L'homme qui se prétend "le juif le plus riche du monde", Sheldon Adelson, donnera "tout ce qu'il faudra" pour empêcher une réélection d'Obama

Sheldon Adelson reportedly has said he will donate "whatever it takes" to defeat President Obama - JTA
Après avoir financé Newt Gingrich à coups de dizaines de millions, il finance maintenant Mitt Romney, le candidat de Lady Lynn Rothschild. Tout pour empêcher une réélection d'Obama.
Sheldon Adelson gave a pro-Mitt Romney super-PAC $10 million - JTA
Adelson’s Pro-Romney Donations Will Be ‘Limitless,’ Could Top $100M
Mitt Romney met with Sheldon Adelson, the billionaire casino magnate who took aim at Romney's presidential campaign by substantially backing challenger Newt Gingrich.
Romney says he will do the ‘opposite’ of Obama on Israel - JTA

La politique israélienne de Mitt Romney sera contraire aux actions d'Obama

Most Israelis think Romney would be 'friendlier'
L’ANTISEMITE (Barack Obama)
‘Obama’s Attitude Towards Pollard Proves His Anti-Semitism’
Republicans: Israelis first to see Obama faults--Ari Fleischer says Israelis lack of support for Obama was harbinger of reduced US Jewish support for Obama.
Romney aide to Haaretz: After he’s elected, Iran will see there’s a new sheriff in town
Ron Paul Supporters Are Really Pissed That Rand Paul Endorsed Mitt Romney
America Last: Will Zionist Pressure Force Rand to Rewrite Ron’s America-First Foreign Policy?
Jewish Democrats to Romney: Return Adelson cash: Calls come amid allegations billionaire approved of prostitution at his casinos; Republican Jews: Allegations unproven.
Romney's post-Tish'a B'Av faux pas, Sheldon Adelson's 'tainted money' Romney's embattled Israel fundraiser Even before landing in Israel as part of a foreign trip that includes Britain,...

TUT Pod-Broadcast June 18, 2012

Romney would to the ‘exact opposite’ as Obama when it comes to Israel.

Mark Dankof joins the program to discuss this and other relevant items.

Download Here

The ‘Richest Jew in the World’ Funds Efforts to Oust Obama

June 26, 2012 AFP

By Michael Collins Piper

Those who want to see Barack Obama out of the White House have a tough, no-holds-barred ally in Las Vegas-and Israel-based billionaire gambling tycoon Sheldon Adelson, who some call “the modern-day Meyer Lansky,” recalling the longtime head of the national crime syndicate.

The New York Times reported on June 17 that Adelson—a key ally of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is himself a close, longtime friend of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney—has said he is prepared to spend $100M of his own money this year to defeat Obama and help elect Republicans.

SHELDON ADELSON & LYNN DE ROTHSCHILD
Two of the big names working to oust Obama

Adelson’s friend Fred Zeidman—a prominent figure in the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B’nai B’rith and a major player in the GOP in Texas—told the Times that Adelson is “fully committed to beating Barack Obama,” adding that the $100M Adelson is willing to spend is “a meaningless amount of money” to super-rich Adelson.

Reportedly worth some $25B, Adelson once referred to himself as “the richest Jew in the world.”

This past year, the American-born gambling chief and his Israeli wife gave $20M to a so-called superPAC supporting the presidential ambitions of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who loudly echoed Adelson’s hard-line support for Israel.

A superPAC refers to a new breed of political action committee that was spawned from an infamous 2010 Supreme Court ruling, which allowed corporations to spend unlimited sums of money to influence elections. With federal election law loopholes in place, superPACs can avoid disclosing the names of their contributors. But unlike regular PACs, superPACs cannot donate funds directly to politicians. What they do is hire propagandists, and spend their millions buying commercials on television and placing advertisements in newspapers backing one politician over another.

Now the casino kingpin is going all out to make sure the GOP not only take theWhite House but also Congress, leading the Times to refer to Adelson’s “growing role as one of the country’s leading political financiers”—referring to Adelson’s clout here in America, rather than to his equally considerable impact in Israel.

Adelson has not only pledged an additional $10M to a superPAC supporting Mitt Romney but he has also dropped $5M into the coffers of the Congressional Leadership Fund, a superPAC that supports GOP candidates for Congress.

And it has been reported that Adelson has given even more millions to other superPACs, some $5M going to Young Guns, a front for Rep. Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, who shares Adelson’s devotion to Israel, as well as $10M to the Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies run by GOP operative Karl Rove. He has even talked of handing $10M to fellow billionaires Charles and David Koch, key figures behind the tea party movement, to assist in their pro-GOP endeavors.

If Adelson lives up to his promises, this is just the start.

Adelson joins Lady Lynn Forrester de Rothschild of the international banking dynasty and a member of the influential Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in lining up behind Romney, another of the big names who says “Obama must go.”

Recently, Leslie Gelb, the former president of the CFR, complained to writer Edward Klein, author of the new book The Amateur (highly critical of Obama) that no president had taken more personal control over foreign policy than Obama. Klein quoted Gelb as having stated:

“This is an Obama-centric decision-making operation. In other administrations, a lot of decisions were made below the presidential level. But Obama shapes most policies. He takes pen to paper and writes decision papers. Usually presidents have other things to do than sit down and write a document that takes an inordinate amount of time. But Obama makes the calls on most every subject and with a degree of personal intensity.”

Klein suggests that Obama’s policies—especially his stance toward Israel—are “a rupture with the past” betraying the bipartisan consensus forged on foreign policy issues and carried out by officials in Republican and Democratic administrations alike.

That Klein is also taking on Obama may spell a public relations danger to the president.

Klein has been a key figure in three of the most powerful Zionist media dynasties: He was editor-in chief of The New York Times Magazine, published by the Sulzberger family; former foreign editor of Newsweek, published by the Meyer-Graham family (of Washington Post fame); and is the author of the “Walter Scott” column in the weekly Parade, owned by S.I. Newhouse, who famously saved then-Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) from election defeat by cutting off “Jewish lobby” money to Helms’s opponent, after which Helms became fervently pro-Israeli.

——

Michael Collins Piper is an author, journalist, lecturer and radio show host. He has spoken in Russia, Malaysia, Iran, Abu Dhabi, Japan, Canada and the U.S.

No More No-Win Wars
• Is Obama the reason we haven’t attacked Iran?

By Willis A. Carto
There are many things that an alert American may criticize President Barack Obama for, but these failings are not the subject of this commentary. Instead, we wish to congratulate him for his surprising statesmanship and guts for resisting the Israeli lobby in a matter of vital national interest.
No one may doubt that what Israel wants, Israel gets. It is estimated by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, the authors of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy, that Israel has received more than $140 billion in financial and other benefits from U.S. taxpayers since 1949. And yet, in spite of this proof of Israel’s political power in this “democracy,” President Obama has so far rejected Israel’s efforts to do the one thing that Israel craves above everything else—to attack Iran.
Israel-firsters (and by the use of this term the Judeo-Christians under the sway of such racketeers as John Hagee must be included) claim Iran is an existential threat to Israel. At any moment, they fear, Iran will lob hundreds of missiles at the poor Israelis. Iran must be stopped before it’s too late.
And Israel must have the full cooperation—monetary as well as military—of the United States to forestall or avenge this fate.
But here’s the rub. Has Obama turned a deaf ear to the Israel-firsters? Could he be cognizant of the advice of this country’s Founding Father, George Washington and the other God-inspired men who created this nation, to avoid foreign wars? Could Obama actually be rejecting the internationalists, such as Mitt Romney, John McCain, Joe Lieberman and other war maniacs and acting in the best interests of America, and damn the industrialists, bankers and lunatics who want perpetual war for America?
Could Obama realize that an American attack on Iran—even if Israel could procure the consent of Congress—would be a strategic disaster for this nation no matter if endorsed by multitudes of TV talking heads and scribblers who can be counted to bark obediently every time Israel gives the signal?
Such an attack would beyond question constitute the greatest no-win war yet for our country.
Such an attack would mean bombing Tehran and other Iranian cities with nuclear warheads. This would be a major atrocity and war crime. We would kill many thousands of Persians but only an invasion by infantry wins wars, and deploying a minimum of 15 million infantrymen (not girls and fairies) along with sufficient tanks, cannon, rockets, airplanes, ammunition and materiel to do the
job would be impossible, as would be our Navy aking control of the Persian Gulf.
An attempted invasion of Iran would be the greatest favor we could possibly do for Russia and China. U.S. embarrassment at the outcome of such an ill-conceived venture would follow, and Russia and China could be counted on to rub it in on the international stage. Goodbye, American prestige and all the billions the taxpayers have contributed for the past 50 years to make people love us.
——
Willis A. Carto is a longtime nationalist writer and editor, who has also published hundreds of books of interest to populists. He was the founder of LIBERTY LOBBY and is currently the editor of THE BARNES REVIEW (TBR) history magazine. If you’ve never seen TBR, write P.O. Box 15877,Washington, D.C. 20003 for a free sample issue.

Pro-Israel or Pro-Obama?

September 11, 2011 By Bess Byers

Republican Bob Turner, Democrat David Weprin, Senator Joe Lieberman and Mayor Ed Koch all agree, President Obama is not pro Israel.



VIDEO - ECI - THE UNITER




VIDEO - ECI - Daylight: The Story of Obama and Israel



VIDEO - ECI - TIME TO ACT. Is President Obama serious about stopping Iran?

Odd Bedfellows Unite Against Obama

May 28, 2012 AFP

• Conservatives, radicals, centrists, birthers, Zionists join to challenge president
By Michael Collins Piper

Barack Obama’s fight to win reelection just got tougher. One of his biggest critics, one of the world’s richest, most powerful women—Lady Lynn de Rothschild of New York and London—has not only endorsed Republican Mitt Romney, but she also pulled the plug on Americans Elect (AE), the proposed “centrist” third party of which she was one of the chief sponsors.

Although the establishment media loudly noted in recent reports that AE folded up shop after having spent at least $35M in Wall Street-financed organizing efforts, those reports did not mention that the primary reason AE collapsed was because Lady de Rothschild—the American-born wife of Sir Evelyn Rothschild of the international banking dynasty and a key figure in the global elite in her own right—had decided Romney was acceptable as the GOP’s nominee.

While AE postured as a “grass-roots” effort to break partisan gridlock in America, the truth is that Lady de Rothschild and a clique of elite figures from the Rothschild sphere of influence on Wall Street and in the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)—of which she is a member—had set AE in motion in the first place.

The intent of such a centrist party at the time was to defeat Obama and any potential GOP nominee, who did not meet the standards of the Rothschild family and its circles.

While Lady de Rothschild had backed former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman—a fervent internationalist—for the GOP nomination, his campaign was fading well before the first primary battle. As far back as Dec. 19—while both promoting Huntsman’s aspirations and providing pivotal support for AE’s centrist party efforts—Lady de Rothschild publicly told the popular news website the Huffington Post she would back Romney if Huntsman eventually withdrew.

Not a month later, while holding a fundraiser for Huntsman at her apartment in Manhattan, she told The Washington Post she would support Romney if he did win the GOP nomination, which, at that point, was still not assured.

On Jan. 13, the Post—owned by investors such as Warren Buffett and the Graham family who have long been closely intertwined with the Rothschilds—reported Lady de Rothschild’s endorsement of Romney, describing Lady de Rothschild as “a glamorous and die hard Hillary Rodham Clinton supporter whose antagonism toward Barack Obama has led her across the partisan aisle.”

Romney, in fact, prevailed over his challengers, and Lady de Rothschild and her allies decided to pull the plug on the centrist third party they were holding in reserve. Their big aim now is to deny Obama a second term, and Romney is clearly their chosen candidate to do it.

Lady de Rothschild had supported Mrs. Clinton for the 2008 Democratic nomination. She then vocally endorsed Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain over Obama, who she said was too “ideological” (that is, too liberal). This surprised many who perceived Obama as the Rothschilds’ golden boy.

As president, Obama confirmed Lady de Rothschild’s worst suspicions. As early as Feb. 28, 2010, writing on the Daily Beast, Lady de Rothschild said that “After watching President Obama in office for more than a year, it is clear to me that . . . we already knew what kind of president he would become. . . . Perhaps the biggest fabrication of the Obama candidacy was his claim of being a centrist.” Accusing Obama of being “beholden to the left,” Lady de Rothschild said he had “misled” the American people during the 2008 campaign about his “real plans for America.” She added that “his cynical use of centrist language as a tool to get elected does not change the fact of his true objectives.”

In the wake of her attacks on Obama, Lady de Rothschild began publicly promoting the AE centrist movement—along with a host of other influential figures, including veteran Democratic Party pollster Doug Schoen. They saw AE as both a tool to remove Obama from the White House and to prevent the rise of a serious populist and nationalist challenger from GOP ranks.

As recently as Dec. 5, the billionaire aristocrat published a screed at The Huffington Post, hailing AE, actually suggesting the new party—representing what she called “the radical center”—would “take on all the vested interests and the extremists in the political parties, in the media, in the streets and in the guts of Washington.”

Now that the power elite have thrown AE to the side, a remarkable coalition including the Rothschilds, the “birther” movement led by former Israeli Orly Taitz, white separatists joined with hardline Zionists, as well as many self-styled “patriots” and “conservatives” and others—are joining behind Romney—long seen as a “moderate” and “centrist” and even as a “liberal”—to put Obama out of the White House.

——
Michael Collins Piper is an author, journalist, lecturer and radio show host. He has spoken in Russia, Malaysia, Iran, Abu Dhabi, Japan, Canada and the U.S.

Warhawk Romney Will Bankrupt U.S.

April 21, 2012 AFP

• Populists concerned about Republican candidate’s rabid internationalism, unabashed love for Israel
By Michael Collins Piper

If Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.) hopes to mold the Republican Party’s 2012 national campaign platform into a document of nationalism and non-interventionism, he has a tough job ahead, for the global outlook of all-but-certain GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney is firmly internationalist and interventionist.

In fact, as AFP noted on Oct. 24, 2011, Romney’s first major foreign policy address delivered on Oct. 7 at the Citadel was a declaration of budget-busting, round-the-planet meddling, a promise of unending wars against an array of perceived enemies, ranging from Iran, Russia, China, Pakistan and billions of Muslims across the Earth.

“Endless trillions,” concluded AFP, “will continue to go down the black holes of the military-industrial banking police state.”

A rabid call for U.S. adventurism, Romney’s speech was full of rhetoric that, on its face, had a lot of energetic fervor that appealed to many good American patriots. He declared:

This century must be an American century. In an American century, America leads the free world and the free world leads the entire world. God did not create this country to be a nation of followers. America is not destined to be one of several equally balanced global powers. America must lead the world, or someone else will. Without American leadership,without clarity of American purpose and resolve, the world becomes a far more dangerous place, and liberty and prosperity would surely be among the first casualties.

However, while the language reflects the views expressed in Romney’s campaign book No Apology: The Case for American Greatness, there’s much more to it than meets the eye. And this is what is important for real patriots to understand:

The concept of an “American century”—a catchphrase of American internationalists of the Council on Foreign Relations school of thought going back to the post-World War II era—has seen its most recent incarnation in the theme of “American greatness”—also known as “American exceptionalism”—bandied about by the ex-Trotskyite hard-line pro-Israel neo-conservatives who orchestrated the United States into the no-win war in Iraq and who now push for a war against Iran.

Romney’s linguistics constitute a modern-day propaganda cover for old-fashioned Trostkyite communism: rapacious imperialism and internationalism wrapped in the American flag, but no different from the age-old dream of a world imperium—a global government—a New World Order.

The specific foreign policy aims expressed by Romney were a virtual wish list for warmongers and profit-driven plutocrats. Although none of Romney’s five sons served in uniform, their father calls for a significant—some say “muscular”—role for the U.S. military abroad. Romney said, in part:

We are at war with Islamic fundamentalism. We must fight against the most ancient of prejudices: anti-Semitism.

In my first 100 days in office, I will . . . announce an initiative to increase the shipbuilding rate from nine ships per year to 15 [ships per year].

I will begin . . . the full deployment of a multi-layered national ballistic missile defense system. I will enhance our deterrent against the Iranian regime by ordering the regular presence of aircraft carrier task forces, one in the Eastern Mediterranean and one in the Persian Gulf region.

I will begin discussions with Israel to increase the level of our military assistance and coordination . . . an Iranian nuclear weapon is unacceptable. I will launch a campaign to advance economic opportunity in Latin America . . . free trade . . . I will reaffirm as a vital national interest Israel’s existence as a Jewish state. I will count as dear our special relationship with the United Kingdom. . . .

Romney’s saber-rattling against Iran, ritually embracing the mantra that Iran is a threat to not only Israel but to the United States, has been supplemented with equally dangerous bombast.

On CNN, Romney actually described modern Russia as America’s “number one geopolitical foe,” charging Russia “lines up with the world’s worst actors,” and that “Russia is not a friendly character on the world stage.”

That these words sound familiar is no surprise, considering those who constitute Romney’s most intimate advisors.

Notable among those whispering in Romney’s ear is Eliot A. Cohen—a longtime and foremost figure in military and geostrategic affairs, one of the most influential of the Zionist neo-conservative internationalists active today. A founding member of the neo-conservative Project for the New American Century—famed for suggesting America needed a “New Pearl Harbor” in order to jump-start U.S. involvement in new global military ventures—Cohen is one of multiple “neo-cons” who populate Romney’s inner circle.

But even more so, Romney prizes, in particular, an unusually close and long-standing personal (and political) alliance—going back 36 years—with no less than Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu.

First openly revealed in candid detail by The New York Times on April 7—to the genuine surprise of many who were confounded by the link between the Michigan-born former Mormon missionary and the cosmopolitan Israeli-born Jew who graduated from high school in suburban Philadelphia—the Times described the relationship as “a warm friendship, little known to outsiders, that is now rich with political intrigue.”

Emphasizing that the Romney-Netanyahu axis is additionally “strengthened by a network of mutual friends and heightened by their conservative ideologies” the Times commented frankly that “the ties between Mr. Romney and Mr. Netanyahu stand out because there is little precedent for two politicians of their stature to have such a history together that predates their entry into government.”

The two met in 1976 while working at the Boston Consulting Group. Remaining in close contact, they regularly advised one another after both went into government on both domestic and foreign policy, having absorbed, the Times said, “the same profoundly analytical view of the world.”

What is disturbing—at least to American nationalists—is that, as the Times noted, “Romney has suggested that he would not make any significant policy decisions about Israel without consulting Mr. Netanyahu.” Even the Times—a staunchly pro-Israel voice—noted that this was “a level of deference that could raise eyebrows given Mr. Netanyahu’s polarizing reputation.”

Michael Collins Piper is an author, journalist, lecturer and radio show host. He has spoken in Russia, Malaysia, Iran, Abu Dhabi, Japan, Canada and the U.S.

‘American Exceptionalism’ Just More NWO Rhetoric

By Michael Collins Piper

During the 2012 election campaign, you’ll probably be hearing a lot about “American exceptionalism,” particularly from the Republican presidential candidates. Newt Gingrich has made the concept a centerpiece of his campaign, and Gingrich’s wife—the current one, that is—has produced a documentary on the topic. Mitt Romney’s campaign book is entitled No Apology: The Case for American Greatness. Sarah Palin’s book, America by Heart, has a chapter entitled “America the Exceptional.” And former Sen. Rick Santorum and Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty have also been heard touting the topic.

But don’t be fooled by rhetoric that has a lot of patriotic appeal. In fact, the concept of American exceptionalism— and a related theme known as national greatness conservatism—are really modern-day propaganda masks for old-fashioned Trotskyite communism: rapacious imperialism and internationalism now wrapped in the American flag, but no different from the age-old dream of a world imperium—a global government.

Many call it the New World Order. The wizards who conjured up these themes are three key figures in the so-called neo-conservative movement:

(read the rest...)




Gambling Mogul in Trouble After Betting on GOP Victory

December 11, 2012   AFP

Sheldon Adelson now fighting a bribery probe after wasting over $150 million to buy Republicans By Michael Collins Piper For years, the name of international gambling tycoon Sheldon Adelson—who, with his Israeli wife Miriam, is worth $20.5B—was known only among the monied elite of Wall Street, London and Tel Aviv (and in the inner circles


Sheldon Adelson Spent Far More On Campaign Than Previously Known

VIDEO - Romney financier Adelson "loyal to Israel NOT America" 



Plus d'infos:
Le néocon juif Eliot Cohen serait conseiller de Romney pour le Moyen-Orient
Sheldon Adelson: « je suis le juif le plus riche au monde »
Le père du PNAC William Kristol prédit que Joe Lieberman sera nommé secrétaire d’État par l’administration Romney
Un autre grand comique, propriétaire et éditeur d’un journal juif américain, soutient qu’il ne prônait pas vraiment l’assassinat d’Obama
Selon Frank J. Gaffney (PNAC), les Frères Musulmans ont infiltré et contrôlent l’administration Obama
Le mouvement des Birthers ou Quand les Patriotes font le travail de Netanyahou...

Chris Christie Apologizes to Sheldon Adelson for ‘Occupied Territories’ Remark, but wll it cost him the nomination?

Christie, Walker court Jewish Republican donors in Las Vegas = Adelson

Sheldon Adelson expands Israeli media empire, buys Makor Rishon and NRG

Rabbi Yosef: il est interdit de soigner un non-juif le jour du Shabbat

Rabbi Ovadia Yosef

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0%2c7340%2cL-4229767%2c00.html

Rabbi Yosef: Treating gentiles violates Sabbath

Shas' leader says religious physicians cannot violate Sabbath in order to save gentiles' lives, but offers halachic solution to avoid legal repercussions

Ynet

05.17.12, 13:36 / Israel Jewish SceneWhat should religious doctors do if a gentile is injured in a car accident on Shabbat and is rushed to the hospital? According to Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, this does not warrant violating the sanctity of the Sabbath.

During a class on Sabbath halacha relating to religious physicians, the spiritual leader of Shas said that while doctors are expected to do everything in their power – even if it requires violating the Sabbath – in order to save Jews whose lives are in danger, the same does not apply for gentiles.

"If a gentile were to get injured in a car accident during Sabbath, and he is brought to the hospital – Israel must not treat him," he said, explaining that "if the particular procedures come from rabbis (de-rabbanan), then they might be permitted, but if they stem from prohibitions in the Torah (de-'oraita), then they are not allowed, as the Torah forbids to violate the Sabbath for gentiles."

Rabbi Yosef expounded on the problem, saying that the Mishnah Berurah explicitly says that "all religious physicians who treat gentiles on the Sabbath or violating the Sabbath; however, in reality the patients are brought to the hospital and must be treated. The doctors' license says they must treat all patients without distinction of faith or race, and if they don’t, the State could revoke their license and also punish them. So what should the poor doctors do?"

The rabbi offered a halachic solution that follows a rule by which if a single person is doing the act, he is violating the Sabbath, while if two people are doing it together, they are exempt.

"The doctor who needs to operate will call on another doctor, or nurse, to hold the scalpel together and make the incision," said Rabbi Yosef, saying that "it is necessary in order for religious physicians to refrain from being put on trial for distinguishing between a Jew and a gentile on Sabbath."



judeologie.com :

Racisme juif: «ne violez pas les règles du Shabbat pour sauver la vie d’un goy»

Article d’Asher Zeiger, dans The Time of Israel, le 17 Mai 2012



Le rabbin Ovadia Yosef avec le président de l’entité sioniste Shimon Peres

Donnant récemment une leçon sur les lois du Shabbat, le rabbin Ovadia Yossef, chef spirituel du parti Shas et ancien grand rabbin séfarade a déclaré que les lois concernant la violation du Shabbat sont différentes selon que l’on a affaire à un «gentil»( ndlr: goy, non-juif, bref un sous-homme) ou a juif quand il s’agit de sauver une vie.
Yosef, qui a 91 ans, a dit dans la leçon qui a été enregistrée par ses adhérents, que parce que la Torah nous enseigne que ses lois sont pour nous pour «vivre par elles et non pour mourir par elles», le sauvetage d’une vie l’emporte sur toutes les lois de la Torah, mais seulement quand la vie est celle d’un Juif. Il a dit que la Torah ne permet pas la profanation du Shabbat pour sauver la vie d’un gentil.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/ovadia-yosef-speaks-against-sabbath-desecration-to-save-non-jewish-lives/

(lire le reste...)



 (Flashback 2009) Cisjordanie : un rabbin déclare que les Juifs peuvent tuer les enfants et bébés qui « menacent » Israël

Contre-Info
mar., 19 nov. 2013 00:28 CST

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...
Source : Haaretz

v.o.a.
West Bank rabbi: Jews can kill Gentiles who threaten Israel
Book by Rabbi Yitzhak Shapiro of Yitzhar permits even the murder of babies and children who pose threat.
By Haaretz Service | Nov. 9, 2009 | 9:36 AM
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.

La justice israélienne renonce à poursuivre les auteurs d’un ouvrage jugé raciste






Sur ce blog:

Le racisme permis: le racisme israélien

Selon le Grand rabbin orthodoxe sépharade Ovadia Yosef, « les Gentils n’existent que pour servir les Juifs »

John McCain et les leçons de la Libye: "Bombardez la Syrie!"

John McCain: U.S. should bomb Syria

McCain Calls for Bombing Syria 'We Should Have Learned From Libya'

Israel’s No.1 asset in the Senate calls for airstrikes against Syria

Canada sanctions Syria, McCain calls for air strikes: John Baird, Canada's Foreign Minister, closes embassy, says "Assad must go"; McCain says US should lead int'l strikes.

McCain calls for airstrike on Syria Statement is as much a critique of President Barack Obama as a rallying call for an international military campaign, accusing the president of being too soft on Assad.

McCain slams military brass for inaction on Syria



Sur ce blog:


La soif de sang frénétique de John McCain: après la mort de Kadhafi, les "dictateurs" comme Assad, Poutine, les Chinois doivent avoir peur...

Un esclave des Bronfman-Rothschild, John McCain, menace Poutine: "Cher Vlad, le #printemps arabe s'en vient dans un quartier près de chez vous"

AL QAÏDA, ISRAËL: MÊME COMBAT!

McCain et Lieberman: "bombardez la Libye!"

Le néocon juif Eliot Cohen serait conseiller de Romney pour le Moyen-Orient

Eliot Cohen Returns as Romney’s Man on Iran

By Max Blumenthal

In 2005, a group of graduate students at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced and International Studies (SAIS) participated in the school’s annual diplomatic simulation. The high pressure scenario required the students to negotiate a resolution to a standoff with a nuclear-armed “Republic of Pakistan.”Mara Karlin, a student known for her hawkish politics on Israel and the Middle East, played president of the U.S.A.

Though most of the participants were confident they could head off amilitary conflictwith diplomatic measures,Ms. Karlin jumped the gun. According to a former SAIS student, not only did Ms. Karlin order a nuclear strike on Pakistan, she also took the opportunity to nuke Iran. Her classmates were shocked. It was the first time in 45 years that a simulation concluded with the deployment of a nuke.

That year, Ms. Karlin received a plum job in the Bush administration’s Department of Defense where, according to her bio, she was “intimately involved in formulating U.S. policy on Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Israel-Palestinian affairs.” Lebanon was a special area of focus for Ms. Karlin. She claims to have helped structure the Lebanese armed forces and coordinated relations between the U.S. and Lebanese militaries.

According to the former SAIS student, Ms. Karlin was a favorite of Eliot Cohen, an ultra-hawkish professor of strategic studies at SAIS, which is regarded in American foreign policy circles as a training ground for the neo-conservative movement.

Today, Cohen is among Republican presidential front-runner Mitt Romney’s top campaign advisers.

He is the primary author of Romney’s foreign policy white paper, which attacks Obama for “currying favor with [America’s] enemies” and “ostentatiously shunning Jerusalem.”

The paper urges a policy of regime change in Iran including possible coordination with Israel on military strikes, allegedly to prevent the Iranian regime from developing a nuclear weapon. It is an aggressive Republican election season document presenting a concoction of post-9-11 unilateralism and unvarnished imperialism as the antidote to a sitting president Cohen accused of “unilateral disarmament in the diplomatic and moral sphere.” More importantly, it suggests that a Romney administration’s foreign policy might look remarkably similar to—and perhaps more extreme than—that of the Bush administration.

Cohen rose through the ranks of the Republican foreign policy elite as a protégé of Paul Wolfowitz, the former assistant secretary of defense who is credited with playing a central role in the push for invading Iraq. Stephen Walt, a professor of international affairs at Harvard University’s School of Government who has been on the receiving end of aggressive attacks by Cohen, called Cohen “a classic neo-conservative.” Walt said: “He is constantly fretting about alleged U.S. vulnerabilities, consistently supportive of increased defense spending and generally inclined to favor U.S. intervention in other countries. Second, like virtually all neo-conservatives, he is also deeply attached to Israel, as well as to the United States.”

Despite Cohen’s deep Israeli ties, he has proved extremely sensitive to critiques of the connection.When Walt and John Mearsheimer, the latter a professor of International Relations at the University of Chicago, published their widely debated paper on the Israeli lobby in 2006,* Cohen authored one of the first attempts to discredit their thesis about a loose coalition of individuals and organizations creating political pressure to move U.S. foreign policy in a pro-Israeli direction. In an op-ed in The Washington Post, Cohen accused the authors of “kooky academic work” and “obsessive and irrationally hostile beliefs about Jews.”

“Cohen’s rather hysterical reaction to our work was both typical and easy to explain,” Walt remarked.

“Given that he and other neo-conservatives had played a key role in convincing George Bush to invade Iraq in 2003, he was understandably upset when we pointed this out and provided extensive documentation of their role in the run-up to this disastrous war.

He could not refute our logic or our evidence, however, so he chose tomisrepresent our views and smear us falsely as anti-Semites and conspiracy theorists.”

With the last battalions of U.S. troops preparing to redeploy from Iraq to other conflict zones, Cohen is homing in on Iran. In a September 2009 editorial for The Wall Street Journal, he dismissed diplomacy and sanctions as feasible means of curbing Iran’s alleged nuclear ambitions.

“The choices are now what they ever were: an American or an Israeli strike, which would probably cause a substantialwar, or living in aworldwith Iranian nuclear weapons, which may also result in war, perhaps nuclear, over a longer period of time,” he wrote.

As tensions between Israel and Iran rise to unprecedented levels, and Israel’s leaders beseech the U.S. to join a military strike, Cohen’s visions of regime change seem closer to realization than ever.

For him and the neo-conservative policy elite, a Romney victory in November might deliver the next “big prize.”

——

* Walt and Mearsheimer’s book The Israel Lobby & U.S. Foreign Policy (hardcover, 484 pages $30 plus $6 S&H) is available from AFP.Send order to AFP, 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite. 100, Washington,D.C. 20003. To order by major credit card, call toll free 1-888-699-NEWS.

——

Max Blumenthal is an independent journalist who maintains the popular news and commentary website maxblumenthal.com.

Report: Gingrich benefactor Sheldon Adelson may shift support to Romney

In GOP Debate, Romney Reiterates Lies on Iran

Romney blasts Obama on Israel, Iran

Romney Tied to Terrorism GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney looked like a deer caught in the headlights when he was asked if he supported an international, anti-American terrorist organization with a bloody record for killing innocent civilians thousands of times worse than al Qaeda. This “expert on international affairs” claimed he never had heard of them. Then, like a lying politician, he promised: “I’ll take a look at the issue.” Video taken at a town hall meeting in New Hampshire shows Romney quickly waving the issue aside and hurrying on to another question.

 Le général Richard Myers et Eliot Cohen. 

COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

Cabal of Rabid Warhawks Advising Mitt Romney

The American media is strangely silent about Mitt Romney’s shadow National Security Council, the 50-plus madmen Romney has surrounded himself with as “foreign policy advisers”—many of whom helped push the U.S. into the disastrous war against Iraq. Romney had the chutzpa to name his foreign policy after the Project for a NewAmerican Century, the neo-con dream of a new Pearl Harbor that was fulfilled on 9-11. Several include:

MICHAEL HAYDEN: On CNN (2010), former CIA director and prominent torture advocate, Michael Hayden said attacking Iran over its nuclear program might not be a bad idea. “In my personal thinking . . . I have begun to consider that [nuclear war] may not be the worst of all possible outcomes.”

ELIOT COHEN: Insanely used the 9-11 attacks to advocate war with Iran. Cohen, director of the strategic studies program at Johns Hopkins University, said either we attack Iran, or it gets nukes. “The choices are now what they ever were: an American or an Israeli strike, which would probably cause a substantial war.”

ERIC EDELMAN: Former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney. Earlier this year in an article in the Council on Foreign Relations’s publication Foreign Affairs, Edelman, along with two other co-authors, said that the U.S. will either have to attack Iran or contain its nuclear weapons capability. “The military option should not be dismissed because of the appealing but flawed notion that containment is a relatively easy or low-risk solution to a very difficult problem,” they wrote.

NORM COLEMAN: Former Republican senator from Minnesota. Said that if Israel ever attacks Iran, the United States should join in. Coleman said: “The United States is going to be part of that.”

KIM HOLMES: The Heritage Foundation’s Kim Holmes worried that negotiating with Iran over its nuclear program might be preventing the U.S. from using military force to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Holmes called peace a “serious mistake.”
Should Mitt Romney become president, get ready for more undeclared war, bigger government and a further expansion of the police state.

Irving Kristol, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Elliott Abrams Lewis, Douglas Feith

La liste des contributeurs au document du PNAC "Reconstruire les défenses americaines" ("Rebuilding America's Defenses") compilé en 2000, qui a appelé à un "nouveau Pearl Harbor": Roger Barnett, du US Naval War College, Alvin Bernstein, de la National Defense University, Stephen Cambone, de la National Defense University, Eliot Cohen, de la Nitze School of Advanced International Studies de la Johns Hopkins University, Devon Gaffney Cross, du Donors' Forum of International Affairs, Thomas Donnelly, du Project for the New American Century (PNAC), David Epstein, du Bureau du Secrétaire de la Défense, Net Assessment, David Fautua, Lieutenant Colonel de l'armée américaine, Dan Goure, du Center for Strategic and International Studies, Donald Kagan, de l'Université Yale, Fred Kagan, de l'Académie militaire américaine de West Point, Robert Kagan, du Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Robert Killebrew Colonel américain (à la retraite ), William Kristol du journal The Weekly Standard, Mark Lagon de la Commission sénatoriale des affaires étrangères, James Lasswell de la GAMA Corporation, I. Lewis Libby de Dechert Price & Rhoads, Robert Martinage du Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessment, Phil Meilinger du US Naval War College, Mackubin Owens du US Naval War College, Steve Rosen de l'Université Harvard, Gary Schmitt du PNAC, Abraham Shulsky de RAND Corporation, Michael Vickers du Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessment, Barry Watts Northrop Grumman Corporation, Paul Wolfowitz Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, et Dov Zakheim de System Planning Corporation, comprend une proportion relativement élevée de noms juifs. Il y a beaucoup plus d'individus associés au PNAC. (...)

John Bolton, Eliot Abrams, Robert Kagan, Michael Ledeen, William Kristol, Frank Gaffney Jr.

VIDEO - The War Party - Zionism in NeoCon Foreign Policy

Organized Jewry, The Inciter of Global War and Genocide

Posted on November 30, 2011 by ZionCrimeFactory

War is a Jewish racket

by ZionCrimeFactory

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, we have been fed a crock of Jewish/Zionist dung-heap about the Second World War. Our governments, beholden to Jewish money and political influence, have been peddling fantasy stories as “truth”, fairy tales as “fact”, and preposterous fables as “history”, for seventy years straight. Our criminal governments have been lying to us and manipulating us into fighting senseless, catastrophic wars with the sole purpose of vanquishing the enemies of International Jewry, and thus paving the path for the Jewish takeover of the entire planet.
WWII — A Bloodbath For Jewish Benefit
It is a very difficult thing for Americans, Canadians, Brits, Australians, Frenchmen, and other Westerners, to come to terms with the fact that i) WWII was a senseless bloodbath that served no purpose other than to benefit the Jewish Power Elite in various ways, ii) that we were fighting on the wrong side, and iii) Hitler was right about everything. Call it pride, cognitive dissonance, or some combination of both — nobody likes to admit they were hoodwinked.

Jews fired the first shot in 1933.

Despite popular belief, WWII did not start in September of 1939 with the British and French declaration of war against Germany; it actually started in 1933. In 1933, organized Jewry initiated a subversive economic war against Germany; a boycott of German goods designed to weaken and destroy Hitler’s National Socialist government.  The March 24, 1933, edition of England’s Daily Express newspaper ran the headline “Judea Declares War on Germany“. The article reported: “The Israeli people around the world declare economic and financial war against Germany. Fourteen million Jews stand together as one man, to declare war against Germany. The Jewish wholesaler will forsake his firm, the banker his stock exchange, the merchant his commerce and the pauper his pitiful shed in order to join together in a holy war against Hitler’s people.”
International Jewry formally declared its “holy war” against Germany long before Hitler began restricting the rights of Germany’s Jews. Jewry’s war declaration against Germany was issued by Samuel Untermeyer of the World Jewish Federation who said, in the New York Times of 7 Aug. 1933, that it would be means of an “economic boycott that will undermine the Hitler regime and bring the German people to their senses by destroying their export trade on which their very existence depends.” The Toronto Evening Telegram, February 26, 1940, quoted Rabbi Maurice L. Perlzweig of the World Jewish Congress telling a Canadian audience that “the World Jewish Congress has been at war with Germany for seven years.” The Jewish desire for war was admitted to by Rabbi Felix Mendelsohn in the Chicago “Sentinel” of 8 Oct. 1942 where he states: “The Second World War is being fought for the defense of the fundamentals of Judaism.” 
Vladimir Jabotinsky (founder of the Jewish terrorist group, Irgun Zvai Leumi) in Mascha Rjetsch, January, 1934 (also quoted in “Histoire de l’Armée Allemande” by Jacques Benoist-Mechin, Vol. IV, p. 303) said: “For months now the struggle against Germany is waged by each Jewish community, at each conference, in all our syndicates, and by each Jew all over the world. There is reason to believe that our part in this struggle has general value. We will trigger a spiritual and material war of all the world against Germany’s ambitions to become once again a great nation, to recover lost territories and colonies. But our Jewish interests demand the complete destruction of Germany. Collectively and individually, the German nation is a threat to us Jews.” In Les Nouvelles Litterairres, February 10, 1940, Schalom Asch is quoted as saying: “Even if we Jews are not physically at your side in the trenches, we are morally with you. This war is our war and you fight it with us.”
Chaim Weizmann, the late chairman of the World Zionist Organization and first president of Israel, made clear the genocidal Jewish intention to destroy Germany. In a letter to British PM Winston Churchill dated September 10, 1941, Weizmann spoke about how the Jews of the United States pulled the nation into the first World War, and he promised they could do it again, given that Britain fulfilled Zionist demands regarding Palestine. Weizmann wrote: “It has been routinely acknowledged by British statesman that it was the Jews who, in the last war, effectively helped to tip the scales in America in favour of Great Britain. They are keen to do it — and may do it — again.” In a Speech on December 3, 1942, in New York, Weizmann stated: “We are not denying and are not afraid to confess that this war is our war and that it is waged for the liberation of Jewry… Stronger than all fronts together is our front, that of Jewry. We are not only giving this war our financial support on which the entire war production is based, we are not only providing our full propaganda power which is the moral energy that keeps this war going. The guarantee of victory is predominantly based on weakening the enemy forces, on destroying them in their own country, within the resistance. And we are the Trojan horses in the enemy’s fortress. Thousands of Jews living in Europe constitute the principal factor in the destruction of our enemy. There, our front is a fact and the most valuable aid for victory.”
The 24 July, 1942, edition of the American Hebrew Magazine made it plainly clear who brought America into the war when it declared that “whenever an American or a Filipino fell at Bataan or Corregidor or at any other of the now historic spots where MacArthur’s men put up their remarkable fight, their survivors could have said with truth: the real reason that boy went to his death was because Hitler’s anti-semitic movement succeeded in Germany.”
Further proof Jews were behind the push for war on both sides of the Atlantic came in the form of a diary entry made by James Forrestal, who later became U.S. Secretary of Defense in the Truman administration. In his diary of 27 Dec. 1945 Forrestal notes that he played golf with Joseph Kennedy (father of JFK), FDR’s ambassador to Britain, who told him that ex-Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain “stated that America and the world Jews had forced England into war.” In 1949, Forrestal was fired by President Truman and within two months was murdered (ruled a “suicide”) for his opposition to Zionism and the nascent state of Israel.

Likewise, Roosevelt was guided into the war by Jews. On 9 February 1938, the Polish Ambassador in Washington, Count Jerzy Potocki, reported to the Foreign Minister in Warsaw on the Jewish role in shaping American foreign policy. His secret reports said such things as:

“The pressure of the Jews on President Roosevelt and on the State Department is becoming ever more powerful …
… The Jews are right now the leaders in creating a war psychosis which would plunge the entire world into war and bring about general catastrophe.
…the Jews have also created real chaos: they have mixed together the idea of democracy and communism and have above all raised the banner of burning hatred against Nazism.
In conversations with Jewish press representatives I have repeatedly come up against the inexorable and convinced view that war is inevitable. This international Jewry exploits every means of propaganda to oppose any tendency towards any kind of consolidation and understanding between nations.
The American public is subject to an ever more alarming propaganda which is under Jewish influence…
…Propaganda is mostly in the hands of the Jews who control almost 100 percent radio, film, daily and periodical press.”

Roosevelt was surrounded by Jew advisers — rabid anti-German hatemongers and warmongers of the worst sort — such as Bernard Baruch, S. I. Rosenman, Sidney Weinburg, Sidney Hillman, Henry Morgenthau Jr., and Felix Frankfurter.
As Dr. Stephen Sniegoski points out in his book review of The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State:

“Jews also played a significant role in getting the United States into World War II to destroy their Nazi nemesis. And they worked actively to undermine popular noninterventionist resistance to war. For example, the Anti-Defamation League “employed investigative agents who secretly penetrated isolationist and anti-Semitic organizations and collected potentially damaging or incriminating information” which it turned over to the FBI and other federal agencies. (p. 110) Ginsberg does not develop this point, but given the fact that the overwhelming majority of “isolationists” were not enemy agents and were simply exercising their constitutional right to oppose a policy, it is apparent that activist American Jews have been quite willing to crush the civil liberties of others in order to advance their own goals. Jews also played a critical part in turning the media toward a prowar stance. (That was quite an achievement, since the American mood in the 1930s was strongly antiwar and “isolationist.”) In Hollywood, Jewish film makers concentrated on producing anti-Nazi propaganda films to prepare the masses for a crusade against evil.”

So, as has been clearly demonstrated, WWII was provoked by Jews and the blame for this catastrophic bloodbath of sixty million human beings lays squarely at the feet of International Jewry. Hitler did not start the war nor did he want war. To the contrary, Hitler made it clear that he was opposed to such a war, having witnessed first hand the hell of the first catastrophic world war. In 1945 Hitler stated: “It is untrue that I or anyone else in Germany wanted war in 1939. It was wanted and provoked solely by international statesmen either of Jewish origin or working for Jewish interests. Nor had I ever wished that after the appalling first World War, there would ever be a second against either England or America.”
In fact, Jew lackey British PM Winston Churchill — who was a self-professed Zionist, a warmonger, a terrorist, and mass murderer –  flatly rejected peace offers from Hitler in 1939, 1940 and 1941. When Hitler’s number two man, Rudolf Hess, made his miraculous flight to Britain (having to crash land in Scotland) in 1941 to make peace and end the war, Churchill had him arrested and imprisoned for life. Undeniably it was the Jews, and their puppet politicians in America, France and Britain, who wanted war, and did everything they could to instigate and then prolong it.
Jews throughout the world often screamed that National Socialist Germany was intent on ruling the world. The Jewish-controlled US press collectively referred to Germans as war-like barbarians and “Huns”. The Jew Theodore Kaufman, in his diabolical anti-Germanic hate screed, Germany Must Perish! (published in 1941), accused the Germans of pursuing a policy of world dominion and therefore advocated their complete annihilation and the territorial dissection of their nation. Kaufman chillingly wrote: “For it must be patent by now that while all the Germans may not approve of the means being employed by the Nazis in achieving German-world-dominion, they are practically unanimous in agreeing that that goal must, now or in the future, be definitely achieved by Germany. Were the German nations to win this war, not one German would hesitate laying claim to a share in the loot … Yet defeat will on no account erase their desire to conquer and rule the world. There is only one way to frustrate such a desire: the goal of world-dominion must be removed from the reach of the German and the only way to accomplish that is to remove the German from the world!” (Kaufman, Theodore. “Germany Must Perish!”, Argyle Press. 1941)
This is a classic case of Jewish psychological projection, considering that it has always been the chief objective of the Jewish religion to rule the earth and acquire all earthly treasures and possessions; thereby making all Gentiles into subservient slaves to the Jews. It is the Jews, not the Germans, who desire world domination, as the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion have made perfectly clear. Not only is Jewish world dominion elucidated in the Protocols (which have undoubtedly proven to be authentic, despite endless Jewish kvetching to the contrary) but in all ancient Judaic religious texts — the Torah, Talmud, books of the Zohar and Kaballah. Prominent Jewish rabbis from Israel are quite open about their sinister desire to murder and enslave non-Jews.
The Zionist Hand Behind Middle-East Wars

Zionist butcher, Ariel Sharon, puppeteered America's military forces like a marrionette to crush his enemies.

The genocidal destruction that has rained down on the middle-east for the past decade was launched at the behest of a small cadre of conniving Jewish-Zionist ideologues who call themselves “neoconservatives.” The brainchild of three Jewish Communists (“Trotskyites”) Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz and Leo Strauss, neoconservatism is — and has always been — a Jewish movement, led by Zionist motivations and for Zionist gain.
An article written by Gal Beckerman in the Jewish daily news magazine, The Forward, opined: “Acknowledging the Jewishness of neoconservatism has always triggered the red, flashing lights of antisemitism, especially since the start of the Iraq War (with extra points if it’s Pat Buchanan doing the acknowledging). But there is some truth to the suspicion. If there is an intellectual movement in America to whose invention Jews can lay sole claim, neoconservatism is it. It’s a thought one imagines most American Jews, overwhelmingly liberal, will find horrifying. And yet it is a fact that as a political philosophy, neoconservatism was born among the children of Jewish immigrants and is now largely the intellectual domain of those immigrants’ grandchildren.“
Jewish political scientist, Benjamin Ginsberg, acknowledged that neoconservatism was essentially a product of Jewish tribalism: “One major factor that drew them inexorably to the right was their attachment to Israel and their growing frustration during the 1960s with a Democratic party that was becoming increasingly opposed to American military preparedness and increasingly enamored of Third World causes [e.g., Palestinian rights]. In the Reaganite right’s hard-line anti-communism, commitment to American military strength, and willingness to intervene politically and militarily in the affairs of other nations to promote democratic values (and American interests), neocons found a political movement that would guarantee Israel’s security.”
Irving Kristol, the Jewish “godfather” of the neoconservative movement let slip the Israeli-centric agenda of his nefarious ideology when, in 1973, he stated: “Senator McGovern is very sincere when he says that he will try to cut the military budget by 30%. And this is to drive a knife in the heart of Israel… Jews don’t like big military budgets. But it is now in the interests of the Jews to have a large and powerful military establishment in the United States… American Jews who care about the survival of the state of Israel have to say, no, we don’t want to cut the military budget, it is important to keep that military budget big, so that we can defend Israel.”
Fellow neoconservative godfather Norman Podhoretz has made similar statements about using American military prowess to protect Israel. Leo Strauss, also a Jewish Zionist and early neocon “intellectual,” advocated the perpetual deception of the public by those in power for a “greater good.” This “greater good” that he spoke of was what was good for the Jews, not the Gentiles among whom they live. Noam Chomsky has argued that Strauss’s theory is a form of Leninism, in which society should be led by a group of elite vanguards, whose job is to protect liberal society against the dangers of excessive individualism, and creating inspiring myths to make the masses believe that they are fighting against anti-democratic and anti-liberal forces. Journalists, such as Seymour Hersh, have opined that Strauss endorsed noble lies, “myths used by political leaders seeking to maintain a cohesive society.”
Jewish neocon genocidists like to speak in public about “global crusades for democracy,” but this is just a clever ruse to deceive the “Goyim” about their real agenda which is to bolster the hegemonic status of Israel in the middle-east ensemble. The Jew William Kristol (son of Irving Kristol), editor of the Weekly Standard, explained the real reason for the disingenuous rhetoric about global democracy to the Jerusalem Post (27th July 2000): “I’ve always thought it was best for Israel for the US to be generally engaged and generally strong, and then the commitment to Israel follows from a general foreign policy.”

Two of Leo Stauss’s more notable protégé’s were none other than Jewish Iraq war architect, Paul Wolfowitz, and Abram Shulsky. Shulsky was the Jewish Straussian who was appointed head of the Office of Special Plans by fellow Jewish neocon Douglas Feith (then Under Secretary of Defense for Policy in the Pentagon). This office supplied the major portion of the fraudulent “intelligence” that was used by the Bush administration to justify the war against Iraq. It has been proven that the Zionist propaganda entity embedded within the Pentagon, the Office of Special Plans, worked closely with Israel to cook up the “Iraq WMD threat to America” hoax.
The phony “threat” of Iraq possessing or attempting to possess and wield “weapons of mass destruction” was cunningly contrived by Israel and its vast network of Jewish “sayanim” operatives in America who formed a tight conglomeration of neoconservative “think tanks”, such as the Project for a New American Century, American Enterprise Institute, Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, among many others, who were behind all of the propaganda, conjecture and lies that led to the disastrous Zionist proxy war to behead the Iraqi nation for Israel’s benefit in 2003.
Israel’s sayanim operatives had also burrowed their way into the top echelons of the Bush Administration and the Pentagon — namely Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, David Wurmser, Eliot Abrams, Abram Shulsky, Lewis Libby, Ari Fleischer, David Frum, Eliot Cohen, Joshua Bolten, Marc Grossman and many others — thus enabling these inhuman Zionist war-hawks to set US foreign policy at the drop of a dime. In fact, the Bush Administration was infested with dual Israeli-American citizens; forty-two of them to be exact. Many of these Jews had extensive links to the Jewish-Israeli lobby (AIPAC, AJC, ADL, ZOA, etc) and to the Sharon regime in Israel.
It’s not exactly a secret that the neocons are mostly Jews whose loyalty lies with the Zionist state, not America. Ari Shavit, a writer for Israel’s Haaretz Daily News Service, proudly proclaimed that:

“The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservatives, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history.”

It’s incredible to see some people still trying to deny this.
This lunatic Zionist agenda for mid-east destruction goes back much further than many people realize. In 1996, a militarist Israeli “thank tank” called the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS), authored a policy paper for the incoming Israeli Likud Prime Minister, the crazed Arab-hating war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu, entitled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm“. Within this damnable Zionist strategy paper we find the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi Ba’athist regime being advocated as an “important Israeli strategic objective”, as well as calls for the toppling of the governments of Iran and Syria. Their grand strategy was aimed at replacing the governments of these countries with Israel-friendly stooges. Three of the authors of this warmongering paper were none other than Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and David Wurmser — all of whom became top ranking members of the Bush Administration in 2001 eagerly pushing for an American war with Iraq. The Clean Break paper was essentially a continuation of an earlier proposal by Zionist extremist Oded Yinon called “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s” (published in 1982). Yinon wickedly suggested that the Arab States should be destroyed from within by exploiting their internal religious and ethnic tensions. These cold-blooded Israeli Geo-political strategists envisioned that by weakening Israel’s external enemies they could thereby weaken Israel’s internal enemies, i.e. the native Palestinians.

Some of the subversive Jews behind the Iraq War.

The ultra-militaristic Project for a New American Century group — which many people suggest was the prime mover in shaping the post-9/11 American-led war agenda in the middle-east — was essentially an offshoot of the Israeli IASPS, and was headed by Jewish neocon heavyweights William Kristol and Robert Kagan. In one of the group’s deranged “studies” in September of 2000, PNAC released a report entitled, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources For a New Century”, which called for a “New Pearl Harbor” in order to galvanize the American masses behind illegal wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and a broader war against the entire Arab/Muslim world. It chillingly stated, “the process of transformation is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic catalyzing event — like a New Pearl Harbor.” At least half the members of the PNAC group were Jewish. The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs and the American Enterprise Institute were also instrumental in the deceptive propaganda campaign that led to the war in Iraq. Both groups were Jewish-financed and run operations.
Another important piece to this Zionist puzzle is the Jonathan Institute, a maniacal Zionist “think tank” set up in 1979 by former and current Israeli prime minister’s Menachem Begin (terrorist/mass murderer, former head of the Irgun) and Benjamin Netanyahu. This group of Israeli terror planners held a series of conferences throughout the 1980s and derived its name from Bibi Netanyahu’s late brother Jonathan Netanyahu, who was killed in the Israeli raid on Entebbe airport in Uganda in the 1970s. This coterie of Zionist crooks endeavored to promote their genocidal fantasies of a “clash of civilizations” between the West and Israel’s Arab/Islamic adversaries and also effectively publicized their desire for Western powers to adopt their espoused doctrine of “preemptive retaliation,” the Israeli policy of killing those designated as “terrorists” before they can act. Begin, Netanyahu and other international Jewish terror masters, attempted to seduce Western leaders to join their sadistic effort to fragment and destabilize the middle-east so as to make it safer for Israel and ripe for Israeli plundering.

Zionist parasite Netanyahu, the architect of 9/11 and the global "war on terror" crusade of Zionist mayhem and chaos.

Netanyahu published a book in 1986 entitled, Terrorism: How the West Can Win, which was a collection of essays from himself and like-minded Zionist gangsters who harbored grandiose dreams of the annihilation of Arabs and Muslims who get in the way of the Likud Party’s strategic objectives. Netanyahu’s book basically lays out the frame-work for what is now generally known as the “war on terror”, and contains all of the vocabulary and discourse that didn’t enter our lexicon until after the suspicious events of 9/11. This book is undoubtedly a key piece of evidence that the “war on terror” is a Zionist-engineered scam for global Jewish hegemony.
The Jewish Neocons — who had been lurking over capital hill like hawks for decades, running their sleazy Zionist propaganda outfit magazines and periodicals such as The Weekly Standard and The New Republic — had for years been unsuccessful in their ceaseless pursuit to drag America into another war in the middle-east, following the first Persian-Gulf war in 1991. Nobody was buying their lies that Iraq posed an imminent danger to America. But that all changed on September 11, 2001.
The catalyst for this current state of perpetual warfare between the West and Israel’s Islamic enemies was, of course, 9/11; the “new pearl harbor” event that the PNAC Zionists had been lusting for to realize their wet-dreams of endless warfare.
Pitting the West against the Islamic Middle-East in a prolonged battle was something that Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak and the then Israeli PM Ariel Sharon publicly called for within an hour of the terrorist spectacle that struck America on that fateful day; a testament to the true authors of the day’s horrific events. An event that Benjamin Netanyahu mockingly proclaimed was a “good thing for Israel … will bring immediate sympathy [for Israel's cause].” An event that genocidaire, Ariel Sharon, dubbed Israel’s “Hanukkah miracle.” An event which Israeli political analyst Ehud Sprinzak candidly described as “the most important public relations act ever committed” in favor of the Jews and Israel.
Of course, for those of us who have actually studied the subject of 9/11, we know who the real perpetrators were. The former head of Pakistan’s ISI intelligence service (Hamid Gul), the 25 year German SPD parliamentarian and author of several books on the secret operations of intelligence agencies (Andreas Von Bulow), the former President of Italy (Francesco Cossiga), as well as the former director of studies of the US Army War College (Dr. Alan Sabrosky), all unanimously concur that the Israeli Mossad conducted 9/11 as a false-flag attack to kick-start this long-planned “clash of civilizations” that Zionists had been so zealously lobbying for, for decades.
(For more information about the Jewish origins and Zionist machinations of the neoconservative movement that engineered the Iraq War, see Michael Collins Piper’s book, The High Priests of War, and Dr. Stephen Sniegoski’s book, The Transparent Cabal. Also recommended are the two excellent documentaries, “War By Deception” and “Missing Links“, which comprehensively expose the Zionist cabal behind 9/11 and the 9/11 wars.)
Jewish Neocons and the HoloHoax

There is an interesting connection between Jewish neoconservatism and the fictitious ‘Holocaust’ religion. The Jewish Mafia’s preposterous anti-German conspiracy theory — known to the world as The Holocaust™ — is central to neoconservative thinking.
Jewish journalist Gal Beckerman had this to say about the motivations of Jewish neoconservatives:

“It was Podhoretz, however, who gave neoconservatism its most explicitly Jewish cast. The August 1968 issue of Commentary featured Emil Fackenheim’s famous essay, “Jewish Faith and the Holocaust: A Fragment,” which included Fackenheim’s contention that after Auschwitz, Jews had a moral responsibility to defend Jewish interests so as not to hand Hitler a “posthumous vic-tory.” By February 1972, Podhoretz himself wrote a piece titled, without irony, “Is It Good for the Jews?”
Holocaust consciousness was growing in the 1970s, as was a renewed sense of threat to Jews and a feeling that, as Podhoretz put it, the postwar “statute of limitations” on anitisemitism had run out. Israel’s security, threatened in the Six Day War and the Yom Kippur War — both events that gave Jews existential pause — suddenly became a top American Jewish concern. Podhoretz came to identify more and more with the defense of Jews, and by the 1980s, half his articles on international affairs focused on Israel and threats to the Jewish people.”

As that article demonstrates, one of the main motivating factors behind the policies advocated by neoconservative ideologues was protecting the Jews from “another holocaust.” Of course, what this article won’t tell you is that the alleged ‘holocaust’ of Jews during WWII did not, and could not have scientifically, mathematically, possibly ever occurred. Nor did any of the dozens of other “holocausts” or “imminent holocausts” of “six million Jews” that Jewish-Zionist and Jewish-Communist propagandists had been incessantly promoting in the press dating back to the late 19th century.
Interestingly, the main Zionist architect of the savage Iraq War, Paul Wolfowitz, was heavily influenced by the fraudulent mythology of Holocaustianity. According to Shelemyahu Zacks, Paul Wolfowitz’ father, Jacob Wolfowitz, “fought … for the liberation of Soviet Jewry. He was a friend and strong supporter of the state of Israel, AIPAC member and had many friends and admirers there.” Paul Wolfowitz’s wikipedia article asserts that he was, “Strongly influenced by his father, Paul Wolfowitz became “a soft-spoken former aspiring-mathematician-turned-policymaker … [whose] world views … were forged by family history and in the halls of academia rather than in the jungles of Vietnam or the corridors of Congress … [His father] … escaped Poland after World War I. The rest of his father’s family perished in the Holocaust.” Wolfowitz may have lost some family in WWII, as did tens of millions of other people, but his relatives certainly didn’t die in a “homicidal gas chamber” because such claims are a tissue of fabrication.
Wikipedia tells us that Wolfowitz read about the HoloHoax and Hiroshima as a boy and calls them “the polar horrors”. Speaking of the influence of the HoloHoax on his views, Wolfowitz said: “That sense of what happened in Europe in World War II has shaped a lot of my views … It’s a very bad thing when people exterminate other people [except, of course, when Jews exterminate Palestinians or when Allied troops exterminated Germans or when Jewish Communists exterminated Russians and Ukrainians or when American troops exterminate Arabs and Muslims on behalf of Israel -- ZCF], and people persecute minorities. It doesn’t mean you can prevent every such incident in the world, but it’s also a mistake to dismiss that sort of concern as merely humanitarian and not related to real interest.”
Another key architect of the Iraq War, sleazeball Zionist genocidist Richard Perle, is seen in this BBC documentary titled “The War Party”, saying how the HoloHoax has shaped his worldview and is essentially the motivating factor that drives his insidious warmongering on behalf of Israel. At the 16:49 mark of the video, Perle says: “the defining moment of our history was certainly the holocaust. It was destruction, a genocide of a whole people, and it was the failure to respond in a timely fashion to a threat that was clearly gathering. We don’t want that to happen again. When we have the ability to stop totalitarian regimes we should do so because when we fail to do so the results are catastrophic.”
It is supremely axiomatic that the “big lie” of “Iraqi WMD” that was used to justify the war against Iraq was conjured up by, in essence, the same caliber of cunning Jew propagandists that conned the world into believing in the “big lie” of “German WMD” (the gas-chambers myth). The shared mindset of people like Perle, Wolfowitz, and other Jewish neocons, is that the HoloHoax justifies Israel’s existence, it justifies US support for Israel, and it justifies endless wars against Arab/Muslim nations for Israel’s “security.”

Little children are mesmerized by HoloHoax propaganda films from the outset of their childhood. No wonder they believe it so much.

The Zionist-trumpeted myth of ‘Iraqi WMD’ has been dismantled and is believed by very few people today (with the possible exception of Sean Hannity). However, the myth of ‘German WMD’ (gas-chambers lie) is still very much believed by the majority of the mind-controlled Western populace, because that propaganda has been so relentless and intensively force-fed to people since a young age. Not only that, but it is actually illegal to challenge the claims of the HoloHoax in a dozen countries in Europe — no wonder so many people believe it, in many countries they are forced to by law! Europeans who bravely refuse to blindly accept and adhere to the conformist dogma of this hoax run the risk of heavy fines and even imprisonment! Truth doesn’t need laws to protect it from scrutiny, but lies do.
Once the holocaust myth is finally dismembered on a wide scale, then all of the fraudulent justifications Jewish Neocons give to generate support for Israel and global Jewry in all of their villainous endeavors, will collapse like a house of cards.
The First Gulf War, Atrocity Propaganda and the HoloHoax

Zionists Steven Solarz and Tom Lantos masterminded the push for American intervention in the first Persian-Gulf war using lies and deceit.

There is also an interesting correlation between the first Gulf War, atrocity propaganda and the HoloHoax.
The late American-Jewish congressman Tom Lantos, a Hungarian “HoloHoax survivor” and rabid Zionist, was the mastermind behind another series of atrocity lies which led the US down the path of endless wars in the middle-east on behalf of Israel. Tom Lantos’ Congressional Human Rights Caucus held a hearing after the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq in 1991. Lantos’ Human Rights Caucus presented “(lie)witnesses” who spoke about alleged atrocities committed by Iraqi soldiers in Kuwait. It was revealed months after this hearing successfully pushed America into the first Gulf War, that the whole thing was a scripted hoax! The entire saga was concocted with the help of the public relations firm, Hill and Knowlton.
The testimony that clinched the war resolution that barely passed in the Senate in a 52-47 vote, was delivered by a young Kuwaiti girl who appeared anonymous at the hearing, known to the public only as “Nayirah”. She claimed to have witnessed Iraqi troops come into a Kuwaiti hospital with guns, who then proceeded to remove dozens of babies from their incubators — stole the incubators — and left the babies to die on the cold floor. This never happened. “Nayirah” spoke perfect American English (likely lived in the US her whole life) and turned out to be the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. This disgraceful and corrupt young woman was nothing less than a paid actor, coached in the art of deception, who tearfully recited a rehearsed pro-war propaganda script prepared for her by her Zionist paymasters. This hoax atrocity story was widely publicized by mainstream media outlets and Kuwaiti officials repeated these lies at the United Nations in their campaign to elicit Western intervention in their struggle with Saddam Hussein.
The “Kuwaiti incubators hoax” essentially provided the casus belli for American intervention in the first Gulf War. Evidently, child atrocity stories are an effective pro-war propaganda tool because of their ability to garner anger from the public, which is why Jews are so fond of telling grotesque tall tales of Nazis ripping babies in half with their bare hands. Is it any surprise that Lantos (being the experienced liar that he is) was one of the highlighted stars of Steven Spielberg’s Holocaust Hoax documentary, “The Last Days”? A counter-documentary which exposes the lies of Spielberg’s hate film was released earlier this year titled “The Last Days of the Big Lie“; I encourage everyone to watch it.

Zionists attempted second twentieth century "gas chambers" hoax in 1991; this time maligning Iraqis with this ridiculous 'blood libel'. Click to enlarge.

It is hardly surprising that during the first Zionist-contrived Gulf War deceitful Jews laughably attempted to resurrect the WWII “homicidal gas chambers” myth and project it onto Iraq. The New York based Jewish Press, then calling itself “the largest independent Anglo-Jewish weekly newspaper,” wrote on its title page on February 21, 1991: “IRAQIS HAVE GAS CHAMBERS FOR ALL JEWS” The front cover announcement of volume 12, number 1 (spring 1991), of Response, a periodical published by the Jewish Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles and distributed in 381,065 copies, was: “GERMANS PRODUCE ZYKLON B IN IRAQ (Iraq’s German-made gas chamber)”
Nobody took those claims seriously, and they obviously weren’t true. But it illustrates the reckless disregard Jews have for historical truth and accuracy. Time and time again we see mendacious Jews carelessly trying to elicit sympathy from the public using lies, even resorting to resurrecting past false propaganda narratives to malign their new enemies (the Arabs and Muslims) with. It’s been over 60 years since WWII, you’d think these scoundrels would have come up with some new lies and slanders by now. It seems that any time the Jews want to demonize someone they march up to the old “attic of Jewry” where they keep all the atrocity propaganda albums and highlight reels, lift off the shelf the first ancient Aggadah fable they can find, dust it off, and use it once again. If it doesn’t work the first time, they try again and again until it finally sticks. I guess the Jews aren’t as sophisticated as some might think.
Conclusion
Countless times, non-Jews — mesmerized by subversive propaganda — have been duped into going to war against the Jews’ enemies. Unmistakeably, the main tool of the Jew to accomplish his sinister ends is the power of propaganda and mass persuasion through atrocity lies. The television and news-media is their greatest weapon because with those elements under their firm control they are able to shape what the public thinks and feels; thereby shaping what people do. Multitudinous millions of Gentiles have fought, killed and died in wars instigated by International Jewry, aided and abetted by Gentile pawns and stooges who sell out their own people for short-term monetary gain and political power.
Ostensibly, the Jews have attained their current position as global hegemon and world dictator through the instigation of wars and revolutions — pitting Gentiles against Gentiles. As we are busy killing each other, the Jews merrily count their shekels all the way to the bank. In the end, it is people’s innate naivety, as well as their susceptibility to be deceived and misled by emotive atrocity stories, that affords the Jews a smooth ride to world supremacy. Ladies and gentlemen, it’s time to wake up and smell the coffee before it’s too late. Either accept the truth now, and inform others about it, or face slavery!


Sur ce blog:

Michele Bachmann est comme Sarah Palin: plus sioniste que les sionistes

Rick Santorum, le nouveau candidat sioniste le plus en vue aux États-Unis, représente un grave danger pour la liberté d'expression

Sheldon Adelson: "je suis le juif le plus riche au monde"

Selon Frank J. Gaffney (PNAC), les Frères Musulmans ont infiltré et contrôlent l'administration Obama

'A CLEAN BREAK': un document incontournable du gvt israélien pour comprendre le projet du Grand Israël et les agressions impérialistes au Moyen-Orient

La Judée déclare la guerre à Ron Paul

11 septembre et tout le reste: c'était pas les musulmans!

Le mouvement juif Néo-conservateur : du trotskisme au bellicisme sioniste

Les fauteurs de guerres