Saturday, January 15, 2005

The Rise of Zionist World Domination.

This blog explores the emergence of zionist world domination.

Zionist influence over the american and british media has grown almost exponentially since the end of the second world war until zionists now own and control virtually all the major newspapers, radio, and television companies in these countries. In america, the key which enabled zionists to buy up newspapers, commercial radio, and television companies, was advertising revenue from zionist owned industries. Many newspapers were driven into bankruptcy because zionist advertisers wanted to advertise only in newspapers which promoted zionist policies. "Jewish advertising power not only has increased the Jewish monopolization and consolidation of American newspapers, it also greatly affects publications with Gentile management or ownership. All major publications are dependent on Jewish advertising revenue, so their features, reporting, and editorial policies must be carefully attuned to Jewish attitudes and interests. Ultimately, the free press is not free. It runs on money. The old axiom certainly holds true in the media: "He who pays the piper calls the tune." (David Duke ‘Who Runs the Media?’ A more recent example of this phenomenon happened in britain when zionists punished the spectator magazine for publishing what they claimed was an anti-semitic article. "Following Mr. Weinraub's article, the Anti-Defamation League swung into action from its New York office as a result of this one of our valued advertisers canceled its contract with us and the Los Angeles Times ran a leader page article to denounce young William Cash." (Dominic Lawson ‘Taboo or not Taboo, That is the Question’ The Spectator, Nov. 19, 1994 Quoted in Jews to Islam ‘Hollywood Jews’ c.2004). Zionist dominance of the american (and brutish) political systems followed in the wake of zionists’ control of the media.

After the foundation of the zionist state, zionists used their financial and economic power to finance its survival. As zionists’ control over the american/brutish media began to increase, they were able to win the support of politicians and the public in both countries for the zionist state and its expansionist policies. The greater zionists’ control over the american/brutish media, the greater their control over the american/brutish public, and the greater their control over the american/brutish political systems. The israeli owned media was able to transform the repugnance of the american and british public for the zionist state’s racist policies into public/political approval. Over the decades, despite the increasing belligerence of the zionist state in palestine, the zionist owned media in america was able to increase the zionist state’s popularity amongst america’s politicians and the public. It is revealing that during the 1970s and the 1980s whilst enormous efforts were made to expose, boycott, and eventually dismantle, the apartheid system in south africa, virtually nothing similar was done about the apartheid zionist state in palestine - even though the zionist state has always been far more racist and barbaric than south african apartheid.

From the 1960s onwards increasing numbers of israelis began to infiltrate into american politics. Many more set up or joined israeli think tanks in america to develop policies favourable to the zionist state in palestine. They then lobbied for such policies amongst american politicians – often with the backing of the zionist owned american media – and gradually learnt enough about the american political system to enable them to become a part of the political process. In case it might be thought that this might not be a very substantial route into american politics it should be pointed out that there is a .. "vast community of 52 American Jewish organizations totally devoted to control American Middle East policies for the benefit of Israel." (Youssef M. Ibrahim ‘Outside View: Israeli hubris vs. the U.S’ December 21st 2004).

Many jews started out on the left of american politics, some even on the extreme left, but gradually became disenchanted with the democratic party and shifted to the republicans. "The original neocons were a small group of mostly Jewish liberal intellectuals who, in the 1960s and 70s, grew disenchanted with what they saw as the American left's social excesses and reluctance to spend adequately on defense. Many of these neocons worked in the 1970s for Democratic Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a staunch anti-communist. By the 1980s, most neocons had become Republicans, finding in President Ronald Reagan an avenue for their aggressive approach of confronting the Soviet Union with bold rhetoric and steep hikes in military spending. (No author ‘Neocon 101’ Christian Science Monitor no date c.2003).

The jewish neocons were at the forefront of the reagan administration’s efforts to topple the soviet empire. "Where other conservatives favored détente and containment of the Soviet Union, neocons pushed direct confrontation, which became their raison d'etre during the 1970s and 80s." (No author ‘Neocon 101’ Christian Science Monitor no date c.2003). They persuaded the reagan administration to provide support for islamic extremists in afghanistan to push the soviet empire out of afghanistan. Whilst the common phrase for the superpower rivalry between the soviet empire and america was the ‘cold war’, the israeli neocons called it the third world war. This phrase is a part of their basic vocabulary and the basis of their understanding of their rise to power in global politics. Conversely, it can be used to identify israeli neocon supporters.

The ostensible objective of the israeli neocons’ efforts to bring down the soviet union was to boost the global power of the united states. However, there was another objective which, given the neocons’ loyalties to the zionist state in palestine, may have been an even more important than the first. The israeli neocons believed the soviet union was anti-semitic and gave support to countries around the world which were also anti-semitic. The dismantling of the soviet union would thus go a long way to combating global anti-semitism. In addition, the dismantling of the soviet union would also free millions of russian jews to leave the country and emigrate to the zionist state in palestine. "By the 1970s, the neocons were taking an aggressive stance against the Soviet Union, which they saw as a bastion of anti-Semitism and opposition to Israel. Richard Perle was the prime organizer of Congressional support for the 1974 Jackson-Vanik Amendment which angered the Soviet Union by linking bilateral trade issues to freedom of emigration, primarily of Jews from the Soviet Union to Israel and the United States." (Kevin MacDonald ‘Thinking About Neoconservatism’ September 18, 2003).

The israeli neocons not only used the reagan administration to try and topple the soviet union they also used a range of zionist think tanks to produce a constant stream of publicity about the need to give russians the right to emigrate. These think tanks rarely referred explicitly to the rights of jews but predominantly, in order to win wider popular support, to the general concept of human rights. The irony of the neocons’ position, and what exposed their facile belief in human rights, was that after the soviet union had been forced to allow russian jews to emigrate most of them did so to the united states. As a consequence, the israeli neocons in the united states introduced a law limiting the numbers of russian jews who would be allowed to settle in the country – thereby forcing hundreds of thousands to emigrate to the zionist state in palestine – where they helped the zionist state to annexe even more palestinian land. If it hadn’t been for this massive influx of russian jews, over a million altogether, it would never have been possible for the zionist state to have carried out such a wide-scale annexation of palestinian land. The neocons’ defeat of the soviet empire was their first great victory and gave their rise to world domination a huge political boost.

It has to be emphasized that although zionists in the reagan administrations were very influential and played a leading role in promoting the afghanistan war, and the cold war against the soviet union, they did not have a dominant degree of political power in america. In 1979, ayatollah khoemeini led an islamic revolution which overthrew the shah of iran who had been armed and financed by the united states for the previous couple of decades. During the revolution, islamic revolutionaries captured the american embassy and kept its officials as political hostages for a year – in fact, until the day of reagan’s inauguration as president of the united states. America’s priority was to exact revenge on iran and contain iran’s revolutionary zeal from toppling a range of dictatorial regimes in the middle east. The reagan administrations financed and armed iraq to wage war on iran: in effect using saddam to fight a proxy american war against iran. Reagan’s arming of iraq was bitterly opposed by zionists who feared that after the war, saddam would use his new found military power to challenge the zionist state. But there was nothing they could do to stop american support for saddam. It was only after the israelis’ success in bringing about the collapse of the soviet empire that they achieved a much greater degree of dominance over the american government which enabled them to shift the american government’s foreign policies in the middle east from a reliance on arab/moslem leaders towards a greater reliance on the zionist state, "In the 1970s and 1980s, U.S. Middle Eastern policy, although sympathetic to Israel, was not identical to that of Israel."(Stephen J Sniegoski 'The war on Iraq: Conceived in Israel' c.February 2003).

Zionists’ influence over american (and brutish) politics was considerable prior to the collapse of the soviet union but it increased substantially after the collapse at the end of the 1980s. This happened for two reasons. Firstly, the neocons had been at the forefront of the attack on the soviet union and were thus regarded as heroes for bringing about such dramatic and wide-ranging changes. Secondly, the neocons were able to exploit the fact that russia lost much of its political and military influence over large parts of the world. America quickly filled the political and military vacuum left by the russians and this gave it much greater influence over the middle east. The increase in american power over the middle east gave the zionists more opportunities to influence american policies over the middle east – after all, the israelis were supposed to be experts about the middle east. The 1991 gulf war would not have been possible if the soviet union had still been a superpower because it would have continued to protect iraq which was within its sphere of influence. The collapse of the soviet union thus had a profound effect not only on the global balance of power between america and russia but on zionists’ power over the american government. In effect, when america became the world’s sole superpower, zionists’ control over america’s media and political system gave them, ipso facto, world domination.

The first manifestation of zionists’ fledgling dominance over the american government was the 1991 gulf war. Many american politicians were indifferent to iraq’s proposed invasion of kuwait – after all, they knew that iraq had bankrupted itself on america’s behalf in the war against iran, and that saddam saw kuwait as america’s pay-off for the sacrifices his country had made over the previous decade. However, the israeli neocons and the zionists were horrified at the prospect of saddam acquiring kuwait’s oil wealth which he would have used to rebuild his country and his military power which would thus pose a threat to the zionists’ hegemony over the middle east. The zionist state in palestine threatened the united states that if it did not remove saddam from kuwait then it would attack saddam. The israeli neocons in america supported the demands of the zionist state which led patrick buchanan, virtually the only politician around the world who seemed to notice what was going on, to denounce the role of the israeli neocons.

The second manifestation of zionists’ dominance over the american government came just after the end of the war when the neocons forced the american and british governments to introduce, through united nations’ resolutions, a highly punitive set of sanctions to, in effect, demilitarize iraq.

The rise of zionist world domination did not proceed entirely smoothly. It was challenged directly by george bush snr. This met with disastrous results - he lost the next presidential election, "In 1991 George H.W. Bush, the father of the man who sits in the White House and the only member of his family ever to have been elected president, demanded that the Israelis stop building new settlements in Palestinian territory. Unlike previous presidents, Bush sounded serious, threatening to block billions in loan guarantees if Israel disobeyed. As might have been predicted, the dominant voices among American Jews were outraged, and Bush responded by complaining at a press conference that "Jews work insidiously behind the scenes." On another occasion he reminded critics that the U.S. gives "Israel the equivalent of $1,000 for every Israeli citizen," a remark that detractors took as antisemitic. Later on Bush's Secretary of State James Baker made his famous "fuck the Jews" remark in private conversation, noting that Jews "didn't vote for us anyway." And it was true: when he lost to Bill Clinton in 1992, Bush got smallest percentage of the Jewish vote of any Republican since 1964." (Noel Ignatiev ‘Toward a Single State Solution: Zionism, Anti-Semitism and the People of Palestine’ counterpunch 17.06.2004).

The event which led to the most dramatic consolidation of zionist world domination was the september 2001 pentagon and new york (hereinafter referred to as p*ny) bombings. George bush jnr’s initial response to this event was to declare war on al quaeda. By january 2002, however, the zionist owned media and zionist owned politicians had exploited this event to win popular and presidential approval for a war on all terror groups – even though they were not a threat to america only the zionist state. Despite the fact that the interests of the zionist state in palestine are quite distinct from the interests of the american state, american zionists were able to transform american foreign policies so that they promoted zionist, rather than american, interests. Zionists in the american media/politics deceived the american public into believing that america’s new zionist policies were in america’s best interests. America’s middle east policies were designed to boost the regional dominance of the zionist state in the middle east and these were the same policies being promoted by the zionist state. Zionists’ power in america enabled them to lead america (and brutland) into wars against afghanistan and iraq, and to declare the start of what was commonly called the third world war against islamic rebels - but which the zionists called world war four. That zionists have been able to drive the western world into a war against the moslem world simply in order to boost the dominance of the utterly racist zionist state in palestine and in the middle east is possible only because of zionists’ world domination.

The zionists who have taken over the bush administration are using the american military to create a new zionist world order. It is not surprising that these israelis are highly antagonistic to the united nations’ efforts to create a new world order through the family of nations. The neocons had gone along with the united nations when it suited them i.e. support for human (jews only) rights in the 1970s and 1980s and the sanctions imposed on iraq in the 1990s but as soon as this organization had outlived its purpose the israelis set about trying to destroy it. The arch neo-con zionist richard perle has made clear his contempt for the united nations. "Writing in the Guardian of London on March 21, 2003, under the title, "Thank God for the Death of the UN", just as the American invasion of Iraq was getting underway, Richard Perle, member of the Pentagon's Defense Advisory Board, said of Saddam Hussein: ... He will go quickly, but not alone: in a parting irony, he will take the UN down with him." This attitude is common amongst the israelis in the bush administration, "Such disdain for international law is very clearly expressed in considerable detail in a 1996 document prepared for the incoming Natanyahu government of Israel of that year entitled, A Clean Break: a New Strategy for Securing the Realm", prepared by Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, David and Meyrav Wurmser, James Colbert, and Robert Loenberg in their capacity as members of The Institute for Advanced Strategy and Political Studies' "Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000" a Washington/Jerusalem based think tank providing policy analyses for the government of Israel." (William James Martin ‘The Dogma of Richard Perle: Zionism and Legal Skepticism’ Counterpunch July 1, 2004).

Neocons’ disdain for the united nations stems unambiguously from the zionist state’s refusal to abide by united nations’ resolutions. "Israel has violated more that 60 UN Security Council resolutions and has never recognized the constraints of UNR 242 and 338 which requires the relinquishing of the parts of Palestine taken by force in the '67 War, much less UN Resolution 194 which call for the reparation of the indigenous Palestinian population expelled from Palestine in 1948." (William James Martin ‘The Dogma of Richard Perle Zionism and Legal Skepticism’ Counterpunch July 1, 2004); "The United States has now matched Israel in its contempt for international law as the US has now declared to the world that it will no longer abide by the ABM treaty, nor by the Comprehensive Test Ban, put into place under Clinton, nor by the Chemical Weapons Treaty. It has rejected the Kyoto Accords, and also the Protocol to the Biological Weapons Conventions which was written to strengthen compliance with that treaty. And it has said that it will not honor the procedures of the recently formed International Criminal Court. The US repeatedly threatened the UN with irrelevancy in its run-up to the Iraq invasion. The administration has promulgated the new strategic doctrine that the United States will arrogate the right to pre-emptively attack any state which, in its view, might threaten its security at some indeterminate time in the indefinite future, which also happens to be a long standing Israeli military doctrine. That's what the Iraq war is about. This arrogant principle is a challenge to the very foundation of the United Nations and its prohibition against the non defensive use of force. The Bush administration and a strong viable and effective regime of international law cannot co-exist." (William James Martin ‘The Dogma of Richard Perle Zionism and Legal Skepticism’ Counterpunch July 1, 2004). The choice is clear: either the united nations and the world community forces the zionist state to abide by united nations’ resolutions or it is replaced by zionist inspired american policies of pre-emptive, lawless, unilateralism aiming to create a new zionist world order.

To summarize: zionists became the dominant political force in american politics, especially congress, after the collapse of the soviet union. But, it was only after the p*ny bombings that the israelis occupied enough positions of power within the american presidency to control, for the first time, an american president. This enabled them to completely reshape american foreign policy to their own liking. This has given them what, in effect, is world domination. Since then, zionists have consolidated and reinforced their grip over the american media and political system to the point where ariel sharon could blurt out, "Every time we do something, you tell me americans will do this and will do that. I want to tell you something very clear. Don’t worry about american pressure on israel; we, the jewish people, control america and the americans know it." (Zionist Prime Minister Ariel Sharon October 3, 2001 IAP News). And nobody in the american administration disagreed with his statement because they knew it to be true. (What is even more amazing, is that sharon could have said exactly the same about russia because, at that time, the country was being controlled by the zionist oligarchs - until putin put an end to their ill-gotten reign).

The israeli neocons in the bush administration set up their own state within the state in order to feed the president with lies about saddam which led him to promote the invasion of iraq. This israeli neocon state within the american state was called the office for special projects. Israeli generals were often seen waltzing into OSP offices in order to ensure the american military was implementing zionist policies, "Karen Kwiatkowski was an eyewitness in NESA (the Pentagon’s Near East and South Asia office), and Lobe reports: "she recounts one incident in which she helped escort a group of half a dozen Israelis, including several generals, from the first floor reception area to Feith's office. (Douglas J. Feith was undersecretary of defense for policy). "We just followed them, because they knew exactly where they were going and moving fast." When the group arrived, she noted the book which all visitors are required to sign under special regulations that took effect after the Sep. 11, 2001 attacks. "I asked his secretary, 'Do you want these guys to sign in?' She said, 'No, these guys don't have to sign in.'" It occurred to her, she said, that the office may have deliberately not wanted to maintain a record of the meeting.’" (Juan Cole ‘Israeli Spy in Pentagon Linked to AIPAC’ August 28, 2004). Julian borger makes the same point, "The Office of Special Projects was an open and largely unfiltered conduit to the White House not only for the Iraqi opposition. It also forged close ties to a parallel, ad hoc intelligence operation inside Ariel Sharon's office in Israel specifically to bypass Mossad and provide the Bush administration with more alarmist reports on Saddam's Iraq than Mossad was prepared to authorise. "None of the Israelis who came were cleared into the Pentagon through normal channels," said one source familiar with the visits. Instead, they were waved in on Mr Feith's authority without having to fill in the usual forms." (Julian Borger ‘The spies who pushed for war’ Guardian July 17, 2003). Surely if the zionist state in palestine was only an american political satellite then it would not be surprising to hear of american generals walking into the offices of zionists’ defence department in such a way. But to discover this was what zionist generals were doing in america’s defence department suggests an entirely different relationship.

Zionists still do not have total domination over american politics. The zionist-controlled bush administration does not have the same control over the american people as the zionist state in palestine has over the palestinians. For the last few decades, zionists have been taking the leaders of america’s armed forces on all expenses paid trips to the zionist state in order to indoctrinate them into zionism. They have also been taking american politicians and religious leaders on such jaunts. These zionized religious leaders have converted tens of millions of christians into apocalyptic zionism which supports the forcible removal of all palestinians from their homeland. America’s zionist dominated media has persuaded a large section of the american public to support the zionist state because of the hoax they have perpetrated about the zionist state as a helpless victim facing the overwhelming power of the arab world. And zionists’ ownership of a major proportion of american industries ensures the silence of millions of non-zionist employees about the injustices being perpetrated by the zionist state in palestine. Perhaps, if american goyims began to rebel against their manipulation by their zionist rulers then the zionists would have to start treating them as they do palestinians. But, it seems that most americans are so ignorant of the world around them that zionists are unlikely to have to resort to such tactics in the near future.