FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Balfour & a Comprehensive History of Zionist Crimes

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> General
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ZIONISM_IS_THE_ENEMY
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 12 May 2007
Posts: 26

PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2007 3:45 am    Post subject: Balfour & a Comprehensive History of Zionist Crimes Reply with quote

A Comprehensive History of Zionist Crimes
Revised March 11, 2007


http://www.takeourworldback.com/zionistcrimes.htm


Preface

It was decided to compile a relatively comprehensive account of the Zionist Mafia's crimes, ranging from the spinning of wartime propaganda into a new religion for political and business purposes, to the 9/11 World Trade Center demolition and the London bombings. The narrative is essentially in chronological order, so readers may scroll down to the period of their choice. Some consideration of the reality behind government and press distortions of previous events is necessary in order to fully appreciate the current global power structure and motive behind 21st century atrocities. This synthesis is clearly a mix of facts, conjecture and opinion, and is best regarded as a hypothesis. To complement it, another briefer version exists in timeline format. Although the following description will contain errors, it is certainly a much more accurate rendition of history than versions provided by governments and mainstream media. The material is subject to revision.
Contents

Prologue

The Khazars

Zionism

Holocaustianity

World War One

Bolshevik Revolution

World War Two

King David Hotel attack, 1946

Proclamation of Independent State of Israel, 1948

Forrestal assassination, 1949

Lavon Affair, 1954

JFK assassination, 1963

USS Liberty attack, 1967

Operation Trojan (Libya frame-up), 1986

Pan Am 103 bombing over Lockerbie, 1988

Other late 20th century false-flags and assassinations

EgyptAir 990, Atlantic Ocean, October 1999

Apollo Moon landings, fake conspiracy, February 2001

9/11, crime of the century, September 2001

Guantanamo Bay, post 9/11

Motives for Afghanistan/Iraq wars

AA Flight 587, Belle Harbor, November 2001

Bali micro nuke bombing, October 2002

Dr David Kelly assassination, July 2003

Madrid 3/11 train bombings, March 2004

US phony Presidential election, 2004

London 7/7 train / bus bombings, July 2005

Bali bombings, October 2005

Jordan bombings, November 2005

Suppression of free speech, 2005

Egyptian 2/2 ferry sinking, February 2006

Dahab bombings, April 2006

Mumbai 7/7 train bombings, July 2006

Attack on Gaza and Lebanon, July/August 2006

Liquid explosives plot hoax, August 2006

Litvinenko polonium assassination, November 2006
Prologue

As governments continue their relentless drive towards global dictatorship, emasculation of national sovereignties and wilful refusal to govern for the benefit of their own citizens, it is clear that an international cabal or Mafia exerts great influence upon the obsequious flunkies and traitors who pose as 'leaders'. A measure of the cabal's power is provided by the fact that the armed forces of several nations are deployed on phony pretexts such as "WMDs", or "al Qaeda" conspiracy theories based on faked videos and planted 'evidence'. The military's legitimate defensive role has been superseded by the new mission: that of mercenaries employed to enrich the cabal by providing opportunities for private profit, from looting of oil wealth to heroin trafficking. Presidents and prime ministers receive a relatively small share of the proceeds, yet must pay a heavy price in unpopularity and the tarnishing of their legacy. In contrast, the cabal reaps almost all of the loot and benefits, and gains power to boot. The cabal's overriding objective is the pursuit of absolute political power; money is important to them, but a proportion is regularly reinvested in exchange for power. Their interests are not restricted to a single nation, but extend to the entire world.

It is logical to refer to this global power elite as a "Zionist" Mafia or cabal, since Zionism has been an essential feature of their strategy over the last 110 years. Zionism was officially supposed to be about establishing a national homeland for the Jewish people. Back in 1946, Jewish terrorists dressed as Arabs bombed the King David Hotel in Palestine. These bombers, part of the Irgun group who were officially classed as "radical Zionists", were directed by future Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. In the same year the Irgun also plotted to kill British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin, although the assassination attempt was foiled by British Intelligence. But Zionism did not stop with the creation of Israel in 1948.

In 1954, Israel was caught red-handed in a false-flag terrorist operation in Egypt. This involved attempts to frame "Moslem militants" for a series of bombings, and the Israeli Defense Minister Pinhas Lavon was forced to resign in the ensuing scandal. In 1963, Israel's Mossad (motto: "By Way of Deception, thou shalt do War", although their deception includes attempting to deny that!) and the Meyer Lansky (Majer Suchowliński) Zionist crime syndicate were implicated in the JFK assassination. (It was Lansky who pioneered the use of Swiss bank accounts for laundering the proceeds of international crime. Switzerland is a guaranteed war-free zone; the crooks would have too much to lose.) In 1967 Israel launched a sustained, unprovoked attack on the USS Liberty, hoping to pin the blame on Egypt. Unfortunately for Israel, they failed to sink the vessel, and had to fall back on the claim that it was a "mistake". In 1986, Israel's "Operation Trojan" involved the installation of a transmitter in Tripoli, and was successful in tricking Reagan into bombing Libya.

More recently, the roles of Ariel Sharon (Scheinermann) and Ehud Olmert have been primarily as war criminals who tended to focus on the immediate Middle-Eastern theater. Their overt activities included terrorising and oppressing Palestinians, invading neighboring Arab states, and generally carrying out as much ethnic cleansing - and doing as much to sabotage peace - as they could conceivably get away with. In contrast, Binyamin / Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu was charged with a crucially important covert role. Bibi's father Ben-Zion Milikowsky was secretary to Ze'ev "Vladimir" Jabotinsky, who founded the Zionist terrorist movement that played an important part in the creation of Israel. Binyamin Netanyahu was a unit team leader in Sayeret Matkal, an elite special forces unit of the Israel Defense Forces. Bibi, a close friend of Larry Silverstein, was in New York City in the morning of 9/11 and in London on the morning of the 7/7 bombings where he exhibited foreknowledge of the attacks. Netanyahu's job is to supply "new Pearl Harbors".

Although it turns out that the world wars and major terrorist events such as skyscraper demolitions, train and restaurant bombings and ferry sinkings are the handiwork of a Jewish Zionist Mafia, it would not be fair to blame "Jews" in general and assume that they are all part of a conspiracy. It would be too far-fetched to imagine the likes of Barry Manilow, for example, as part of a conspiracy for world domination; a conspiracy to send people to sleep would be more credible. A week after 9/11, Manilow was not calling for revenge or saying "Muslims did it". And attempts to downplay Albert Einstein's genius and paint him as a "warmonger" are either motivated by envy or even an incipient racism. The best indications are that the world's arch-villains are part of the Khazar tribe. There is a partial correlation between "Jews" and the Khazars, but this is hard to quantify. It is also quite possible that the plotters of murder and mayhem are the descendants of a small association of Khazar families. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that just as Gentiles have been abused and cheated, the vast majority of the Jewish people have been cruelly exploited and deceived by the crooked cabal who lead them.

There is no doubt that almost all Jews sincerely believe in the "Holocaust" legend (as do many Gentiles), and the criminals have seized on these fears of persecution by using it as a recruiting sergeant for Mossad terrorist operatives, who are led to believe that they are serving their nation and helping to "save Jews" around the world. The cabal were only too happy to sacrifice Jews in World War Two. Yitzhak / Izaak Greenbaum said that one cow in Palestine was worth more than all the Jews in Europe (Poland or the diaspora in some accounts). But even if the true death toll in the camps - mostly from typhus, and a breakdown in the supply chain leading to starvation - was only 100,000, that was 100,000 too many. Acquiring a sovereign territory was a necessary but not sufficient element of the criminals' program for world domination. In order to achieve the required political power, it was necessary to populate the territory with millions of people who would both imagine themselves as, and be perceived as, a persecuted minority.

Hypotheses holding that all Jews are part of a conspiracy would require some quite extravagant postulates. For example, if an advanced alien species had landed on Earth in 2000 BC and created 50 pairs of Jews with unique brain hard-wiring ("ROM") to induce supremacist tendencies and confer a competitive advantage, a population growth rate of just under 0.3% p.a. (almost three times the human mean) would lead to 11.2 million Jews by 1900 AD. And the interesting corollary is that Creationism and Evolution would both be correct, to varying degrees. It is possible that emergent civilizations could be subject to a test, in order to protect an interstellar community from any technologically precocious but intellectually immature horde of savage barbarians who would simply shoot everyone, blow everything up, pollute the galaxy, and wreak havoc.

A more chilling alternative is that the dinosaurs never became extinct, instead evolving into humanoid form - and then making up for their lack of numbers and hedonistic tendencies with cunning, brutality and wickedness. Combining elements of each premise would posit that a race of reptilian humanoids (reptoids) invaded earth several millennia ago. In order to throw people off the scent, a theory about "reptilians" would be promoted by a character who had already been turned into a figure of ridicule by his claim to be "the son of God". Truthful information about a conspiracy by the elite would be mixed with distracting nonsense about instantaneous "shape-shifting" and blood-drinking royals.

However, there is no empirical support for the alien or reptilian hypotheses, and Occam's Razor favours the previous explanation that the Mafia warlords play on people's fears of persecution. Another theory that should be borne in mind in any general theory of evil is that of "political ponerology", which is about evil being used for political purposes. According to Andrew (Andrzej) Lobaczewski, “an ever-strengthening network of psychopathic and related individuals gradually starts to dominate, overshadowing the others. This rapidly develops into a pathocracy of a system wherein a small pathological minority takes control over a society of normal people.” Lobaczewski says that sociopaths constitute about 6% of the population of any given group, which appears too high, but would explain a lot. His theory does not account for the Khazars being strongly linked to atrocities (often against Semites, and then these Caucasian Turkic Khazar descendants have the effrontery to cry "you're an anti-Semite" whenever someone exposes Caucasian crimes against Semites!) A missing link in the ponerology theory, e.g. harsh winters in the climate of northern Khazaria selecting for ruthlessness, or a degenerate pursuit of hedonism by the Khazars, or possibly some feature of the Khazar flora, might explain the relatively high preponderance of Ashkenazi Turkic so-called "Jews" amongst the psychopathic, conscience-lacking fringe.

In favor of the political ponerology theory, we all start out relatively naive, imagining that people are basically good. When we find that a group of people are fundamentally evil, it is only natural for each race or tribe to imagine that the evil ones must be the "other" tribe. It is hard to see how political leaders could carry out mass murder against their own citizens, and the obvious explanation is that it must be another tribe, e.g. Ashkenazi Jews or Khazars, who have infiltrated the government. And there is plenty of evidence of inordinate Zionist Israeli (Ashkenazi Jewish) influence in the governments and mainstream media of the "Western democracies". But if the likes of George W Bush and Tony Blair are sociopaths, able to present themselves as "normal" individuals but utterly lacking any trace of a conscience, then there would be no need to posit that these are "crypto-Jews", or being blackmailed into submission.

Only a fool would claim that there are no differences of proclivities between various tribes or races. But we are all part of the human race, and a common characteristic of the various subgroups is that they all feature a decent, honourable majority and a crooked minority, and the ordinary people are oppressed (to varying extents) by their leaders who are almost invariably part of the crooked minority. This analysis concentrates on Zionists, Israelis or Jews because their criminal leaders have become more powerful than their Gentile rivals. In order to improve the human condition, these crooks must be exposed and brought to justice.

The Mafia cabal's tactics include hiding behind the Jewish people by asserting that an attack on the tiny crooked elite is an "anti-Semitic" racial attack on all Jews. They hope to deflect attention by pretending that research into Zionist atrocities and lies will lead to "hate crimes". However, the well-intentioned researcher has better things to do with his or her time than to simply select some group to hate. It is high time for a new alignment based upon ethics rather than ethnics. The cost of doing nothing would be catastrophic for humankind: the criminal elite's plans for global enslavement would come to fruition.

Approximately 1,250 years ago, a pagan tribe of Turks, Finns and Mongoloids - who had established a kingdom known as Khazaria in the steppe region between the Black and Caspian Seas - realised that converting to Judaism would reap massive dividends. Their King Bulan and his advisors wanted to introduce a monotheistic religion. However, adopting Christianity would have left them subservient to Rome; an alternative choice of Islam would have placed them under the rule of the Caliph of Baghdad. Judaism offered a third way which would offer the prospects of continuing to trade with both Christians and Muslims, along with lucrative profits obtained through creating and exploiting divisions between each group.

Attacks on Khazaria by the Rus', Byzantines and Mongols gradually forced the Khazar tribe to flee westwards to Eastern Europe, with some continuing right across to Spain and others settling in the Middle East including Egypt. The empire of self-styled or so-called Jews had been completely overrun by the time of Genghis Khan around AD 1200. In the period up to 1900, most of the emerging crooked cabal's operations were focused on amassing great wealth by way of the Rothschilds' banking exploits. This seed money was to be used for political and terrorist purposes throughout the 20th century and beyond.

In the late nineteenth century, these proto-terrorists and gangsters had a brilliant, Machiavellian scheme for world domination, including bribery and blackmail of governments, and control of the press and banking system. But in order to become untouchable and more powerful than the governments they sought to control, it was necessary for them to obtain their own sovereign state. And by the 1880s or 1890s this was no mean feat - the earth's territories had already been seized and allocated. Desperate times called for desperate measures.

A decision was made to create a new world religion, whose tenets would justify the handing over of sovereign territory to this crooked organization. The term "Zionism", coined in 1890, referred to the political programme to seize territory. But the programme went far beyond the land grab, euphemistically defined as seeking "to establish a home for the Jewish people in Eretz Israel". Zionism is best used to describe the whole Machiavellian geopolitical get-immensely-rich-steadily scheme, featuring the fomenting of racial and religious hatred in order to establish a global dictatorship, as detailed in the remainder of this article and other files at www.takeourworldback.com. The religion which would be an essential part of Zionism is best described as Holocaustianity.

Early attempts to introduce Holocaustianity's kernel - a hoax of "six million" dead or dying Jews - failed, when global conditions did not include the prerequisite critical mass of corrupt world leaders. In June 1900, for example, Rabbi Stephen Wise spoke of "6,000,000 living, bleeding, suffering arguments in favor of Zionism". Another botched attempt to kick-start the myth was in 1919, when few believed Martin Glynn's claims of "six million" starving Jews. On November 25, 1936, Chaim Weizmann told of "six million" Jews in Europe who were unwanted and effectively sentenced to be imprisoned.

The derivation of the "six million" is an ancient Jewish prophecy, which predicts the return of the Jews to the "Promised Land" after the loss of six million of their number. Specifically, the six stems from the sixth letter "vav" in the Hebrew alphabet or alef-bet. Six is the number of man in the Jewish tradition, since vav is said to be a picture of man. Man was supposedly created on the sixth day, works for six days of the week, and the "beast" has the "number of a man" - 666. Six billion deaths would be credible only to utter nincompoops; six thousand would be too insignificant to yield appreciable income and political capital. Hence, six million was chosen as a figure that almost everyone could agree on.

The few who had been duped by the pre-WWII scams did provide some cash. However, the crooked Zionist Mafia were already immensely rich by the time of Glynn's assertions, through seizing control of US and European central banks and newspapers, and looting Russia in the "Bolshevik Revolution". Nowadays these crime supremos will not even get out of bed for anything less than a billion dollars, unless the project provides other non-financial benefits.

It was not until the Zionists had instigated a Second World War which killed in excess of fifty million that these genocidal gangsters tricked the world into providing them with their own sovereign state, and into allowing the establishment of the new religion that would be employed to stifle all opposition. Control of their own state - "Israel" in occupied Palestine - would furnish a base for terrorist (Mossad) training camps, nuclear weapons, and the Zionist international crime syndicate.

As we shall see, by around 2001, Israel's arsenal had extended to several German-built, diesel-powered submarines fitted with nuclear-tipped modified cruise missiles with a 900-mile range. Their spying skills, and ability to get close to political leaders, were already second to none. Hence, the Zionist Mafia were then able to bribe, blackmail and terrorise other states into supplying their own armed forces as Israel's private mercenaries or proxy armies, invading and attacking its oil and water-rich enemy neighbouring states. The pretexts would range from truly asinine claims, e.g. of "WMDs" and "evil dictators" with "industrial shredders", to more elaborate schemes involving remote-controlled unmanned planes and multi-billion-dollar insurance frauds featuring skyscrapers felled by strategically placed thermite charges.

Zionist mobsters had gained substantial control of the press in Europe and the US by the early 20th century. These criminals planned to use the "six million" hoax along with a World War in order to seize their state in Palestine, but it was a question of awaiting the right opportunity. Rabbi Stephen S Wise and the New York Times were key players right from the 1890s when the plot was hatched, up to the early 1940s when conditions were conducive to foisting such an imposture on the long-suffering public. Wise was a Secretary of the Zionist Organization of America, and President of the American Jewish Congress. He was a pivotal figure in peddling the hoax in 1942, following his inopportune attempts of 1900, a mere two years after he attended the Second Zionist Congress at Basel in 1898. He was also trying to prepare the foundations when the New York Times of April 18, 1938 quoted him as saying that "millions of Jews are dying today". His maternal grandfather Mor(ic) Fischer had been a founder of the Herend Porcelain Company in 1839, and within thirty years was raised to the ranks of the Hungarian nobility by Francis Joseph I. Wise's paternal grandfather Joseph Hirsch Weiss (formerly Weissfeld) was a Chief Rabbi in Hungary. Wise's father Aaron sought to unionize the porcelain company, prompting Fischer to give the family one-way tickets to New York. Aaron Wise emigrated in 1874, one month after Stephen's birth, with his wife and children following him in 1875.

In 1896, Adolph Ochs (born to German-Jewish immigrants) bought The New York Times. Ochs had married Effie Wise, the daughter of another Rabbi (Isaac Mayer) Wise in 1884. The newspaper remained in Jewish ownership after Ochs' death in 1935. So in 1900, Wise was reported in the Times as saying "six million" bleeding, suffering Jews were a pretty good argument for Zionism, in 1938 the Times quoted Wise as saying that "millions of Jews are dying today", and in 1942 Wise and the Times were co-conspirators in peddling claims of an "extermination of Jews". Wise and the London section of the World Jewish Congress were said to have been in receipt of "information" from anonymous sources, with confirmation provided by the Polish government in exile in London. The New York Times of 30 June 1942 ran an article on page 7:

1,000,000 JEWS SLAIN BY NAZIS, REPORT SAYS

LONDON, June 29 (U.P.) ... spokesmen for the World Jewish Congress charged today.

They said Nazis had established a "vast slaughterhouse for Jews" in Eastern Europe ...

A report to the Congress said that Jews, deported en masse to Central Poland from Germany, Austria, Czechoslovakia and the Netherlands were being shot by firing squads at the rate of 1,000 daily.

Information received by the Polish Government in London confirmed that the Nazis had executed "several hundred thousand" Jews in Poland.

A good indicator of the quality of this 'information' comes from the fact that claims of any "firing squad slaughterhouse" in Poland have been abandoned by even the most fundamentalist of Holocaustians. It was also asserted that Jewish corpses were being used to manufacture soap, glue, lubricants and artificial fertilizer, and these myths were never taken very seriously. On October 10, 1942, the Vatican said it had been unable to confirm the many reports it had heard of severe measures against the Jews. (See A R Butz, The Hoax of The Twentieth Century, Chapter III.)

The ensuing colossal fraud was not only a prerequisite for the Zionists' annexing of Palestine, but also served as a sword and shield enabling Sharon, Olmert et al to conduct terrorist operations against Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, etc, and Bibi Netanyahu to instigate and direct a "War on Terror" featuring false-flag staged terror attacks such as 9/11, London 7/7, Madrid 3/11, Amman "9/11", etc. The "War on Terror" enabled the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which was mostly about removing a (relatively) honest leader who refused to sell his country out to the Zionist protection racket. This invasion also yielded fringe benefits of billions of dollars of looted oil wealth, i.e. the cost of the war included a massive blood price and vast sums of taxpayers' money, but the profits went into the pockets of the Zionist Mafia, with a few crumbs tossed at their lackeys. The 2001 Afghanistan invasion was in response to the Taliban's curtailing of CIA / Mossad profits from opium trafficking. It was hardly about catching Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, or Mullah Omar, none of whom were ever apprehended, and in any case could not be killed off since they played starring roles in the "War on Terror" myth.

Back in 1913 (just before the start of WWI!), the Zionists set up the Anti Defamation League (ADL) in the US. The purpose of this organization was to denounce opponents of crime, deception, and the power elite's plans for a fascist global dictatorship, as "anti-Semitics". Zionist logic ran thus: Since Jews were merely a persecuted minority who could do no wrong, anyone who so much as suggested that a Jew was guilty of a crime or a conspiracy was at best mentally deficient, at worst a racist bigot.

In 1916, Germany was on course to win World War One. Its submarines controlled the Atlantic, and the French, Italian and Russian armies were defecting, rebelling, or in disarray. Magnanimously, Germany did not want to force anything more than calling it quits and starting afresh with no strings attached.

Until October 1916, Zionists had been on the side of Germany. So the US press - already in the hands of Jews who also controlled the banks - supported Germany. Many of the American Jews had come from Germany; they also hoped to see Czar Nicholas II defeated. But, ever the opportunists, European Zionists made a deal with the British War Cabinet on the lines of: "You can still win this war and beat Germany. Get us Palestine as a home for the Jews, and we'll get the US to enter the war on your behalf."

After the deal was concluded, the Zionist press switched sides - concocting inane tales of Germans chopping the hands off babies. The consequence of the deal was the defeat of Germany, which led to the Balfour Declaration. Britain had no right to give Palestine to the Zionists; nevertheless, they promised to do so. The Zionists had demanded something in writing to ensure the British kept their side of the bargain; they got the Balfour declaration. Those who "worked with" Lord Balfour in drafting it - i.e., dictated it - included Chaim Weizmann and Leopold Amery, a crypto-Jew. The document promised that the British government would "use their best endeavours" to establish "a national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine.

In Germany, Jews had been respected, admired members of the community. At the end of World War One, the Germans became aware of the machinations which had brought the US into the war, leading to Germany's defeat and the associated terms of surrender and reparations. Jews were collectively blamed for the defeat. Although the German Jews were not physically harmed, they were perceived as traitors having sold out their German hosts who had treated them so well. Undoubtedly, there was deliberate discrimination and ostracism against Jews at this stage.

In 1933, World Jewry demanded that Hitler be replaced, and German Jews be reinstated to their former positions. The Germans refused outright, and then Samuel Untermyer - a wealthy Jew with strong links to US leaders - broadcast an announcement that World Jewry was declaring economic war on Germany. In order to feed its population, Germany had to import two-thirds of its food. 82 million Germans were crammed into an area of a few hundred thousand square kilometres at a time when 46 million Englishmen claimed the right to rule over 40 million square kilometres of the earth. Boycotting of German exports would have left the nation unable to finance its food imports, and a number of Germans would have starved. Hence, the eastward territorial expansion into Austria and Czechoslovakia.

A letter dated August 28, 1937, from Chancellor Heinrich Bruning to Winston Churchill stated: "I did not and do not even today, for understandable reasons, wish to reveal that from October 1928 the two largest regular contributors to the Nazi party were the general managers of two of the largest Berlin banks, both of Jewish faith, and one of them the leader of Zionism in Germany".

Twenty years after the Balfour Declaration, the British had still not delivered on their promise to hand over part or the whole of Palestine; Zionists were also struggling to get their nascent "six million" hoax taken seriously. Hitler's final territorial solution (abbreviated to "the final solution" in Zionist propaganda) to the Jewish question was compulsory repatriation. He had offered - on many occasions right up to April 1945 - to let the Allied countries take in the Jews. They refused, knowing that any talk of "gas chambers" or an "extermination policy" was nothing more than Zionist propaganda and wild conspiracy theory.

The National Socialists originally hoped to send Germany's Jews to Madagascar, but the French would not accept them. As the conflict intensified, this idea had to be abandoned. The Germans did not want the Jews within the German living space or lebensraum; in addition, they did not want them in Palestine. In fact, the German foreign office's terms for sending Jews to Britain or releasing them via Switzerland included an insistence that they must never be transferred to Palestine, since the Arabs rejected the Jews just as strongly as did the Germans.

So in the run-up to WWII, Zionists financed Hitler because they knew it would help them to get Palestine. Although the Germans did not want the Jews in Palestine, they intended to move them eastwards. The diabolical Anglo-French Mutual Aid Agreement with Poland, announced on March 31, 1939, led to the terrorising, slaughter and rape of thousands of ethnic Germans by Jews in the Polish corridor, with the backing of the Polish government. Germany invaded Poland in order to save Germans from these outrages. The Anglo-French-Polish pact was so beneficial to Zionism, that if Zionists were not behind it, it was extraordinarily convenient.

The Germans put some Jews in labour "concentration" camps, hoping that the final territorial solution to the "Jewish problem" could be resolved after the war. The camps were hit by terrible epidemics of typhus, particularly as the Allied bombing raids intensified and Soviet troops advanced. Breakdown of the supply chain also led to malnutrition and starvation. The gas Zyklon B - essentially hydrogen cyanide - was employed in tiny delousing rooms to fumigate the inmates' clothing in order to reduce the toll from typhus. Crematory ovens served to incinerate the dead and reduce the risk of contamination and infection compared to burial. Because of wartime scarcities, shoes, clothes, human hair (which was then used in the textile industry), etc was collected in piles for recycling.

When the Allied forces took control of the camps, they photographed the dead and the dying and the malnourished, whilst omitting the large crowds who had remained healthy. At this point, the liars had not properly agreed on their stories. Some propagandists were simply trying to make the Germans look bad; Zionists were anxious to promote the "gas chambers" hoax. If the anti-German reporters had synchronised their stories with the Zionist mobsters, they would have shown images of the dead along with a few healthy inmates. If the camps really were "death camps" with an astounding processing capacity, prisoners would have been gassed before having time to become barely more than starving skin and bones.

Other Allied propaganda was rather more cunning. They filmed the tiny delousing gas chambers and portrayed them as if they had been used for mass execution of prisoners rather than for fumigation of clothing in order to protect and save lives. They filmed the crematory ovens and claimed they had been used to dispose of the bodies of millions of victims of genocide, rather than the reality of cremation being a safer method of disposal than burial at a time when lethal infections were rife. They photographed the piles of human hair, shoes, etc, as if these were trophies collected by sadistic mass murderers, rather than part of a recycling operation by a nation fighting for its very survival against attacks by the US, USSR, UK, etc. They showed the cans of Zyklon B insecticide as if they had been used for mass murder of human beings in "gas chambers", as opposed to the reality of serving to kill lice in order to save lives.

In recent times, several independent forensic analyses by investigators such as the chemist Germar Rudolf have found that the cyanide content of walls of the delousing chambers ranged from 1,035 to 13,500 mg/kg. In contrast, the walls of the alleged "gas chambers" exhibited zero or trace levels of up to 7.9mg/kg. Those trace levels are regarded as too low to be reliably interpreted as indicating anything other than a building selected at random.

It is well established that cremation by modern-day ovens such as the Newton takes about 70 minutes per body. At Auschwitz-Birkenau, where Holocaustianity claims the majority of the gassing took place (even though the figure has been revised from 4,500,000 to between 1 and 1.5 million with no corresponding reduction in the headline "six million Jews, five million non-Jews" figures; original claims of gassing in Germany proper were exposed as fake decades ago and quietly abandoned), there were 52 oven units or muffles in total. They were in operation for between one and two years. Suppose one had to dispose of 11 million bodies over two years, suppose the time required is one hour per body, and suppose the ovens are to be operated throughout a 100% duty cycle 24/7 with no stoppages for maintenance or to change the firebricks. The number of muffles required would be:

11 million / (number of hours in two years)

= 11,000,000 / (2 * 365.25 * 24) = 11,000,000 / 17,532 = 628.

So which camps contained the other 576 muffles? In fact, the Topf ovens were only designed and programmed to function for twelve hours per day, so the Holocaustian must explain where the other 1,203 oven muffles were located. It is easier for the Holocaustian to propose that the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, logic and psychology are not invariant throughout the last 100 years on the earth's surface, but undergo local, temporary variations - e.g. Poland, 1944; and Manhattan, 2001. Presumably, it could be claimed that the "variations" are caused by invisible, inaudible, odorless "spirits", possibly of dead Jews or Muslims. The Holocaustian's world-view is but a hollow flim-flam and hocus-pocus.

In any case, even after cremation, the remaining bone fragments (which must be crushed by mechanical means) are some 4 to 10 pounds, say 7 lb per person which is 77,000,000 lb or 38,500 short tons. If the Holocaust or Shoah business had nothing to hide, its principals would not be so anxious to prevent the Iranians, for example, from conducting an independent investigation to search for forensic evidence of the alleged Holocaust.

The amount of coke required for cremations is known to be around 30 to 40 kg per corpse, let us assume 30 kg. 11,000,000 * 30 kg = 330,000 metric tonnes. Deliveries of coke to Auschwitz are known, and are a tiny fraction of this. From February 1942 to October 1943, for example, the total coke deliveries amounted to 1,032.5 tonnes, which is a mean monthly delivery of nearly 50 tonnes. Three years at 50 tonnes per month totals 1,800 tonnes. So at 30 kg per corpse we have 1,800 / 0.03 = 60,000 which is a long way short of 1 million let alone 11 million. Alternatively, the earlier claim of 4 million murdered at Auschwitz would correspond to 0.45 kg of coke per body, or the revised 1.5 million would equate to 1.2 kg of coke per victim. It takes about 3.5 kg of coke (105 MJ) to merely boil the water in a corpse if, somehow, it had been extracted and placed in a vessel beforehand - without even beginning to denature the proteins or heat the firebricks.

The actual coke deliveries to Auschwitz confirm the figures in the official death books in the order of tens of thousands of dead, who were victims of typhus and starvation. The Germans were meticulous in their record keeping, and according to the documents captured at Oranienburg by the Soviet Army in April 1945, the total deaths from all causes in the entire German prison camp system over ten years was 403,713. The total for Auschwitz was 73,137, of whom 38,031 were Jews. Responsibility for their deaths, along with more than 50 million other victims of WWII's human holocaust, lies with wicked, traitorous scoundrels such as Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin, together with their Zionist crime baron handlers.

And the claims about other so-called "death camps" such as Treblinka are even feebler. The scriptwriters concocted a yarn about "Diesel engines from Soviet tanks" being used to kill Jews with carbon monoxide. Zionist logic went like this: gasoline engine exhaust can kill, Diesel engine exhaust smells worse, hence Diesel engine exhaust can kill. Unfortunately, in their ignorance they overlooked the fact that Diesel engines operate with a surplus of oxygen, and do not produce nearly enough CO to kill unless run at close to full load.

The hoaxers came up with a bizarre 'explanation' in their attempts to account for the absence of forensic evidence at Treblinka - they claimed the Germans originally buried 870,000 victims, then Himmler decided they had better get rid of the evidence (rather like Saddam Hussein was said to have destroyed his "WMDs" to avoid getting into deep trouble). So they exhumed all 870,000 and burnt them in open pits using wood, in the space of four months. Open air cremations require at least 200 kg of wood per body, in India they allow for 300 kg. A Douglas fir, for example, yields about 800 to 900 kg of merchantable wood. 7,131 cremations per day at 200 kg per corpse and 1 tonne of wood per tree would require 1,426 trees per day, or 100 loggers working flat out for a 16-hour day with no breaks for meals and ablutions would have 16 / 14.26 hours = 67 minutes to fell, chop and transport each tree to the burning pits and return to start on the next load. Not surprisingly, there is no evidence of soil disturbance, or of human or wood ashes, and the hoaxers are so anxious to avoid any further investigation that they have even resorted to concreting over the site!

Back in October 1917, the Zionists had taken control of Russia in the Bolshevik Revolution. Lenin, originally named Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, had a Jewish maternal grandfather named Blank who later converted to Christianity. Leon Trotsky, originally named Lev Davidovich Bronstein, was born to Jewish parents in the South Ukraine. Jews comprised around 80% of the Bolshevik officials. Stalin's defeat of Trotsky, and purges in the Thirties, were a blow to the Zionists. Nevertheless, they did not forgo the opportunity to partake in an orgy of ethnic cleansing and looting. They failed to secure Russia as their very own Zionist sovereign state, but the establishment of totalitarian societies in Eastern Europe helped their "Holocaust" hoax in gaining a foothold until it was generally accepted by governments and the unquestioning masses.

Real historical holocausts, such as the tens of millions murdered under the Soviet communist regime which was instigated by ex-Khazar self-styled Jews, or the 1.5 million Christian Armenians massacred by the Young Turks (part of the ex-Khazars' tribe), are ignored by the Zionist press as it plays the fictional "Jewish holocaust" for all it is worth. And it has been worth hundreds of billions of marks, and more than a trillion dollars, to date.

On July 22, 1946, Jewish terrorists dressed as Arabs blew up the King David Hotel in Palestine, killing 91 and injuring 45. The perpetrators were Menachem Begin's Irgun extremist group; the same Menachem Begin who went on to win the Nobel peace prize 32 years later, as Israeli Prime Minister. This false-flag style, in which stage-managed attacks are blamed on an innocent third party for political ends, was to be a cornerstone of Israeli state terrorism and frequently employed over the following decades including the 21st century. It did not always succeed - particularly in the Forties, Fifties and Sixties - in which case Jews ended up having to admit responsibility. However, they never showed any remorse. And in July 2006, Israeli right-wingers including former prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu held a two-day seminar to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the King David bombing.

Britain, with Arab support, had conquered Palestine from the Ottoman Turks in 1917. The Allied Supreme Council (the US, France, Italy, Japan - and Britain) created a mandate for Britain to administer Palestinian territory (along with Transjordania and Iraq) in April 1920. The terms were subsequently approved by the League of Nations, forerunner of the UN. The King David Hotel was a base for British administrators, military command and a police division. In 1946 the Zionist cabal were still waiting for the British to deliver their promise on Palestine (as per the Balfour Declaration). And after several failures, they believed that their latest "six million" hoax might have better success in the context of a World War that had just killed at least 50 million. Killing British forces whilst pitting them against the Palestinians was aimed at speeding up the departure of the Brits and bringing about a transfer of power in favour of the Zionist cabal.

Recent released declassified intelligence files show that Begin's Irgun terrorists plotted to assassinate British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin in 1946. Bevin, a moderate socialist and anti-communist, opposed the creation of a Zionist state; Begin was a terrorist dedicated to the use of lethal force against as many innocents as it took to achieve his goal of a Zionist state. The Bevin assassination plot was thwarted by British Intelligence, and the terrorism was mostly restricted to letter bombs sent to prominent British figures in 1947.

In 1948, the Zionist Mafia got their sovereign state: Israel. This was just two years after the King David attack, and just as the hoax of "The Holocaust" began to take hold in the minds of the true believers - aided by the Zionist media and the fact that Stalin and Beria would not permit independent observers to check the alleged crime scenes in Poland. However, subsequent events demonstrated that Zionism is much more than establishing a national homeland for the Jewish people. It is a programme for world domination and dictatorship, as documented in The Protocols of The Learned Elders of Zion and its earlier (ghost-written) revisions such as The Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu (1864), and The Prince (c. 1516). The Protocols were not written by Russian secret police as Zionists try to pretend; there is ample evidence that they are genuine.

Many Jews oppose the racist supremacist warmongering policies of Zionism and Israel, just as one would not expect all US and UK citizens, for example, to mindlessly support Bush, Blair and their Zionist handlers' criminal decimation and abuse of the Iraqi population. There are plenty of Jewish peace groups, e.g. the Jewish Peace Fellowship. Organizations such as Jews Against Zionism, Jews Not Zionists and Neturei Karta are vehemently opposed to the actions of the self-styled or so-called Jews who were originally pagan Khazarian Asiatics. The ex-Khazars' secular leaders, who are now Zionist Mafia crime lords and Israeli politicians, cynically exploit Judaism for political and business purposes. The Orthodox Jews practised Israelite customs in Biblical times, when pagan Khazar traditions included human and animal sacrifices. In comparison to the Khazars, the Israelites were a darker-skinned race from more southern climes. The Khazars were predominantly a light-skinned Turkic people, were not of the Semitic races, and had no historical ties to Palestine. This distinction persists, with the Jewish Israelis being lighter than the Semitic Arabs.

It is a great irony that Hitler and his National Socialists are claimed (by the Zionist press) to have been "anti-Semitic" and "Aryan (or even Caucasian) supremacists". German National Socialists wanted to banish Jews from their living space; most of these Jews were ex-Khazarian Caucasians (or even Aryans). The same alleged anti-Semites insisted that European Jews should not be foisted upon the Palestinians, a Semitic people. Another irony is that those who oppose the status quo, of wealth redistribution from approximately 99.9% of the population to a tiny, crooked elite who exploit mass murder to satisfy their lust for power and riches, are labelled as "right-wing" extremists or "criminals" by the same "Robin Hood in reverse" genocidal megalomaniacs they are attempting to bring to justice.

In May 1949, former US Secretary of Defense James Forrestal was found dead at the Bethesda Naval Hospital in suspicious circumstances. This was less than two months after he had been fired by President Truman. Forrestal had been the administration's leading opponent of the formation and US recognition of Israel. Seven weeks after being committed for "treatment", apparently against his will, his body was found on a ledge beneath a window of his 16th-floor room. The official account held that it was "suicide". It was said he had been copying a morbid poem by Sophocles shortly before plunging from the window, but the handwriting on the transcription did not match that of Forrestal. A belt or cord from his dressing gown was tied tightly around his neck, but there was no evidence that the other end had ever been secured to a radiator, say, for a hanging attempt. In any case, a would-be suicide could have simply jumped rather than attempt a hanging. It appears that Forrestal was strangled and thrown out of the window.

As he still represented a threat to Israel's interests, Israeli forces would be a prime suspect. There remains the possibility that Israel was innocent in this case, and the assassination was to prevent publication of Forrestal's knowledge of corruption in the Truman administration. However, theories of Zionist complicity in this case have been bolstered by recently released documents showing that Menachem Begin's Irgun Jewish terrorist group plotted in 1946 to kill Ernest Bevin, Britain's anti-Zionist counterpart to Forrestal. Begin was supposed to have turned to politics after the state of Israel was founded in 1948. But Jewish terrorism did not stop with the formation of Israel.

In July 1954, American and British interests in Cairo and Alexandria were hit by a series of bombs. These were originally thought to have been placed by militant Moslems. A couple of years prior to the eruption of the "Suez Crisis", negotiations were taking place between Egypt and Britain over control of the Suez Canal, and it was thought that militants were attempting to scupper any compromise by Colonel Nasser. In October 1954, Egypt announced that an Israeli spy ring of thirteen saboteurs had been broken up. The plot was uncovered when incendiary bombs went off prematurely in the pocket of one of the perpetrators, outside a British-owned Alexandria theatre.

There were claims of an "anti-Semitic frame-up". However, the result was humiliation for Israel when it was forced to admit its responsibility for the terrorist attacks. It had been Israel's head of Intelligence, Colonel Benyamin Givli, who had independently ordered the spies to strike. However, his boss, Defense Minister Pinhas Lavon who was oblivious of the operation, ended up having to resign, and the incident was dubbed the "Lavon Affair". Note that phosphorus, used in the 1954 attacks, was later used to sink an Egyptian ferry in 2006 with the loss of around 1,000 lives (q.v. below).

In November 1963, Israel's Mossad operatives assassinated US President John F Kennedy. The motive was that Kennedy opposed Israel's (i.e. the Zionist Mafia's) plans to develop nuclear weapons at its (their) Dimona facility in the Negev Desert. Naturally, an official version of events was concocted, denying any Israeli involvement, and claiming that Oswald, the patsy, was a "lone assassin".

The official fiction was not supported by eyewitnesses, who reported that shots were fired from the Grassy Knoll rather than Oswald's location in the Texas School Book Depository. They also reported seeing a cloud of smoke in the Knoll area. Eighteen of these material witnesses died within the next three years. Oswald was shot by Jack Ruby (a Jew, born as Jacob Leon Rubenstein). Clay Shaw, who had been observed with Ruby / Rubenstein, was on the Board of Directors of Permindex, a Swiss Corporation which was a Mossad front. Permindex had been expelled from Italy and Switzerland in 1962 for subversive activity. The Banque De Credit International of Geneva (a.k.a. Credit Suisse), founded by Mossad financier Tibor Rosenbaum, was a major shareholder in Permindex. Louis Bloomfield of Montreal was the chairman of Permindex, and an agent of Canada's Bronfman family. Meyer Lansky was a prominent Zionist and head of the global crime syndicate, who used the Swiss bank for money laundering.

In June 1967, the state of Israel carried out a sustained air and naval attack on the USS Liberty for over an hour, employing torpedoes, machine guns and napalm rockets. 34 men were killed and more than 170 wounded. According to Israel, the attack was a "tragic accident" due to "misidentification". The ancient Egyptian freighter that Israel claimed to have mistaken the Liberty for was of totally different appearance, and there is ample evidence that they knew full well that their target was an American ship, following two days of reconnaissance by Israeli planes.

In the early stages of the attack, US planes were launched from nearby carriers to assist the Liberty, in response to its SOS. When Washington was notified, US Defense Secretary Robert McNamara ordered these aircraft back to the carriers. At the time of the attack, US President Lyndon Johnson (supposedly representing the US people rather than international racketeers) said, "I don't give a damn if every man drowns and the ship sinks. I don't want to embarrass our allies."

Israel's plan was to sink the Liberty, kill any survivors (which it attempted by firing on the life rafts), frame Egypt for the attack, and provoke the US into attacking Egypt. After assassinating Kennedy, the Zionist Mafia crime lords had installed their stooge - Johnson - as US President. All US opposition to Israel's nuclear programme had, predictably, vanished. Johnson and McNamara were probably advised in advance of the plan to sink a US ship to provide the US with a pretext for attacking Egypt. When the Liberty failed to sink, two hours into the operation, Tel Aviv and Washington had to revert to Plan B - the claim of an 'accident'.

As the Zionist Mafia gained in power and influence, they became ever more brazen and demanding. Once merely a band of very rich gangsters with excellent skills in bribery, blackmail and deception who were blagging their way into seizing their own sovereign state, they progressed through to gangsters trying to become a nuclear power, and then to a Mafia who not only had their own nuclear sovereign state and international ring of spies and terrorists but also a capability to deliver nuclear warheads anywhere within 900 miles of the coast. An embryonic Mafia will run protection rackets and have politicians in its pocket. Advanced globalist gangsters manage a protection racket that has entire governments in its pocket - bribing, blackmailing, and terrorising them into submission. Whenever one of the Zionist Mafia's client satellite states does something which displeases its crime lord masters, the ex-Khazar terrorists order a hit, which the satellite must then blame on a suitable patsy (or bogeyman) who (or that) is acceptable to both parties.

In the Eighties, when Reagan was US President, Libya was frequently selected as the 'perpetrator' of Israel and the Mossad's various deceptions and terrorist acts. Whenever a Bush was in the White House, the crimes would be blamed on Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Clinton, although something of a sleazeball, appears to have resisted some of his blackmailers' demands such as large-scale invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan. Hence, his trysts with Monica Lewinsky were publicized.

In April 1986, a bomb exploded in La Belle Discotheque in Berlin. Three were killed including two US soldiers, and over 200 injured. Ten days later, Ronald Reagan gave the order to bomb Libya. Around 37 people were killed including Colonel Gaddafi's adopted baby daughter, and over 200 wounded. This was the result of the Mossad's Operation Trojan - known by their agents as "the old Trojan dick trick" - that conned some countries into believing Libya was actually behind terrorism such as the Berlin disco bombing. It is true that there was a territorial dispute between the US and Libya, following some provocative US naval manoeuvres in the Gulf of Sidra. But Libya was innocent of many of the terrorist crimes it was alleged to have committed.

Shimon Peres had given the order to launch Operation Trojan in February 1986. One of Israel's ships would broadcast misleading pre-recorded digital transmissions that could only be received by a Mossad device planted in Tripoli - the Trojan. The Trojan would retransmit a signal on a frequency known to be used for official Libyan business, ready to be received by the Americans or their allies. The source would appear to be emanating from such location as to appear genuine, and Western intelligence services would find that the Mossad also had confirmation that these series of "terrorist orders" were supposedly being broadcast to various Libyan embassies.

On the night of February 17-18, an Israeli team of naval commandos headed for Tripoli. The dark green Trojan cylinder, six feet long and seven inches in diameter, was carried by two men from the shore to a grey van parked about a hundred feet from the water's edge. The van driver - a Mossad combatant - stopped "repairing a flat tyre" as the team approached and opened the rear doors. He then headed for Tripoli, accompanied by four commandos. Wrapped in a carpet, the Trojan cylinder was carried by the Mossad combatant and two commandos to a Mossad-rented apartment on the top floor of a five-storey building, and installed in front of a north-facing window. In the event of unauthorised entry to the apartment, the Trojan was rigged to self-destruct, taking out most of the upper part of the building. In that case, the Western press would doubtless have blamed "Muslim terrorists" for the incident.

France and Spain smelt a rat and realised that the broadcasts were bogus. If Western Intelligence had been monitoring transmissions of a conspiracy to bomb the Berlin disco, then they should have been able to prevent the attack. Officially, the Mossad claimed not to know the identity of those who had carried out the attack. In fact, they would be the prime suspect.

The bombing of Pan Am 103, which crashed in December 1988 at Lockerbie, Scotland, was probably another Mossad operation. Evidently, the Mossad were running drugs and had to eliminate CIA operatives who knew too much. Whatever the motive, normal practice would be to frame some innocent third party. A retired Scottish police chief - described as "of assistant chief constable rank or higher" - gave lawyers a signed statement testifying that the CIA planted a tiny fragment of circuit board that supposedly linked Libya to the crime. The fragment was identified by the FBI as part of a timer device used to control a detonator. Mebo, a Swiss company, manufactured these electronic timers and supplied them only to Libya and East Germany's Stasi. But in 2003, a retired CIA officer gave a statement to the lawyers of a Libyan convicted and jailed for the bombing, admitting that evidence had been planted. This was later corroborated by the former Scottish police chief, who was a member of the Association of Chief Police Officers Scotland. The Zionist press had also been quick to blame Syria and Iran for Lockerbie; Israel is the prime beneficiary of conflict between the West and Islamic nations.

Other terrorist operations conducted by Israel in the late 20th century included the murder of 220 US Marines and 21 other servicemen in a massive bombing in Beirut (to teach the Americans not to interfere in Lebanon), the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing of a Federal building by Jews including Andreas Strassmeir and Daniel Spiegelman which killed 168 (blamed on "white supremacist" patsies in order to discredit US patriots), the 1985 hijacking of the Achille Lauro by "Abu Abbas" who killed a disabled American Jewish tourist and threw his body and his wheelchair overboard (to turn world opinion against Arabs and in favour of Israel), the murder of British policewoman Yvonne Fletcher in 1984 (another false-flag operation that was blamed on Libya), and other acts blamed on Abu Nidal (a Zionist agent) and his Black September group. When briefing and remunerating their agents, Mossad katsas would sometimes pose as Sicilian dons. In addition to JFK, targets of Mossad assassination squads included Robert Maxwell (Jan Hoch), and Gerald Bull (who designed and worked on a "supergun" project for Iraq).

On October 31, 1999, EgyptAir Flight 990 - a Boeing 767 - plunged into the Atlantic. Officially, the 'accident' was blamed on a suicidal co-pilot. The reality, as usual, involved powerful, wealthy criminals lured by the prospect of further political and financial benefits. Israel and the Zionist Mafia planned to conduct a major false-flag terror attack within the next two years. They needed to conduct a trial run to test remote control technology for taking over planes already in flight, and they needed to promote the concept of "Muslim suicide pilots" to a gullible public. As a bonus, they got to murder 33 Egyptian army officers including two Air Force brigadier generals and two army major generals. Other ill-fated flights out of JFK International Airport, NY, included TWA 800 (July 1996), allegedly destroyed by a center wing fuel tank that 'accidentally' exploded in mid-air, and American Airlines 587 (November 2001), which crashed shortly after take off when its entire vertical tail section and both engines happened to fall off, supposedly as a result of "wake turbulence".

In February and March of 2001, the Zionist-controlled Fox TV network broadcast a documentary titled "Conspiracy Theory - Did We Land on the Moon?" on the notion that the Apollo landings were a hoax, with scenes having been filmed in a US desert. The evidence that the Apollo landings were faked is much weaker than the evidence that they were genuine. The motive for the timing of these Fox broadcasts was Zionist foreknowledge of a massive Mossad false-flag terrorist operation that was planned for the second half of that very year. The Zionists knew that sceptics would be able to prove that the official government account of the forthcoming major event was false, and it would not be possible to refute the sceptics with rational arguments. Hence, it would be necessary to resort to ad hominem attacks in which they would be portrayed as tin-foil-hatted crackpot conspiracy theorists, in the same mould as the Apollo Moon landings sceptics.

On May 4, 2001, Rabbi Dov Zakheim was sworn in as Comptroller at the Pentagon, overseeing its (then) $300 billion budget. On September 10, 2001 (well aware that it would be a good time to "bury bad news"), Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld declared at a press conference that, according to some estimates, they could not track $2.3 trillion in transactions. After the audit had uncovered a massive black hole in the Pentagon's finances, Zakheim remained at the helm for more than two years until resigning in April 2004.

Zakheim, a dual nationality Israeli-American and a rabid Zionist, had co-authored "Rebuilding America's Defenses", a position paper by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) in 2000, which called for a new "Pearl Harbor" type of incident which would provide a pretext for US military moves to boost its global hegemony. The other signatories on the document included neocons I Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Paul Wolfowitz, and William Kristol. Rabbi Zakheim's career included various posts at the Department of Defense (DoD), foreign policy advisor to George W Bush, and also in the private sector on defense and consultancy. In the years running up to 9/11, he was corporate vice president of System Planning Corporation (SPC) and chief executive officer of SPC International Corporation. SPC is a manufacturer of highly sophisticated military specification technology such as its "Flight Termination System". FTS includes SPC's Command Transmitter System. It enables remote operators to control up to eight planes simultaneously, from a single position either on the ground or airborne (or, say, in WTC Building 7). The technology provides the capability to take remote control of aircraft already in flight.

Zionists had tricked the Bush Administration into carrying out a relatively small scale false-flag terrorist operation. An unmanned, remote-controlled plane would be crashed into a section of the Pentagon that was under renovation; hence, casualties would range from zero to very low. The remote control technology for the Pentagon incident would be provided by Raytheon. Since it was necessary to claim that "Arabs" had hijacked a passenger plane and the US government had not signed up to deliberately murder dozens of their own civilians as part of Operation Pentagate, the claimed flight that the "suicide pilots" had taken over would be one that ran fairly regularly, but was unscheduled on the particular day of the operation. The Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) flight records could be falsified after the fact - unless, of course, the planners were to slip up, as they did...

The "dead passengers" were to be individuals linked to government (e.g. Barbara Olson), and the defense contractor Raytheon, who would be paid to fake their own deaths and provided with sanctuary in Israel. As confirmation of the official version of events, it would be claimed that the "passengers" had made cell phone calls to report a hijacking by men of "Arabic" appearance. (Never mind the fact that such cell phone calls were impossible with 2001 technology at cruising height and speed; the fact that it takes at least an hour and 30 kg of coke to cremate a cadaver had not stopped the indoctrination of millions of people with a physically impossible ludicrous conspiracy theory about a secret German plot to gas and cremate 11 million "undesirables".) If required, fictitious names could be concocted. In order to save on names, it would be claimed that the passenger count just happened to be unusually low that day, say, around one-third of capacity.

American Airlines Flight 77 from Washington Dulles to Los Angeles was scheduled on most days, but was not scheduled (and did not fly) on September 11, 2001. The date had been chosen from the US "911" emergency number. Hence, the official Bush-Cheney story would claim this as the plane which hit the Pentagon. The Bush Administration would then have a pretext for invading Islamic oil-rich nations and looting their oil wealth, and for granting itself with authoritarian powers by introducing legislation such as the Patriot Act. More to the point, Rumsfeld and Cheney - along with other corrupt leaders who had been bribed or blackmailed into the scam - would have a pretext for doing the Zionist Mafia's bidding of supplying the servicemen of the US, UK, Australia, Italy, Spain, etc, as Israel's proxy army to fight its enemy neighbours. I.e., the offering up of national armed forces as a supply of private mercenaries, or cannon fodder, or uranium-ingesting l

_________________
Standing up to Italian crime gangs is not anti-Italian;
Standing up to American crime gangs is not anti-American;
So don't be fooled into thinking that standing up to Zionist crime gangs is anti-Semitic!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15573
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 10:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zionists extracted 1917 Balfour Declaration from British as price for bringing US into WWI
http://www.radio4all.net/index.php/program/88488
https://youtu.be/bjmUNR4sLMg
The Battle of the Somme in WWI – one million casualties and the result inconclusive; Germans tried to make peace in late 1916 – Former Tory Education secretary Michael Gove called World War One a 'Just War' but was it really? Benjamin Freedman at Washington DC's Willard Hotel in 1961 discusses US joining the war on the proviso that Zionists would get Palestine: As Germany sued for peace after battle of the Somme in 1916 London was on its knees but hesitated. Zionists offered to bring the United States in on the losing British, Italian, French and Russian side against Germany, The Ottoman Empire and Austria-Hungarian Empire which ended up being decisive. Zionists around Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild, extracted 1917 Balfour Declaration from British government as price for bringing US into WWI which carried on for another two years of mindless slaughter and human sacrifice. Balfour Declaration 1917 and again ceremonially reiterated in 1926; letter is to British Zionist chief Walter Rothschild; sinking of the RMS Lusitania with many Americans on board by German submarine had prepared the way. Vice News – Milène Larsson discusses with London Jewish Rabbi Bach from Neturei Karta whether Israel is a Jewish nation – Nakba (catastrophe) day is mourning for Palestinians and celebration for Israelis.
https://youtu.be/bjmUNR4sLMg
https://politicsthisweek.wordpress.com/2016/09/23/bcfms-weekly-politic s-show-presented-by-tony-gosling-48/?preview=true

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15573
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 10:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Despicable Balfour: A story of betrayal
29th October 2016 British stooges, Highlights, Home
Balfour, Britain and Israel
By Stuart Littlewood
http://www.redressonline.com/2016/10/despicable-balfour-a-story-of-bet rayal/

The 2 November marks the centenary of the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which began the still-ongoing colonisation of Palestine and sowed the seeds of an endless nightmare for the Palestinian people, both those who were forced to flee at gunpoint and those who have managed to remain in the shredded remains of their homeland under Israel’s brutal military occupation.

A movement called the Balfour Declaration Centenary Campaign is urging action and wants an apology.

We call on the international community and all peace and justice loving people to join the campaign to call on the government and parliament of the United Kingdom to:

1. Reject the Balfour Declaration, including its role as an instrument of displacement and dispossession of the Palestinian people;

2. Issue an official apology to the Arab Palestinian people for their role in issuing the Balfour Declaration and making possible the displacement and dispossession of the Palestinian people;

3. Acknowledge their historic, legal and moral responsibility for damages sustained as a result of the implementation of the Balfour Declaration

4. Institute reparations to the Palestinian people in accordance with the provisions and principles of international law, justice and equity, which guarantee the right of return of the Palestinian refugees to their homeland and the right of self-determination.

A century of ethnic cleansing and denial of Palestinian rights

In his excellent book, Blood Brothers, David Hazard charts the life of Father Elias Chacour, a remarkable Christian Palestinian who grew up on the shores of Galilee and saw his beautiful world shattered by the Israeli occupation. Like countless others, he was made a refugee in his own country.

Mr Hazard describes an encounter he had with a young Palestinian, one of millions who suffer daily persecution, harassment and humiliation at the hands of Israeli soldiers and settlers.

A seventeen-year-old girl trembling with grief and rage told me how she witnessed her teenage cousin being shot through the head by Israeli soldiers. They had been walking to school together and the soldiers were taunting him. In response he had picked up a rock. She accused me and all Americans of knowing about these daily abuses against Palestinians but not caring. I tried to tell her that most Americans do not know about these tragedies, and that we would never support those who perpetrate them. But her belief that the average American is savvy about international politics was as strong as it was naive. “Of course Americans know we’re suffering over here,” she retorted.“You’re the most powerful nation on earth. And everyone has a television. I know you know.”

Americans aren’t alone in ignorance of their complicity. British people too seem largely unaware of how tragedy was allowed to overtake the Palestinians, and how this once-peaceful province of the Ottoman Empire, renowned for its antiquities and culture, became a land scarred by conflict, where everyday the humiliation of illegal occupation stokes the fires of hatred. You cannot get in or out, or move around, without running the gauntlet of Israeli customs, baggage searches, roadblocks and checkpoints under the sneer of contemptuous, sun-glassed troops. Even in the remote countryside you’ll run into one of six or seven hundred armed checkpoints. And that’s what visitors have to put up with. Imagine what it’s like for residents.

The so-called “Israel Defence Forces” is largely made up of conscripts – men and women – teenagers drafted in and trained to use lethal force. They have a reputation for being trigger-happy. Of course, they don’t all wish to play the thug or necessarily agree with their orders.

The truth about Palestine doesn’t sit well with Britain’s now crumbling reputation for fair play. Its name has been airbrushed from maps and purged, like a dirty word, from the diplomatic lexicon. Even today the subject is only haphazardly taught in our schools. For older generations like mine it was never on the curriculum. To understand why, one must at least dip a toe into the complicated history of the last 100 years. To help readers over this hurdle, I offer this “potted” version. At least it will explain why, 10 years ago, I went to see Palestine for myself.

For centuries long our land enslaved
by Turkish kings with sharpened blade.
We prayed to end the Sultan’s curse,
the British came and spoke a verse.

“It’s World War One, if you agree
to fight with us we’ll set you free.”

The war we fought at Britain’s side,
our blood was shed for Arab pride.

At war’s end Turks were smitten,
our only gain, the lies of Britain.

Stephen Ostrander’s simple verse manages to cut through a mountain of rhetoric to the root cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

There was a Jewish state in the Holy Land some 3,000 years ago, but the Canaanites and Philistines were there first. The Jews, one of several invading groups, left and returned several times, and were expelled by the Roman occupation in 70AD and again in 135AD. Since the 7th century Palestine has been mainly Arab. During World War I the country was ‘liberated’ from Turkish Ottoman rule after the allied powers, in correspondence between Sir Henry McMahon and Sharif Hussein ibn Ali of Mecca in 1915, promised independence to Arab leaders in return for their help in defeating Germany’s ally.

At the same time, however, a new Jewish political movement called Zionism was finding favour among the ruling élite in London, and the British government was persuaded by the Zionists’ chief spokesman, Chaim Weizman, to surrender Palestine for their new Jewish homeland. Hardly a thought, it seems, was given to the earlier pledge to the Arabs, who had occupied and owned the land for 1,500 years – longer, say some scholars, than the Jews ever did.

The Zionists, fuelled by the notion that an ancient Biblical prophecy gave them the title deeds, aimed to push the Arabs out by inserting millions of Eastern European Jews. They had already set up farm communities and founded a new city, Tel Aviv, but by 1914 Jews numbered only 85,000 to the Arabs’ 615,000. The infamous Balfour Declaration of 1917 – actually a letter from the British foreign secretary, Lord Balfour, to the most senior Jew in England, Lord Rothschild – pledged assistance for the Zionist cause with apparent disregard for the consequences to the native majority. Calling itself a “declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations”, it said:

His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing and non-Jewish communities…

Balfour, a Zionist convert, later wrote:

In Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country. The four powers are committed to Zionism and Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long tradition, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now occupy that land.

There was opposition. Lord Sydenham warned:

The harm done by dumping down an alien population upon an Arab country may never be remedied. What we have done, by concessions not to the Jewish people but to a Zionist extreme section, is to start a running sore in the East, and no-one can tell how far that sore will extend.

The American King-Crane Commission of1919 thought it a gross violation of principle:

No British officers consulted by the commissioners believed that the Zionist programme could be carried out except by force of arms. That, of itself, is evidence of a strong sense of the injustice of the Zionist programme.

There were other reasons why the British were courting disaster. A secret deal, called the Sykes-Picot Agreement, had been concluded in 1916 between France and Britain, in consultation with Russia, to re-draw the map of the Middle Eastern territories won from Turkey. Britain was to take Jordan, Iraq and Haifa. The area now referred to as Palestine was declared an international zone. The Sykes-Picot Agreement, the Balfour Declaration and the promises made earlier in the McMahon-Hussein letters all cut across each other. It seems to have been a classic case of the left hand not knowing what the right was doing in the confusion of war.

Some distinguished Jews opposed a “national home” in Palestine

After the Russian Revolution of 1917 Lenin released a copy of the confidential Sykes-Picot Agreement into the public domain, sowing distrust among the Arabs. Thus, the unfolding story had all the makings of a major tragedy. Subsequent crimes – on both sides – flow from this triple-cross. The Zionist organisation asked permission to submit its proposal for Palestine to the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, hitching a ride on the British request to be granted a mandate over Palestine in order to implement the Balfour Declaration. The Zionist case included the statement that

the land itself needs redemption. Much of it is left desolate. Its present condition is a standing reproach. Two things are necessary for that redemption – a stable and enlightened government, and an addition to the present population which shall be energetic, intelligent, devoted to the country, and backed by the large financial resources that are indispensable for development. Such a population the Jews alone can supply.

Prominent US Jews opposed to this move handed President Woodrow Wilson a counter-statement objecting to the Zionists’ plan, and asked him to present it to the peace conference. It said the scheme to reorganise the Jews as a national unit with territorial sovereignty in Palestine

not only misrepresents the trend of the history of the Jews, who ceased to be a nation 2,000 years ago, but involves the limitation and possible annulment of the larger claims of Jews for full citizenship and human rights in all lands in which those rights are not yet secure. For the very reason that the new era upon which the world is entering aims to establish government everywhere on principles of true democracy, we reject the Zionistic project of a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine.

Foreseeing the future with uncanny accuracy, it went on to say:

We rejoice in the avowed proposal of the Peace Congress to put into practical application the fundamental principles of democracy. That principle, which asserts equal rights for all citizens of a state, irrespective of creed or ethnic descent, should be applied in such a manner as to exclude segregation of any kind, be it nationalistic or other. Such segregation must inevitably create differences among the sections of the population of a country. Any such plan of segregation is necessarily reactionary in its tendency, undemocratic in spirit and totally contrary to the practices of free government, especially as these are exemplified by our own country.

The counter-statement quoted Sir George Adam Smith, a noted biblical scholar and the acknowledged expert on the region, who had said:

It is not true that Palestine is the national home of the Jewish people and of no other people… It is not correct to call its non-Jewish inhabitants “Arabs”, or to say that they have left no image of their spirit and made no history except in the great Mosque… Nor can we evade the fact that Christian communities have been [there] as long as ever the Jews were… These are legitimate questions stirred up by the claims of Zionism, but the Zionists have not yet fully faced them.

America, England, France, Italy, Switzerland and all the most advanced nations of the world, it said, are composed of representatives of many races and religions. “Their glory lies in the freedom of conscience and worship, in the liberty of thought and custom which binds the followers of many faiths and varied civilisations in the common bonds of political union… A Jewish state involves fundamental limitations as to race and religion, else the term “Jewish” means nothing. To unite church and state, in any form, as under the old Jewish hierarchy, would be a leap backward of two thousand years…

We ask that Palestine be constituted as a free and independent state, to be governed under a democratic form of government recognising no distinctions of creed or race or ethnic descent, and with adequate power to protect the country against oppression of any kind. We do not wish to see Palestine, either now or at any time in the future, organised as a Jewish state.

But Wilson apparently failed to put the document before the Conference.

In 1922 the League of Nations placed Palestine under British mandate, which incorporated the principles of the Balfour Declaration. Jewish immigration would be facilitated “under suitable conditions” and a nationality law would allow Jews taking up permanent residence to acquire Palestinian citizenship (in sharp contrast to the Jews-only law now operated by a dominant Israel). But the high commissioner was soon recommending a halt to Jewish immigration for fear that it would create a class of landless Arabs. That same year the British government, aware of Arab concerns that the Balfour Declaration was being interpreted in an “exaggerated” way by Zionists and their sympathisers, issued a White Paper to clarify the position.

“The terms of the Declaration referred to,” it said,

do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish national home, but that such a home should be founded “in Palestine”. In this connection it has been observed with satisfaction that at a meeting of the Zionist Congress, the supreme governing body of the Zionist Organisation, held at Carlsbad in September 1921, a resolution was passed expressing as the official statement of Zionist aims the determination of the Jewish people to live with the Arab people on terms of unity and mutual respect, and together with them to make the common home into a flourishing community, the upbuilding of which may assure to each of its peoples an undisturbed national development…

It is also necessary to point out that the Zionist Commission in Palestine, now termed the Palestine Zionist Executive, has not desired to possess, and does not possess, any share in the general administration of the country. Nor does the special position assigned to the Zionist Organisation in Article IV of the Draft Mandate for Palestine imply any such functions. That special position relates to the measures to be taken in Palestine affecting the Jewish population, and contemplates that the organisation may assist in the general development of the country, but does not entitle it to share in any degree in its government.

Further, it is contemplated that the status of all citizens of Palestine in the eyes of the law shall be Palestinian, and it has never been intended that they, or any section of them, should possess any other juridical status.

“It is necessary,” said the White Paper with masterly ambiguity,

that the Jewish community in Palestine should be able to increase its numbers by immigration. This immigration cannot be so great in volume as to exceed whatever may be the economic capacity of the country at the time to absorb new arrivals. It is essential to ensure that the immigrants should not be a burden upon the people of Palestine as a whole, and that they should not deprive any section of the present population of their employment.

However, the White Paper flatly denied that a promise had been made to the Arabs ahead of the Balfour Declaration.

It is not the case, as has been represented by the Arab Delegation, that during the war His Majesty’s Government gave an undertaking that an independent national government should be at once established in Palestine. This representation mainly rests upon a letter dated the 24th October 1915 from Sir Henry McMahon, then His Majesty’s High Commissioner in Egypt, to the Sharif of Mecca, now King Hussein of the Kingdom of the Hejaz. That letter is quoted as conveying the promise to the Sharif of Mecca to recognise and support the independence of the Arabs within the territories proposed by him. But this promise was given subject to a reservation made in the same letter, which excluded from its scope, among other territories, the portions of Syria lying to the west of the District of Damascus. This reservation has always been regarded by His Majesty’s Government as covering the vilayet of Beirut and the independent Sanjak of Jerusalem. The whole of Palestine west of the Jordan was thus excluded from Sir Henry McMahon’s pledge.

Nevertheless, it is the intention of His Majesty’s government to foster the establishment of a full measure of self-government in Palestine. But they are of the opinion that, in the special circumstances of that country, this should be accomplished by gradual stages…

From then on, the situation would go from bad to worse.

In 1937 the Peel Commission declared that British promises to Arabs and Zionists were irreconcilable and unworkable. Too late, Britain dropped its commitment to the Zionists and began talking about a Palestinian state with a guaranteed Arab majority and protection for minorities.

The Zionists reacted furiously. Their underground military wing, the Haganah, and other armed groups, unleashed a reign of terror in the run-up to World War II. They continued their attacks on the British after the war and tried to bring in hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees.

In 1946 they blew up the south wing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, which housed the British mandatory government, killing 91. This terrorist act was ordered by David Ben-Gurion in retaliation for the arrest of Haganah, Irgun and Stern Gang members suspected of attacks on the British. He then thought better of it and cancelled the operation but Menachem Begin, who led the Irgun, went ahead. Both Ben-Gurion and Begin, who had a big price on his head as a wanted terrorist, became Israeli prime ministers.

Throughout this period the United States was reluctant to allow Jews fleeing Europe to enter the empty spaces of North America, preferring to play the Zionist game and see them funnelled into Palestine. In 1945 the new US president, Harry Truman, offered Arabs this excuse: “I am sorry, gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands of those who are anxious for the success of Zionism; I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents.”

However, Truman was frequently exasperated by the Zionist lobby and on one occasion had a delegation thrown out of the White House for their table-thumping antics. He wrote:

I fear very much that the Jews are like all underdogs. When they get on top they are just as intolerant and cruel as the people were to them when they were underneath.

American author Gore Vidal provided an intriguing insight.

Sometime in the late 1950s, that world-class gossip and occasional historian, John F. Kennedy, told me how, in 1948, Harry S. Truman had been pretty much abandoned by everyone when he came to run for president. Then an American Zionist brought him two million dollars in cash, in a suitcase, aboard his whistle-stop campaign train. “That’s why our recognition of Israel was rushed through so fast.” As neither Jack nor I was an anti-Semite (unlike his father and my grandfather) we took this to be just another funny story about Truman and the serene corruption of American politics.

By now this monster Britain had breathed life into, was running out of control. The Arabs, tricked and dispossessed, were outraged. The collision has been fatally damaging to the West’s relationship with Islam ever since. As the violence escalated, Gandhi was moved to comment:

Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English. They [the Jews] have erred grievously in seeking to impose themselves on Palestine with the aid of America and Britain and now with the aid of naked terrorism.

With the mandate about to expire in 1948 an exhausted Britain handed over the problem to the United Nations and prepared to quit the Holy Land, leaving a powder-keg with the fuse fizzing. The newly-formed UN thought it would save the situation by partitioning Palestine into Arab and Jewish states and making Jerusalem an international city. But this gave the Jews 55 per cent of Palestine when they accounted for only 30 per cent of the population. The Arab League and the Palestinians of course rejected it.

Map 1: 1947 UN Partition of Palestine

Map of 1947 UN Partition Plan

Under the UN Partition Plan the Jews received 55 per cent of the country (including both Tel Aviv/Jaffa and Haifa port cities, the Sea of Galilee and the resource-rich Negev) although they accounted for only a third of the population (548,000 out of 1,750,000) and owned only 6 per cent of the land. The Jewish community accepted the Partition Plan; the Palestinians (except those in the Communist Party) and the Arab countries rejected it.

The UN partition of Palestine never did stand close scrutiny. At that time, as some commentators have pointed out, UN members did not include African states, and most Arab and Asian states were still under colonialist regimes. The UN was pretty much a white colonialist club. The Palestinians themselves had no representation and they weren’t even consulted.

The first vote failed to reach the required two-thirds majority: 25 for partition, 13 against and 19 abstentions. To ensure success in the second vote, a good deal of arm-twisting was applied to the smaller countries, but again it fell short. At the third attempt France was persuaded to come “on board” after the US threatened to withdraw desperately needed post-World War II aid, and on 29 November the UN voted to partition Palestine into three parts: a Jewish state on 14,000 sq km with some 558,000 Jews and 405,000 Palestinian Arabs; and an Arab state on 11,500 sq km with about 804,000 Palestinian Arabs and 10,000 Jews. Jerusalem, including major religious sites, would be a corpus separatum, internationally administered.

Map 2: Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories

Map of 1949 Israeli-Arab armistice line

By the end of the 1948 war Israel controlled 78 per cent of the country, including half the territory that had been allocated by the UN to the Palestinians. Around 750,000 Palestinians living in what became Israel were made refugees: only 100,000 remained in their homes. More than 418 villages (two-thirds of the villages of Palestine) were systematically destroyed by Israel after their residents had left or been driven out. The Arab areas were now reduced to 22 per cent of the country, the West Bank was taken by Jordan and Gaza by Egypt. The 1949 Armistice Line (the “Green Line”) remains the de facto boundary of the state of Israel until today. Since 1988, when the Palestinians recognised Israel within that boundary, it has been the basis of the two-state option.

This ludicrous carve-up was quickly followed by shameful incidents at Deir Yassin, Lod and Ramle. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinian Arabs were uprooted from their homes and lands and to this day are denied the right to return. They received no compensation, and after their expulsion Jewish militia obliterated hundreds of Arab villages and towns. No sooner had Britain packed its bags than Israel declared statehood on 14 May 1948 and immediately set about expanding control across all of Palestine.

The following day, 15 May, is remembered by Palestinians as the Day of Al-Nakba (the Catastrophe), which saw the start of a military terror campaign that forced three-quarters of a million Palestinians from their homeland to make room for the new Jewish state. Some 34 massacres were allegedly committed in pursuit of Israel’s territorial ambitions.

An event permanently etched on the Palestinian memory is the massacre at Deir Yassin by Zionist terror groups, the Irgun and the Stern Gang. On an April morning in 1948 130 of their commandos carried out a dawn raid on this small Arab town with a population of 750, to the west of Jerusalem. The attack was initially beaten off, and only when a crack unit of the Haganah arrived with mortars were the Arab townsmen overwhelmed. The Irgun and the Stern Gang, smarting from the embarrassment of having to summon help, embarked on a “clean-up” operation in which they systematically murdered and executed at least 100 residents – mostly women, children and old people. The Irgun afterwards exaggerated the number, quoting 254, to frighten other Arab towns and villages. The Haganah played down their part in the raid and afterwards said the massacre “disgraced the cause of Jewish fighters and dishonoured Jewish arms and the Jewish flag”.

Deir Yassin signalled the ominous beginning of a deliberate programme by Israel to depopulate Arab towns and villages – and destroy churches and mosques – to make room for incoming holocaust survivors and other Jews. In any language it was an exercise in ethnic cleansing, the knock-on effects of which have created an estimated 4 million Palestinian refugees today.

By 1949 the Zionists had seized nearly 80 per cent of Palestine, provoking the resistance backlash they so bitterly complain about today. Many Jews condemn the Zionist policy and are ashamed of what has been done in their name.

UN Resolution 194 had called on Israel to let the Palestinians back onto their land. It has been re-passed many times, but Israel is still in breach. The Israelis also stand accused of violating Article 42 of the Geneva Convention by moving settlers into the Palestinian territories it occupies, and of riding roughshod over international law with their occupation of the Gaza Strip and West Bank.

But expulsion and transfer were always a key part of the Zionist plan. According to historian Benny Morris, no mainstream Zionist leader was able to conceive of future co-existence without a clear physical separation between the two peoples. David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister, is reported to have said:

With compulsory transfer we have a vast area [for settlement]… I support compulsory transfer. I don’t see anything immoral in it.

He showed astonishing candour on another occasion when he remarked:

If I were an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. We have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it is true, but 2,000 years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti- Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country.

General Moshe Dayan, hero of the 1967 war, made it known to Palestinians in the territories that “you shall continue to live like dogs, and whoever wishes, may leave, and we shall see where this process will lead.” That appears to have been the general attitude ever since.

In 1967 Israel used a number of Arab threats designed to check Zionist ambitions, including a blockade of their Red Sea port, as a pretext to launch war. In a series of pre-emptive strikes against Egypt, Syria and Jordan, Israel succeeded in doubling the area of land under its control, seizing the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the Syrian Golan Heights, violating both international law and the UN Charter, which says that a country cannot lawfully make territorial gains from war. It was reported that Israel demolished 1,338 Palestinian homes in the West Bank and detained some 300,000 Palestinians without trial.

The UN issued Security Council Resolution 242, stressing “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war” and calling for “withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict”. It was largely ignored, thus guaranteeing further discord in the region.

Israel’s most notorious prime minister, Ariel Sharon, made a name for himself in 1953 when his secret death squad, Unit 101, dynamited homes and massacred 69 Palestinian civilians – half of them women and children – at Qibya in the West Bank. His troops later destroyed 2,000 homes in the Gaza Strip, uprooting 12,000 people and deporting hundreds of young Palestinians to Jordan and Lebanon.

Then in 1982 he masterminded Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, which resulted in a massive death toll of Palestinians and Lebanese, a large proportion being children. An Israeli tribunal found him indirectly responsible for the massacre of Palestinians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps and removed him from office. But he didn’t stay in the background for long.

By the end of 1967 there were just three illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Jerusalem. By the end of 2005 the total was 177. “When we have settled the land,” the then chief of staff of the Israeli armed forces, Rafael Eitan, remarked in 1983, “all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle”.

By 2015 there were 196 illegal Israeli settlements in addition to 232 settler outposts in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, according to the Applied Research Institute of Jerusalem, and upwards of 750,000 settlers residing there.

Apartheid and occupation: “in practice there is little difference”

So what sort of person was responsible for this misery and mayhem in the Holy Land – the “running sore” Lord Sydenham predicted? At Cambridge Arthur Balfour read moral sciences (no, seriously!). Much good it did the poor Palestinian Arabs he helped dispossess.

Described as born lazy, aloof and having an attitude problem, he was convinced of his personal superiority and wished to keep the vulgar world at arm’s length. Balfour famously remarked: “Nothing matters very much, and few things matter at all.”

He had been prime minister (1902-05) and was regarded as weak. At the time of the Declaration blunder he was foreign secretary. In the words of one commentator, Balfour’s career “stretches before our eyes in a flat and uneventful plain of successful but inglorious and ineffective self-seeking”. He was said to be a man who would make almost any sacrifice to remain in office. In this case, he sacrificed the Arab homeland. In 1922 the League of Nations put Palestine under British mandate, which incorporated the principles of the Balfour’s Declaration.

How have things turned out?

John Dugard, Professor of International Law and former Special Rapporteur to the UN Human Rights Council on the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, explained on Aljazeera the differences and similarities between apartheid South Africa and apartheid Israel.

Of course, the regimes of apartheid and occupation are different. Apartheid South Africa was a state that practised discrimination against its own people. It sought to fragment the country into white South Africa and black Bantustans. Its security laws were used to brutally suppress opposition to apartheid. Israel, on the other hand, is an occupying power that controls a foreign territory and its people under a regime recognised by international law [as] belligerent occupation.

However, in practice, there is little difference. Both regimes were/are characterised by discrimination, repression and territorial fragmentation (that is, land seizures).

Israel discriminates against Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem in favour of half a million Israeli settlers. Its restrictions on freedom of movement, manifested in countless humiliating checkpoints, resemble the “pass laws” of apartheid. Its destruction of Palestinian homes resembles the destruction of homes belonging to blacks under apartheid’s Group Areas Act. The confiscation of Palestinian farms under the pretext of building a security wall brings back similar memories. And so on. Indeed, Israel has gone beyond apartheid South Africa in constructing separate (and unequal) roads for Palestinians and settlers.

Apartheid’s security police practised torture on a large scale. So do the Israeli security forces. There were many political prisoners on Robben Island but there are more Palestinian political prisoners in Israeli jails.

Apartheid South Africa seized the land of blacks for whites. Israel has seized the land of Palestinians for half a million settlers and for the purposes of constructing a security wall within Palestinian territory – both of which are contrary to international law.

Dugard suggested there is sufficient evidence for a legitimate enquiry into the question of whether Israel violates the prohibition of apartheid found in the 1973 Apartheid Convention and the Rome Statute.

Sydenham’s “running sore” has been festering for a century, crippling the Middle East and turning the Holy Land into an abomination. Balfour and his fellow Zionist stooges in the corridors of British power clearly had no understanding of the true purpose and base methods of Zionism.

This is also true of present-day Christian-Zionists. Some Christian churches have rejected Zionist doctrine as false teaching that corrupts the biblical message of love, justice and reconciliation. They deplore the cosy relationship between Christian Zionist leaders and the governments of Israel and the United States that impose their pre-emptive borders and domination over Palestine. And they condemn the teachings of Christian Zionism that support those policies as they encourage racial exclusivity and perpetual war.

In other words, no Christian with a functioning brain cell should touch Zionism with a bargepole. Yet the upper echelons of our government and many Western churches are riddled with Zionist sympathisers. Unless they are smoked out, a hundred years from now an outraged civil society will still be calling for government apologies for the actions of that lunatic Balfour and his successors.

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Thomas Tol
Minor Poster
Minor Poster


Joined: 07 Jun 2016
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

0:06 / 1:08
Bishop Williamson - The only Sin left


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cllmZQ_Z0A
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15573
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Theresa May wants British people to feel 'pride' in the Balfour Declaration. What exactly is there to be proud of?
Balfour initiated a policy of British support for Israel which continues to this very day, to the detriment of the occupied Palestinians of the West Bank and the five million Palestinian refugees living largely in warrens of poverty around the Middle East, including Israeli-besieged Gaza. Surely we should apologise

Robert Fisk @indyvoices Thursday 2 March 2017 12:45 GMT
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/balfour-declaration-israel-palesti ne-theresa-may-government-centenary-arabs-jewish-settlements-a7607491. html

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson greets Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the Foreign Office, London, on 6 February 2017 Getty
Theresa May told us that Britain will celebrate the centenary of the Balfour Declaration this summer with “pride”. This was predictable. A British prime minister who would fawn to the head-chopping Arab autocrats of the Gulf in the hope of selling them more missiles – and then hold the hand of the insane new anti-Muslim president of the United States – was bound, I suppose, to feel “pride” in the most mendacious, deceitful and hypocritical document in modern British history.

As a woman who has set her heart against immigrants, it was also inevitable that May would display her most venal characteristics to foreigners – to wealthy Arab potentates, and to an American president whose momentary love of Britain might produce a life-saving post-Brexit trade agreement. It was to an audience of British lobbyists for Israel a couple of months ago that she expressed her “pride” in a century-old declaration which created millions of refugees. But to burnish the 1917 document which promised Britain’s support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine but which would ultimately create that very refugee population – refugees being the target of her own anti-immigration policies – is little short of iniquitous.

The Balfour Declaration’s intrinsic lie – that while Britain supported a Jewish homeland, nothing would be done “which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine” – is matched today by the equally dishonest response of Balfour’s lamentable successor at the Foreign Office. Boris Johnson wrote quite accurately two years ago that the Balfour Declaration was “bizarre”, a “tragicomically incoherent” document, “an exquisite piece of Foreign Office fudgerama”. But in a subsequent visit to Israel, the profit-hunting Mayor of London suddenly discovered that the Balfour Declaration was “a great thing” that “reflected a great tide of history”. No doubt we shall hear more of this same nonsense from Boris Johnson later this year.

Although the Declaration itself has been parsed, de-semanticised, romanticised, decrypted, decried, cursed and adored for 100 years, its fraud is easy to detect: it made two promises which were fundamentally opposed to each other – and thus one of them, to the Arabs (aka “the existing non-Jewish communities”), would be broken. The descendants of these victims, the Palestinian Arabs, are now threatening to sue the British government over this pernicious piece of paper, a hopeless and childish response to history. The Czechs might equally sue the British for Chamberlain’s Munich agreement, which allowed Hitler to destroy their country. The Palestinians would also like an apology – since the British have always found apologies cheaper than law courts. The British have grown used to apologising – for the British empire, for the slave trade, for the Irish famine. So why not for Balfour? Yes, but.... Theresa May needs the Israelis far more than she needs the Palestinians.


0:00
/
1:09

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu meets Theresa May
Balfour’s 1917 declaration, of course, was an attempt to avoid disaster in the First World War by encouraging the Jews of Russia and America to support the Allies against Germany. Balfour wanted to avoid defeat just as Chamberlain later wanted to avoid war. But – and this is the point – Munich was resolved by the destruction of Hitler. Balfour initiated a policy of British support for Israel which continues to this very day, to the detriment of the occupied Palestinians of the West Bank and the five million Palestinian refugees living largely in warrens of poverty around the Middle East, including Israeli-besieged Gaza.

This is the theme of perhaps the most dramatic centenary account of the Balfour Declaration, to be published this summer by David Cronin (in his book Balfour’s Shadow: A Century of British Support for Zionism and Israel), an Irish journalist and author living in Brussels whose previous investigation of the European Union’s craven support for Israel’s military distinguished him from the work of more emotional (and thus more inaccurate) writers. Cronin has no time for Holocaust deniers or anti-Semites. While rightly dismissing the silly idea that the Palestinian Grand Mufti, Haj Amin al Husseini, inspired the Holocaust of the Jews of Europe, he does not duck Haj Amin’s poisonous alliance with Hitler. Israel’s post-war creation as a nation state, as one Israeli historian observed, may not have been just – but it was legal. And Israel does legally exist within the borders acknowledged by the rest of the world.

There lies the present crisis for us all: for the outrageous right-wing government of Benjamin Netanyahu is speeding on with the mass colonisation of Arab land in territory which is not part of Israel, and on property which has been stolen from its Arab owners. These owners are the descendants of the “non-Jewish communities” whose rights, according to Balfour, should not be “prejudiced” by “the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine. But Balfour’s own prejudice was perfectly clear. The Jewish people would have a “national home” – ie, a nation – in Palestine, while the Arabs, according to his declaration, were mere “communities”. And as Balfour wrote to his successor Curzon two years later, “Zionism … is … of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices [sic] of 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land”.

Cronin’s short book, however, shows just how we have connived in this racism ever since. He outlines the mass British repression of Arabs in the 1930s – including extrajudicial executions and torture by the British army – when the Arabs feared, with good reason, that they would ultimately be dispossessed of their lands by Jewish immigrants. As Arthur Wauchope, the Palestine High Commissioner, would write, “the subject that fills the minds of all Arabs today is … the dread that in time to come they will be a subject race living on sufferance in Palestine, with the Jews dominant in every sphere, land, trade and political life”. How right they were.

Even before Britain’s retreat from Palestine, Attlee and his Cabinet colleagues were discussing a plan which would mean the “ethnic cleansing” of tens of thousands of Palestinians from their land. In 1944, a Labour Party statement had talked thus of Jewish immigration: “Let the Arabs be encouraged to move out as the Jews move in.” By 1948, Labour, now in government, was announcing it had no power to prevent money being channelled from London to Jewish groups who would, within a year, accomplish their own “ethnic cleansing”, a phrase in common usage for this period since Israeli historian Illan Pappe (now, predictably, an exile from his own land) included it in the title of his best-known work.


0:00
/
0:49

Protesters disrupt hearings for Israeli ambassador nominee
The massacre of hundreds of Palestinian civilians at Deir Yassin was committed while thousands of British troops were still in the country. Cronin’s investigation of Colonial Office files show that the British military lied about the “cleansing” of Haifa, offering no protection to the Arabs, a policy largely followed across Palestine save for the courage of Major Derek Cooper and his soldiers, whose defence of Arab civilians in Jaffa won him the Military Cross (although David Cronin does not mention this). Cooper, whom I got to know when he was caring for wounded Palestinians in Beirut in 1982, never forgave his own government for its dishonesty at the end of the Palestine Mandate.

Cronin’s value, however, lies in his further research into British support for Israel, its constant arms re-supplies to Israel, its 1956 connivance with the Israelis over Suez – during which Israeli troops massacred in the Gaza camp of Khan Younis, according to a UN report, 275 Palestinian civilians, of whom 140 were refugees from the 1948 catastrophe. Many UN-employed Palestinians, an American military officer noted at the time, “are believed to have been executed by the Israelis”. Britain’s subsequent export of submarines and hundreds of Centurion tanks to Israel was shrugged off with the same weasel-like excuses that British governments have ever since used to sell trillions of dollars of weapons to Israelis and Arabs alike: that if Britain didn’t arm them, others would.

In opposition in 1972, Harold Wilson claimed it was “utterly unreal” to call for an Israeli withdrawal from land occupied in the 1967 war, adding that “Israel’s reaction is natural and proper in refusing to accept the Palestinians as a nation”. When the Palestinians first demanded a secular one-state solution to Palestine, they were denounced by a British diplomat (Anthony Parsons) who said that “a multinational, secular state” would be “wholly incompatible with our attitude toward Israel”. Indeed it would. When the PLO opposed Britain’s Falklands conflict, the Foreign Office haughtily admonished the Palestinians – it was “far removed” from their “legitimate concerns”, it noted – although it chose not to reveal that Argentine air force Skyhawk jets supplied by Israel were used to attack UK forces, and that Israel’s military supplies to Argentina continued during the war.

A year later, Margaret Thatcher, according to a note by Douglas Hurd, included “armed action against military targets of the occupying power” as a definition of “terrorism”. So the Palestinians could not even resist their direct occupiers without being criminals.

UK news in pictures
33
show all
On an official visit to Israel in 1986, Thatcher said that she regarded discussion of Jerusalem as “internal politics”. In 2001, Tony Blair’s government granted 90 arms exports licences to Israel for “defensive” weapons – including torpedoes, armoured vehicles, bombs and missiles. There is much, much more of this in Cronin’s book, including Blair’s useless and disgraceful period as “peace” envoy to the Middle East and the growing business contracts between British companies and Israeli arms providers – to the extent that the British army ended up deploying Israeli-made drones in the skies of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Outside the EU, Theresa May’s Britain will maintain its close relations with Israel as a priority; hence May’s stated desire less than a month ago to sign a bilateral free trade agreement with Israel. This coincided with an Israeli attack on Gaza and a Knesset vote to confiscate – ie, steal – yet more lands from Palestinians in the West Bank.

From the day that Herbert Samuel, deputy leader of the Liberal Party and former (Jewish) High Commissioner for Palestine, said in the House of Commons in 1930 that Arabs “do migrate easily”, it seems that Britain has faithfully followed Balfour’s policies. More than 750,000 Palestinians were uprooted in their catastrophe, Cronin writes. Generations of dispossessed would grow up in the camps. Today, there are around five million registered Palestinian refugees. Britain was the midwife of that expulsion.

And this summer, we shall again be exhorted by Theresa May to remember the Balfour Declaration with “pride”.

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15573
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2017 1:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Balfour Declaration at 100: Seeds of Discord
A hundred years since Britain's infamous declaration, its repercussions are still felt across the Middle East today.
31 Oct 2017 12:54 GMT Politics, Palestine, Israel, Middle East, United Kingdom
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/aljazeeraworld/2017/10/balfour-dec laration-100-seeds-discord-171025141929350.html

Filmmaker: Mohammed Salameh

The Balfour Declaration was a public promise by the British government during World War One, announcing support for the establishment of "a national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. Palestine was still a part of the Ottoman Empire at the time, with a minority Jewish population.

The 67-word document, in the form of a letter from British Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour to the prominent British Jewish figure, Lord Rothschild, dated November 2, 1917, read:

His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

Whatever its real intentions, the declaration has had a profound impact on the Middle East and its people; and its effects still resonate across the region today.

Without Britain, the state of Israel wouldn't have been established. No question. Without the Zionists, it wouldn't have been established.

Motti Golani, historian, Haifa University

The British War Cabinet began to consider the future of Palestine during World War One in which it fought the central powers of Germany, Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire.

According to historian and author Jonathan Schneer, the British somehow "felt that the Jews held the key to winning the war and so they had to figure out how to bribe the Jews to support them."

James Renton of Edge Hill University elaborates on British motives: "We can boil it down to two elements of British self-interest at that time. Not an emotional interest in Zionism or a love of Jews and the Jewish plight and the desire for return of the Jews to the holy land, no... they wanted to mobilise the allies behind Britain and this idea of Jewish power in the world. They were all of the different policy elites in the war - believers in the notion that Jews who have tremendous influence in the corridors of power around the globe. If the British government appeared to support Zionism, they would win over World Jewry to their side, and all that entailed. The British were convinced that Zionism was really at the centre of the Jewish heart."

Whatever its basis, the relationship between the British Zionists and the government was established in late 1916 and continued to develop throughout 1917, leading to the Declaration in November. It was the first expression of public support for Zionism by a major political power.

"As a term, 'a national home' didn't exist", says Palestinian historian Basheer Nafi. "At that time, international law was well developed. They could have used 'self-governance' or 'independent state'. There was no such a term in international law as 'a national homeland'. What did 'a national home for the Jews in Palestine' mean?"

The term "national home" was intentionally vague as to whether a Jewish state was contemplated. The intended boundaries of Palestine were not specified, and the British government later confirmed that the words "in Palestine" meant that the Jewish national home was not intended to cover all of Palestine.

The second half of the declaration was added to satisfy opponents of the policy, who had claimed that it would otherwise prejudice the position of the local population of Palestine and encourage anti-semitism against Jews worldwide.

While the declaration called for political rights in Palestine for Jews, rights for the Palestinian Arabs, who comprised the vast majority of the local population, were limited to civil and religious rights.

"The Jews were described as a people with the right to self-determination while the Arabs were considered non-Jewish communities," explains French historian Philippe Prevost. "They didn't even mention the name of the Arabs. They were called non-Jewish. They only could enjoy civil and religious rights. They had no political rights."

READ MORE: The Balfour Declaration Explained

But the Balfour Declaration set in motion a series of events that, over two decades, began to signal its deep flaws.

The British proposed partitioning Palestine into separate Arab and Jewish states, but Arab dissent built up to the three-year Revolt between 1936 and 1939. It was a nationalist uprising against the British administration, demanding Arab independence and the end of Jewish immigration.

In May 1939, the British government had begun to reconsider its position and published a policy document, known in the UK as a White Paper. It proposed abandoning the partition of Palestine into two states - and called instead for an independent Palestine in which Arabs and Jews would share government.

It limited Jewish immigration to 75,000 for five years and said that the Arab majority should determine future immigration levels. It also said that Balfour had not meant to create a Jewish state at the expense of the Arabs - any more than the McMahon-Hussein correspondence 24 years before had promised an Arab state to Sharif Hussein of Mecca.

But the White Paper faced opposition on several fronts and was dropped by a British government suddenly preoccupied with the Second World War.

A hundred years on, the declaration's effects still resonate across the Middle East. It still represents to Palestinians the moment an imperial power promised their land away to another people. They hold Balfour responsible for their expulsion, displacement and occupation.

Source: Al Jazeera

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Whitehall_Bin_Men
Validated Poster
Validated Poster


Joined: 13 Jan 2007
Posts: 1844
Location: Westminster, LONDON, SW1A 2HB.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 3:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Benjamin Netanyahu blames Holocaust on Palestinian leader Haj Amin al-Husseini
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/benjamin-netanyahu -blames-holocaust-on-palestinian-leader-haj-amin-al-husseini-a6702091. html
Israeli PM told the World Zionist Congress that Hitler wanted to expel the Jews - but was convinced to exterminate them

Victoria Richards @nakedvix Wednesday 21 October 2015 07:23 BST

Benjamin Netanyahu has placed the blame for the extermination of millions of Jewish people during World War II on the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, in a controversial speech.

READ MORE
Dumping blame for the Holocaust on the Grand Mufti is immoral
'Hitler's holocaust plan for Jews in Palestine stopped by Desert Rats'
Jaffa: Divided it fell
The Israeli Prime Minister told the 37th World Zionist Congress this week that Nazi leader Adolf Hitler only wanted to expel the Jews - but was convinced to exterminate them by the Muslim leader, who died in 1974.


He said that the pair met in November 1941, and claimed: "Hitler didn't want to exterminate the Jews at the time, he wanted to expel the Jew. And Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said, 'If you expel them, they'll all come here (to Palestine).' According to Netanyahu, Hitler then asked: "What should I do with them?" and the Mufti replied: "Burn them."


Mr Netanyahu has made similar claims in the past, including during a Knesset speech in 2012, where he described Husseini - who visited Hitler and Himmler and supported their persecution of the Jews of Europe - as "one of the leading architects" of the final solution, Haaretz reported.

Others have detailed Husseini's influence on Hitler, yet the theory that Husseini was the one to initiate the mass murder of European Jews has been widely rejected.


Holocaust Memorial Day 2015: Haunting images of Auschwitz
20
show all
In his speech, as detailed in a transcript issued by the Prime Minister's Office, Mr Netanyahu also described attacks on the Jewish community in Jerusalem in 1920, 1921 and 1929 as being "instigated by a call of the Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini, who was later sought for war crimes in the Nuremberg trials because he had a central role in fomenting the final solution".

Not only does PM @netanyahu blame Palestinians for the Jewish holocaust, he paints Hitler as a reasonable guy, forced to commit heinous acts
— Ferrari Sheppard (@stopbeingfamous) October 21, 2015
But it has been met with outrage by writers and users of social media, who have branded Mr Netanyahu's comments a "bizarre kind of Holocaust revisionism". "This statement is almost too absurd to debunk," the Alternet reported.

This is a modal window.
This video is either unavailable or not supported in this browser
Error Code: MEDIA_ERR_SRC_NOT_SUPPORTED
Session ID: 2017-11-14:5a13e06da2110322388e77f4 Player ID: brightcove-video-4544701089001
OK
Israel's Netanyahu pledges action after stabbing attacks
Others, such as novelist Linda Grant, accused Mr Netanyahu of being "toxic" and of effectively "exonerating Hitler".


And some described the PM's comments as a "whitewash" and "smear on Palestinians".






Dumping blame for the Holocaust on a Palestinian is an insult to its six million victims

A highly incriminating story, if true – but 'possible' is hardly the stuff of history

Robert Fisk @indyvoices Sunday 6 July 2014 17:08 BST

A new book accuses Haj Amin al-Husseini, pictured here in 1927, of responsibility for the Nazi genocide GETTY IMAGES
And so – amid the tragedy and revenge of last week’s butchery by Arabs and Jews, we should return to that devious, hypocritical – yes, and anti-Semitic – man, the Palestinian Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, the prelate who visited Hitler and Himmler and supported their persecution of the Jews of Europe. Did he know that the Holocaust had started? Of course he knew. Did he make morally iniquitous broadcasts for the Nazis? Of course he did. Did he appeal to the Germans to send Jews “to the east”? Of course, he made just such a call which may – or may not – have sealed the fate of Jews in Europe.

Netanyahu blames Holocaust on Palestinian leader

But a new book goes much further. Its two authors, the late Barry Rubin and Wolfgang Schwanitz, claim this Palestinian Jew-hater (let us not avoid the truth here) was actually responsible for the mass killing of the Jews of the Holocaust, that without him – without this single, one Arab Muslim who was largely treated by the Nazis themselves with the scorn he deserved – the greatest crime against humanity in modern generations would not have taken place. You get the point, of course. Haj Amin was a Palestinian. He brought about the mass murder of the Jews. Therefore the Palestinians were responsible for the Holocaust. Ergo…

Well, you can imagine. How can the Palestinians be trusted with a state when they and their fellow Arabs “demonstrated how the same radical views that had once found the Nazis to be congenial, right-thinking allies, had such a powerful, long-lived effect in shaping the contemporary Middle East”. This, the authors assert, “is the terrible secret of modern Middle Eastern history”. At which, you have to cry: ‘Whoah there!’

It’s not difficult, of course, to dredge up bucket-loads of racist drivel from Palestinian and other Arab leaders – whether of the “pigs” and “microbes” variety, or of the more insidious Holocaust denial/“Hitler didn’t finish the job” dirt which anyone living in the Middle East – myself included – hears and must, always, fight. And Arabs point out, correctly, that Israeli politicians have variously called Palestinians “cockroaches in a glass jar”, “ants”, “serpents” and “crocodiles”.

But the Rubin-Schwanitz thesis in Nazis, Islamists and the Making of the Modern Middle East goes much, much further. After some extraordinary research – and a lot of new archive material – they formulate the theory that Haj Amin was the architect of the Holocaust and that he had so much power over Hitler and his cronies that he was, in effect, the perpetrator of the mass murder of the Jews of Europe. Much of the material to support this comes from Fritz Grobba (former German envoy to Kabul, Baghdad and Riyadh, and Muslim-Arab affairs officer in the Nazi foreign ministry) – “highly dubious evidence”, in the words of Gilbert Achcar, whose own research fills a volume of tremendous historical importance (The Arabs and the Holocaust) – and from the observation that Haj Amin and his colleagues were the only Nazi allies (apart from fascist movements) who gave their support to the “genocide plan”.

For example, when a proposal that Jews were to be released from Nazi captivity – 10,000 children via Romania to Palestine in 1942 – in return for the Allied release of German civilians, Adolf Eichmann noted that Haj Amin had heard of the plan and protested to Himmler, who, according to the book, “had then reversed his decision and sent them (the children) back to almost certain death”. The authors repeat the story that Haj Amin had visited Auschwitz extermination camp, drawing upon a sinister document recording the Palestinian Grand Mufti’s 1943 visit to Himmler at the Ukrainian village of Zhitomir (near Kiev), which is geographically close to the Polish town of Oswiencim (Auschwitz). Rubin and Schwanitz say that it is “possible” Haj Amin visited the death camp on his way to Zhitomir, and that Treblinka and Majdanek camps were “also conveniently located for a possible visit along the route”.


READ MORE
Netanyahu's claims about the Holocaust have been debunked before
A highly incriminating story, if true – but “possible” is hardly the stuff of history. The authors record some fatuous conversations between the Palestinian and Nazi officers, the former favourably comparing Islam to Nazism and the latter exclaiming their admiration for the religion, even though both sides knew this was nonsense. Having established that these two views had little in common, Rubin and Schwanitz then make an astonishing leap of faith by recording Hitler’s suicide – then adding that “the Third Reich’s Arab and Islamist allies were just getting started in conducting what would become the longest war of all”.

This lies at the heart of the whole “Islamofascist” narrative (see Christopher Hitchens, Norman Podhoretz and George W. Bush) in which Nazism still exists in Arab anti-Semitism, and in which the Mufti was “a pioneer in race murder” – this from Sean McMeekin in his The Berlin-Baghdad Express – for inciting Arab mobs to lynch Jews in Jerusalem in the 1920s. McKeekin quoted Hitler as telling Haj Amin that he would annihilate “the Jews living under British protection in Arab lands”, a sentiment which the Palestinian heard “with an air of gratification”. The source, again, is Grobba. And the problem is obvious. If we trust this account, do we therefore trust the Nazi version of history? If they lied so much, how come the Nazis were scrupulously honest in recording Haj Amin’s actions and words? And how come, by the way, do the authors of Nazis, Islamists etc not talk about the historically established links between Nazism and Zionism?

The Grand Mufti, let’s face it, was a pretty horrible man, immoral and racist, but he was a puny figure in the history of Nazism’s epic evil. Dumping the Holocaust on this wretched figure is ultimately an insult to history as well as to the six million victims of an evil regime. It also provides another means of denigrating the entire Palestinian people – whose lands are still being gobbled up by the Israeli government – when the real criminals were neither Muslim nor Arab but Europeans, that cultured, largely Christian race who have inflicted more suffering on the people of this world than any other in recent history.

_________________
--
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com
http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 15573
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Part two tonight of our three part series on Zionist fundamentalist fanatic Benjamin Netanyahu's rise to power - this week - the 1995 Oslo accords and the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin - a discussion borrowing from this PBS documentary
Netanyahu at War - PBS Frontline

Link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28TNwroqY4U

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> General All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group