesitate to sacrifice
the people around him, and when he knows he is lost, he consoles
himself by causing as many people as possible to fall.
Basically,
the psychopath perceives others as objects. He has a mechanical view of
people and human relationships (and, in some way, of himself as well).
Although devoid of conscience, he often has a keen perception of the
law, which he, as a mechanic of the social engine, overestimates. He has
not internalized moral law and in this sense is not socialized, but he
has mastered the rules of the game and cheats without qualms if he can.
For the same reason, the psychopath almost always develops an immoderate
taste for money; he idealizes it as the epitome of power, the very
essence of the social; he thinks that people can be bought and sold like
things, and life often proves him right.The diagnostic criteria for psychopathy also include pathological lying, deception (cunning) and manipulative behavior. The psychopath feels only very superficial emotions and has no real feelings for anyone; but he has developed a great ability to deceive. He can be charming to the point of being charismatic. He typically shows highly-developed verbal intelligence and lies with disconcerting aplomb. He is unable to empathize, but learns to simulate it, sometimes with a tendency to histrionics (Latin histrio, “theater actor”). The psychoanalyst Helène Deutsche makes this trait the mark of “as-if personalities” endowed with purely mimetic “pseudo-emotions,” devoid of inner experience, “a little like an actor with good technique, but not animated by any actual life.” (2) But the psychopath is more than that: he is a manipulator. It is through his extraordinary ability to feign, trick, trap, and capture that the psychopath draws his power. Although he himself is immunized against guilt, he becomes a master in the art of using guilt to dominate others.
In
any situation, the psychopath projects a persona, which can vary
according to circumstances. The opinions he wears in public are all
disguises that he tailors to his own advantage. However, lying is so
deeply embedded in his nature that the question of his “sincerity” is
almost irrelevant: the psychopath can beat a lie detector. The truth has
no value in his eyes, or merges with the version of events that suits
him. The psychopath is unable to put himself in the place of others, and
thus to view himself critically. Confident in any circumstance of being
right and innocent (and superior), he considers the resentment of his
victims as irrational and pointless.Although those close to the psychopath – at least those who learn the hard way his true nature – can judge him raving mad, the psychopath is not “sick” because he does not “suffer.” He is innocent of neurosis, and never requests psychiatric care (except as a strategic calculation). He is not psychotic, and cannot be regarded as maladapted to social life. On the contrary, he is, in a certain sense, over-adjusted. That is why the real mystery, from a Darwinian point of view, is not the existence of psychopaths, but their low proportion in the population.
Jewishness and selective empathy
The most optimistic low-end estimate of the proportion of psychopaths in the Western population is 1%. This 1% should not be confused with the famous 1% who own half the world’s wealth; but a study of senior executives of large companies, published under the title Snakes in Suits, shows that psychopathic traits are widespread among them (3). This is not surprising; modern society values psychopathic traits and favors the upward mobility of psychopaths.
The fact that Jews today are disproportionately represented among the elite (they form half of billionaires in the United States, while representing only 2.4% of the population) (4) does not allow us to conclude that psychopathy is more prevalent among the chosen people. In a way, quite the opposite is the case: Jews demonstrate among themselves an extraordinary capacity for empathy, or at least familiarity that breeds exceptional solidarity to the point of self-sacrifice. But the selective nature of this empathy suggests that it is addressed less to the humanity of others than to their Jewishness. In Nomads. Essay on the Jewish Soul (1929) we learn what transpires when two Jews meet. “We have never met before, but I instantly know him. One look, one phrase, and I know where he grew up, how he grew up, where he got his drive and his sense of humor. He is New York. He is Jewish. He looks like my uncle Louis, his voice is my uncle Sam. I feel we’ve been together at countless weddings, bar mitzvahs, and funerals. I know his genetic structure. I’m certain that within the last five hundred years—perhaps even more recently—we shared the same ancestor.” (5)
This is a comment from Robert Reich, Secretary of Labor, about his meeting with Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Council of the Federal Reserve, two very influential Americans, about whom we would like to believe that such familiarity does not affect their judgment of the nation’s interest. Kadmi Isaac Cohen described Judaism as “the spiritualized deification of the race […]. Thus the divinity in Judaism is contained in the exaltation of the entity represented by the race.” (6) It is as if the Jews felt united by a collective or ethnic soul, which occupies more or less of their individual soul according to individuals and circumstances.
IDF slogan: “1 shot 2 kills”
Jewish ethnocentrism
In contrast to the empathy it shows for itself, the Jewish community as a whole, to the extent it submits to its representative elites, tends to behave towards the mass of Gentiles in a psychopathic rather than empathic manner. This is why a goy observer, Werner Sombart, despite his reputation as a Semitophile, highlights features of Jewish collective psychology that are similar to psychopathic tendencies including a temperament that is “coldly utilitarian” and “calculating,” alongside a propensity to mimicry, combined with a mechanical conception of human relations. (9) The founder of sociology Emile Durkheim (1858-1917), very critical of his Jewish community, noticed among Jewish intellectuals a pragmatic and self-interested notion of truth, which can be compared with that of the psychopath: “The Jew . . . seeks to learn not in order to replace his collective prejudices by reflective thought, but merely to be better armed for the struggle. . . . [H]e superimposes this intellectual life upon his habitual routine with no effect of the former upon the latter”. (10) Many Jewish historians, for example, seem to value History less as a pursuit of truth than as a means of power.
The
hypothesis of a form of “collective psychopathy” with narcissistic
tendencies makes it possible to deconstruct the universalism in which
Judaism is draped. At the first level, Jewish universalism is a fable
intended to obfuscate reality and confuse the goy. But it is not only
this, as it also appears in the literature internal to the Jewish
community, where it amounts to an expression of limitless ethnic
narcissism. The Jewish people are “the seed that is germinating the
humanity of the future” (Jacob Kaplan, Chief Rabbi of France); “the
living ladder that meets the sky” (Emmanuel Levinas); “Israel equals
humanity” (Levinas) (11); “The Jew is closer to humanity than any
other,” so that “the enemy of the Jews is the enemy of humanity” and
therefore killing Jews is “murdering all mankind” (Elie Wiesel) (12).
Worse, “Hitting a Jew is hitting God Himself,” according to Cardinal
Aron Jean-Marie Lustiger (13), taken almost verbatim from the Talmud
(Sanhedrin 58b: “Hitting a Jew is like slapping the face of God himself
“). This is why the strange notion of “crimes against humanity” was
created specifically in 1945 at the Nuremburg Trials to describe the
massacre of Jews, while the term “genocide” was coined for the same
purpose by Raphael Lemkin in 1944. These terms having since been
generalized to other victims of history, the copyrighted term Holocaust
was coined — hard to beat.This equation between Jewishness and humanity, which is the height of ethnocentrism, is the real meaning of Judaism’s claim to embody humanism. Though Israelis are “the most separatist people in the world” according to Nahum Goldman (former president of the World Jewish Organization and founder of the World Jewish Congress), he adds: “The Israelis have the great weakness of thinking that the whole world revolves around them .” (14) So there is not necessarily a contradiction in their minds between universalist discourse and the practice of tribalism. If the Jew is the essence of humanity, what is good for the Jews is good for humanity, on principle. And although fundamentally racist, Jewishness cannot see itself as such: “Judaic ethics […] by definition deny racism. A Jew cannot be racist.” (Elie Wiesel) (15). This does not prevent the same Elie Wiesel from stating that “Jewish history describes an ongoing conflict between us and the others. Since Abraham, we are on one side and the whole world is on the other.” (16)
It has often been
said that Jews have an ethnocentric conception of universal history,
which has no meaning in their eyes except in relation to the Jewish
people. Josef Kastein acknowledges this in his book History and Destiny of the Jews
(1936): “Because it accepted the idea of the chosen people and
salvation, the Jewish world was Judeocentric, and Jews could interpret
everything that happened according to a single point of view, with
themselves as the center.” (17) Joshua Jehouda illustrates this
perfectly in Antisemitism, Mirror of the World: “He who plumbs
the depths of universal history, to gain an overall vision, finds that
from ancient times until today two opposing currents are fighting over
history, penetrating and shaping it constantly: the messianic current
and the anti-Semitic current […] Because messianism and anti-Semitism
are the two opposite poles of the journey of humanity.” (18)
In
his megalomania, the psychopath is convinced that when he uses others,
it is for their own good. Similarly, according to rabbinical logic, it
is to enlighten humanity that the Jewish community must preserve itself,
prosper, and eventually dominate humanity: “Judaism considers only the
salvation of the house of Israel, which alone will permit the salvation
of the seventy nations of the universe” (Rabi, Anatomy of French Judaism,
1962) (19). This is where the double ethno-religious nature of Judaism
helps streamline the paradox that the Jews should remain a separate
people in order to spread their universal religion. Such Jewish
intellectuals as Felix Adler (1851-1933) have defended the paradoxical
idea that the Jewish people must remain ethnically united to accomplish
their mission: To spread the universalism that will dissolve ethnicity
from the rest of humanity. Only when the mission is completed will the
Jewish people disappear. In this way has the most ethnically oriented
community manages to impersonate the champions of universalism. (20)
Thus when Martin Buber called for a state for the Jews, it was so they
could serve humanity. For it is only by fulfilling his messianic dream
of a national home, he said, that the Jewish religion can lead humanity
towards the messianic age. (21) This argument, developed by Reform
Judaism, is intended primarily for goyim but also for “soft” Jews, in
order to convince them that their commitment in favor of the group is a
service to humanity.The Innocent Victim
The
psychopath is unable to see the other person’s point of view, and
criticism strikes him as irrational aggression. This is the reaction of
the Jewish elites to criticism: To them it can be nothing other than the
expression of visceral anti-Semitism, an atavistic goyish disease.
“Judeophobia is a psychosis,” wrote Leo Pinsker, a founding father of
Zionism, “a hereditary demonic madness,” “a congenital perversion of
human mentality,” “passed down for two thousand years,” “incurable.”
(22)The psychopath does not know the feeling of guilt; he constantly plays innocent. Those who get in his way, or even cast a shadow over his path, are solely responsible for their own destruction. Their accusations are baseless fabrications, their anger an irrational hatred. “One thing that Judaism has which other spiritualities lack is innocence,” explains André Neher, one of the leaders of “the Jewish school of thought of Paris” (with Emmanuel Levinas and Leon Ashkenazi). “We are innocent, and we feel even more deeply that we are innocent when we are accused. […] It is this innocence that we must be aware of at present, and that we must never deny, never, in any circumstance.” (23) And it works: “You will understand nothing of anti-Semitism,” wrote Jean-Paul Sartre, “if you fail to remember that the Jew, that object of so much hatred, is perfectly innocent, nay harmless.” (Anti-Semite and Jew, 1946). The Jewish question is thus reduced to the question of anti-Semitism, which, thanks to the mythology of the Holocaust, is elevated to the status of metaphysical Evil. “The hatred of the Jews is the enigma of enigmas …” (André Glucksmann, Hate Speech, 2004) (24). It is a necessary enigma, without which the Jewish people could dissolve. Towards the end of his life, the Jewish writer Ilya Ehrenburg repeated that he would consider himself a Jew “as long as there was a single anti-Semite left on earth.” (25) Persecution is the central theme of the Passover holiday, Hanukkah, Purim and Yom Kippur, and Jewish history as taught to Jewish children, according to Michael Walzer, is one long tale of exile and persecution – Holocaust history read backwards. (26) According to historian Zygmunt Bauman, Israel uses the Holocaust “as the certificate of its political legitimacy, as a safe-conduct pass for its past and future policies, and, above all, as advance payment for the injustices it might itself commit.” (27)
Israel, Psychopath State
The State of Israel is now in the international scene what the psychopath is in a human community. With regard to the Palestinians, “Israeli Jews’ consciousness is characterized by a sense of victimization, a siege mentality, blind patriotism, belligerence, self-righteousness, dehumanization of the Palestinians, and insensitivity to their suffering,” in the words of journalist Akiva Eldar (“Operation Cast Lead against Gaza in 2008-2009″). (28) As noted by the Deputy Director of Military Intelligence Yehoshafat Harkabi: “Dazzled by its self-righteousness, Israel cannot see the case of the other side. Self-righteousness encourages nations no less than individuals to absolve themselves of every failing and shake off the guilt of every mishap. When everyone is guilty except them, the very possibility of self-criticism and self-improvement vanishes…” (29) The Israeli journalist Gideon Levy wrote in Haaretz in 2010 that “Only psychiatrists can explain Israel’s behavior.” However, the diagnosis he offers, including “paranoia, schizophrenia and megalomania,” (30) is in my opinion insufficient. It must take into account Israel’s extraordinary manipulative capacity on the world stage via corruption and propaganda, that is to say, the Bank and the Press.
Israel’s
relationship to the United States is that of a typical psychopath to an
influential and impressionable man he has decided to use to accomplish
his misdeeds. The golden rule of manipulation formulated by Colonel
Mandell House (who was the intermediary between the Zionist network and
President Woodrow Wilson) applies generally to Israel’s manipulation of
the United States: “With the President […] it was invariably my
intention to always to make him believe that ideas he derived from me
were his own.” (31) Indeed, Israel has managed to lead America into a
Middle East policy that only serves Israeli interests, by pretending to
the American people that it serves their interests. The psychopath tries
to interfere in all the human relationships of his prey, so as to
prevent any alliance that could allow him to be unmasked. Isolate and
divide-and-rule are the essence of this strategy. This is exactly what
Israel and its neoconservative moles have done, by trying to split the
United States from its historic allies in the Middle East, with the aim
of one day remaining the only ally of the United States in the area; the
demonization of all heads of state in the Arab world is part of this
strategy.The power of the Zionist manipulation of the United States, based on quasi-total control of the mainstream media alongside large-scale psychological operations such as September 11th, is truly bewildering. But it becomes understandable in light of the cognitive mechanisms of psychopathy. It even becomes predictable to some extent, if we keep in mind that the psychopath has no ability to question, no limits to his appetite for power, and no remorse about leading humanity into ruin to save his skin. Nothing better illustrates the psychopathic nature of Zionism than the apocalyptic nuclear blackmail Israel perpetually exercises over the West under the name “the Samson Option.” In 1974 Golda Meir summed it up as “Israel’s willingness in a doomsday situation to take the region down with it” (32) in the event of looming defeat.
And remember: there is no limit to the psychopath’s thirst for power, because he does not seeks power for the comfort it can bring him, but instead loves power for the sake of power.
Conclusion
By drawing a parallel between psychopathy as a personality disorder and the attitude of Israel, I do not mean, of course, the Jews in general. They are the first to be manipulated by their elites, and they are part of this collective psychopathy only to the extent of their submission to those elites. Jewishness, do not forget, is whatever idea the Jews make of it; and the idea the Jews make of it is, almost entirely, the one imposed on them by their elites.
What
is at issue is the prevailing ideology of Israel, and (more discreetly)
of the organized Jewish community. Dominant discourse is always shaped
by the elite. Sometimes a strong current of popular thought emerges to
challenge the dominant way of thinking, but nothing of this kind is yet
observable in the Jewish community; it is overwhelmingly docile to its
elite, which currently dominates the media and the entertainment
industry and therefore enjoys considerable mind-control powers. Their
ruse is to maintain in the Jews an absolute conviction of the immaculate
innocence of their people, and simultaneously to inculcate a paranoid
fear of anti-Semitism, this “disease transmitted for two thousand years,
incurable.” (Leon Pinsker) (33)In The Corporation: the Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power (Free Press, 2005), Joel Bakan noted that those “legal persons” that are large companies behave like psychopaths, insensitive to the suffering of those they crush in their pursuit of profit: “Corporate behavior is very similar to that of a psychopath.” That company culture, which involves every employee to one degree or another, is driven by its ruling elite. The Enron case has shown the world the tremendous damage that can be done by a company run by people of high intelligence and perverse ideology. (34) My analysis here of the Jewish community is based on exactly the same reasoning. Like it or not, the character of a nation is as much determined by its legitimate leaders than the reverse. Until proven otherwise Benjamin Netanyahu is as much Israel as Vladimir Putin is Russia.
Ledeen is indeed a “terrorism expert” – he is said to be an Operation Gladio wet work operative
This article is in no way anti-Semitic; it is a severe criticism of “Jewishness” as a system of thought, a representation of the world and the self. We are critiquing an idea by exposing its dangerous irrationality, nothing more. Even if it is as old as the world, an idea still deserves critique. Since the first victims of a toxic idea are the men and women it inhabits, they are likewise the first we would help liberate. This article is basically a fraternal message to all Jews: Jews of all countries, disunite! Break away from your elites and their pathological ideology! Rejoin humanity!
Likewise,
not all elites deserve to be put in the same bag. Many are the Zionist
leaders who have had the courage to confront the monster they created,
and to try to undo the damage. Moshe Sharett, Foreign Minister from 1948
to 1956 and Prime Minister from 1954 to 1955, advocated a moderate
Zionism respectful of international rules, in contrast to the methods of
Ben Gurion, Pinhas Levon, Moshe Dayan and Shimon Peres, the clan
determined “to set the Middle East on fire,” “to frighten the West into
supporting Israel’s aims,” by raising “terrorism to the level of a
sacred principle” according to Sharett (36). The Zionist leader Nahum
Goldman, quoted above, was in favor of a genuine dialogue with the Arabs
and was deeply disillusioned by the attitude of Ben Gurion, whom he
described as “organically incapable of compromise” and blinded by
self-righteousness. After 1967 he became an outspoken critic of illegal
occupation of Palestinian territories. During the government of Begin,
he advised President Carter to “break the back” of the Zionist lobby
that he had long headed, which he believed had become a “negative
factor” afflicting American foreign policy. (37)
Why
have men like Sharett and Goldman never managed to overcome the
psychopathic ideological power machine of Zionism? Could it be because
it – like Jewishness itself – is rooted deeply in the Bible? In the
final analysis does not the Zionist manipulation go back to the creation
by those ancient priests, the Levites, of a tribal god by the name of
Yahweh, who usurped the title of the Creator of the Universe and Father
of Humanity? Ultimately, is not Zionism the logical outcome of Yahwism?
This is a question that I will reserve for another article.1) Robert Hare, Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us, The Guilford Press, 1993.
2) Helene Deutsche, Les «comme si» et autres textes, 1933-1970 (1992), Seuil, 2007, p. 55, cited in Roland Gori, La Fabrique des Imposteurs, Le Lien qui Libère, 2013, p. 232.
3) Paul Babiak et Robert Hare, Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work, HarperCollins, 2007. Theme expressed in documentary film I am Fishead (2011) : www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXFmo6WipNk
4) Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State, University of Chicago Press, 1993 ; J.J. Goldberg, Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establishment, Basic Books, 1997.
5) Robert Reich, Locked in the Cabinet, Scribner, 1997, cited in Kevin MacDonald, Culture of Critique: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements, Praeger 1998, kindle edition 2013, e. 9222-27.
6) Cited in André Pichot, Aux origines des théories raciales, de la Bible à Darwin, Flammarion, 2008, p. 418-419.
7) www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/Alain-Soral-commentaires-de-l-actualite-et-conseils-de-lecture-25711.html, à 15:12.
8) Cité dans Hervé Ryssen, Les Espérances planétariennes, Éditions Baskerville, 2005, p. 183.
9) Werner Sombart, Les Juifs et la vie économique (1902), KontreKulture, 2012, p. 482 et 158.
10) Cited in Kevin MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism, Praeger, 1998, édition kindle 2013, e. 5403-10.
11) Cited in Hervé Ryssen, La Guerre eschatologique, Éditions Baskerville, 2013, p. 23-24 et Les Espérances planétariennes, Éditions Baskerville, 2005, p. 184-189.
12) Cited in Roger Garaudy, Le Procès du sionisme, 1998, p. 17 et dans Hervé Ryssen, Les Espérances planétariennes, Éditions Baskerville, 2005, p. 184-189.
13) Jean-Marie Lustiger, La Promesse, Parole et Silence, 2002.
14) Nahum Goldman, The Jewish Paradox, Fred Jordan Book, 1978, p. 8 et 56-57.
15) Cited in Hervé Ryssen, Les Espérances planétariennes, Éditions Baskerville, 2005, p. 191.
16) Hervé Ryssen, La Guerre eschatologique, Éditions Baskerville, 2013, p. 25.
17) Josef Kastein, History and destiny of the Jews, Garden City publishing, 1936, cited in Douglas Reed, La Controverse de Sion (1956), Kontre Kulture, 2012, p. 163.
18) Josué Jehouda, L’Antisémitisme, miroir du monde, Éditions Synthesis, 1958, p.185, cited in Léon de Poncins, Les Juifs et le Concile Vatican II, Kontre Kulture, 2014, p. 173.
19) Cited in Martin Peltier, L’Antichristianisme juif. L’enseignement de la haine, Diffusion Internationale Édition, 2014, p. 250-252.
20) Kevin MacDonald, Culture of Critique, Praeger, 1998, Kindle edition 2013, e. 9983-10008 ; see also Separation and Its Discontents, Praeger, 1998, Kindle edition 2013, ch. 7.
21) Cited in Kevin MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents, Praeger 1998, Kindle edition 2013, e. 5485-91.
22) Léon Pinsker, Autoémancipation, Lettre d’un juif russe à ses frères (1882), Éditions Mille et Une Nuits, 2006, p. 17 et 21.
23) Cited in Hervé Ryssen, Les Espérances planétariennes, Éditions Baskerville, 2005, p. 319.
24) Cited in Hervé Ryssen, Psychanalyse du judaïsme, Éditions Baskerville, 2006, p. 205.
25) Kevin MacDonald, Culture of Critique, Kindle 2013, e. 3176-78.
26) Michael Walzer, “Toward a New Realization of Jewishness,” Congress Monthly n° 61, 1994, p.4, cited in MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents, Kindle 2013, e. 4675-86.
27) Kevin MacDonald, Separation and Its Discontents, Kindle 2013, e. 4674-86.
28) Cited in Max Blumenthal, Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel, Nation Books, 2013, p. 16.
29) Alan Hart, Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, Volume 2: David Becomes Goliath, p. 42-49.
30) Gideon Levy, “Only psychiatrists can explain Israel’s behavior,” Haaretz, January 10, 2010, www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/only-psychiatrists-can-explain-israel-s-behavior-1.261115
31) Arthur Howden Smith, The Real Colonel House (1918), Bibliographical Center for Research, 2010, citd in Aline de Diéguez, Aux Sources du chaos mondial actuel, on line at: http://aline.dedieguez.pagesperso-orange.fr/mariali/chaos/house.html.
32) Alan Hart, Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, vol. 2: David Becomes Goliath, Clarity Press, 2009, p. 194.
33) Léon Pinsker, Auto-émancipation, 1882, cited in Jean Daniel, La Prison juive, Odile Jacob, 2005, p. 133.
34) See the documentary The Smartest Guy in the Room (2005), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxzLX_C9Z74
35) Michael Ledeen, “What Machiavelli (A Secret Jew?) Learned from Moses,” Jewish World Review, 7 juin 1999, www.jewishworldreview.com/0699/machiavelli1.asp
36) Livia Rokach, Israel’s Sacred Terrorism: A Study Based on Moshe Sharett’s Personal Diary and Other Documents, Association of Arab-American University Graduates, 1986, p. 42-49.
37) Alan Hart, Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, Volume 2: David Becomes Goliath, p. 42-49.
Kevin Barrett
Dr. Kevin Barrett, a Ph.D. Arabist-Islamologist, is one of America’s best-known critics of the War on Terror.
Dr. Barrett has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications.
Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin, where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host.
Dr. Barrett has appeared many times on Fox, CNN, PBS and other broadcast outlets, and has inspired feature stories and op-eds in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune, and other leading publications.
Dr. Barrett has taught at colleges and universities in San Francisco, Paris, and Wisconsin, where he ran for Congress in 2008. He currently works as a nonprofit organizer, author, and talk radio host.
US media ‘complicit in mass murder of Muslims’
Media hatemongers help kill millions
Watch the video at Press TV
The media in the United States is helping to create mass
murder of Muslims by hiding the shooting deaths of three American Muslim
students in the country, an American scholar says.
Kevin Barrett, founding member of Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance, made the remarks in a phone interview with Press TV on Wednesday while commenting on the murder of three Muslim students in a shooting incident in the US state of North Carolina.
The incident has not been given coverage “worldwide or here in the United States as Charlie Hebdo incident,” Barrett said because “the media here is complicit in the mass murder of Muslims.”
He added the media is “actually helping to create more such incidents.”
“It seems that the mainstream media as well as the extremist media
here in the United States are both complicit in genocide against Muslims
and the religion if Islam, and that they are also trying to
propagandize the world into a convincing…that Muslims don’t have right
to defend themselves against this kind of genocidal violence,” Barrett
said.
“They are simply the latest victims of anti-Muslim genocide which has
been created by elements that own most of the media here in the United
States,” he noted.
As an example for the ongoing “genocide” of Muslims, Barrett mentioned the occupied Palestinian territories where “the Zionists have been conducting slow motion genocide since the World War I really, and certainly since the Nakba, or the mass murder of Palestinians and the expulsion of the rest in 1948.”
Palestinians refer to the May 15, 1948 occupation of Palestine as the
Nakba Day, which means the Day of the Catastrophe in Arabic, to
solemnly commemorate the expulsion of more than 700,000 Palestinians
from their homeland in 1948.
Israeli forces have wiped nearly 500 Palestinian villages and towns
off the map, leaving an estimated total of 4.7 million Palestinian
refugees hoping for an eventual return to their homeland more than six
decades later.
“So we are facing a genocide of over a million people and Muslims
absolutely have the duty, not just the right but the duty, to defend
themselves by any means necessary against this genocide,” Barrett
stated.
“Every good person on earth also has this duty to stop this genocide
and bring the perpetrators, including those who own the American and
Western mainnstream media, to justice,” he concluded.
Muhammad Ali Ben Marcus Le Président John Fitzgerald Kennedy: "Ich bin ein Berliner" - Je suis un Berlinois! 26 juin 1963
ReplyDeleteJFK pronconça ces paroles dans le but de souligner le soutien des USA aux Allemands de l'Ouest contre les Allemands de l'Est.
"Lass' sie nach Berlin kommen" - Laissez-les venir à Berlin, parlant des Allemands de l'Est qui désiraient venir à Berlin Ouest afin de démontrer que les Capitalistes et les Communistes pouvaient travailler ensemble.
Sur les marches de Rathaus Schöneberg, il rappela à une audience de 450,000 personnes présentes, la célèbre formule: civis romanus sum - je suis un citoyen romain! Faisait-il ainsi
À l'époque de JFK, le monde occidental sous contrôle judéo-maçonnique était fier de dire tout haut: Today "Ich bin ein Berliner!" Tous les hommes (pas les femmes!) libres, peu importe où ils habitaient, furent des citoyens de Berlin, et, comme un homme libre (croyait-il), JFK prononça avec une grande fierté ces mots: "Ich bin ein Berliner!" alors que les habitants de Berlin ne se disaient jamais Berlinois. Berliner dans le jargon local voulait tout simplement dire beignet!
Theodore Chaikin "Ted" Sorensen (May 8, 1928 – October 31, 2010), de mère juive de Russie (Annis (Chaikin) Sorensen, écrivit la plupart des discours de JFK, y compris le plagiat du poète mystique chrétien Khalil Gibran qui avait écrit: "Ne demandez pas ce que peut faire le pays pour vous; demandez ce que vous pouvez faire pour votre pays!"
Il est d'usage de dire "Nous sommes tous Palestiniens", et cela ne veut pas dire pour autant que ceux et celles qui disent ces mots font "l'apologie du terrorisme palestinien" ou qu'ils soient des voyous, des brigands, des gangsters, des enfoirés (Jacques Weber) comme veulent nous le faire croire les criminels et 'philosophes' juifs, et les sionistes de France et d'ailleurs!
BAFS
Samedi 4 janvier 2015
FRENCH "CIVILISATION DE MERDE"!
Pour vivre ensemble il faut savoir aimer 1971
http://muhammad-ali-ben-marcus.blogspot.co.uk/.../to-live...
THE JEWISH FREEMASONIC WAR ON ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY GETS WORSE!
http://muhammad-ali-ben-marcus.blogspot.co.uk/.../the...
Je suis Shoarlie
ReplyDeleteJerry Lewis repeats his distaste for female comics
May 23, 2013, 4:27 PM
By JAKE COYLE AP Entertainment Writer
Associated Press
Print
CANNES, France — Ladies? Don't make him laugh.
Asked who his favorite female comics were Thursday at a Cannes Film Festival press conference, Jerry Lewis listed Cary Grant and Burt Reynolds. He then added: "I don't have any."
In 1998, Lewis famously said that watching women do comedy "sets me back a bit" and that he has trouble with the notion of would-be mothers as comedians.
Asked Thursday if he had changed his mind at all because of performers like Melissa McCarthy and Sarah Silverman, the 87-year-old Lewis said of women performing broad comedy: "I can't see women doing that. It bothers me."
"I cannot sit and watch a lady diminish her qualities to the lowest common denominator," he said. "I just can't do that."
Lewis was in Cannes for the premiere of "Max Rose," a drama directed by Daniel Noah in which Lewis stars as an aging jazz musician.
In her 2011 memoir, "Bossypants," Tina Fey alluded to Lewis' attitudes about female comedians: "Whenever someone says to me, 'Jerry Lewis says women aren't funny,' or 'Christopher Hitchens says women aren't funny,' ... Do you have anything to say to that?'
"Yes," writes Fey. "We don't f------ care if you like it."