Zionism

Jewish Influence In America

I can’t get my head around the numbers. And because I question the unbelievable control Jews have on America, our thoughts and our policies, I am considered an “anti-Semite” by many people. I am considered a hater and a racist.

I am just asking the right questions and so should you:

How can 2% of the population of the USA (less than that in the world) wield so much power, hold such a vast number of political positions, manipulate the media with absolute control, run the elite universities and law schools, and have so much wealth as they do (50% of America’s billionaires are Jewish)?

Since the 1960s, Jews have come to wield considerable influence in American economic, cultural, intellectual, and political life. Jews played a central role in American finance during the 1980s, and they were among the chief beneficiaries of that decade’s corporate mergers and reorganizations. Today, though barely 2% of the nation’s population is Jewish, close to half its billionaires are Jews. The chief executive officers of the three major television networks, and the four largest film studios are Jews, as are the owners of the nation’s largest newspaper chain and most influential single newspaper, the New York Times. In the late 1960s, Jews already constituted 20% of the faculty of elite universities and 40% of the professors of elite law schools; today, these percentages doubtless are higher.

~Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State (University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1993)

Mr Ginsberg has a whole lot more to say on the subject here.

Some will claim that Jews are simply exceptional and very, very smart. According to David Duke’s research, this is not true. That due to “hard work” they earn their positions of influence. I just don’t agree. First, of the Jews I’ve gotten to know over the years, their intelligence is basically the same as most people… some smart, some stupid. I never saw anything exceptional, but I did see that other Jews’ influence got them seats at the best schools and jobs. As for hard work, most I have encountered wouldn’t know how to conduct a hard day’s work and if they were forced, would bitch and moan until it was through… constantly trying to figure out a way never to do it again.

I have worked in very hard laborious jobs in extreme conditions of heat with hundreds of men and I never met a Jew on the job. It always seems to be the cushiest positions you see them in. Maybe that’s just me, but it is my experience. Surely there are some professionals, like Doctors that work hard and long hours, but I’ve never met any Jew that does LABOR. I know one guy that will TELL you he works hard, when, in fact, he sits in front of a computer all day and gambles. I’d be willing to bet he couldn’t last 5 minutes with me in my garden, much less actually working with his hands.

Look, if we are to be real about things, we need to evaluate these claims I make. Any sensible person should be aware of what I am sharing, but it does take more than the normal American TV watcher or newspaper reader to realize it for the truth that it is. Why is that? Because Jews run those outlets and they don’t want to advertise the truth because you will get pissed if you find out the truth. It mucks up their control game.

“During the last three decades Jews [in the United States] have made up 50 percent of the top two hundred intellectuals … 20 percent of professors at the leading universities … 40 percent of partners in the leading law firms in New York and Washington … 59 percent of the directors, writers, and producers of the 50 top-grossing motion pictures from 1965 to 1982, and 58 percent of directors, writers, and producers in two or more primetime television series.”

~Seymour Lipset and Earl Raab, Jews and the New American Scene (1995)

And please. Stop with blaming all those OTHER inane entities the disinformation agents and useful idiots  (like Alex Jones) tell us it is:

Let’s get serious. First of all, it is critical to know how much we give to Israel and why. It is officially noted that we give in excess of $3BILLION yearly to Israel. This does not include all the various hidden military equipment. We are told that they are our best ally in the middle east and that we need to help them protect themselves from the rogue nations, like Iran. But any cursory look shows us that they are the only ones that are rogue. They are the only ones in the middle east that are attacking other countries and continuously accusing those countries of the very crimes they conduct. If Jews don’t control our policies, why are we sending so much money to them and furnishing them with the ordinance to kill so many children? Why do we turn away and disregard their assaults on innocents? Why do they get special treatment and protection from their abuses against common international laws? Why do we continuously attack Muslim countries if we aren’t following their policies? Do you still honestly believe that those middle eastern countries are OUR enemies… or theirs?

Why Do They Do It?

No, the real reason we treat them as special is that we are scared of them and that we have been brainwashed into their sob stories of lies and their religious garbage of their being the “Chosen Ones” of God. The politicians are scared because if they say something against their influence and control, they are immediately labelled by the media they control as anti-semites and vast sums of money are spent to unseat those truthful people. Many have been brainwashed by the Holohoax story, which is easily shown as the lie it is, with just a small amount of research. Even a 15 year old can figure it out. And too many “Christians” have been duped into believing that Christ following is really “judeo-Christianity” when He constantly taught against any such a stupid notion.

You can see the politicians every year fall all over themselves at the AIPAC convention:

and even in the State House…

Oh, God. It’s Pitiful.

Even the Jewish newspapers know it is control and MONEY in regards to politics.

Jewish influence is far more disproportionate to the size of the community Jewish leaders and US officials acknowledge, but so is the amount of money they contribute to election campaigns.

~The Jerusalem Post

Only In America…

From Greg at The Goon Squad
(Where Brains are Tenderly Washed, Disinfected and Made Usable Again)

Only In America…

Will people get in their gas guzzling tank-like vehicles and drive 1/2 mile to the gym so they can walk 2 miles on a treadmill.

Will Christians go to church on Sunday, pray to the ‘Prince of Peace,’ Jesus Christ, then spend the rest of the week lustily cheering on the USA and Israel genocide against the Muslim world.

Will these same Christians on Sunday, read from the gospel of love, the New Testament, then spend the rest of the week thumping the Old Testament, which is filled with hate; incest; rape; drunkenness; murder; genocide; cannibalism; infanticide and revenge.

Will people set their rather large posteriors down on a couch, surround themselves with mountains of greasy potato chips, then wash all that junk down with a ‘diet’ soda because they’re watching their weight.

Will people spend huge sums of money on weight loss programs, then drive the family to McDonald’s to eat.

Will people spend 50 thousand on some gas guzzling behemoth, then shop for the cheapest, adulterated, toxic chemical laden ‘food’ from Wal Mart to feed their family.

Will people raise all sorts of hell about abortion clinics, saying its murder, then let their government murder millions of innocents, mostly women and children, in the ME, SW Asia and Africa w/o protesting.

Yes, America, these murdered children are human beings, or they were. Where’s the tears for these souls?

These too are children, murdered with your tax dollars. Feel proud to be a ‘Gawd fearin’ Christian’ now, Amerikkka?

Video and narration by BuelahMan

Articles referenced or worth reading

Bible Atrocities

EXCLUSIVE: Cowardice Redefined, The New Face of American Serial Killers

A Song For 9/11

Elvis has obviously left the building:

Another parody by DC Dave regarding the real culprits of 9/11.

Based on Elvis Presley’s “Can’t Help Falling In Love With You”

Wise men say
Only fools rush in
So why are we so quick in solving major crimes?

Pigs fly high
Santa’s sleigh flies higher
And buildings fall down from a kerosene fire.

Like the water flows
From a high place to a low
The laws of science don’t change
When shills tell us what’s so.

Just this once
Think it all the way through
And ask yourself, “If not them, then who?”

Like the water flows
From a high place to a low
The laws of science don’t change
When shills tell us what’s so.

Just this once
Think it all the way through
And ask yourself, “If not him, then who?”

http://www.dcdave.com/poet15/130407.htm

Video and vocals by BuelahMan

Falling To Pieces For Israel

New parody by DCDave:
http://www.dcdave.com/poet15/130405.htm

Falling To Pieces For Israel

(to Patsy Cline’s “I Fall to Pieces”)

You fall to pieces
At just the sound of their name.
You fall to pieces,
Now we’ve wised up to their game:

They want us to think that you work for us
Because we wanted you,
Went to the polls for you.
Well we’re sorry we see what you say and do:
They say “boo,” and you fall to pieces.

You fall to pieces.
We see what you’re all about.
You fall to pieces.
You’re only there to sell out.

You know who puts butter upon your bread.
You’ll jump through hoops for it.
Do loop de loops for it.
If you get out of line just a little bit
They flash cash and you fall to pieces.
They flash cash and you fall to pieces.

Featuring new singing sensation, Liz Dilling

Video by BuelahMan

April Fools!

Your Government Is A Joke

Article by horse237:

https://vidrebel.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/april-fools-your-government-is-a-joke/

Graphics by David Dees:

http://www.deesillustration.com/index.asp

Video clip (for illustration and education purposes):

Video and narration by BuelahMan:

http://buelahman.wordpress.com/

It’s Time To Stop Being Israel’s Bitch

If I Were President

Greg at The Goon Squad explains what he’d do if he were President:

http://careandwashingofthebrain.blogspot.com/2013/03/if-i-were-president.html

Referenced reading:
The Video Rebel’s “The Bankers Really, Really Want Us Dead”

http://vidrebel.wordpress.com/2013/03/20/the-bankers-really-really-want-us-all-dead-2/

B’Man’s POS Watch: TN Sen Bob Corker

http://buelahman.wordpress.com/2013/03/18/bmans-pos-watch-tn-sen-bob-corker/

Video by BuelahMan:

http://buelahman.wordpress.com

We’re The USA!

We’re The USA!
See the pyramid there in the aisle;
See those naked Arabs in a pile.
Just remember, people, all the while,
We’re the USA.

From Indonesia to beyond Algiers,
We’ll show off our Muslim souvenirs.
This reminds me of those Viet Cong ears.
We’re the USA.

Where would you be without us?
Maybe we’ll invade you, too–and you.

We can make the world a better place,
Putting evildoers in their place,
Or just giving Israel living space.
We’re the USA.

Song written by DC Dave

http://www.dcdave.com/poet13/040512.htm

Sung to the tune of Dean Martin’s rendition of ‘You Belong To Me’

Karaoke version used:

Sung by BuelahMan (snicker)

http://buelahman.wordpress.com/

American Victims of the Soviet Gulag

A Review of The Forsaken: An American Tragedy in Stalin’s Russia

With the collapse of the Soviet bloc, and before that with the revelations of the great Alexander Solzhenitsyn and others, virtually every educated American not named Oliver Stone or Peter Kuznick now knows that the Soviet Union, particularly during the long period of Joseph Stalin’s absolute dictatorship, was little more than one big killing machine.  Stalin ruled through terror and fear, but also with a cult of personality in which he was regarded as a god-like father figure for the country and for worldwide Communism.  The main instrument of the terror was the precursor of the KGB, the dreaded NKVD.  The major victims were first the losers in the civil war, primarily the aristocracy and the supporters of the tsar, including the Orthodox Christian Church; then the small land owners who resisted the draconian collectivization program or just anyone who owned land; then in the 1930s the revolution turned in on itself with the years of the Great Terror, and literally no one was safe.

The slain of all nationalities numbered in the tens of millions.  Many were summarily executed with a bullet to the back of the head or neck.  A far larger number were done to death by a sentence, of whatever length, to one of the many work camps.  Conditions were often such that the prisoners were hardly expected to survive.  The food was typically inadequate for replacement of the calories used up in the labor, and the clothes often provided insufficient protection from the elements.  That was especially the case at Kolyma, perhaps the harshest of all the labor camps.  One reason author Tim Tzouliadis focuses particularly upon Kolyma is that American memoirist Thomas Sgovio, who managed to survive ten years there because of his artistic skills and amazing good fortune, has left us a very good description of the experience.  It was also the place that one of the heroes of Stone and Kuznick’s Untold History of the United States, Vice President Henry Wallace, visited in May of 1944 as part of his NKVD-hosted 25-day tour of the Russian Far East from which he returned with glowing reports on the Soviet pioneer spirit.

The American Common Man’s Route to the Gulag

It might have been a real American pioneer spirit that motivated some of the thousands of people who moved from this country to the Soviet Union in the late 1920s and early 1930s in what Tzouliadis aptly calls a “forgotten exodus.”  For many, with the nation’s economy flat on its back in the throes of the Great Depression, it was simple desperation.  Tzouliadis reports that in the first eight months of 1931 alone, the Soviet trade agency, Amtorg, based in New York, received one hundred thousand American applications for emigration to the USSR.  “Ten thousand optimistic Americans were hired that year, part of the official ‘organized emigration,’ who received their good news with glee closer to lottery winners than economic migrants.”

Another reason why so many people made such an ultimately foolish decision was that they just didn’t know.  Virtually everything they had heard about the Soviet Union was positive, because almost everything anyone in the United States had heard at that time was propaganda.  Almost nothing had been published to counter the favorable impression of the Russian revolutionaries since John Reed’s very influential Ten Days that Shook the World in 1919.  Many had already left for Russia before the man-made famine in Ukraine in 1932-33, but news of that event was highly distorted by no less a powerful news organ than The New York Times, and the flow of migrants continued.

Heavily represented among the emigrants were Americans on the far left of the political spectrum.  Given the state of the economy at that time, though, the radical left perspective had a much broader appeal then than it does now.  For those good, patriotic Americans today who find it impossible to empathize with these thousands of ill-fated migrants to Russia, Tzouliadis has a good corrective at the end of his first chapter:

Few paused to distinguish whether they were being pulled by an ideology or pushed by their need.  Nor were these Americans merely a confederacy of political fanatics, hopeless idealists, or naïve adventurers.  Theirs was a reaction to the actuality and future threat of poverty, and to understand them we must place ourselves momentarily in a similar position of unknowing: when the idea of the Soviet Revolution was still filled with hope, and only the most perspicacious could discern the truth that lay beneath that promise.  It was an era when the political system of communism had yet to be fully tested, just as once upon a time democracy, too, had presented an equally radical affront to conservative opinion.  (p. 11)

That chapter is titled “The Joads of Russia,” after the main characters in John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath, the fictional family that was forced to migrate from Oklahoma to California at about the same time as the migration to Russia took place.

The title of the second chapter, “Baseball in Gorky Park,” captures what the migration experience was like for many in the early days.  There was a brief honeymoon period when the presence of so many Americans was a source of pride for the government and for many of the Russian people.  Baseball was at the peak of its popularity in the United States, and the young Americans brought their game with them.  Teams and leagues were formed.  The review of the book in The Telegraph of London has a heartbreaking photograph of the members of one such team.  It is heartbreaking because there is a very good chance that not a single young man in that photograph made it through the next decade alive, not only that, but their deaths were likely to have been quite agonizing.  The young players at that time, looking happy in the photograph like contented beef cattle clueless as to their eventual fate, could even read about their baseball exploits in the English language Moscow News.  The pro-Soviet Anna Louise Strong was the editor at that time and one of the reporters for a brief period was the later New Deal-connected business writer, Eliot Janeway.

To the extent that Kolyma is representative, there was a certain cruel politico-economic logic to the Great Terror that began in the later 1930s and swallowed up millions of people, including most of the Americans.  The rigidly planned economy produced little that anyone outside Russia wanted to buy.  The only desirable Soviet exports were raw materials.  The most valuable raw material, and the best form of payment for needed imports, was gold.  Much of the gold and many of the other raw materials were located in places with such a cold climate that no amount of money would lure workers to go there.  Prisoners were the solution.  At the same time, rigid political control required arbitrary arrests for the most trivial offenses, or in many cases, for no offense at all.  That assured an endless supply of prisoners.  The collective farms didn’t produce enough to feed both the free and the imprisoned populace, so the prisoners were underfed, died off, and were replaced by constant streams of new prisoners.  The author notes that many of the prisoners were transported to Kolyma in ships donated to the Soviet Union by the United States through the Lend Lease program.

What was done by the American government to rescue its citizens or “former citizens” from this horror?  The answer is precious little.  The government reacts to public pressure, but before there can be public pressure there must be publicity, and there was virtually none.  To be sure there were family and loved ones contacting their Congressmen and petitioning the State Department, but they might was well been the family members of American POWs abandoned in Southeast Asia almost a half a century later.  Even had there been strong domestic pressure, the obstacles faced by the American embassy in Moscow were daunting:

In Moscow, the American diplomats understood very well that low-level negotiation with the Soviet Foreign Ministry was entirely useless, given the fact that the entire Commissariat was petrified of the NKVD and were themselves frequent victims of the Terror.  Clearly more forceful intervention was required at the very highest levels of government.  Had the diplomats been willing, action might still have been taken, and the lives of the American emigrants might well have been saved.

But what was abundantly clear was that if this was about to happen, the “captured Americans” needed a heroically protective figure to intervene on their behalf—someone with the courage of Oskar Schindler or Raoul Wallenberg—someone willing to lend sanctuary, to hand out passports, to speak to the president, and to kick up a very loud and very public fuss in a time of peril.  Someone, in short, who might hold a protective hand over them when their lives were so evidently endangered.

What they got, instead, was Ambassador Joseph Davies.  (pp. 106-107)

The Biggest American Villains

In the whole sorry story there are few, if any, American heroes, unless you count the pitifully few survivors.  Certainly there were none in the U.S. government or among the U.S. reporters assigned to the Soviet Union.  Whatever they sent out had to pass through Soviet censors, and they knew that if they managed to smuggle out anything critical of their host country they would be finished as reporters there.  Even Eugene Lyons, whose under-publicized 1937 book Assignment in Utopia, written after his return to the States, finally gave Americans a look at Stalin’s horrors, followed the rules when he was in Moscow and kept the lid on the story of the American expatriates’ virtual imprisonment in the years before they were being sent off to the Gulag.

Paul Robeson

There are American villains aplenty, though.  If one counts Walter Duranty, an Englishman, as an honorary American because he worked for The New York Times when he wrote the award-winning cover-up stories that helped lure the migrants in the first place, the top three would be Davies, Duranty, and the famous black athlete, singer, and actor, Paul Robeson.   (Curiously, the aforementioned Strong, who was a prolific promoter of Soviet Communism, gets a virtual pass from Tzouliadis.  He mentions her only once.*) Davies and his heiress wife at the time, Marjorie Merriweather Post, come across as decadent royalists of the let-them-eat-cake variety.  Davies is best known for his embarrassingly gushing book, Mission to Moscow, which endorsed the Moscow show trials as legitimate and was made into a wartime movie by Warner Brothers, upon the personal insistence of FDR to Jack Warner.  Post, for her part, spent most of her time in Russia buying up art and antique treasures that had been plundered from the murdered or exiled aristocracy.  They now fill up her Hillwood Estate in Washington, DC, open for public viewing.

Robeson is a particularly sad case.  Like Strong, he was brilliant and seemed to have only the very best intentions, but also, like Strong, he was ultimately led astray by rigid adherence to ideology.  He had every reason to know the true story of the Soviet tyranny because he made a number of visits to the country.  On one such visit the black American automobile worker, Robert Robinson, encountered him personally in a desperate attempt to enlist Robeson’s assistance to get him out of Russia, but Robeson gave him the cold shoulder and did nothing.   Worse than that, he defended Stalin’s Soviet Union his entire life.

Paul Robeson’s steadfast campaign for civil rights in America made his acquiescence to Stalinism all the more tragic.  There were many American communists who recanted once they understood the nature of the crimes committed in the USSR.  There remained, however, a psychological conflict among those who understood, yet whose pride or ideology could not allow them to admit their error.  Robeson’s actions and speeches had justified, and therefore contributed to, the crimes of Stalinism, and for that at least, he was morally culpable. (p. 327)

The Tragedy Hits Home

When it comes to psychological reactions, it is perhaps a natural thing for all of us to want to put some distance between ourselves and unbearable tragedy, whether it be in the Soviet Union or anywhere else..  Tzouliadis makes it harder for Americans to do that than Solzhenitsyn did.  Early on, he tells us that the emigrants came from every state in the union.  From the stories I had heard from my mother about her farm family’s deprivations in North Carolina during the Great Depression I could easily see how she or her siblings would have found an opportunity to go to the purported “workers’ paradise” of Russia attractive.  But then I noticed that nowhere in the book is anyone mentioned among the migrants who came from the South.  As Richard M. Weaver has observed, “Southerners are not a traveled people.”  Steinbeck’s story of the Joads was a lot closer to home to me, both literally and figuratively, than this one was, that is, until I reached Chapter 23 entitled, “Citizen of the United States of America, Allied Officer Dale.”

That chapter is full of reports by witnesses in the Gulag of sightings of American prisoners in the 1950s.  Our government apparently knew that the Chinese were sending prisoners captured in the Korean War to the Soviet Union.  George Kennan, working in the U.S. embassy in Moscow sent a letter to Washington urging that the matter be publicized.  Instead, his letter was stamped “Secret” and eventually buried away in the archives.

Tzouliadis has unearthed minutes from a Politburo meeting with China’s Chou En-lai in which Stalin recommends that the Chinese hold back 20 percent of the Korean War POWs:

In the early 1950s—well before the Sino-Soviet quarrels—if Stalin’s “advice” had called for the retention of 20 percent of UN prisoners of war during the Korean War, then to the Chinese such a “proposal” carried the sanctity of a commandment from the “Great Leader” of the Communist cause.  It was Joseph Stalin, after all, who had armed the sixty Chinese divisions poured into the conflict in Korea.

My mother’s younger brother, William Gray Bell, who went by his middle name, was a draftee who served with the U.S. Army occupation forces in South Korea after the end of World War II.  He got an early hardship discharge of a few months when his father died.  He was needed back on the farm where there were two much younger twin brothers, and an even younger sister and a step-sister.  His mother had died at age 36 during the Great Depression.  When the Korean War broke out, as a reservist, he was called back to active duty and sent into the fray.  Not long after his arrival in Korea he was reported missing in action.  We never heard from him again.  He was, to my recollection and from all I have heard about him, a prince of a man.  I have eulogized him with this short poem.  It chills me to think that he could have been one of the Gulag victims.

The Forsaken’s Tragic Flaw

For all the book’s importance and general praiseworthiness, it does have one major shortcoming.  Interestingly, it is the same shortcoming that I noted in Stalin’s Secret Agents.  We must state it bluntly.  Like M. Stanton Evans and Herbert Romerstein, Tim Tzouliadis covers up for Franklin Roosevelt.  The cover-up is not as central to his book as it is theirs, but it involves the same episode and he is perhaps even more dishonest about it than they are.  Here is what Tzouliadis writes on page 282:

As early as September 2, 1939, Whittaker Chambers, a former American Communist Party member and Soviet military intelligence agent, gave a long interview to Adolf Berle, the assistant secretary of state, revealing the names of several Soviet agents working inside the State Department and other branches of the U.S. government, including Alger Hiss and his brother, Donald.  According to Chambers’ account, Adolf Berle immediately passed this information on to Roosevelt’s secretary, but Berle had been unable to take seriously the notion that the “Hiss boys” were planning to “take over the United States’ government.”

At that point there is an endnote that leads one to p. 466 of Witness: An Autobiography by Whittaker Chambers.  The quote from Berle is indeed there, at the top of page 466, but Tzouliadis has taken it completely out of context so as to virtually reverse its meaning.  Let us look at the full passage, starting at the bottom of page 465 to reveal the trickery:

After midnight, [Isaac Don] Levine and I left.  As we went out, I could see that Mrs. Berle had fallen asleep on a couch in a room to my right.  Adolf Berle, in great excitement, was on the telephone even before we were out the door.  I supposed that he was calling the White House.

In August, 1948, Adolf A. Berle testified before the House Committee on Un-American Activities not long after my original testimony about Alger Hiss and the Ware Group.  The former Assistant Secretary of State could no longer clearly recall my conversation with him almost a decade before.  His memory had grown dim on a number of points.  He believed, for example, that I had described to him a Marxist study group whose members were not Communists.  In any case, he had been unable to take seriously, in 1939, any “idea that the Hiss boys and Nat Witt were going to take over the Government.”

At no time in our conversation can I remember anyone’s mentioning the ugly word espionage.  But how well we understood what we were talking about, Berle was to make a matter of record.  For when, four years after that memorable conversation, his notes were finally taken out of a secret file and turned over to the F.B.I., it was found that Adolf Berle himself had headed them: Underground Espionage Agent.

What follows in the second half of page 466 through two thirds of page 469 are the actual notes, which follows with this summing up by Chambers:

These notes are obviously rambling and garbled…

But if the notes are studied carefully, it will be seen that the essential framework of the conspiracy is here even down to such details as the fact that [Vincent] Reno was working as Colonel Zornig’s assistant at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds.  It is equally clear that I am describing not a Marxist study group, but a Communist conspiracy.  The Communists are described as such.  The reader has only to ask himself what he would have done, if he had been a security officer of the Government, and such information had come into his hands, or even if he had been told no more than the address for cables to the Soviet apparatuses, which is the meaning of one of the entries, or the fact that a Communist was working on the bombsight.

Contrary to the impression left by Tzouliadis, Berle took the revelations of Chambers every bit as seriously as he should have.  So what happened?  Did that unnamed secretary of Roosevelt sit on the information?  That’s not possible because Tzouliadis has made that part up from whole cloth.  Chambers makes no mention of any intermediary between Berle and the president.  Let’s pick up his story at the bottom of page 470:

The same night that I talked with Berle, I returned to New York.  For the second time in two years, I had laid my life in ruins.  I had only to wait for what would happen next.  One of the things most likely to happen, it seemed to me, was my arrest.

But nothing at all happened.  Weeks passed into months.  I went about my work at Time.  Then, one day, I am no longer certain just when, I met a dejected Levine.  Adolf Berle, said Levine, had taken my information to the President at once.  The President had laughed.  When Berle was insistent, he had been told in words which it is necessary to paraphrase, to “go jump in a lake.”

The thought crossed my mind that the story might have been put out to conceal the Government’s real purpose.  Surveillance and investigation were necessary.  It might be some time before the Government was prepared to act.  Meanwhile, it would watch and check.

I tried to believe that that was the fact.  But I knew that it could not be, for if the Government were checking, it could not fail also to check with me.

What Tzouliadis has done, besides lying about Berle passing the information on to FDR’s secretary instead of FDR himself is that he has collapsed what Adolfe Berle said in his cover-up testimony of August 30, 1948, into how he reacted on the night of September 2, 1939, and immediately afterward.  Why would he do such a thing?  His brief biography in the front of the book might provide the answer:

Tim Tzouliadis is a writer and filmmaker.  Born in 1968, he read philosophy, politics, and economics at Oxford and went on to pursue a career in television current affairs and documentary making for the BBC Channel 4, NBC, and the National Geographic Channel. (links added by me, obviously)

Unfortunately, in this day and age, working for such organizations is not a very reputable way to make a living.  The fact that the paperback edition has 33 favorable blurbs for the book from across the mainstream political spectrum is also not the best of signs.  One has to wonder if the book would have been so well received had Tzuoliadis told the full truth about the complicity of Roosevelt in the Soviet horror.  One can be almost certain that no mainstream reviewer has faulted him for what I have pointed out here, a dishonest use of a source that I can only characterize as journalistic and scholarly malpractice.

The Publisher’s Spin?

There is another possibility.  Maybe the publisher—Penguin Books (2008) in this case—changed his original manuscript to cover up for Roosevelt.  This is a possibility that I would not have thought of had I not followed up on a suggestion that Tzouliadis makes in his acknowledgments at the end:

All memoirs from the survivors of the camps are invaluable, but I would like to acknowledge two books in particular as primary sources for this one:  Thomas Sgovio’s Dear America and Victor Herman’s Coming Out of the Ice.  I would encourage all interested readers to search out and read these authors’ firsthand accounts.

I tracked down a reprint of the Herman book.  It is a 1983 paperback version by Freedom Press, Ltd., of Oklahoma City, OK.  The original publisher in 1979 was Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.  My version has a typewritten message stuck to the inside cover.  It is a jaw dropper.  I have added emphasis where deemed appropriate, and I would remind the readers that Victor Herman came from an American Jewish family.

This book is a special edition of COMING OUT OF THE ICE, prepared especially for Dr. D. James Kennedy and Coral Ridge Ministries.

Expletives have been deleted and replaced with an asterisk (*).  It should be noted, however, that the expletives were not those of the author.  They were inserted by the publisher.

Certain portions of this book are somewhat sensual in nature which we and others may find objectionable.  But, like the affair of David and Bathsheba, these passages need to be considered in the light and context of the entire message.

Please also note that Victor Herman’s original manuscript contained an account of his conversion to Christ.  This portion was deleted by the publisher.

Out of millions of Americans, God raised up this one man to live through this experience and share with us the story of his imprisonment and torture in the Soviet Union.

CORAL RIDGE MINISTRIES

David Martin

February 26, 2013

__________________________________________________________________________________

*”By the winter of 1931, sufficient numbers had arrived for a weekly English-language newspaper to be established in Moscow with the aim of reporting the ‘truth about what the Soviet government is trying to do.’  Staffed by young American journalists keen to salute the progress of the Five-Year Plan, The Moscow News was the ramshackle brainchild of its editor, Anna Louise Strong, a redoubtable progressive and personal friend of Eleanor Roosevelt.  On her trips back to the United States, Strong was an occasional guest of the White House, where the ever-curious president would pepper her with questions about Soviet Russia.  How, Roosevelt asked, could Stalin afford to buy all those factories?” (p. 13)

Who Killed James Forrestal? Part 4

Who Killed James Forrestal?  Part 4

Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 5, Part 6, Short Version, Synopsis, Letters to Historians, James Carroll’s Dishonesty, Patrick J. Hurley Meets David Ben-Gurion

Britain’s Forrestal

Imagine this scenario:  A powerful, radical Middle East movement, with a record of terrorism, decides to embark upon a program of bombings and assassinations of high government officials in the home territory of a major Western power.  The plot is to be carried out by five teams infiltrated into the Western country, and the primary target is the leading government minister opposing the actions and the aspirations of the radical group.

As luck would have it, the secret service of the Western country discovers the plot, and the terrorist movement has to fall back to a plan of sending 20 letter bombs to various government officers, including the aforementioned leading opponent of the terrorists as well as his predecessor.  The letter bombs also fail to reach their intended targets.

What would the Western power do in response to these bombing and assassination attempts?  You would be right if you answered that it would keep quiet about them for sixty years.  In the meantime, it would be a party to giving the terrorist group everything it hoped to get, and more, from the failed assassination.  It would even help the terrorists to develop their own nuclear weapons.

The scenario is not fanciful.  According to recently declassified British intelligence documents, it actually happened.  The targeted official was British Foreign Minister, Ernest Bevin.  His targeted predecessor was Anthony Eden.  The terrorists were the Zionist gang Irgun Tsvai Leumi, or Irgun, for short.  Its leader at the time of the assassination attempts in 1946, before the state of Israel had been carved out of Palestine, was Menachem Begin.  Begin would later become Israel’s Prime Minister and would be awarded the Nobel Prize for peace in 1978 for the agreement that he would reach with Egypt’s president, Anwar Sadat, known as the Camp David peace accords.

The intelligence documents were declassified in early March 2006.  The assassination attempts occurred in 1946 and 1947; the supplying of plutonium to Israel by Britain first occurred in 1966, but it had supplied heavy water, another nuclear weapons ingredient, in the 1950s.  The Times of London reported on the failed assassinations on March 5, and the BBC reported on the illegal nuclear assistance on March 9.

These shocking, extraordinarily important new revelations shed a great deal of light upon what we have virtually proved to be the assassination of America’s first Secretary of Defense, James Forrestal.   The parallels in the government careers of Bevin and Forrestal are great.  Although Bevin came up through the labor movement and was a member of the opposition Labor Party, Tory Prime Minister Winston Churchill had made him his Labor Secretary during World War II.  In that capacity, he played a key role in mobilizing Britain’s economy for the war.

Forrestal was a Wall Street investment banker whom Franklin Roosevelt made Under Secretary of the Navy.  A tireless worker, Forrestal was the key liaison person between the Roosevelt administration and the private industrial sector, and he was largely responsible for the transformation of the economy from production for consumption to production for the war effort.

When the Labor Party won a majority after the war, Bevin was appointed foreign secretary in the new government.  Forrestal had been elevated to Secretary of the Navy when the previous Secretary died near the end of the war.  He continued in that position when Harry Truman replaced Roosevelt upon the latter’s death in 1945.  When the National Security Act of 1947 consolidated the armed services, Truman made Forrestal the first Secretary of Defense.

Though both men were very popular and both were very successful in their government careers, each suffered major setbacks over the issue of the creation of a state for Jews in the territory of Palestine.  The Labor Party, heavily influenced by its Jewish members, when out of power during the war actually favored expulsion of the Arab population of Palestine to clear the way for a Jewish state.  As Foreign Minister of the new Labor government, Bevin, repulsed by Zionist terrorist actions directed at British military and government officials in Palestine, steered the British government toward a position more heavily favoring the rights of the Arab residents of the region.  In doing so, he made himself British public enemy number one of the Zionists.

As we have previously noted, Forrestal was enemy number one of the Zionists in the United States.  Near the end of part one of “Who Killed James Forrestal?” we told of the December 4, 1948, letter to The New York Times signed by a number of prominent Jews, including Albert Einstein, warning the American public about Menachem Begin and his terrorist organization upon Begin’s visit to the United States.  At the conclusion of the letter recounting the Begin organization’s murderous activities, we asked this question, “Would men like Menachem Begin and his followers have hesitated at assassinating the most popular, outspoken, and powerful critic of the nascent state of Israel in the United States if given the opportunity?”

How apt that question was has now been made manifest.  We now know that they had no compunction against assassinating Forrestal’s precursor and counterpart in Britain.  The main difference seems to be that the powers that be in Britain did not give them the opportunity, while those in the United States did.  Maybe that is a measure of the relative power of the Zionists in the two countries.  The federal government and the organs for molding public opinion were penetrated at the very top in the United States by the most extreme and violent elements of the Zionist movement, and they continue to be so, or, at least, effectively so.

That is not to say that the Zionists are exactly weak in Britain.  Official Britain hardly reacted with appropriate fury at the outrage.  Rather, the country sat on information about the attempted assassination, and soon fell into line behind the United States in its pro-Israel policies.  It even got a bit ahead of the United States over the nuclear weapons issue, as we have noted, and also during the Eisenhower administration when the British, the French, and the Israelis attempted a power grab known as the Suez Crisis.

Even now, the release of the news of the outrage of the attempted Bevin assassination has been extremely timid.  A search of the Internet some three weeks after the initial revelation shows only one other major newspaper in the world picking up on the story, the Sydney Morning Herald in Australia.  It has a slightly different version of events, though, claiming that it was the Stern gang, rather than Irgun, that planned the assassinations, though both stories are ostensibly based upon the same release of British intelligence documents.  The Times, itself, has barely squeaked out the news.  When I telephoned the newspaper, attempting to locate the reporter of the story, Peter Day, the person I talked to was unable to find Day in their directory, nor could he find the article in the hard copy of the March 5 Times.  The online version of the story lists no page number.  The folks at The Times foreign desk, with whom I was then connected, were familiar with the story, which the first contact person was not, but they did not know Mr. Day.  They were able to confirm only that he was not one of their own regular reporters.  Perhaps, as has been asserted in the case of the author of the only critical book on James Forrestal’s death, Cornell Simpson, the name is a pseudonym.*   The topic, after all, is a hot one, and it may not be good for one’s journalism career to be associated with it.  Maybe the publishers of The Times have had some second thoughts about what they have done in letting this news out.  As of April 5, the article could no longer be found on their web site.

The veritable radioactivity of the subject would explain, as well, the complete blackout of this news by the mainstream news organs of the United States.  The news suppression is of a piece with the complete failure of the U.S. press to report that the long secret report on the investigation of Forrestal’s death was finally made public in 2004.  The Seeley Mudd Manuscript Library of Princeton University even sent out a press release,  and the online History News Network of George Mason University made mention of it, but the mainstream press made certain that this very important news, like the news of the attempted assassination of Britain’s foreign minister, never reached the attention of the general public.

That the American press should vigorously suppress this news should hardly surprise us.  As we have seen throughout this series, they were a very active party in selling the story that the far-sighted statesman, Forrestal, the man who saw better than anyone where America’s Middle East policy was leading it, ended his own life.  The last thing such a press would want would be for the public to learn of the existence of powerful evidence that undermines the suicide thesis, and worse, points the finger of blame at Zionist terrorists.

The complete suppression of the news of Irgun’s assassination attempt on Foreign Minister Bevin for all these many years is almost as important as the attempt, itself.  Imagine how much stronger that 1948 New York Times warning letter by Albert Einstein and a number of other prominent American Jews about the murderous proclivities of Menachem Begin and company could have been had they known about Begin’s previous attempt on the life of Bevin.  In all likelihood, no such warning letter would have even been needed.  If Begin was known to have attempted to kill Britain’s most powerful opponent, when Britain was the power over Palestine, he and his organization would certainly have been regarded as a similar threat to Forrestal when the United States had become the main controller of Palestine’s destiny.

Who Knew? 

Although it is apparent that those signers of the warning letter to The New York Times had no knowledge of the previous attempt on the life of Ernest Bevin, one must wonder who, outside the ranks of British intelligence, did know about it.  In particular, we have to wonder if one so connected to the higher reaches of power in the world as Bernard Baruch, when he warned his friend Forrestal in February of 1949 that he had already become too identified with opposition to Israel for his own good, knew more than he was telling about the danger that Forrestal faced.  And when Forrestal complained about being followed and bugged, did he know that the Irgun crowd had come pretty close to snuffing out the life of his British counterpart?  Could such knowledge have been behind his resistance to commitment to Bethesda Naval Hospital and his reported claim that he would never leave the hospital alive when he attempted to get out of the car taking him there?  Might that have been the revelation from Secretary of the Air Force Symington on the day of Forrestal’s departure from office that drove him into his sudden funk?

And after Forrestal’s death, could there have been any doubt in the minds of those aware of the attempt on Bevin who had ultimately been behind the later crime?  Might these have included those powerful friends such as Ferdinand Eberstadt and Robert Lovett, who had failed to visit him in the hospital and then, when the results of the investigation of his death were never made public, failed to register any public complaint?  At the very least, those in the know included the contemporary and future leaders of Great Britain, and the knowledge that the leaders of the United States government had conspired with Zionist thugs in the assassination of the one courageous voice of reason in their midst would very likely have animated their own future Middle East policy.

Zionists and Communists

The Times article on the Bevin assassination attempt has one particularly intriguing passage, which might fill in some more pieces of the puzzle.  That is that Britain’s foreign intelligence service, MI6, believed that Menachem Begin was backed in his terrorist activities by the Soviet Union.  One might wonder whether their belief was founded on solid evidence and, if so, how far this backing went.  Did they just generally encourage him in his murderous endeavors, or were they actually calling the shots?  If MI6 was right, then those like author Cornell Simpson who argue that the Communists killed Forrestal and those who suggest that the Zionists did it are probably both right.

The Soviets, as Simpson explains quite well, certainly had ample reasons to want to be rid of Forrestal.  Not only was he the leading anti-Zionist in the Truman administration, but he was also the leading anti-Communist.  Interestingly enough, the same can probably be said for Ernest Bevin in Britain’s Clement Atlee administration.  Bevin’s anti-Communism carried a particular potency because he came from a British labor movement that was heavily influenced and infiltrated by the Communists.

In many instances in the United States in the 1930s and 1940s pro-Communism and pro-Zionism could be found in the same individuals.  As we noted in the first installment of this series, that appears to have been the case for the very powerful and secretive adviser to both Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, David Niles.**

With these new revelations, Niles is due even greater scrutiny than before as the most likely coordinator of the Forrestal assassination.  Some measure of Niles’s power can be gained from the following passage in the oral history interview of Truman aide, Stephen J. Spingarn:

David Niles worked with nobody. He was sui generis. David Niles was the oldest senior staff man in point of service. He came over from the Roosevelt administration. His titular jurisdiction was minorities. But, actually, his main job, I suppose you could say, was Jewish problems on the one hand, and the intricate politics of New York City, those two things; maintaining liaison with Dave Dubinsky and Alex Rose and the Liberal Party there, you know, and keeping the White House abreast of that. But David Niles seemed to me to pay very little attention to Negro and other minority matters, so it seemed to me. Philleo Nash was his assistant and Philleo paid a lot of attention, but it didn’t seem to me that Dave paid much. And there was another interesting thing, Dave Niles did not attend the President’s morning staff conferences — ever.

[JERRY] HESS: Can you tell me about those morning staff conferences?

SPINGARN: Yes. The President held a morning staff conference every morning at 9:30 — I think it was 9:30. It was indispensable to a staff man — a senior staff man — to attend that thing, but it was a very delicate matter as to who attended. http://www.trumanlibrary.org/oralhist/sping1.htm

Elsewhere Spingarn makes it clear that Niles was very much a part of Truman’s inner circle, so it would have been natural for him to attend these daily meetings.  The impression one gets is that he was so powerful, and confident of his power, that the staff meetings were actually beneath him.  He didn’t have to go in order to stay on top of the issues that really mattered, and to continue to have the ear of the putative boss, President Truman.  Or perhaps he realized that it wasn’t all that important to have influence with Truman, when he had influence with the people who really mattered.

At this point, the observations of the son-in-law of President Franklin Roosevelt, Colonel Curtis Dall, as relayed by Henry Makow, are apropos:

Dall maintained a family loyalty but could not avoid several disheartening conclusions in his book [FDR: My Exploited Father-in-Law, 1970].  He portrays the legendary president not as a leader but as a “quarterback” with little actual power.  The “coaching staff” consisted of a coterie of handlers (“advisers” like Louis Howe, Bernard Baruch and Harry Hopkins) who represented the international banking cartel.  For Dall, FDR ultimately was a traitor manipulated by “World Money” and motivated by conceit and personal ambition.

If such a commanding politician as Franklin Roosevelt, a man widely believed to be the most powerful president the United States has ever had, was really little more than a quarterback executing plays called in by the coaching staff, what would that have made the former haberdasher and protégé of the Kansas City machine of boss Tom Pendergast?  Certainly it was not Truman’s idea to have James Forrestal assassinated and very little was required of him for the assassination to be carried out and covered up.  In matters such as this, the President would not have been calling the shots.

David Martin

April 9, 2006

*As I reported in March of 2005, former John Birch Society official, J. Bruce Campbell asserts that the name “Cornell Simpson” is a pseudonym.  I had suspected as much because this “Simpson” is clearly a polished professional writer, but the name, to my knowledge, appears nowhere in any political writing except as the author of The Death of James Forrestal.  Recently, an acquaintance in Washington with Birch Society contacts confirmed that “Cornell Simpson” was the name assumed in this instance by Medford Evans, the father of noted conservative, M. Stanton Evans.  The elder Evans also wrote under his own name an even more obscure book, also published by the Birch Society’s Western Islands Press, The Assassination of Joe McCarthy.

(April 22, 2011 update:  Now the conclusion that “Cornell Simpson” was actually Medford Evans has been called into question by Evans, the younger.  Stay tuned.)

**The following passage from Alfred Lilienthal’s 1953 classic What Price Israel? is very revealing of the person described by Alfred Steinberg in the December 24, 1949, Saturday Evening Post as “Truman’s Mystery Man”:

There were many ways in which Niles served the State of Israel after partition, too.  Early in 1950, when the United States first awoke to the Soviet danger in the Middle East, our Government requested the various Arab countries for information regarding troops, equipment, and other confidential military data.  These statistics were necessary in order to plan possible assistance under the Mutual Security Act.  The Arab nations were naturally assured that the figures, supplied for the Chief of Staff, would be kept secret.

Late that year, military representatives of the Middle East countries and of Israel were meeting with General [W.E.] Riley, who headed the United Nations Truce Organization.  Trouble had broken out over the Huleh Marshes, and charges and countercharges of military aggression were exchanged between Israel and the Arab countries.  The Israeli military representative claimed that the Syrian troops were employed in a certain manner, and General Riley remarked: “That’s not possible.  The Syrians have no such number of troops.”  Whereupon the Israeli representative said, “You are wrong.  Here are the actual figures of Syrian military strength and the description of troops.”  And he produced the confidential figures, top-secret Pentagon information.  General Riley himself had not been shown the new figures given by the Syrian War Ministry to his superiors.

When the question of Egyptian military strength was raised, a similar security leak appeared.  It was obvious that top-secret figures had been passed on to the Israeli Government.  Both the Central Intelligence Agency and the Army G-2 investigated the security breach but discovered only that these figures had been made available to the White House.  How and through whom they leaked out of the White House remained forever obscure.  However, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Omar Bradley, reportedly went to the President and told the Chief Executive that he would have to choose between him (Bradley) and Niles.  Not too long after this reported intervention, David Niles resigned from his post as Executive Assistant to the President and went on a visit to Israel. (Pp. 72-73)

Addendum 1

While doing some additional research on the September 17, 1948, assassination in the new state of Israel of United Nations mediator, Count Folke Bernadotte of Sweden, by the Stern Gang (Lehi), I ran across this intriguing entry on the Bernadotte discussion page on Wikipedia:

Contrary to what you say, Lehi being a terror organization is very much disputed. Most (or at least many) Israelis (myself included) do not consider Lehi to be a terrorist organization. Lehi never targeted innocent civillians [sic] in attempt to terrorize them. All of Lehi’s attacks were against military or government targets (including high-ranked officials such as Bernadotte). This is very different than what “proper” terrorist organizations do – attacking random civilian targets such as busses or airplanes.

Avraham Stern’s memorial day is attended every year by Israeli political and government officials. Given Israel’s effort to gain international support for its ongoing war against terrorism of all kinds, you wouldn’t expect Israeli leaders to associate themselves with the memory of someone who led a terrorist organization. Indeed they don’t – like me they believe that Lehi, while sometimes using extreme measures, was not a terrorist organization.

I’m not really trying to convince you that Lehi was not a terrorist organization (you are entitled to your own opinion on that) – only that the issue is disputed. Since it is indeed so, the proper place to discuss it is on the Lehi page – rather than have is stated on every page which mentions Lehi.

This is a perfect example of the attitude toward the attempted Bevin assassination described in the aforementioned London Times article:

Lord Bethell, author of The Palestine Triangle and an expert on Soviet intelligence, said Bevin was detested by Zionist groups. He added, however: “Zionists would be very angry if you compared these people with terrorists now. You have to remember that Irgun were the grandfathers of today’s ruling politicians.

“They would say they were at war with the British and behaved well, fighting under Marquess of Queensberry rules. They would say that they didn’t target civilians.”

James Forrestal, as the leading opponent in the United States government of the new state of Israel would have been regarded as anything but an “innocent civilian,” and that would have made this great American patriot fair game for assassination in Zionist eyes.  Hardly anything could be more incriminating of them than their own words…unless it is their known deeds.

David Martin

April 13, 2006

Addendum 2

On June 13, 2006, Reuters reported that according to the Lebanese Army, a Lebanese man by the name of Mahmoud Rafeh had confessed to a series of assassinations of senior Hezbollah and Palestinian militants over a seven year period on behalf of Israeli intelligence.  If true, it would demonstrate that Israel has continued to use assassination as a weapon for what it considers to be the good of the state.  Any “senior official” in the world whom Israel should regard as a danger to its interests surely must be made uneasy at this latest development.

David Martin

June 14, 2006

Addendum 3

The beat goes on.  This is from the Lebanon Daily Star:

Beirut steps up search for head of terror group tied to Mossad

BEIRUT: Lebanese security forces redoubled their efforts Monday to find Palestinian Hussein Khattab after Mahmoud Rafeh, the reported leader of a recently uncovered Mossad-linked terrorist network, confessed that Khattab was the actual leader of the group.

Judicial sources told The Daily Star that Rafeh admitted receiving a list of names of Lebanese and Palestinian political figures to be assassinated on orders from Israel.

The sources said Rafeh told the authorities Khattab also received the list, and was “leading” assassination operations…

David Martin

June 20, 2006

Addendum 4

Just last year I discovered that the Jewish Stern Gang actually made an assassination attempt against President Harry Truman in 1947.  It seems not to have been reported by any news media at the time and biographers of Truman and other historians have kept the matter a secret even though it was reported in a book by the former head of the White House mail room in 1949 and again by Margaret Truman in her book about her father in 1972.  You can read about that episode in “’Jews’ Tried to Kill Truman in 1947.”

David Martin

February 21, 2013

Like A Violin

They are playing you like a violin. It must be embarrassing to you, because I know it is to me as I witness it.

Another of Digger’s Ditties, “Like A Violin”

http://diggerfortruth.wordpress.com/2012/06/24/like-a-violin/

If you are a white nationalist ~ it’s exactly what the elite Jews want.

If you prattle on all the time about the Illuminati and global elite ~ it’s exactly what the elite Jews want.

If you attend demos with the intent to create violence ~ it’s exactly what the elite Jews want.

If you watch pornography ~ it’s exactly what the elite Jews want.

If you have no spiritual connection ~ it’s exactly what the elite Jews want.

If you induce stimulants to deal with the stress of life ~ it’s exactly what the elite Jews want.

If you choose the medical mafia for every single ailment as opposed to using natural traditional remedies ~ it’s exactly what the elite Jews want.

If you hang about on forums bickering and infighting over trivial matters and do not support those that are pulling their weight ~ it’s exactly what the elite Jews want.

If you hate pinkie ~ it’s exactly what the elite Jews want.

If you hate the Jews ~ it’s exactly what the elite Jews want.

If all you do is browse the events of this agenda and refuse to do your bit ~ it’s exactly what the elite Jews want.

If you support the matrix in a career where you keep others in line to be productive little sheep ~ it’s exactly what the elite Jews want.

Lets stop them playing us like a violin

Video and Narration by BuelahMan

http://buelahman.wordpress.com/

Would You Perform Oral Sex On A Donkey, For Israel?

Our US Senators would and do… frequently.

A perfect follow up to my video post yesterday.

Thanks to DCDave for sharing (altho, I come away thinking that the producers of SNL are just rubbing out stupid faces in the truth and laughing at us, instead of vice versa).

And The Answer Is: Every One Of Them

My video called them all parasites. But it is far worse than that.

Look how much groveling, lying, and down right self-castration Chuck Hagel did in front of the Senate and cameras for all America to see (as if they cared). And this is supposed to be a “hero”… a decorated soldier.

He is a disgrace. He should ask Hillary for her balls.

The Definition of a Parasite

Adapted from Greg’s work at the Goon Squad.

Oh israel

Another of Digger’s Ditties. As I explained to him, the words are powerful enough that added graphic pictures of dead Palestinian children and israel’s attacks against Gaza aren’t needed. (“i”srael is purposefully left non-capitalized to push home the idea that they have no right to exist in the first place).

Another Digger’s Ditty. Original ditty found here:

http://diggerfortruth.wordpress.com/2012/06/30/oh-israel/

Text:

Oh israel

If you only knew what disdain the world has for you.
If you only knew the palpable anger directed towards you.
If you only knew the global lust for your demise.
If you only knew.

Oh israel

How could you be so deluded?
How low you have sunk in humanity.
The levels of insanity you project.
How could you be so demonic?
How could you be so unconscious?

Oh israel

Are you aware you maim, torture, kill and seek unjust revenge?
Are you aware you degrade, sin, persecute and destroy?
Are you aware of the suffering, pain, fear, cruelty, distress you induce?

Oh israel

For your crimes, there will be payback.
For your sins, justice will be met.
For your atrocities, you will get your comeuppance.
For your your wrongful actions, karma will be dealt.
For your carnage, you have set a curse upon yourself.

For the little ones, the elderly, the weak, the European sex slaves, the disabled, the animals, the innocent, the land, the culture, the history, your universal criminality.

You will sorely pay.

Oh israel

Oh shut up israel, we’re all sick of your hubris.
Oh shut up israel, we’re all tired of your arrogance.
Oh shut up israel, we’re all fatigued with your haughtiness.
Oh shut up israel, we’re all exhausted with your smugness.

Oh israel

You, the only criminal state in the Middle East — you have no future.
You, the modern-day Babylon — you have no future.
You, the parasitic existence — you have no future.
You, Lucifer’s illegal squat — you have no future.

Oh israel

When are you going to wake up?
When are you going to join the human race?
When are you going to show compassion?
When are you going to drop your racist, supremacist ideology?
When are you going to become conscious?
When are you going to own up to your precious fake identity?

Oh israel

You have no right to freeload your existence.
You have no right to persecute the Palestinians.
You have no right to expand your evil empire.
You have no right to perpetrate criminal global activities.

Oh israel

You have no right to exist.