islamozionism: Neoconservative Think Tank Influence on US Policies: 'Team B'

This article gives an indication of the generational and pervasive nature of the Jabotinskian Zionist Neocon conspiracy.

Richard Pipes, who worked closely with Paul Wolfowitz during the 70s, is the father of Daniel Pipes.

Just as Richard Pipes produced distorted Neoconservative propaganda about the Soviet Union, Daniel Pipes disseminates distorted Neoconservative propaganda about the Arab and Islamic worlds.

Richard Pipes has consistently lied about the role of Bolshevik Ashkenazim in overthrowing the pre-Soviet Russian government, in consolidating the Soviet Union, and in planning as well as in participating in Soviet crimes including mass murder, ethnic cleansing and genocide.

Both Pipeses are extremist Zionist Jewish ethnic fundamentalists that lie whenever it is "good for the Jews." Sphere: Related Content

Fox Interview on Obsession

The videoclip below of a Fox interview on the film Obsession is quite interesting.

I would have made Wuco explain what he thinks "extremism" means, for it is hard to find any idea more extreme than the belief that Eastern Europeans had the right to steal Palestine from the native population on the basis of an etymological relationship between the word Jew and the word Judea. Because far too many Americans have no problem with such thinking, Americans have to be really careful when they use the term extremist.

Watching the video made me think it would be quite interesting to put together a documentary video entitled Delusion: Radical Judaism's War against Everybody (see Jewish, Zionist War Against Salvation). My film would be quite scholarly and provoke thoughtful discussion unlike Obsession, which is meant to stifle rational thought and which as a consequence is propaganda and racist incitement despite Wuco's claim that it is merely provocative.

All Americans should be disturbed that Aish haTorah, The Clarion Fund and EMET have 501(c)(3) status yet distribute massive quantities of materials to incite racism.

Because the US tax code grants contributions to such corporations tax deductible status, all Americans are subsidizing the efforts of these three organizations to provoke anti-Muslim and anti-Arab hatred.

2of2: Obsession Film Distribution, Israeli-based Aish HaTorah Behind Campaign

Tampa Radio show host and Human Rights Council President Ahmed Bedier debates the impact of the mass distribution of the anti-Muslim DVD "Obsession: Radical Islam's War  Against the West" ahead of the 2008 presidential election. The film was distributed by the Clarion Fund a front organization for Israeli-based Aish HaTorah International.

Sphere: Related Content

Strauss, Heidegger and Their Fans

Followup: Leo Strauss, Neocons, and Maimonides

 

The essay "Leo Strauss: September 10, 1899 -- October 18, 1973" contains another paragraph worth reproducing because of its irony now that we can see so clearly the harm done to the USA and the Middle East by the Neoconservative cult that grew around Strauss. Allan Bloom writes on p. 252:

Strauss, with his respect for speech and its power, believed that men are responsible for what they say. And it was not entirely an accident of personality that Heidegger, who most of all contemporaries attracted a cult by brave talk, not only prepared the atmosphere for Hitler but eagerly enlisted his rhetoric in Hitler's cause.

Sphere: Related Content

islamozionism: Neoconservative Think Tank Influence on US Policies: Project for the New American Century (PNAC)

Project for the New American Century (PNAC) is worth revisiting in order to obtain an awareness of just how far Jabotinskian Neocon and Friedmanite Neoliberal plans have gone awry since the Neoconservatives and Neoliberals took effective control of US foreign and economic policy making under George W. Bush. As everything stands today, the 21st century hardly looks American at all. Sphere: Related Content

mariahussain:Obsession is Boring

My wife Karin Friedemann wrote a review of Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West, which can be read here on her mariahussain blog. Sphere: Related Content

Fight a Republican October Surprise!

Write on Aafia Siddiqui's Behalf!

by Joachim Martillo (ThorsProvoni@aol.com)

 

Republican strategists may be attempting to use Aafia Siddiqui to create conditions for an October surprise so that McCain will defeat Barak Obama.

 

For more information on Aafia, see the World View News Service.

 

Please write Democratic Congressmen on her behalf.

 

Here is a letter that I sent to politically connected academics in the Boston area.

 

Sometimes Kindness is Realism

 

Dear Sirs,

 

My wife Karin spoke with MP Lord Nazir Ahmed yesterday about the case of Brandeis graduate Aafia Siddiqui, who is being held in NY City and is being tried on numerous terrorism charges that have a strong resemblance to the Niger yellowcake story associated with the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq.

 

To follow up what Karin learned, I have spent a good deal of time in researching the matter.

 

As far as I can tell, practically everything of which Siddiqui is accused looks like some form of paranoid -- dare I say it -- Zionist fantasy. (We have -- thank Martin Peretz -- a lot of that around Boston.) 

 

Siddiqui is only clearly guilty of Islamic activism and charity work at Brandeis. While a certain segment of Zionists would like such activities to be criminalized, they have not yet been. If she really had been some sort of deep cover al-Qaeda operative in the USA, Brandeis is probably the last place to work on such projects.

 

The case is becoming a cause célèbre in Pakistan and has the potential to whip up a new frenzy of anti-Americanism in the Islamic world.

 

It is not impossible that the Bush administration is in fact trying to stoke conditions for some sort of blow-up against the USA because it would help the McCain election campaign, but from the standpoint of realist foreign policy, some effort on the part of politically active Americans to make sure this woman is at least treated for the gunshot wound, from which she is suffering, would do a lot to prevent a situation that probably should never have arisen from spinning out of control to cause truly disproportionate harm to US international interests.

 

Sincerely yours,

 

Joachim Martillo

 

Sphere: Related Content

Leo Strauss, Neocons, and Maimonides

Exoteric, Esoteric Doctrine, Then, Now

 

On occasion I have mentioned Leo Strauss in conjunction with Neocon (Jabotinskian Zionist) ideology.

 

In Pious Degenerates: Repentance and Religious Hypocrisy, Director David Shasha of the Center for Sephardic Heritage in Brooklyn discusses Maimonides in conjunction with modern Jewish malaise, which many including me connect with Zionism.

 

A further investigation of the topic of Leo Strauss, Zionism and Maimonides is worthwhile.

 

In his essay "Leo Strauss: September 10, 1899 -- October 18, 1973" contained in Giants and Dwarfs, Alan Bloom addresses these subjects on pp 242-246.

 

From "Leo Strauss: September 10, 1899 –  October 18, 1973"
by Allan Bloom

 

But I have spoken too academically, and Leo Strauss's thought was never academic. It had its source in the real problems of a serious life. His intellectual odyssey began with his Zionism. Assimilation and Zionism were the two solutions to what was called "the Jewish problem." Zionism understood assimilation to be both impossible and demeaning. The establishment of a Jewish state was the only worthy and proud alternative. This formulation of the choice was predicated on the assumption that Orthodox Judaism – the belief in the letter of Mosaic revelation and the acceptance of the fate of Jews in the Diaspora as part of Divine Providence to be changed only by the coming of the Messiah – is no longer tenable for thoughtful men. In fact, the situation of the Jews could only be looked on as a problem, requiring and susceptible of a solution, in the light of that assumption. "The Jewish Problem" was a child of the Enlightenment, with its contempt for revelation and its assurance that political problems, once posed as such, can be solved. Strauss, while accepting the Zionist view of assimilation, wondered whether a strictly political or secular response to the Jewish situation in Europe was sufficient and/whether a Jewish state that rejected the faith in the biblical revelation would have any meaning. Could the Jews become a nation like any other? And if they could, would that not be just a higher form of assimilation, of accepting the undesirability of being Jewish? Strauss saw, moreover, that pious Jews who tried to salvage Judaism and respond to the philosophical denial of the claims of the Mosaic code tacitly accepted many of the premises of their adversaries and were no longer really orthodox. Unable to accept the facile and convenient solutions available, he turned to the examination of the great thinker who suggested both the alternatives, assimilation and a Jewish state, and who initiated the higher criticism of the Bible which appeared to make life lived in adherence to the written word foolish and which prevails to this day; he turned to the renegade Jew, to Spinoza. With this, his first serious scholarly undertaking, begun in his mid-twenties, Strauss embarked on the journey from which he never returned.

 

As it then appeared to Strauss,[i] Spinoza directed his criticism of the Jewish tradition against two kinds of men – the Orthodox who believe in the divinely revealed character of every word of the Torah and for whom there was no need for, and a positive hostility toward, philosophy; and the philosophers, Maimonides in particular, who tried to show that reason and revelation are compatible, that Aristotelian philosophy arrived at by unaided reason is in perfect harmony with and is perfected by the Mosaic revelation. Briefly, Strauss concluded that Spinoza's method of textual criticism was persuasive only insofar as one believed that the textual difficulties cannot be explained as miracles or as the result of supernatural and suprarational causes and that Spinoza gave no adequate proof of that belief. Hence, he found, in agreement with Pascal, that the strictest orthodoxy which refused any concession to philosophy could still be maintained. And he also concluded that he must study Maimonides, for he had to see whether it was a failure of reason that made this philosopher remain loyal to the Jewish people and its sacred book. For, unlike Pascal, he was not prepared to reject philosophy.

 

So Strauss turned to Maimonides. His first impression was bewilderment. It was not only that he could make no sense of it; he felt utterly alien to the manner of thought and speech. But it was always his instinct to look for something important in that which seemed trivial or absurd at first impression, for it is precisely by such an impression that our limitations are protected from challenge. These writings were distant from what he understood philosophy to be, but he could not accept the ready explanations based on abstractions about the medieval mind. He kept returning to Maimonides and also to the Islamic-thinkers who preceded and inspired Maimonides. And gradually Strauss became aware that these medieval thinkers practiced an art of writing forgotten by us, an art of writing with which they hid their intentions from all but a select few. He had discovered esoteric writing. By the most careful readings, the texts become intelligible and coherent to rational men. This discovery, for which Strauss is famous and for which he is derided by those who established their reputations on conventional interpretations, may appear to be at best only an interesting historical fact, akin to learning how to read hieroglyphics. But it is fraught with philosophic significance, for the different mode of expression reflects a different understanding of reason and its relation to civil society. When one becomes aware of this, one is enabled to learn strange and wonderful things and to recognize the questionable character of our own view, to which we see no alternative. Out of this discovery emerged the great themes that dominated the rest of Strauss's life: Ancients and Modems, and Athens and Jerusalem. Real radicalism is never the result of passionate commitment, but of quiet and serious reflection.

 

Strauss found that the harmony of reason and revelation was Maimonides' and Farabi's public teaching, while the private teaching was that there is a radical and irreducible tension between them; he found that the teachings of reason are wholly different from and incompatible with those of revelation and that neither side could completely refute the claims of the other but that a choice had to be made. This is, according to these teachers, the most important issue facing man. It turned out that the opposition between reason and revelation was no less extreme in Maimonides than in Spinoza and that Maimonides was no less rational than Spinoza. Strauss also later learned that Spinoza too recognized and used the classic art of writing. Wherein, then, did the difference lie? Put enigmatically, Spinoza no longer believed in the permanent necessity of that art of writing. His use of it was in the service of overcoming it. He thought it possible to rationalize religion and, along with it, civil society. Philosophy, instead of the secret preserve of a few who accept the impossibility of the many being philosophers, or truly tolerating it, could be the instrument of transforming society and bringing enlightenment. Maimonides' loyalty to the Jewish people may have been due less to his faith in the Bible than his doubt as to the possibility or desirability of depriving them of that faith. Spinoza, on the other hand, was a member of a conspiracy the project of which was the alteration of what were previously considered to be the necessary conditions of human life. This project required a totally different view of the nature of things, and it is the essence of modernity. It began in agreeing with the ancients that the primary issue is the religious question. With its success, its origins in this question disappeared from sight. Hence, to understand ourselves, we must return to this origin and confront it with the view of things it replaced. Nietzsche, Strauss found, was wrong in his belief that there is a single line of Western rationalism originating in the ancients and culminating in contemporary science.

 

There was a great break somewhere in the sixteenth century. Nietzsche's critique of rationalism might well hold good for modern rationalism, but the character of ancient rationalism is unknown to us. A choice had been made by modern man, but whether that choice had led to broader horizons seen from a higher plateau is not clear.

 

Moreover, in his study of Maimonides and the Islamic thinkers, Strauss found that they understood themselves not as innovators, as did the moderns, but as conveyors of a tradition that went back to Plato and that they had only adapted the Platonic teaching to the Judaic and Islamic revelations. Plato, he heard, was the teacher of prophecy. What in the world that meant he could not divine. So he turned to Plato, and it was by this route that he came to the ancients. His access to their thought was by way of medieval philosophy. He had, of course, had the classical education common in Germany and was possessed of the conventional wisdom about the ancients. But that education precisely had made the classics uninteresting to him, little more than learning or general culture. No more than any of his contemporaries would he have gone to the ancient philosophers to solve the real problems of his life. Everybody was sure that the most important issues had been settled against the ancients. Now, as his thought had been drawn backward in time by the force of his vital concerns, he discovered an inlet to ancient thought through which those concerns were addressed more fully than he had imagined they could be. The unexpected perspective on the Greek philosophers which had emerged from his original needs proved to be the authentic one, for the medieval thinkers, closer in time to the Greeks and still preoccupied with the same problems as were they, had a surer knowledge of them than did the scholars who had, unawares, adopted one version or another of the modern resolution of the religious question and were most generally easygoing atheists (as opposed to atheists who faced up to the real consequences of atheism).

 

Strauss discovered that Plato, Xenophon, Aristophanes, and Thucydides, as well as many others, wrote like the medieval thinkers who had pointed in this direction. The execution of Socrates for impiety is the threshold to the Platonic-world, and the investigation of philosophy's stance toward the g6ds is the beginning and end of those dialogues which are the supreme achievement of the ancient art of writing. Strauss found here the beginning point from which we would "be open to the full impact of the all important question which is coeval with philosophy although the philosophers do not frequently pronounce it — the question quid sit deus."[ii] The profound opposition between Jerusalem and Athens and the modern attempt to alter their relation — and he now knew that this was the hidden origin of modem philosophy — became the sole theme of his continuous meditation. He was thus able to get a synopsis of the permanent human alternatives; their permanence, he argued, constituted the decisive refutation of historicism.

---

[i] If one wishes to see the development of Strauss's thought through his studies, it would be well to compare the "Preface to the English Edition" of Spinoza's Critique of Religion (New York: Schocken, 1965) with the book itself.

[ii] The City and Man (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964).

Sphere: Related Content

Khaleel Mohammed Apologizes Once Again

Khaleel Mohammed
In an exclusive statement for ObsessionWithHate, Dr. Khaleel Mohammed, the only Obsession interviewee who is an Islamic Studies Professor, delivers a new lethal blow to the film's credibility, exposing what many already knew:

"Sadly, it would seem that I have allowed myself to be used. I gave an interview to the makers of "obsession" wherein I explained the meaning of Jihad, and its misuse by extremists. I understood that the film would be used objectively, focusing on fanatics who seek to spread violence. I am aware that there is a disclaimer at the beginning of the film that says it is not about Islam in general, but only about extremist interpretations.

"But the material from some of the speakers gives the lie to the disclaimer: many of them are not experts, or have used the mantle of academic qualifications to purvey hate. That their alarmist drivel should be mixed with my whittled down interview proves that the intent of the film is not to educate, but to mislead. The free distribution of the film to voters in particular districts shows the political chicanery that is the motive, and the secrecy about the financing of the distribution only underlines the evil intent in circulating this vile piece of propaganda.

[For the complete story, click here.]

To be honest, Dr. Mohammed's contribution beyond lending his name to the movie was fairly trivial. (He defined the term jihad and stated that it was a powerful concept among Muslims.)

In Web of Zionist enmeshment, Dr. Mohammed expresses "sadness" for possible misuse of some of his comments by anti-Mosque activists during the Roxbury Mosque controversy in Boston:

The ISB shared with TMO a June 1, 2004 opposition email which refers to an unnamed "pro-Jewish Muslim ally in Boston," who used Roxbury Community College connections to help conspirators investigate parking infractions the mosque might have committed inadvertently, that could be used in a legal attack.

Khaleel Mohammed, an academic who advocates "Islamic reform" to right-wing audiences, was also mentioned in the anti-mosque correspondence.

An October 1993 Boston Herald article linked a quotation from Mr. Mohammed about mosque financing with two succeeding anonymous quotations so that he would appear to accuse the ISB of connections to "fundamentalist Islamist politics."

In discovery emails, Mohammed discusses with professional Israel advocates the allegedly "Wahhabi" content of library materials at the ISB. Mohammed was invited to comment about his involvement with the anti-mosque group.

"I am sad to find out that organizations are now using government funds to combat the building of mosques," Mr. Mohammed began.

"I have imparted no 'secret' information to anyone…I don't know any of the people in the Boston Mosque. I would at most say that if they are into radical Islam, I would be against their building a mosque."

Mr. Mohammed informed TMO that he verified "some translations [of statements by] someone on the mosque board" for a good friend at the ADL.

Unfortunately, Dr. Mohammed has never apologized for his inexcusable record of pandering the rapaciousness and extremism of the Zionist ethnic Ashkenazi invaders that stole Palestine from the native population.

I link here to an email exchange I had with Dr. Mohammed shortly after a talk at Harvard on October 20, 2002. After the formal panel session Dr. Mohammed spent some time in dumping on Palestinians for not welcoming racist ethnic Ashkenazi Zionists, who colonized Palestine from the 1880s through 1940s for the purpose of imposing a Zionist state on the country despite the wishes of the majority native population.

I am ThorsProvoni@aol.com.
Dr. Khaleel Mohammed is kmoham1@brandeis.edu.
en_i_ne@yahoo.com is a NJ solidarity member named Bassem.
togethertalk@hotmail.com is Karin Friedemann.

In the past, even though Dr. Mohammed has condemned ignorant Islamophobes like Robert Spencer for making bigoted pronouncements about Islam without any genuine knowledge of Islamic studies, Dr. Mohammed has been willing to make equally if not more ignorant comments about Eastern European Jews and the crimes that Zionists have committed against the native Palestinian population.

It is time for Dr. Mohammed to apologize to Palestinians and either to learn something about ethnic Ashkenazi history and politics or to shut up, for he is not making a positive contribution to the debate as long as he lends his name and ignorance so casually to the cause of Islamophobic incitement. Sphere: Related Content

Obsession, Thernstrom, Stern, EMET, USCCR

EMET Manipulates US Government

by Joachim Martillo (ThorsProvoni@aol.com)

 

In Civil Rights for Some Americans, I pointed out that the United States Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) has been perverted by Jewish members and staff like Abigail Thernstrom and Kenneth Marcus to serve Jewish privilege instead of carrying out its civil rights mission.

 

In 2005 the Commission was investigating anti-Semitism on campus, watching the defamatory movie Columbia Unbecoming produced and distributed by The David Project, and taking testimony from Sarah Stern all for the purpose of substantiating a non-existent problem of anti-Semitism on college campuses.

 

Who is Sarah Stern?

 

The document USCCR document Campus Anti-Semitism gives her biography. On p. 74, it identifies her as the Director, Office of Governmental and Public Affairs, American Jewish Congress, and points out on p. 75 that she has left the AJCongress to establish the think tank and policy center named the Endowment for Middle East [Truth] (EMET). This latter organization has worked with Aish haTorah and probably funded the effort to disseminate tens of millions of copies of the propaganda DVD Obsession, Radical Islam's War against the West, in order

• to influence the presidential election,
• to incite racism and Islamophobia against Muslim Americans and Muslims in general for the purpose of marginalizing American Muslims in the US political system, and
• (quite probably) to distract from the role that Aish haTorah and other Jewish social networking has played in the Wall Street meltdown.

It looks like a prima facie case of conspiracy on the part of right-wing Jewish Zionist extremist members of the USCCR to engage in a conspiracy with right-wing Jewish Zionist Islamophobes against the rights of Muslim and Arab Americans.

 

Should not the General Account Office be investigating the USCCR for possible gross misuse of government funds? Should not Attorney General Mukasey, who is himself a racist Zionist extremist, be investigating Thernstrom, Marcus and the Jewish members and staff of the USCCR for criminal violation of Conspiracy Against Rights (18 USC 241)  At a time of war, might not Thernstrom and Marcus' actions constitute Seditious Conspiracy (US CODE: Title 18,2384. Seditious Conspiracy)?

 

Why is the government engaging in malicious prosecution of loyal Muslim American citizens for their efforts to aid poor and oppressed Palestinians under brutal genocidal Zionist siege when racist extremist Zionists are subverting the US government? (See Holy Land Foundation (Re)trial: THE ILLOGIC OF THE HLF PROSECUTION SUMMED UP IN ONE QUESTION..)

 

Please note

• the involvement of Aish HaTorah as a member of the Israel on Campus Coalition in the USCCR's travesty of an investigation,
• the degree to which institutions of the organized Jewish community like the American Jewish Congress are infested with fanatic Jewish extremist racists,
• the ridiculous findings and recommendations on pp. 72 and 73 of Campus Anti-Semitism, and
• the supercilious and dismissive nature of Thernstrom's reaction to the following suggestion:

The US Commission on Civil Rights should seriously think about monitoring Islamophobia and Arabophobia incitement on campus and the very un-American ideological program with which such hatred is associated.

The article attached below provides a framework for addressing the problem.

Sincerely yours,

Joachim Martillo

The article entitled "The Significance of the AJC Attack on Progressive Jews" can be found at http://www.eaazi.org/ThorsProvoni/JewishPolitics/AJCattacks.htm .

Here is the critical section.

In order to be truly certain to block this "Muslim-liberal coalition," of which there is yet actually little evidence in the USA (it is more developed in the UK), these Jewish communal and Zionist organizations are trying to incite a form of Islamophobia on the model of Central and Eastern European Judeophobia or anti-Semitism of the late 18th through the middle 20th century. Here are some of the activities associated with this ongoing and expanding program. [Read the complete correspondence at Civil Rights for Some Americans.]

Here is Thernstrom's response.

April 19, 2007

Dear Mr. Martillo:

When I suggested you send your email to Kenneth Marcus, I had not had the time to read it. I did no more than glance at it to see the subject and, on that basis, decided the staff director was the right person to contact.

But, having now read it with a bit more care, I see your message that "concerned Americans must begin seriously to consider whether fanatic and extremist Jewish Americans, more committed to Zionism than either to their fellow Americans or to basic human decency, should continue to play important roles in US media, academia and politics."  Moreover, you characterize the American Jewish Committee and Commentary magazine as "un-American" and "subversive."

I would never have suggested you contact the staff director had I noticed what you had actually written.  I suspect I am in the category of "fanatic and extremist Jewish Americans" myself.

Sorry for leading you astray; I am always short on time and should have taken a few minutes to read what you wrote.  Lesson learned.

AT

She seems to have convicted herself.

 

Here is an excerpt from my response.

As for Commentary, which until January 2007 was published by the AJC, can you characterize as a passage like

...in the judgment of the political scientist Peter Skerry, we may now be witnessing the emergence of a new force in American politics. Writing in Time, and citing a whole range of such convergent interests, Skerry calls this a "Muslim-liberal coalition" (more accurately it might be called a Muslim/Arab-liberal coalition). If he is right, and if this coalition can be organized to act with any degree of coherence, it could indeed end up, through sheer numbers alone, wielding a disproportionate influence on American politics [my emphasis], to the clear detriment of the interests of American Jews.

as anything but subversive and un-American? [Note that Schoenfeld is a contributor to Commentary, and this passage is not exceptional.] Do you disagree that majority rule in theory is an intrinsic element of the American system? In the US political system we normally think of the exercise of influence by sheer numbers as proportionate not disproportionate. 

 

Are you having a problem with my characterization because the AJC is a Jewish organization, because Commentary is supposed to be a Jewish intellectual magazine, and you yourself are Jewish? Arab and Muslim organizations like CAIR, MPAC or the AAI are subject to this sort of scrutiny all the time. Yet, Walt and Mearsheimer's (by my standards ) very unsophisticated analysis suggests that certain Jewish or Zionist organizations might unlike CAIR, MPAC or the AAI be genuine threats to American interests and the American political system.

 

Should the US Commission on Civil Rights be renamed the US Commission on Civil Rights for Some Americans?

Sphere: Related Content

Peninsulares versus Criollos

The Insignificance of Israeli Politics
by Joachim Martillo (ThorsProvoni@aol.com)

When I wrote the Israel Lobby and American Society, I started from the premise that Middle East Zionist Jewish political leaders have far less political consequence to the USA or to the world than the US Israel Lobby, which is the public face of the Zionist Virtual Colonial Motherland. The article Morris and Udi: A Story of Unrequited Love, How a Five Towns macher brought down the prime minister of Israel, from New York Magazine supports this contention.

The article calls Morris Talansky a macher, but he is more of a shlep and really low on the American Zionist foodchain. Paying off Olmert did not even merit a senior-level Jewish Zionist political economic oligarch. (When Talansky tried to talk with Sheldon Adelson on the telephone, Adelson just hung up.)

In a nutshell, here is the history and current situation of Jewish power.

While Jewish Bolsheviks mobilized the masses, Jewish Zionists mobilized the Jewish plutocracy of Western Europe and the USA.

Initially the Bolsheviks proved more successful, but the Zionists had more staying power.

As a result of Zionist origins, the genuine center of Zionist politics and mobilization is the USA where the Jabotinskian Jewish Zionist Neocon intelligentsia (.e.g. Douglas Feith, William Kristol, Daniel Pipes, or Paul Wolfowitz) often working in association with Jewish or non-Jewish Friedmanite Neoliberal associates like Dick Cheney mobilizes Jewish political economic oligarchs.

Thus, Jewish interlopers in stolen and occupied Palestine constitute a criollo population with no serious political influence in comparison with Jewish peninsulares in the USA. One could argue that in some sense the new Jewish Zionist empire is more "progressive" than the old Spanish empire because criollos were not even permitted local political authority in Spain's colonial holdings in Latin America.

Sphere: Related Content

Pious Degenerates: Repentance and Religious Hypocrisy

Guest Essay for Yom Kippur

by David Shasha

 

[I put some of the text in read, and I like the essay very much, but the issue does not seem so clear to me that the defeat of the Maimonidean tradition is the source of today's malaise within Judaism and the associated harm to American society. According to Alan Bloom, Leo Strauss, on whom Neoconservatives have depended so much for ideological inspiration, learned a lot from Maimonides.]

 

Give the members of your community a fair hearing, and judge rightly between one person and another, whether citizen or resident alien.  You must not be partial in judging: hear out the small and the great alike; you shall not be intimidated by anyone, for the judgment is God's.

 

            Deuteronomy 1:16-17

 

The human mind may devise many plans, but it is the purpose of the Lord that will be established.

 

            Proverbs 19:21

 

Pages turning

Pages torn and pages burning

Faded pages, open in the sun

Better bring your own redemption when you come

To the barricades of heaven where I'm from

 

Jackson Browne, "The Barricades of Heaven"

 

Many's the time I've been mistaken
And many times confused
Yes, and I've often felt forsaken
And certainly misused…

 

And I don't know a soul who's not been battered.
I don't have a friend who feels at ease.
I don't know a dream that's not been shattered
or driven to its knees.

 

But it's all right, it's all right
for we lived so well so long.

Still, when I think of the
road we're traveling on,
I wonder what's gone wrong
I can't help it, I wonder what's gone wrong.

 

Paul Simon, "American Tune"

 

As the Jewish High Holy days approach, I am reminded of a story that has stuck with me since I first learned it when I was a young boy.  The story comes from the Hasidic tradition and it tells of a married couple who are preparing to go to Synagogue on Yom Kippur night.  They have made arrangements to have their young child watched by a local girl, but as the time of the prayer comes nearer, the babysitter does not show up.  The couple starts to become very worried: What will happen if they miss out on the most sacred night of the Jewish calendar?  What will God think of them?  How will they be able to face the other members of their community if they do not show up at their Synagogue on Yom Kippur night?

 

Tellingly, the couple decides to leave the baby alone in the house and take their chances.

 

They arrive in the Synagogue to a big hubbub.  It seems that the sun is setting and the Grand Rabbi has still not arrived.  The congregants wonder where the rabbi is and begin to worry about him.  After much fretting, the Synagogue beadle leaves the hall to go look for the rabbi.  Walking up and down the now-empty thoroughfares of the Shtetl, the beadle hears the cooing of a baby coming from an open window.  Moving closer to the window, the beadle espies the Rebbe swaying in a rocking chair with the baby on his lap!

 

The beadle enters the dwelling and asks the Rebbe what is going on. 

 

The Rebbe responds that as he was walking to Synagogue, he heard the cries of the baby and felt duty-bound to see what was happening.  Upon discovering the apartment empty and the baby abandoned, he entered on his own volition to care for the child.

 

He states resolutely: "This is where God would expect me to be."

 

Rather than sit at the head of the largest prayer service of the year, the Grand Rabbi elected to serve God by caring for a child – abandoned on the eve of the most Holy date of the Jewish calendar.

 

The reason I repeat this story is because it drives home the point that sincere monotheists believe: God is everywhere and all human beings – big or small – are made in the image of the Lord.  God does not dwell in the Synagogue as if He was some magical spirit.  The magnitude of God is beyond anything that human beings can imagine.  What the Rebbe knew – and what most unthinking people do not – is that the way to serve God is to serve Man.

 

Behind the retelling of this story is my own personal story; something that over the past year has led me to abandon my Synagogue in order to try and deal with issues having to do with my own children. 

 

As those who know me personally are by now aware, the work of the Center for Sephardic Heritage is filled with difficulties that many human beings could not bear.  Little by little, it has become quite clear to me that the job of Sephardic Jewish renewal – the protection and dissemination of the classical Sephardic tradition – is one that must be accomplished by discipline and self-abnegation.  Having begun this task many years ago, I had little idea how much pain would be involved in this undertaking.

 

But like the Rebbe who abandoned his pulpit in order to rock a little child to sleep and to protect it, I have understood all too well that the reality of God is one that is alienating when one lives in a culture of cruelty, hate and cynicism.

 

Just yesterday I was watching the movie version of Clifford Irving's book "The Hoax."  Irving, for those who do not remember, was a struggling writer who decided that to succeed, he would have to come up with some great scam that would set the publishing world on fire.  The scam he concocted was to pretend that he was on intimate terms with the notorious billionaire recluse Howard Hughes.  Irving sold a book project to McGraw-Hill that would present to the world Hughes' personal memoir.

 

Irving played the scam to the hilt.  Every time there appeared to be a snag in the road, he upped the ante on his lies and deceit.  The web of lies became so gargantuan that Irving knew people would believe him.  It seems that the bigger the lie, the more credulous people become because they would not dare to think that anyone would go to such extreme lengths to make a point.

 

But as we now know – and as Irving admitted – his project was to manipulate and alter reality to the point where nothing was what it seemed to be.  Along the way, Irving ruined the lives of those around him.  But while the scam was going on, he was what could be called a "Pious Degenerate."  Irving presented a public persona, a public image that was sanctimonious. 

 

As portrayed by Richard Gere in the movie, Irving was always devoted to the purity of the lie; his demeanor and deportment was disciplined and precise.  If one were to try to question Irving's credibility, he would deploy his sanctimoniousness and raise the heat to a white-hot point.

 

Irving, of course, had many enablers.  From the handwriting "experts" who affirmed the forgeries of Hughes' writing as authentic way down to the person who cut the million dollar check in Howard Hughes' name, only to re-cut the same check to the name of "H.R. Hughes" when Irving realized that he could not cash a check made out to "Howard Hughes."

 

People believe what others want them to believe – when those others seek to appropriate the mechanisms of truth and to manipulate those "facts" to suit their own needs.  This is the classically Greek understanding of the term "rhetoric" which is seen as the opposite of "reality."

 

Extending this logic, in Judaism today there can be no expectation that in religious circles people actually believe in God.  "Rhetoric" has replaced "reality."  Truth is subservient to an amoral expediency.

 

The very idea of repentance from sin goes back to the ways in which the great Sages, Hakhamim, sought to take the sacrificial system as practiced in the Jerusalem Temple and adapt it to a world that had no Sanctuary.  In the Temple the guilty individual brought an animal as an expiatory offering that was slaughtered according to some very specific rules.  After the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE, the Law had to account for new realities.  There was no priest; no altar; no cleansing blood.  All that we now had were words; words that became tangible in the dense textuality of the rabbinic tradition where prayer would replace blood.

 

The Hakhamim established that Jews were to beseech God with their words to forgive them of their ritual transgressions. 

 

So far, so good. 

 

But what of offenses between individuals? 

 

In such cases, called in Hebrew 'Aberot ben Adam le-Habero, transgressions between individuals, people were left without a liturgical system.  So the Sages developed an idea that they called 'Aseret Yemei Teshuba, the Ten Days of Repentance, which would be established to allow people to approach one another and request forgiveness.

 

The Ten Days of Repentance represent a massive advance in human civilization.  Using the liturgical days of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur – commemorations that appear in the Bible – as parenthetical markers, the Sages marked the Ten Days of Repentance as a substantive expression of the values of humanity.  According to the Sages, Yom Kippur – the holiest day of the Jewish calendar – only atones for ritual matters between Man and God.  Individual human offenses are not expiated in the Kippur liturgy!

 

What an amazing idea.

 

What now comes to mind in the Jewish world that I live in is the sanctimoniousness and hypocrisy that remains a ubiquitous factor in our communities.  As I have consistently argued, the Jewish world today is predicated along the Ashkenazi model where, in the words of Rabbi Jose Faur, irrational zeal for the Law has displaced respect for the learned traditions of our progenitors.  I often hear that my attempt to restore the Sephardic tradition is impossible and that I should just throw in the towel.

 

Not having thrown in the towel, I can state clearly and unequivocally that the hatred for God and His Holy Law is now at an absolute peak.  The movement known as The Maimonidean Controversy helped to suppress the old Andalusian traditions that were central to Sephardic civilization.  Quoting Faur in his new book "The Horizontal Society":

 

The triumph of the Church v. Galileo marked the end of Italian scientific thought until recent times.  Anti-Maimonideans were not less successful.  Their triumph marked the end of Jewish creative thought.  It was not until modern times, when European universities opened their doors to Jews that Jewish genius flourished: invariably outside the Jewish quarters.  Jewish inspectors of truth – or the "little foxes" – would not have permitted a Freud or an Einstein to flourish in their midst.  Rabbis that dared to think suffered vicious persecution; e.g. Israel Moshe Hazzan, Elias Benamozegh, Isaac Abul'afya, Aaron b. Shim'on, et. al. (volume 1, p. 433)

 

Having now watched as my own life and my own family have been decimated by the liars and the evildoers, it has become all too clear to me that those who abide by the values of the Torah are sitting outside the Jewish Synagogue.  Those sitting inside that Synagogue are wrapped in their piety and sanctimoniousness.  They have marked themselves with the religious symbols of Judaism, even as they have in the inner sanctums of their wickedness elected to follow the ways of Satan and of inhumanity.

 

While watching Tyler Perry's film "Daddy's Little Girls" I was struck by an idea that has been known to me since I first saw Roman Polanski's "Chinatown" so many years ago: Our world is destroyed when those entrusted with enforcing the Law, choose to pervert it out of expediency.  The expediency we are discussing here is the power that money brings to those who have it.  At the very heart of evil in human history is the way in which money has served the powerful and enabled them to exert their tyranny over others.

 

In "Daddy's Little Girls" we have a desperate father – someone who reminded me of myself – who is fighting the evils of money and power.  Money buys the protection and support of the courts, where judges ignore the harsh reality of evil in the world, the evil of drug dealers and the evil of those who do violence – emotional and physical – to little children and to the weak.  The frenzied father is forced to take the Law into his own hands – but of course we understand that the movie is a wish-fulfillment fantasy – real life is not so forgiving.

 

Polanski's "Chinatown" ends with the triumph of evil as the rich and powerful rapist sees the woman he raped – his own daughter – shot and killed by the police and is left with his "other" "daughter" – the product of the incestuous rape that he perpetrated years before.  Watching all this, a private investigator played by the great Jack Nicholson is left impotent as he sees the perversion of justice taking place right before his very eyes.

 

God gave to the Jews a set of Laws known as the Decalogue, or Ten Commandments.  These Laws are the very foundation of Judaism.  It is sad to say that those who have been entrusted to protect their communities using these Laws have now submitted to the lure of money and power.  Like Clifford Irving, they have perpetrated a hoax of epic proportions.  Enveloping themselves in the accoutrements of religion, such Pious Degenerates run their institutions according to the tenet of "Might makes Right."  The weak and the disenfranchised do not have a fighting chance.

 

You see, it is quite clear that the Jewish leaders in the world I live in do not believe in God – because if they did, they would have to – like the Rebbe of the Hasidic tale mentioned earlier – work to preserve the Laws and the values of God as expressed in the Torah.  It is not possible for them to believe in God given that they so flagrantly disregard His Law.

 

These Laws are not obscure – the books that contain explanations of the Laws are quite plentiful and available in many places.  It is not that the Laws are not known – it is that the Law is an inconvenient truth that serves to undermine the hoax being perpetrated on the public. 

 

Religious hypocrisy is a form of dissimulation that depends on appropriating the rhetoric of authenticity – the outwardly visible symbols of Judaism – while abusing the very internal realities of the faith.  When adultery, theft, immorality are promoted and protected as the values that such rabbis and leaders affirm, the situation of God's place in this world is placed in jeopardy.

 

While watching Frank Capra's "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" with one of my intimate disciples who is deeply aware of the things and persons that have undermined my life, I remarked that Jefferson Smith took his profound belief in the American Scripture – the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and Bill of Rights – and reached out to God to affirm those sacred texts.  In the end, Smith wins because America has remained true to those ideals.  It has maintained a system of government that is predicated upon those documents.

 

But in the case of Judaism today, Torah is a relative matter.

 

Torah is, as Faur repeats ad nauseum in "The Horizontal Society," now wrongly based on the private prerogative of the rabbi.  There is no objective yardstick by which we are all measured.  The Law is subjectivized and we are all left beholden to the corruption of a system that is run by the Pious Degenerates.  The system is bought and sold to the highest bidder. 

 

In order to ensure that change is off the table and the corrupt and venal status quo is maintained, voices of change are stifled and voices of compliance to the system as it is are lavished with material perks. 

 

The system is self-censoring and has created a bubble of insularity where a plethora of voices and ideas are a priori rejected and where information generated outside the enchanted sphere of the bubble is ignored.  Repentance within the Law is limited to those who are recognized as legitimate members of the bubble-world.  Those outside the bubble are completely exposed to the most venal attacks and to an immoral treatment that is meted out to those considered "aliens."

 

Such is a Jewish world of dissimulation, hypocrisy and illusions of tradition.

 

For Jews who still remain committed to the truth and to justice, the depredations of those who hold the strings of power are often too much to bear.  The temptation to become degenerate is powerful.  When you see others "getting away with it" and those committed to their integrity and dignity struggling mightily just to hold on to their lives, the rational thing to do is to go along with whatever gives you the least resistance.

 

But this Faustian bargain is the confirmation of Pious Degeneracy.  It is an affirmation that God is dead and that justice is out of reach.  As I discussed in my earlier essay on "Gaslighting," those who hold to the truth and to justice now find themselves locked out of the system.  We have been "gaslighted" by the Pious Degenerates.

  

But we can profitably recall the image of that great Rebbe who defied the expectations of his congregation – who thought that God could only be worshipped in the Synagogue – and did the simplest thing that he could do: Hearing the cries of a child, he heard the voice of the Lord and acted accordingly.

 

Those who would deny the cries of a child are not human beings. 

 

Those who try to pass themselves off as Pious as they allow the cries to continue, are Degenerates.  In spite of the fact that they themselves may not have caused those awful, piercing cries of the child, they live as witnesses to the pain of a child in need.  It is most certainly true that those who have inflicted that pain are most to blame, but when crimes committed in so public a fashion are rationalized by those in power, the will of God is thwarted and Religious Hypocrisy triumphs.

 

Repentance is the option that Man has to mark his failings and to restore justice to the world.  While God watches silently from on high, Man is left with the possibility of personal redemption.  Looking at the history that Sephardim have had to face, the collateral damage left at the side of the road has led to a vicious circle.  Those who have tried to break us out of the vicious circle are the ones who have most often been forced to pay the impossible cost demanded by the Pious Degenerates.

 

Sphere: Related Content

Aish, Meltdown, Jewish Social Networking

Followup (II): Obsession, Aish, Clarion Fund

by Joachim Martillo (ThorsProvoni@aol.com)

 

In Did Sheldon Adelson Fund Anti-Obama Propaganda DVD?, Richard Silverstein references a recently published NY Times article about Aish. It was entitled Important? If You Are, Torah Study Can Visit and provides circumstantial evidence of the role that Aish and other Jewish Zionist social-networking or religious organizations played in creating conditions for the Wall Street meltdown.

 

Aish haTorah likes to hang out with rich Jewish ignoramuses (like Sheldon Adelson) of the sort found all over Wall Street or the City of London. Because of Aish's crude simple-minded Zionism it became one of several conduits for spreading around all sorts of Neocon propaganda and racist anti-Muslim anti-Arab incitement, and in 2003 a lot of finance guys and other people more or less associated with Aish were passing around the idea that CDOs were essentially a sort of high yield low risk junk bond, which are normally high yield high risk.

 

Obviously, the claim is too good to be true, but it had a superficial plausibility. As long as the US economy is growing, housing values are likely to go up, and holders of subprime mortgages will eventually be able to refinance at affordable fixed rate mortgages -- and Neocons, whom Aish staff and many Wall Streeters treated like prophets spreading the word of God, promised a post-Iraq invasion economic boom as Iraqi state assets were privatized.

 

In contrast to a junk bond, which is generally tied to a single business, a CDO was a bundle of many mortgages, and in theory the possibility of total across-the-board default was extremely unlikely. From the standpoint of middle-level finance guys CDOs were marvelous because they could get rich on brokering deals and receiving fees without actually having to invest.

 

While there is some fraud associated with the meltdown albeit less than commonly believed, there has been a huge amount of gross fiduciary negligence and irresponsibility as well as possibly conspiracy in the actions of Neocons and Jewish Zionist social organizations in spreading hype about CDOs.

 

A lot of the money brokers reaped in fees can be reclaimed as fines for civil infractions after extremely long litigation, but far too many would get away with their ill-gotten gains.

 

Not only would my proposed solution work faster and more effectively to punish the guilty and fix the finance industry than SEC litigation in combination with the Bush bailout, but it does not have the obvious flaw of putting lots of money in the hands of people that have been totally asleep at the financial wheel for the last five years.

 

Overall, the Wall Street crisis supports my contention in Pre-State Zionism that understanding Jewish history is an absolute necessity in a world where Jews are so important politically and economically.

 

The NY Times article contains some truly errant nonsense that would be apparent to anyone with a good background in Eastern European Jewish studies. I am saddened that the reporter did not have the knowledge base to challenge the following ridiculous claim.

Rabbi Kenneth Brander, dean of the Center for the Jewish Future at Yeshiva University in New York, said the Aish program reflected a long tradition in Judaism of cooperation between the tribes of ancient Israel known as the Zebulun and the Issachar. "The Zebulun, the tribe of the merchants and business people, provided financially for the tribe of the Issachar," the rabbis and Torah scholars, he said. It is not the first such program to accommodate the wealthiest, either.

In reality, the pattern of alliance between religious "scholars" like the Aish haTorah rabbis and Jewish wealth like Wall Street Jews or Zionist Jewish political economic oligarchs like Adelson was for the most part the norm in E. Europe and provided the Jewish wealthy class with almost total control of Jewish intracommunal and extracommunal politics. (Sounds familiar doesn't it?)

 

Until the Hasidic Movement developed its own merchant class, it represented in many ways a rebellion of ordinary Jews (proste yidn) against such domination.

 

Somewhat later Israel Salanter founder of the Musar (Ethics) Movement took a principled stand against the corruption of Jewish religion by Jewish wealth. Unfortunately, his lessons have been almost entirely forgotten by Jews outside of groups like Neturei Karta.

 

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century Sholem Aleichem was already working on the short story collection entitled Menahem-Mendl that contained apparently humorous but really quite grim stories presaging today's tragedy of errors on Wall Street.

 

Sphere: Related Content

Endowment for Middle East Truth Funds Massive ‘Obsession’ DVD Distribution

In this article Richard Silverstein discusses more evidence for Sheldon Adelson's involvement in the distribution. I never considered the apparent equivalence of Aish and Clarion Fund personnel to exclude Adelson as a funding source for the Obsession project, and as my Israeli Orthodox informant points out, "Aish likes rich Jewish ignoramuses." Sphere: Related Content

For the Holidays!

 

Sphere: Related Content

islamozionism: A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties

With this article Wendy Mann introduces some of the historical themes of Zionist foreign policy and includes a badly formatted version of the important Oded Yinon essay entitled "A Strategy for Israel in the 1980's," which can also be found here in a more readable form.
Sphere: Related Content

legalienate: More Headline News from a Rational Empire

Michael Smith gives a good sense of the strangeness of contemporary American politics with this article. Robin Yassin-Kassab gives a sense of similar weirdness in contemporary Arab political discourse with his blog entry My Absence, and a Sad Marriage, which demonstrates how vacuous the American discussion of Arab politics is. Sphere: Related Content

Followup: Obsession, Aish, Clarion Fund

The Inside Scoop

by Joachim Martillo (ThorsProvoni@aol.com)

 

While I have some knowledge of the early days of Aish haTorah in the USA, my informant became familiar with the organization in Israel.

 

He knew the organization during the 80s when the Israel government gave it two large buildings facing the Haram al-Sharif. Aish fairly quickly expanded its complex to block the view of the Haram from many Jerusalem homes.

 

While the Aish staff at first did not have a particularly Zionist orientation, Aish haTorah as an organization was from the beginning "small z-zionist" (i.e., Zionism-accommodating) because its students were generally raised culturally albeit rarely ideologically Zionist. Such students could not easily be drawn away from Zionist thinking, and the attempt would have driven them away from the Yeshiva. 

 

Thus unlike other Baale Tshuvah (returnee) yeshivas (like Brovenders, Ohr Someah, and Devar Yerushalayim back then), Aish was rather more Zionistic without the full religious nationalism of yeshivas associated with the Mafdal political party or the Benei Akiva movement. 

 

As Aish ha-Torah began serious outreach and fundraising in the USA during the eighties and nineties, its Zionism became more explicit, but it still did not move into the Mafdal camp. It created the model for Birthright Israel with Jerusalem Fellowships targeting non-observant Americans. The program brought a group of Jewish kids to Israel, set up meetings for them with machers in the government and the military, and introduced them to the yeshiva. In order to prevent any challenge or confusion about the message, which is dumbed-down and fundamentalist, the program managers rejected any intelligent Modern Orthodox applicants for the fellowships.

 

Because of founder Noah Weinberg's inclusive philosophy, Aish ha-Torah has some resemblance to Chabad (Lubavitch) outreach.

 

Both organizations are willing to work with Jews on their own terms as long as their enthusiasm about Judaism is sincere.

 

Aish ha-Torah outreach rabbis differ from Chabad שליחים/שלוחים (shlichim/shluchim) by wearing modern non-hasidic garb.

 

Thus the Aish organization seems in many ways close to Mormon and evangelical oureach organizations.

 

To put it nicely, Aish literature and programs are not particularly intellectually challenging. The Aish yeshiva cannot point to any alumnus, who has achieved the status of noteworthy talmid hacham (scholar). Aish likes rich Jewish ignoramuses, and one should not be particularly surprised that the organization was badly hurt when the hi-tech bubble burst -- at least according to one fund-raiser.

 

Aish has long tentacles. It has taken over United Synagogue in Manchester, UK.

 

Support for Israel is a key factor in Aish's outreach and identity as an organization. From the Aish standpoint pro-Israel feeling is part of Jewishness and serves as the means by which Aish rabbis and staff can relate and connect to non-Orthodox Jews. Hasbarah (Zionist propaganda) has become a tool of Aish outreach since the Second Intifada, but there is still some political ambiguity in the organization because of the logic by which it defines genuine Jewishness. When the Union of Progressive Zionists sponsored Breaking the Silence, Aish initially supported this organizations right to remain part of the Israel on Campus Coalition but later back-pedaled because of internal pressure.

 

Note that Aish is not a particularly exceptional phenomenon in Modern Orthodox Judaism. Nowadays the older baale teshuva yeshivas serve modern orthodox Jewish youth as much as they do non-Orthodox Jewish young people. Today, every movement or trend within Orthodoxy has yeshivas targeting Jews with little Jewish education probably because most modern orthodox kids and even haredi kids in the US have deficient Jewish education.

 

Aish haTorah has gotten into trouble because it is the only pro-Israel orthodox movement with centers all over the world. Aish-LA is very big, but the organization is not always successful in its growth efforts. It failed to establish any important presence at Maryland colleges and basically abandoned the state.

 

In the past Aish has avoided controversy because it hurts their image of universal Jewish hospitality.  Also in the past their leaders, organizers and staff evinced no evidence of cynicism. They were simply true-believers, who could not understand how their behavior might upset others. Yet, the right-wing political bent of the current Aish is not surprising especially because the organization seems to have developed so many Christian fundamentalist friends.

 

In general Israel haredim including the leadership has been trending to the right. Once upon a time, Rav Shach forbade his followers to buy over the green line, but such behavior effectively belongs to an almost forgotten "ancient" pre-historical period. 

 

For a Muslim discussion of Aish, click True Talk 09/19/08. The initial segment interviews Alison Weir. At 29'40'' the topic turns to Aish.

 

 

Sphere: Related Content

French Version: One Economic Crisis or Two?

Vous avez dit : une crise économique ? N'en y aurait-il pas plutôt deux

Posté le 25.07.2008 par djamazz

Vous avez dit : une crise économique ? N'en y aurait-il pas plutôt deux, pour le même prix ?

Trop nombreux sont ces analystes économiques qui évitent de débattre du lien fondamental entre la crise des prêts immobiliers (subprimes) et l'augmentation des prix de produits de base, comme le pétrole. Un commentateur de la National Public Radio (américaine) a même osé affirmer que le problème des prêts immobiliers résultait d'un « échauffement » de l'économie sui generis. Rien ne saurait être plus éloigné de la vérité. L'effondrement des organismes de prêts immobiliers et le pétrole à 4-5 dollars le gallon sont les deux faces de la même erreur de calcul économique.


Vous avez dit : une crise économique ? N'en y aurait-il pas plutôt deux, pour le même prix ?

par Joachim Martillo

on EAAZI (Ethnic Ashkenazim Against Zionist Israel), 17 juillet 2008

http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/07/one-economic-crisis-or-two.html

traduit de l'anglais étazunien par Marcel Charbonnier

Trop nombreux sont ces analystes économiques qui évitent de débattre du lien fondamental entre la crise des prêts immobiliers (subprimes) et l'augmentation des prix de produits de base, comme le pétrole. Un commentateur de la National Public Radio (américaine) a même osé affirmer que le problème des prêts immobiliers résultait d'un « échauffement » de l'économie sui generis. Rien ne saurait être plus éloigné de la vérité. L'effondrement des organismes de prêts immobiliers et le pétrole à 4-5 dollars le gallon sont les deux faces de la même erreur de calcul économique.

Vous trouverez à ce lien (en anglais, ndt) un passage de mon étude Le lobby sioniste et la société israélienne The Israel Lobby and American Society. J'y ai ajouté les passages en rouge afin de clarifier la nature de l'inflation qui n'avait pas encore réussi à s'évincer elle-même, dans le secteur pétrolier, au moment où j'ai rédigé cette analyse.

Le concept de 'subprime', en matière de prêt immobilier, trouve son modèle dans le vol des propriétés des Palestiniens dans les territoires palestiniens occupés, qui sont revendus à des détenteurs de prêts immobiliers juifs impécunieux. Voir à ce lien : Scamming Americans Robbing Palestinians.

Si le système israélien a 'fonctionné', c'est parce que les Etats-Unis n'ont cessé de financer la croissance économique israélienne, en particulier dans le secteur des technologies de pointe, durant les années 1980, au moyen d'aide financière gratuite accordée au gouvernement israélien sous l'empire des accords de Camp David, et en raison du fait que les Etats-Unis ont financé une expansion du nombre de candidat sionistes au logement, en aidant à la réinstallation de juifs soviétiques et ex-soviétiques en Israël (oups : en Palestine volée et occupée).

A l'époque du décollage du boom Internet, aux Etats-Unis, le secteur des technologies de pointe israélien, financé par les gouvernements américain et israélien, fut enclin à profiter de l'aubaine, et travailla d'arrache-pied afin de transformer le boom de l'Internet en la bulle de l'Internet, au moyen de la manipulation de réseaux socio-affairistes juifs non-officiels, qui existaient depuis longtemps au sein de l'industrie financière américaine, et que les sionistes américains et le gouvernement israélien se sont ingéniés à transformer, depuis les années 1970 (à travers des organisations telles que Aish haTorah) en un réseau social juif sioniste transnational israélo-américain, extrêmement soudé, caractérisé par une culture épistémique sioniste.

Une fois la bulle Internet installée, l'étape suivante consista à déménager les techniques du financement immobilier israéliennes des Territoires occupés vers les Etats-Unis, et cela creusa le lit du désastre des subprimes.

Le lobby israélien et la société américaine : l'échec du friedmanisme et la panique de Bernanke

Israel Lobby and American Society:
The Failure of Friedmanism and Bernanke's Panic

Durant le remodelage de la société américaine par les néoconservateurs, les Etats-Unis ont commencé à ressembler à la gare centrale du pays de l'Islamophobie, avec des attaques légales contre des associations caritatives musulmanes, contre des investissements arabes, la persécution de militants pro-palestiniens, des efforts visant à expulser des universitaires musulmans, la campagne politique visant à diaboliser Barak Obama, car musulman [Obama versus the Israel Lobby ], et la tentative des dirigeants juifs pour imposer un test d'allégeance à Israël aux musulmans avant qu'ils puissent participer totalement à la vie politique américaine.

En raison de la manipulation de l'économie américaine par la Judonie et le gouvernement israélien, cette islamophobie représente désormais une menace pour l'ensemble des Américains.

Le fait de réduire les impôts tout en faisant marcher la planche à billets pour mener la « guerre contre le terrorisme » a eu pour effet de créer des conditions économiques grosses d'une menace d'inflation rampante, en dépréciant la monnaie, avec une augmentation concomitante du prix des produits importés. Greenspan et Bernanke ont réagi en augmentant graduellement les taux d'intérêt.

Si le plan néoconservateur friedmanien consistant à privatiser l'économie irakienne, puis l'économie libanaise, puis l'économie soudanaise, puis l'économie iranienne après le succès de séquences de guerre, d'interventions et de changements de régime politique, les nouveaux canaux de revenus coloniaux auraient pu générer une réelle croissance, qui aurait fait augmenter la valeur des biens immobiliers. Seulement voilà, le programme a foiré, dans chacun de ces pays, et Bernanke a augmenté les taux de prêt, tandis que la valeur des biens immobiliers connaissait une stagnation. Résultat : Bernanke a provoqué l'effondrement du marché des subprimes, et il a plongé les Etats-Unis dans la récession, voire, possiblement, dans la dépression économique, tandis que la valeur du dollar ne cessait de s'effriter inexorablement.

Pour sauver (leur) économie, les Etats-Unis ont besoin d'une croissance authentique, qui est pratiquement impossible à obtenir tant que les Etats-Unis continueront à brûler du fric dans l'occupation de l'Irak. Les garants des banques de Wall Street, comme Bear Stearns, aident trois groupes indissociables, constitués de certains membres de la Judonie, des plus puissants des représentants des réseaux ethniques juifs dans l'industrie de la finance et des amis du Président.

Non seulement de tels cadeaux monétaires aux riches et aux puissants n'apportent strictement aucun bénéfice à l'immense majorité des Américains, mais ils représentent une reprise du sauvetage financier, déjà mentionné, des membres de l'aristocratie allemande durant la Longue Dépression, qui a débuté en 1873.

A ce stade, les Arabes du Golfe et le gouvernement chinois ont autant intérêt à sauver l'économie américaine que les Américains ordinaires, parce que les Arabes sont riches en dollars, tandis que les Chinois détiennent une quantité effroyables de créances des Etats-Unis. Pourtant, en raison des tentatives déployées par Summers et ses amis, visant à pérenniser la domination des juifs sur Wall Street [Zionist Control: Sovereign Wealth Funds?], la tentative de vamper les musulmans d'organisations telles que le David Project, la xénophobie obsédée de sécurité qui a fait queuter l'acquisition d'Unocal (pétrolière américaine) par Cnooc (pétrolière chinoise) [Chinese Drop Bid To Buy U.S. Oil Firm ], et la tentative de la communauté juive organisée de détourner l'attention des crimes israéliens et néocons en Palestine, en Irak et au Liban en diffamant le Soudan et la Chine, les investisseurs arabes et le gouvernement chinois sont réticents à apporter le fric nécessaire et à déployer les efforts indispensables pour sauver l'économie américaine, même si cela leur serait vraisemblablement profitable, et même si cela aurait pour effet de protéger la valeur de leurs avoirs actuels aux Etats-Unis.

Mercredi 23 Juillet 2008

Sphere: Related Content