The Forgotten History of the Jewish, Anti-Zionist Left

“Zion¬≠ism is a tox¬≠ic mix¬≠ture of Euro¬≠pean nation¬≠al¬≠ism and British impe¬≠ri¬≠al¬≠ism graft¬≠ed onto a cul¬≠tur¬≠al reser¬≠voir of Jew¬≠ish tropes and mytholo¬≠gies that come from Jew¬≠ish litur¬≠gy and culture.”

“WHEREVER WE LIVE, THAT’S OUR HOMELAND”

“The Zionists have become known in the world, and they are considered like the lowest and the cheapest.” ~-Rabbi Shalom Dov Ber Schneersohn,Rebbe of Lubavitch, Russia (1866-1920)

A conversation with scholar Benjamin Balthaser about Jewish, working-class anti-Zionism in the 1930s and ’40s.

Israeli Prime Min­is­ter Ben­jamin Netanyahu’s push to forcibly annex up to 30% of the occu­pied West Bank is expos­ing the vio­lence inher­ent in impos­ing a Jew­ish eth­no-state on an indige­nous Pales­tin­ian pop­u­la­tion.

While the plan is delayed for now, the human rights orga­ni­za­tion B’Tselem reports that, in prepa­ra­tion for annex­a­tion, Israel already ramped up its demo­li­tions of Pales­tin­ian homes in the West Bank in June, destroy­ing 30 that month, a fig­ure that does not include demo­li­tions in East Jerusalem.

We can see the emptiness and barrenness of aligning ourselves with an American imperial project.

The theft and destruc¬≠tion of Pales¬≠tin¬≠ian homes and com¬≠mu¬≠ni¬≠ties, how¬≠ev¬≠er, is just one piece of a¬†much larg¬≠er‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČand old¬≠er‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČcolo¬≠nial project.

As Pales¬≠tin¬≠ian orga¬≠niz¬≠er San¬≠dra Tamari writes, ‚Äč‚ÄúPales¬≠tini¬≠ans have been forced to endure Israel‚Äôs poli¬≠cies of expul¬≠sion and land appro¬≠pri¬≠a¬≠tion for over 70¬†years.‚ÄĚ

Today, this real­i­ty has evolved into an overt apartheid sys­tem: Pales­tini­ans with­in Israel are sec­ond-class cit­i­zens, with Israel now offi­cial­ly cod­i­fy­ing that self-deter­mi­na­tion is for Jews only.

Pales¬≠tini¬≠ans in the West Bank and Gaza are sub¬≠ject to mil¬≠i¬≠tary occu¬≠pa¬≠tion, siege, block¬≠ade and mar¬≠tial law‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČa sys¬≠tem of vio¬≠lent dom¬≠i¬≠na¬≠tion enabled by polit¬≠i¬≠cal and finan¬≠cial sup¬≠port from the Unit¬≠ed¬†States.

Anti-Zion­ists argue that this bru­tal real­i­ty is not just the prod­uct of a right-wing gov­ern­ment or fail­ure to effec­tive­ly pro­cure a two-state solu­tion.

Rather, it stems from the mod­ern Zion­ist project itself, one estab­lished in a colo­nial con­text, and fun­da­men­tal­ly reliant on eth­nic cleans­ing and vio­lent dom­i­na­tion of Pales­tin­ian peo­ple.

Jews around the world are among those who call them¬≠selves anti-Zion¬≠ists, and who vocif¬≠er¬≠ous¬≠ly object to the claim that the state of Israel rep¬≠re¬≠sents the will‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČor inter¬≠ests‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČof Jew¬≠ish¬†people.

In These Times spoke with Ben­jamin Balthas­er, an asso­ciate pro­fes­sor of mul­ti­eth­nic lit­er­a­ture at Indi­ana Uni­ver­si­ty at South Bend.

His recent arti¬≠cle, ‚Äč‚ÄúWhen Anti-Zion¬≠ism Was Jew¬≠ish: Jew¬≠ish Racial Sub¬≠jec¬≠tiv¬≠i¬≠ty and the Anti-Impe¬≠ri¬≠al¬≠ist Lit¬≠er¬≠ary Left from the Great Depres¬≠sion to the Cold War,‚ÄĚ exam¬≠ines the erased his¬≠to¬≠ry of anti-Zion¬≠ism among the Jew¬≠ish, work¬≠ing-class left in the 1930s and ‚Äč‚Äė40s.

Anti-Zionism - Wikipedia

Balthas­er is the author of a book of poems about the old Jew­ish left called Ded­i­ca­tion, and an aca­d­e­m­ic mono­graph titled Anti-Impe­ri­al­ist Mod­ernism.

He is work­ing on a book about Jew­ish Marx­ists, social­ist thought and anti-Zion­ism in the 20th century.

He spoke with In These Times about the colo­nial ori­gins of mod­ern Zion­ism, and the Jew­ish left’s quar­rel with it, on the grounds that it is a form of right-wing nation­al­ism, is fun­da­men­tal­ly opposed to work­ing-class inter­na­tion­al­ism, and is a form of impe­ri­al­ism.

Accord­ing to Balthas­er, this polit­i­cal tra­di­tion under­mines the claim that Zion­ism reflects the will of all Jew­ish peo­ple, and offers sign­posts for the present day.

‚Äč‚ÄúFor Jews in the Unit¬≠ed States who are try¬≠ing to think about their rela¬≠tion¬≠ship not only to Pales¬≠tine, but also their own place in the world as an his¬≠tor¬≠i¬≠cal¬≠ly per¬≠se¬≠cut¬≠ed eth¬≠no-cul¬≠tur¬≠al dias¬≠poric minor¬≠i¬≠ty, we have to think of whose side we are on, and which glob¬≠al forces we want to align with,‚ÄĚ he says.

‚Äč‚ÄúIf we do not want to side with the exe¬≠cu¬≠tion¬≠ers of the far-right, with colo¬≠nial¬≠ism, and with racism, there is a¬†Jew¬≠ish cul¬≠tur¬≠al resource for us to draw on‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČa polit¬≠i¬≠cal resource to draw¬†on.‚ÄĚ

Sarah Lazare: Can you please explain what the ide­ol­o­gy of Zion­ism is? Who devel­oped it and when?

Ben­jamin Balthas­er: A cou­ple of things need to be dis­en­tan­gled.

First of all, there is a long Jew­ish his­to­ry that pre­dates the ide­ol­o­gy of Zion­ism that looks at Jerusalem, the ancient king­dom of Judea, as a site of cul­tur­al, reli­gious and, you can say, mes­sian­ic long­ing.

If you know Jew­ish litur­gy, there are ref­er­ences that go back thou­sands of years to the land of Zion, to Jerusalem, the old king­dom that the Romans destroyed.

There have been attempts through¬≠out Jew¬≠ish his¬≠to¬≠ry, dis¬≠as¬≠trous¬≠ly, to ‚Äč‚Äúreturn‚ÄĚ to the land of Pales¬≠tine, most famous¬≠ly, Sab¬≠batai Zevi in the 17th cen¬≠tu¬≠ry.

But for the most part, through much of Jew¬≠ish his¬≠to¬≠ry, ‚Äč‚ÄúIsrael‚ÄĚ was under¬≠stood as a¬†kind of a¬†cul¬≠tur¬≠al and mes¬≠sian¬≠ic long¬≠ing, but there was no desire to actu¬≠al¬≠ly phys¬≠i¬≠cal¬≠ly move there, out¬≠side of small reli¬≠gious com¬≠mu¬≠ni¬≠ties in Jerusalem and, of course, the small num¬≠ber of Jews who con¬≠tin¬≠ued to live in Pales¬≠tine under the Ottoman Empire‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČabout 5% of the¬†population.

Con­tem­po­rary Zion­ism, par­tic­u­lar­ly polit­i­cal Zion­ism, does draw on that large reser­voir of cul­tur­al long­ing and reli­gious text to legit­imize itself, and that’s where the con­fu­sion comes.

Mod­ern Zion­ism arose in the late 19th cen­tu­ry as a Euro­pean nation­al­ist move­ment. And I think that’s the way to under­stand it. It was one of these many Euro­pean nation­al­ist move­ments of oppressed minori­ties that attempt­ed to con­struct out of the diverse cul­tures of West­ern and East­ern Europe eth­ni­cal­ly homogeneous nation-states.

And there were many Jew­ish nationalism of the late 19th and ear­ly 20th cen­turies, of which Zion­ism was only one.

There was the Jew­ish Bund, which was a left-wing social­ist move­ment that rose to promi­nence in the ear­ly 20th cen­tu­ry that artic­u­lat­ed a deter­ri­to­ri­al­ized nation­al­ism in East­ern Europe.

They felt their place was East­ern Europe, their land was East­ern Europe, their lan­guage was Yid­dish.

And they want­ed to strug­gle for free­dom in Europe where they actu­al­ly lived.

And they felt that their strug­gle for lib­er­a­tion was against oppres­sive cap­i­tal­ist gov­ern­ments in Europe.

Had the Holo­caust not wiped out the Bund and oth­er Jew­ish social­ists in East­ern Europe, we might be talk­ing about Jew­ish nation­al­ism in a very dif­fer­ent con­text now.

Of course, there were Sovi­et exper­i­ments, prob­a­bly most famous in Biro­bidzhan, but also one very brief one in Ukraine, to cre­ate Jew­ish autonomous zones with­in ter­ri­to­ries that Jews lived, or else­where with­in the Sovi­et Union, root­ed in the Yid­dish idea of doykait, dias­poric here­ness, and Yid­dish lan­guage and culture.

Zion­ism was one of these cul­tur­al nation­al­ist move­ments.

What made it dif¬≠fer¬≠ent was that it graft¬≠ed itself onto British colo¬≠nial¬≠ism, a¬†rela¬≠tion¬≠ship made explic¬≠it with the Bal¬≠four Dec¬≠la¬≠ra¬≠tion in 1917, and actu¬≠al¬≠ly tried to cre¬≠ate a¬†coun¬≠try out of a¬†British colony‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČMan¬≠date Pales¬≠tine‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČand use British colo¬≠nial¬≠ism as a¬†way to help estab¬≠lish itself in the Mid¬≠dle East.

The Bal­four Dec­la­ra­tion was essen­tial­ly a way to use the British Empire for its own ends.

On some lev­el, you could say Zion­ism is a tox­ic mix­ture of Euro­pean nation­al­ism and British impe­ri­al­ism graft­ed onto a cul­tur­al reser­voir of Jew­ish tropes and mytholo­gies that come from Jew­ish litur­gy and culture.

Sarah: One of the under­pin­nings of mod­ern Zion­ism is that it’s an ide­ol­o­gy that rep­re­sents the will of all Jews.

But in your paper, you argue that crit¬≠i¬≠cism of Zion¬≠ism was actu¬≠al¬≠ly quite com¬≠mon on the Jew¬≠ish left in the 1930s and ‚Äč‚Äô40s, and that this his¬≠to¬≠ry has been large¬≠ly erased.

Can you talk about what these crit­i­cisms were and who was mak­ing them?

Ben­jamin: The fun­ny part about the Unit­ed States, and I would say this is most­ly true for Europe, is that before the end of World War II, and even a lit­tle after, most Jews dis­par­aged Zion­ists.

And it didn’t mat­ter if you were a com­mu­nist, it didn’t mat­ter if you were a Reform Jew, Zion­ism was not pop­u­lar. There were a lot of dif­fer­ent rea­sons for Amer­i­can Jews to not like Zion­ism before the 1940s.

There’s the lib­er­al cri­tique of Zion­ism most famous­ly artic­u­lat­ed by Elmer Berg­er and the Amer­i­can Coun­cil for Judaism.

The anx­i­ety among these folks was that Zion­ism would basi­cal­ly be a kind of dual loy­al­ty, that it would open Jews up to the claim that they’re not real Amer­i­cans, and that it would actu­al­ly frus­trate their attempts to assim­i­late into main­stream Amer­i­can cul­ture.

Elmer Berg­er also for­ward­ed the idea that Jews are not a cul­ture or a peo­ple, but sim­ply a reli­gion, and there­fore have noth­ing in com­mon with one anoth­er out­side of the reli­gious faith.

This, I¬†would argue, is an assim¬≠i¬≠la¬≠tion¬≠ist idea that comes out of the 1920s and ‚Äč‚Äô30s and tries to resem¬≠ble a¬†Protes¬≠tant notion of ‚Äč‚Äúcom¬≠mu¬≠ni¬≠ties of¬†faith.‚ÄĚ

 

But for the Jew¬≠ish left‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČthe com¬≠mu¬≠nist, social¬≠ist, Trot¬≠sky¬≠ist and Marx¬≠ist left‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČtheir cri¬≠tique of Zion¬≠ism came from two quar¬≠ters: a¬†cri¬≠tique of nation¬≠al¬≠ism and a¬†cri¬≠tique of colo¬≠nial¬≠ism.

They under­stood Zion­ism as a right-wing nation­al­ism and, in that sense, bour­geois.

They saw it as in line with oth¬≠er forms of nation¬≠al¬≠ism‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČan attempt to align the work¬≠ing class with the inter¬≠ests of the bour¬≠geoisie.

There was at the time a well-known take­down of Vladimir Jabotin­sky in the New Mass­es in 1935, in which Marx­ist crit­ic Robert Gess­ner calls Jabotin­sky a lit­tle Hitler on the Red Sea.

Jewish labor Bund

Gess­ner calls the Zion­ists Nazis and the left in gen­er­al saw Jew­ish nation­al­ism as a right-wing for­ma­tion try­ing to cre­ate a uni­fied, mil­i­taris­tic cul­ture that aligns work­ing-class Jew­ish inter­ests with the inter­ests of the Jew­ish bourgeoisie.

So that’s one cri­tique of Zion­ism. The oth­er cri­tique of Zion­ism, which I think is more con­tem­po­rary to the left today, is that Zion­ism is a form of impe­ri­al­ism.

If you look at the pam¬≠phlets and mag¬≠a¬≠zines and speech¬≠es that are giv¬≠en on the Jew¬≠ish left in the 1930s and ‚Äč‚Äô40s, they saw that Zion¬≠ists were align¬≠ing them¬≠selves with British impe¬≠ri¬≠al¬≠ism.

They also were very aware of the fact that the Mid­dle East was col­o­nized, first by the Ottomans and then by the British.

They saw the Pales­tin­ian strug­gle for lib­er­a­tion as part of a glob­al anti-impe­ri­al­ist movement.

Of course, Jew­ish com­mu­nists saw them­selves not as cit­i­zens of a nation-state, but as part of the glob­al pro­le­tari­at: part of the glob­al work­ing class, part of the glob­al rev­o­lu­tion.

And so for them to think about their home¬≠land as this small strip of land in the Mediter¬≠ranean‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČregard¬≠less of any cul¬≠tur¬≠al affin¬≠i¬≠ty to Jerusalem‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČwould just be against every¬≠thing they¬†believe.

As the Holo­caust began in earnest in the 1940s, and Jews were flee­ing Europe in any way they pos­si­bly could, some mem­bers of the Com­mu­nist Par­ty advo­cat­ed that Jews should be allowed to go to Pales­tine.

If you’re flee­ing anni­hi­la­tion and Pales­tine is the only place you can go that is nat­ur­al.

But that doesn’t mean you can cre­ate a nation-state there. You need to get along with the peo­ple who live there as best as you pos­si­bly can.

There was a¬†com¬≠mu¬≠nist par¬≠ty of Pales¬≠tine that did advo¬≠cate for Jew¬≠ish and Pales¬≠tin¬≠ian col¬≠lab¬≠o¬≠ra¬≠tion to oust the British and cre¬≠ate a¬†bina¬≠tion¬≠al state‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČwhich, for a¬†host of rea¬≠sons, includ¬≠ing the seg¬≠re¬≠gat¬≠ed nature of Jew¬≠ish set¬≠tle¬≠ment, proved hard¬≠er in prac¬≠tice than in¬†theory.

In any case, the Jew­ish left in the 1930s and 1940s under­stood, crit­i­cal­ly, that the only way Zion­ism would be able to emerge in Pales­tine was through a colo­nial project and through the expul­sion of the indige­nous Pales­tini­ans from the land.

In a speech by Earl Brow­der, chair­man of the Com­mu­nist Par­ty, in Manhattan’s Hip­po­drome, he declares that a Jew­ish state can only be formed through the expul­sion of a quar­ter-mil­lion Pales­tini­ans, which atten­dees thought was very shock­ing at the time, but it actu­al­ly end­ed up being a dra­mat­ic undercount.

Sarah: You wrote in your recent jour¬≠nal arti¬≠cle, ‚Äč‚ÄúPer¬≠haps the sin¬≠gle most per¬≠va¬≠sive nar¬≠ra¬≠tive about Zion¬≠ism, even among schol¬≠ars and writ¬≠ers who acknowl¬≠edge its mar¬≠gin¬≠al sta¬≠tus before the war, is that the Holo¬≠caust changed Jew¬≠ish opin¬≠ioin and con¬≠vinced Jews of its neces¬≠si¬≠ty.‚ÄĚ You iden¬≠ti¬≠fy some major holes in this nar¬≠ra¬≠tive. Can you explain what they¬†are?

Ben­jamin: I would alter that a bit to say I’m real­ly talk­ing about the com­mu­nist and Marx­ist left in this con­text.

I grew up with in a left-wing fam¬≠i¬≠ly where opin¬≠ion was def¬≠i¬≠nite¬≠ly divid¬≠ed on the ques¬≠tion of Zion¬≠ism‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČyet, nonethe¬≠less, there was a per¬≠va¬≠sive idea that the Holo¬≠caust changed opin¬≠ion universally, and every¬≠one fell in line as soon as the details of the Holo¬≠caust were revealed, Zion¬≠ist and anti-Zion¬≠ist alike.

It’s unde­ni­ably cor­rect to say that with­out the Holo­caust there prob­a­bly would have been no Israel, if just for the sin­gle fact that there was a mas­sive influx of Jew­ish refugees after the war who would have undoubt­ed­ly stayed in Europe oth­er­wise.

With­out that influx of Jews who could fight the 1948 war and pop­u­late Israel just after, it’s doubt­ful an inde­pen­dent state of Israel could have succeeded.

How¬≠ev¬≠er, one thing I¬†found most sur¬≠pris¬≠ing going through the Jew¬≠ish left press in the 1940s‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČpub¬≠li¬≠ca¬≠tions of the Trot¬≠sky¬≠ist Social¬≠ist Work¬≠ers Par¬≠ty, the Com¬≠mu¬≠nist Par¬≠ty, and writ¬≠ings by Han¬≠nah Arendt‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČis that even after the scope of the Holo¬≠caust was wide¬≠ly under¬≠stood, their offi¬≠cial posi¬≠tion was still anti-Zion¬≠ist.

They may have called for Jews to be allowed to reset­tle in the lands from which they were expelled or mas­sa­cred, with full rights and full cit­i­zen­ship, be allowed to immi­grate to the Unit­ed States, or even be allowed to emi­grate to Pales­tine if there was nowhere else to go (as was often the case).

But they were still whol­ly against par­ti­tion and the estab­lish­ment of a Jew­ish-only state.

What is impor¬≠tant to under¬≠stand about that moment was that Zion¬≠ism was a¬†polit¬≠i¬≠cal choice‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČnot only by west¬≠ern impe¬≠r¬≠i¬≠al pow¬≠ers, but also by Jew¬≠ish lead¬≠er¬≠ship.

They could have fought more stren­u­ous­ly for Jew­ish immi­gra­tion to the Unit­ed States.

And a lot of the Zion­ist lead­ers actu­al­ly fought against immi­gra­tion to the Unit­ed States.

There were a num­ber of sto­ries report­ed in the Jew­ish Com­mu­nist press about how Zion­ists col­lab­o­rat­ed with the British and Amer­i­cans to force Jews to go to Man­date Pales­tine, when they would have rather gone to the Unit­ed States, or Eng­land.

There‚Äôs a¬†famous quote by Ernest Bevin, the British For¬≠eign Sec¬≠re¬≠tary, who said the only rea¬≠son the Unit¬≠ed States sent Jews to Pales¬≠tine was ‚Äč‚Äúbecause they do not want too many more of them in New York.‚ÄĚ

And the Zion­ists agreed with this.

While this may seem like ancient his¬≠to¬≠ry, it is impor¬≠tant because it dis¬≠rupts the com¬≠mon sense sur¬≠round¬≠ing Israel‚Äôs for¬≠ma¬≠tion. ‚Äč

‚ÄúYes, maybe there could have been peace between Jews and Pales¬≠tini¬≠ans, but the Holo¬≠caust made all of that impos¬≠si¬≠ble.‚ÄĚ

And I would say that this debate after 1945 shows that there was a long moment in which there were oth­er pos­si­bil­i­ties, and anoth­er future could have happened.

Iron­i­cal­ly, per­haps, the Sovi­et Union did more than any oth­er sin­gle force to change the minds of the Jew­ish Marx­ist left in the late 1940s about Israel.

Andrei Gromyko, the Sovi­et Union’s ambas­sador to the Unit­ed Nations, came out in 1947 and backed par­ti­tion in the Unit­ed Nations after declar­ing the West­ern world did noth­ing to stop the Holo­caust, and sud­den­ly there’s this about-face.

All these Jew­ish left-wing pub­li­ca­tions that were denounc­ing Zion­ism, lit­er­al­ly the next day, were embrac­ing par­ti­tion and the for­ma­tion of the nation-state of Israel.

You have to under¬≠stand, for a¬†lot of Jew¬≠ish com¬≠mu¬≠nists and even social¬≠ists, the Sovi¬≠et Union was the promised land‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČnot Zion¬≠ism.

This was the place where they had, accord­ing to the pro­pa­gan­da, erad­i­cat­ed anti­semisitm.

The Russ­ian Empire was the most anti­se­mit­ic place through­out the late 19th and ear­ly 20th cen­tu­ry, before the rise of Nazism.

Many of the Jew­ish Com­mu­nist Par­ty mem­bers were from East­ern Europe, or their fam­i­lies were, and they had very vivid mem­o­ries of Rus­sia as the cru­cible of anti­semitism.

For them, the Russ­ian Rev­o­lu­tion was a rup­ture in his­to­ry, a chance to start over.

And, of course, this is after World War II, when the Sovi­et Union had just defeat­ed the Nazis.

For the Sovi­et Union to embrace Zion­ism real­ly sent a shock­wave through the left-wing Jew­ish world.

The Sovi­et Union changed its pol­i­cy a decade or so lat­er, open­ly embrac­ing anti-Zion­ism by the 1960s. But for this brief piv­otal moment, the Sovi­et Union firm­ly came down in favor of par­ti­tion, and that seems to be what real­ly changed the Jew­ish left.

With­out this kind of legitimization, I think we are all start­ing to see the Jew­ish left such as it exists return back in an impor­tant way to the posi­tions that it had orig­i­nal­ly held, which is that Zion­ism is a right-wing nation­al­ism and that it is also racist and colo­nial­ist. We are see­ing the Jew­ish left return to its first principles.

Sarah: That’s a good segue to some ques­tions I want­ed to ask you about the rel­e­vance of anti-Zion­ist his­to­ry to the present day. For a lot of peo­ple, Israel’s plan to annex huge amounts of Pales­tin­ian land in the West Bank, while delayed, is still lay­ing bare the vio­lence of the Zion­ist project of estab­lish­ing Jew­ish rule over a Pales­tin­ian pop­u­la­tion. And we are see­ing some promi­nent lib­er­al Zion­ists like Peter Beinart pub­licly pro­claim that the two-state solu­tion is dead and one state based on equal rights is the best path. Do you see now as an impor­tant moment to con­nect with the his­to­ry of Jew­ish anti-Zion­ism? Do you see open­ings or pos­si­bil­i­ties for chang­ing peo­ple’s minds?

Ben­jamin: In a way, Beinart’s let­ter was 70 years too late.

But it is still a very impor­tant cul­tur­al turn, to the extent that he is part of a lib­er­al Jew­ish estab­lish­ment.

I¬†would also say that we‚Äôre in a¬†dif¬≠fer¬≠ent his¬≠tor¬≠i¬≠cal moment. In the 1930s and ‚Äč‚Äô40s, you can real¬≠ly talk about a¬†kind of glob¬≠al rev¬≠o¬≠lu¬≠tion¬≠ary sen¬≠ti¬≠ment and a¬†real Jew¬≠ish left that‚Äôs locat¬≠ed in orga¬≠ni¬≠za¬≠tions like the Com¬≠mu¬≠nist Par¬≠ty, the Social¬≠ist Work¬≠ers Par¬≠ty and the Social¬≠ist Par¬≠ty.

And you can see that again in the 1960s. Stu­dents for a Demo­c­ra­t­ic Soci­ety, which also had a very size­able Jew­ish mem­ber­ship, for­mal­ly backed anti-Zion­ism in the 1960s, along with the Social­ist Work­ers Par­ty, and formed alliances with the Stu­dent Non­vi­o­lent Coor­di­nat­ing Com­mit­tee, which had also tak­en an offi­cial anti-Zion­ist posi­tion in the late 1960s.

You could think about a¬†glob¬≠al rev¬≠o¬≠lu¬≠tion¬≠ary frame¬≠work in which Pales¬≠tin¬≠ian lib¬≠er¬≠a¬≠tion was an artic¬≠u¬≠lat¬≠ed part‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČyou could think about the Pop¬≠u¬≠lar Front for the Lib¬≠er¬≠a¬≠tion of Pales¬≠tine and the Pales¬≠tine Lib¬≠er¬≠a¬≠tion Orga¬≠ni¬≠za¬≠tion as part of the fab¬≠ric of glob¬≠al rev¬≠o¬≠lu¬≠tion¬≠ary¬†movements.

Today we’re in a much more frag­ment­ed space.

On the same note, though, we‚Äôre see¬≠ing the rebirth, or maybe con¬≠ti¬≠nu¬≠ity, of Pales¬≠tin¬≠ian civ¬≠il rights move¬≠ments, with Pales¬≠tin¬≠ian civ¬≠il soci¬≠ety putting out a¬†call for decol¬≠o¬≠niza¬≠tion‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČboth out of their own tra¬≠di¬≠tions of lib¬≠er¬≠a¬≠tion, but also look¬≠ing to mod¬≠els from the South African free¬≠dom strug¬≠gle.

For con­tem­po­rary Jews who are pro­gres­sive and see them­selves on the left, they’re sud­den­ly real­iz­ing that there real­ly is no cen­ter any­more, there is no lib­er­al Zion­ist posi­tion any longer.

The cen­ter has real­ly fall­en away. And we’re faced with this very stark deci­sion: that either you’re going to be on the side of lib­er­a­tion, or you’re going to be on the side of the Israeli right, which has elim­i­na­tion­ist and geno­ci­dal intent that has always been there, but is naked­ly appar­ent now.

And so I¬†think peo¬≠ple like Beinart are wak¬≠ing up and say¬≠ing, ‚Äč‚ÄúI don‚Äôt want to be on the side of the¬†executioners.‚ÄĚ

The his­to­ry of the old Jew­ish left and the new Jew­ish left of the 1960s shows us this isn’t new.

Any lib­er­a­tion strug­gle is going to come from the oppressed them­selves, so the Pales­tin­ian lib­er­a­tion move­ment is going to set its terms for strug­gles.

But for Jews in the Unit­ed States who are try­ing to think about their rela­tion­ship, not only to Pales­tine, but also their own place in the world as an his­tor­i­cal­ly per­se­cut­ed eth­no-cul­tur­al dias­poric minor­i­ty, we have to think of whose side we are on, and which glob­al forces we want to align with.

If we do not want to side with the exe¬≠cu¬≠tion¬≠ers of the far-right, with colo¬≠nial¬≠ism and with racism, there is a¬†Jew¬≠ish cul¬≠tur¬≠al resource for us to draw on‚ÄČ‚ÄĒ‚ÄČa polit¬≠i¬≠cal resource to draw on.

This his­to­ry of the anti-Zion­ist Jew­ish left demon­strates that an impor­tant his­tor­i­cal role in a dias­po­ra has been sol­i­dar­i­ty with oth­er oppressed peo­ple.

That‚Äôs the place from which we‚Äôve gath¬≠ered the most strength his¬≠tor¬≠i¬≠cal¬≠ly. So I¬†look at this not as say¬≠ing, ‚Äč‚ÄúWe‚Äôre not going to repro¬≠duce the Com¬≠mu¬≠nist Par¬≠ty of the 1930s and 1940s.‚ÄĚ

We‚Äôre say¬≠ing, ‚Äč‚ÄúWe‚Äôll pro¬≠duce some¬≠thing new, but the past can be a¬†cul¬≠tur¬≠al resource that we can use¬†today.‚ÄĚ

Sarah: Who or what is respon­si­ble for the era­sure of this his­to­ry of Jew­ish, left anti-Zionism?

Ben­jamin: I wouldn’t blame the era­sure sole­ly on the Sovi­et Union or Zion­ism, because we also have to think of the Cold War and how the Cold War destroyed the old Jew­ish left, and real­ly drove it under­ground and shat­tered its orga­ni­za­tions.

So I think we also have to see how the turn toward Zion­ism was under­stood as some­thing that would nor­mal­ize Jews in a post-war era.

With the exe¬≠cu¬≠tion of the Rosen¬≠bergs, the Red Scare of the late 1940s and ‚Äč‚Äô50s, and the vir¬≠tu¬≠al ban¬≠ning of the Com¬≠mu¬≠nist Par¬≠ty, which had been through¬≠out the 1930s and ‚Äč‚Äô40s half Jew¬≠ish, for much of the Jew¬≠ish estab¬≠lish¬≠ment, align¬≠ing them¬≠selves with Amer¬≠i¬≠can impe¬≠ri¬≠al¬≠ism was a¬†way for Jews to nor¬≠mal¬≠ize their pres¬≠ence in the Unit¬≠ed States.

And hope­ful­ly that moment has to some degree passed. We can see the empti­ness and bar­ren­ness of align­ing our­selves with an Amer­i­can impe­r­i­al project, with peo­ple like Bari Weiss and Jared Kush­n­er.

Why would some­one like Bari Weiss, who describes her­self as lib­er­al, want to align her­self with the most reac­tionary forces in Amer­i­can life?

It’s a bloody matrix of assim­i­la­tion and white­ness that emerged out of the Cold War sub­ur­ban­iza­tion of the 1950s. Israel was part of that devil’s bar­gain.

Yes, you can become real Amer­i­cans: You can go to good U.S. uni­ver­si­ties, you can join the sub­urbs, enter into the main­stream of Amer­i­can life, as long as you do this one lit­tle thing for us, which is back the Amer­i­can Empire.

Hope­ful­ly, with the emer­gence of new grass­roots orga­ni­za­tions in the Unit­ed States, among Jews and non-Jews who are ques­tion­ing the U.S. role sup­port­ing Zion­ism, this cal­cu­lus can begin to change.

With the rise of Jew­ish Voice for Peace, IfNot­Now, the Demo­c­ra­t­ic Social­ists of Amer­i­ca and the Move­ment for Black Lives all tak­ing a seri­ous stance against U.S. sup­port for Zion­ism, the com­mon sense in the Jew­ish com­mu­ni­ty has begun to move in a dif­fer­ent direc­tion, par­tic­u­lar­ly among the younger gen­er­a­tion.

The bat­tle is very far from over, but it makes me just a lit­tle opti­mistic about the future.

What the Holocaust‚ĄĘ Proves

George S. Patton, commander of the U.S. Third Army: “I have been at
Frankfurt for a civil government conference. If what we are doing (to
the Germans) is ‘Liberty, then give me death.’ I can’t see how Americans
can sink so low. It’s the Jews, and I am sure of it.”


Dangerous Liaison: The Inside Story of the U.S. – Israeli Covert Relationship

excerpt Magazine article Washington Report on Middle East Affairs

 

The premise is that there’s a side to the relationship between the U.S. and Israel which goes much beyond just the sentimental links and the links forged by supporters of Israel in this country.

What we say, what we explain is that there has been since almost the earliest days of the Israeli state and the earliest days of the CIA a secret bond, a secret link between them, basically by which the Israelis — the Israeli intelligence — did jobs for the CIA and for the rest of American intelligence.

You can’t understand what’s been going on around the world with American covert operations and the Israeli covert operations until you understand that the two countries have this secret arrangement. Andrew Cockburn

Two hundred pages into this 416-page fact-filled book, I recognized that it is the best compendium of information about the multifaceted secret relationships between Israel and private American citizens, and with the U.S. government itself, ever assembled.

This is reason enough to recommend the book. As I continued reading the second half, however, I found it also contained much information that was new to me, despite 30 years of full-time involvement in U.S.-Middle East affairs.

For a serious student of the history of Israeli dirty tricks, U.S. voluntary and involuntary involvement in them, and their results in making the Middle East into what it is today, there can be no more useful book.

This husband-and-wife journalistic team sketches in seven short sentences the essential fact about the U.S.-Israeli relationship that could give the U.S. the power to control it, instead of being controlled by it. Describing a contemptuous reaction by Israeli journalist Gideon Levi to a live-ammunition performance by Israel Defense Force soldiers on the Golan Heights for the edification of busloads of American Jewish tourists, the authors write:

“What Levi called the `masses of women with blue hair and pseudo-athletic men’ and many others like them back in the U.S. contribute at least $1 billion a year in private donations to Israel.

These donations are tax-deductible. The state raises another $500 million a year through the sale of Israel bonds. U.S. commercial banks lend an additional $1 billion.

Such generosity is dwarfed by the contributions of U.S. taxpayers overall, which amount to almost $4 billion in military and economic aid, at least, even in peacetime. All this adds up to well over $6 billion a year, or $1,300 for each and every Israeli.

Israel’s gross national product amounts to some $24 billion a year, so the country is receiving one quarter of its total income in the form of gifts from U.S. citizens, acting either as philanthropists or taxpayers.”

Closer to the theme of the book, the Cockburns point out that “the weapons trade accounts for almost 40 percent of Israel’s export earnings S1.5 billion a year.”

How Israel has developed those weapons, with stolen U.S. technology, and markets for them, by selling arms and technology to world pariahs ranging from South Africa to Colombian drug lords while the U.S. looks the other way, is part of what the book is all about.

Ironies of tiny Israel’s gigantic weapons trade are illustrated by the book’s description of Shaul Nehemiah Eisenberg, the richest man in Israel, who, the Cockburns report, “represents the ultimate confluence of arms, intelligence and political power.”

Eisenberg supervised modernization of the Chinese army’s weaponry, an upgrading of the entire Chinese tankforce, and even an improvement of the Chinese “Eastwind” ballistic missiles, which ultimately were purchased by Saudi Arabia, “whose defense purchases from the United States have always met with strenuous Israeli objections.”

The fact that while the Israeli government, through its Washington, DC lobby, blocks the access of major Arab states to U.S. weapons, it actually works with the other arms-producing countries which ultimately get the arms orders of some of the same Arab countries is the kind of thing that is unbelievable to most Americans, but carefully documented in this book.

The Cockburns present seldom-recalled historical facts. Most of the founding fathers of Israel “were born within 500 miles of the city of Minsk.”

The best known among them, Plonsk-born David Gruen, who renamed himself David Ben-Gurion upon arriving in Palestine in 1906, was “an atheist who refused to attend a synagogue; he adopted Zionism as his religion.”

Among those early leaders who became Israeli prime ministers, Ben-Gurion rival Menachem Begin’s Irgun Zvai Leumi had split from its revisionist parent group, Lehi, over the issue of opposing Hitler during World War II. ‚Ķ

 

Identity Thieves: the Zionist Campaign

Welcome to the Israeli Army Melting Pot, the greatest spiritual equalizer that the world has ever seen.

The early Zionist leaders created the state of Israel with the goal of eradicating religion and transforming “Jews” into Israeli nationalists.

Until very recently Hareidi (ultra-orthodox) Jews were exempt from mandatory service.

They were able to remain true to their faith and traditions without fear of legal repercussions.

Rabbi Yosef Tzvi Dushinsky, Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem (1867-1948): “We furthermore wish to express our definite opposition to a Jewish state in any part of Palestine.”¬† The United Nations Special Committee in Palestine Wednesday, July 16, 1947 by the Chief Rabbis of the Ashkenasic Jewish Community, Rav Yosef Zvi Dushinsky and Rav Zelig Ruven Bengis of blessed memory, taken from the United Nations Trusteeship Library.

Recently that has changed. In 2014 the law exempting Hareidi Jews expired and was not renewed. Even though the IDF had a surplus of soldiers they decided that it was time to call the Orthodox to duty thus finally taking advantage of the opportunity to transform them from from “Jews” to “Israelis”.

The Rothschild Zionists sacrificed European Jewry during WW2 to transfer the surviving  European Jews to Palestine to occupy. Then they occupied the Palestinian Jews.

The transfer to Palestine

Palestinian Muslims and Christians pushed into the sea and transferred out

The Hareidi community has staged a number of peaceful protests and the Israeli police has responded with violence.

Young men are being pulled from their beds in the middle of the night and thrown into military detention centers.

We will continue to assert our right to be conscientious objectors according to Article 18 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.

We will not give up our faith to serve in your military. We will not offer up our children’s lives on the alter of Zionism. We will protest until the end for our rights as Jews and human beings.

Palestine is one of the richest countries in the world in terms of antiquities, competing with Egypt in the Arab world. At least 22 civilizations have left their mark on Palestine, the first of which were the Canaanites; their presence is still visible today.

Since 1948, successive Israeli governments have paid particular attention to the antiquities that have a distinct Arab and Palestinian identity. Committees of Israeli archaeologists were formed to research in every part of Palestine on which Israel was founded.

The aim remains to create a fake historical narrative by Judaising Palestinian antiquities. Historical monuments in major Palestinian cities, such as Acre, Jaffa, Jerusalem and Tiberias, have not been spared from this process.

Moreover, Israel has used various institutions to Judaise Palestinian fashion through systematic cultural theft and forgery. Even local recipes are not spared.

Israel has participated in international exhibitions to display Palestinian fashion and cuisine labelled as ‚ÄúIsraeli‚ÄĚ.

This is how Palestine‚Äôs heritage and history dating back thousands of years are being stolen by the Israeli occupation and the ‚Äúmafias‚ÄĚ selling invaluable antiquities.

This is happening at a time when Palestinian parties are taking action and calling for the protection of their legacy, history and civilisation.

WATCH: Israeli forces shoot Palestinian ‚Äėfor fun‚Äô

In this context, studies have indicated that there are over 3,300 archaeological sites in the occupied West Bank alone. A number of researchers confirm that, on average, there is an archaeological site every half a kilometre in Palestine which indicates the true identity and history of the land.

It is important here to mention the devastating effects of the Israeli separation wall on the future of Palestinian antiquities and monuments.

The ongoing building of the wall on Palestinian land in the West Bank will ultimately lead to the annexation of over 50 per cent of the occupied territory. It will also include over 270 major archaeological sites, in addition to 2,000 archaeological and historical locations.

Dozens of historically important sites and monuments have been destroyed in the course of the construction of the wall.

Specialised studies of Palestinian antiquities indicate that, since occupying the West Bank and Gaza Strip in June, 1967, Israel has been able to steal and sell even more Palestinian artefacts from the West Bank.

This phenomenon was exacerbated by the outbreak of the Aqsa Intifada at the end of September 2000.

The Palestinian Authority’s Department of Antiquities and Cultural Heritage has pointed out that more than 500 archaeological sites and more than 1,500 landmarks have been stolen and destroyed by Israeli thieves and the occupation.

It is a simple fact that, as the work of Salman Abu Sitta has demonstrated, more than 500 Palestinian towns and villages have been destroyed and wiped off the map by Israel since 1948. The Department also confirmed that the cultural and economic resources of Palestine continue to be depleted by Israel.

READ: Israel forces Palestinian to demolish his own house

Palestinian studies indicate that the reason for this ongoing Nakba is the collapse of any system to protect Palestinian areas due to Israeli control.

Such protection falls under the direct management of the occupation, which basically means that the Israeli army is free to destroy cultural heritage sites, as has happened in Jerusalem, Nablus, Hebron, Bethlehem, and other Palestinian cities, towns and villages.

Archaeological theft and the violation of Palestinian heritage sites is one of the biggest challenges facing Palestinians as they seek to preserve their culture and physical presence in their homeland, which is threatened by Judaisation and targeted by systematic Israeli policies.

. We need to raise awareness in Palestinian society to confront this new-old challenge imposed by Israel.

We also need to boost our capacity to fight Israel’s theft of our history at the local, regional and international levels. This may be reinforced through Palestine’s full membership in relevant international organizations, including UNESCO.

Cultural diversity in Palestine dates back thousands of years. It is shameful that we are allowing this to be whitewashed out of history as Israel seeks to ‚Äúprove‚ÄĚ its fake narrative of the ‚ÄúJewish state‚ÄĚ, to the exclusion of the indigenous people.

Felt That You Hate [Zionist] Jews Lately? Here’s Why

Isaac Asimov

‚ÄúI am frequently asked if I have visited Israel, whereas yet, it is simply assumed that I have. Well, I don‚Äôt travel. I really don‚Äôt, and if I did, I probably wouldn‚Äôt visit Israel. I remember how it was in 1948 when Israel was being established and all my Jewish friends were ecstatic, I was not. I said: what are we doing? We are establishing ourselves in a ghetto, in a small corner of a vast Muslim sea. The Muslims will never forget nor forgive, and Israel, as long as it exists, will be embattled. I was laughed at, but I was right.”
‚Äē Isaac Asimov

Modern Zionism encapsulates the ancient reference to the ‘synagogue of Satan’

Christ drives the Usurers out of the Temple

In 1286, Jews are said to have murdered children in a mill at Fulda: Hameln being originally Quern Hameln

A nearly 500 year old sculpture depicts a man wearing a Jewish hat eating a sack of babies in Bern, Switzerland

The European immigrant terrorist Jew depicted in occupied Palestine

This plaque at the Palazzo Salvadori in Trent, Italy, illustrates the martyrdom of Simon of Trent at the hands of Jews.

(Toni L. Kamins)

This carving on the facade of Martin Luther’s church in Wittenberg, Germany, shows Jews suckling at a sow’s teat.

This post by a Jew illustrates the delusion of Zionist Jews. The defenders of “israel” leave out the ‘Zionist’ part of their definition of Jew to pretend they are a part of the whole, which they are not. They do not even represent Jews, they are frauds.

By Tal Mandelbaum

Ever felt that you hate Jews? Feel uneasy about them? How about Israel? Do you hate Israel? Do you sometimes feel that if Israel did not exist, the world would be safer, and just generally better off?

An EOS Gallup Europe survey showed that Europeans view Israel as the No 1 threat to world peace, ahead of Iran and North Korea.

Jews are consistently blamed for controlling the world, the banks, the weather, for causing the economic crises and exploitation of the masses, for 9/11, even for creating Isis.

So, if you ever felt hate or anger towards Jews, you are not alone.

There are many, many people all over the world, from all religions, cultures, and nationalities, who feel the same.

It doesn’t even matter if there are Jews around you, or in your country, you may still feel that you hate them.

It may not be all the time, but the sensation that Jews are to blame may arise in you especially when things don’t work out in your life.

In fact, in 2009 the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology published a study titled ‚ÄúModern Anti-Semitism and Anti-Israeli Attitudes‚ÄĚ.

They wanted to find out how Anti-Semitism was linked to people’s sense of angst, in this case, their personal fear of death, which is basically the greatest negative experience we know.

They showed that mortality salience (reminding people that they will someday die) increases Anti-Semitism and Anti-Israel attitudes.

The study also showed that mortality salience caused Israel, but no other country to perceptually loom large.

It further showed that mortality salience increased punitiveness toward Israel’s human rights violations, more than it increased hostility toward the identical human rights violations committed by Russia or India.

The researchers managed to expose these sentiments in even the most polite participants, showing a very basic underlying attitude towards Jews.

Faced with fear, dread or unease, many people sense that Israel and the Jews are somehow at fault.

And here is where I want to ask you for just a moment to consider:

WHY?

Could there be a deeper reason that so many people feel Jews and Israel are to blame for such a contradictory collection of issues?
The Reason You May Feel That Jews Are To Blame

Let’s face it, people have a myriad of explanations to why they feel that Jews are bad. From socialism to capitalism, to religious reasons and conspiracy theories, everyone has their own take.

Even if Jews can’t be all of these things at once.

So consider that there is one deeper, root to all of this sentiment.

Consider that if people knew the real reason they hate Jews, they could also learn how to channel their anger constructively, so that something finally CHANGES for the better.

Because Jews really do have a special role to play in everyone’s happiness.

It’s just not what you think.

Very few Jews actually know this, but as a collective, they have a primordial inner potential to unite among themselves, and thus bring peace, harmony and what‚Äôs referred to as ‚ÄúTikkun Olam‚ÄĚ to the world.

Consider that we live in a kind of human network where we are all interconnected and interdependent. But it’s all falling apart because the connector units aren’t functioning properly, because the glue is not there to hold it together.

THAT’S what Jews are meant to do. They are the hubs, the conduits through which unity and love must flow to the rest of the network. This positive influence is what’s necessary for relationships to work out on every level.

The Jewish heritage is full of sayings about the people of Israel being ‚Äúbrothers who are in mutual concern for one another‚ÄĚ, united ‚Äúas one man in one heart‚ÄĚ.

It contains deep and thorough spiritual teachings about HOW to ‚Äúlove others as yourself‚ÄĚ

‚Ķbut it‚Äės not taken seriously, it‚Äôs not being realized.

So Jews continue to be divided and the world continues to move into crisis after crisis- lacking the method to connect its failing limbs into one thriving organism.

Jewish sages such as Rabbi Kook wrote of this many many times.

‚ÄúThe construction of the world, which is currently crumpled by the dreadful storms of a blood-filled sword requires the construction of the Israeli nation ‚Ķ in anticipation of a force full of unity ‚Ķ that is found in Israel.‚ÄĚ (Lights)

Forgetful of their role, Jews continue to be baffled by the world’s demands towards them, unaware that they carry the key.

How To Create True Change

The Jewish people have suffered tremendously at the hands of the nations of the world.

Throughout history, the rage that people felt towards Jews imploded and surfaced as hate speech, physical attacks, pogroms, and even calculated mass murder strategies.

But the violence towards Jews has never been constructive. The nations that lost their Jews were not better off for it. On the contrary.

Wherever Jews have dwelled they brought prosperity and development.

Their unique inner potential has enabled them to advance and contribute to society more than any other people.

Yet, patents, inventions, and even humanitarian aid were never what the world truly needed from them.

And now Antisemitism is on the rise once more.

The post World War II notions of peace, equality, and democracy that the world hoped would prosper and last, are once again challenged.

As if no one has learned the lessons of the past.

To really be smart, to get the results that we need, violence must be renounced.

Instead, anyone who feels hate towards Jews or Israel must channel this angst, to pressure them TO UNITE.

Unity is the key to fulfilling the Jewish role as the light unto the nations.

Jewish efforts to rise above their divisions and unite will create a profound ripple effect throughout the entire human network, ushering in a new sense of harmony, love, and stability.

Jews need to remember that and to realize the enormous wisdom and special traits that they carry.

Syria hosted Jewish European refugees during World War II

No doubt the “Israeli” new generations are not taught about this because it’s necessary to make them believe that everyone hates Jews just because they Are Jews.

Image result for jews stab US in the back

Backstabbers

Jewish civilians from Europe and the Balkans sought refuge in Middle East to escape the Nazi.

It is a long-forgotten fact that some Middle East nations, including now war-torn Syria, hosted European refugees during the second World War. 

Civilians from Eastern Europe and the Balkans migrated to the Middle East crossing the Mediterranean Sea and Turkey to escape the Nazi during the harshest period of the war.

The Middle East Relief and Refugee Administration (MERRA), established by the British in 1942, placed around 40,000 Europeans Jews to the camps set up in Syria, Egypt and Palestine.

Jewish Europeans stayed at the camps until the war was over, and then they returned to their country or went to a third country they preferred to go.

The Washington Post narrated the forgotten story in a report it published in 2016.

The report shared information on the situation in camps by providing notes from a study conducted by the Public Radio International (PRI) in April 2016.

According to the PRI, once the newly-arrived Jewish refugees went through a medical inspection, they were sent to separate living quarters ‚ÄĒ for families, unaccompanied children, single men and single women ‚ÄĒ and were assigned to a section of the camp.

In 1944, civilians coming from Greek island to the Aleppo camp could go out to socialize and shop after their security was ensured.

Iran also hosted tens of thousands of Jewish Poles who escaped Nazi slaughter, with the number varying from 114,000 to 300,000 between 1939 and 1941.

“Israel” was planted on top of Palestine after ww2 after the Jews were victorious. This was for imperialist control of the Middle East. The Middle East has since been on fire.

 

Also, on Jan. 11, 1942, an Arabic newspaper titled ‚ÄúHere is Jerusalem‚ÄĚ (Huna al-Quds) published a front-page photograph of Syrian women distributing clothes to Greek children.

‚ÄúMeal and clothes distributed to refugees coming from Greece to Syria,‚ÄĚ the newspaper read.

Syria has only just begun to emerge from a devastating conflict that began in 2011. Since then, hundreds of thousands of people have been killed in the conflict and millions more displaced, according to the UN.

Turkey hosts more than 3.5 million Syrians, more than any other country in the world, while many European countries refuse to open its doors for the displaced civilians.

The Trump Impeachment Jew Coup Matters to Anti-Semites

Antisemitism: This term is used to refer to prejudice against European Jews, incorrectly implying they constitute a Semitic race as opposed to only a religion. Example: An Arab is a Semite. An Arab Jew is a Semite. The European Jew is not a Semite.

To point Jews out in any context is anti-semitic to non-Semitic Jews. Article by the Times of Israel 6 December 2019

WASHINGTON (JTA) ‚Äď On Wednesday, the US House of Representatives Judiciary Committee launched impeachment hearings just hours after the Intelligence Committee, chaired by Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., concluded its own impeachment inquiry

All three witnesses are Jewish: Noah Feldman of Harvard, Pamela Karlan of Stanford and Michael Gerhardt of the University of North Carolina. So are Schiff and Nadler, and so was the Democrats’ counsel who directed the first 45 minutes of questioning, Norm Eisen.

Why does this matter?

Well, predictably, it mattered to anti-Semites.

Ann Coulter,¬†the right-wing agitator, tweeted, ‚ÄúToo little ethnic diversity among¬†the professors for me to take them seriously.‚Ä̬†past flirtations with anti-Semitism, one could conclude that she wasn‚Äôt faulting¬†the¬†professors just for being white.

TruNews,¬†the YouTube channel run by an¬†anti-Semitic Florida pastor who has coined¬†the term ‚ÄúJew coup‚Ä̬†to describe¬†the impeachment process, took to Twitter to accuse¬† ‚ÄúJewish socialist Jerry Nadler‚ÄĚ and his ‚Äúthree Jewish witnesses‚ÄĚ of ‚Äúescalating¬†the¬†Jew coup.‚ÄĚ

Rick Wiles: “the devil is the father of Zionist Jews.” Wiles warns the Christian Zionists to give up Israel worship and worship Jesus. He is anti-war, anti-evil and pro-USA Pastor in Florida.

TruNews also helpfully informed us that Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University scholar and witnesses called by the Republicans who testified that the evidence for impeachment simply does not add up, is a Roman Catholic.

Twitter removed the tweet. Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt took a screenshot of it for posterity, calling on social media platforms to take action against blatantly anti-Semitic posts.

Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt

Why not ignore the blatant anti-Semitism?

Because the fringes no longer have pariah status: TruNews has been accredited for White House news conferences. Trump has taken questions from them (about his plans for Israeli-Palestinian peace, of all things) and his son, Donald Jr., gave TruNews an impromptu interview earlier this year at a Michigan rally. (Trump Jr.’s spokeswoman told The Washington Post that he was not aware at the time of TruNews’ outlook.)

Those views have crept into the mainstream discourse.

“The trepidation is a shame because considerations of how being Jewish shapes one‚Äôs outlook should be free of anxieties about what anti-Semites will make of it.”

While the hearings were underway, Breitbart News,¬†the Trump-boosting news site, posted a story, ‚ÄúNorm Eisen, Democrat Impeachment Counsel, Linked to George Soros.‚Ä̬†that Soros‚Äôs Open Society Foundation had helped fund an ethics watchdog Eisen founded, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, to¬†the tune of $1.35 million in 2017. (This is not a secret: It‚Äôs on the Open Society website.)

But the Breitbart story failed to explain the relevance. Eisen is not pretending to be nonpartisan or unaffiliated from a liberal outlook; there is no suggestion that Soros’s money is reaching the committee itself.

Soros, the liberal Jewish billionaire philanthropist, is incessantly attached to conspiracies. Fiona Hill, a former senior National Security Council staffer, noted last month how the baseless Soros conspiracy theories beset the Ukraine scandal and called them anti-Semitic.

Republicans on the panel attempted to depict the three scholars on the Democratic side as effete elitists, another classic trope.

‚ÄúDemocrats still don‚Äôt get it,‚ÄĚ Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said on Twitter. ‚ÄúThey are pushing ahead with impeachment based on opinions from liberal law professors from coastal universities.‚ÄĚ

McCarthy, from California, attended a ‚Äúcoastal university‚ÄĚ (Cal State, Bakersfield), and Turley, the GOP‚Äôs scholar, teaches at one, George Washington ‚ÄĒ but never mind.

This creates Jewish fear

I got texts from leading Jewish Democrats during Wednesday’s hearings wondering, with not inconsiderable trepidation, whether the scholars were indeed Jewish.

The trepidation is a shame because considerations of how being Jewish shapes one’s outlook should be free of anxieties about what anti-Semites will make of it. And there are meaningful Jewish stories behind the decisions of these witnesses to become constitutional scholars:

‚ÄúI grew up in Alabama, and I grew up Jewish in Alabama in¬†the¬†1960s,‚Ä̬†Gerhardt told C-Span last year, ‚Äúand that was a time of great turbulence, and¬†the time¬†the¬†civil rights movement was sort of unfolding, and it was all unfolding in front of me, and I paid attention to it, and that¬† ‚ÄĒ those events that arose in¬†the ‚Äô60s and early ‚Äô70s really shaped my interest in civil rights, but also my interest in law.‚ÄĚ

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., gives final remarks during a hearing where former White House national security aide Fiona Hill, and David Holmes, a U.S. diplomat in Ukraine, testified before the House Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Nov. 21, 2019, (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Karlan, delivering closing remarks in 2006 at the¬†annual meeting of¬†the¬†liberal American Constitution Society, called herself one of¬†the¬†‚Äúsnarky, bisexual, Jewish women who want¬†the freedom to say what we think, read what we want and love who we do,‚Ä̬†calling on listeners to ‚Äúseize back¬†the high ground on patriotism and on love of our country‚ÄĚ from the rich, pampered, prodigal, sanctimonious, incurious, white, straight sons of¬†the powerful.‚ÄĚ

Feldman, who in 2015 launched Harvard’s Julis-Rabinowitz Program in Jewish and Israeli Law, also helped draft the Iraqi constitution; he is gripped by how and whether religious and civil law can coexist.

‚ÄúJewish law and Israeli law (Zionist) are distinct and different,‚ÄĚ Feldman was quoted as saying by Tablet at¬†the time of¬†the¬†launch of¬†the¬†Harvard program, ‚Äúyet they also interact and make claims on each other.‚ÄĚ

 

Jews Impeach Trump

One side benefit for the Deep State in this impeachment theater is that Congress was able to renew the Patriot Act with no mention of it in the media before the fact.

People are exchanging bread, jam and other goods for circus tickets.

‚Äʬ†November 21, 2019

The impeachment farce is basically a Jewish affair, noted the Israeli daily Haaretz. The soul and engine of the impeachment is Adam Schiff, ‚ÄėShifty Schiff‚Äô in Trump‚Äôs colourful expression.

His name brings to mind the Jewish banking house of Schiff, top Jewish aristocracy of money and media.

The second man is Greedy Goldman, or Daniel Sachs Goldman, the chief interrogator in the impeachment hearings. Sachs Goldman or Goldman Sachs, another top Jewish name and bank.

The third Jew in the heart of the impeachment is infamous George Soros. Haaretz could add that the top witnesses for prosecution are also Jewish, the bizarre Gordon ‚ÄúZelensky loves your ass‚ÄĚ Sondland, or Vindman the Spy.

Trump would never dare to notice this remarkable coincidence, concludes Haaretz. Only antisemites would.

Instead of pointing this open conspiracy out and calling the Americans to save the Republic, President Trump appealed to the Jewish sense of gratitude.

He bestowed now his third fabulous gift to the Jewish state, namely recognition of the settlements for-Jews-only on the stolen Palestinian land, after he recognized Jerusalem and the Golan Heights.

Or perhaps the fourth, if you’d count his withdrawal out of Iran agreement. He legalized the settlements by the unilateral decision of the superpower, something the Israeli governments never could or dared.

If the US were be as omnipotent as it was twenty years ago, that would be the end of Oslo and Geneva agreements, and practically the end of attempts to create a State of Palestine alongside with Israel, something Israeli nationalists wanted all along.

With the US engulfed in the cold civil war, it could lead to self-de-legitimisation of the US, or to collapse of Two States paradigm. It is apparently a huge gift to the Jewish state.

Trump thought that his generosity would melt Jewish hearts, and they would let him govern in peace. But no, the Jews accept every gift as their due; it is absence of a gift that is surprising and troublesome, probably to be explained by anti-Semitism. They said that his recognition will annoy the Democrats, and they will take it away when they regain the White House.

Probably this reaction is exactly what Trump counted on, for he does not care about Palestine or Israel. His target audience is the US Jewry.

Trump hopes that the Jews who care about Israel more than they care about the US would switch allegiance and support him, so the Democrats wouldn’t win the next elections and roll back the recognition. Judging by past experience, the Jews will gain by this competition for their favours, while the US will lose, and so will Trump.

Israel’s Netanyahu Indicted on Charges of Fraud, Bribery and Breach of Trust

It is worth our while to see who are the Jewish persons in the impeachment proceedings.

Adam Schiff, whether a remote relation to the banker Jacob Schiff or just a namesake, could be a reincarnation of the old man; for he inherited his love for mass immigration and hatred to Russia. Before Jacob Schiff’s time, the US Jewry was a small community.

Wealthy, yes, but very small. Jacob Schiff who arrived to the American shore in the mid-19th century, understood that he needed numbers, masses, demography on his side if he wanted Jews to become an important player.

He organized mass immigration of Russian and Polish Jews into the US. ‚ÄúHe lobbied Congress and President Grover Cleveland to prevent the passage of legislation which would have prevented the massive wave of Russian Jewish immigrants from whom most current New York Jews descend‚ÄĚ, says the Jewish source.

Millions of Jews arrived and eventually changed the US in their own image. Now Adam Schiff wants to import millions of Third Worlders to cement the change started by Jacob.

Jacob Schiff’s hatred of Russia had been quite extraordinary, even by the standards of that time. A prominent banker, he issued a war loan to Japan to build its fleet to fight Russia.

Accidentally, the fleet built with Schiff’s money had attacked Pearl Harbour some years later, so every victim of the Pacific War and his descendants may sue Schiffs for their contribution.

Long before Soros and NED, Jacob Schiff played the regime change game in Russia, bankrolling the revolutionaries.

(He contributed to February 1917 revolution, the liberal pro-Western coup, but the Russians screwed him by doing another coup in November 2017 and installing the Bolsheviks; his agents had to flee and Russia regained its independence, while Schiff had lost his investment.)

Adam Schiff is rabidly anti-Russian just like Jacob was. He dreams of a regime change in Moscow like Jacob did.

He claimed Russian conspiracy had brought Trump to the White House; he refused to accept Mueller’s enquiry results and still insists that the Russians interfered in the US elections.

His words of ‚Äúdamning evidence‚ÄĚ of collusion with Russia, ‚Äúmore than circumstantial,‚ÄĚ a scandal of a size ‚Äúbeyond Watergate‚ÄĚ had poisoned Russo-American relations, and made Trump presidency a lame duck from the first moment.

Adam Schiff is so dishonest and unfair that even the WSJ noted his innovation in law. ‚ÄúIs it an impeachable offense for a president to resist impeachment? House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff told CNN last week that White House officials‚Äô refusal to testify in his committee‚Äôs impeachment probe could lead to ‚Äúobstruction of Congress‚ÄĚ charges against President Trump.‚ÄĚ

Perhaps, after all, Adam Schiff is a relative to another swindler, Irwin Schiff, who died in federal prison in 2015 while he was serving a 13 years sentence for tax evasion. (Probably it is anti-Semitic to mention the old canard that some Jews could be swindlers, but we’d dare anyway).

The chief interrogator Daniel Sachs Goldman has an excellent pedigree for a Jewish macher (wheeler dealer). He went to the school ‚ÄúPresident Barack Obama‚Äôs daughters, Sasha and Malia attended, as well as Chelsea Clinton, former Vice President Joe Biden‚Äôs grandchildren, Richard Nixon‚Äôs daughter Tricia and Theodore Roosevelt‚Äôs son Archibald‚ÄĚ.

His wife is a Vice President of Goldman Sachs Bank, the ‚Äúgreat vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity‚ÄĚ, in the famous words of Matt Taibbi. His family had established a special program called The Birthright-Taglit. The name implies that every Jew has a birthright for the land of Palestine, as opposed to its natives.

The program allows American Jewish youths to make a free (courtesy of US taxpayer) trip to Israel, to meet other Jewish young men and girls and to fight intermarriage by marrying within the tribe. That’s right, you are forbidden to approve of such racist measures, but Jews are allowed to run it as a tax-exempt charity.

Daniel Sachs Goldman’s family is also a founder of New Israel Fund, another tax-exempt, that directs money saved from the US tax authorities (where it could reach goyim) towards Jews-only purposes.

George Soros is another prominent Jewish participant in the impeachment proceedings. The old reptilian is so ugly that our soul (being naturally Wildean) feels he is immoral, too.

The facts on the ground confirm this premonition. If the Ukraine had been turned from a jolly rotund East European country into pale grim disaster area, he is partly responsible.

While the impeachment deals with Trump‚Äôs alleged interference in the Ukraine, the case of Trump enemies‚Äô interference in the Ukraine is open and shut. They interfered so rudely in the dealings of the ostensibly sovereign state, that they had a joke among themselves: ‚ÄúThe Vienna Convention is optional for our Kiev staff‚ÄĚ.

The Vienna Convention is the international agreement forbidding the diplomats to meddle in the internal affairs of the state they are posted at.

Some of this meddling had been done by and for Joe Biden, who robbed the Ukrainian state of ample funds; George Soros had been another beneficiary of the State Department activity.

He has a few NGOs there, and the US Embassy under the Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch (another accuser of Trump) actively shilled for them.

John Solomon discovered that one of the witnesses for the prosecution in the impeachment hearings, then-embassy Charge d’ Affaires George Kent (now he has risen to the lofty position of the Assistant Secretary of State) demanded from the Ukrainian authorities to drop investigation of Soros’ own NGO, the Anti-Corruption Action Centre (AntAC).

Moreover, on March 5, 2019, Ambassador Yovanovitch had delivered a speech asking for ‚ÄúUkraine‚Äôs special anticorruption prosecutor to be removed.‚ÄĚ

And this woman dares to speak of Trump’s interference!

George Soros had a regular access to the Ukrainian desk of the State Department, to Assistant Secretary of State Victoria (‚ÄúF*ck EU‚ÄĚ) Nuland.

It is difficult to separate between the twain, for the AntAC had been jointly funded by the State Department and George Soros.

But George Soros is untouchable, for the ADL President Jonathan Greenblatt already determined that ‚ÄúInvoking Soros ‚Ķ is trafficking in some of the worst anti-Semitic tropes.‚ÄĚ

A former Federal Attorney for the District of Columbia Joe DiGenova committed this grievous crime, when he said on the Fox News that George Soros had a daily opportunity to tell the State Department through Victoria Nuland what to do in Ukraine.

‚ÄúSoros ran it. He corrupted FBI officials, he corrupted foreign service officers. George Soros wants to run Ukraine and he‚Äôs doing everything he can to use every lever of the United States government to make that happen.‚ÄĚ

DiGenova didn’t mention Jewishness of Soros or of his friend Nuland; it was not necessary. An attack on George Soros is an attack on Jews the world over, concluded a knowledgeable observer.

Joe DiGenova indeed is guilty, but of understatement. George Soros wants to run Ukraine, he said.

The Ukraine is a small though profitable part of the world Soros and his companions-in-arms want to run. The US is the more important part, and by running it, they can get the Ukraine for a side dish.

The impeachment indeed became an important affair, not as a threat to President Trump, but because it revealed the modus operandi of the liberal Jews.

It would be better if instead of Donald Trump their opponent would be a shining knight on a white charger.

But we’ve got what we’ve got. These guys should be stopped, and if Trump will do it, bless him.

His tactics of bribing Jews with rich gifts of Palestinian patrimony are immoral, and I doubt they will be effective.

Probably if he were to call for justice and equality for Palestine he would not have a chance of snowball in hell.

By dividing his enemies between Zionists and Liberals, he improves his chances, or so he thinks.

For people who cherish and treasure Palestine like I do this is a hard choice. Liberal Jews sound nicer; they speak against Jewish settlements in the occupied territories; they condemn Israeli shelling of Gaza and Syria.

But we had a long experience of their ascendancy: they do preciously nothing for Palestine and they allow Israel to commit all possible crimes.

A condemnation is not good enough if the flow of weapons and finances is not affected.

The Jews are used to play for both teams, and win twice. By going into absolutely forbidden, no-go area of seeing the impeachment team as a Jewish team, this game may be changed. If and when Capitol Hill will be free from occupation, the time for freedom of Jerusalem will also come.

P.S. Lawyers Update

Keep lawyers out of politics, I wrote recently. We have to choose whether we want democracy, or the rule of law.

In a democracy, the people rule via their elected representatives; under the rule of law, the judges rule supreme. Statesmen should remain immune from prosecution for life.

Donald Trump and Bibi Netanyahu aren’t angels, but they were elected by their nations and should remain untouched. Let them be judged by history, not by lawyers.

Since I wrote that, there were developments confirming my distrust of legal profession:

In Israel, PM Netanyahu had been indicted, amid strong feelings that this is the Deep State revenge.

He could be indicted, tried and hanged for his war crimes in Gaza and Syria, and I would applaud; but he was indicted for very flimsy reasons (he allegedly said he will help a publisher after elections, just let him provide some good press).

Israeli Deep State is directly connected with the US Deep State; and they do not want to see strong independent men in power.

In the US, the judge-cum-prosecutor Schiff ruled that for Trump, to fight his impeachment is an impeachable offence, while every objection of the accused counts as witness intimidation. You can’t win with such guys!

In Hong Kong, the judges outlawed the governor’s decree banning masks, and released the detained rioters who burned the tube stations and robbed shops to do more robbery and arson.

And in the UK, the High Court banned 110,000 postal workers from going on strike, despite more than 97 per cent of postal union members voting for action on a 75.9 per cent turnout. They said… what the heck, they always find what to say!

Thus, the lawyers and judges from Israel to Hong Kong and from London to Washington seem to be wedded to one Deep State, not to their national states. They are against workers, and for rioters, and never for justice.

The Jewish hand: a century of mass transfer of populations

Military attacks and terrorist attacks on the surface of the Earth are caused by world Zionism, through NATO, GRU, CIA, Mossad, SAS, FSB-KGB, DST, MAD, Cesis and others, economic and political destabilization for Colonization Hebrew worldwide.

1932

The fact that population transfers are currently making a comeback on the scholarly and policy agenda also suggests that we should scrutinize with particular care the most extensive experiment made with them to date.

Latest example

Between 1945 and 1950, Europe witnessed the largest episode of forced migration, and perhaps the single greatest movement of population, in human history.

Between 12 million and 14 million German-speaking civilians‚ÄĒthe overwhelming majority of whom were women, old people, and children under 16‚ÄĒwere forcibly ejected from their places of birth in Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia, and what are today the western districts of Poland.

As The New York Times noted in December 1945, the number of people the Allies proposed to transfer in just a few months was about the same as the total number of all the immigrants admitted to the United States since the beginning of the 20th century.

They were deposited among the ruins of Allied-occupied Germany to fend for themselves as best they could.

The number who died as a result of starvation, disease, beatings, or outright execution is unknown, but conservative estimates suggest that at least 500,000 people lost their lives in the course of the operation.

Most disturbingly of all, tens of thousands perished as a result of ill treatment while being used as slave labor (or, in the Allies’ cynical formulation, “reparations in kind”) in a vast network of camps extending across central and southeastern Europe‚ÄĒmany of which, like Auschwitz I and Theresienstadt, were former German concentration camps kept in operation for years after the war.

At the end of World War II, the U.S. opened camps of its own, where perhaps a million German prisoners died in secret.

As Sir John Colville, formerly Winston Churchill’s private secretary, told his colleagues in the British Foreign Office in 1946, it was clear that “concentration camps and all they stand for did not come to an end with the defeat of Germany.”

Ironically, no more than 100 or so miles away from the camps being put to this new use, the surviving Nazi leaders were being tried by the Allies in the courtroom at Nuremberg on a bill of indictment that listed “deportation and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population” under the heading of “crimes against humanity.”

By any measure, the postwar expulsions were a manmade disaster and one of the most significant examples of the mass violation of human rights in recent history.

Yet although they occurred within living memory, in time of peace, and in the middle of the world’s most densely populated continent, they remain all but unknown outside Germany itself.

On the rare occasions that they rate more than a footnote in European-history textbooks, they are commonly depicted as justified retribution for Nazi Germany’s wartime atrocities or a painful but necessary expedient to ensure the future peace of Europe.

As the historian Richard J. Evans asserted in In Hitler’s Shadow (1989) the decision to purge the continent of its German-speaking minorities remains “defensible” in light of the Holocaust and has shown itself to be a successful experiment in “defusing ethnic antagonisms through the mass transfer of populations.”

Even at the time, not everyone agreed. George Orwell, an outspoken opponent of the expulsions, pointed out in his essay “Politics and the English Language” that the expression “transfer of population” was one of a number of euphemisms whose purpose was “largely the defense of the indefensible.”

The philosopher Bertrand Russell acidly inquired: “Are mass deportations crimes when committed by our enemies during war and justifiable measures of social adjustment when carried out by our allies in time of peace?”

A still more uncomfortable observation was made by the left-wing publisher Victor Gollancz, who reasoned that “if every German was indeed responsible for what happened at Belsen, then we, as members of a democratic country and not a fascist one with no free press or parliament, were responsible individually as well as collectively” for what was being done to noncombatants in the Allies’ name.

That the expulsions would inevitably cause death and hardship on a very large scale had been fully recognized by those who set them in motion. To a considerable extent, they were counting on it.

For the expelling countries‚ÄĒespecially Czechoslovakia and Poland‚ÄĒthe use of terror against their German-speaking populations was intended not simply as revenge for their wartime victimization, but also as a means of triggering a mass stampede across the borders and finally achieving their governments’ prewar ambition to create ethnically homogeneous nation-states. (Before 1939, less than two-thirds of Poland’s population, and only a slightly larger proportion of Czechoslovakia’s, consisted of gentile Poles, Czechs, or Slovaks.)

For the Soviets, who had “compensated” Poland for its territorial losses to the Soviet Union in 1939 by moving its western border more than 100 miles inside German territory, the clearance of the newly “Polish” western lands and the dumping of their millions of displaced inhabitants amid the ruins of the former Reich served Stalin’s twin goals of impeding Germany’s postwar recovery and eliminating any possibility of a future Polish-German rapprochement.

The British viewed the widespread suffering that would inevitably attend the expulsions as a salutary form of re-education of the German population.

“Everything that brings home to the Germans the completeness and irrevocability of their defeat,” Deputy Prime Minister Clement Richard Attlee wrote in 1943, “is worthwhile in the end.”

The European Jews were terrorized out of Europe by the Zionists into America and Palestine.

The Native Palestinians were terrorized out of Palestine and became homeless refugees…the new arrival Jews moved into their homes and on their lands. To this day all the wars are for Israel which has usurped the US military.

The Holocaust played an important role in the founding and long term visibility of the State of Israel in three respects: The Holocaust motivated large numbers of immigrants to move to the new country, providing the necessary population; secondly, the Holocaust enabled Israel to pressure Germany into supplying the economic base necessary to build infrastructure and support those immigrants; and finally, the Holocaust swayed world opinion so that the United Nations approved the State of Israel in 1948.*

And the Americans, as Laurence Steinhardt, ambassador to Prague, recorded, hoped that by displaying an “understanding” and cooperative attitude toward the expelling countries’ desire to be rid of their German populations, the United States could demonstrate its sympathy for those countries’ national aspirations and prevent them from drifting into the Communist orbit.

The Allies, then, knowingly embarked on a course that, as the British government was warned in 1944 by its own panel of experts, was “bound to cause immense suffering and dislocation.”

That the expulsions did not lead to the worst consequences that could be expected from the chaotic cattle drive of millions of impoverished, embittered, and rootless deportees into a war-devastated country that had nowhere to put them was due to three main factors.

The first was the skill with which the postwar German chancellor, Konrad Adenauer, drew the expellees into mainstream politics, defusing the threat of a potentially radical and disruptive bloc.

The second was the readiness of most expellees‚ÄĒthe occasionally crass or undiplomatic statements of their leaders notwithstanding‚ÄĒto renounce the use or threat of force as a means of redressing their grievances.

The third, and by far the most important, was the 30-year-long “economic miracle” that made possible the housing, feeding, and employment of the largest homeless population with which any industrial country has ever had to contend.

(In East Germany, on the other hand, the fact that the standard of living for the indigenous population was already so low meant that the economic gap between it and the four million arriving expellees was more easily bridged.)

The downside of “economic miracles,” though, is that, as their name suggests, they can’t be relied upon to come along where and when they are most needed. By extraordinary good fortune, the Allies avoided reaping the harvest of their own recklessness.

Nonetheless, the expulsions have cast a long and baleful shadow over central and southeastern Europe, even to the present day. Their disruptive demographic, economic, and even‚ÄĒas Eagle Glassheim has pointed out‚ÄĒenvironmental consequences continue to be felt more than 60 years later.

The overnight transformation of some of the most heterogeneous regions of the European continent into virtual ethnic monoliths changed the trajectory of domestic politics in the expelling countries in significant and unpredicted ways.

Culturally, the effort to eradicate every trace of hundreds of years of German presence and to write it out of national and local histories produced among the new Polish and Czech settler communities in the cleared areas what Gregor Thum has described as a state of “amputated memory.”

As Thum shows in his groundbreaking study of postwar Wroclaw‚ÄĒuntil 1945 and the removal of its entire population, the German city of Breslau‚ÄĒthe challenge of confronting their hometown’s difficult past is one that post-Communist Wroclawites have only recently taken up.

In most other parts of Central Europe, it has hardly even begun.

Contradicting Allied rhetoric that asserted that World War II had been fought above all to uphold the dignity and worth of all people, the Germans included, thousands of Western officials, servicemen, and technocrats took a full part in carrying out a program that, when perpetrated by their wartime enemies, they did not hesitate to denounce as contrary to all principles of humanity.

The degree of cognitive dissonance to which this led was exemplified by the career of Colonel John Fye, chief U.S. liaison officer for expulsion affairs to the Czechoslovak government.

The operation he had helped carry out, he acknowledged, drew in “innocent people who had never raised so much as a word of protest against the Czechoslovak people.”The Czech gov. is still friends of Israel to this day.

Thomas Masaryk became President of Czechoslovakia, and it was in that capacity that he warmly welcomed the first Zionist Congress convened after the Balfour Declaration, at Karlovy Vary in 1921‚ÄĒtwo more would follow in 1923 and 1933, under Chaim Weizmann‚Äôs leadership.

To accomplish it, women and children had been thrown into detention facilities, “many of which were little better than the ex-German concentration camps.”

Yet these stirrings of unease did not prevent Fye from accepting a decoration from the Prague government for what the official citation candidly described as his valuable services “in expelling Germans from Czechoslovakia.”

Today we have come not much further than Fye did in acknowledging the pivotal role played by the Allies in conceiving and executing an operation that exceeded in both scale and lethality the violent breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s.

It is unnecessary to attribute this to any “taboo” or “conspiracy of silence.” Rather, what is denied is not the fact of the expulsions themselves, but their significance.

Many European commentators have maintained that to draw attention to them runs the risk of diminishing the horror that ought properly to be reserved for the Holocaust and other Nazi atrocities, or giving rise to a self-pitying “victim” mentality among today’s generation of Germans, for whom the war is an increasingly distant memory.

Czechs, Poles, and citizens of other expelling states fear the legal ramifications of a re-examination of the means by which millions of erstwhile citizens of those countries were deprived of their nationality, liberty, and property.

To this day, the postwar decrees expropriating and denationalizing Germans remain on the statute book of the Czech Republic, and their legality has recently been reaffirmed by the Czech constitutional court.

Some notable exceptions aside, like T. David Curp, Matthew Frank, and David Gerlach, English-speaking historians‚ÄĒout of either understandable sympathy for Germany’s victims or reluctance to complicate the narrative of what is still justifiably considered a “good war”‚ÄĒhave also not been overeager to delve into the history of a messy, complex, morally ambiguous, and politically sensitive episode, in which few if any of those involved appear in a creditable light.

By no means are all of these concerns unworthy ones. But neither are they valid reasons for failing to engage seriously with an episode of such obvious importance, and to integrate it within the broader narrative of modern European history.

For historians to write‚ÄĒand, still worse, to teach‚ÄĒas though the expulsions had never taken place or, having occurred, are of no particular significance to the societies affected by them, is both intellectually and pedagogically unsustainable.

The fact that population transfers are currently making a comeback on the scholarly and policy agenda also suggests that we should scrutinize with particular care the most extensive experiment made with them to date.

Despite the gruesome history, enthusiasts continue to chase the mirage of “humane” mass deportations as a means of resolving intractable ethnic problems.

1897!

Andrew Bell-Fialkoff, in a much-cited study, has advocated population transfers as a valuable tool so long as they are “conducted in a humane, well-organized manner, like the transfer of Germans from Czechoslovakia by the Allies in 1945-47.” John Mearsheimer, Chaim Kaufmann, Michael Mann and others have done likewise.

And although the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court has attempted to restrain this tendency by prohibiting mass deportations, Elazar Barkan maintains that such proscriptions are far from absolute, and that “today there is no single code of international law that explicitly outlaws population transfers either in terms of group or individual rights protections.”

The expulsion of the ethnic Germans is thus of contemporary as well as historical relevance. At present, though, the study of many vital elements of this topic is still in its earliest stages.

Innumerable questions‚ÄĒabout the archipelago of camps and detention centers, the precise number and location of which are still undetermined; the sexual victimization of female expellees, which was on a scale to rival the mass rapes perpetrated by Red Army soldiers in occupied Germany; the full part played by the Soviet and U.S. governments in planning and executing the expulsions‚ÄĒremain to be fully answered.

At a moment when the surviving expellees are passing away and many, though far from all, of the relevant archives have been opened, the time has come for this painful but pivotal chapter in Europe’s recent history to receive at last the scholarly attention it deserves.

R.M. Douglas is an associate professor of history at Colgate University. This essay is adapted from his new book, published by Yale University Press, Orderly and Humane: The Expulsion of the Germans After the Second World War.

Star of David spotted amidst migrant caravan…oh what a surprise! Not!

“Jews are responsible for every single thing wrong in this world until proven otherwise.”

<They have been responsible for mass migrations since ww2>


 

Honduras and Guatemalan presidents, where the migrants are coming from, are friends of Israel, they cooperate with whatever the (anti-semitic, Jewish cabal) wants.

Nixon: Well, listen, are they all Jews over there?

Colson: Every one of them. Well, a couple of exceptions.

Nixon: See my point?

Colson: You know goddamn well they’re out to kill us.

Nixon:Generally speaking, you can’t trust the bastards. They turn on you. Am I wrong or right?

MEXICO

There’s disturbing new footage showing a Jewish Star of David coming out of the Zacapa, Guatemala ‚Äúcaravan‚ÄĚ migration of illegal aliens attempting to forcefully violate the Immigration and Naturalization Act of the United States of America.

Original footage broadcast by Canadian Broadcasting Company (CBC), October 2018. A Star of David is emblazoned on the door panel of a truck transporting a load of Honduras who are making their way through Guatemala towards the USA.

The Israeli truck has stirred controversy on social media, with allegations of forced-migrant assistance being given on behalf of ‚Äúour greatest ally.‚ÄĚ

These tactics are not new and have been used many times, including in Europe: to mobilize millions of people from the most poverty-stricken countries in the world and have them invade the country, using children as their shields, and then use these people in their own political games to protect their political interests in this country.

Assimilated and religious Jews who did not serve the bankers’ interests were the main victims of Nazi persecution. Zionists, on the other hand, were spared. These same Zionists put ordinary Jews on trains to Auschwitz telling them they were being “resettled.” Whoever changed their minds were spirited away to Palestine by ready-Zionists. The Jews were ’emptied’ from Europe.

Weaponized mass migration to Europe

There’s nothing surprising in this fact. What is surprising is that they broke their taboo in the mainstream media to reveal Israel’s role in this process, although they’ve been talking about in alternative media for a long time already.

Wars for Israel

 What sparked renewed attention on immigrant detention centers?

The Trump administration says the United States is currently facing a crisis as the number of people arriving at the southwest border increases month to month and outpaces apprehensions from last fiscal year.

At the southwest border, Border Patrol made around 593,500 apprehensions in the first eight months of fiscal year 2019. In all of fiscal year 2018, it made close to 396,600 apprehensions.

Based on recent unannounced visits to Border Patrol facilities, government investigators have flagged serious concerns about overcrowding and prolonged detentions at these locations, saying the conditions “represent an immediate risk to the health and safety” of immigration officials and detainees.

The findings in the investigative reports and photos have renewed criticism of the Trump administration’s detention practices.

Who oversees the detention of immigrants?

“We were stonewalled today by an administration and a private contractor that does not want us to see what is happening behind those walls,” said presidential candidate Juli√°n Castro, outside the facility.

Once in federal custody, immigrants are held in a variety of facilities led by different agencies ‚ÄĒ from processing centers operated by Customs and Border Protection, to detention facilities run by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, to shelters for children under the supervision of the Office of Refugee Resettlement within the Health and Human Services Department.

People held by ICE are either awaiting deportation or a decision on their immigration case. They are held throughout the country, including in federally-owned centers, contracted county jails, and contracted facilities owned by private prison companies.

The average daily population in ICE detention fluctuates and was around 45,000 people as of March 2019. 

Immigration officials refer children apprehended at the border to the Office of Refugee Resettlement, an agency that is part of HHS. Each year, the office oversees tens of thousands of migrant children, most of whom have come alone without a parent or guardian.

Children stay in shelters before being handed over to the care of a sponsor, often a parent in the United States, or another family member. Whether in federal care or with a sponsor, the children still go through immigration proceedings to determine whether they can remain in the United States.

Private companies, as well as nonprofits, can be contracted by the government to run facilities holding migrant children. For instance, Caliburn International, a private for-profit company, runs a center in Homestead, Fla.

A Texas nonprofit recently was announced to have received a $300 million contract to run a new temporary shelter for child migrants in Carrizo Springs, Texas, and provide 1,300 beds, according to a notice published July 2, 2019, in the Federal Register.

What have investigators said about conditions at ICE facilities?

The U.S. government is responsible for ensuring that facilities contracted by ICE adhere to federal standards guiding the care and treatment of migrants. Over the years, the Office of Inspector General within the Department of Homeland Security has highlighted poor conditions and violations of standards at some federally-run and contracted facilities. 

In 2017, investigators examined whether ICE immigration detention inspections ensured adequate oversight and compliance with detention standards. Contracted facilities were part of the scope, according to the inspector general report published June 2018.

The report concluded that ICE wasn‚Äôt adequately monitoring facilities and that its “difficulties with monitoring and enforcing compliance with detention standards stretch back many years and continue today.”

Other groups outside the government have also flagged issues at ICE facilities.

The Southern Poverty Law Center conducted a seven-month investigation of six immigrant detention facilities in the South. The group analyzed three private facilities and three run by county sheriffs.

“From facility to facility, their stories are remarkably similar accounts of abuse, neglect and rights denied ‚ÄĒ symptoms of an immigrant detention system where the failures of the nation‚Äôs immigration system intersect with the failures of its prison system,” the Southern Poverty Law Center said in a 2016 report.

What are the conditions in child migrant centers?

Migrant children spend an average of fewer than 45 days at children’s shelters, according to a frequently asked questions page on the Office of Refugee Resettlement website, last reviewed May 15, 2019.

The average number of children in care of HHS has ranged from 11,151 to 14,226 so far in fiscal year 2019, according to HHS.

Patrick Fisher, a public affairs and media specialist of the Administration for Children and Families at the Department of Health and Human Services, told PolitiFact that all care providers, including the Homestead Temporary Shelter in Florida for unaccompanied children, are required to “report incidents affecting a child‚Äôs health, well-being and safety,” and specifically “significant incidents.”

The latter include “verbal threats by one youth against another youth to physical altercations or allegations of sexual abuse.”

Several Democratic presidential candidates went to the Homestead center (although they were not allowed to enter) at the time of the presidential debates in Miami, amid demands for its closure.

“We were stonewalled today by an administration and a private contractor that does not want us to see what is happening behind those walls,” said presidential candidate Juli√°n Castro, outside the facility.

The center in Homestead, which is holding 2,300 children of its 3,200 capacity, is a temporary influx shelter. Another is slated to open in Oklahoma at a facility that was the site of a World War II internment camp, according to CBS News.

What action has Congress taken to address private child migrant centers?

Trump signed a $4.5 billion humanitarian aid bill into law July 1, 2019. The bipartisan bill divvies up the appropriations by the agencies that will implement the law, which are those within the Justice Department, DHS, and HHS.

Some of that funding specifically goes to getting children out of large-scale shelters faster. 

Another bill currently before a committee in the House of Representatives seeks to close temporary emergency shelters for unaccompanied minors. U.S. Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., in February introduced the Shut Down Child Prison Camps Act, to prohibit HHS from operating unlicensed temporary emergency shelters for unaccompanied immigrant children.

The bill’s chances of getting through the Republican-controlled Senate, however, are low.

In addition to that bill, the House Oversight and Reform Committee will hold hearings on the separation and treatment of migrant children, according to a statement by the committee.

“The committee needs to hear directly from the heads of these agencies as soon as possible in light of the almost daily reports of abuse and defiance,” said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, D-Md., chairman of the committee.¬†

What are President Donald Trump’s plans for immigration detention?

Trump’s approach is at odds with that of House Democrats. As part of his hard-line approach to immigration, Trump seeks to increase detention space to keep more migrants in custody. Lack of detention space has consistently been one of the reasons why immigration authorities release immigrants. 

Trump’s fiscal year 2020 budget plan asks for $2.7 billion for 54,000 detention beds and requests the creation of a Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Fund.

The fund would be used to expand immigration detention capacity to 60,000 beds (including 10,000 family detention beds) and to hire more staff to enforce and litigate immigration laws.

Jews Behind the LGBTQ Movement

Evangelical mom fights Texas school district when told her transgender kindergartner will be barred from using the girls’ bathroom

“Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus, atheists ‚ÄĒ they don‚Äôt agree with us on much of anything. But we talk with them.”

[They’re aim is to guilt dumb parents and are especially successful at inspiring warped Christian Zionists]

As Jewish leaders working for LGBTQ equality and racial justice in Jewish life, our emotions run deep this month: June marks two historical moments of liberation. Fifty years ago, LGBTQ people resisted a violent police raid at the Stonewall Inn in New York City, sparking the start of the modern LGBT rights movement and signaling to the world that trans women, drag queens, gay men, lesbians, and other queer people demanded dignity, equal rights, and freedom.

More than 100 years before that transformative night at a New York City bar, the course of history changed forever in the American South. On June 19, 1865, a Union Army general arrived in Texas and shared the news that the Civil War had ended, and that enslaved African Americans were now free.

Known by many as¬†‚ÄúJuneteenth‚ÄĚ, this day is considered the most historic celebration of the end of slavery in the United States.


DRAG queens are to read fairytales to schoolchildren to raise LGBT awareness.
Normalizing it for YOUR kids. LGBT awareness is the law!

As we reflect on the power of these historical moments, we are troubled by how the struggles for LGBTQ rights and Black liberation are often viewed as separate, unrelated movements. And yet, these two histories ‚ÄĒ and our ongoing work for LGBTQ equality and racial justice today ‚ÄĒ are deeply intertwined and profoundly interdependent.

People of color are at the heart of Stonewall. Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera, both trans women of color, led the fight at the Stonewall Inn. And yet, they are often omitted from the story of Stonewall and excluded from the traditional canons of Black and Latinx American history.

As Jewish colleagues of different racial and cultural backgrounds, we understand the power of our own histories and the shared responsibility we have to work for justice, especially in challenging, painful, or violent times. The stories we tell of our past inform possibilities for a better present and future.

So, as leaders committed to LGBTQ equality and racial justice, we ask our Jewish communities: What would it look like to integrate these commitments and ensure that we value them equally? What would it take for synagogues, day schools, summer camps, and other Jewish institutions to invest wholeheartedly in both racial justice and LGBTQ equality?

Black leaders Proclaim Forbidden Truths about Israeli and Talmudic Lies

Farrakhan insisted that “Israel and AIPAC pays off senators and congressmen to do their bidding, so [Omar is] not lying.¬†So if you’re not lying, stop laying down. You were sent there by the people to shake up that corrupt House. Shake it up!”

Farrakhan also claims that contemporary Jews are responsible for promoting child molestation, misogyny, police brutality and sexual assault, among other social ills. In addition, he asserted that contemporary Judaism is nothing but a ‚Äúsystem of tricks and lies‚ÄĚ which Jews study in order to learn how to ‚Äúdominate‚ÄĚ non-Jews.

He also said that ‚Äúthe false Jew will lead you to filth and indecency. That‚Äôs who runs show business. That‚Äôs who runs the record industry. That‚Äôs who runs television.‚ÄĚ Farrakhan alleged that Jews often force aspiring actors to submit to anal sex.

Jewish academic Dr Nathan Abrams: ‚ÄúThough Jews make up only 2 percent of the American population, they dominate porn.‚ÄĚ

Jewish academic Dr Nathan Abrams:‚ÄúThough Jews make up only 2 percent of the American population, they dominate porn.‚ÄĚ

‚ÄúDo you know that many of us who go to Hollywood seeking a chance have to submit to anal sex and all kind [sic] of debauchery [before] they give you a little part?‚ÄĚ he asked. ‚ÄúIt‚Äôs called the casting couch. See, that‚Äôs Jewish power.‚ÄĚ

He used disgraced Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein, who is Jewish, as proof of his allegations.

Farrakhan also said that President Barack Obama was ‚Äúunder Jewish influence‚ÄĚ when he advocated for the legalization of same-sex marriage. Marriage equality, Farrakhan informed his audience, is ‚ÄúSatanic.‚ÄĚ

Now here’s Mr. Putman. In the 1960s, this movie was screened at YMCAs, Catholic groups, American Legions, and Elk Lodges, trying to spread the anti-pornography message to as many people as they could.¬†

A reporter named George Putnam narrates this half-hour-long educational film on pornography. He is blaming “the masters of deceit” and warns that it is satanic big business. Well, everyone knows who the “master of deceit.”

Perversion for Profit

“This moral decay weakens our resistance to the onslaught of the masters of deceit.”

Who are the richest and most successful entrepreneurs of the $100 billion year porn industry?  The peddlers of pornography belong to all races, but one race above all stands out as preeminent in this field. 

Selling sex, like slave trafficking and money-lending, has always been a Jewish specialty.

Example: In the spring of 2002, the Israeli military had the Palestinian town of Ramallah under siege.  The IDF had captured three of the four Palestinian television stations. 

While in control of these media outlets, the Israeli military implemented a very disturbing plan: they began broadcasting pornographic movies to the Palestinian households. 

For those who are familiar with the tactics frequently used by Israel against the Palestinian people, such a thing will come as no surprise.

They also take over Palestinian sites routinely and replace it with pornography (I’m a witness). It’s their first tactic they think of to shock and disgust.¬† These Zionists use pornography as a weapon for non-Zionists, and for fun because they are sick, and they can.

Who has labeled this Video ‘hysterical? Who would do that? Someone who obviously profits from porn!

The ‚ÄúJudeo-Nazis‚ÄĚ of Israel are another story

Israel is a Jewish Bolshevik creation, all the Israeli leaders are from Russian empire. Notice they are ALL white.¬† The ‚ÄúJews‚ÄĚ Are Not The Seed of Abraham and the Palestinian Jews, the REAL Jews rejected them.¬† Zionist fake Jews have courted and colluded with European white supremacists ever since the movement‚Äôs inception.

The very uncomfortable truth is that the harsh characterizations of Diaspora Jewry found in the pages of Mein Kampf were not all that different from what was voiced by Zionism’s founding fathers and its subsequent leaders, so the cooperation of those two ideological movements was not really so totally surprising.

It is true that only an extreme lunatic fringe of Zionism went so far as to offer to join the war on Germany‚Äôs side in 1941, in the hope of establishing ‚Äúthe historical Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, and bound by a treaty with the German Reich.‚ÄĚ Unfortunately this was the group which the present Prime Minister of Israel chose to join.

Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael ‘Oren’. Upon assuming Israeli citizenship, he changed his last name from “Bornstein” to “Oren.” If any of these fake Jews were Semitic they would look like the Arabs.

Extracts from article by Ron Unz, entire article good read!

In 1983, Amoz Oz, often described as Israel’s greatest novelist, had published In the Land of Israel to glowing reviews. This book was a collection of lengthy interviews with various representative figures in Israeli society, both moderate and extreme, as well as some coverage of the Palestinians who also lived among them.

Of these ideological profiles, one of the shortest but most widely discussed was that of an especially hard-line political figure, unnamed but almost universally believed to be Ariel Sharon, a conclusion certainly supported by the personal details and physical description provided.

Near the very beginning, that figure mentioned that people of his ideological ilk had recently been denounced as ‚ÄúJudeo-Nazis‚ÄĚ by a prominent liberal Israeli academic, but rather than reject that label, he fully welcomed it. So the subject generally became known in public discussions as the ‚ÄúJudeo-Nazi.‚ÄĚ

That he described himself in such terms was hardly an exaggeration, since he rather gleefully advocated the slaughter of millions of Israel’s enemies [everyone who hates evil] , and the vast expansion of Israeli territory by conquest of neighboring lands and expulsion of their populations, along with the free use of nuclear weapons if they or anyone else too strongly resisted such efforts.

In his bold opinion, the Israelis and Jews in general were just too soft and meek, and needed to regain their place in the world by once again becoming a conquering people, probably hated but definitely feared.

To him, the large recent massacre of Palestinian women and children at Sabra and Shatila was of no consequence whatsoever, and the most unfortunate aspect of the incident was that the killers had been Israel’s Christian Phalangist allies rather than Israeli soldiers themselves.

Now rhetorical excess is quite common among politicians and a shroud of pledged anonymity will obviously loosen many tongues. But can anyone imagine an American or other Western public figure talking in such terms, let alone someone who moves in higher political circles?

These days, Donald Trump sometimes Tweets out a crude misspelled insult at 2am, and the American media is aghast in horror. But given that his administration leaks like a sieve, if he routinely boasted to his confidants about possibly slaughtering millions, we surely would have heard about it.

For that matter, there seems not the slightest evidence that the original German Nazis ever spoke in such ways privately, let alone while a journalist was carefully taking notes. But the ‚ÄúJudeo-Nazis‚ÄĚ of Israel are another story.

As near as I can recall, the last even slightly prominent figure in American public life who declared himself a ‚ÄúNazi‚ÄĚ was George Lincoln Rockwell during the 1960s, and he was much more of a political performance artist than an actual political leader. Even as marginalized a figure as David Duke has always hotly denied such an accusation. But apparently politics in Israel is played by different rules.

In any event, Sharon’s purported utterances seem to have had little negative impact upon his subsequent political career, and after spending some time in the political wilderness after the Lebanon disaster, he eventually served five years as Prime Minister during 2001-2006, although by that later date his views were regularly denounced as too soft and compromising due to the steady rightward drift of the Israeli political spectrum.

Once Hitler consolidated power in Germany, he quickly outlawed all other political organizations for the German people, with only the Nazi Party and Nazi political symbols being legally permitted. But a special exception was made for German Jews, and Germany’s local Zionist Party was accorded complete legal status, with Zionist marches, Zionist uniforms, and Zionist flags all fully permitted.

Under Hitler, there was strict censorship of all German publications, but the weekly Zionist newspaper was freely sold at all newsstands and street corners. The clear notion seemed to be that a German National Socialist Party was the proper political home for the country‚Äôs 99% German majority, while Zionist National Socialism would fill the same role for the tiny Jewish minority. continue reading….