Subscriptions, Current Issue & Back Issues

Shop Website | Annual Subscriptions | Back Issues |

Tag: Israel

MUST READ…to the end!! The BIGGER picture creates a better understanding of WHY…clearing the way for PEACE!

From Sweet Liberty:

AMAZING history not widely known! Keep in mind this is being told by a Jewish defector in 1961, in DC
A Jewish Defector Warns America:
Benjamin Freedman Speaks on Zionism
This should do it! For the second and last time we are updating the transcript of Ben Freedman’s 1961 speech at the Willard Hotel.
The piece has been posted for over a year now. A few months ago, a person challenged the authenticity of the transcript, because his version stated that Samuel Untermeyer had used the Columbia Broadcasting studios when he declared a worldwide boycott against Germany — in his words: ‘A Holy War’. We could not debate the issue, having never heard the actual recording of Mr. Freedman’s speech. Today, I discovered that we have a cassette tape of the speech, so I listened to the entire tape while reading the posted transcript. According to Mr. Freedman the radio station used by Untermeyer was, in fact, ABC.
There had also been some simple rearrangements of sentence structure in that transcript, and a line or two omitted in places. For the sake of authenticity, the corrections have been made. The transcript is now word for word from Mr. Freedman’s speech.
The original transcriber had ‘tidied up’ Mr. Freedman’s responses during the Q&A period, omitting superfluous and repetitious words. For the most part, we’ve left the tidied up version as it was, since it didn’t change the response, and actually helped to clarify Mr. Freedman’s answers. If the names were changed, he could have been making that speech yesterday. — Jackie — April 8, 2003
Here is our first update notice, about a year ago:
The original posting of this speech was taken from an existing web site. In going through our files we recently discovered a full transcript of the speech and realized the original posting was not complete. Here is the transcript from our files, with additional text at the beginning – some within the body of the speech – and a question and answer section at the end that had not been included in the original posting. There will be further postings from other writers and quotes that will confirm much of what Mr. Freedman said here. Many of you will see the truth of it, as it stands. — Jackie —
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Truth will stand on its own merit

A Jewish Defector Warns America:

Benjamin Freedman Speaks
by Benjamin H. Freedman
Introductory Note — Benjamin H. Freedman was one of the most intriguing and amazing individuals of the 20th century.
Mr. Freedman, born in 1890, was a successful Jewish businessman of New York City who was at one time the principal owner of the Woodbury Soap Company. He broke with organized Jewry after the Judeo-Communist victory of 1945, and spent the remainder of his life and the great preponderance of his considerable fortune, at least 2.5 million dollars, exposing the Jewish tyranny which has enveloped the United States.
Mr. Freedman knew what he was talking about because he had been an insider at the highest levels of Jewish organizations and Jewish machinations to gain power over our nation. Mr. Freedman was personally acquainted with Bernard Baruch, Samuel Untermyer, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Joseph Kennedy, and John F. Kennedy, and many more movers and shakers of our times.

https://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/untermeyer.htm
This speech was given before a patriotic audience in 1961 at the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C., on behalf of Conde McGinley’s patriotic newspaper of that time, Common Sense. Though in some minor ways this wide-ranging and extemporaneous speech has become dated, Mr. Freedman’s essential message to us — his warning to the West — is more urgent than ever before. — K.A.S. —
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A CHRISTIAN VIEW OF THE HOLOCAUST
Ladies and gentlemen, you are about to hear a very frightening speech. This speech is an explanation of the plans now being laid to throw the United States into a third world war. It was made a short time ago before a large group in the Congressional `Room of the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C. Both the speech and the question and answer period later so electrified the audience that a group of patriots has transferred it to two long-playing records which you may buy to play for friends, clubs, and your church group in your community. The speaker is Mr. Benjamin Freedman, noted authority on Zionism and all of its schemes. Mr. Freedman is a former Jew, and I mean a FORMER Jew. He has fought the Communist world conspiracy tooth and nail, and stands today as a leading American patriot. We now take you to the speaker’s platform to present Benjamin Freedman.
(applause)
[Freedman’s speech]
What I intend to tell you tonight is something that you have never been able to learn from any other source, and what I tell you now concerns not only you, but your children and the survival of this country and Christianity. I’m not here just to dish up a few facts to send up your blood pressure, but I’m here to tell you things that will help you preserve what you consider the most sacred things in the world: the liberty, and the freedom, and the right to live as Christians, where you have a little dignity, and a little right to pursue the things that your conscience tells you are the right things, as Christians.
Now, first of all, I’d like to tell you that on August 25th 1960 — that was shortly before elections — Senator Kennedy, who is now the President of the United States, went to New York, and delivered an address to the Zionist Organization of America. In that address, to reduce it to its briefest form, he stated that he would use the armed forces of the United States to preserve the existence of the regime set up in Palestine by the Zionists who are now in occupation of that area.
In other words, Christian boys are going to be yanked out of their homes, away from their families, and sent abroad to fight in Palestine against the Christian and Moslem Arabs who merely want to return to their homes. And these Christian boys are going to be asked to shoot to kill these innocent [Arab Palestinians] people who only want to follow out fifteen resolutions passed by the United Nations in the last twelve years calling upon the Zionists to allow these people to return to their homes.
Now, when United States troops appear in the Middle East to fight with the Zionists as their allies to prevent the return of these people who were evicted from their homes in the 1948 armed insurrection by the Zionists who were transplanted there from Eastern Europe… when that happens, the United States will trigger World War III.
You say, when will that take place? The answer is, as soon as the difficulty between France and Algeria has been settled, that will take place. As soon as France and Algeria have been settled, that will take place. As soon as France and Algeria have settled their difficulty, and the Arab world, or the Moslem world, has no more war on their hands with France, they are going to move these people back into their homes, and when they do that and President kennedy sends your sons to fight over there to help the crooks hold on to what they stole from innocent men, women and children, we will trigger World War III; and when that starts you can be sure we cannot emerge from that war a victor. We are going to lose that war because there is not one nation in the world that will let one of their sons fight with us for such a cause.
I know and speak to these ambassadors in Washington and the United Nations — and of the ninety-nine nations there, I’ve consulted with maybe seventy of them — and when we go to war in Palestine to help the thieves retain possession of what they have stolen from these innocent people we’re not going to have a man there to fight with us as our ally.
And who will these people have supporting them, you ask. Well, four days after President Kennedy — or he was then Senator Kennedy — made that statement on August 28, 1960, the Arab nations called a meeting in Lebanon and there they decided to resurrect, or reactivate, the government of Palestine, which has been dormant more or less, since the 1948 armed insurrection by the Zionists.
Not only that… they ordered the creation of the Palestine Army, and they are now drilling maybe a half a million soldiers in that area of the world to lead these people back to their homeland. With them, they have as their allies all the nations of what is termed the Bandung Conference Group. That includes the Soviet Union and every Soviet Union satellite. It includes Red China; it includes every independent country in Asia and Africa; or eighty percent of the world’s total population. Eighty percent of the world’s population. Four out of five human beings on the face of the earth will be our enemies at war with us. And not alone are they four out of five human beings now on the face of this earth, but they are the non-Christian population of the world and they are the non-Caucasians… the non-white nations of the world, and that’s what we face.
And what is the reason? The reason is that here in the United States, the Zionists and their co-religionists have complete control of our government. For many reasons too many and too complex to go into here at this — time I’ll be glad to answer questions, however, to support that statement — the Zionists and their co-religionists rule this United States as though they were the absolute monarchs of this country.
Now, you say, ‘well, that’s a very broad statement to make’, but let me show what happened while you were — I don’t want to wear that out — let me show what happened while WE were all asleep. I’m including myself with you. We were all asleep. What happened?
World War I broke out in the summer of 1914. Nineteen-hundred and fourteen was the year in which World War One broke out. There are few people here my age who remember that. Now that war was waged on one side by Great Britain, France, and Russia; and on the other side by Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey. What happened?
Within two years Germany had won that war: not alone won it nominally, but won it actually. The German submarines, which were a surprise to the world, had swept all the convoys from the Atlantic Ocean, and Great Britain stood there without ammunition for her soldiers, stood there with one week’s food supply facing her — and after that, starvation.
At that time, the French army had mutinied. They lost 600,000 of the flower of French youth in the defense of Verdun on the Somme. The Russian army was defecting. They were picking up their toys and going home, they didn’t want to play war anymore, they didn’t like the Czar. And the Italian army had collapsed.
Now Germany — not a shot had been fired on the German soil. Not an enemy soldier had crossed the border into Germany. And yet, here was Germany offering England peace terms. They offered England a negotiated peace on what the lawyers call a status quo ante basis. That means: “Let’s call the war off, and let everything be as it was before the war started.”
Well, England, in the summer of 1916 was considering that. Seriously! They had no choice. It was either accepting this negotiated peace that Germany was magnanimously offering them, or going on with the war and being totally defeated.
While that was going on, the Zionists in Germany, who represented the Zionists from Eastern Europe, went to the British War Cabinet and — I am going to be brief because this is a long story, but I have all the documents to prove any statement that I make if anyone here is curious, or doesn’t believe what I’m saying is at all possible — the Zionists in London went to the British war cabinet and they said: “Look here. You can yet win this war. You don’t have to give up. You don’t have to accept the negotiated peace offered to you now by Germany. You can win this war if the United States will come in as your ally.”
The United States was not in the war at that time. We were fresh; we were young; we were rich; we were powerful. They [Zionists] told England: “We will guarantee to bring the United States into the war as your ally, to fight with you on your side, if you will promise us Palestine after you win the war.”
In other words, they made this deal: “We will get the United States into this war as your ally. The price you must pay us is Palestine after you have won the war and defeated Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey.”
Now England had as much right to promise Palestine to anybody, as the United States would have to promise Japan to Ireland for any reason whatsoever. It’s absolutely absurd that Great Britain — that never had any connection or any interest or any right in what is known as Palestine — should offer it as coin of the realm to pay the Zionists for bringing the United States into the war.
However, they made that promise, in October of 1916. October, nineteen hundred and sixteen. And shortly after that — I don’t know how many here remember it — the United States, which was almost totally pro-German — totally pro-German — because the newspapers here were controlled by Jews, the bankers were Jews, all the media of mass communications in this country were controlled by Jews, and they were pro-German because their people, in the majority of cases came from Germany, and they wanted to see Germany lick the Czar.
The Jews didn’t like the Czar, and they didn’t want Russia to win this war. So the German bankers — the German-Jews — Kuhn Loeb and the other big banking firms in the United States refused to finance France or England to the extent of one dollar. They stood aside and they said: “As long as France and England are tied up with Russia, not one cent!” But they poured money into Germany, they fought with Germany against Russia, trying to lick the Czarist regime.
Now those same Jews, when they saw the possibility of getting Palestine, they went to England and they made this deal. At that time, everything changed, like the traffic light that changes from red to green. Where the newspapers had been all pro-German, where they’d been telling the people of the difficulties that Germany was having fighting Great Britain commercially and in other respects, all of a sudden the Germans were no good. They were villains. They were Huns. They were shooting Red Cross nurses. They were cutting off babies’ hands. And they were no good.
Well, shortly after that, Mr. Wilson declared war on Germany.
The Zionists in London sent these cables to the United States, to Justice Brandeis: “Go to work on President Wilson. We’re getting from England what we want. Now you go to work, and you go to work on President Wilson and get the United States into the war.” And that did happen. That’s how the United States got into the war. We had no more interest in it; we had no more right to be in it than we have to be on the moon tonight instead of in this room.
Now the war — World War One — in which the United States participated had absolutely no reason to be our war. We went in there — we were railroaded into it — if I can be vulgar, we were suckered into — that war merely so that the Zionists of the world could obtain Palestine. Now, that is something that the people in the United States have never been told. They never knew why we went into World War One. Now, what happened?
After we got into the war, the Zionists went to Great Britain and they said: “Well, we performed our part of the agreement. Let’s have something in writing that shows that you are going to keep your bargain and give us Palestine after you win the war.” Because they didn’t know whether the war would last another year or another ten years. So they started to work out a receipt. The receipt took the form of a letter, and it was worded in very cryptic language so that the world at large wouldn’t know what it was all about. And that was called the Balfour Declaration.

https://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/wars/balfour.htm
The Balfour Declaration was merely Great Britain’s promise to pay the Zionists what they had agreed upon as a consideration for getting the United States into the war. So this great Balfour Declaration, that you hear so much about, is just as phony as a three dollar bill. And I don’t think I could make it more emphatic than that.
Now, that is where all the trouble started. The United States went in the war. The United States crushed Germany. We went in there, and it’s history. You know what happened. Now, when the war was ended, and the Germans went to Paris, to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, there were 117 Jews there, as a delegation representing the Jews, headed by Bernard Baruch. I was there: I ought to know. Now what happened?
The Jews at that peace conference, when they were cutting up Germany and parceling out Europe to all these nations that claimed a right to a certain part of European territory, the Jews said, “How about Palestine for us?” And they produced, for the first time to the knowledge of the Germans, this Balfour Declaration. So the Germans, for the first time realized, “Oh, that was the game! That’s why the United States came into the war.” And the Germans for the first time realized that they were defeated, they suffered this terrific reparation that was slapped onto them, because the Zionists wanted Palestine and they were determined to get it at any cost.
Now, that brings us to another very interesting point. When the Germans realized this, they naturally resented it. Up to that time, the Jews had never been better off in any country in the world than they had been in Germany.
You had Mr. Rathenau there, who was maybe 100 times as important in industry and finance as is Bernard Baruch in this country. You had Mr. Balin, who owned the two big steamship lines, the North German Lloyd’s and the Hamburg-American Lines. You had Mr. Bleichroder, who was the banker for the Hohenzollern family. You had the Warburgs in Hamburg, who were the big merchant bankers — the biggest in the world. The Jews were doing very well in Germany. No question about that. Now, the Germans felt: “Well, that was quite a sellout.”
It was a sellout that I can best compare — suppose the United States was at war today with the Soviet Union. And we were winning. And we told the Soviet Union: “Well, let’s quit. We offer you peace terms. Let’s forget the whole thing.” And all of a sudden Red China came into the war as an ally of the Soviet Union. And throwing them into the war brought about our defeat. A crushing defeat, with reparations the likes of which man’s imagination cannot encompass.
Imagine, then, after that defeat, if we found out that it was the Chinese in this country, our Chinese citizens, who all the time we thought they were loyal citizens working with us, were selling us out to the Soviet Union and that it was through them that Red China was brought into the war against us. How would we feel, in the United States against Chinese? I don’t think that one of them would dare show his face on any street. There wouldn’t be lampposts enough, convenient, to take care of them. Imagine how we would feel.
Well, that’s how the Germans felt towards these Jews. “We’ve been so nice to them”; and from 1905 on, when the first Communist revolution in Russia failed, and the Jews had to scramble out of Russia, they all went to Germany. And Germany gave them refuge. And they were treated very nicely. And here they sold Germany down the river for no reason at all other than they wanted Palestine as a so-called “Jewish commonwealth.”
Now, Nahum Sokolow — all the great leaders, the big names that you read about in connection with Zionism today — they, in 1919, 1920, ’21, ’22, and ’23, they wrote in all their papers — and the press was filled with their statements — that “the feeling against the Jews in Germany is due to the fact that they realized that this great defeat was brought about by our intercession and bringing the United States into the war against them.”
The Jews themselves admitted that. It wasn’t that the Germans in 1919 discovered that a glass of Jewish blood tasted better than Coca-Cola or Muenschner Beer. There was no religious feeling. There was no sentiment against those people merely on account of their religious belief. It was all political. It was economic. It was anything but religious.
Nobody cared in Germany whether a Jew went home and pulled down the shades and said “Shema’ Yisrael” or “Our Father.” No one cared in Germany any more than they do in the United States. Now this feeling that developed later in Germany was due to one thing: that the Germans held the Jews responsible for their crushing defeat, for no reason at all, because World War One was started against Germany for no reason for which they [Germans] were responsible. They were guilty of nothing. Only of being successful. They built up a big navy. They built up world trade.
You must remember, Germany, at the time of Napoleon, at the time of the French Revolution, what was the German Reich consisted of 300 — three hundred! — small city-states, principalities, dukedoms, and so forth. Three hundred little separate political entities. And between that time, between the period of. . . between Napoleon and Bismarck, they were consolidated into one state. And within 50 years after that time they became one of the world’s great powers. Their navy was rivalling Great Britain’s, they were doing business all over the world, they could undersell anybody and make better products. And what happened? What happened as a result of that?
There was a conspiracy between England, France, and Russia that: “We must slap down Germany”, because there isn’t one historian in the world that can find a valid reason why those three countries decided to wipe Germany off the map politically. Now, what happened after that?
When Germany realized that the Jews were responsible for her defeat, they naturally resented it. But not a hair on the head of any Jew was harmed. Not a single hair. Professor Tansill, of Georgetown University, who had access to all the secret papers of the State Department, wrote in his book, and quoted from a State Department document written by Hugo Schoenfelt, a Jew who Cordell Hull sent to Europe in 1933 to investigate the so-called camps of political prisoners. And he wrote back that he found them in very fine condition.
They were in excellent shape; everybody treated well. And they were filled with Communists. Well, a lot of them were Jews, because the Jews happened to be maybe 98 per cent of the Communists in Europe at that time. And there were some priests there, and ministers, and labor leaders, Masons, and others who had international affiliations.
Now, the Jews sort of tried to keep the lid on this fact. They didn’t want the world to really understand that they had sold out Germany, and that the Germans resented that.
So they did take appropriate action against them [against the Jews]. They. . . shall I say, discriminated against them wherever they could? They shunned them. The same as we would the Chinese, or the Negroes, or the Catholics, or anyone in this country who had sold us out to an enemy and brought about our defeat.
Now, after a while, the Jews of the world didn’t know what to do, so they called a meeting in Amsterdam. Jews from every country in the world attended in July 1933. And they said to Germany: “You fire Hitler! And you put every Jew back into his former position, whether he was a Communist, no matter what he was. You can’t treat us that way! And we, the Jews of the world, are calling upon you, and serving this ultimatum upon you.” Well, the Germans told them. . . you can imagine. So what did they [the Jews] do?
They broke up, and Samuel Untermyer, if the name means anything to people here. . . (You want to ask a question? — Uh, there were no Communists in Germany at that time. they were called ‘Social Democrats.)
Well, I don’t want to go by what they were called. We’re now using English words, and what they were called in Germany is not very material. . . but they were Communists, because in 1917, the Communists took over Germany for a few days. Rosa Luxembourg and Karl Liebknecht, and a group of Jews in Germany took over the government for three days. In fact, when the Kaiser ended the war, he fled to Holland because he thought the Communists were going to take over Germany as they did Russia, and that he was going to meet the same fate that the Czar did in Russia. So he left and went to Holland for safety and for security.
Now, at that time, when the Communist threat in Germany was quashed, it was quiet, the Jews were working, still trying to get back into their former — their status — and the Germans fought them in every way they could, without hurting a hair on anyone’s head. The same as one group, the Prohibitionists, fought the people who were interested in liquor, and they didn’t fight one another with pistols, they did it every way they could.
Well, that’s the way they were fighting the Jews in Germany. And, at that time, mind you, there were 80 to 90 million Germans and there were only 460,000 Jews. . . less than one half of one percent of Germany were Jews. And yet, they controlled all of the press, they controlled most of the economy, because they had come in and with cheap money — you know the way the Mark was devalued — they bought up practically everything.
Well, in 1933 when Germany refused to surrender, mind you, to the World Conference of Jews in Amsterdam, they broke up and Mr. Untermeyer came back to the United States — who was the head of the American delegation and the president of the whole conference — and he went from the steamer to ABC and made a radio broadcast throughout the United States in which he said:
“The Jews of the world now declare a Holy War against Germany. We are now engaged in a sacred conflict against the Germans. And we are going to starve them into surrender. We are going to use a world-wide boycott against them, that will destroy them because they are dependent upon their export business.”
And it is a fact that two thirds of Germany’s food supply had to be imported, and it could only be imported with the proceeds of what they exported. Their labor. So if Germany could not export, two thirds of Germany’s population would have to starve. There just was not enough food for more than one third of the population.
Now in this declaration, which I have here, it was printed on page — a whole page — in the New York Times on August 7, 1933, Mr. Samuel Untermyer boldly stated that: “this economic boycott is our means of self-defense. President Roosevelt has advocated its use in the NRA” . [National Recovery Administration] — which some of you may remember, where everybody was to be boycotted unless they followed the rules laid down by the New Deal, which of course was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court at that time.

https://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/untermeyer.htm
Nevertheless, the Jews of the world declared a boycott against Germany, and it was so effective that you couldn’t find one thing in any store anywhere in the world with the words “made in Germany” on it.
In fact, an executive of the Woolworth Company told me that they had to dump millions of dollars worth of crockery and dishes into the river; that their stores were boycotted. If anyone came in and found a dish marked “made in Germany,” they were picketed with signs: “Hitler”, “murderer”, and so forth, and like — something like these sit-ins that are taking place in the South.
R. H. Macy, which is controlled by a family called Strauss who also happen to be Jews. . . a woman found stockings there which came from Chemnitz, marked “made in Germany”. Well, they were cotton stockings. They may have been there 20 years, because since I’ve been observing women’s legs in the last twenty years, I haven’t seen a pair with cotton stockings on them. So Macy! I saw Macy boycotted, with hundreds of people walking around with signs saying “MURDERS” and “HITLERITES”, and so forth.
Now up to that time, not one hair on the head of any Jew had been hurt in Germany. There was no suffering, there was no starvation, there was no murder, there was nothing.
Now, that. . . naturally, the Germans said, “Why, who are these people to declare a boycott against us and throw all our people out of work, and our industries come to a standstill? Who are they to do that to us?” They naturally resented it. Certainly they painted swastikas on stores owned by Jews.
Why should a German go in and give their money to a storekeeper who was part of a boycott who was going to starve Germany into surrender into the Jews of the world, who were going to dictate who their premier or chancellor was to be? Well, it was ridiculous.
That continued for some time, and it wasn’t until 1938, when a young Jew from Poland walked into the German embassy in Paris and shot one of the officials [a German official] that the Germans really started to get rough with the Jews in Germany. And you found them then breaking windows and having street fights and so forth.
Now, for anyone to say that — I don’t like to use the word ‘anti-Semitism’ because it’s meaningless, but it means something to you still, so I’ll have to use it — the only reason that there was any feeling in Germany against Jews was that they were responsible: number one, for World War One; number two, for this world-wide boycott, and number three — did I say for World War One, they were responsible? For the boycott — and also for World War II, because after this thing got out of hand, it was absolutely necessary for the Jews and Germany to lock horns in a war to see which one was going to survive.
In the meanwhile, I had lived in Germany, and I knew that the Germans had decided [that] Europe is going to be Christian or Communist: there is no in between. It’s going to be Christian or it’s going to be Communist. And the Germans decided: “We’re going to keep it Christian if possible”. And they started to re-arm.
And there intention was — by that time the United States had recognized the Soviet Union, which they did in November, 1933 — the Soviet Union was becoming very powerful, and Germany realized: “Well, our turn is going to come soon, unless we are strong.” The same as we in this country are saying today, “Our turn is going to come soon, unless we are strong.”
And our government is spending 83 or 84 billion dollars of your money for defense, they say. Defense against whom? Defense against 40,000 little Jews in Moscow that took over Russia, and then, in their devious ways, took over control of many other governments of the world.
Now, for this country to now be on the verge of a Third World War, from which we cannot emerge a victor, is something that staggers my imagination. I know that nuclear bombs are measured in terms of megatons. A megaton is a term used to describe one million tons of TNT. One million tons of TNT is a megaton. Now, our nuclear bombs have a capacity of 10 megatons, or 10 million tons of TNT. That was when they were first developed five or six years ago. Now, the nuclear bombs that are being developed have a capacity of 200 megatons, and God knows how many megatons the nuclear bombs of the Soviet Union have.
So, what do we face now? If we trigger a world war that may develop into a nuclear war, humanity is finished. And why will it take place? It will take place because Act III. . . the curtain goes up on Act III. Act I was World War I. Act II was World War II. Act III is going to be World War III.
The Jews of the world, the Zionists and their co-religionists everywhere, are determined that they are going to again use the United States to help them permanently retain Palestine as their foothold for their world government. Now, that is just as true as I am standing here, because not alone have I read it, but many here have read it, and it’s known all over the world.
Now, what are we going to do? The life you save may be your son’s. Your boys may be on their way to that war tonight; and you you don’t know it any more than you knew that in 1916 in London the Zionists made a deal with the British War Cabinet to send your sons to war in Europe. Did you know it at that time? Not a person in the United States knew it. You weren’t permitted to know it.
Who knew it? President Wilson knew it. Colonel House knew it. Other ‘s knew it. Did I know it? I had a pretty good idea of what was going on: I was liaison to Henry Morgenthau, Sr., in the 1912 campaign when President Wilson was elected, and there was talk around the office there.
I was ‘confidential man’ to Henry Morgenthau, Sr., who was chairman of the Finance Committee, and I was liaison between him and Rollo Wells, the treasurer. So I sat in these meetings with President Wilson at the head of the table, and all the others, and I heard them drum into President Wilson’s brain the graduated income tax and what has become the Federal Reserve, and also indoctrinate him with the Zionist movement.
Justice Brandeis and President Wilson were just as close as the two fingers on this hand, and President Woodrow Wilson was just as incompetent when it came to determining what was going on as a newborn baby. And that’s how they got us into World War I, while we all slept.
Now, at this moment… at this moment they may be planning this World War III, in which we don’t stand a chance even if they don’t use nuclear bombs. How can the United States — about five percent of the world — go out and fight eighty to ninety percent of the world on their home ground? How can we do it… send our boys over there to be slaughtered? For what? So the Jews can have Palestine as their ‘commonwealth’? They’ve fooled you so much that you don’t know whether you’re coming or going.
Now any judge, when he charges a jury, says, “Gentlemen, any witness that you find has told a single lie, you can disregard all his testimony.” That is correct. I don’t know from what state you come, but in New York state that is the way a judge addresses a jury. If that witness said one lie, disregard his testimony.
Now, what are the facts about the Jews?
The Jews — I call them Jews to you, because they are known as Jews. I don’t call them Jews. I refer to them as so-called Jews, because I know what they are. If Jesus was a Jew, there isn’t a Jew in the world today, and if those people are Jews, certainly our Lord and Savior was not one of them, and I can prove that.
Now what happened? The eastern European Jews, who form 92 per cent of the world’s population of those people who call themselves Jews, were originally Khazars.
They were a warlike tribe that lived deep in the heart of Asia. And they were so warlike that even the Asiatics drove them out of Asia into eastern Europe — and to reduce this so you don’t get too confused about the history of Eastern Europe — they set up this big Khazar kingdom: 800,000 square miles. Only, there was no Russia, there were no other countries, and the Khazar kingdom was the biggest country in all Europe — so big and so powerful that when the other monarchs wanted to go to war, the Khazars would lend them 40,000 soldiers. That’s how big and powerful they were.
Now, they were phallic worshippers, which is filthy. I don’t want to go into the details of that now. It was their religion the way it was the religion of many other Pagans or Barbarians elsewhere in the world.
Now, the [Khazar] king became so disgusted with the degeneracy of his kingdom that he decided to adopt a so-called monotheistic faith — either Christianity, Islam — the Moslem faith — or what is known today as Judaism — really Talmudism. So, like spinning a top and calling out “eeny, meeny, miney, moe,” he picked out so-called Judaism. And that became the state religion.
He sent down to the Talmudic schools of Pumbedita and Sura and brought up thousands of these rabbis with their teachings, and opened up synagogues and schools in his kingdom of 800,000 people — 800,000 thousand square miles — and maybe ten to twenty million people; and they became what we call Jews. There wasn’t one of them that had an ancestor that ever put a toe in the Holy Land, not only in Old Testament history, but back to the beginning of time. Not one of them! And yet they come to the Christians and they ask us to support their armed insurrection in Palestine by saying:
“Well, you want to certainly help repatriate God’s chosen people to their Promised Land, their ancestral homeland, It’s your Christian duty. We gave you one of our boys as your Lord and Savior. You now go to church on Sunday, and kneel and you worship a Jew, and we’re Jews.”
Well, they were pagan Khazars who were converted just the same as the Irish [were converted]. And it’s just as ridiculous to call them “people of the Holy Land,” as it would be. . . there are 54 million Chinese Moslems. Fifty four million! And, Mohammed only died in 620 A.D., so in that time, 54 million Chinese have accepted Islam as their religious belief.
Now imagine, in China, 2,000 miles away from Arabia, where the city of Mecca is located, where Mohammed was born. . . imagine if the 54 million Chinese called themselves ‘Arabs’. Imagine! Why, you’d say they’re lunatics. Anyone who believes that those 54 million Chinese are Arabs must be crazy. All they did was adopt as a religious faith; a belief that had its origin in Mecca, in Arabia.
The same as the Irish. When the Irish became Christians, nobody dumped them in the ocean and imported from the Holy Land a new crop of inhabitants that were Christians. They weren’t different people. They were the same people, but they had accepted Christianity as a religious faith.
Now, these Pagans, these Asiatics, these Turko-Finns. . . they were a Mongoloid race who were forced out of Asia into eastern Europe. They likewise, because their king took the faith — Talmudic faith — they had no choice. Just the same as in Spain: If the king was Catholic, everybody had to be a Catholic. If not, you had to get out of Spain. So everybody — they lived on the land just like the trees and the bushes; a human being belonged to the land under their feudal system — so they [Khazars] all became what we call today, Jews!
Now imagine how silly it was for the Christians. . . for the great Christian countries of the world to say, “We’re going to use our power, our prestige to repatriate God’s chosen people to their ancestral homeland, their Promised Land.”
Now, could there be a bigger lie than that? Could there be a bigger lie than that?
And because they control the newspapers, the magazines, the radio, the television, the book publishing business, they have the ministers in the pulpit, they have the politicians on the soap boxes talking the same language . . . so naturally you’d believe black is white if you heard it often enough. You wouldn’t call black black anymore — you’d start to call black white. And nobody could blame you.
Now, that is one of the great lies. . . that is the foundation of all the misery that has befallen the world. Because after two wars fought in Europe — World War I and World War II — if it wasn’t possible for them to live in peace and harmony with the people in Europe, like their brethren are living in the United States, what were the two wars fought for? Did they have to — like you flush the toilet — because they couldn’t get along, did they have to say, “Well, we’re going back to our homeland and you Christians can help us”?
I can’t understand yet how the Christians in Europe could have been that dumb because every theologian, every history teacher, knew the things that I’m telling you. But, they naturally bribed them, shut them up with money, stuffed their mouths with money, and now. . . I don’t care whether you know all this or not. It doesn’t make any difference to me whether you know all these facts or not, but it does make a difference to me. I’ve got, in my family, boys that will have to be in the next war, and I don’t want them to go and fight and die… like they died in Korea. Like they died in Japan. Like they’ve died all over the world. For what?
To help crooks hold on to what they stole from innocent people who had been in peaceful possession of that land, those farms, those homes for hundreds and maybe thousands of years? Is that why the United States must go to war? Because the Democratic Party wants New York State — the electoral vote? Illinois, the electoral vote? And Pennsylvania, the electoral vote?… which are controlled by the Zionists and their co-religionists?. . . the balance of power?
In New York City there are 400,000 members of the liberal party, all Zionists and their co-religionists. And New York State went for Kennedy by 400,000 votes. Now, I don’t blame Mr. Kennedy. I’m fond of Mr. Kennedy. I think he’s a great man. I think he can really pull us out of this trouble if we get the facts to him. And I believe he knows a great deal more than his appointments indicate he knows. He’s playing with the enemy. Like when you go fishing, you’ve got to play with the fish. Let ’em out and pull ’em in. Let ’em out and pull ’em in. But knowing Mr. Kennedy’s father, and how well informed he is on this whole subject, and how close Kennedy is to his father, I don’t think Mr. Kennedy is totally in the dark.
But I do think that it is the duty of every mother, every loyal Christian , every person that regards the defense of this country as a sacred right, that they communicate — not with their congressman, not with their senator, but with President Kennedy. And tell him, “I do not think you should send my boy, or our boys, wearing the uniform of the United States of America, and under the flag that you see here, our red, white and blue, to fight there to help keep in the hands of these that which they have stolen”. I think everyone should not alone write once, but keep writing and get your friends to write.
Now, I could go on endlessly, and tell you these things to support what I have just asked you to do. But I don’t think it’s necessary to do that. You’re above the average group in intelligence and I don’t think it’s necessary to impress this any more.
But. . . I want to tell you one more thing. You talk about… “Oh, the Jews. Why the Jews? Christianity. Why, we got Christianity from the Jews and the Jews gave us Jesus, and the Jews gave us our religion”. But do you know that on the day of atonement that you think is so sacred to them, that on that day… and I was one of them! This is not hearsay. I’m not here to be a rabble-rouser. I’m here to give you facts.
When, on the Day of Atonement, you walk into a synagogue, the very first prayer that you recite, you stand — and it’s the only prayer for which you stand — and you repeat three times a short prayer. The Kol Nidre. In that prayer, you enter into an agreement with God Almighty that any oath, vow, or pledge that you may make during the next twelve months — any oath, vow or pledge that you may take during the next twelve months shall be null and void.
The oath shall not be an oath; the vow shall not be a vow; the pledge shall not be a pledge. They shall have no force and effect, and so forth and so on.
And further than that, the Talmud teaches: “Don’t forget — whenever you take an oath, vow, and pledge — remember the Kol Nidre prayer that you recited on the Day of Atonement, and that exempts you from fulfilling that”.
How much can you depend on their loyalty? You can depend upon their loyalty as much as the Germans depended upon it in 1916.
And we’re going to suffer the same fate as Germany suffered, and for the same reason. You can’t depend upon something as insecure as the leadership that is not obliged to respect an oath, vow or pledge. Now I could go on and recite many other things to you, but I would have a little respect for your time, and you want to really, uh, get through with all of this. Tomorrow’s going to be a long day.
Now I want to say one thing. You ask me. . . well, you think to yourself: “well how did this fellow get mixed up in this the way he got mixed up in it.” Well, I opened my mouth in 1945, and I took big pages in newspapers and tried to tell the American people what I’m telling you. And one newspaper after another refused the advertisement. And when I couldn’t find a newspaper to take them — I paid cash, not credit — what happened? My lawyer told me, “There’s an editor over in Jersey with a paper who will take your announcement”. So, I was brought together with Mr. McGinley, and that’s how I met him.
So somebody told me the lawyer who introduced me, who was the son of the Dean of the Methodist Bishop, he said: “Well, I think he’s a little anti-Semitic. I don’t know whether I can get him over here. So he brought him over to my apartment and we hit it off wonderfully, and have since then.
Now, I say this, and I say it without any qualifications. I say it without any reservations. And I say it without any hesitation. . . if it wasn’t for the work that Mr. Conley McGinley did with “Common Sense” — he’s been sending out from 1,800,000 to 2,000,000 every year — if it wasn’t for the work he’s been doing sending those out for fifteen years now, we would already be a communist country. Nobody has done what he did to light fires. Many of the other active persons in this fight learned all about if for the first time through “Common Sense”.
Now, I have been very active in helping him all I could. I’m not as flush as I was. I cannot go on spending the money. . . I’m not going to take up a collection. Don’t worry. I see five people getting up to leave. (laughter)
I haven’t got the money that I used to spend. I used to print a quarter of a million of them out of my own pocket and send them out. Mr. McGinley, when I first met him, had maybe 5,000 printed and circulated them locally. So I said, “With what you know and what I know, we can really do a good job”. So I started printing in outside shops of big newspaper companies, a quarter of a million, and paid for them. Well, there’s always a bottom to the barrel. I suppose we’ve all reached that at times.
I’m not so poor that I can’t live without working and that’s what worries the Anti-Defamation League. I can just get by without going and asking for a job or getting on the bread line. But Mr. McGinley is working. He’s sick and he’s going at this stronger than ever. And all I want to say is that they want to close up “Common Sense” more than any other single thing in the whole world, as a death-blow to the fight Christians are making to survive.
So I just want to tell you this. All they do is circulate rumors: “Mr. Benjamin H. Freedman is the wealthy backer of ‘Common Sense’.” The reason they do that is to discourage the people in the United States: don’t send any money to Common Sense. They don’t need it. The’ve got the wealthy Mr. Freedman as a backer. That all has strategy. They don’t want to advertise me so that people that have real estate or securities to sell will come and call on me. They just want people to lay off “Common Sense”. And all I’m telling you is, I do try to help him, but I haven’t been able to. And I will be very honest. One thing I won’t do is lie. In the last year I’ve had so much sickness in my family that I could not give him one dollar.
How he’s managed to survive, I don’t know. God alone knows. And he must be in God’s care because how he’s pulled through his sickness and with his financial troubles, I don’t know. But that press is working. . . and every two weeks about a hundred or a hundred-fifty-thousand of “Common Sense” go out with a new message. And if that information could be multiplied. . . if people that now get it could buy ten or twenty five, or fifty, give them around. Plow that field. Sow those seeds, you don’t know which will take root, but for God’s sake, this is our last chance.
[Freedman then discusses the importance of people forgoing unnecessary purchases to ‘buy more stuff’, play golf, etc., and use the money to keep “Common Sense” going. He explains that the paper is going in debt; could be closed down and he (Freedman) no longer has the funds, having spent some $2,400,000 in his attempt to bring the information to the American public and elected officials. He then asks for questions from the audience.)…..

[End of transcript of Benjamin Freedman speech, given in 1961 at the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C., on behalf of Conde McGinley’s patriotic newspaper of that time, Common Sense.]

 

The Syrian Outcome Has Departed the Script, by Paul Craig Roberts

The Syrian Outcome Has Departed the Script
The CIA and presstitutes will re-write the history
Paul Craig Roberts

 

Syrian

Stephen Lendman sums up the success of Russian and Syrian militaries against Washington-supported ISIS. Washington claims to be fighting ISIS, but doesn’t.

Remember, U.S. General Flynn, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, revealed on television that it was the “willful decision” of the Obama regime to use ISIS to overthrow the Assad government. General Flynn said the decision was made over his objection. https://www.rt.com/usa/312050-dia-flynn-islamic-state/
News agencies and writers should stop referring to ISIS and any of the other groups as “terrorists.” The term “terrorists” connotes an independence that the “terrorists” do not have. These so-called “terrorists” are organized, financed, and armed by Washington and Washington’s vassals. Washington uses “terrorists” as a foreign policy tool. This has been going on for decades. Yes, sometimes the “terrorists” escape Washington’s control. Washington supported Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan to help organize the Mujahideen to fight against the Soviet occupying force. Everyone knows this, or, perhaps I should say, fomerly knew it prior to the presstitutes helping Washington bury all the facts and replace them with fake news.
The CIA has long used presstitutes to rewrite history. But not all facts have yet been thrown down the Memory Hole. Here is former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook: “Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the ’80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan.” Here is Prince Bander bin Sultan on CNN’s Larry King program (October 1, 2001): “This is ironic. In the mid-’80s, if you remember, we and the United – Saudi Arabia and the United States were supporting the Mujahideen to liberate Afghanistan from the Soviets. He [Osama bin Laden] came to thank me for my efforts to bring the Americans, our friends, to help us against the atheists, he said the communists. Isn’t it ironic?” See also: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3340101/t/bin-laden-comes-home-roost/#.WdDYarGZPFR
Russia Effectively Smashing US-Supported Terrorists in Syria
by Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org – Home – Stephen Lendman)
Russia’s military intervention in Syria at the request of its government began two years ago today – September 30.
It dramatically changed the dynamic on the ground, turning sure defeat into eventual triumph.
Thousands of square miles of Syrian territory were liberated from the scourge of US-supported terrorists, defeating Washington’s imperial aims, wanting regime change, the country transformed into another vassal state.
Tass reviewed Russian operations over the past two years, saying “victory over terrorism is near.” Its efforts transformed armed opposition conflicting groups into “a common front in the struggle against terrorists.”
What began two years ago today “is entering its final phase,” Russian air power enabling Syrian and allied forces to regain control over “85% of the country’s territory,” a remarkable turnaround from conditions before Moscow’s involvement.
Washington didn’t expect it, intending to eliminate Assad the way it ruthlessly killed Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi.
Things didn’t go as planned. Russia foiled US objectives, achieving them highly unlikely, a significant body blow to its regional aims, a step closer to defeating them worldwide.
In Syria, Aleppo was liberated late last year, the country’s pre-war commercial hub. Historic Palmyra was freed twice, hopefully for good after the second time.
The campaign to liberate Zeir Ezzor province entirely from US-supported terrorists continues, ISIS’ last stronghold in the country. Its three-year-long siege of the city was broken, security sweeps underway to eliminate its remnants in residential and other areas.
“Official forecasts regarding the chances of a successful completion of the anti-terrorist operation sound ever more optimistic,” said Tass.
Ahead of the Deir Ezzor campaign, Akerbat was liberated, “a major transport hub and command center (and stronghold) of the terrorists in the east of Hama province,” Tass explained.
“With the loss of the city the terrorists were no longer able to regroup forces, receive ammunition and supplies, while the Syrian government army gained access to Deir Ezzor.”
During 24 months of combat, 38 Russian military personnel perished, including General Valery Asapov, the coordinates of his location almost certainly provided ISIS by US forces. Washington bears responsibility for his death.
Russian and American objectives in Syria are world’s apart – Moscow combating terrorism, Washington supporting it. Bilateral relations are dismal on virtually everything except cooperation in non-military space activities.
Astana peace talks spearheaded by Russia continue making progress – without significant breakthroughs so far because Washington wants endless war and regime change, waging a losing battle, pursuing it anyway.
According to Russia’s reconciliation center, 2,200 localities joined the ceasefire agreement. More than 230 armed groups agreed to observe it.
Reconstruction in some areas began, restoring power, water and other essential infrastructure a vital first step, along with supplying humanitarian aid – Russia, Iran and Damascus alone providing it.
Nothing from America. Nothing from the EU. Nothing from regional Arab countries. Nothing from Israel, of course. Woefully inadequate UN help, Syrians on their own, dependent on their government and allies.
Moscow remains firmly committed to Syrian sovereign independence, its territorial integrity, and right of its people alone to choose their leadership, free from foreign interference.
“Both Russian and Syrian military commanders stress the intention to push ahead with the operation until the elimination of the last terrorist” nationwide, said Tass.
VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”
https://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

SOURCE:

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2017/10/01/syrian-outcome-departed-script/

Israeli jets hit ‘chemical weapons site’ in Syria

Syria’s army said Israeli air strikes on Thursday killed two people at a military facility in the country’s west, a zone where the regime has been accused of developing chemical weapons.
The army statement said it took place near the town of Masyaf and warned against the “dangerous repercussions of this aggressive action to the security and stability of the region”.
An Israeli army spokeswoman earlier declined to discuss reports of a strike in Syria, saying the army does not comment on operational matters.
Israeli officials have in the past admitted that Israel has attacked weapons shipments bound for Lebanon’s Iran-backed Hezbollah group, an ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, without specifying which ones.
Amos Yadlin, a former head of Israeli military intelligence, tweeted that the reported attack was not routine and targeted a Syrian military scientific centre.

Israeli Jets

© Provided by The Telegraph
Israeli armed forces took part in the largest military drill in 20 years even as reports emerged that a Syrian chemical weapons facility had been attacked.Credit: EPA

“The facility at Masyaf also produces chemical weapons and explosive barrels that have killed thousands of Syrian civilians,” Yadlin said in the tweet.
There was no independent confirmation that this was the target but the United Nations has said in the past that the Syrian government has carried out chemical weapons attacks, which Damascus denies.
Israeli officials have also previously said that Israel and Russia, another Assad ally, maintain regular contacts to coordinate military action in Syria.
Jets flying over Lebanon overnight broke the sound barrier and Lebanese media reported that some Israeli jets had breached Lebanese airspace.

Source:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/

Will the Federal Government Make It Illegal to Protest Israel?

A new bill with bipartisan support has drawn the ire of the ACLU and others.

A growing number of Republicans and Democrats in Congress are backing a bill that would criminalize support for the international boycott against Israel, also known as the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.

Boycott Israel Bill

Named the Israel Anti-Boycott Act, the bill so far has garnered support from 29 Republicans and 14 Democrats in the Senate. A similar piece of legislation introduced in the House of Representatives has 237 co-sponsors—63 Democrats and 174 Republicans. With the intent to suppress the BDS movement and others allied with the boycott against Israel, the Israel Anti-Boycott Act imposes harsh punishments: any person guilty of violating the law faces a “minimum civil penalty of $250,000 and a maximum criminal penalty of $1 million and 20 years in prison.”

The Israel Anti-Boycott Act was introduced by Democratic Sen. Benjamin Cardin on March 23 and was drafted with the help of AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, according to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. In fact, passage of the bill was listed as one of the group’s top lobbying priorities for 2017.

The bill would build upon two laws, the Export Administration Act of 1979 and the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, the former law making it illegal for U.S. corporations to cooperate with the boycott of Israel. The Office of Anti-Boycott Compliance under the Department of Commerce was created to enforce this very measure.

In addition to its already draconian felony punishments, the law would penalize people for requesting information about boycotts against Israel and would extend the boycott ban into any parts of Israel, including the settlements that were deemed to violate international law by the United Nations. The act would also expand upon the prohibition of partaking in boycotts sponsored by foreign governments to include boycotts from international organizations like the U.N. and the European Union.

On July 17, the American Civil Liberties Union published a letter it sent to all senators urging them to not support the bill on the basis that “it would punish individuals for no reason other than their political beliefs.” While the ACLU clarified that it takes no position on the international boycott of Israel, the statement asserts that, under the First Amendment, the government cannot punish people just because of their “expressed political beliefs.”

The ACLU statement further criticizes the bill for specifically singling out businesses and individuals who do not do any business with Israel for expressed political beliefs.

“There are millions of businesses and individuals who do no business with Israel, or with companies doing business there, for a number of reasons,” the statement reads.

The statement notes that the bill ignores those companies that choose not to do business with Israel purely for pragmatic reasons outside of political belief, instead punishing “businesses and individuals based solely on their point of view.”

This is not the first time lawmakers on both sides of the political spectrum have attempted to infringe on First Amendment rights with the goal of silencing supporters of the BDS movement. Many college students in recent years have faced punishment for expressing support for Palestine and the BDS movement and for pushing their college administrations to cut ties with corporations that conduct business with Israel.

In 2015, members of the Board of Regents who oversee the University of California system—along with support from University president Janet Napolitano—attempted to pass speech codes that would severely crack down on forms of Israel criticism and anti-Israeli activism. Students at any UC campus violating the speech codes would be faced with suspension or even expulsion.

This March, the New York State Senate passed two bills that would strip funding from students and college organizations that participate in “hate speech related to Israel” or partake in boycotts of “Israel and American allied nations.” A third bill passed that same week would prohibit the state from contracting with or investing in businesses that support the BDS movement.

Ironically enough, a number of the bill’s supporters include Democratic lawmakers who have positioned themselves as leaders of the anti-Trump resistance. California Sen. Ted Lieu, who is one of the bill’s co-sponsors, has previously championed the protection of civil liberties and announced he would send monthly donations to the ACLU to resist Trump. New York Sens. Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, the latter of whom has been floated as a potential 2020 contender to Trump, have also co-sponsored the bill despite their purported support of civil liberties.

It also seems that a number of Senate Democrats have blindly backed a bill they have little knowledge of, according to inquiries sent to co-sponsors of the bill by the Intercept. When told of the ACLU’s letter, Democratic Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan said, “What’s the Act? You’ll have to get back to me on that.” Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez from New Jersey, considered a reliable congressional ally to AIPAC, told the Intercept, “I’d want to read it….I’d have to look at it.”

With politicians providing lip service to protecting civil liberties and First Amendment rights, it is baffling and alarming that so many of these “free speech advocates” would throw support behind a bill that is not shy about its intent to punish people for their political beliefs.

https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/will-federal-government-make-it-illegal-protest-israel

Celisa Calacal is a junior writing fellow for AlterNet. She is a senior journalism major and legal studies minor at Ithaca College in Ithaca, New York. Previously she worked at ThinkProgress and served as an editor for Ithaca College’s student newspaper. Follow her at @celisa_mia.

Another Grim Aniversary For Gaza

Another grim anniversary for Gaza
Efforts to end the Gaza blockade must go hand in hand with the wider Palestinian right to self-determination.By
Sharif Nashashibi

Sharif Nashashibi is an award-winning journalist and analyst on Arab affairs.

July 8 marks the anniversary of last year’s Israeli onslaught against Gaza. Commonly and mistakenly described as a war against Hamas, the targets and victims were overwhelmingly civilian (a consistent and deliberate Israeli military strategy). According to the United Nations, two-thirds of the 2,251 Palestinian fatalities were civilian, including 551 children and 299 women.
More than 1,500 children were orphaned. Children and women comprised almost two-thirds of the 11,231 Palestinians injured, 10 percent of whom are permanently disabled. A report by Save The Children on July 6 documented continued “severe emotional distress” among children, including regular bedwetting and nightmares.
Some 19,000 homes were totally or partially destroyed, and 500,000 Palestinians (28 percent of Gaza’s population) were displaced, in what the UN described as “the largest displacement recorded in Gaza since 1967”.

Gaza anniversary

Has Israel committed war crimes in Gaza?
The anniversary of the war will attract predictions about the likelihood or inevitability of the next one. Certainly, for the people of Gaza that prospect is always on the horizon.
Most extremist
Israel’s recently elected government – aptly described as the most extremist in the country’s history (and that is saying something) – consists of figures who believe Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has actually been too soft on Hamas, and want a full-scale invasion and reoccupation of Gaza to wipe out the Palestinian faction.
The terms of last summer’s ceasefire agreement repeat the basic flaws that doomed previous truces: vague wording, and the postponement of talks on the fundamental issues. That means ample time and opportunity for the ceasefire to unravel (Israel has repeatedly violated it).
There is no mention of Egypt or Israel ending their blockades of Gaza, nor of the wider issue of Palestinian statehood. Israel even balks at smaller-scale issues such as constructing a Gaza seaport and rebuilding the airport that was bombed in 2000.
Furthermore, Netanyahu may feel that whenever his popularity is flagging, the remedy is another assault on Gaza. His public approval ratings were sky high during last year’s onslaught, peaking at 82 percent when the ground invasion began.
Gaza’s civilian population has for too long languished in what is aptly described as the world’s largest open-air prison.

So yet another war may be a matter of when, not if, but the next one might not necessarily be with Israel. Last week, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) threatened to “uproot” and “overrun” the “tyrants of Hamas” in Gaza, and to implement sharia law there.
The threat should be taken seriously, given that it follows a string of recent attacks carried out by its sympathisers against Hamas in Gaza – a jihadist challenge to the latter’s authority that would have been unthinkable not long ago. There have reportedly been at least a dozen such attacks so far this year alone, including four in May.

Desperate population

The humanitarian catastrophe that the years-long blockade has caused in Gaza is providing ISIL with fertile ground for recruitment among sections of the impoverished territory’s increasingly desperate population.
“The blockade – now in place for eight years – has devastated Gaza’s economy, left most people unable to leave Gaza, restricted people from essential services such as healthcare and education, and cut Palestinians in Gaza off from those in the West Bank,” said Oxfam on July 3.
According to its report, more than 40 percent of people in Gaza are unemployed, including 67 percent of youth, “the highest rate in the world”. A whopping 80 percent of people are in need of aid, and exports are at less than 3 percent of their pre-blockade levels due to “heavy restrictions” on the transfer of goods.
“Many key industries … have been decimated as essential materials are not allowed” into Gaza, “most of the water supply is unsafe to drink and there are power cuts of 12 hours a day”.

Debate about whether or when conflict will erupt again takes place under the fundamentally flawed premise that war entails simply the resumption of military hostilities. The blockade itself is an act of war, with no end in sight. Focusing only on violence gives the false impression that in its absence there is peace in Gaza, which is occasionally and inexplicably broken by Palestinian militants.
Last summer’s Israeli onslaught did not create a humanitarian disaster – it exacerbated a long-festering one.
“One year on… life for many people in Gaza is getting worse,” said Oxfam, adding that “an already vulnerable civilian population has been left even more vulnerable.”
Not a single home that was totally or partially destroyed has been rebuilt, due to the blockade’s restrictions on building materials.
Moral imperative
A complete lifting of the blockade is a moral imperative, as Gaza’s civilian population has for too long languished in what is aptly described as the world’s largest open-air prison. However, that should be seen as a stepping-stone to realising Palestinian rights and aspirations, not an end-all solution.
The blockade and its duration – even efforts to end it – have created a discourse that views Gaza increasingly as a distinct entity separate from the rest of Palestine and its people. This serves Israel’s divide-and-conquer strategy, which must be resisted.
Efforts to end the blockade must go hand in hand with the wider Palestinian right to self-determination. Palestinians may be geographically and politically divided, but they are one people and one nation.
Even if the blockade were lifted, Gazans would not accept to leave their compatriots to their own fate. Sadly, however, the end of their misery remains a more distant prospect than the resumption of armed conflict, for which there will be more grim anniversaries.
Sharif Nashashibi is an award-winning journalist and analyst on Arab affairs.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.

https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2015/07/grim-anniversary-gaza-150708061032649.html

 

Narendra Modi in Israel: Don’t believe the hype, India isn’t abandoning support for Palestine

It seems only fair that the first Indian prime minister to visit Israel is Narendra Modi of the BJP.

Benjamin Netanyahu and Narendra Modi at Tel Aviv airport on Tuesday. PTI

Benjamin Netanyahu and Narendra Modi at Tel Aviv airport on Tuesday. PTI

The party had, even when it was in the Opposition, advocated closer ties to Israel, a nation much admired by the BJP and the Sangh Parivar for its aggressive defence capabilities and disproportionate retaliation for every missile launched from Palestinian soil.

In the hubbub surrounding Modi’s visit, former prime minister PV Narasimha Rao is almost forgotten. It was Rao, ever the pragmatist, who decided to improve relations with with Israel in 1992, at the end of the Cold War.

So he should be given some credit, especially as the Congress party since Independence had been a forceful advocate of Palestinian rights and Rao’s decision would have shocked several party stalwarts.

Israel prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is going all out to make Modi’s visit — to mark 25 years of diplomatic ties — a memorable one. He will receive Modi at the airport, which he has done only for US president Donald Trump. Remember, the US is Israel’s closest ally.  Netanyahu will also accompany Modi everywhere during the trip.

In fact, there has been so much focus on the Modi visit, that Israel’s well respected newspaper Haaretz, wondered if India was to replace the US as Tel Aviv’s major ally: “Judging by the multiple ‘promo’ articles in the Indian and Israel press pre-announcing the visit of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Israel in July 2017, India could be Israel’s greatest ally. Uncertain of President Trump’s stand on several key issues, will ‘redemption’ come to Jerusalem via New Delhi?”

And the same piece goes on to say: “Indeed, the stakes are high. Israel has already signed on its largest deal in history: a $2 billion defense agreement (reportedly, $1.6 billion for Israel Aerospace Industries and $0.4 billion for Rafael, a a state-owned defense company) by which India will purchase anti-missile systems and
components made in Israel.’’

Yet despite the friendship and the hype around it, Modi will need to balance relations with Israel with that of other Gulf countries. The tight rope walk that India has always done since 1992, will continue to be Delhi’s focus. Modi knows that well and has drawn red lines.

In interviews ahead of the visit, the prime minister made it clear that on certain issues, he would not completely break from the past. When asked if India would shift its embassy to Jerusalem by an Israeli newspaper that was pro-government, unlike Trump, who promised he would do so during the election, Modi gave a categorical no.

Modi also stuck to Delhi’s line on the Palestinian issue: “India believes in a two-state solution in which both Israel and a future Palestinian state coexist peacefully,” he said on Monday.

He went on to say: “A final-status agreement should respect the sentiments and address demands of all affected parties,” he added. So despite India’s close ties with Israel, it is not as if Delhi is going to ignore Palestine or the Gulf countries.

There has been much talk about breaking with convention and making the trip to Israel a stand-alone visit. It had been mandatory for all Indian leaders to visit both Israel and Palestine. President Pranab Mukherjee as well as Vice-President Hamid Ansari had done so.

While Modi is not visiting Palestine, India had invited President Mahmoud Abbas to Delhi in May and again reiterated Delhi’s support for a Palestinian state. Despite Modi’s desire to expand ties with Israel and upgrade it to perhaps a strategic partnership, Modi has not neglected the Gulf nations. He has invested both time and effort and established a rapport with the ruling families of Saudi Arabi, Qatar, and UAE and has visited each of these countries.

Considering over seven million Indians live and work out of the region and send back remittances fluctuating between $35 and $4o billion annually, the Arab states cannot be ignored.

The bulk of India’s oil supplies and 80 percent of its natural gas is imported from the region. So Modi knows that he cannot tilt completely towards Israel without offending key Arab leaders. Though the Arab states have paid mere lip service to the Palestinian cause in the last two decades, a complete change of India’s policy towards Palestine will not go down well in the region. It will be interpreted as part of the the BJP government’s anti-Muslim stand.

Leaders of the region are also aware that Kashmir, India’s only Muslim majority state, is on the boil as street protests take on the BJP-PDP government in Srinagar. Despite the violence and the crackdown by the authorities in Kashmir, the Gulf leaders, have not so far made many statements on the situation in Kashmir.

In the early days, there would have been an outpouring of concern from every Arab capital on the Valley. More significant has been the cooperation of both Saudi Arabia and the UAE in getting terror suspects back from these countries.

Published Date: Jul 05, 2017 06:46 am | Updated Date: Jul 05, 2017 06:46 am

Water: India is desperately short of it, and Israel is a leader in desalination and irrigation tech. Might be a key ingredient in this scenario?

Jared Kushner: Man On A Middle-Eastern Mission

 Jared Kushner: The young, well spoken, impeccably groomed son-in-law seems to be unstoppable in his rise to prominence. I mark him as a man to watch very closely. There is certain to be speculation and controversy galore with this man!
FROM REUTERS:
By Luke Baker | JERUSALEM

JERUSALEM U.S. President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, Jared Kushner, met Israeli and Palestinian leaders on Wednesday to try to revive long-fractured Middle East peacemaking that Washington acknowledged will take some time.

Kushner, a 36-year-old real estate developer with little experience of international diplomacy or political negotiation, arrived in Israel on Wednesday morning and was due to spend barely 20 hours on the ground.

Video showed him giving Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a friend of Kushner’s father, a handshake and a hug as they prepared to sit down with the Israeli ambassador to Washington, the U.S. ambassador to Israel and other senior officials for preliminary discussions.

“This is an opportunity to pursue our common goals of security, prosperity and peace,” Netanyahu said. “Jared, I welcome you here in that spirit. I know of your efforts, the president’s efforts, and I look forward to working with you to achieve these common goals.”

Kushner replied: “The president sends his best regards and it’s an honor to be here with you.”

Kushner did not speak to the media or take questions, maintaining the circumspect profile he has established since Trump took office in January.

U.S. officials and Israeli leaders “underscored that forging peace will take time and stressed the importance of doing everything possible to create an environment conducive to peacemaking,” the White House later said in a statement.

Kushner traveled to Ramallah, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, for two hours of talks with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas after iftar, the evening meal that breaks the daily Ramadan fast.

Abbas spokesman Nabil Abu Rdainah said all major issues at the heart of the conflict were discussed.

U.S. officials called the trip part of an effort to keep the conversation going rather than the launching of a new phase in the peace process, saying that Kushner and Jason Greenblatt, the president’s special representative for international negotiations, are likely to return often.

Trump has described peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians as “the ultimate deal” and made it a priority. As well as receiving both Netanyahu and Abbas in the White House, he visited the region last month.

But it remains unclear what approach Trump, via Kushner and Greenblatt, plans to take on resolving one of the world’s most intractable conflicts.

For at least two decades, the goal of U.S.-led diplomacy has been a “two-state solution”, meaning an independent Palestinian state living side-by-side and at peace with Israel.

But when Trump met Netanyahu in Washington in February, he said he was not fixed on two states saying, “I’m looking at two-state and one-state, and I like the one that both parties like”.

12 ‘BULLET POINTS’

Netanyahu has in the past given conditional backing to two states. But ahead of his last election victory in 2015, he promised there would never be a Palestinian state on his watch, a remark seen as an attempt to shore up right-wing support.

In discussions with Greenblatt before Kushner’s visit, Palestinian sources said the phrase “two-state solution” had not been used.

Palestinian sources said that ahead of Kushner’s meeting with Abbas, they had been asked to draw up a list of 12 “bullet point” demands they would want met in any negotiations.

They saw it as a helpful exercise in focusing on core elements rather than an oversimplification of a complex issue.

Trump administration officials have said that if they are going to make progress on peace, they do not want to get bogged down in process but to move rapidly on tackling what are known as “final status” issues, the complexities around Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees, water resources, security and borders.

Those have long been thorny problems in the multiple rounds of peace negotiations launched by both Republican and Democratic presidents since the mid-1990s. It remains unclear what new approach Trump’s administration may have to untangling disputes that blend politics, land, religion and ethnicity and have defied resolution for 70 years.

(Additional reporting by Jeffrey Heller and Ali Sawafta; Editing by Howard Goller)

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-palestinians-usa-talks-idUSKBN19C162

AND FOR A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE:

Even before Benjamin Netanyahu locked him in a warm embrace, Jared Kushner began his effort to broker peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians by making it clear that he completely accepts Israel’s vision of itself as an innocent victim.

That’s because Kushner started his 15-hour trip to the Middle East on Wednesday by mourning with the family of an Israeli police officer, Hadas Malka, who was killed by a Palestinian assailant in East Jerusalem on Friday.

Since her death, Israelis have been outraged over the murder of Malka, who was a member of the border police force charged with maintaining Israeli control in the Old City of Jerusalem, one of the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967.

Read more:

https://theintercept.com/2017/06/21/jared-kushners-pursuit-middle-east-peace-looks-lot-like-total-surrender-israel/

See also:

Jared Kushner: “There Is Something Very Strange About This Man”: Video

U.S. tells UN rights forum to remove ‘chronic anti-Israel bias’

Image result for UN slams US Israel bias

By Stephanie Nebehay | GENEVA

GENEVA The Trump administration gave formal notice on Tuesday that it is reviewing its participation in the U.N. Human Rights Council and called for reforming the body to eliminate what it called its “chronic anti-Israel bias”.

“The United States is looking carefully at this Council and our participation in it. We see some areas for significant strengthening,” Nikki Haley, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, told the Geneva forum, opening a three-week session.

The Council’s critical stance of Israel has long been a contentious issue for the United States, Israel’s main ally.

The body has taken a strong position against Israel’s occupation of territory seized in the 1967 Middle East war, its treatment of Palestinians, and its building of Jewish settlements. Most countries consider the settlements, in areas the Palestinians envisage as part of an eventual independent state, illegal.

Washington says the Council is stacked with opponents of Israel and boycotted it for three years under President George W. Bush before rejoining under Barack Obama in 2009.

“Tragically, we’ve been down this road before, Haley later told the Graduate Institute of Geneva. “America does not seek to leave the Human Rights Council. We seek to reestablish the Council’s legitimacy.”

She named Venezuela, Cuba, China, Burundi, and Saudi Arabia as not upholding the highest standards despite their membership and said that the forum was becoming “discredited” like its predecessor body, the Human Rights Commission.

The 47-member Council adopted five “biased” resolutions on Israel and the Palestinian territory at its March session, but never even considered a resolution on Venezuela, she said.

“This relentless, pathological campaign against a country that actually has a strong human rights record makes a mockery not of Israel, but of the Council itself,” Haley said, as some in the audience interrupted briefly with laughter at the remark.

She called for the Council to address serious human rights violations in Venezuela and for the government of President Nicolas Maduro to address them.

“If Venezuela cannot, it should voluntarily step down from its seat on the Human Rights Council until it can get its own house in order. Being a member of this council is a privilege, and no country who is a human rights violator should be allowed a seat at the table,” she said.

Haley called for the council to adopt strong resolutions on abuses in Syria, Eritrea, Belarus, Ukraine and the Democratic Republic of Congo at its session.

Some activists urged Washington to focus on abuses at home.

“It’s hard to take Ambassador Haley seriously on U.S. support for human rights in light of Trump administration actions like the Muslim ban and immigration crackdowns,” Jamil Dakwar, director of the human rights program at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), told Reuters.

“The United States must get its own house in order and make human rights at home a priority – then, it can begin to credibly demand the same of other countries abroad.”

(additional reporting by Tom Miles, Editing by Angus MacSwan)

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-un-rights-idUKKBN18X16W

Hmmmm….truth? Bias?

%d bloggers like this: