Comment by sott.net: Damning new evidence came to light last month that clearly implicates the Blair government in covering-up the murder of British scientist Dr. David Kelly. And this month it was announced that the UK's Attorney General would investigate a dossier submitted by a former KGB agent, now resident in the UK, detailing how the scientist was "exterminated in a planned assassination."
So can we expect the British government to overturn the 70 year timelock it placed on files related to Kelly's postmortem? Unlikely. When SOTT.net pulled on the threads related to his murder several years ago, it unravelled a series of connections that made plain why this man had to be silenced and why his murder had to be covered up.
With the new British government acknowledging that the case is far from closed, it seems timely to revisit the dark activities unearthed by Kelly's death.
Israel is working on a biological weapon that would harm Arabs but not Jews, according to Israeli military and western intelligence sources. The weapon, targeting victims by ethnic origin, is seen as Israel's response to Iraq's threat of chemical and biological attacks.
A scientist there said the task was hugely complicated because both Arabs and Jews are of Semitic origin. But he added: "They have, however, succeeded in pinpointing a particular characteristic in the genetic profile of certain Arab communities, particularly the Iraqi people."Read More...
Des douzaines de rabbins signent une déclaration condamnant l'arrestation du rabbin Yitzhak Shapira, l'auteur principal du livre "La Torah des Rois" (King's Torah).
Ces rabbins attestent que Shapira a énoncé une vérité de la loi juive ("Halakha"), une vérité que plusieurs tiennent cependant à maintenir sous le boisseau. ("Tu ne tueras point" serait donc un commandement qui ne s'applique qu'entre juifs!)
La franchise du rabbin Shapira lui vaudra-t-elle la prison?
Rabbis oppose Yitzhak's arrestDozens of rabbis, National Religious figures sign condemnation of Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira's arrest over book. Rabbi Aviner tells Ynet: I am opposed to book, but religious laws governing killing non-Jews outlined in it are legitimate, must be dealt with halachically'
Le rabbin d’Yitzhar, entre les mains de la police Par YAAKOV LAPPIN La police a arrêté le rabbin d’Yitzhar, Yossef Elitzur-Hershkowitz, dans la nuit de mercredi. Elle le soupçonne d’incitation à la haine raciale et de possession de textes racistes.
Cette arrestation s’inscrit dans une enquête plus large sur le livre Torat Hamelech (La Torah du roi), co-écrit par Elitzur-Hershkowitz et le rabbin Itzhak Shapira de l’implantation d’Yitzhar, en Judée-Samarie. Le livre traite des règles de guerre et notamment des conditions dans lesquelles des non-Juifs peuvent être tués sans enfreindre les lois religieuses. Entre liberté de religion et incitation
Depuis sa publication en 2009, l’ouvrage suscite la controverse. La police a interrogé Shapira le mois dernier. Elle a également confisqué des copies du texte, dans la yeshiva d’Yitzhar.
Le rabbin Dov LIOR
Les rabbins Dov Lior de Kiryat Arba et Yaacov Yossef, fils du leader spirituel du parti Shas, Ovadia Yossef, soutiennent l’ouvrage et ses auteurs. Ils ont toutefois refusé de répondre aux questions de la police.
Pour le représentant du ministère public, Shaï Nitzan, s’en est trop : "Le fait d’être rabbin en Israël ne donne pas l’immunité. Ils tombent aussi sous le coup de la loi", a-t-il expliqué à la radio de l’armée. "La liberté de religion ne permet pas de faire n’importe quoi. Si quelqu’un incite à la haine raciale, une enquête doit être ouverte contre lui. Il y a des limites à ne pas dépasser."
Des centaines de rabbins d’extrême-droite ont pris part, mercredi, à un séminaire "en l’honneur de la Torah et de son indépendance". Sans être d’accord avec tout ce qui est écrit dans l’ouvrage controversé, ils demandent à l’Etat de "ne pas se mêler des affaires des religieux". Des figures tutélaires, comme le rabbin de Ramat Gan, Yaacov Ariel, et le rabbin Haïm Druckman étaient également présents lors de l’événement.
NDLR - Les communiqués diffusés dans certaines synagogues d’Israël, démentent les implications des rabbins Dov Lior et Yaakov Yossef, et indiquent même que les préfaces publiées en leur nom dans ce livre seraient des faux. Un grand nombre de rabbins du mouvement sioniste pour la plus part ont signé des motions de soutien aux rabbins Dov Lior et Yaakov Yossef, qui sont des sommités de la Torah. D’autre part la question posée serait la suivante :
Est-ce qu’un rabbin qui enseignerait les lois de la guerre en se basant sur les textes du corpus rabbinique serait en infraction avec la loi ?
Un grand nombre de rabbins affirment que non, et que ce serait là une ingérence de la politique dans le rôle du rabbin dont la mission est la transmission du savoir rabbinique.
pour exemple nous soumettons un verset qui peu faire débat : nombre chapitre 33 verset 55. Soirée de solidarité à l’Hotel Rmamada de Jérusalem, avec le rav Lior et Yaakov Yossef.
Près de deux cents rabbins, du courant sioniste-religieux, se sont réunis jeudi soir à l’hôtel Ramada de Jérusalem pour exprimer leur soutien à leurs confrères, menacés d’être soumis à une enquête policière pour ce qu’on pourrait appeler un « délit d’opinions ».
Des poursuites ont en effet été engagées contre certains d’entre eux en raison du soutien qu’ils auraient apporté à un livre, Torat Hamelekh, dans lequel il serait écrit notamment qu’il est permis de tuer des non-juifs mettant en danger la paix d’Israël. Les rabbins concernés ont refusé de répondre à la convocation de la police, arguant du fait qu’il s’agissait d’une enquête politique et que la Torah ne pouvait en aucun cas faire l’objet d’investigations ».
Lors de cette soirée de solidarité, le Rav de Kiriat Arba Dov Lior, qui est l’une des personnes impliquées dans cette affaire, a notamment déclaré « qu’il n’était pas question de laisser quelques fonctionnaires donner des directives et décréter ce qui est permis et ce qui est interdit ».
Le Rav Lior a encore souligné que « c’était le rôle des rabbins de rappeler les règles de la loi juive sans craindre les répercussions de leurs propos ». A ce stade, on ne sait pas encore si la police entamera une procédure contre les rabbins ou si elle renoncera à son enquête. Rappelons que l’auteur du livre, le Rav Itsik Shapira, de la localité de Itshar, a été arrêté à son domicile et soumis à un interrogatoire. Après lui, le Rav Itshak Ginsbourg, directeur de la Yeshiva Od Yossef Haï, a également dû répondre aux questions des enquêteurs.
[AFP] Dans son livre intitulé La Torah du roi, le rabbin israélien justifie le meurtre de non-juifs pour "freiner leurs inclinations malignes".
Un rabbin colon auteur d'un livre justifiant le meurtre, dans certaines circonstances, de goys (non-juifs), y compris des enfants, a été arrêté jeudi 19 août par la police israélienne, a annoncé la radio militaire.
Ce rabbin, Yossef Elitzur, résidant dans la colonie d'Yitzhar dans le nord de la Cisjordanie et co-auteur d'un ouvrage intitulé La Torah du roi, est soupçonné d'incitation à la haine raciale et à la violence.
Dans cet ouvrage publié au début de l'année, les rabbins Elitzur et Yitzhak Shapira affirment que les non-juifs ne sont pas, "par nature, sujets à la compassion" et que les attaquer "peut freiner leurs inclinations malignes", selon des extraits publiés par le quotidien Haaretz.
Les deux auteurs estiment également qu'il peut être licite de tuer les bébés et les enfants des "ennemis d'Israël car il est clair qu'ils nous porteront préjudice lorsqu'ils auront grandi".
"Partout où l'influence de goys constitue une menace pour la vie d'Israël, il est permis de les tuer, même s'il s'agit des Justes parmi les nations", soulignent ces rabbins en faisant allusion à ceux qui ont sauvé des juifs durant la Deuxième Guerre mondiale.
L'ouvrage a été publié avec l'imprimatur de deux autres rabbins plus connus, Dov Lior et Yaakov Yossef, fils du rabbin Ovadia Yossef, fondateur et chef spirituel du Shass, un parti ultra-orthodoxe représenté au gouvernement. Ces deux rabbins ont refusé de répondre à une convocation de la police qui voulait leur demander des explications.
Mercredi soir, plusieurs dizaines de rabbins, d'éducateurs et d'activistes d'extrême droite se sont réunis à Jérusalem pour les soutenir dans leur refus de voir "l'Etat se mêler de la Torah".
Israël: Un rabbin ultra nationaliste, arrêté puis relâché quelques heures plus tard
http://www.kipa-apic.ch/index.php?pw=&na=0,0,0,0,f&ki=211118 Il est soupçonné de racisme envers les non juifs Jérusalem, 20 août 2010 (Apic) Un rabbin ultra, soupçonné de racisme envers les non juifs, a été arrêté jeudi pour être libérer quelques heures plus tard. Yossef Elitzur, rabbin colon, s’était fait remarquer par son livre dans lequel il justifiait le meurtre, dans certaines circonstances, de personnes non juives. Il est permis de tuer les bébés et les enfants des ennemis d’Israël, écrit ce religieux juif.
Yossef Elitzur, rabbin résidant dans la colonie d’Yitzhar dans le nord de la Cisjordanie occupée et co-auteur d’un ouvrage intitulé "La Torah du roi", est soupçonné d’incitation à la haine raciale et à la violence, indique vendredi l’Agence France presse.
Le tribunal de Rishon Le Zion, au sud de Tel-Aviv, a pourtant ordonné sa libération reprochant à la police de ne pas l’avoir convoqué auparavant pour interrogatoire, selon un communiqué de l’association de juristes ul …
At the conclusion of prayers, eight
major state-funded rabbis ambled up to the platform above the crowd,
most representing an official yeshiva from a settlement or major Israeli
city. With their long, gray beards, black suits, black fedoras, and
wizened appearances, they looked as though they had been lifted from the
imagination of some deranged anti-Semite. And here they were to defend a
book that openly justified the mass slaughter of gentile babies, though
to be sure, not all were willing to say that they agreed with its
contents. The only point the rabbis agreed on, at least openly, was that
the state should never scrutinize or punish the speech of religious
authorities. With their penchant for firebreathing tirades against
Arabs, homosexuals, and other evildoers, these rabbis knew they were
next in line if Shapira and Elitzur were officially prosecuted.
Yaakov
Yosef was escorted into the gathering by Baruch Marzel, a notoriously
violent leader of the Jewish terrorist group, Kach. Up at the podium,
Yosef hailed Marzel as a “gever,” or a great man of honor. Yosef was the
son of Ovadiah Yosef, the spiritual guide of the Shas Party and former
Chief Sephardic Rabbi of Israel. Despite Ovadiah Yosef’s penchant for
outrageous ravings (“Goyim were born only to serve. Without that, they
have no place in the world,” he proclaimed in a weekly sermon), he
opposed the publication of Torat Ha’Melech, calling it “racist”
and dangerous to Israel’s international image. But since joining the
extremist, cultic Jewish sect of Chabad, Yaakov had taken on a decidely
more radical posture than his father. (Elitzur was a Chabad rabbi.)
In his speech, Yosef attempted to couch Torat Ha’Melech
within the mainstream tradition of the Torah. Quoting from Psalms
Chapter 79 in order to demonstrate the book’s supposed consistency with
established Halakhic teachings, Yosef declared, “Pour out your wrath on
the nations that do not acknowledge you, on the kingdoms that do not
call on your name; for they have devoured Jacob and destroyed his
homeland.” He then reminded his audience of the Passover tale. “We asked
the Jewish people, ‘You don’t want to read from the Hagadah at the
Passover table [citing the slaughter of non-Jews]? Does anyone want to
change the Bible or the statements of the Torah?” Shapira and Elitzur’s
only crime, Yosef claimed, was remaining faithful to the oral and
written statements contained in the Torah.
Next, Rabbi
Haim Druckman, rose to speak. A former member of Knesset and winner of
the 2012 Israel Prize for education, Druckman was a figurehead of Jewish
extremism in Israel. In 1980, after a group of settlers embarked on a
semi-successful terror plot to maim the leading Palestinian mayors of
the West Bank (they crippled the mayors of Nablus and Ramallah),
Druckman celebrated: “Thus may all of Israel’s enemies perish!” Hunched
over the podium, the hoarse-throated Druckman was careful to avoid
endorsing the contents of Torat Ha’Melech, volunteering only
that he “hope[d] what happened here will end soon and that we will never
have to make such conferences again.”
A more strident
statement of support came from Rabbi Yehoshua Shapira, head of the
state-sponsored yeshiva in the Tel Aviv suburb of Ramat Gan. Yehoshua
Shapira bellowed, “The obligation to sacrifice your life is above all
others when fighting those who wish to destroy the authority of the
Torah. It is not only true against non-Jews who are trying to destroy it
but against Jewish people from any side.”
Outside the
conference hall, where the Kahanist Knesset member Michael Ben-Ari
milled around with Baruch Marzel and Itamar Ben-Gvir, another aide he
pulled from the ranks of Kach, Yossi and I chatted with a 22-year-old
settler who spoke to us in an American accent. We demanded to know if he
was willing to defend the provisions in Torat Ha’Melech
justifying the murder of innocent children. Without hesitation or any
initial shame, the young man, who refused to give his name, told us,
“There is such a concept in Jewish law as an enemy population, and under
very, very specific circumstances, according to various rabbinic
opinions, it would be seemingly permissible to kill, uh, uh....” For a
moment, he trailed off, and his eyes darted around the room. But the
settler managed to collect himself and complete his statement. “To kill
children,” he muttered uncomfortably.
The genocidal philosophy expressed in Torat Ha’Melech
emerged from the fevered atmosphere of a settlement called Yitzhar
located in the northern West Bank near the Palestinian city of Nablus.
There, Shapira helps lead the settlement’s Od Yosef Chai yeshiva,
holding sway over a small army of fanatics eager to terrorize the
Palestinians tending to their crops and livestock in the valleys below
them. Shapira was raised in an infl uential religious nationalist
family. Like Yaakov Yosef, he took a radical turn after joining the
Chabad sect under the tutelage of Rabbi Yitzchok Ginsburgh, the director
of Yitzhar’s Od Yosef Chai yeshiva who defended seven of his students
who murdered an innocent Palestinian girl by asserting the superiority
of Jewish blood. In 1994, when the Jewish fanatic Baruch Goldstein
massacred 29 Palestinian worshippers at the Cave of the Patriarchs in
Hebron, Ginsburgh lionized Goldstein in a lengthy article titled
“Baruch, Hagever,” or “Baruch, the Great Man.” Ginsburgh cast
Goldstein’s murder spree as an act consistent with core Halakhic
teachings, from the importance of righteous revenge to the necessity of
the “eradication of the seed of Amalek.”
Under the
direction of Ginsburgh and Shapira, Od Yosef Chai has raked in nearly
$50,000 from the Israeli Ministry of Social Affairs since 2007. The
Israeli Ministry of Education has supplemented the government’s support
by pumping over $250,000 into the yeshiva’s coffers between 2006 and
2007. Od Yosef Chai has also benefited handsomely from donations from a
tax-exempt American non-profit called the Central Fund of Israel.
Located inside the Marc Brothers Textiles store in Midtown Manhattan,
the Central Fund transferred at least $30,000 to Od Yosef Chai between
2007 and 2008. (Itamar Marcus, the brother of Central Fund founder
Kenneth, is the director of Palestine Media Watch, a pro-Israel
organization ironically dedicated to exposing Palestinian incitement).
In April 2013, the Israeli government finally announced it would cease
funding Od Yosef Chai, citing the yeshiva as a threat to public safety.
Though
he did not specify the identity of the non-Jewish “enemy” in the pages
of his book, Rabbi Shapira’s longstanding connection to terrorist
attacks against Palestinian civilians exposes the true identity of his
targets. In 2006, another rabbi in Shapira’s yeshiva, Yossi Peli, was
briefly held by Israeli police for urging his supporters to murder all
Palestinian males over the age of 13. Two years later, Shapira was
questioned by Shin Bet under suspicion that he helped orchestrate a
homemade rocket attack against a Palestinian village near Nablus. Though
he was released, Shapira’s name arose in connection with another act of
terror, when in January 2010 the Israeli police raided his settlement
seeking the vandals who set fire to a nearby mosque. After arresting 10
settlers, the Shin Bet held five of Shapira’s confederates under
suspicion of arson. None ever saw the inside of a prison cell.
Asked
if the students at the Oded Yosef Chai yeshiva were taking the law into
their own hands in attacking Palestinians, one of Shapira’s colleagues,
Rabbi David Dudkevitch, replied, “The issue is not taking the law into
our hands, but rather taking the entire State into our hands.”
Jewish
settler violence has been a fact of life in the occupied West Bank
since the 1970s. Since 2007, however, settler violence has spiked
dramatically. A 2008 article in Ha’aretz attributed the rise in attacks
to the 2005 withdrawal of settlers from the Gaza Strip, after which West
Bank settlers vowed to answer each state action against them by with a
“price tag” assault on Palestinians, thus establishing a deterrent
“balance of terror.”
But a detailed analysis of
documented settler attacks that occurred during the past decade by the
Washington-based research institute, the Palestine Center revealed the
violence as structural, not reactive. Staged without pretext and most
frequently in West Bank areas under Israeli security control, the
settlers acted without restraint. The report identified northern
settlements such as Yitzhar as hotbeds of violent activity, with
shooting attacks and arson on the rise. According to Yesh Din, an
Israeli human rights group, the Israeli police closed 91 percent of
investigations into settler attacks without indicting anyone, and
usually failed to locate the suspects.
According to a
March 2011 Ynet-Gesher poll of 504 Israeli adults, 48 percent of
Israelis supported settler violence in retaliation to Palestinian or
Israeli government actions, with only 33 percent stating their belief
that settler violence was “never justified.” While a vast majority of
Orthodox and religious nationalist respondents expressed strong support
for settler attacks, 36 percent of secular Israelis did as well—a
remarkably high number for a population that lives primarily inside the
Green Line.
While Ginsburgh and Shapira provided the
halakhic seal of approval for settler rampages in the north of the West
Bank, in the south, their comrade, Dov Lior, the chief rabbi of Hebron,
has cheered on the murder of anyone, Jew or non-Jew, who appeared to
interfere with the redemptive cause of Greater Israel. At the funeral
for Baruch Goldstein, Lior extolled the mass killer as “a righteous man”
who was “holier than all the martyrs of the Holocaust.” Thanks in part
to Lior’s efforts, a shrine to Goldstein stands inside the Jewish
settlement of Kiryat Arba, where Lior presides over the yeshiva. At the
same time, Lior pronounced Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin a moser (a Jew
who snitches to the goyim) and a rodef (a traitor worthy of
elimination), helping establish the religious justification for Yigal
Amir, one of Lior’s admirers, to assassinate him.
Lior’s
penchant for overheated, fascistic tirades has not diminished with age.
He has warned Jewish women not to allow in vitro fertilization with the
sperm of non-Jews, claiming that “gentile sperm leads to barbaric
offspring,” described Arabs as “evil camel riders” and said captive
Palestinian militants could be used as subjects for live human
experiments. The short, gray-bearded rabbi has even held forth on the
evils of “boogie woogie,” declaring that rock and roll “expresses
people’s animalistic and lower urges.” He added, “Something that belongs
to the rhythms of kushim [Negroes] does not belong in our world.”
Thanks
to the growing corps of religious nationalist youth signing up for army
service after studying in hesder yeshivas, or institutions of religious
learning that train young men for the military, Lior has secured
considerable influence inside the military. In 2008, when the chief
rabbi of the Israeli army, Brigadier General Avichai Ronski, brought a
group of military intelligence officers to Hebron for a special tour, he
concluded the day with a private meeting with Lior, who was allowed to
regale the officers with his views on modern warfare, which includes
vehement support for the collective punishment of Palestinians. Ronski,
for his part, has overseen the distribution of extremist tracts to
soldiers during Operation Cast Lead, including “Baruch, Hagever,” and a
pamphlet stating, “When you show mercy to a cruel enemy, you are being
cruel to pure and honest soldiers.”
In October 2009, a
group of soldiers from the army’s notoriously abusive Shimshon Battalion
upheld a protest banner vowing to refuse orders to evacuate settlements
during a swearing-in ceremony at the Western Wall—“Shimshon does not
expel.” When the army punished the two soldiers who organized the
display of disloyalty by ejecting them from the unit, rabbis Ginsburgh
and Lior promptly planned a religious revival in Jerusalem in their
honor. A source told the Jerusalem Post that the ceremony would include
the mass distribution of the newly published Torat Ha’Melech.
Weeks after the incident, two more major Israeli army brigades, Nahson
and Kfir, decorated their training bases with banners announcing their
refusal to evacuate settlements.
Less than two years
later, Matanya Ofan, the cofounder of a Jewish extremist media outlet
based in Yitzhar, appeared in a viral online video in full army uniform,
cradling an army-issued M-16 in one hand and a copy of Torat Ha’Melech
in the other. The book had come to represent the unofficial code of the
religious nationalist soldier. Staring into the camera, Ofan declared,
“When I come at the border, with God’s grace, I will not listen to the
nonsense that the commanders will tell me, and if I see an enemy coming
towards the border I will do anything to stop him from passing and I
will try and harm him—because this is how we can save the lives of the
Jews. Only this way no Sudani or Syrian will get to Tel Aviv.” A caption
at the end of the video read, “Jews, let’s win.”
By
this time, the ranks of the army were overrun by religious nationalists,
with more than a third of infantry officers expressing a right-wing
religious point of view—a 30 percent jump since 1990. A 2010 study
showed that 13 percent of company commanders lived in West Bank
settlements. The army’s second-in-command, Deputy Chief of Staff Yair
Naveh, was the first religious officer appointed to a position on the
General Staff. He was also the officer implicated in the Anat Kamm
scandal for ordering the assassination of Palestinian militants in
flagrant violation of a Supreme Court ruling.
Another
prominent religious Zionist was Yaakov Amidror, the former director of
the analysis wing of the army’s military intelligence and commander of
its officer academies. A settler with a puffy white beard, Amidror was
appointed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to serve as the director
of his National Security Council. Besides advocating the reoccupation of
the Gaza Strip, Amidror stirred controversy by calling for summary
executions of Israeli soldiers who refused to advance in battle, and for
using disproportionate force against the enemy’s civilian population.
“What
should be said is, kill more of the bastards on the other side, so that
we’ll win. Period,” he bellowed during a panel discussion on “National
Values in the Israel Defense Forces.”
While Amidror’s views appeared to dovetail with some of those of the authors of Torat Ha’Melech,
he did not dare defend them. This was a job for rabbis Lior and Yaakov
Yosef, who became the most prominent apologists, if not the most
enthusiastic boosters, of Torat Ha’Melech. In early 2011, with
the controversy over the book still raging across Israel, Yosef and Lior
provided the supreme rabbinical stamp of approval: a haskama, the kind
of endorsement provided at the preface of Judaic works by scholars
testifying to their halakhic value and the veracity of their contents.
“I
was gladdened, seeing this wonderful creation,” Lior said of the book.
That February, the minister of Internal Security issued an arrest
warrant for Lior after he refused to come in for questioning on
suspicion of incitement to racism, a crime in Israel that is seldom
punished, but which carries a penalty of as much as five years in
prison. Lior rejected the state’s order on the grounds that he had no
obligation to abide by its rules; the Torah itself was being put on
trial, he claimed.
Thus the self-proclaimed voice of Judaism in its purest form placed himself above the law.
Meanwhile,
the arrest order provoked calls for total resistance from right-wing
members of Knesset like Yaakov Katz, who said the government was
behaving like the “dark regimes” that persecuted Jews throughout
history, casting the attorney general in the role of Nazis and Pharoahs.
Twenty-four members of Netanyahu’s coalition, including David Rotem,
the chair of the Knesset’s Constitution, Law and Justice Committee,
joined Katz in denouncing Lior’s arrest. Both chief rabbis of Israel,
Yona Metzger and Shlomo Amar, issued a joint statement denouncing the
arrest of a man they called “one of Israel’s greatest rabbis.”
The
religious right’s ire exploded at a boisterous protest outside the
Supreme Court in July 2011, with hundreds of young settlers breaching a
wall outside the courthouse and attempting to storm the building. That
same month, when two right-wing activists were caught breaking into his
home, Shai Nitzan, the deputy state prosecutor, was forced to travel
with a special security detail.
In May 2012, the
government buckled under unrelenting pressure—the right-wing caved to
the far-right—with Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein ruling that he had
insufficient evidence to conclude that Torat Ha’Melech incited
racism, mainly because the book was written in a “general manner.” Lior
walked free along with the book’s authors, Shapira and Elitzur,
consolidating their political dominance while ensuring that the tract
they produced would continue circulating freely within the ranks of the
army. Astonished by the state’s decision, Sefi Rachlevsky, a liberal
columnist for Ha’aretz, pronounced Lior “the ruler of Israel.”
Having
successfully exerted its influence on the military and the justice
system, the religious right set out into mixed cities across Israel to
promote segregation and punish miscegenation in a campaign that spread
block by block, street by street.
[American Free Press] The King’s Torah: Kill All Who Endanger a Chosen One
RABBI YITZHAK SHAPIRA, who is a “spiritual leader” for extremist Jews, is making headlines around the world for his new book, The King’s Torah, which sanctions killing non-Jews, even children and babies, in any situation in which “a non-Jew’s presence endangers Jewish lives.” This is acceptable, says Shapira, even if “the gentile” is “not at all guilty for the situation that has been created.” According to journalist Jonathon Cook, Shlomo Aviner, another of the settlement movement’s spiritual leaders, is defending the book’s points as a “legitimate stance . . . that should be taught in Jewish seminaries.” [American Free Press]
In the 230-page book, 'The King’s Torah', Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira and his co-author, Rabbi Yosef Elitzur argue that Jewish law permits the killing of non-Jews in a wide variety of circumstances. The terms 'gentiles' and 'non-Jews' in the book are widely understood as references to Palestinians, notes Jonathan Cook.
THE KING'S TORAH, ISRAELI "BEST SELLER" JUSTIFIES TERROR
LEGAL JUSTIFICATION FOR ATTACKS ON GENTILES
Conservative interpretations of Jewish law, currently being used to
justify resettlement of Palestinians and even total removal of all
non-Jews from greater Palestine and adjacent areas have long been used
to justify acts such as the attack on the USS Liberty, bombings of US
facilities in Egypt and, less openly, “false flag” terror attacks
attributed to Muslims but performed by Israeli security forces. Rabbi
Yitzhak Shapira and Rabbi Yosef Elitzur, seen as the ethical conscience
behind the Netanyahu government have taken the following position as
reported by Jonathan Cook:
“In the 230-page book, Shapira and his co-author, Rabbi Yosef
Elitzur (The King’s Torah,currently Israel’s best selling book) argue
that Jewish law permits the killing of non-Jews in a wide variety of circumstances. They write that Jews have the right to kill Gentiles in any situation in which “a non-Jew’s presence endangers Jewish lives” even if the Gentile is “not at all guilty for the situation that has been created”.
The book sanctions the killing of non-Jewish children and babies: “There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us, and in such a situation they may be harmed deliberately, and not only during combat with adults.”
The rabbis suggest that harming the children of non-Jewish leaders is justified if it is likely to bring pressure to bear on them to change policy. The authors also advocate committing “cruel deeds to create the proper balance of terror” and treating all members of an “enemy nation” as targets for retaliation, even if they are not directly participating in hostile activities.” (false flag terrorism) Source: GORDON DUFF: FALSE FLAG NUKE ATTACK ON U.S. JUSTIFIED….”KING’S TORAH”
"Our holy Torah will not be subject to interrogation!"
Two prominent rabbis from the national-religious camp refused police requests on Monday that they undergo questioning for their endorsements of a controversial book authored by Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira of the West Bank settlement of Yitzhar.
The book, Torat Hamalech (The King’s Torah), discusses the rules of war and states that in certain situations, non-Jews can be killed. The book has attracted a firestorm of controversy since being published in 2009, and police questioned Shapira over the text last month while raiding his yeshiva, Od Yosef Chai, in Yitzhar in order to confiscate copies.
Rabbi Dov Lior of Kiryat Arba and Rabbi Yaakov Yosef, son of Shas spiritual leader Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, endorsed the book and were summoned by the police’s National Serious and International Crimes (NSCIC) Unit for questioning at its Lod Headquarters.
But in a joint statement issued on Monday, the rabbis said they would not show up for questioning.
‘Our holy Torah will not be subject to interrogation!” the statement read. “The attempt to prevent the rabbis of Israel from expressing their opinion, the opinion of the Torah, through intimidation and threats is a most severe act and will not succeed. Authorities that act this way join the authorities of evil that have banned the study of Torah and lifted up their hand against the Torah of Israel.”
The rabbis defended the book, describing it as “the real instruction guide on the rules of warfare according to our holy Torah.”
Responding to the statement, a police spokesman told The Jerusalem Post on Monday evening that the authorities would “not discuss an ongoing investigation.”
Un
rabbin de Cisjordanie a publié il y a deux semaines un livre dans
lequel il autorise les Juifs à tuer les « Gentils » qui « menacent »
Israël.
Rabbi Yitzhak Shapiro, qui dirige une yeshiva (centre d'étude talmudique), précise dans son ouvrage La Torah du roi, que même les bébés et les enfants peuvent être tués s'ils représentent une menace pour la nation...
« Il est permis de tuer les Justes parmi les Nations, même si ils ne sont pas responsables de la situation menaçante », écrit-il aussi, ajoutant : « Si nous tuons un païen qui a péché ou a violé l'un des sept commandements - parce que nous nous soucions des commandements - il n'y a rien de mal à l'assassiner ».
Plusieurs rabbins éminents, dont le rabbin Yithak Ginzburg et le rabbin
Yaakov Yosef, ont recommandé le livre à leurs élèves et disciples.Il
faut dire que lorsque l'on connait le Talmud, ces thèses ne sont guère étonnantes...
Just weeks after the arrest of alleged Jewish terrorist, Yaakov
Teitel, a West Bank rabbi on Monday released a book giving Jews
permission to kill Gentiles who threaten Israel.
Rabbi
Yitzhak Shapiro, who heads the Od Yosef Chai Yeshiva in the Yitzhar
settlement, wrote in his book "The King's Torah" that even babies and
children can be killed if they pose a threat to the nation.
Shapiro based the majority of his teachings on passages quoted from the Bible, to which he adds his opinions and beliefs.
"It
is permissable to kill the Righteous among Nations even if they are not
responsible for the threatening situation," he wrote, adding: "If we
kill a Gentile who has sinned or has violated one of the seven
commandments - because we care about the commandments - there is nothing
wrong with the murder."
Several
prominent rabbis, including Rabbi Yithak Ginzburg and Rabbi Yaakov
Yosef, have recommended the book to their students and followers.
Armée canadienne: augmentation vertigineusedes infractionsDepuis dix ans (...) le nombre de procès sommaires intentés contre des militaires a fait un bond vertigineux de 346 %. C’est ce qui ressort des dix derniers rapports annuels du juge-avocat général sur l’administration de la justice militaire... Une telle augmentation coïncide notamment avec le déploiement des troupes en Afghanistan. Plusieurs infractions graves ont d’ailleurs été commises à Kandahar ou au Canada par des militaires qui revenaient d’une mission à l’étranger.
Jose Maria Aznar ---- John Bolton ---- Alejandro Toledo ---- Dore Gold
Powerful New Lobby Group Set in Motion
by Michael Collins Piper
To much acclaim, a handful of former politicians from Western Europe—backed by the media clout of a consortium of super-rich pro-Israel families—recently gathered in Paris to proclaim on May 31 that, “There is no West without Israel.” This is a rather amazing point of view, considering that the recorded history of Western civilization extends back for thousands of years.
Declaring the West cannot survive unless the Western “democracies” stand firm with Israel—that “Israel’s fight is our fight,” that “the assault on Israel is itself an assault on Judeo-Christian values,” and that “Israel’s future is our fate,” the Friends of Israel Initiative, or FII, was set in motion. They are concerned that people worldwide are growing disgusted with Israel and they are fomenting fears of a nuclear Iran.
While proclaiming it “differs from previous such ventures primarily in that it is being led by people who are not Jewish,” the record shows the fine hand of the global Zionist network is singularly behind the campaign. Although this forum is declaring its impartiality, it is no more than a front for Zionist billionaire Rupert Murdoch and a stable of his employees and henchmen.
The group’s chairman, Jose Maria Aznar, former prime minister of Spain, is a member of the News Corporation’s board of directors, which is the global media giant controlled by Murdoch. Murdoch’s operation has been bankrolled by a global consortium funded by the Rothschild family of Europe, the Oppenheimers of South Africa and the Bronfmans of Canada, together known as “The Billionaire Gang of Four.” So Aznar owes his patronage to forces beyond his native Spain.
What’s more, on its web site, the FII belies its purported independence by acknowledging that it “formed from a group of high-level personalities supported by a large network of influential opinionmakers,” citing among them such closely interconnected figures as:
• William Kristol, editor of Murdoch’s “neo-conservative” Weekly Standard. Kristol has also attended Bilderberg meetings, founded under the sponsorship of the Rothschild family.
• Elliot Abrams, member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)—New York offshoot of the Rothschild-controlled Royal Institute of International Affairs in London—and son-in-law of Norman Podhoretz, protégé of the late Irving Kristol, father of the above-noted William Kristol and longtime editor of the American Jewish Committee’s Commentary (now edited by Abrams’s brother-in-law John Podhoretz).
• Dore Gold, president of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, a foreign policy voice for the hard-line “right-wing” elements in Israel. A former advisor to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a former Israeli ambassador to the UN, Gold has been a leading advocate for the global “Community of Democracies” founded to counteract nationalist sentiments among blocs within the United Nations (led by, for example, Venezuela and Iran), who reject Zionist influence and domination by the New World Order.
• Jeffrey Gedmin—another CFR member long active in “neoconservative” policy initiatives, including the so-called Community of Democracies;
• Alan Mendoza, director of the Israel-Diaspora Trust and founder of the Henry Jackson Society, named after the flamboyantly pro-Israel U.S. senator who employed Richard Perle and Stephen Bryan, who were investigated by the FBI of espionage on behalf of Israel.
• Allen Roth, president of One Jerusalem—funded by casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson—which demands absolute Jewish control over the holy city. Also a long-time advisor to billionaire Ronald Lauder, president of the World Jewish Congress.
Among the official “founding members” of FII, there are others figures with equally interesting resumes, in light of their claim to “independence”:
• Alejandro Toledo, former president of Peru, known for his close ties to powerful pro-Israel families who constitute an influential clique among Peru’s elite.
• John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the UN and a key figure in “neo-conservative” circles including the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, founded by the aforementioned Stephen Bryan.
• David Trimble, a pro-British politician from Northern Ireland who was given the title “baron” by the British queen and who was appointed by Israel to the Israeli-controlled commission “investigating” Israel’s attack on the peaceful flotilla bringing aid to Gaza.
• Fiamma Nirenstein, a member of the Italian Parliament, who lives part of the year in Israel. Ms.Nirenstein is associated with the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and has written laudatory prefaces to the writings of Muslim-hating propagandist Bernard Lewis
and Soviet-born-turned-Israeli hard-liner Natan Sharansky, whose writings on global democracy were said to inspire the foreign policy of George W. Bush.
• George Weigel, an American Catholic writer who was celebrated for his attacks on Pope Benedict for reinstating excommunicated leaders of the Society of Pope Pius X because of reputed “Holocaust denial” by one of those clerics, Bishop Richard Williamson.
• Robert Agostinelli, an American billionaire investor whose entre into the world of finance came through his earlier association with the Zionist banking houses of Lazard Freres and Goldman-Sachs.
While these names proclaim “Israel is a normal Western country,” they ignore the fact Israel’s entire economy is based on billions of dollars in grants, subsidies, loans and other schemes—said by ex-Rep. Jim Traficant to reach as high as $25 billion—not to mention billions in “reparations” payments given annually to Israel by the German government. No “normal Western country” operates on any such foundation.
They also fail to acknowledge Israel is a theocracy known to discriminate against both its Christian and Muslim Arab citizens. In addition there are rising conflicts between secular Jews and Orthodox Jews, to the point that many have predicted a possible civil war between them. There is no other such unstable theocracy existing in any “normal” Western state.
Saying “Israel’s right to exist should not be questioned,” these Friends of Israel ignore the point made by former high-ranking CIA official Michael Scheuer, who was head of the CIA’s bin Laden tracking division:
Much of the unreality in U.S. attitudes toward Israel is a result of a historical arguments that Israel has “the right to exist.” Clearly, no nation has the “right to exist.” Darwinian logic applies to nation states as well as to the other components of the animal kingdom. . . . Nations exist as long as they can defend themselves, contain internal societal rot at non-fatal levels, maintain economic viability, and do not gratuitously make a constellation of more powerful enemies. This truism applies equally to all: The United States has no more right to exist than does Israel. . . . Supporting Israel’s “right to exist” is especially a historical when it is advocated by Americans, as it is a “right” they have never insisted on for their own nation. If they had, we would never [have] talked or negotiated with the Soviets after Premier Nikita Khrushchev promised that the USSR would “bury” the United States—surely a failure to acknowledge America’s right to exist if ever there was one.
And when these Friends of Israel say “Israel is our ally,” they ignore Israel’s attack on the USS Liberty in 1967, resulting in the deaths of 34 Americans and the wounding of 172 others —an act designed to provoke a U.S. attack on Egypt which nearly resulted when President Johnson ordered a nuclear assault on Cairo (an order quickly withdrawn) thinking (as Israel intended) that Egypt had attacked the vessel.
The “Israelization” of America Judas Goat Number One: George W. Bush— Shill for Zionist Theoretician Natan Sharansky: Planning for Global War in the Name of “Democracy”
President George W. Bush may well rank—by virtue of his high office—as perhaps America’s most insidious and most dangerous Judas Goat. His role in guiding America into the war in Iraq—not to mention his lead part in covering up the truth about the forces behind the 9-11 attack on America—has cast him as a veritable Enemy Within-in-Chief, so to speak. Now he urges America to fight another war against Iran.
However, the truth is that Bush’s messianic call for a worldwide “democratic revolution” (enunciated in his second inaugural address and sounding much like the rhetoric of the global Trotskyite Bolshevik movement) was not really of his own making. His words were written by others far more intelligent than Young Bush. And the origins of Bush’s newfound philosophy are very telling indeed. Perhaps what is most frightening is that the rhetoric of the American president—prodded by his behind-the-scenes “advisors”—points toward more and more military action around the globe in the years to come.
Although a documentary, Bush’s Brain, suggested that Karl Rove, purportedly the president’s chief political tactician, is the mastermind who tells the president what to think, it is now clear—based on solid evidence—that Soviet-born Israeli cabinet minister Anatoly “Natan” Sharansky is the one who actually has bragging rights to that title. Despite the fact that he gained worldwide attention in the 1970s as a Soviet dissident, make no mistake in thinking that Sharansky was ever any kind of Western-style free-market conservative or anti-communist.
Instead, Sharansky was a traditional old-line communist who—like many others in the Soviet Union—simply ran afoul of the ruling regime.
But thanks to an adoring international media, Sharansky capitalized on his imprisonment by the Soviets—who accused him of being a CIA spy—and emerged as a much-touted “human rights activist.”
Later, after his release from prison, Sharansky emigrated to Israel and soon established himself as one of Israel’s most outspoken extremist leaders who damned even Israel’s heavy-handed Prime Minister Ariel Sharon—known as “the Israeli Caesar”—as being “too soft” on the Palestinian Christians and Muslims.
The role of Sharansky in guiding Bush’s thinking is no “conspiracy theory.” Instead, disclosures from the White House itself—published, although not prominently, in the mainstream media—demonstrated that not only did Sharansky personally consult with the president in drafting the now-controversial inaugural address, but also that at least two of Sharansky’s key American publicists were among those brought in to compose Bush’s revolutionary proclamation.
Bush himself told The Washington Times in an interview published on January 12, 2005—even prior to his inauguration: “If you want a glimpse of how I think about foreign policy, read Natan Sharansky’s book, The Case for Democracy. It’s a great book.”
Buried in the very last paragraph of a very lengthy article published on January 22, 2005 The New York Times reported that “The president was given [Sharansky’s] book and asked Mr. Sharansky to meet with him
in the Oval Office . . .Mr. Bush also gave the book to several aides, urging them to read it as well. Mr. Sharansky visited the White House last November.”The Times did not say who gave the book to the president in the first place, but to find out who actually pressed the book upon the president might be very telling indeed.
Affirming the Times’ disclosure, The Washington Post likewise revealed on January 22, 2005 (although, again, in the closing paragraphs of an extended analysis) that an administration official said that planning for Bush’s address began immediately after the November election and that Bush himself had invited Sharansky to the White House to consult with him and that, in the Post’s words,“Sharansky also helped shape the speech with his book.”
It was the Post which revealed that two well-known hard-line “neoconservative” supporters of Israel—William Kristol, publisher of billionaire Rupert Murdoch’s Weekly Standard magazine, and psychiatristturned-pundit Charles Krauthammer, a strident advocate for harsh U.S. military and economic warfare against the Arab and Muslim worlds—were also among those brought in to help draft the president’s address.
Kristol—in particular—and Krauthammer are generally acknowledged even in the mainstream media in America as being among those we’ve dubbed as “the high priests of war” who were instrumental in orchestrating the U.S.war against Iraq,was a measure high-up on Israel’s “want list” for the Bush administration.
It is no coincidence that the individual on the White House staff whom the Post said helped set up the planning conferences to direct Bush’s thinking was one Peter Wehner, director of the White House Office of Strategic Initiatives.Wehner—it happens—is a Kristol protégé, having been his deputy when Kristol was serving as chief of staff for former Reagan administration Education Secretary William Bennett himself a protégé of Kristol’s very influential father, famed “ex-Trotskyite” communist-turned-neo-conservative, Irving Kristol.
So, considering Kristol’s wide-ranging input, shaping Bush’s mindset, it is really no surprise that, as the Post put it,“Bush’s grand ambitions excited his neoconservative supporters who see his call to put the United States in the forefront of the battle to spread democracy as noble and necessary.”
Meanwhile, for his own part,William Kristol chimed in with an editorial in The Weekly Standard on January 24, 2005 declaring “it’s good news that the president is so enthusiastic about Sharansky’s work. It suggests that, despite all the criticism, and the difficulties, the president remains determined to continue to lead the nation along the basic foreign policy lines he laid down in his first term.”
The BBC News noted on January 22, 2005 that Sharansky “has in fact been moving in American conservative circles for some time.”
As far back as July 2002—just prior to the time Bush delivered a hotly-debated speech calling for “democratization” of the Arab world—neo-conservative Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz was in attendance at a conference addressed by Sharansky during which the Israeli leader put forth the same demand.
Shortly thereafter, when Bush gave his own speech, echoing Sharansky, the Israeli hard-liner “provided an important bit of last minute affirmation,” according to American neo-conservative Richard Perle, who—between stints in government, during which time he was suspected of espionage on behalf of Israel—peddled weapons for an Israeli arms manufacturer.
Although the news of Sharansky’s profound influence was not widely known among grassroots Americans, it was big news in Israel where The Jerusalem Post headlined a story declaring “White House takes a page out of Sharansky’s democracy playbook.” In fact, the Israeli newspaper actually went so far as to say that Bush is “doing [Sharansky’s book] promotion free of charge,” pointing out that the president hyped Sharansky’s book in an interview on CNN.
But it’s not only Bush who is relying on Sharansky. On January 20, 2005, Scotland’s independent-minded newspaper, The Scotsman, noted that “Mr. Sharansky’s influence on the way Washington now sees the world was clear this week when Condoleeza Rice quoted him during her Senate confirmation hearings,” confirming that the Israeli hard-liner is very much the brains behind Bush policy.
The fact that Sharansky happened to be in charge of “diaspora affairs” in the Israeli cabinet was significant indeed.The term “diaspora” refers to all Jews living outside the borders of Israel and the “mission statement” of Sharansky’s cabinet office says it places its “emphasis on Israel, Zionism, Jerusalem and the interdependence of Jews worldwide.
In essence, this translates into a single, general aim: securing the existence and the future of the Jewish people wherever they are.” In short, Sharansky is no less than a powerful spokesman for the worldwide Zionist movement.And now, beyond any question, his views are directing George Bush’s worldview.
Considering all of this, it is no wonder that on January 22, South Korea’s English-language media voice, Chosun Ilbo, went so far as to describe Sharansky’s philosophy as outlined in his book The Case for Democracy—now being touted by Bush—as “a blueprint for U.S. foreign policy.”
The propaganda line of Israeli hard-liner Natan Sharansky upon which the president’s inaugural address was based was virtually a complete turn-about from Bush’s rhetoric in the 2000 presidential campaign.
This contradiction is a point that—theoretically—should have given pause to many Republicans who voted for Bush the first time he ran for the presidency.
Enthusiastically proclaiming in a front-page analysis on January 21, 2005 that Bush’s address laid the “groundwork for [a] global freedom mission,” The Washington Times—a leading “neo-conservative” voice which advocates a hard-line globalist foreign policy in sync with Israel’s security demands—stated flat out that:
President Bush’s inaugural address sends the United States on a new, expansionist and far more aggressive global mission to free oppressed countries from dictators—a sharp departure from his 2000 campaign that warned against becoming the world’s policeman . . . an ambitious, perhaps unprecedented internationalist doctrine that could deploy U.S. military power far beyond America’s present commitments . . . .
For its own part, the Times’s daily “liberal” counterpart, The Washington Post, declared editorially on January 21, 2005 that Bush’s address was “more Wilsonian than conservative”—that is, recalling the messianic internationalism of former U.S. President Woodrow Wilson, hardly a hero of American nationalists or traditional conservatives.
Effectively endorsing Bush’s turnabout, the Post acknowledged.
that Bush’s pronouncement “promised an aggressive internationalism, one that if seriously pursued would transform relations with many nations around the world,”saying that if Bush is serious,U.S. policy “is on the verge of a historic change.”
James Steinberg, the former deputy national security advisor in the Clinton administration, found Bush’s emergence as the voice of globalism quite intriguing, inasmuch as it is a determined betrayal of what had been traditional Republican opposition to international meddling.
Steinberg told The New York Times on January 21, 2005 that it is “quite remarkable that one of the notions that’s been so resisted by Republicans is the idea of a deep interdependence in the world, and now [Bush has] essentially adopted the notion that tyranny anywhere threatens freedom anywhere.”
In the same vein, hard-line American-based Zionist Robert Kagan, one of the most aggressive neo-conservative media voices, echoed American Free Press (AFP) when he wrote in the Post on January 23, 2005 that Bush’s “goals are now the antithesis of conservatism.”
According to Kagan,“They are revolutionary.”
In its January 31, 2005 editorial,AFP called Bush a “revolutionary,” and this came very much to the dismay of many traditional conservatives who—inexplicably—still viewed the president as the voice of American patriotism.
These folks are evidently unaware that what is called “neo-conservatism” is anything but what Americans long viewed to be “conservative” in the traditional American nationalist sense of the word.
However, Zionist Robert Kagan understands this distinction and that’s precisely why he said that “Bush may lose the support of most oldfashioned conservatives” once they realize what his new internationalist policy is all about. In short, conservatives have been “had.”And that’s why AFP reminded its readers not to forget what Jesus said: “Beware wolves in sheep’s clothing” or, rather,“Beware the Judas Goats.”
In the meantime, however, Sharansky’s influence on American Republicanism—under George Bush and in the years ahead—remains substantial. In fact, there’s a new brand of Republicanism, at least according to Ken Mehlman, whom President George W. Bush personally hand picked, following the 2004 election, to serve as chairman of the Republican National Committee.
In a March 14, 2005 speech in Washington to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the lobby for Israel, the GOP’s national chairman candidly and enthusiastically described himself as a “Sharansky Republican.”
What was so striking is that this appeared to be the first time in American history that the chairman of one of the national parties used the name and ideology of a political leader from a foreign nation—one known as an “extremist” at that—to describe his own ideology.
In the past, there were self-described “Taft Republicans,” who supported the presidential ambitions of the nationalistic and traditionally conservative Sen. Robert Taft of Ohio—popularly known as “Mr. Republican”—who was the undisputed leader of the America First bloc in Congress from 1936 until his untimely (and some say “suspicious”) death in 1953.
Later, there were the conservative “Goldwater Republicans”who—under the leadership of Sen. Barry Goldwater (Ariz.)—set the stage for the ascendancy of the “Reagan Republicans” who came to power in 1980 under the popular two-term president, Ronald Reagan.
At the same time, in opposition to the Taft and Goldwater Republicans, there were the more liberal and internationalist-minded Republicans who rallied behind New York Governor Thomas E. Dewey and Wall Street lawyer Wendell Willkie,dubbing themselves—naturally—“Dewey Republicans” and “Willkie Republicans.”
And later, of course,many of those same party leaders evolved into “Rockefeller Republicans” following New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller. And there were even a few folks, for a time, who called themselves “Eisenhower Republicans,” stressing their so-called “mainstream, moderate” point of view (however defined) in the spirit of America’s 35th president, Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Now, however, the new GOP national chairman is not calling himself a “Reagan Republican” or even a “Bush Republican” (after the reigning GOP president who is wildly popular among grass-roots members of his party), but, instead, is hailing a foreign leader—a known extremist—as the role model for what 21st century Republicanism is all about.
And this is a direct legacy of George W. Bush who so proudly installed Sharansky as one of the GOP’s ideological dictators, betraying the historic legacy of the GOP. Sharansky’s policy of promoting “global democracy”is hardly in the American tradition, but it’s now part and parcel of what the “modern” Republican Party is all about.
