Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

How The Deep State Controls Social Media and Digitally Assassinates Critics

By Robert David Steele | American Herald Tribune | November 7, 2107

This is a speculative account based on personal experience and broad reading. In no way is it a substitute for a proper legal discovery process – but it could be useful in guiding such a process.

The recent arbitrary deletion with no appeal by Twitter of two accounts – one belonging to my friend Alt-Right white male Roger Stone [1] and the other to an Alt-Left black female activist who goes by the name of “Charlie Peach” [2] and reminds me of my friend Cynthia McKinney, [3] should be the death rattle of #GoogleGestapo. If Roger Stone and “Charlie Peach” were to sue Twitter together, in combination with my own lawsuit against three apparatchiks and their many co-conspirators, [4] and the new potentially formidable case by Prager University against Google, YouTube, and DOES 1-25, [5] I believe these three cases and perhaps others might converge in a most constructive manner assuredly in the public interest. The above juxtaposition is important – the Deep State is seeking to censor and in some cases digitally assassinate both those on the right and those on the left who challenge official narratives. This is discrimination based on political affiliation or belief.

While I identify the Deep State as the ultimate antagonist, it is the Zionists who have refined the system that the Deep State now uses to control social media and digitally assassinate critics and those espousing conservative values or support for the US Constitution as well as opposition to the prevailing “Israel First” mantra at the federal, state, and local levels. [6] “Hate speech” and related filters are code for repressing those critical of the Zionist and Deep State narratives, known in the aggregate as “Alternative Media.” [7]

I have found it helpful to distinguish early on between a few very powerful extremist Zionists who serve a foreign agenda that calls for the complete subversion of the United States of America (USA) and other countries, and millions of loyal decent Jews world-wide, nine million of whom reside in the USA. My focus is on a limited number of extremists who are certain they are above all laws; they do not represent decent Jews – or the established religion of Judaism – as a whole. My focus is also only on social media control, not on other methods used by the Zionists to subvert entire countries. [8]

In combination with false flag [9] events that perpetuate a climate of fear and astronomic levels of spending on a militarized domestic total surveillance and control system in which police forces abandon community-based policing and go straight to treating the public as the enemy, with a complicit Mainstream Media (MSM), #GoogleGestapo has emerged as the social control mechanism of the 21st Century, not only blocking over 400 websites [10] (I suspect the number is much higher) but censoring millions and digitally assassinating tens of thousands of individuals, many of them in the USA. The intent of the Deep State has recently been made clear by one of its fronts, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR): dissidents and those who question authority should be treated as “domestic terrorists.” [11]

I do not address the related issue of #GoogleGestapo as a global surveillance [12] enterprise violating all rights to anonymity, identity, privacy, and security – my focus here and now is on discrimination. [13]

It bears noting in passing that Fourth Amendment protections against search and seizure do not apply to third party cloud holdings – this is yet another sucking chest wound in the GooglePlex waiting for the law to catch up.

The Prager University team includes Alan Dershowitz, who is both a celebrated scholar and defense lawyer and an Israel Firster [14] – a mixed blessing when one is suing a Zionist system that is relied upon by the Deep State. Having this enormous but conflicted talent on the team reminds me of the Warren Commission, where Allen Dulles, the mastermind of the John F. Kennedy (JFK) assassination, was put on the Commission by Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ), the man who signed JFK’s death warrant, to ensure that the falsehoods being put forward by the government were adhered to. [15] The Plaintiffs may wish to consider adding someone like Judge Andrew Napolitano to their team, and be most wary of Dershowitz negotiating a pro forma settlement behind the scenes that results in a limited victory that forestalls the much larger Title 7 challenge to the entire #GoogleGestapo system administered for the Deep State by the Zionists. I predict You Tube will quickly restore the videos in question and apologize, so as to stop this case, potentially the Title 7 [16] case of the century, from going to discovery, trial, and logical expansion.

Here is a simple example of a discovery question that the Prager U team could ask, given that they have over fifty videos that have been banned from YouTube:

Provide a list of all banned videos in the past five years, the specific reasons why each video was banned; and the identity of and contact information for each of the related individuals or organizations for each of the banned videos.

This matters because no one, anywhere, has been able to compile a list of all banned videos. The legal discovery process is the only means by which we can compel the revelation of this vital information while assuring that the resulting information is of evidentiary quality.

Properly done, a larger challenge would also document through a legal discovery process – and then hold accountable – organizations such as Kaspersky, Rolling Stone, Slate, Mother Jones, and others that have been lazy and allowed Zionist trolls to “game” their reporting systems and digitally assassinate individuals critical of Zionist Israel (or skeptical of the Deep State narrative) by submitting false reports of bullying, spamming, hating, and even – the latest – “X-Rated Content” such that entire web sites are blocked from being accessed. As Congress has recently determined, the social media endeavors – which should be but are not regulated as public utilities [17] – have been cutting corners on screening content, and been severely remiss in both technical and human quality control. [18] As most cases against the #GoogleGestapo monolith should show if legal discovery is pursued, there is both a failure to be serious in terms of properly screening content, and a double standard – those that agree with the Deep State – or serve the needs of the Deep State – are allowed to threaten assassination, spew hateful language, and crowd-stalk at will. Those that do not agree with the Deep State are at the capricious mercy of an unregulated system that excels at censorship and crowd-stalking with impunity. [19]

#GoogleGestapo Overview

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and In-Q-Tel, both early sponsors of Google and other social media innovations, clearly understood the value of these enterprises to create a desired “total surveillance” architecture. [20] It was the Zionists, however, who appear to have perfected a pervasive blend of people, organizations, and technologies to achieve persistent and pervasive censorship and crowd-stalking that is now in the service of the Deep State, both in the USA and around the world.

Below are the key elements of #GoogleGestapo based on my broad reading and direct personal experience. Pending proper legal discovery, I speculate that all levels are connected – this is a system.

• Deep State – banking families including Vatican, City of London, Wall Street [21]
• Zionist Government of Israel/Benjamin Netanyahu/Mossad [22]
• American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Anti-Defamation League (ADL) [23]
• Eric Schmidt, Arnon Milchan, George Soros, Media Matters and many more
• Complicit Internet services companies including Facebook, MeetUp, Twitter
• Paid sub-contractors that do live-streaming defamation on command
• Paid trolls — Israeli reservists, ADL, Media Matters and others
• Volunteer trolls too stupid to know they are being lied to — sayonim
• Dumb algorithms and lack of investment in ethics, human oversight, etc. by design
• “Shadow banning” (demonetization), subscription list neutralization, service cancellation [24]
• Lack of government regulation, not holding social media to anti-discrimination standards

Not included in my own experience with #GoogleGestapo, but highly pertinent to YouTube’s lack of professionalism in both algorithms and human quality control and respect for customers given the ease with which false reports can destroy entire channels, is the entire matter of grand-fathered changed terms of service, moronic keyword and meta data restrictions, and malicious copyright strikes (to include the destruction of negative reviews of a product) and copyright extortion. [25]

My Personal Experience

Live-Streamed Defamation

On 13 June I did a live-streamed interview with George Webb, whom I respect very much. He was being “handled” at the time by one Jason Goodman with Patricia Negron as his partner. In the course of that interview, [26] I raised the prospect of Goodman himself being handled – perhaps unwittingly – by the Mossad. I speculate now that legal discovery will reveal both monthly payments to Goodman on the order of $3,000 a month, and a pattern of email and cellular contacts suggestive that Goodman has been taking direction, first toward undermining George Webb (who was getting too close to the truth about the Awan brothers being patsies for a Mossad operation via Debbie Wasserman Schultz, spying on and blackmailing Members of Congress) and then #UNRIG, Earth Intelligence Network, and me. [27]

From that day forward, Goodman began a campaign of defamation, video slander, crowd-stalking libelous commentary, and tortuous interference that I have carefully documented. I will not litigate this case in public. Goodman and his many co-conspirators will have their day in court – but I note with interest that YouTube, a surrogate of Google, has not – despite my repeated complaints – deleted any of the many slanderous videos by Goodman, Negon, and “Queen Tut” now known to be Susan Lutzky. Based on my personal experience, I speculate that #GoogleGestapo – the full list of elements yet to be defined through legal discovery – is a co-conspirator with those who seek to manipulate public perception with aggressive character assassination and discrimination, the “Alt Right” and pro-Trumpers being top targets at this time. [28]

YouTube appears to be the most prominent element within which slander and libel occur daily – those with pro-Zionist opinions who parrot the government party line are protected – they slander and libel with impunity – while those who challenge Zionist atrocities and improprieties and the government party line find themselves de-monetized (“shadow-banned”) or digitally assassinated – in many cases an entire life’s work destroyed – with no recourse.

Below is a table of specific slanderous videos posted to YouTube (in red), and specific libelous crowd-stalking endeavors against third party videos (in black) in which I am interviewed, correlated with the collapse of our non-profit educational crowd-funding campaign at IndieGoGo (in green). [29]

Troll Armies – from Israel to Media Matters to the Sayonim

In my speculative view based on my direct experience, the Zionists have perfected the use of human trolls and automated bots; one overtly active Mossad collaborator can inspire a crowd-stalking campaign that mobilizes over 400 distinctly identifiable trolls and bots (my best guess is one third human, two thirds artificial). While I have no direct knowledge, my understanding from secondary sources is that there is a clear division of labor between Israeli Army reservists based in Israel, the primary Zionist agents in the USA, not only the ADL but also its parent organization AIPAC, and specific sympathetic organizations such as Media Matters, whose “troll army” has been widely publicized.

Then there are the sayonim. These are volunteers who buy the Zionist “party line” and dedicate themselves to destroying anyone they see as an “enemy” of the Zionists. I have dealt personally with many such individuals who have emailed me, and it is with great sadness that I report my impression that these people, while well-intentioned, are out of touch with reality and often poorly educated.

Below is a partial listing of specific trolls for whom I have in hand copies of defamatory statements suitable for submission to a Court, for YouTube only. I have another list and copies of defamatory statements for Facebook. Every single one of these individuals is discoverable in true name via legal discovery, and can be held to account as a crowd-stalker and co-conspirator.

In my direct personal experience, these troll armies are very capable at persistent pervasive crowd-stalking. Every YouTube channel I have appeared on has been attacked (not just current, but past), to the point that most of my hosts have been forced to disable all comments, depriving the honest viewers of the interaction that I take pains to provide when not being crowd-stalked. Many hosts have not invited me to return, perhaps influenced by the demonetization (“shadow-banning”) of any interview with me rather than the substance of my work that led to my being recommended for the Nobel Peace Prize in January 2017. [30]

These crowd-stalkers have also, on occasion, succeeded in getting videos deleted by marshalling multiple reports of “bullying” which is patently absurd in my case, but effective when YouTube is lazy (or complicit). Here is one case of a perfectly reasonable interview deleted by YouTube – there are others.

Steele, Robert, with Kenneth Ameduri, “Another False Flag? What Evidence Shows Us About The Las Vegas Shooting,” Crush the Street (Audio, 30:57), October 17, 2017.

In my direct personal experience, these crowd-stalkers are skilled at destroying fund-raising campaigns, to include pursuing all 1,500 Facebook shares (in the case of the #UNRIG IndieGoGo-Generosity campaign) such that a campaign raising $29,237.44 the month prior to the crowd-stalking, can quickly be brought down to $8,054.14, then $4,733.41, then $1,200 or so in two subsequent earnings. The most recent was $542.51.

In my direct personal experience, these crowd-stalkers engage in campaigns of defamation intended to make their target destitute. Apart from alienating all possible donors, funding channels such as IndieGoGo and PayPal appear to receive hundreds of emails claiming that a particular individual, organization, or campaign is a scam or a fraud. To their great credit, both IndieGoGo and PayPal have proven to be steady level-headed organizations able to discern such obvious defamation endeavors in my specific case, but I am troubled by some instances where they have closed accounts on the basis of what appear to me to be both illegal and often capricious discriminatory actions.

In my direct personal experience, these crowd-stalkers do not read. They worship at the altar of video and social media blurbs. They are so myopic that they are incapable of visiting my personal website where my life’s work is free online, including two books with Forewords by US Senators, and my recent recommendation for the Nobel Peace Prize. [31]

Media “Hit Jobs” On Demand

I appeared on Alex Jones’ InfoWars on 29 June 2017, speaking for two hours on the subject of pedophilia. [32] Few people know that I am both a Commissioner for the International Tribunal for International Justice (INTJ) [33] and its project on elite pedophilia led by Chief Justice Sir John Walsh of Brannaugh, and I am also nurturing a book by West Point graduate Joachim Hagopian, Pedophilia & Empire: Satan, Sodomy, and the Deep State. [34] My remarks clearly scared at least one major pedophile in the media world. On the very same day, Ben Collins at The Daily Beast published a story intended to discredit me, “NASA Denies That It’s Running a Child Slave Colony on Mars,” that was quickly repeated by Peter Holley of The Washington Post and then a number of other international outlets. [35] This stuff does not happen by accident. This was a hit job.

During a two-hour interview with Alex Jones, I spoke in depth about pedophilia and the fatal exploitation of children (on Earth), including their murder and the harvesting of their blood, body parts, and bone marrow. Only at the very end, in answer to a caller who in retrospect may have been setting me up, did I address children sent into space on “20 year and out missions” to leverage growth while in transit; and an existing colony on Mars, established fifteen years ago, with 10,000 people there now. [36]

The Daily Beast conflated these three completely separate factual concepts to discredit me. I believe that legal discovery will determine that Ben Collins was “fed” the conflated false story and lacked the integrity to refuse the lead. Who, exactly, put Ben Collins on to this story and authorized the follow on by The Washington Post is discoverable by due legal process. If I had to guess, I would look to Media Matters, which is led by an individual with some serious issues, and “ruthlessly targets conservatives.” [37]

This aspect of #GoogleGestapo represents the total complicity between the MSM and the new social media control network – the larger “system” is comprehensive and includes – in addition to the ability to marshal public communications including Hollywood movies – the ability to interfere with commercial contracts.

Meet-Up Pro Account Termination

In early July 2017, when Cynthia McKinney agreed to join me in leading #UNRIG, [38] a non-violent fact-based alternative to #RESIST, I committed to a $77,300 per year paid professional MeetUp network of 435 fully-integrated MeetUps (one for each Congressional District). At the same time I published the below concept graphic for billboards and bumper stickers.

Almost immediately (with notification to me on 14 July via email), the CEO of MeetUp, Scott Heiferman, appears to have personally ordered the cancellation of our 435 MeetUps, giving up $77,300 in revenue. This is the same CEO who is collaborating with the ADL to sponsor 1,087 #RESIST MeetUps for whom the fees have been waived – hence MeetUp appears to be providing an illegal, undeclared, in-kind donation to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) of over $195,000 dollars. The ADL is the co-sponsor of all 1,087 #RESIST MeetUps. I speculate – subject to legal discovery at the appropriate time and place – that the ADL directed Scott Heiferman to cancel our #UNRIG professional network. [39] This action was so outrageous it inspired the below cartoon by Robert Ocegueda.

I would not be at all surprised to learn that the ADL (or its higher master, AIPAC), provided $77,300 to Meet-Up as a covert substitute payment, and perhaps also paid the $195,000 in “waived” fees. All of this is discoverable by due process of law.

Denial of Service Attacks

When all else fails, do denial of service attacks. We have been shut down for as long as a week. Fortunately these brute force attacks – while demanding time and money to defeat – are moderately moronic. I have much more admiration for the manner in which the Zionists subvert otherwise well-intentioned institutions (including in my own experience, the various newspapers in the United Kingdom (UK) that very stupidly censor commentators reported by the Zionists to be spammers and haters, without bothering to actually read the content in question).

It has been amusing for me to trace some of these denial of service attacks to rogue elements of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) as well as Delphi in Ashburn, Virginia. If and when a full legal discovery process can take place, specific chains of command can be identified.

X-Ratings Across Microsoft via Kaspersky

I don’t make this stuff up. A fan – we have millions of them – sent me the below graphic.

Kaspersky 6e1ce

Kaspersky is not stupid – they are just lazy, as are all others who rely on automated processes to filter out individuals and sites on the basis of what are largely false reports from Zionist trolls.

What the above really means is that the Zionists have successfully fooled Kaspersky – and perhaps Norton and others – into X-rating a non-profit educational website that sets the gold standard for truth in public service. This means that citizens in libraries, universities, and government agencies as well as corporations who have legitimate needs for access to truthful information are being blocked by Zionists who have mastered the art of censoring information critical of Zionist Israel or the larger Deep State.

As someone who has managed a false flag operation for the CIA, and who is a top published author on the topics of deep state, false flag operations, pedophilia, and fake news (and rarely but sometimes about the holocaust and Zionist subversion), I speculate that my non-profit educational website is triggering just about every flagword on the Deep State / Zionist watchlist – a watchlist that is “Top Secret” and not subject to any form of Congressional or judicial oversight. The First Amendment consequences are staggering, completely apart from a global conspiracy to commit tortuous interference against hundreds of thousands in not millions of individuals and organizations.

My Personal Conclusions

All Paths Lead to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL)

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) appears to be the Zionist social media spy service and enforcer. [40] In the early years of social media, the ADL and the Zionist Information Operations (IO) units – generally reservists is Israel – appear to have perfected the art of digital assassination. Anyone critical of Israel and Zionist atrocities (such as the genociding of the Palestinians) or calling for the boycott of Israel in social media was immediately “reported” by no fewer than twelve Zionist trolls as being a spammer, a hater, or – as has been used to successfully cause the deletion of three interviews of me at YouTube [41] – a “bully.” They seem to have perfected the art of gaming the system – from Kaspersky to Rolling Stone to Slate to Mother Jones and all other sites, the “system” is on automatic pilot and anytime twelve or more “reports” come in, they are assumed to be authentic and the person being reported is automatically assassinated – banned, blocked, deleted or in the case of Kaspersky, “X-Rated.” I experienced this personally and found that none of the organizations where this process works to the Zionists’ complete satisfaction are competent at detecting and neutralizing digital assassination – nor do they care – they are part of the system, with malice aforethought.

#GoogleGestapo: A Work in Progress

Eric Schmidt was hired by Larry Page and Sergei Brin to build Google after they stole Yahoo’s search engine, [42] received funding from Dr. Rick Steinheiser in CIA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD), [43] and picked up the best and the brightest from Alta Vista that was suffering under Hewlett Packard (HP) dysfunctionality. [44] It was probably Schmidt that master-minded the illegal, undeclared in-kind contributions from Google to the Hillary Clinton campaign, manipulating search results so that “Hillary + Crime” become just Hillary, and “Trump” became Trump plus Hitler. [45] Schmidt went on to create a virtual Censorship Board that included Facebook and Twitter and others, and began actively manipulating, across all social media, not just searches, but polls and trending. Most recently Twitter has admitted that in the weeks leading up to Election Day it repressed substantial numbers of tweets critical of Hillary Clinton or referring to alleged pedophile John Podesta’s emails. [46] Today I see the Censorship Board actively demonetizing, [47] censoring, and assassinating – digitally assassinating – anyone who they judge to be a source of “fake news” which is to say, any source that disputes the MSM and USG narratives that are so obviously false themselves.

I have learned recently that Eric Schmidt is so proud of his Censorship Board [48] and his ability to control, censor, and manipulate social media, that he has offered this system to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) – Communist China. Imagine the irony. Made in the USA by Zionists, totally satisfactory to Communist China. [49]

I must also observe that Google appears to have become an alternative to the CIA, a full-fledged covert operations organization where Zionist Jared Cohen is totally enamored of regime change operations and the digital assassination of dissidents [50] in every dictatorship the USA loves (which is to say, all of them less North Korea and Cuba), [51] and the active manipulation of information to serve his Deep State masters including the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) – the same organization that has recommended that US citizen dissidents be treated as “domestic terrorists.” [52]

The Zionist Double-Standard

What is quite clear to me is that no one is holding the Zionists (or other elements of the Deep State) accountable. For all of the misplaced focus on Russian efforts to “hack” the election – a pack of lies that I and others have compellingly challenged [53] – no one has raised the obvious point that the pernicious influence of Israel is everywhere and the Zionist attacks on all of us are carried out with impunity.

A double-standard appears to exist. It is “okay” for Zionists to call for the assassination of Barack Obama, or Donald Trump, or Roger Stone on Twitter, Facebook, or YouTube, but it is not “okay” for Prager University, [54] to take the most important case of our time, to espouse conservative values consistent with the US Constitution and all that it represents; nor is it “okay” for me to question the official narrative despite my unique qualifications for doing so as a former spy who has managed a false flag and covert media influence operations, and is in passing the top Amazon reviewer for non-fiction who has also been recommended for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Snap-Shot of the Zionist Attack Machine: Six Ways, Ninety Days

Using #UNRIG and myself as a case study, I speculate – subject to legal discovery – that I have seen #GoogleGestapo apply against #UNRIG, Earth Intelligence Network and me a total of six methods in ninety days (there may be more).

01 The ordering of a paid asset to begin a 90-day defamation campaign including many lies, mobilizing many others to do crowd-stalking and actively libel me, perhaps with some assurance of indemnity (coverage of the eventual award from a federal lawsuit).

02 The ordering of a Media Matters hit-job that reached over 25 million people

03 The ordering of Meet-Up to shut down a legitimate non-profit educational campaign, sacrificing $77,300 in revenue (perhaps paying the same amount covertly)

04 The mobilization of over 400 distinct trolls and bots to defame, slander, libel, and otherwise interfere with the legitimate election reform civics education campaign of my non-profit educational corporation, focused on censoring my public appearances and cutting off all donations.

05 The ordering of multiple denial of service attacks against my primary blog.

06 The mobilization of over 400 distinct trolls and bots to report http://phibetaiota.net as an X-rated website to be blocked across governments, corporations, libraries, and other institutions.

All of this is personal speculation pending a legal discovery process – I have written all of this down because I am worried that the emerging legal cases will be “gamed” through settlements that forego legal discovery documenting a much larger systemic conspiracy – a global racketeering network inimical to democracy, freedom, peace, and prosperity.

Conclusion

All of the social media enterprises appear to be vulnerable to a massive Title 7 discrimination lawsuit. I believe that Prager University is making a mistake in limiting its focus to YouTube, a Google surrogate, alone.

As my own experience suggests, there is a larger construct of control and I am quite certain that if Prager University and its superb legal team plan for a jury trial and discovery along the lines I have outlined above, they will find that this is a vaster conspiracy than they imagined (they are being attacked at multiple points, not just through the deletion of a few videos); that it has been deliberately constructed by Eric Schmidt and others serving Zion; and if they can legally discover and document this conspiracy in detail, then they are eligible for triple damages as well as a place of honor among those who defend the First Amendment specifically and the US Constitution generally.

The role of Alan Dershowitz within the Prager team is of some concern to me. Absent the lead lawyers understanding that he is an Israel Firster, it is possible they will allow him to gut their case down to a simple restoration of a few videos, rather than the systemic discovery of a conspiracy that must be exposed in detail, and eradicated, if we are to restore democracy and the rule of law in the USA while ending the scourge of predatory digital censorship and assassination world-wide.

There is a middle ground but I doubt that the social media mandarins are ready to consider the following accommodations to the public interest – if Alan Dershowitz can make this happen, he will have served us all very well and I will be the first to acknowledge his national service.

01 Restore all banned videos and posts going back in time except those that violate copyright or are defamatory – end false copyright strikes (e.g. against negative reviews) and end copyright extortion;

02 Establish a clear demonetization policy approved by advertisers and open to all for review;

03 Respect all providers of content without exception: create a 24/7 appeals process with real humans and maintain a publicly accessible list of every banned and demonetized video or post with a clear explanation of why it was banned or demonetized;

04 Respect all reports of defamation without exception: create a 24/7 delete and ban process with real humans and maintain a publicly accessible list of every instance of defamation that has been acted upon.

05 Require all subscribers to have one identity only; end trolls and end bots.

06 End the role of the ADL and others as preferred “fact-checkers” – reject Israel First and specifically protect all criticism of Israel and all calls for a boycott of Israel.

07 Agree that all Internet services providers are de facto public utilities and earnestly abide by Title 7.

All of this is my personal opinion, not a legal commentary. I believe we are beginning a 1,000 year cycle of peace and prosperity; #GoogleGestapo can reform itself, or it can be replaced. The collective is rising.

*(Image credit: Snapshout courtesy of The Alex Jones Channel/ YouTube)

Endnotes

[1] Sonam Sheth, “Roger Stone plans to sue Twitter for suspending his account,” BusinessInsider.com, 29 October 2017.

[2] Editors, “‘I’m looking to sue’: Black activist says Twitter banned her as ‘Russian bot’,” Newline.com, 26 October 2017.

[3] I founded #UNRIG and was pleased to have Dr. Cynthia McKinney agree to not only join the non-profit educational campaign, but assume total responsibility for the people side of the campaign – creating and nurturing civics “PowerCells” – while I pursue crypto solutions (Crypto-Value, Crypto-Voice, Crypto-Tools, and Crypto-Intelligence). Learn more at http://unrig.net.

[4] Jason Goodman, Patricia Negron, and “Queen Tut” now known to be Susan Lutzke, have been served. The original complaint, soon to be expanded and amended, can be seen at http://tinyurl.com/Steele-vs-Goodman. I will not litigate this case in social media or published articles – I trust the Court and Jury to render fair judgment on the basis of both my own evidence and evidence discovered through due process of the law.

[5] Prager University, “Prager University (PragerU) Takes Legal Action Against Google and YouTube for Discrimination,” Press Release, 24 October 2017. The Complaint for Damages, Injunctive Relief, and Declaratory Judgment demanding a Jury Trial was filed on 10/23 and served on 11/1. DOES 1-25 is probably an open-ended reference to 25 specific individuals to be identified as the case goes forward and discovery is undertaken. As of 5 November 21 of the banned videos are available for viewing via the following: Rachel del Guidice, “Watch the 21 PragerU Videos That YouTube Is Censoring,” The Daily Signal, 14 October 2016. The editors have been asked to update the post to include the 50+ banned videos as of today.

[6] Outrage is growing across the USA against the Zionists. From pedophilia to legislation that would make it felony to criticize Israel and call for a boycott of Israel, to the Las Vegas massacre and associated financial crimes, to the recent discovery that many state and local leaders are mandating that no one can receive disaster relief or even have a contract with their state or local government unless they swear to never boycott Israel, the Israel First versus America First confrontation has never been more obvious to so many.

[7] Arnold, Steve, “Revealing the Google Relevance Sins,” Beyond Search, 2 May 2017 and Arnold, Steve, “Google and Hate Speech: None of This I Know It When I See It,” Beyond Search, 7 June 2017. See also 21st Century Wire, “Google Is the Engine of Censorship,” GlobalResearch.ca, 11 August 2017; Andre Damon, “Google Turning into Censorship Engine,” GlobalReseach.ca, 5 August 2017 and Andre Damon, “Google’s chief search engineer legitimizes new censorship algorithm,” World Socialist Web Site, 31 July 2017; Susan Duclos, “Google-YouTube Goes Full Nazi Against Independent Media – Hiding ‘Controversial Content’ And ‘Redirecting’ Searches,” AllNewPipeline.com, 2 August 2017; Peter Hasson, “Anti-Corporate Voices On Both Right And Left Claim Google Censorship,” Daily Caller, 31 August 2017; David North, “An Open Letter to Google: Stop the Censorship of the Internet!GlobalResearch.ca, 25 August 2017; Michael Nunez, “Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News,” Gizmodo, 9 May 2016; Valentina Palladino, “YouTube clarifies “hate speech” definition and which videos won’t be monetized,” ArsTechnica.com, 2 June 2017; Bethania Palma, “Facebook Introduces Measure to Block Advertisements From Sites That Share Fake News,” Snopes.com, 28 August 2017.

Robert Parry, “NYT Cheers the Rise of Censorship Algorithms,” ConsoritumNews.com, 2 May 2017 and my favorite, Whitney Webb, “YouTube Moves To Censor “Controversial” Content – Brings ADL On Board As Flagger,” MintPressNews.com, 7 August 2017.

[8] Related but far beyond the scope of this carefully focused work are Zionist controls over banking, entertainment, and media; Zionist use of “crypto-Jews” who over generations remain deeply devout but penetrate other religious hierarchies as well as institutions inherent hostile to Zionists; and inter-marriage to include very calculated targeting of brides from prominent non-Jewish families that comprise the non-Zionist “establishment.”

[9] As a spy I managed a false flag event for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) – no one died. Since leaving CIA and particularly since 9/11 I have published and spoken extensively on false flag events in which some people do die, and the budget-building nature of these events in which most domestic terrorists appear to be entrapment operations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Cf. Trevor Aaronson, The Terror Factory: Inside the FBI’s Manufactured War on Terrorism (Ig Publishing, 2013). An excellent summary review of this book that studies 175 court cases across the USA can be read at Orange Alert!

[10] Thomas Dishaw, “Bookmark This: Over 400 Links Google Doesn’t Want You To Visit,” Government Slaves, 29 August 2017; Eric Sommer, “Google Censors Block Access to CounterPunch and Other Progressive Sites,” CounterPunch, 9 August 2017. The best over-all review is Robert Epstein, “The New Censorship: How did Google become the internet’s censor and master manipulator, blocking access to millions of websites?US News & World Report, 22 June 2016.

[11] David Byman, “Should We Treat Domestic Terrorists the Way We Treat ISIS? What Works—and What Doesn’t,” Foreign Affairs, 3 October 2017.

[12] Editors, “Facebook admits “oversight” after leak reveals internal research on vulnerable children,” CBS News, 1 May 2017; Editors, “Google Spying on Credit Card Spending to See if Ads Work Raises Privacy Concerns,” SputnikNews.com, 24 May 2017; Christopher Ketcham and Travis Kelly, “The Cloud Panopticon: Google, Cloud Computing and the Surveillance-Industrial-Complex,CounterPunch, 12 May 2017; John Naughton, “Google, not GCHQ, is the truly chilling spy network,” The Guardian, 18 June 2017.

[13] Christopher Ketcham and Travis Kelly, “The Cloud Panopticon: Google, Cloud Computing and the Surveillance-Industrial-Complex,” CounterPunch, 12 May 2017.  The following quotes are most helpful:

“’In legal terms, Google is in the Wild West,’ says Bankston. ‘The law hasn’t kept up.’

“But one of the big problems with the cloud, and the danger it presents, is that the Fourth Amendment’s protections against search and seizure do not apply. The caveats are buried deep in the text that users usually skip over, and click “I agree,” to install a new application. But the consequences are huge, says Bankston. ‘When private data is held by a third party like Google, the Supreme Court has ruled that you ‘assume the risk’ of disclosure of that data.’ When you store e-mail at Gmail – or, similarly, in the cloud at Yahoo or Hotmail – ‘you lose your constitutional protections immediately.’”

[14] Editors, “Alan Dershowitz,” Wikipedia, undated, accessed 3 November 2017.

[15] David Talbot, The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government (Harper Perennial, 2016). My summary review, which is “shadow-banned” by Amazon – itself part of the #GoogleGestapo system that censors with impunity – can be seen at 6-Star Reference for President Donald Trump — John Brennan Using Allen Dulles Playbook.

[16] Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, covers discriminatory practices and redress. While the language refers only to employees it appears to be applicable in practice to customers and the general public. One Department of Labor online notice entitled “Discrimination Is Against the Law,” undated, accessed 3 November 2017, says  this: “These types of discrimination are against the law[:] A program that is covered by one of the laws mentioned at the top of this poster is not allowed to discriminate on any of the following bases (types of discrimination): For customers, applicants, employees, and the general public: • race • color • national origin • religion• sex • age • disability • political affiliation or belief.” It is the latter – political affiliation or belief – that applies to Roger Stone, “Charlie Peach,” Prager University, and those of us who oppose the pernicious influence of Zionists within the USA. The matter of how “fake news” can be arbitrated and moderated, and who has the authority to censor anyone exercising their First Amendment rights including the right to put forward beliefs and opinions contrary to all evidence if evidence is considered, does not appear to be adequately addressed by existing law in as much as the US Constitution, as amended, has been thrown out by the Deep State and is not being respected – from power of the purse to the power to declare war, Congress appears to be in enemy hands. What we do know is that both the USG and MSM lie to the public (and to the Courts) on a regular basis, and it is most difficult for “Alternative Media” to get treated fairly by the social media counterparts – including fund-raising channels – to the MSM.

[17] Ryan Brim, “Steve Bannon Wants Facebook and Google Regulated Like Utilities,” The Intercept, 27 July 2017.

[18] Cf. Philip Ewing, “Tough Questions, Hours Of Hearings But No Silver Bullet On Russian Tech Interference,” NPR.org, 2 November 2017. Both Congress and the social media enterprises continue to be hypocritical in pursuing the Russians as the primary offenders. The only person that hacked the US elections was Hillary Clinton, who stole 13 primary elections from Bernie Sanders (who knew it and went along) and was then blocked from doing the same thing to Donald Trump in the general election. Cf. Editors, “Graphic: How Hillary Clinton Stole the Democratic Nomination from Bernie Sanders — and Did Not Legally Win the Popular Vote,” Phi Beta Iota Public Intelligence Blog, 16 November 2017, with link to Axel Geijsel and Rodolfo Cortes Barragan, “Are we witnessing a dishonest election? A between state comparison based on the used voting procedures of the 2016 Democratic Party Primary for the Presidency of the United States of America,” White Paper, 7 June 2016 and other sources. My own two best analytic products are Steele, Robert. The Soft Coup Collapses – Blackmail Revealed – What Next?: CIA was bluffing, produced no evidence – Russians did not “hack” the election. Is this the beginning of the end of the Deep State in the USA? (Trump Revolution Series Book 6), Amazon Kindle, 7 January 2017 and Steele, Robert. Donald Trump, The Accidental President, Under Siege! (Trump Revolution Series Book 5), Amazon Kindle, 11 November, 2016. It is the Zionists – the Debbie Wasserman Schultz Awan Brothers case and of course Jeffrey Epstein’s covert operations – and our own CIA and FBI as well as National Security Agency (NSA) – that are spying on and blackmailing politicians, judges, celebrities, and selected bankers. These hearings are “fake news” and we can only hope that the Prager University case is not settled in a fake way – restoring 50+ videos and a quit claim when in fact the entire system could be exposed and dismantled.

[19] A really excellent contrast is provided by Michelle Malkin, “YouTube Banned Me, But Not the Hate Imams,” CNSNews.com, 7 June 2017.

[20] Nafeez Ahmed, “How the CIA made Google: Inside the secret network behind mass surveillance, endless war, and Skynet—part 1,” Medium.com, 22 January 2015; Deidre Fulton, “Revealed: CIA Funding Companies that Specialize in Social Media Spying,” CommonDreams.org, 15 April 2016.

[21] This work is not focusing on political enablers such as the “two-party tyranny” that legalizes high crimes by the Deep State, nor covert operations by elements of the USG. As unconstitutional as both of those may be, the primary focus here is on the private sector “system” known as #GoogleGestapo. On the two-party tyranny legalizing Deep State crime, see Matt Taibbi, Griftopia: A Story of Bankers, Politicians, and the Most Audacious Power Grab in American History (Spiegel & Grau, 2011) and Matt Taibbi, The Divide: American Injustice in the Age of the Wealth Gap (Spiegel & Grau, 2014). For an excellent article about covert government operations, using a British case, see Glenn Greenwald, “How Covert Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive, and Destroy Reputations,” The Intercept, 24 February 2014. I feel personally blessed to have always been supported by CIA in my post-government authorship, to include rapid approval of major books on intelligence reform by the Publications Review Board (PRB). I have the impression that most of the “dirty tricks” of this sort in the USA are based at Fort Meade and done by a mix of NSA contractors and US Army reservists. I do believe that CIA, the FBI, and NSA are actively spying on and blackmailing Members of Congress, but that is another story for another day.

[22] The Mossad was among the first of the national intelligence agencies to understand that software was the next frontier for spying.  From the mid-1980’s they excelled at both penetrating national, state, and local governments and law enforcement agencies with compromised software, and also overtly bidding for contracts to provide software and hardware services that enabled them to easily compromise the content of every client they served – the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the National Security Agency (NSA) are in my view totally compromised by the Zionists. A classic book on this subject is Martin Dillon and Gordon Thomas, Robert Maxwell, Israel’s Superspy: The Life and Murder of a Media Mogul (Carroll & Graf, 2002). My summary review, “shadow-banned” by Amazon, can be seen here: Riveting, Shocking, Eye-Opening, and Credible.

[23] Both of these are easily classified as unregistered agents of a foreign power but they have successfully avoided being held to account for failing to register, easily one of the reasons Israel supported the assassination of John F. Kennedy (the other was Kennedy’s insistence that CIA stop providing Israel with clandestine delivery of nuclear weapons components). Yitzhak  Rabin was in Dallas for the assassination and appears to have been Israel’s official representation to the assassination cabal led by Allen Dulles and protected by Lyndon Baines Johnson. See among multiple other sources Michael Collins Piper, “Israel’s Central Role in JFK Assassination,” Rense.com, 1 August 2010; and Phil Giraldi, “Should AIPAC Register as a Foreign Agent?The American Conservative, 29 July 2017.

[24] In my direct experience, YouTube is “neutralizing” the subscription lists of leading Alternative Truth channels such as those of Jordan Sather and Sarah Westall, the latter a business professor. I know people who have had their MailChimp and other accounts arbitrarily suspended. This along with “shadow banning” through de-monetization are the primary “light” censorship protocols. There is some evidence Google and YouTube are rethinking their blatant censorship – videos of Cynthia McKinney that were once demonetized have suddenly been remonetized, and many of the interviews with me are being allowed to earn ad revenue. Some of the demonetization is very legitimate – advertisers have a right to appear only in relation to content they favor – but a legal discovery process will probably find that YouTube has been weaponized against both the left and the right.

[25] The single best summary I have found to date, including many case studies with links, is Maximillian Laumeister, “Google is Deleting Your Favorite YouTube Channels, And They Won’t Say Why,” MaxLaumeister.com, 12 May 2016.

[26] Jason Goodman, Patricia Negron, and George Webb with Robert Steele, “Robert David Steele,” Crowd Source the Truth (YouTube, 51:30), 13 June 2017.

[27] Mongoose, “AWANGATE – Joint CIA-Mossad Operations to Spy on US Congress? Debbie Wasserman Schultz Indictable? Phi Beta Iota Public Intelligence Blog, 28 August 2017.  As a former spy familiar with how our system works, I speculate that the CIA and perhaps the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have been complicit in both Mossad spying on Congress directly, and the use of Jeffrey Epstein to entrap politicians, judges, and others through the “Lolita Island” and “no-name hotel” pedophilia complex. Learn more at Epstein @ Phi Beta Iota.

[28] Adi Robertson, “Two months ago, the internet tried to banish Nazis. No one knows if it worked,” The Verge, 9 October 2017 has provided a superb overview of recent discrimination against the Alt-Right while failing to observe that Charlottesville was a contrived false flag event intended to make the Alt Right vulnerable. The article also provides a useful review of “Alt Tech” endeavors to create a post-Google Internet, with BitChute being notable as an alternative to YouTube. Several evaluations of Charlottesville are provided by Owl, “Charlottesville False Flag — Professional Hit, Paid Protesters? UPDATE 9 Jim Fetzer Outlines False Flag Anomalies,” Phi Beta Iota Public Intelligence Blog, 14 August 2017.

[29] #UNRIG: Summer of Peace, Generosity, from June 2017. Donations from those who wish to resist Zionist exploitation of US social media are especially invited.

[30] Jan Kalvik, “Intelligence & the Nobel Peace Prize,” Defence and Intelligence Norway, 6 February 2017; and Nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize: Robert David Steele, undated, accessed 4 November 2017.

[31] http://robertdavidsteele.com.

[32] Steele, Robert, with Alex Jones, “Alex Jones (FULL SHOW Commercial Free) Thursday 6/29/17: Today’s News, Robert David Steele #UNRIG,” InfoWars (YouTube, 3:01:12), June 29, 2017. Steele starts at 48:00. The ITNJ of which I am a Commissioner was so dismayed by the media hit job (next note) that they immediately published an extract from the two-hour interview to showcase the statements about pedophilia that appear to have frightened the pedophiles in positions of media power, Steele, Robert, with Alex Jones, “#UNRIG – Robert David Steele on the Alex Jones Show 6/29/17 – excerpts,” Committee to Support the International Tribunal, July 1, 2017.

[33] https://www.itnj.org/.

[34] Joachim Hagopian, Pedophilia & Empire: Satan, Sodomy, and the Deep State (Joachim Hagopian, on-going 2017). My Foreword and the first nine chapters are both free online and available as Kindle Shorts for 99 cents each. Access both via “Joachim Hagopian: Pedophilia & Empire – Satan, Sodomy, & the Deep State UPDATE 10 Kindles Up,” Phi Beta Iota Public Intelligence Blog, 2 July 2017. A memorable short url is http://tinyurl.com/pedoempire.

[35] The two links below contain both a link to the original articles and my open letter to each author. “Ben Collins: NASA Denies It Kidnaps Children for 20-Year+ Missions to Mars UPDATE 1,” Phi Beta Iota Public Intelligence Blog, 1 July 2017; and “Robert Steele with Peter Holley: NASA, Kidnapped Children, Mars — Open Letter,” Phi Beta Iota Public Intelligence Blog, 3 July 2017.

[36] I was briefed on this personally by a retired PhD from NASA in July 2017, in the presence of other international figures, and I absolutely believe what I was told.

[37] Rachel Alexander, “Astroturf ‘Outrage Machine’ of Paid Trolls Floods Social Media to Counteract Negative News About Hillary Clinton,” The Stream, 9 October 2017. . In an earlier article the same author outlines Media Matters partners, “American Bridge 21st Century will provide research. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, is an ethics watchdog group similar to Judicial Watch. Shareblue is a social media firm.” Rachael Alexander, “LEAKED: Media Matters’ Secret Plan to Destroy Conservatives,” The Stream, 22 August 2017. See also Jerome R. Corsi, “Leaked Docs: David Brock Conspires with Facebook, Google to Shut Down Conservative Media,” NotionalValueBlogspot.com, 9 February 2017. For a direct source, see Media Matters, “Donor Pitch,” Freebeacon.com, January 2017. Articles that focus on foreign troll armies, such as Leo Benedictus, “Invasion of the troll armies: from Russian Trump supporters to Turkish state stooges,” The Guardian, 6 November 2016, are very deliberately avoiding the “third rail” in banking, entertainment, government, and media: the Zionist “machine.”

[38] http://unrig.net and also http://tinyurl.com/IndieGoGo-UNRIG.

[39] MeetUp @ Phi Beta Iota.

[40] The ADL is the front end for the B’Nai Brith, the oldest Jewish service organization in the world, established in 1843. According to Wikipedia, 95% of its membership is in the USA, leading me to speculate the various agents of Israel (a foreign power) see the USA as the single most important nation-state to be subverted, controlled, and exploited (e.g. by instigating wars that serve Israel on the basis of false flag operations and other lies).

[41] Steele, Robert, with Kenneth Ameduri, “Another False Flag? What Evidence Shows Us About The Las Vegas Shooting,” Crush the Street (Audio, 30:57), October 17, 2017; Steele, Robert, with Sarah Westfall, “Robert David Steele: Las Vegas Massacre False Flag Case Study,” Business Game Changers (You Tube, 54:48), October 7, 2017. New: BitChute to overcome #GoogleGestapo deletion by YouTube; Steele, Robert. “MGM Execs Made $190M On Insider Trading -Las Vegas Update,” Victurus Libertas, October 6, 2017. Note: new spreadsheet shows $297M in insider trading. YouTube (a Google surrogate) has restored the second reference two times now – there is clearly a business discussion going on within YouTube – the more they discriminate, the more people are moving to DTube, BitChute, Steemit and other alternatives. There is growing demand for a post-Google Internet that cannot be censored or manipulated.

[42] Saul Hansell, “TECHNOLOGY; Google and Yahoo Settle Dispute Over Search Patent,” New York Times, 10 August 2004.

[43] Supra Note 13, Ketcham and Kelly. This was announced at my Open Source Solutions Conference in 2006 by Stephen E. Arnold himself author of The Google Trilogy.

[44] As I recollect the situation from various conversations with others Alta Vista was a demo project for Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) which was acquired by Compaq and then Compaq was acquired by HP.  Neglected by HP and saddled with DEC “ovens” many but not all of the best and the brightest from Alta Vista quit and went to work for Google – these hires were the primary reason Google search worked as it did. Had HP understood the potential of Alta Vista, they would own it still today and Google would not exist – Alta Vista would be Google Plus.

[45] Jack Hadfield, “Report: Google Search Bias Protecting Hillary Clinton Confirmed in Experiment,” Breitbart.com, 13 September 2016, and Robert Epstein, “Research Proves Google Manipulates Millions to Favor Clinton,” Sputniknews.com, 12 September 2016. By its very nature #GoogleGestapo is designed to produce refutations of such accusations, see for example Don Evon, “Collusion Confusion: A viral video accused the search engine of manipulating results in favor of Hillary Clinton,” Snopes.com, 10 June 2016, declaring this to be FALSE. Whom are we to believe? It is the absence of integrity across the system that needs to be addressed, the persistence and pervasiveness of #GoogleGestapo – and the Zionist’s exploitation of the system – are merely symptoms of the disease. A prolonged legal discovery process, perhaps led by a convergence of multiple lawsuits, could move beyond speculation and informed but unproven accusations, and actually document the inter-locking personalities, tools, and techniques used to achieve both deliberate and casual discrimination against individuals and organizations across the spectrum. New law is needed, starting with the determination that social media services are public utilities subject to the most rigorous enforcement of existing laws against discrimination.

[46] Jerome Corsi, “Twitter Admits to Blocking Anti-Hillary Tweets During 2016 Campaign,” InfoWars.com, 2 November 2017; and Tyler Durden, “Twitter Admits It Buried “Podesta Email”, DNC Tweets Ahead Of The Presidential Election,” ZeroHedge.com, 2 November 2017. And then there are those allegedly out-of-control employees: Lucas Tolan, “Disgruntled Twitter Employee Temporarily Deletes President Trump’s Personal Account,” Breitbart, 2 November 2017.

[47] The most famous and blatant case of demonetization was that of Alex Jones and InfoWars. AdSense, a Google surrogate, declared InfoWars a purveyor of “fake news” and deprived his organization of $3.5 million dollars in advertising earnings in relation to his coverage of the PizzaGate story based on John Podesta emails suggestive of a major pedophilia network involving both political and media personalities, one of whom is known to have been James Alefantis’ gay lover. The speed with which Alex Jones backed down on a perfectly legitimate story is suggestive of the coercive power of #GoogleGestapo. See Roberto Villalpando, “Infowars’ Alex Jones apologizes for spreading fake ‘Pizzagate’ story,” Austin American-Statesman, 26 March 2017. I reject the notion that PizzaGate was fake news – the panic that it inspired among the elite – many of them pedophiles – is sufficient to suggest that this was close to the mark. PizzaGate played a major role in opening the public mind to the reality that pedophilia is “the last veil” that once removed, will destroy the 1%.  PizzaGate was also the first major test of the Internet as a battleground between citizen investigators and #GoogleGestapo. Cf. Jasun Horsley, “David Brock, Invasion 4Chan, the Alt-Right, & Pizzagate,” Auticulture, 4 December 2016.

“David Brock and Correct the Record played a central role in a massive and long-term covert campaign of perception management that spans both Republican and Democratic parties. It involves the “infiltration” of 4chan and the illegitimate use of more mainstream social networking sites (reddit, twitter) in order to redirect and undermine public political debate, polarize opinion, and help “populate and co-opt” an alt-“Alt-right” movement to be associated with racism, misogyny, fascism, anti-Semitism, conspiracy theories, and ‘fake news.’ Many of the agendas, and even players, involved in this can now be seen to congregate in or around the viral memeplex known as Pizzagate.’”

[48] Poynter’s International “fact-checking network” includes Snopes, Factcheck.org, ABC News, and Politifact, but behind the scenes the primary “aggressive” fact-checker is the ADL. Its funders are the enemies of democracy, including the Gates Foundation, Google, the Omidyar Network, and the Open Source Foundation (OSF).

[49] #GoogleGestapo @ Phi Beta Iota.

[50] Julian Assange, “Google Is Not What It Seems,” Wikileaks.org, 2014. The below is a quote from Assange:

“Cohen’s directorate appeared to cross over from public relations and “corporate responsibility” work into active corporate intervention in foreign affairs at a level that is normally reserved for states. Jared Cohen could be wryly named Google’s ‘director of regime change.’”

[51] (Ambassador) Mark Palmer, Breaking the Real Axis of Evil: How to Oust the World’s Last Dictators by 2025 (Rowman & Littlefield, 2003). My summary review can be read at Single Most Important Work of the Century for American Moral Diplomacy.

[52] Supra Note 11, David Byman.

[53] Supra Note 18, Soft Coup. The CIA report, on page A-13, actually states in black and white that its findings are not based on evidence. See also many posts with linked sources under Russians @ Phi Beta Iota.

[54] Prager University, “Prager University (PragerU) Takes Legal Action Against Google and YouTube for Discrimination,” Press Release, 24 October 2017.

November 7, 2017 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Ritual Defamation: A Contemporary Academic Example

By Daniel McGowan | Dissident Voice | September 22, 2017

The term ritual defamation was coined by Laird Wilcox to describe the destruction of the reputation of a person by unfair, wrongful, or malicious speech or publication. The defamation is in retaliation for opinions expressed by the victim, with the intention of silencing that person’s influence, and making an example of him so as to discourage similar “insensitivity” to subjects currently ruled as taboo. It is aggressive, organized and skillfully applied, often by a representative of a special interest group, such as, ironically, the Anti-Defamation League.

Ritual defamation is not called “ritual” because it follows any prescribed religious or mystical doctrine, nor is it embraced in any particular document or scripture. Rather, it is ritualistic because it follows a predictable, stereotyped pattern which embraces a number of elements, as in a ritual.

Laird Wilcox enumerated eight basic elements of a ritual defamation:

First, the victim must have violated a particular taboo, usually by expressing or identifying with a forbidden attitude, opinion or belief.

Second, the defamers condemn the character of the victim, never offering more than a perfunctory challenge to the particular attitudes, opinions or beliefs the victim expressed or implied. Character assassination is its primary tool.

Third, the defamers avoid engaging in any kind of debate over the truthfulness or reasonableness of what has been expressed. Their goal is not discussion but rather condemnation, censorship and repression.

Fourth, the victim is usually someone who is vulnerable to public opinion, although perhaps in a very modest way. It could be a schoolteacher, writer, businessman, minor official, or merely an outspoken citizen; visibility enhances vulnerability to ritual defamation.

Fifth, an attempt is made to involve others in the defamation. In the case of a public official, other public officials will be urged to denounce the offender. In the case of a student, other students will be called upon; in the case of a professor, other professors will be asked to join the condemnation.

Sixth, in order for a ritual defamation to be most effective, the victim must be dehumanized to the extent that he becomes identical with the offending attitude, opinion or belief, and in a manner which distorts his views to the point where they appear at their most extreme. For example, a victim who is defamed as a “subversive” will be identified with the worst images of subversion, such as espionage, terrorism or treason.

Seventh, the defamation tries to bring pressure and humiliation on the victim from every quarter, including family and friends. If the victim has school children, they may be taunted and ridiculed as a consequence of adverse publicity. If the victim is employed, he may be fired from his job. If the victim belongs to clubs or associations, other members may be urged to expel him.

Eighth, any explanation the victim may offer is dismissed as irrelevant. To claim truth as a defense for a tabooed opinion or belief is treated as defiance and only compounds the offense. Ritual defamation is often not necessarily an issue of being wrong or incorrect but rather of “insensitivity” and failing to observe social taboos.

Ritual defamation is not used to persuade, but rather to punish. It is used to hurt, to intimidate, to destroy, and to persecute, and to avoid the dialogue, debate and discussion that free speech implies. Its obvious maliciousness is often hidden behind the dictates of political correctness and required sensitivity to established myths.

Ritual Defamation at Hobart and William Smith Colleges: A Textbook Example

In the September 2009 I wrote an op-ed for the local newspaper, The Finger Lakes Times, defining “Holocaust Denial.” It was submitted in response to the media frenzy and demonization of Iranian President Ahmadinejad, who was scheduled to address the UN General Assembly. After several delays, it was published on September 27 under a quarter-page picture of Ahmadinejad and under the headline “What do deniers really mean? (See Appendix 1)

Although the definition I presented has been widely accepted, both by those who affirm and by those who contest or “revise” the current narrative of the Holocaust, and although the facts I presented were not challenged, the op-ed sparked a classical case of ritual defamation. Questioning the Holocaust narrative, or even defining what it means to question it, is arguably the most serious taboo in the United States today. It is considered “beyond the pale” and even touching the subject is like touching the third rail on the subway – instant death to your career.

First Blood

On October 3 a “colleague” from the Education Department, James MaKinster, “facilitated” a smear letter, signed by six additional colleagues, and circulated it by email to over 300 other professors and people in the Hobart and William Smith Colleges community. Their letter was addressed to the colleges’ President Mark Gearan; it denounced me with lies and insidious innuendos and demanded the revocation of my status as a faculty emeritus.

I heard about the MaKinster letter quite by happenstance soon after it was circulated, but neither the President nor any of the original seven who signed it was willing to provide me with a copy. It was not until May 2011 some 20 months later that I finally got a copy of the email version, not of the final letter with all the signatures. (See Appendix 2)

My Response

In a vain attempt to clear my name and set the record straight I sent a message to the entire community rebutting the charges made in the MaKinster smear letter. I stated that:

1. Contrary to the feigned outrage of my ritual defamers as to the date of publishing the op-ed, I had nothing to do with the timing of the article and make no apology for when it appeared vis-à-vis a Jewish holiday.

2. My ritual defamers’ egregious claim to know my “personal beliefs” and their claim that I used my title to give them credence was untrue. Nowhere were my personal beliefs stated. Moreover, my article included an exceptionally long disclaimer showing The Colleges neither condone nor condemn what I had written.

3. My ritual defamers’ claim that “Holocaust denial carries absolutely no weight among academic scholars in any field whatsoever” was also untrue. There are a number of scholars who dare to criticize the typical Holocaust narrative and are willing to fight the slime hurled at them by ardent Zionists who feel it their duty to protect the current version that serves as the sword and shield of apartheid Israel. (As a footnote, our former provost and former dean of women (both Jewish) demanded that I not use the word “apartheid” in connection with Israel. Although the term was used in the Israeli press and later by ex-President Jimmy Carter, they did not consider it to be “suitable discourse” on our campus where, ironically, we routinely claim to support free speech and diversity of opinion.)

4. My ritual defamers said that “denying undisputed facts of the holocaust (sic) is not a way to show support for the Palestinians.” First, the three tenets of Holocaust revisionism are clearly not “undisputed.” To the contrary, these taboos are hotly and passionately disputed; people’s lives are ruined when they dispute these “facts” or even mention them. In fourteen countries you can get jail time for disputing “facts” surrounding the Holocaust.

Second, disputing purported facts is what science and historical analysis are all about. We academics have no problem discussing and disputing whether or not Jesus Christ is truly the son of God, or if President Obama’s birth certificate is real, or if Jewish slaves built the Egyptian pyramids, or if Roosevelt knew a Japanese attack on Hawaii was imminent, but we are not allowed to discuss or dispute the six-million figure, which was bantered about before World War I. (Yes, before World War I; see for example, “Dr. Paul Nathan’s View of Russian Massacre”, The New York Times, March 25, 1906.) To question the six million figure on most American campuses is simply taboo.

Finally, what gives these ritual defamers the credentials to pontificate on what supports or hurts Palestinians? None of them are experts on Palestine and none are activists for Palestinian human rights. To the contrary, some of them have been responsible for feting at Hobart and William Smith Colleges anti-Palestinian demagogues including Elie Wiesel and even Benyamin Netanyahu. They have also endorsed giving Madeleine Albright our highest humanitarian award, which was not only ironic, but disgraceful in light of her statement that the deaths of over 500,000 Iraqi children were “worth it”.

5. Labeling Holocaust revisionism “Holocaust denial” is unwarrantedly pejorative. It might be fine for Fox News, but it is not conducive to, and often precludes, intelligent discourse. To call Holocaust revisionism “thinly veiled anti-Semitism” is simply untrue and it defames scholars and others, including Jews, who question the Holocaust doctrine as we are fed it in hundreds of films, books, articles, and commentaries. Terms like Holocaust Industry, Holocaust Fatigue, Holocaust professional, Holocaust wannabes, and Holocaust High Priest were not coined by “deniers” or anti-Semites; they were coined by Jews. (The High Priest quip is an obvious reference to Elie Wiesel; it was made by Tova Reich in her book My Holocaust. Tova’s husband, Walter Reich, was the former director of the US Holocaust Museum in Washington.)

In 1946 the US government told us that 20 million people were murdered by Hitler. Now that figure is said to be 11 million; it has been “revised” downward and literally carved in stone at the US Holocaust Memorial. For years we were told that over 4 million were killed at Auschwitz alone, but by the early 1990s that figure was “revised” downward to 1.5 million. Wiesel tells us that people were thrown alive onto pyres; he claims to have seen it with his own eyes; today even Israeli-trained guides at Auschwitz say that is not true. They have already “revised” his narrative. These are but a few examples of historical revisionism, examples that not inherently anti-Semitic and no longer considered taboo.

6. It is most interesting to see academic colleagues say, “(a)s we all know … the term ‘ethnic cleansing’ was introduced to make genocide sound more palatable.” That means they either deny that Palestinians have been (and continue to be) ethnically cleansed or they agree that Israel is performing genocide on the Palestinian people.

7. While the ritual defamers found my piece to be “abhorrent,” they seemed unable to find fault with a single fact I presented. So they resorted to name-calling and labeled the piece “hate speech” and “unsupported vitriol” and smeared my name to hundreds of people. I am surprised that the Anti-Defamation League or the Mossad did not come knocking on my door.

8. The ritual defamers genuinely were concerned about the op-ed’s impact on our Jewish students, staff, and faculty. But maybe it is time for all members of the community to see the Holocaust for what it really was and not the unquestionable, unimpeachable, doctrine that makes Jewish suffering superior to that of other people. Maybe it is time to recognize that Zionism as a political movement to create a Jewish state in Palestine began long before the Holocaust and that Zionist discrimination, dehumanization, and dispossession of the Palestinian people should not be excused by it. Maybe it is time to see that since over half the population (within the borders controlled by Israel) is not Jewish, the dream of creating a Jewish state has failed. Walling in the non-Jews or putting them in Bantustans or driving them into Jordan will not make Israel a Jewish state. Nationalistic allegiance to “blood and soil” has been a failure in Germany and in Israel. That should be the real lesson of the Holocaust.

9. To say that my op-ed “does not meet our expectation of minimally rational and minimally humane discourse” is pure nonsense. The piece is well written, well substantiated, and quite humane.

10. The ritual defamers are quite right about one thing; they were deeply disturbed and saddened to see a Hobart and William Smith Colleges’ title attached to it, even with a lengthy disclaimer. Diversity and perspectives outside the mainstream are to be encouraged, but not if they question Jewish power, Israel, or Holocaust doctrine. Apparently those topics are totally taboo.

11. The demand to President Gearan to remove my title of Professor Emeritus is both classic and stupid. Would it save Hobart and William Smith Colleges from being associated with my writings? Of course not; I would simply become “Former Professor Emeritus at Hobart and William Smith Colleges” with no disclaimer.

But what it would really do is to cast me into the briar patch with Norman Finkelstein, Marc Ellis, Paul Eisen, Henry Herskovitz, Gilad Atzmon, Rich Siegel, and Hedy Epstein (a Holocaust survivor), all friends of mine and all anti-Zionists.

Lest I seem irreverent or unscathed by this widely-circulated smear letter from my ritual defamers, allow me to admit that I have been hurt by it. Many faculty and other HWS folks now shun me as a persona non grata largely because they only read the slime and never my rebuttal. My former student and long-time friend, David Deming, who is now the Chair of the HWS Board does not answer my letters. President Gearan does not answer them either. Board member Roy Dexheimer, disparages me and wonders if I fell “off my meds.” Another Board member, Stuart Pilch, took it a step further and made a threatening phone call to my home with a promise “to hunt me down.”

Recourse? Most Doors are Closed

For twenty months I did not know the contents of the MaKinster email. When I discovered it as an email draft, my first inclination was to sue him and the other six faculty members who circulated it. I wanted to sue for libel and defamation of character. I knew it would be expensive, but I was determined to correct the lies they had spread about me. The problem was that in New York State the statute of limitations for libel is one year from the date it was committed, not one year from the date it was discovered.

I went to the Provost, who is the head of our faculty, and asked her to get me a copy of the final letter as it was sent to President Gearan. (I had seen only the email draft of it shown in Appendix 2) I wanted a copy of the final letter including the names of all those ritual defamers who had signed it — MaKinster and the six other “facilitators” and any others of the 300 they sent it to who might have also signed). She refused on the grounds of “confidentiality”.

I went to the President and asked for a copy; he refused. I asked MaKinster; he refused to give me a copy of the letter and refused to meet with me to discuss it. I asked the other six “facilitators”. Three agreed to meet with me, but were unable to give me a copy of the final letter. They all told me that they thought additional people had signed, but they could not or would not name a single one for sure. Like MaKinster, the remaining three “colleagues” refused to meet with me or give me a copy of what they had collectively written in their smear letter.

I went to The Grievance Committee, but I was told that I could not bring the issue before it, since that committee does not hear such matters. I asked to address the faculty at large, but I was told that only faculty can attend an HWS Faculty Meeting and not those who are retired, with or without emeritus status.

I tried a market approach and publicly offered a $1,000 contribution to Hobart and William Smith Colleges in return for a final copy of the MaKinster ritual defamation letter with the names of all signatories. The offer was made by email to all current faculty members. No response. I raised the offer to $1,500. Some faculty called on me to stop; some even charged me with smearing MaKinster. Others counseled me to “turn the other cheek” and “get over it.”

But others thought that withholding the letter and the names of those who signed it was “cowardly,” “inappropriate,” and “unethical.” They asked rhetorically if my critics should not “openly stand by their words and acts?” They supported my right to peacefully and non-violently discover the smears and slime thrown at me by “colleagues” who now piously claim their right to anonymity.

Via college email to all members of the faculty I raised the public offer to $2,000, then $2,500, then $3,000, and so forth. At $5,000 the current acting Provost and long-time friend, Pat McGuire, came to my home (11/22/11) to discuss the “situation” and to advise that my email offers were annoying some people and that Hobart and William Smith Colleges was considering restricting or terminating my email privileges. I raised the offer to $10,000, not by campus-wide email, but in specific offers to several alumni.

Resolution?

Not yet. But I am optimistic. I have been a part of the Hobart and William Smith Colleges community for almost 40 years. I am proud of my record of teaching and activism on behalf of Palestinian human rights. And I am proud of having fought against academic hypocrisy and cowardice, especially when it comes to Israel.

I am also proud that Hobart and William Smith Colleges did not completely roll over to the ritual defamation initiated (or facilitated) by otherwise well-meaning “colleagues,” especially by those who are too cowardly to reveal or defend their participation in this injustice. And I am eternally thankful that the institution has allowed me to keep my emeritus status and my walking pass at the gym.

Appendix 1

Finger Lakes Times, September 27, 2009, Section D, p.1+ (not available on line)

What Does Holocaust Denial Really Mean?

In April 2007 the European Union agreed to set jail sentences up to three years for those who deny or trivialize the Holocaust.1 More recently, in response to the remarks of Bishop Richard Williamson, the Pope has proclaimed that Holocaust denial is “intolerable and altogether unacceptable.”

But what does Holocaust denial really mean? Begin with the word Holocaust. The Holocaust2 (spelled with a capital H) refers to the killing of six million Jews by the Nazis during World War II. It is supposed to be the German’s “Final Solution” to the Jewish problem. Much of the systematic extermination was to have taken place in concentration camps by shooting, gassing, and burning alive innocent Jewish victims of the Third Reich.

People like Germar Rudolf, Ernst Zundel, and Bishop Williamson who do not believe this account and who dare to say so in public are reviled as bigots, anti-Semites, racists, and worse. Their alternate historical scenarios are not termed simply revisionist, but are demeaned as Holocaust denial. Rudolf and Zundel were shipped to Germany where they were tried, convicted, and sentenced to three and five years, respectively.

Politicians deride Holocaust revisionist papers and conferences as “beyond the pale of international discourse and acceptable behavior.”3 Non-Zionist Jews who participate in such revisionism, like Rabbi Dovid Weiss of the Neturei Karta, are denounced as “self-haters” and are shunned and spat upon. Even Professor Norman Finkelstein, whose parents were both Holocaust survivors and who wrote the book, The Holocaust Industry, has been branded a Holocaust denier.

But putting aside the virile hate directed against those who question the veracity of the typical Holocaust narrative, what is it that these people believe and say at the risk of imprisonment and bodily harm? For most Holocaust revisionists or deniers if you prefer, their arguments boil down to three simple contentions:

1. Hitler’s “Final Solution” was intended to be ethnic cleansing, not extermination.

2. There were no homicidal gas chambers used by the Third Reich.

3. There were fewer than 6 million Jews killed of the 55 million who died in WWII.

Are these revisionist contentions so odious as to cause those who believe them to be reviled, beaten, and imprisoned? More importantly, is it possible that revisionist contentions are true, or even partially true, and that they are despised because they contradict the story of the Holocaust, a story which has been elevated to the level of a religion in hundreds of films, memorials, museums, and docu-dramas?

Is it sacrilegious to ask, “If Hitler was intent on extermination, how did Elie Wiesel, his father, and two of his sisters survive the worst period of incarceration at Auschwitz?” Wiesel claims that people were thrown alive into burning pits, yet even the Israeli-trained guides at Auschwitz refute this claim.

Is it really “beyond international discourse” to question the efficacy and the forensic evidence of homicidal gas chambers? If other myths, like making soap from human fat, have been dismissed as Allied war propaganda, why is it “unacceptable behavior” to ask if the gas chamber at Dachau was not reconstructed by the Americans because no other homicidal gas chamber could be found and used as evidence at the Nuremburg trials?

For more than fifty years Jewish scholars have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to document each Jewish victim of the Nazi Holocaust. The Nazis were German, obsessed with paperwork and recordkeeping. Yet only 3 million names have been collected and many of them died of natural causes. So why is it heresy to doubt that fewer than 6 million Jews were murdered in the Second World War?

“Holocaust Denial” might be no more eccentric or no more criminal than claiming the earth is flat, except that the Holocaust itself has been used as the sword and shield in the quest to build a Jewish state between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River, where even today over half the population is not Jewish.

The Holocaust narrative allows Yad Vashem, the finest Holocaust museum in the world, to repeat the mantra of “Never Forget” while it sits on Arab lands stolen from Ein Karem and overlooking the unmarked graves of Palestinians massacred by Jewish terrorists at Deir Yassin. It allows Elie Wiesel to boast of having worked for these same terrorists (as a journalist, not a fighter) while refusing to acknowledge, let alone apologize for, the war crimes his employer committed. It makes Jews the ultimate victim no matter how they dispossess or dehumanize or ethnically cleanse indigenous Palestinian people.

The Holocaust story eliminates any comparison of Ketziot or Gaza to the concentration camps they indeed are. It memorializes the resistance of Jews in the ghettos of Europe while steadfastly denying any comparison with the resistance of Palestinians in Hebron and throughout the West Bank. It allows claims that this year’s Hanukah Massacre in Gaza, with a kill ratio of 100 to one, was a “proportionate response” to Palestinian resistance to unending occupation.

The Holocaust is used to silence critics of Israel in what the Jewish scholar, Marc Ellis, has called the ecumenical deal: you Christians look the other way while we bludgeon the Palestinians and build our Jewish state and we won’t remind you that Hitler was a good Catholic, a confirmed “soldier of Christ,” long before he was a bad Nazi.

The Holocaust narrative of systematic, industrialized extermination was an important neo-conservative tool to drive the United States into Iraq. The same neo-con ideologues, like Norman Podhoretz, routinely compare Ahmadinejad to Hitler and Nazism with Islamofascism with the intent of driving us into Iran. The title of the Israeli conference at Yad Vashem made this crystal clear: “Holocaust Denial: Paving the Way to Genocide.”

“Remember the Holocaust” will be the battle cry of the next great clash of good (Judeo/Christian values) and evil (radical Islamic aggression) and those who question it must be demonized if not burned at the stake.

Daniel McGowan
Professor Emeritus
Hobart and William Smith Colleges
Geneva, NY 14456

September 24, 2009

Because of admonishment by the administration, it is hereby stated that the above remarks are solely those of the author. Hobart and William Smith Colleges neither condone nor condemn these opinions. Furthermore, the author has been instructed to use his personal email address of moc.oohay@leinadnawogcm and not his college email at ude.swh@nawogcm for those wishing to contact him with comments or criticisms.

Appendix 2This is a draft of the letter “facilitated” by James MaKinster, signed by six other “colleagues,” and circulated to over 300 others in the Hobart and William Smith Colleges’ community.

October 3, 2009

President Gearan,

This letter is a response to Daniel McGowan’s defense of Holocaust deniers published in the Finger Lakes Times on September 27. The content of the essay and its publication on the eve of Yom Kippur was appalling. We are writing to you because of the disgrace to Hobart and William Smith caused by McGowan’s continued use of the institutional imprimatur and his honorary title of “Emeritus Professor” to lend credence in disseminating his personal beliefs. He has every right as a private citizen to hold and spew forth whatever beliefs he may happen to have, but we ask you to prevent the use of his title and the name of Hobart and William Smith from contributing to its effects in the future.

It should be clear that while McGowan is claiming to raise legitimate historical and free speech issues, Holocaust denial has a history of being no more that thinly veiled anti-Semitism. When historians talk about the Holocaust what they mean is that approximately six million Jews and several millions of others were killed in an intentional and systematic fashion by the Nazis using a number of different means, including death by shooting and in gas chambers. This is the position held universally by scholars. The Holocaust deniers reject the historicity of the Holocaust based on three types of assertions. They reject the number of 6 million, the existence of killing camps, and the element of intentionality.

Professor McGowan’s article is an example of denying the reality of the most studied and documented event in history. Holocaust denial carries absolutely no weight among academic scholars in any field whatsoever. Additionally, denying the undisputed facts of the holocaust is not a way to show support for the Palestinians. For example, his argument denying the intentionality of the Nazi’s execution of Jews is that there is not sufficient proof that it was designed to exterminate the Jewish population. Rather, he asserts, it may have been merely a program of “ethnic cleansing.” The suggestion that this somehow makes it less morally reprehensible speaks for itself, as we all know that the term “ethnic cleansing” was introduced to make genocide sound more palatable.

Professor McGowan’s position is a classic case of blaming the victims for their own victimization. Promo Levi wrote in The Drowned and the Saved that what he most feared was echoed in a remark by one of his SS guards: That if he somehow managed to live through this hell no one would believe his descriptions of Auschwitz. Sadly, for some, that day has arrived.

Freedom of speech is a right for citizens in a democracy that should be vigorously protected, especially when we find the content of that speech to be abhorrent. Colleges and universities have an educational obligation to encourage scholarship that reflects perspectives outside the mainstream of public political discourse, and we encourage that. Hate speech, on the other hand, is a trickier issue for campuses to wrestle with because while free speech has a special value, we have a duty to protect members of our diverse community from unsupported vitriol being espoused under the name of our colleges and its professors. We faculty of all persuasions, Buddhists, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Jews, and atheists, are deeply offended and also share a special concern about the impact of such hateful messages (and its association with us) upon our Jewish students, staff, and faculty.

Professor McGowan’s actions do not meet our expectation of minimally rational and minimally humane discourse. As human beings who see the transparent motivation and effects of such writing, we are deeply disturbed and saddened to see a Hobart and William Smith title attached to it. We therefore request the removal of Professor McGowan’s honorary title of “Emeritus Professor.”

Sincerely,

Scott Brophy, Professor of Philosophy
Michael Dobkowski, Professor of Religious Studies
Khuram Hussain, Assistant Professor of Education
Steven Lee, Professor of Philosophy
James MaKinster, Associate Professor of Education
Lilian Sherman, Assistant Professor of Education
Charles Temple, Professor of Education

Notes

  1. Previously appeared at http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/850644.html.
  2. Holocaust. Dictionary.com. The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005 (accessed: February 09, 2007).
  3. Previously appeared at http://clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/details.cfm?id=268474 (accessed: February 09, 2007).

Daniel McGowan is a Professor Emeritus at Hobart and William Smith Colleges. Because of admonishment by the administration, it is hereby stated that the above remarks are solely those of the author. Hobart and William Smith Colleges neither condone nor condemn these opinions. Furthermore, the author has been instructed to use his personal email address of mcgowandaniel@yahoo.com and not his college email at mcgowan@hws.edu for those wishing to contact him with comments or criticisms.

September 23, 2017 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | 1 Comment

ADL Campus guide describes how to block events about Palestine

The ADL claims to oppose injustice, but spends much of its huge budget defaming Palestinians and their allies who work for an end to Israel’s human rights abuses.
By Alison Weir | If Americans Knew | September 13, 2107

The ADL (Anti-Defamation League) has just launched a new initiative for college students called “ADL CAMPUS: Tools for Dealing with Anti-Semitic and Anti-Israel Incidents on Campus.”

This resource contains much useful information about addressing anti-Semitism, endorses such valuable principles as freedom of speech and non-violence, and recommends that students talk to others who may hold different perspectives.

It also, however, contains some deeply problematic components for anyone who believes that human rights and justice should apply to all people without exception.

Unfortunately, the ADL does not share this belief. While it announces prominently, “We protect the Jewish people and secure justice and fair treatment to all,” in reality the ADL supports Israeli injustice against Palestinians.

Its recent campus resource exemplifies this, and distorts facts and words in order to do so.

First of all, ADL Campus conflates criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism. Rather than meaning bigotry against Jewish people, the ADL’s use of the term anti-Semitism includes many forms of criticism of Israel. The Israeli government and certain of its partisans have been pushing this new, expanded definition in the U.S., Europe and elsewhere.

Below, this article will look in more detail at what kinds of criticism of Israel the ADL considers unacceptable, and why its parameters will include virtually all speakers truly critical of Israeli oppression of Palestinians. First, however, let us turn to the ADL’s advice on blocking events championing Palestinian human rights (and undermining free speech and academic inquiry).

ADL strategies to prevent events about Palestine

ADL Campus provides an entire section on how to block events on Palestine. The section starts out by assuring students that they have tremendous resources on their campuses to help them in this: faculty, Hillel, Chabad, J Street U, Stand With Us, The David Project, off-campus organizations like ADL, the Israel Action Network, Israel on Campus Coalition, AIPAC, and “your local Israeli Consulate.”

It provides an array of “Proactive Strategies to Prevent Anti-Israel Activity” – “steps you can take year-round to prevent an anti-Israel event from taking place on your campus, and to be prepared if and when an anti-Israel event does take place.”

They are advised to join – and lead, when possible – student organizations so that they can use this position to advocate for Israel and prevent campus activism on Palestine. The guide advises students to:

“Run for student government. Write for the campus newspaper. Join committees and other student organizations. Holding leadership positions on campus provides a great opportunity to meet new people, build coalitions, and exchange views with your peers. With a seat at the table, you can more effectively speak out (or even vote) against anti-Israel actions, including divestment resolutions.”

This is not a new idea. In 2010 an AIPAC official (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) said that AIPAC was going to take over student governments in order to block resolutions on behalf of Palestinian rights:

More recently, pro-Israel students have been working to insert an Israel-centric definition of anti-Semitism into student governments. This then blocks university funding for student groups wishing to bring speakers on Palestine.

ADL Campus expands further upon the value of building relationships with other students as a strategy to prevent Palestine activism:

“Build coalitions with other student groups. Take the time to understand the needs and priorities of other groups and learn how to be an ally to other communities. Attend their events and meetings.  Join advocacy efforts for issues you care about. Think about opportunities for co-sponsoring events with these groups.”

Another suggested strategy is to put on Israel-related events; again the document suggests resources students can tap into:

“Hillel, the Israeli consulate responsible for the region in which your campus is located, ADL and other organizations, on campus and off, can help provide you with speakers and ideas.”

What to do if an event about Palestine is scheduled

If, despite their efforts, a program on Palestine is scheduled for their campus, ADL Campus tells students what to do next: investigate the speaker by contacting Hillel, ADL, ICC (Israel on Campus), or other organizations. (Some of these groups compile witch-hunt-like dossiers on Palestinian rights speakers which often contain inaccurate information, grossly exaggerated ad hominem attacks and claims that they are “anti-Semitic.”)

If they find that the speaker has engaged in alleged “hate speech, including anti-Semitic comments [sic],” ADL Campus tells them to contact the administration about it. Given that the ADL labels numerous valid statements about Israel “anti-Semitic (see below),” this could apply to virtually all honest and committed speakers on Palestine, and is often used in attempts to impugn the speaker’s integrity and block his or her talk. Such misrepresentations sometimes cause academic departments and other organizations to back out of sponsoring a lecture.

If an event does go forward with speakers that don’t pass ADL muster, ADL Campus tells students they should consider “an active, organized effort.” It advises them to “send a small contingent of pro-Israel students to the event to question the speaker about their views. Prepare some questions in advance based on what you’ve learned about the speaker [sic] in your research.”

ADL Campus also tells students: “Share information with fellow students attending the event about the speakers and organizations they’re about to hear from. Prepare fact sheets [sic] in advance that highlight how extreme the views of the speaker really are. ADL and other organizations make it easy to access information on extreme speakers who frequently appear on campuses.”

In reality, such “fact sheets” typically misrepresent speakers’ statements and contain non-factual information about Israel-Palestine in general and about the speaker in particular.

The ADL “deciphers” anti-Semitism

ADL Campus contains an entire section and video that claim to help students decipher when something is anti-Semitic or contains “anti-Israel bias” (the latter seems to be anti-Semitism’s almost equally objectionable sister sin).

According to the ADL, you are anti-Semitic if you who fail to affirm Israel’s alleged “right to exist as a Jewish state.”


Palestinians forced out in 1948 by Israel’s founding war

Affirming such a “right” may seem benign. In reality, it means affirming Israel’s “right” to have created its state through the violent expulsion of the majority indigenous population and confiscation of their land, simply because they were not Jewish. It also means you believe Israel has the “right” to prohibit these families from returning to their homes because they are of the “wrong” ethnicity or religion (even though returning to one’s home is an internationally recognized human right.)

In actuality, saying that Israel has a “right to exist as a Jewish state” entails the morally untenable position that universal human rights do not apply to the residents and indigenous people Israel does not want in its ethnically preferential state.

ADL Campus also states that BDS (Boycott, Divestment, & Sanctions), the international nonviolent movement that works to require Israel to adhere to international law and end its violations of human rights, is “anti-Semitic.”

In fact, the ADL head has just endorsed legislation that would make Americans who support boycotts targeting Israel criminals to be punished by fines of up to $1 million and 20 years in prison. Once again, we see the ADL turning morality on its head. Those who stand up for justice and who oppose oppression and discrimination are not bigots or criminals, they are human rights champions.

While the ADL Campus video allows in theory that “people can support the Palestinian cause without being anti-Israel,” it censures what the ADL claims is “illegitimate criticism.” As the narrator’s voice intones that this consists of “false accusations,” the screen shows the words apartheid, genocide, and ethnic cleansing.


Screenshot from ADL Campus video

Far from being “false accusations” and “illegitimate criticism,” however, all three characterizations of Israel and its actions are based on factual conditions and have been argued for by diverse scholars, institutions, and human rights advocates (see links below*).

ADL campus also decrees that statements comparing Israel to Nazis are “anti-Semitic” (reflecting the international redefinition of the term mentioned above). However, Israeli leaders themselves at times have referred to one another this way, beginning with Ben Gurion, who compared both Zionist leader Ze’ev Jabotinsky and future Prime Minister Menachem Begin to Hitler (Begin returned the epithet). An article in the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz is headlined: Calling your political rival a Nazi is a time-hallowed tradition in Israel.

And while such comparisons are exaggerated and imprecise, some years ago there was an uproar in Israel when an Israeli military officer suggested that studying how the German army fought in the Warsaw ghetto could be useful in finding strategies to use in seizing “a densely populated refugee camp, or take over the casbah in Nablus.” Author Melvin Goodman, describing the cruel situation in Gaza, concludes:  “Perhaps the comparison with the Warsaw Ghetto is not completely far-fetched after all.”

ADL helps mislead people, then calls them “anti-Semitic”

In one case, the ADL’s characterization of some statements about Israel as “anti-Semitic” may be legitimate. The ADL accuses individuals of being “anti-Semitic”– i.e. bigots – if they suggest that all Jewish people are responsible for the actions of Israel.

Such a conflation is erroneous and should be corrected. However, it is important to understand that the state of Israel itself and its strongest partisans, including the ADL, actively work to conflate Judaism and Jewish identity with Israel. This intentional conflation has gone on for decades. A century ago Supreme Court Justice and Zionist leader Louis Brandeis was known for specifically working to conflate Zionism with being Jewish at a time when most Jewish people were not Zionists.


Israeli flag featuring the “Star of David” Jewish identity symbol

Israel specifically calls itself “the Jewish state” and often claims to represent Jews worldwide, a claim specifically rejected by certain Jewish individuals and organizations.

The Israeli flag, which adorns tanks, helicopter gunships, and fighter jets that periodically attack Gaza civilians, consists of a star of David, thus working to symbolically conflate Israel and its actions with Judaism and Jews. Israelis regularly call the pro-Israel lobby in the U.S. “the Jewish lobby.”

In addition, virtually every mainstream national Jewish institution in the U.S. publicly supports Israel, numerous synagogues and schools across the country exhibit the Israeli flag and affirm their attachment to Israel, and Jewish Community Relations Councils and Jewish Federations advocate for Israel in cities throughout the country.

The ADL’s 2015 Annual Report itself conflates Israel and “the Jewish people,” stating: “Since the founding purpose of ADL is to protect the Jewish people, our work on behalf of and in support of the State of Israel is a significant way of fulfilling that mission.” The ADL Campus video itself uses an image of a menorah, a religious symbol, to represent Israel.


Graphic featuring the menorah used in ADL Campus video

If some people critical of human rights abuses or other actions by the government of Israel or certain Israel partisans connect all Jews to Israel’s actions, this intentional conflation is part of the problem, not the solution. Those taken in by it are mistaken, not necessarily prejudiced.

ADL: Advocate for Israel

For many years the ADL has been held in high regard by many Americans who believe its purpose is to oppose bigotry and assist those being treated unfairly, and who are unaware of the ADL’s work to defame human rights defenders and maintain Israel’s power over Palestinians, one of the world’s most oppressed populations.

Through its own well-funded efforts combined with the support of media figures who may also be pro-Israel, the ADL has attained considerable power. Its frequent reports on alleged anti-Semitism are cited regularly as though they are the work of an objective, official, accountable entity.

In reality, the ADL is a non-governmental organization without public accountability whose work is non-transparent, lacks objective review, and which has a publicly stated goal of advocating for a foreign country—a nation whose system is antithetical to the principles held by most Americans, and whose actions are frequently harmful to the United States.

With its $142 million assets, the ADL crows that it helps “shape laws locally and nationally, and develop groundbreaking model legislation,” thus exerting influence from the highest levels of the U.S. government down to American campuses.

ADL Campus is its latest effort to maintain US taxpayers’ $10 million+ per day to Israel, and thus maintain Israel’s hegemony over Palestinians and others in the region.

Opposing bigotry, prejudice, and racism are noble actions that benefit everyone. Sadly, that’s not what the ADL is about.


Alison Weir is executive director of If Americans Knew, president of the Council for the National Interest, and author of Against Our Better Judgment: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Was Used to Create Israel.  

* According to the ADL, statements suggesting that Israeli actions and/or policies have constituted apartheid, genocide, and ethnic cleansing are “false claims” and therefore constitute “anti-Israel bias,” a phrase that the ADL seems to suggest is tantamount to anti-Semitism. In reality, however, there is considerable evidence that such statements are accurate; at minimum, they are valid criticisms worthy of investigation. Below are a few of the many resources available on these topics:

Apartheid

Genocide

Ethnic Cleansing

September 13, 2017 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Solidarity and Activism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Facing a Major Attack on Academic Freedom in Canada

By Prof. Tony Hall | American Herald Tribune | September 11, 2017

Sixteen years after the event, 9/11 stands as striking evidence of an insidious assault on science. Officialdom’s dogged adherence to a discredited account of 9/11 stands as a stark illustration of this phenomenon. The subordination of scientific method to the higher imperatives of imperial war propaganda is epitomized by officialdom’s failure to formulate a credible account of the 9/11 debacle. Universities have become important sites of this betrayal. The sabotage of society’s primary platforms of scholarly enterprise forms an essential feature of a more pervasive attack from within. Everywhere, but especially on the Internet, fundamental freedoms to investigate, publish, publicize and discuss interpretations that might undermine or inconvenience power are being menaced.

As a tenured full professor with 27 years of seniority at my home institution, I am currently facing a sharp attack on the remaining protections for academic freedom. In early October of 2016 the President of the University of Lethbridge, Michael J. Mahon, suspended me without pay. He also prohibited me from stepping foot on the University of Lethbridge campus. In explaining his actions Dr. Mahon’s speculated I might have violated a section of the Alberta Human Rights Act.

The vagueness of this assertion exposes the reality that severe punishment was imposed without any proper investigation. Dr. Mahon’s abrupt deviation from the terms of the collective agreement with my faculty association has established precedents and countervailing responses with broad implications. Adversarial proceedings on this matter began this August in the Lethbridge Alberta Court House. As evidenced by the intervention of the 68,000 members of the Canadian Association of University Teachers, the outcome of this case will in all probability significantly affect the future of university governance in Canada and beyond.

Dr. Mahon’ suspension letter detailed that there was a possibility that I might be guilty because of allegations that a) “my Facebook page had been used for virulent anti-semitic comments “and b) “Inferring that Israelis, and hence Jewish individuals, were responsible for the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.”

Before dealing with the manipulation of my Facebook wall in the prelude to my suspension, allow me to linger on questions concerning the academy and 9/11. Along with government, media and law enforcement agencies, universities are deeply implicated in sabotaging the quest for 9/11 truth and many other varieties of inconvenient truth as well. The punitive measures directed at me can be seen as a warning to scare other professors into compliance with all manner of official stories?

As for my own reading of the available evidence, I am far from alone in positing that Israel First partisans, including the American neocons that dominated the Project for the New American Century, are prominent among the many protagonists of the 9/11 crimes. These crimes extend to orchestrating the media spin, rigging investigations, and sustaining the ongoing 9/11 cover-up. In publications and on False Flag Weekly News, Dr. Kevin Barrett and I have joined others in extending this investigative and interpretation trajectory into many cases of possible false flag terrorism particularly after 2001.

I am astonished that the Administration of my University became so aggressive in attempting to outlaw an evidence-based interpretation of the most transformative event of the twenty-first century. New frontiers of subversion are being pioneered in the U of L’s audacious administrative attempt to criminalize independent academic work.

What are the implications of subordinating the scholarly judgments of academic experts on campus to the executive dictates of administrators? How can the principles of critical thinking be cultivated when adherence to conformity is so aggressively enforced by administrators?

The University Administration extends its claims of academic control several steps further in the complaint it brought forward to the Alberta Human Rights Commission seven months after I was suspended. The complaint begins with six sweeping statements outlining topics that the complainants want removed from the reach of critical academic examination. One of the complainants chief assertions is the Islamophobia-inducing proposition that “acts of terrorism between 2001 to the present… were in fact committed and financed by Islamic terrorists.”

Facebook Machinations

A maliciously-engineered Facebook operation created the original catalyst of the smear and disinformation campaign leading to my suspension. Without the originating momentum set in motion by the Facebook operation the campaign to discredit me could not have unfolded as it did. The most public face of this campaign was presented by the Canadian extension of the Israeli- and US-based Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith. According to B’nai Brith Canada, an abhorrent post appeared and then disappeared on my Facebook wall during a short interval on Aug. 26, 2016. The text of the disgusting digital item proclaimed that the Holocaust didn’t happen and that Jews should be “KILLED, EVERY LAST ONE.”

This heinous assertion goes against everything I have tried to stand for in my life including in my academic work. As soon as I became aware of this blaspheme embedded in the planted Facebook post I publicly condemned it. By mid-September, however, my persecutors were far advanced in pushing forward the manufactured crisis. By then B’nai Brith Canada was mounting a petition campaign demanding that I be investigated, fired and silenced.

Recently the results of a Freedom of Information inquiry have brought to light documents illuminating the elaborate defamation pointed my way in the hours and days immediately following the August 26 Facebook operation. One document was sent to the Office of the University of Lethbridge President and copied to the Premier of Alberta as well as the Alberta Justice Minister. Citing the B’nai Brith, the document’s author characterized me as an “advocate for the murder of Jews.”

Another letter dated 1 Sept. 2016 was signed by the President of the Canadian Jewish Civil Rights Association. This signatory, who has since passed away, cited the complete text of the offending Facebook post. The letter to Dr. Mahon indicated the reprehensible words actually came “from my lips.”

I cannot understand why Dr. Mahon did not at this juncture properly investigate by consulting me directly and conferring with the University of Lethbridge Faculty Association. Instead the President opted to push ahead with drastic action based on incomplete information combined with the intense pressure brought to bear on him by an extremely influential external political lobby

Hate Speech Deceptions

None of my persecutors has yet identified the true source of the offending Facebook item. My own research into the matter, including my email exchange with cartoonist Ben Garrison, has led me to Joshua Goldberg. American Herald Tribune has published my article on this young man. Goldberg is widely reported to be the creator of many Internet personalities, all of whom generate abundant “hate speech deceptions” from various ethnic and ideological perspectives.

Goldberg’s case exposes much about the wholesale manufacturing and misrepresentation of so-called “hate speech” to justify censorship on the Internet. In my case an atrocious digital item was strategically inserted with the aim of ruining me professionally and personally.

The intervention of Internet leviathans like Google and Facebook is especially aggressive when it comes to disappearing material critical of the Israeli government’s treatment of Palestinians. My own experience with the Canadian branch of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith points to the strength of this pattern. Why is it that this same Zionist organization is being tasked with the strategic responsibility of censoring and categorizing You Tube videos?

As illustrated by William Pepper’s development of civil litigation to bring to light the US government’s role in the tragedy suffered by the family of Martin Luther King Jr., we rarely get criminal trials pressed against the world’s most powerful interests and operatives. Instances of possible false flag terrorism, but especially 9/11, have been rendered especially immune to any kind of trial that would put before the public evidence garnered from genuine investigations of facts.

Perhaps the reference to 9/11 in a University Administration’s efforts to condemn me for academic thought crimes and speech crimes will force the forbidden topic into some kind of evidence-based juridical procedure. When it comes to understanding the real dynamics of who did what to whom on 9/11, the truth must prevail.

Dr. Hall is editor in chief of American Herald Tribune. He is currently Professor of Globalization Studies at University of Lethbridge in Alberta Canada. He has been a teacher in the Canadian university system since 1982.

September 12, 2017 Posted by | Deception, False Flag Terrorism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Islamophobia | , , , , | 3 Comments

Left, You Have Been Duped

By Richard Hugus | August 20, 2017

On August 19, a week after a heavily publicized clash over a statue of Robert E. Lee in Charlottesville, Virginia, an estimated 8,000 people converged on Boston Common to protest a speaking event organized by a group calling itself the Boston Free Speech Movement. Who are the Boston Free Speech Movement and what do they stand for? We’ll never know because antifascists, leftists, anti-racists, and progressives of Boston prevented them from even speaking. Some might say this was a good thing — no one wants to hear from bigots (if that’s who they were) — but in fact the left in all its self-righteousness was duped into an assault on the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution, which guarantees the right of free speech, for everyone. The left have been the pawns of much more powerful forces who, if they aren’t organizing these news events and provocations outright, are certainly happy to see precedents set for publicly shutting down free speech by the use of force. First it will be the speech of fascists, then it will be the speech of anybody the authorities don’t like, including leftists.

Suddenly we are being confronted with organizations who claim to know what is or is not appropriate for the rest of us to hear. Now that sides have been established — one which can decide what is and isn’t acceptable speech, and another which is forbidden to speak on pain of attack, all that remains is for the powerful to make sure their narrative is the one that’s allowed. Isn’t this fascism? Aren’t people who claim to be anti-fascist actually doing what classic fascists do?

It’s not a coincidence that just prior to these speaking events being shut down, Google, Inc. asserted its right to decide what is and is not a legitimate news source. At the same time the US Congress is considering legislation that would make it illegal for US citizens to support boycott, divestment, or sanctions against Israel. Not surprisingly, the pro-Israel Anti Defamation League (ADL) has been brought on by Google to advise them on which news sources are legitimate and which are not. Google now has such a monopoly on information on the Internet that it is in a position to bury unapproved news sources forever. The ADL will therefore be able to effectively censor any negative news about what Israel is doing in Palestine and the middle east, just as AIPAC, through its ownership of the US Congress, will be able to censor free speech of American citizens when it comes to, once again, Israel.

In the ‘50s the ADL monitored “pinkos” for the House UnAmerican Activities Committee. In the ‘90s ADL monitored activists working to end apartheid in South Africa, in the 2000s the ADL began monitoring Arab American organizations and mosques. Today the ADL monitors pro-Palestine groups on college campuses. In each case the ADL has gone after “extremism and hate speech” in the US, as defined by Israel.

One wonders, why does Israel, a foreign country, have such a say on what people in the US can and can’t talk about?

There is no way to censor speech without a point of view or agenda. The agenda is usually dictated by whoever has power. Thus censorship serves those in power. When we take part in it, we serve the power.

People are apparently upset about an upsurge of Nazism. Why weren’t they in the streets when neocon Victoria Nuland and the US State Department organized a coup in Ukraine with the overt assistance of neo-Nazis? Why were Nazis okay during Obama’s presidency but not during Trump’s?

Where was the outrage when Hillary Clinton and the US State Department attacked and destroyed Libya? The liberal left considered this a “humanitarian intervention,” just as it did when the US decimated Yugoslavia.

Why is it that after six years of siege and murder committed by US proxy forces in Syria, the only national demonstration that could be mustered in Washington was on the issue of private remarks Trump once made about grabbing women — the famous “pussy hat” demonstration?

Why is it that the liars in the mainstream press could get away with false stories of chemical attacks in Syria being carried out by the Syrian government when it was obvious that the attacks were carried out as false flags by US proxy forces? Why are Syrians still being bombed and killed every day by US “coalition” forces with no protest?

Why is it that Iraq is no longer a concern, after 26 years of genocidal assault by Uncle Sam, with efforts now being made to balkanize Iraq through support for “Kurdistan”? Why are US troops still there? Why are they still in Afghanistan? Where are the masses taking to the streets to shout down the liars making these policies?

Why is it the business of the US to interfere in Venezuela’s internal affairs, even to the point of military intervention? Has Venezuela harmed the US in some way? Has the left swallowed yet again the lie that the US is concerned about human rights in another country?

Why is it that Palestinians have been forgotten, as Israel, the US’s closest ally, transparently conducts genocide against them, year after year, so that today Israel can talk openly of forced transfer of the entire Arab population of Palestine. Isn’t terror also being committed when Israeli settlers routinely ram their cars into Palestinians in the street, or is it just terror when this happens in Europe?

Why is it that the US supports a state for Jewish people only that necessarily discriminates again non-Jewish Christians and Muslims? Isn’t discrimination on the basis of religion a hate crime? Isn’t the ADL in a conflict of interests when it claims to be an authority on hate crimes while representing such a state? Has the left ever repudiated its long record of blocking for Israel and Israel’s crimes?

Why is it that the virtuous left has nothing better to do than face off with a few obvious provocateurs with their over-the-top nazi slogans while the US — their country, in their name — is actively supporting Saudi Arabia in its destruction of a practically defenseless Yemen?

Where has the left been in its opposition to US government and media “hate speech” and war-baiting against Russia, China, and Iran? Is World War III not a problem? Did something lead leftists to believe that life on earth was not important right now?

Is the US threat of a nuclear attack on North Korea a side issue — something to be dealt with only after facing off with the Klan?

What about the murder of millions of Arabs and Muslims since 9-11 on the basis of a false story about who did 9-11? Surely there is a case to be made here for discrimination on the basis of religion, if not serial mass murder, based on a pretext which itself was an open crime for all the world to see. Why does the left consider discussion of this crime unimportant and passé?

That the left has mobilized to stomp on a handful of people in Charlottesville and Boston only proves its impotence. It’s like the man who has been frustrated at work all day who comes home and kicks his dog.

The worst of it all is that both the left and right have been suckered into a division which will use up all their energy and get plenty of attention from the press while the real crimes and the real criminals roll steadily along, laughing at the stupidity of everyone involved and the ease with which they were manipulated.

August 20, 2017 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | 3 Comments

America’s Militarized Police

Made in Israel?

By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • July 25, 2017

The horrific execution by police of an Australian woman in her pajamas that took place last week in Minneapolis has again produced a torrent of criticism over killings initiated by law enforcement in situations in which the officers are in no way threatened. America has always been a violent place relative to much of the rest of the world, but even so there has been a noticeable shift in how, since the trauma of 9/11, some policemen believe themselves to be superior to and detached from the society they are supposed to be protecting. And the public is reciprocating, seeing the police frequently as a force that is no longer there to serve the people and instead something that should be feared. Even in the upper middle class predominantly white county that I live in, residents not infrequently discuss the increasingly visible and aggressive police presence. It is widely believed that arguing with cops or showing even the slightest attitude in contacts with them is done at one’s peril.

Even in low crime parts of the country, the police are able to deploy fully armed and equipped swat teams that are more military than civilian in their threatening demeanor as well in the body armor and weapons they carry. Many cities and counties now have surplus military armored vans for crowd control even if they have no crowds. Armed drones are increasingly becoming part of the law enforcement arsenal and it sometimes appears as if the police are copying the military as a model of “how to do it.”

The various levels of government that make up the United States seem to be preparing for some kind of insurrection, which may indeed be the case somewhere down the road if the frustrations of the public are not somehow dealt with. But there is another factor that has, in my opinion, become a key element in the militarization of the police in the United States. That would be the role of the security organs of the state of Israel in training American cops, a lucrative business that has developed since 9/11 and which inter alia gives the “students” a whole different perspective on the connection of the police with those who are being policed, making the relationship much more one of an occupier and the occupied.

The engagement of American police forces with Israeli security services began modestly enough in the wake of 9/11. The panic response in the United States to a major terrorist act led to a search for resources to confront what was perceived as a new type of threat that normal law-and-order training did not address.

Israel, which, in its current occupation of much of Palestine and the Golan Heights as well as former stints in Gaza, southern Lebanon and Sinai, admittedly has considerable experience in dealing with the resistance to its expansion manifested as what it describes as terrorism. Jewish organizations in the United States dedicated to providing cover for Israeli’s bad behavior, saw an opportunity to get their hooks into a sizable and respected community within the U.S. that was ripe for conversion to the Israeli point of view, so they began funding “exchanges.”

Since 2002 there have been hundreds of all-expenses-paid trips including officers from every major American city as well as state and local police departments. Some have been sponsored by the American Jewish Committee (AJC) and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA). The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has also been directly funding trips since 2008, explaining that “As a people living under constant threat of attack, the Israelis are leading experts in security enforcement and response strategies.” The intent? To “learn” and “draw from the latest developments” so the American cops can “bring these methods back home to implement in their communities.”

AIPAC has several pages in its website dedicated to security cooperation between the two countries. It asks “Did you know? In May 2010, 50 retired Generals and Admirals wrote to President Obama, highlighting the value of U.S. Israeli cooperation.” It goes on to cite an Alabama sheriff who enthuses that “There is no other country [Israel] that shares the same values and overarching goal to allow others to live in peace.” Regarding airport security, it also quotes a U.S. “security expert” who states “We should move even closer to an Israeli model where there’s more engagement with passengers… We’ve just started to do that at TSA…” Indeed. That’s called profiling and pre-boarding interrogations.

Even the federal government has gotten onto the Israel bandwagon, perhaps not a surprise given the number of Israel Firsters in Congress. In 2003, the Department of Homeland Security established a special Office of International Affairs to “institutionalize the relationship between Israeli and American security officials.” The New York City Police Department has a branch in Israel and carries out frequent exchanges.

It should be noted from the git-go that Israel is no more knowledgeable about possible responses to acts of terror than is anyone else. The techniques employed to create physical barriers, to develop sources for intelligence gathering, and to train in tactical responses are quite familiar to anyone who has studied modern-style terrorism since it emerged in Western Europe in the 1970s.

Most countries that have a high or even moderate risk level deriving from terrorists, either domestic or foreign, have recruited and trained special police and paramilitary forces that are familiar with the basic techniques and are quite capable of responding. Ironically, even though the United States government and local police forces have tended to look at the “real pro” Israelis for guidance, state of the art resources for learning about how to deal with terror are available right here at home. JSOC has teams that are every bit as effective – and lethal – as anything the Israelis can muster and the CIA and FBI together know far more about terrorists and how they behave than do the ideologically driven Mossad and Shin Beth.

The American policemen who go on the “exchanges” are probably only dimly aware that what they are being shown is part of Israel’s military justice system, which has nothing to do with Israeli criminals, but instead is designed to keep the lid on the millions of Palestinians who live in what has become a virtual outdoor prison camp. It is an apartheid police state that uses deadly force as a form of crowd control. And the Palestinian former residents of the lands Israel now holds are the “terrorists” that Israel is protecting itself against.

You can bet that the American guests for their part clearly do not realize that they are being trained as prison guards and you also can be sure that they never catch so much as a glimpse of the 300 child prisoners that Israel continues to hold without charges.

Israel’s reputation for “dealing with” terrorism has in any event been glamorized by the Israel-friendly media and entertainment industry while also being promoted by Jewish organizations. It has meant in practical terms that many of the contract security firms operating at airports in the United States and Europe are Israeli. They have also infiltrated state Homeland Security agencies and corporate security in the U.S. Many of the Israeli companies with offices in the United States work closely with Mossad and might reasonably be considered arms of the Israeli government.

Where Israel really excels is in its willingness to kill large numbers of Arabs of all ages and genders using the excuse that they are terrorists. It does so with impunity because Israeli courts almost never hold the army and police accountable for whatever they do. It might reasonably be suggested that when American police officers go through their training in Israel they acquire at least a bit of that attitude from their instructors.

Recognizing that Israel is not exactly a model to be emulated when it comes to the human rights of its Palestinian victims, there is an alternative viewpoint which suggests that American law enforcement might just be learning the wrong things when it travels to Israel. Amnesty International asks “With Whom are Many U.S. Police Departments Training? With Chronic Human Rights Violator Israel.” It notes that last August when the Department of Justice documented numerous violations by the Baltimore Police Department the report failed to mention that policemen from that city had received training in Israel.

Amnesty makes clear what we are dealing with when our policemen are being trained – “… military, security and police systems that have racked up documented human rights violations for years… carrying out extrajudicial executions and other unlawful killings, using ill treatment and torture (even against children). Suppression of freedom of expressions/association, including through government surveillance, and excessive use of force against peaceful protesters.”

And actually, it is worse than that. The American visitors will be welcomed to contemplate the Potemkin village miracle of a democratic, multicultural, inclusive, clever Israel. They will not be allowed to see how the soldiers training them, representatives of “the most moral army in the world,” force Palestinian women to give birth at military checkpoints and watch their babies die, shoot Palestinian teenagers as they are running away for throwing stones, drag men and women out of their beds and kill them while terrorizing their children and dragging them off to jail during midnight raids.

Amnesty’s article documents many of the abuses by Israeli security forces and concludes that using “Public or private funds spent to train our domestic police in Israel should concern all of us. Many of the abuses [in the U.S.] parallel violations by Israeli military, security and police officials.” I would also add that the training provided by JINSA, ADL and the AJC is also partly on the American taxpayers’ dime as the organizations are all tax exempt.

Finally, Israel’s ability to market its state sponsored brutality has even become a form of light entertainment. A company in Israel called Caliber 3 that was set up by a reserve colonel in the Israeli army is offering what has been described as a two hour “boot camp” counter-terrorism experience. It includes a life size target consisting of a man in Arab attire holding a cell phone. The mostly Jewish American audience ponders if he should be shot, but the instructors eventually intervene and declare that he does not quite meet the standard for being killed. Visitors are also treated to simulations of Israeli commandos taking down terrorists and can even shoot live rounds from a semi-automatic weapon at a firing range. Ironically, the Caliber 3 gated compound camp is located in the Gush Etzion settlement bloc on the West Bank, land that was stolen from the Palestinians.

July 25, 2017 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , | 1 Comment

Diverse groups push for ‘Anti-Semitism Envoy’ who monitors criticism of Israel


Former Antisemitism Envoy Hannah Rosenthal promoting a “Walk for Israel” event in Milwaukee in 2017 (video below). As envoy, Rosenthal adopted a new, Israel-centric definition for antisemitism, and then used it to train U.S. diplomats. Now groups from the ADL to the Southern Poverty Law Center are disturbed that Trump isn’t filling the position.

By Alison Weir | If Americans Knew | July 6, 2017

The Trump administration has failed to appoint an antisemitism monitor or staff the State Department’s antisemitism monitoring office, drawing fire from diverse groups that range from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and Israel lobbying organizations to Think Progress and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

But the State Department Office to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, and the “antisemitism envoy” who heads it, haven’t just been keeping tabs on anti-Jewish bigotry around the world. In reality, they have been monitoring international pro-Palestinian activism and promoting a crackdown on such activism in various countries.

Congress created the antisemitism monitoring office and envoy in 2004. Since then, the office has adopted a definition of antisemitism that includes many forms of criticism of Israel and it has pushed for that definition to be used worldwide to crack down on criticism of Israel. (Read more about who else has adopted the definition and how it is being used to curtail criticism of Israel and pro-Palestinian activism.)

Allan C. Brownfeld of the American Council for Judaism is disturbed by this trend, commenting: “The redefinition of antisemitism to mean criticism of Israel is clearly an effort to end freedom of speech and discussion when it comes to Israel and its policies. It has nothing to do with real antisemitism, which this effort trivializes and which, fortunately, is in retreat.”*

In 2015 Brownfeld wrote “What they seek to silence are criticisms of Israeli policies and efforts to call attention to them through such things as campaigns for academic boycotts or BDS. Whether one agrees with such campaigns or not, they are legitimate criticisms of a foreign government and of U.S. aid to that government. Only by changing the meaning of words entirely can this be called ‘antisemitism.’”

The organization Palestine Legal has similarly objected to the new definition, pointing out that the redefinition of antisemitism allows “virtually any criticism of Israel to be labeled as antisemitic.” It states: “The effect of blurring antisemitism with criticism of Israel is to censor speech. It aims to silence those who wish to criticize Israel’s well-documented human rights violations by making it unacceptable and taboo to do so. It silences the everyday observer of Israel’s actions who may wish to comment and draw parallels with other experiences, or do anything at all to oppose it.”

Meanwhile, the antisemitism envoy position has proved a revolving door to Israel lobbying organizations and activities.

State Department Antisemitism Office Monitors Criticism of Israel

The monitoring office’s 2016 report on global antisemitism included monitoring of pro-Palestinian activism. Below are a few quotes from the report:

♦ “50 Palestinian students protested and boycotted a conference presentation by an Israeli professor who was a guest speaker at the Eastern Mediterranean University (EMU). Approximately 50 Palestinian students opened banners during the conference reading, ‘Free Palestine,’ ‘Terrorist Israel,’ and held photos of suffering Palestinian children.”

♦ “Following the September 28 death of former Israeli president Shimon Peres, the FPDC [Palestinian Federation of Chile] labeled him a ‘war criminal’ on its official Twitter account.”

♦ “activists of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel, spilled red paint on the facade of the restaurant and posted signs reading: ‘Free Palestine,’ ‘Avillez collaborates with Zionist occupation,’ and ‘Entree: A dose of white phosphorus.’ The attack followed picketing opposite the restaurant by BDS activists…”

In addition, the report cited statements that connected Israeli actions to all Jewish people, reporting, for example, that some Kuwaiti columnists “often conflated Israeli government actions or views with those of Jews more broadly,” and “Swedish Jews were at times blamed for Israeli policies.” While it is incorrect and unfair to associate Israeli actions with all Jewish people, the report entirely omitted reference to the many Israeli leaders and pro-Israel organizations who promote this view, claiming that Israel represents all the world’s Jewish people.

There were additional questionable listings of alleged antisemitism related to Israel, for example: “the RT channel’s June 27 airing of Palestinian allegations [by Palestinian Authority head Mahmoud Abbas in an address to the European Parliament] that an Israeli rabbi approved the poisoning of Palestinian wells.” Reporting allegations made by national leaders is what news media do, particularly when there is a context supporting the allegations. There is a documented record of Israeli settlers and, longer ago, the early Israeli military contaminating Palestinian water supply, cisterns, and wells, and of some extremist Israeli rabbis approving – and even calling for – the killing of civilians of all ages.**

Antisemitism Office Promotes Crackdown on Palestine Activism

When Congress created the antisemitism monitoring office and envoy in 2004, the legislation included criticism of Israel among the “antisemitism” to monitor (although that inclusion was buried and not obvious in a quick read of the main legislation).

At that time, the State Department declared publicly that such an office was unnecessary and would be a “bureaucratic nuisance” that would actually hinder the Department’s ongoing work against antisemitism. A State Department press release opposing the new office described the many actions the department was already taking against antisemitism.

After the office was in place, the conflation of criticism of Israel with antisemitism grew incrementally, until it became part of the office’s official definition.

The first antisemitism envoy, Gregg Rickman, endorsed an Israel-centric definition originally proposed by an Israeli government minister and disseminated by Israel partisans in Europe. After his term of office, Rickman went to work for the pro-Israel lobbying organization AIPAC (the American Israel Public Affairs Committee).

The second antisemitism envoy, Hannah Rosenthal, officially adopted the new Israel-centric definition in 2010, making it “the State Department definition.” She then pushed through a training program about antisemitism for U.S. diplomats that used what she called the new “breakthrough definition.”

After she left the envoy position, Rosenthal headed up the Jewish Federation of Milwaukee, where she worked on numerous activities supporting Israel, including promoting a Stand with Israel event (see her promotional video for the event here and below).

The next envoy, Ira Foreman, also worked for AIPAC, and was instrumental in spreading the new Israel-centric definition to other nations. Indeed, Forman declared that “the United States pushed for a global definition of antisemitism” and that this “changed the global discourse on the issue” during an Anti-Defamation League press conference.

Pressure to Staff Antisemitism Monitoring Office

The administration has indicated it may not fill these positions as part of budget cutting; out of 13 Special Envoy positions in the State Department, 8 are currently vacant (there is no Special Envoy to monitor and combat other forms of racism, for example against African Americans)***. Trump’s failure to fill the antisemitism positions has provoked an escalating bipartisan outcry by Congressional representatives and advocacy groups, amplified by certain media coverage and commentary.

Among those pushing for Trump to fill the office are the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, various pro-Israel groups, diverse Congressional representatives supportive of Israel, and, more mildly, the liberal organizations Think Progress and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

♦ The Anti-Defamation League has long used an Israel-centric definition of antisemitism and is known for hardcore Israel advocacy that leans heavily towards blind promotion of the most extremist right-wing elements of Israel’s government. It has created a petition demanding that Trump fill the envoy position. Former ADL director Abe Foxman said: “The special Ambassador to combat antisemitism at the State Department is one of those things that ‘make America great.’”

♦ The American Jewish Committee says it engages in “pro-Israel advocacy at the highest levels.” It has also called for Trump to name an envoy and has created its own petition.

Think Progress, a progressive organization close to the Democratic Party, featured an article critical of the failure to fill the post, announcing: “Attacks targeting Jews are at a record high at home, but the State Department doesn’t think special monitoring abroad is necessary.”

♦ The Southern Poverty Law Center then featured the Think Progress article about the State Department “abandoning the office” in its “Hate Watch Headlines.” The SPLC is often revered for its important work to oppose bigotry and hate, but it has praised Israel and been criticized for equating anti-zionism with antisemitism. Furthermore, its over $300 million operation has sometimes been brought into question as a cash cow that benefits from finding “hate” where it might not actually exist.

The various advocates, as well as the Think Progress article, have cited an Anti-Defamation League report that antisemitism is on the rise, and fast. On the face of it, this certainly should be disturbing to anyone who supports equality and human rights. However, a number of groups have questioned the ADL report, and an ADL official admits that it is “not a scientific study.” The ADL report does not include a spreadsheet of the incidents it has included for independent researchers to examine, and it is unknown how many of the incidents may have been actually pro-Palestinian activism, but we do know that the “rise” included 2,000 hoax threats made by a young Jewish Israeli reportedly suffering from mental problems.

♦ Members of the House of Representatives’ Bipartisan Task Force Against Anti-Semitism initiated a letter in March calling on Trump to fill the position, another bipartisan letter was sent in June, and Democratic Senator Ben Cardin implored Trump to fill the “critical” position. Legislation was introduced into both the Senate and the House that would elevate the envoy position to ambassadorial level and would require even more detailed reporting than it is already doing.

♦ Most recently, Katrina Lantos Swett, whose father Congressman Tom Lantos sponsored the legislation that created the position, sent a letter to Tillerson outraged that there hasn’t been “great eagerness to move swiftly to fill this post.” The Daily Caller reports her view that the special envoy is the “tip of the sword’ to focus on and combat antisemitism on a global scale.”

On June 26 the ADL organized a conference call with the media in which former envoys Hannah Rosenthal and Ira Forman called on Trump to fill the position, saying that “the envoy’s working definition of antisemitism helped U.S. personnel in foreign countries determine what is and is not antisemitism” — in other words, clarifying to them that they must consider various forms of criticism of Israel as antisemitism.

Rosenthal told NBC News: “This is another example of America losing its leadership role in the world.”

In arguing for the office, ADL head Jonathan Greenblatt pointed out: “These dedicated diplomats drove an exponential growth in U.S. reporting on antisemitism and mobilized a full arsenal of U.S. diplomatic tools and training.”

Prognosis

The next tactic may be for Congress to vote to fund the office. Since Israel lobby bills usually easily pass, often with overwhelmingly positive votes (most recently, 98-2), this will quite likely go through. The Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism already has a petition telling Congress to “Fully Fund State Department Office for Monitoring and Combating Anti-Semitism.”

Both Forman and Rosenthal say they expect Congress to fund the envoy’s office in the coming budget, and expect this will succeed in pushing Trump to appoint someone to the post.

Unfortunately, given Trump’s failure to failure to reign in bigotry and antisemitism among some of his supporters, it may be unlikely that the new envoy will turn a focused attention to real cases of anti-Jewish bigotry. In fact, given Middle East advisor and son-in-law Jared Kushner’s support for rightwing Israeli settlers, as well as the Islamophobia embraced by elements of the Trump circle, the Trump administration could well move the office even more in the direction of suppressing support for Palestinian rights and criticism of Israel.

Meanwhile, on July 3rd alone, Israeli authorities forced a Palestinian family to demolish its own home, Israeli forces rounded up 18 Palestinians in predawn raids, prisoners in Israel’s notorious Ktziot prison faced life-threatening conditions (40 percent of Palestinian males have cycled through Israeli prisons), and the Israeli military invaded and bulldozed land in Gaza. A typical day in Palestine. But don’t let the special envoy hear you say that.


Alison Weir is executive director of If Americans Knew, president of the Council for the National Interest, and author of Against Our Better Judgment: The Hidden History of How the U.S. Was Used to Create Israel. Additional citations and information on this topic are in her recent report and timeline: “International campaign is criminalizing criticism of Israel as ‘antisemitism”.

* Allan C. Brownfeld, Publications Editor of the American Council for Judaism, provided the comment below for inclusion in discussing the expanded definition of antisemitism:

The meaning of the term “anti/Semitism” has undergone dramatic change in recent years.  It used to refer to hostility to Jews and Judaism.  It has been redefined by some to mean criticism of Israel. In recent days, establishment Jewish organizations from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) to the Simon Wiesenthal Center have called the BDS movement “anti-Semitic”—despite the fact that it is supported by groups such as Jewish Voice for Peace and such international groups as Jews for Palestinian Right of Return and the Israeli activist organization Boycott from Within.

The effort to redefine anti-Semitism as criticism of Israel has been going on for more than  four decades.  In 1974, Benjamin Epstein, the national director of the ADL co-authored “The New Anti-Semitism,” a book whose argument was repeated in 1982 by his successor at ADL, Nathan Perlmutter, in a book entitled “The Real Anti-Semitism In America.”  After World War II, Epstein argued, guilt over the Holocaust kept anti-Semitism at bay, but as memories of the Holocaust faded, anti-Semitism had returned—this time in the form of hostility to Israel.  The reason:  Israel represented Jewish power.  Jews  are tolerable, acceptable in their particularity, only as victims,” wrote Epstein and  his ADL colleague Arnold Forster, “and when their situation changed so that they are either no longer victims, or appear not to be,the non-Jewish world finds this so hard to take that the effort is begun to render them victims anew.”

Jewish critics of Israel are as likely to be denounced as “anti-Semites” as non-Jews. For example, columnist Caroline Glick, writing in the International Jerusalem Post (Dec. 23-39, 2011) found New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman guilty of employing “traditional anti-Semitic slurs”  and “of channeling long-standing anti-Semitic charges.”  In a February 2012 Commentary article, Ben Cohen writes that, “The list of flagrant Jew-baiters  is growing;  those with Jewish names provide an additional frisson.”  Among those he names are M.J. Rosenberg, a former employee of AIPAC. Mondoweiss editor Philip Weiss, New Yorker correspondent Seymour Hersh, and Time Magazine columnist Joe Klein.

The redefinition of anti-Semitism to mean criticism of Israel is clearly an effort to end freedom of speech and discussion when it comes to Israel and its policies. It has nothing to do with real anti-Semitism, which this effort  trivializes and which, fortunately, is in retreat.

** Abbas later apologized for and retracted his allegation that the rabbi had approved contaminating wells, which numerous media had compared to Medieval “blood libels” of Jews. The Western media and the antisemitism report did not mention the extensive evidence that Israeli settlers have contaminated wells and that the state of Israel did the same during the conquest of Palestine. The suggestion that evidence of human rights violations cannot be discussed if similar accusations have been unfairly made against other people at another time in history enables current violations to continue.

*** State Department Special Envoys (as of June 30, 2017)

Climate Change (Special Envoy): Vacant

Closure of the Guantanamo Detention Facility (Special Envoy): Vacant

Energy Resources (Special Envoy and Coordinator): Mary Warlick (Acting)

Holocaust Issues (Special Envoy): Thomas K. Yazdgerdi

Israeli-Palestinian Negotiations (Special Envoy): Frank Lowenstein

Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism (Special Envoy): Vacant

North Korean Human Rights Issues (Special Envoy): Vacant

Organization of Islamic Cooperation (Special Envoy): Vacant

Six-Party Talks (Special Envoy): Vacant

Special Envoy and Coordinator of the Global Engagement Center: Vacant

Special Envoy for Sudan and South Sudan: Vacant

Special Envoy for Syria: Michael Ratney

Special Envoy for the Human Rights of LGBT Persons: Randy Berry

Special Ambassadors (A similar but higher position)

Global Criminal Justice (Ambassador): Todd F. Buchwald

Global Women’s Issues (Ambassador-at-Large): Vacant

Office of International Religious Freedom (Ambassador-at-Large): Vacant

Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking In Persons (Ambassador-at-Large): Susan Coppedge 


Below is a promotional video that the second anti-Semitism envoy, Hannah Rosenthal, made to promote a “Walk for Israel” event in Millwaukee in May, 2017 . The event was to celebrate the creation of Israel, “the world’s first Jewish state in 2,000 years.”

July 6, 2017 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

ADL to Build Silicon Valley Center to Monitor & Fight “Cyberhate”

If Americans Knew | March 14, 2017

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has announced that it will build a “a state-of-the-art command center in Silicon Valley” to monitor and fight anything online that it determines is “hate.”

The ADL is known for attacking individuals who criticize Israel as allegedly “anti-Semitic.” Its website states: “ADL has always been a strong voice for Israel.”

Critics of the organization have noted that its fundraising strategy relies on finding “anti-Semitism” and charge that it often exaggerates this threat.

A former Israeli minister stated that Israel and its partisans often use the charge of anti-Semitism against those who speak discuss Israel’s oppression of Palestinians: “It’s a trick, we always use it.” The ADL was the initiator of hate crimes legislation in the United States, launching this campaign in 1981.

ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt announced the new center on March 12 at a music festival in Austin, Texas. Accompanying him was Texas Tribune Editor-in-Chief Evan Smith.

According to the ADL’s press release on the project, the new center “will write reports, compile data, and “provide insights to government and policy makers.” The center will use the “best-in-class technology,” according to Greenblatt.

“This is a natural extension of the cyber hate work ADL has been doing for decades,” Greenblatt said, “and builds on the new presence we established last year in the Valley to collaborate even closer on the threat with the tech industry.”

The Omidyar Network is providing seed funding for the project. According to its website, Omidyar Network is a “philanthropic investment  firm” that works to “catalyze economic and social change.” Founded by Ebay creator Pierre Omidyar, the organization has dispersed over a billion dollars since its inception in 2004.

According to the ADL release, “The new center will leverage ADL’s long-standing relationships with law enforcement. It will evaluate artificial intelligence, big data, augmented/virtual reality, and other technologies as potential tools.

The center’s director will be Brittan Heller, who joined the ADL in September 2016 from the U.S. Department of Justice.

CEO Greenblatt came to the ADL from the tech word, with experience “starting ventures, raising capital, developing products, and crafting partnerships in Silicon Valley.

According to the ADL, “Over the next several months, Heller, Greenblatt, and the ADL team will engage with a wide range of stakeholders in Silicon Valley and beyond as they work to stand up this new center.”

Below is the trailer for a documentary on the ADL made by Israeli film director Yoav Shamir:

View full film

March 15, 2017 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | 4 Comments

The ADL and “No Place For Hate”

By Richard Hugus | March 6, 2017

Among those reacting to Trump’s selective Muslim ban while it was in effect in the US was “No Place For Hate,” a brand created by the Anti-Defamation League and retailed by synagogues and other Jewish organizations across the country. The ADL explicitly supports advocacy and activism for Israel. “No Place For Hate” operates under their banner.

On February 3, 2017 the steering committee of “No Place for Hate” in Falmouth, Massachusetts wrote a letter to the editor stating that the Trump administration’s “misguided policies foster an environment of fear toward others and encourage expression of bias.” They continue, “we are especially concerned about the religious bias implicit in this ban that may only serve to increase anti-Muslim sentiments, as well as prejudice against other religious minorities.”

Though the rabbi and others who signed this letter may have been sincere, it is hard to avoid the hypocrisy of any group which advocates for Israel saying it is “concerned” about bias against Muslims. Israel was built on bias against Muslims. It is practiced day in and day out there, with home demolitions, stealing of Palestinian land, military attacks on Gaza, almost daily executions of Palestinians in the streets of the West Bank, and an entire program of genocide since 1948. Further, Israel has exported bias against Muslims to the rest of the world, especially the west, so that it can justify its colonial project in Palestine and get the US and Europe to destroy nearby Muslim-majority lands for the sake of its other project — Greater Israel. The starting point of this campaign was blaming Arabs and Muslims for the false flag attacks of September 11, 2001. Israeli agents from the Bush-era neoconservatives to the Mossad were central in the planning of September 11. If any Arabs or Muslims were involved, they were involved as patsies. A large number of false flag attacks have been blamed on Muslims in the years since, in much the same way, just to keep the momentum going. No place for hate? Israel wrote the book!

Making this possible is an amazing feat of propaganda. While Israel organizes the attacks on Muslims in Asia and Africa, it tells the ADL to lead the defense of Muslims in the US. The criminal pretends to the role of his victim’s best friend. He steals with one hand while offering to help with the other. He bombs Gaza while leading a worldwide struggle for human rights. He profits from the African slave trade and then takes up the cause of African American civil rights. He leads the neoconservative warmongers, and at the same time leads the antiwar left. He creates the wars and also the opposition to those wars. He spies on the US, and he claims the US as his closest ally.

Israel has lasted so long on the world stage because it is an expert at deceit. It is so good at deceit that it can commit monstrous crimes in broad daylight and have the world believe Israel was the victim. The Zionist preempts criticism of Israel by convincing the world that such criticism is a hate crime, and gets laws passed to prevent it. On its website the ADL boasts that “45 states and the District of Columbia have enacted hate crimes laws based on (or similar to) ADL’s model.”

Perhaps this is the motive behind “No Place For Hate”: the real haters must appear to be the leading opponents of hate. If an organization gets itself into the position of defining what hate is and who is doing it, it is in a good position to make sure that the power it represents — racist Israel — is never accused. Has the ADL ever called out Israel for genocide in Palestine? Of course not. What about administrative detention? What about home demolitions? No. The ADL was created so that it could facilitate Israel’s genocide against Palestinians, and make sure the perpetrators never get blamed.

Several years ago, in this same small town in Massachusetts, the venue of a film group was shut down for its screening of Occupation 101, a documentary about the realities of life for Palestinians living under Israeli occupation. The opposition was anonymous. Pressure was brought to bear on the board overseeing the venue. Although a number of bureaucratic explanations were given, the final explanation was that the movie was “hate speech.” The same scenario has played out all over the country. Free speech is shut down on the basis of a construct promoted by organizations like the ADL, specifically to protect Israel. “No Place For Hate” is used as a weapon against free speech, dressed in liberal guise.

Perhaps the purpose of Jewish activism for human rights is, as the letter above says, protecting “other religious minorities” — namely, their own. Many Jews have been outspoken on the cause of Palestine because they know a crime has been committed, and they know that retribution may come. Those who are not witting participants have a guilty conscience. Some may wish to deny, some may wish to bargain, some may wish to obstruct, some may wish to shift the blame, but they all act out of guilt. It is up to those who have suffered in the many wars for Israel to decide what justice should be rendered — most notably, the Palestinians, but also the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Lebanon, Sudan, Yemen, and Iran. It is certain, however, that the ones who have set themselves up as the arbiters of human rights — the ADL among them — are the ones who should actually be on trial.

March 6, 2017 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, False Flag Terrorism, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Israeli-Canadian Thought Police Take Aim…. At Me

Canada Israel 1262e

By Prof. Tony Hall | American Herald Tribune | September 21, 2016

In recent days I discovered that the Canadian branch of the Israeli-US-based Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith is reporting that I am “well known for using academic credentials to deny the Holocaust.” On August 29, Daniel Leons-Marder mirrored the Canadian B’nai Brith report under the title, Facebook Allows “Kill All Jews” Post on Wall of Canadian Professor. In an item Leons-Marder claims has been shared 11,000 times, he asserted “B’nai Brith Canada reported the image, which was ruled acceptable [by Facebook] within two hours, when it was alerted to it having been posted on the Facebook page of Canadian Academic Professor Anthony Hall, who is a holocaust denier.”

FB allows 66848

The B’nai Brith’s Aug. 29 announcement starts with a bald statement that “Police have launched an investigation into an antisemitic Facebook post that was exposed by B’nai Brith Canada last Friday.” The earlier August 26 statement emphasized the role of Facebook, introducing me in the controversy as being “well known for using [my] academic credentials to deny the Holocaust and promote 9/11 conspiracy theories.”

fb Hall 44cca

Under the headline, “Killing Jews Is Now an Acceptable Message, Facebook Says,” the B’nai Brith announced,

“Antisemitism in all forms is rampant on social media, but this is the clearest, most obvious kind of antisemitism one could possibly create,” said Michael Mostyn, B’nai Brith CEO. “The classification of this as antisemitic cannot be challenged, and the fact that this promotes violence towards Jews is beyond dispute. Regardless, Facebook has deemed it acceptable despite its ‘community standards’ containing clear provisions against hate speech. The Jewish community deserves no less protection or respect than any other when it comes to hate speech and threats of violence.”

“Every year, upon publication of our Annual Audit of Antisemitic Incidents, a contingent of detractors accuses us of saying the sky is falling, and that antisemitism does not exist in Canada,” said Amanda Hohmann, National Director of B’nai Brith’s League for Human Rights. “Content like this is proof positive that not only antisemitism of a genocidal nature exists in Canada, but the systems that are supposed to protect us from racist hate speech don’t consider hatred of Jews to be problematic.”

B’nai Brith has reported the post to Lethbridge Police Services.

fb BB 22ad8

The Canadian B’nai Brith’s post, together with those of others that have mirrored B’nai Brith’s announcement, constitute the first time I have seen myself described in print as a ‘holocaust denier.” What is the definition used by the thought police to decide who is or is not a “holocaust denier? Are there many holocausts or only one? Who owns the term, “holocaust?” If there are exclusive rights, how were they obtained?

In the eyes of the B’nai Brith, is a “holocaust denier” anyone who disagrees with any element, large or small, of its favored historical interpretation? Is the B’nai Brith naturally hostile to anyone that retains independent, evidence-based perspectives on some of the most fraught issues of historical interpretation in contemporary times?

What is behind the creation of the original post that set the controversy in motion? Who created it and why? Is this whole episode an engineered crisis? Is one of its purposes to fend off the criticisms of those that accuse the B’nai Brith and related Zionist agencies of claiming “the sky is falling” with their Orwellian system of Annual Audits of Antisemitic Incidents. Please see below the map published to present cartographic interpretations by the Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism.

Map BB 9fccd

As shall be explained below, the B’nai Brith has failed to perform due diligence in its handling of this matter. Its officers did not even attempt back up their provocative characterizations of me with even a shred of genuine evidence. The organization opted instead to exploit for its own political agenda the shock value inherent in the vile contents of an item allegedly posted, apparently very briefly, on my FB page. The item is said to have been posted by Glen Davidson. I did not ever see it on my FB page. I did not invite nor did I even have any knowledge of it until recently.

In its material the B’nai Brith describe the post as a “depiction of a White man assaulting an Orthodox Jew accompanied by a lengthy, violent anti-Semitic screed beside the photograph.” Here is the post, which I first saw sometime early in September as part of a smear piece published about me at “Aussie Dave’s” Israellycool.

Hall BB 01a73

To reiterate and to be absolutely clear, I did not post this social media item myself. I did not create it or solicit it. I do not approve of its contents. In fact I of course strongly condemn the message conveyed in both the image and the text. Due diligence demands, however, that I look further into this matter.

The B’nai Brith in Action

My initial research into the item’s content is leading me to the opinion that the image probably emerges from some sort of staged situation, one that seems to include the application of photo shop techniques. The most basic questions that must now be pressed concern the source of the atrocious text. From whence does it originate? Certainly I did not write it. Glen Davidson did not write it. Who did write it and why? Not once yet have I seen this deeper question posed by those who are exploiting the vile item to dramatize a real or concocted dispute with Facebook.

Quite possibly by design, the miniscule, densely compressed text is very difficult to read especially on small digital devices. Could this attribute be because the text was conceived not as a means of winning adherents but rather as a justification for political actions like the B’nai Brith’s current hate speech campaign highlighting my academic position at the University of Lethbridge?

I first saw the item among a number of screen shots all dedicated to “Aussie Dave’s” nomination of me as “Anti-Zionist-Not-Anti-Semite of the Day.”

Hall Zionism bf767

I remember being particular interested in the part of the post that mentioned Ryan Bellerose, a Metis man and convert to Judaism who has recently been hired as the B’nai Brith’s new Western Canadian representative. Most of my attention zeroed in on Aussie Dave’s suggestion to his readers that they communications to the president of my University, Dr. Mike Mahon. I also took note of a screen shot of an item on U of L letterhead where Dr. Mahon responds to  “JP.” Who is “JP”?

I can trace one thread of this matter’s origins to a recorded telephone call I listened to a year ago. Its source was Amanda Hohmann, National Director of B’nai Brith’s League for Human Rights. In August of 2015 Ms. Hohmann telephoned the manager of a community venue in downtown Edmonton Alberta. Ms. Hohmann aim on behalf of her employer was to shut down a book promotion event. At the time Dr. Barrett along with his wife, two sons a dog and me were touring Alberta to call attention to an edited text entitled We Are Not Charlie Hebdo. Dr. Barrett edited the volume to which I had contributed an article.

The venue’s manager, Richard Awid, taped Ms. Hohmann’s intervention and subsequently played it back for me. Here is how I described this part of the episode in an article entitled “B’nai Brith Moves to Quash Free Speech in Canada,”

Mr. Awid was somewhat dumbfounded that a small event at his community hall, “one of 100 such venues in Edmonton,” would elicit such an intense response from a very powerful organization in Toronto. He played back to me on his answering machine a recorded message he received at about 9 am on August 12 from Amanda Hohmann. Ms. Hohmann explained that she had received “a few complaints” about “Mr.” Kevin Barrett on the B’nai Brith’s “anti-hate hotline.” (1-416-633-6224; 1-800-892-2624)

Ms. Hohmann asserted that

“Mr. Barrett is a known anti-semite conspiracy theorist, a Holocaust Denier, and 9/11 Denier and all sorts of other things.”

Ms. Hohmann made no effort whatsoever to give background proof of her allegations or to identify the sources of the supposed “complaints.” Nevertheless she proposed to Mr. Awid that he should “cancel the event and let Mr. Barrett know he is not welcome in Edmonton.”

Hohmann 4485a

In this telephone call the B’nai Brith’s “human rights” director tried to defame a colleague offering absolutely no proof whatsoever to provide evidentiary backing for her directive from Toronto that Dr. Barrett should not be welcome in Alberta’s capital. I believe the Western world currently supports many Amanda Hohmanns paid very well to target and slander regularly individuals like Dr. Kevin Barrett.

Are the protagonists in these ugly witch hunts ever held accountable for the excesses? Are there any constraints on the increasingly severe incursions of the Zionist thought police? What remedies are or are not available for the likes of Dr. Barrett who is a Muslim man. Along with the rest of the omma, Dr. Barrett and his family are regularly subjected to heavy doses of “hate speech” and sometimes worse?

When Richard Awid, a Muslim himself, did not adhere to Ms. Hohmann’s instructions, the B’nai Brith was able to send in a representative of the “hate speech” unit of the Edmonton police. The officer monitored the first part of the event and then left after informing Dr. Barrett that our presentation deemed was not to be hate speech by the police force he represented. I recall wondering at the time, does that bizarre episode foreshadow an era when all university classes will be policed by officials answerable to agencies like the B’nai Brith? Is that where this is leading?

The B’nai Brith has been front and center in Canada’s increasingly notorious record of aggressively policing citizens for supposed thought crimes and speech crimes. The B’nai Brith’s assault on free speech in Canada includes among its objects for criminalization Doug Collins, Malcolm Ross, Jim Keegstra, Ernst Zundel, Terry Tremaine, David Ahenakew and, most recently, Arthur Topham.

Topham 62b25

The case against Arthur Topham and his Radical Press is still ongoing. By following at a distance the tawdry prosecution of the self-employed reporter, publisher, editor and carpenter in Quesnel British Columbia, I was made aware of a very significant text published in 1941. Theodore Kaufman’s Germany Must Perish outlines an extremely ruthless strategy of genocidal destruction of a whole people. Has this classic description of genocidal intent and methodology been ever given prominence in a school curriculum in Canada?

My reading of an Internet copy of the text, one that became integral to the proceedings of the Topham trial, caused me to reflect on how one-sided the whole discourse on genocide is becoming. The suffering of one group is highlighted and elevated above all others while the suffering and assaults imposed on other groups is often downplayed, ignored or even denigrated. I had no idea before the B’nai Brith-instigated prosecution of Arthur Topham that there was such a detailed plan to annihilate the entire German people.

I only recently have become fully aware of the extent of the murder, rape and pillage of several millions of Germans after 1945 in American prisoner war camps and in orgies of Soviet-instigated ethnic cleansing in Eastern Europe. Where are the museums to promote public education about these crimes against humanity? Where is the museum to commemorate the horrendous intergenerational genocide of perhaps a hundred million Indigenous peoples in the Holocaust of the Americas since 1492? Will future You Tubers make videos to ask elderly members of today’s generation what they did or didn’t do about the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians now underway in order to clear the way for Greater Israel?

Free speech 8de57

Thought Police Wreaking Havoc on Campus

The B’nai Brith is becoming especially aggressive in campaigns to have individuals fired from their work for expounding historical interpretations it does not like. The B’nai Brith boasted menacingly on September 15 of having destroyed the career of Nikolas Balakas, a long-serving lab technician at York University’s Department of Astronomy and Physics. The announcement that Canada’s most ruthless thought police agency had succeeded in its campaign to get York University to fire its employee was written by Aidan Fishman. Mr. Fishman is Campus Advocacy Coordinator of B’nai Brith Canada.

After counting coup on Mr. Balaras’s dismissal, Mr. Fishman concludes with the following plea that the University of Lethbridge should follow York University’s example. The B’nai Brith official wrote,

“Unfortunately not every administration is prepared to act with such decisiveness [as that of York University], as the ongoing saga surrounding Professor Anthony Hall at Lethbridge University shows. I hope that the administration in Lethbridge can use the excellent example set by York University on this matter, and take appropriate steps to ensure that their students are not similarly subjected to hatred and antisemitism on campus.”

Who is the real author of this “ongoing saga?” Where is the proof as of today that University of Lethbridge students are being subjected “to hatred and anti-Semitism on campus.” I have not once seen this kind of language appear in 26 years of teaching evaluations. Where is there any accountability for floating this kind of vicious agenda of smear? The intrusion into this matter of a B’nai Brith official described as Campus Advocacy Coordinator is, as far as I know, setting precedents at my school. What is the nature of the “advocacy” Mr. Fishman is “coordinating”?

The effort of B’nai Brith’s “campus coordinator” and possibly others of his group to inject themselves into the internal governance of the University of Lethbridge brings to mind a similar controversy brewing at Oberlin College. Oberlin College is a renowned Liberal Arts school in Ohio whose origins long predate the American Civil War. There Dr. Joy Karega has been suspended with pay from her teaching position as a result of a controversy also involving Facebook posts. I have written a lengthy open latter on the matter to Oberlin President, Dr. Marvin Krislov. The text, which has been mirrored on other web sites, was first published at American Herald Tribune.

Karega AHT 95018

In my effort to reach out to President Krislov, Dr. Karega and the other students and faculty involved in what has definitely become a fiasco for the Oberlin community, I proposed in my open letter that we all work together to mount a joint academic conference. I proposed that my own Liberal Education program at the University of Lethbridge ally itself with the embattled Liberal Arts College in Ohio to organize an event aimed at bringing thoughtful academic commentary to address a mounting crisis in higher education in North America.

I hereby invite Aiden Fishman to join this initiative and thereby embark on a constructive course rather than the trajectory of negativity implicit in his present preoccupation with hate talk and advocacy for division. Of course Mr. Fishman is far from alone in the type of “advocacy” in which he is engaged. There is a barrage of interventions currently underway from organizations like the AMCHA Initiative, the Simon Wiesenthal Center for Campus Outreach, Hillel, the American Jewish Congress, David Horowitz’s FrontPage and Daniel Pipes’ Campus Watch to mention only a few. As currently on full public display at Oberlin College, these well-funded and deeply staffed interventions invariably wreak havoc on the principles of academic freedom and civil academic discourse on campus?

I suggested the following title for the event.

Anti-Semitic Conspiracy Theories:

A Rational or Irrational Phrase in Academic Discourse?

In my research research into the Joy Karega/Oberlin debacle I became aware of the concerted campaign in 2014 to destroy the career of Prof. William I. Robinson. Dr. Robinson is Professor of Sociology at the University of California at Santa Barbara. Like Dr. Joy Karega, Dr. Steven Salaita, Dr. Hatem Bazian, Dr. Rabab Abdulhadi, Dr. Richard Falk, me and many others, Dr. Robinson includes in the curriculum some focus on the plight of Palestinian people.

Caption: Prof. Richard Falk, Former UN Rapporteur and Princeton University Professor of International Law, Speaks on the Issue of Academic Freedom at the University of California at Santa Barbara

The sociologist refused to back down from incorporating in his teaching critical perspectives on the harsh treatment of Palestinians especially in Gaza and the so-called Occupied Territories. Amidst proliferating Jewish settlements and the constant repressions of the Israeli police state, many Palestinians continue to eke out marginal existences on the heavily militarized lands set aside for them by the United Nations in Resolution 181. Resolution 181, an international instrument calling for partition of Palestine and UN trusteeship over Jerusalem, constitutes the primary law at the roots of the Israeli entity in its present form.

Abdulhadi 1ed77

Robinson books 2ccbc

Prof. Robinson has written of his ordeal in August of 2014 on Truthout. In an article entitled “Repression Escalates on US Campuses,” the sociologist explains,

The persecution to which I was subjected involved a litany of harassment, slander, defamation of character and all kinds of threats against the university by outside forces if I was not dismissed, as well as hate mail and death threats from unknown sources. More insidiously, it involved a shameful collaboration between a number of university officials and outside forces from the Israel lobby as the university administration stood by silently, making a mockery of academic freedom.

The disciplinary procedure initiated against me by UCSB officials involved a host of irregularities, violations of the university’s own procedures, breaches of confidentiality, denial of due process, conflicts of interest, failure of disclosure, improper political surveillance, abuses of power and position, unwarranted interference in curriculum and teaching and so on. As I would discover during the course of the ordeal, individuals inside the university and in positions of authority had linked up with agents of the lobby outside the university in setting out to prosecute me.

Will the same toolbox of wrecking instruments deployed at the University of California be shipped in from the United States and unpacked at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta Canada? Will the administration of my own school continue to uphold the University of Lethbridge’s good reputation as an institution of higher education where the vital principles of academic freedom and civil academic discourse are expressed and defended?

On several occasions I have publicly lauded the U of L for creating an environment of academic freedom. I made this observation, for instance, at the University of Lethbridge’s book event when in 2011 my volume, Earth into Property, was launched. In this 900+ page peer-reviewed academic text published by McGill-Queen’s University Press, I incorporate analysis that the B’nai Brith flippantly trivializes as “9/11 conspiracy theories.”

Deeply corrupt agencies like the B’nai Brith have a lot to lose when the basic facts about what really happened on 9/11–who did what to whom—become the common knowledge of the general public. That day may be approaching far faster than those hiding behind the tired old memes about “conspiracy theories” anticipate.

How much longer can the evidence of 9/11 be concealed behind the ruthless kind of ad hominem attacks that have become the well known-specialty of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith in all its many constituent parts? How much longer will the public tolerate the hate propaganda and professional assaults that are obliterating the fundamental integrity of so many of our most important institutions?

What other lies and deceptions are being fed to the public on a regular basis? What is the level of public confidence these days in the trustworthiness of society’s key institutions including government, media, police and agencies of higher education? Who can say public confidence in these entities is high?

What is the appropriate role for universities in addressing issues of officialdom’s fraud and malfeasance especially in situations that have large implications for public policy? If even tenured university faculty can be intimidated into shying away from the professional responsibility to distinguish truth from falsehood, but especially in situations that threaten power’s imperatives, who will perform this vital function? Politicians? Talking heads on TV? Who will speak truth to the unaccountable power that the B’nai Brith in its current reckless demeanor so abundantly epitomizes?

Ritual Defamation in the Social Media Circus

To return to the Facebook post that lies at the root of this controversy, I have already publicly condemned the contents of the offending item in the September 16 edition of False Flag Weekly News. I currently co-host this regular broadcast along with one of its founding partners, Dr. Kevin Barrett.

I noticed a reference to my public condemnation of the item in question in the comments section of the B’nai Brith’s own web post of August 29. A commenter going by the name of Andrew Blair observes,

It is important to realize that Professor Hall publicly condemns that image and text. Go to False Flag Weekly, at minute 36, to see and hear his denunciation.When I put on my “fairness” glasses and look at that image I see Tony Hall in the headlock, and the arms locking his head are the image and the text. Does anyone else see that, or are my “fairness” glasses defective?

“Andrew Blair’s” question certainly resonates with me. The B’nai Brith’s description of the image in its news announcements refers to “a White man assaulting an Orthodox Jew.” Is the Orthodox Jew not a White man too? What is there to say that the aggressor in this image is not Cherokee or Mohawk or Palestinian for that matter?

What are the politics of the B’nai Brith’s choice of words in its racialized approach to its public announcement highlighting this inflammatory image? What effect is being sought? Did the image emerge from a real or staged situation? If it was the former, what was the event? Where did it happen? Who took the photograph? Have the investigators in the B’nai Brith-police-hate-crime-complex explored such matters.

Is the B’nai Brith’s emphasis on “police investigations” itself a staged tactic of sorts? Is it meant to dramatize the main story line aimed ultimately at seizing control of strategic instruments of Internet communication. The subplot, which is certainly intended to harm me personally and professionally, is that crazed and genocidal anti-Semitic conspiracy theorists– even “holocaust deniers”— are running around loose with full Internet access even in Lethbridge Alberta?

My own best assessment is that the offending social media item seems likely to have been produced by photo shop juxtapositions of different images. The “White man’s” head and the “Orthodox Jew’s” crushed glasses both look like inserts. The white wing of the victim’s crushed and displaced glasses seems to have been drawn in. There are signs of graphic tinkering in the relationship between the huge muscular arm in the forefront and the squeezed face of the suffering victim.

The reversal of Talmudic-style contempt for the Other (the Goy) cries out the pictured message of Jewish victimhood. The provocative power of the image is reinforced by the B’nai Brith’s very racialized description. In my recent research I have discovered that this image and other images very much like—images that often feature the same racist “White man”— show up on many Internet posts, even one I found translated into German.

Garisson 2191d

Ben Garisson fa323

Where the picture provides the main message, the text provides the “evidence” of the antisemitism that the B’nai Brith and its allied agencies are simultaneously engaged in inventing, cultivating, spotlighting and publicly combating. What justification would there be for the existence of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith without the métier of antisemitism? The primary essence of the B’nai B’rith entities is to advance the agendas of the Israeli entity in the Diaspora, in other words in Canada, USA, Britain, France. Australia, and many other countries.

The text in the offending item is perhaps the most appalling excerpt of gutter prose I have ever seen. Its contents are so reprehensible that they demand careful consideration. Like an illegal drug planted by corrupt police on a targeted individual, the reprehensible social media item has been metaphorically put on my digital front door step and then advertised by the B’nai Brith to advance its own political agenda. I am left with little alternative but to respond as decently and as conscientiously to a crime in progress.

The author, it is claimed by the item’s creator, is Ben “Tel Aviv Terror” Garrison. This Garrison person has many nicknames. He is made to exclaim,

“There was never a Holocaust, but there should have been and, rest assured, there WILL be, as you serpentine kikes richly deserve one. I will not rest until every single filthy. Parasitic kike is rounded up and slaughtered like the vermin they are. The White man has had more than enough of International Jewry and we are fully prepared to smite the parasite for the millionth time. The greedy, hook nosed kikes know that there days are numbered and, unlike in the past, they now have nowhere to run. This time, there will be no kikes left alive to spead around the planet like cockroaches. We will get them ALL into the oven and their putrid memory will finally be erased from the planet once and for all. Like all parasites the Jew will continue to reproduce until every last one has been wiped out. This is why it is crucial that all kikes are ruthlessly and mercilesslt butchered for the good of us all. KILL ALL JEWS NOW! EVERY LAST ONE!” Ben “Tel Aviv Terror” Garrison

What kind of demented mind would come up with such a macabre celebration of envisaged mass murder? What would be the motivation to pen such a blatant incitement to hate and slaughter of a specific people?

My research into the offending item’s origins quickly led me to the many Internet profiles and posts of Ben Garrison. Ben Garrison is apparently a real person who lives in Montana. It turns out that this Ben Garrison, the sole named individual in the miniature text of the offending Facebook post, is also the aggressor in the photo shopped image. Adorned with dark glasses and a cowboy hat, Garrison is pictured as (in the words of B’nai Brith) as “the White man assaulting an Orthodox Jew.”

Ben Garrison

The real life Ben Garrison is often described as a libertarian political satirist. He is a prolific cartoonist whose cartoon and personal images lie at the center of an increasingly contentious media circus. Significantly Facebook figures centrally in the many-faceted narrative of Ben Garrison. Perhaps his Facebook connection is a major reason why B’nai Brith and related agencies chose Garrison’s Internet personae as poster boy for its hate speech campaign of fund raising and ritual defamation.

Holocaust Studies experts at Tel-Aviv University are among the most outspoken proponents of the view that Ben Garrison is indeed the kind of bigoted psychopath who would in real life utter provocations to the genocide of Jews. These Israeli academicians would probably argue it is entirely in character for Ben Garrison to have actually declared with sincerity, “Kill All Jews.” The hypothesis that Ben Garrison’s racist screed should be taken at face value is implicit in the wording and headlines of the posts by B’nai Brith, Daniel Leons-Marder’s Everyday Antisemitism and the Coordination Forum for Countering Antisemitism.

The smear campaign’s architects and engineers are attempting a controlled demolition of my reputation in their quest to harness Facebook more fully to their own agendas. These architects and engineers count among their allies the creators and authors at Encyclopedia dramatica, Of Ben Garrison the encyclopedia’s drama experts report, “Scholars from Tel-Aviv University’s Center for Holocaust Studies have ominously described him [Ben Garrison] as the most racist man in the universe, and the biggest existential threat to the Jews since Hitler.”

This characterization runs counter to the dominant view that Garrison is “the Internet’s most trolled cartoonist.” According to a Breitbart article entitled “Ben Garrison: How the Internet Made a Fake White Supremacist”,

Montana-based artist Ben Garrison isn’t a violent Neo-Nazi, or even a white nationalist. He’s a polite, accomplished cartoonist, with no history of overt or covert racism. His true political leanings are libertarian, anti-elitist, and anti-globalist. Garrison is, in fact, the victim of one of the most extraordinary and longest-running smear campaigns on the internet.

For a mixture of amusement and spite, in a trolling spree that has lasted over six years, thousands of online pranksters and real neo-Nazis have been remixing his cartoons into racist caricatures. Most Ben Garrison cartoons attack the government, corporations, and political movements.

However, almost immediately after one is published, it is remixed into a new version that attacks Jews, African-Americans, or other minorities. These are rapidly disseminated in troll communities and sometimes become more widely-shared than the originals.

Garrison cartoons 53de5

Garrison cartoon 2db39

If Breitbart has it right and Tel-Aviv’s Center for Holocaust Studies has it wrong, then the real Ben Garrison could not have written the disgusting text that goes along with the offensive image of the cartoonist putting his victim in a headlock. If Ben Garrison is not to be understood as the kind of person who could have come up with the wording replicated and publicized by Amanda Hohmann, Daniel Leons-Marder,and B’nai Brith’s CEO, Michael Mostyn, then these individuals are involved in a telling case of false flag deception.

Given the nature of their dubious employment in what Norman Finkelstein has labeled the “Holocaust Industry,” I find it difficult to believe that these individuals as well as their bosses, underlings and associates were not aware of the controversy swirling around Ben Garrison. After all, I was able to discovered the basic outlines of the Garrison controversy in a few google searches after viewing the posts featuring Mostyn’s, Hohmann’s and Leons-Marder’s comments. Is this group merely incompetent? Are its members part of a concerted agenda to change the public policies of many agencies, including those of the Canadian government, Facebook and the University of Lethbridge, through calculated misrepresentations, frauds and incitements?

In an Internet post entitled “Ben Garrison on Trolls” the Montana cartoonist is said to speak for himself. Interestingly, Garrison’s observations begin with his reference to the very same Facebook reference to “community standards” that supposedly initiated the B’nai Brith’s slander of me.

“This page wasn’t removed. We reviewed the page you reported for harassment. Since it did not violate our community standards, we did not remove it. Thanks for your report.”

This is the message [writes Ben Garrison] I received after reporting a hate page on Facebook. Near the top of the hate page was a statement that encouraged the extermination of all Jews. Along with that statement was a photo of my face and the name Ben Garrison. Trolls had stolen my artwork and photos from my blog, my cartoon site as well as my fine art site and had concocted an entire page devoted to spewing libelous hate. The troll entity called the page ‘Ben Garrison Cartoons—the Official Site.’  The trolls had stamped the name ‘Ben Garrison’ onto as many hateful images as possible throughout the page. How does one stop such blatant libel? Where do these trolls come from? Is it even possible to track them down? Why do they do such terrible things? Why me?

As I found out, it’s not just me. Many others have suffered the same outrageous indignity. It appears that trolls are no longer content merely talk to each other on sordid sites such as ‘4chan’ or ‘Stormfront.’ They want to go mainstream.  Therefore, social media are a natural target for them. Do they really believe the vitriolic memes they are shoveling, or are they merely playing an elaborate prank? It doesn’t matter. Their memes of hate must not go mainstream. Facebook must wake up and block the hate before it gets established. Hate speech is not free speech. Hate speech is blind, one-dimensional blackness. It is not reasoned debate.  It loudly shouts for the murder of human beings and Facebook is providing them a megaphone for that purpose.

In my view the largest weight of available evidence points to the conclusion that Ben Garrison did not write the “Kill All Jews” commentary. If Ben Garrison did not write the planted text, then who did?

Could the B’nai Brith’s highlighted social media item have been produced by a Zionist group, agency or individual? Why might partisans of Israel do such a thing? Could it be to provide the ammunition for smear campaigns directed against individuals and groups that criticize Israel? Could it be to create incidents to justify appeals for money such as those accompanying the B’nai Brith’s slanderous posts aimed at damaging the reputation of the University of Lethbridge and my tenured academic role in it as a 26-year member of the Arts and Science Faculty?

Worse, much worse, can be envisaged. Could it be that the production and planting of the of the Ben Garrison post as well as others like it might be deployed to provide “evidence” in thought crime and speech crime litigation, the ultimate specialty and raison d’etre of the B’nai Brith?  It is easy to imagine how such an outlandish and extravagant expression of hostility as that said to come from Garrison could be rendered useful to Crown prosecutors serving the Zionist masters.

Regardless of its source, there is no doubt that the Ben Garrison post could conceivably be exploited as a tailor made item to assist Crown prosecutors serving the agenda of B’nai Brith and related agencies. Such an item could definitely be deployed in a litigious assault on designated targets in order to establish webs of connection linking alleged hate speech with genocidal intent as well as the semantic nuke in the Zionist arsenal of weaponized words.

The conspiracy to advance the public perception that the engineered phrase, “holocaust denial,” has any internal and external coherence as an outlawed category of forbidden thought and speech runs absolutely contrary to the intellectual viability of the academy as well as the health of society more generally. The basic premise of the world’s most fraught term creates a false dichotomy that is coming to epitomize the decline of evidence-based rationality beneath the ascent of a new kind of orthodoxy combining both religious and secular elements.

Those that want to entrench and enforce an outlawed realm of forbidden thought and articulation brandish the weaponized term like an ideological sniper on steroids. They have no interest in providing definitions of where orthodoxy ends and where denial begins. As I am discovering by raising even a simple call for “open debate” on the main platform of Zionism’s unaccountable power, there are harsh new authoritarian forces that need to be called to account if we are even to slow down the police state incursions in our post-911 world.

The new configurations of authority are extending to important agencies like the Royal Canadian Legion, Jasper National Park, and the Alberta Society of Fiddlers. Those overseeing these important institutions are made to feel empowered to impose arbitrary sanctions and punishments against an individual who dared to question enshrined orthodoxy.

The message is made clear that the vibrance of art and culture, the wellbeing of veterans as well as the need to protect some of Alberta’s most majestic Alpine environments have become secondary commitments. The treatment in Jasper National Park of violinist Monika Schaefer signals the end of our free and democratic society. Our right and need to express independent thought, the starting point of collective self-determination, has has been sacrificed in order to enforce supine obedience to the sanctification of an historical interpretation that must not be held subjected to sceptical scrutiny and reconsideration.

How many are now being held, including some Canadians, in dark European dungeons for questioning any aspect of the unrelenting vilification of Germany as home of the most the most evil society of monsters ever to walk the face of the earth? Will we ever be able to liberate ourselves from the spell that is causing us to become so blind and unresponsive to the holocausts we ourselves are imposing on the natural world and also on the besieged worldwide community of our Muslim brothers and sisters?

What are the chances that the nuclear holocaust currently being promoted by our governors can be held back when those most intent on making war not peace are so firmly in charge? Is there a connection between the decline of the anti-war movement and the rise of the militarized police state currently deploying false flag-induced fears to constrain our ability to think, speak and act in conformity with the imperatives of survival? What we most require at this moment is simple affirmations of life’s beauty and integrity. Instead we are delivered coercive dictates demanding we deny what our reason and research tells us to be true.

How did we the academics, but especially we the historians, allow it to happen that a whole category of the European past has been declared off bounds to unfettered discussion and critical investigative scholarship? By allowing this development to proceed, a very sweeping and consequential precedent is being set.

How did we the citizens allow the principle to develop that government can declare that whole subject areas of research and publication have been so perfectly interpreted, so correctly dealt with in every detail, that no revision and modification of existing conclusions can be allowed. What is the role of the Anti-Defamation League of the B’nai B’rith in enforcing the ruthless bulldozing aside of the most basic foundations of freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and adherence to rigorous standards of scientific inquiry.

The B’nai Brith and Ben Garrison, the poster boy for the Zionist organization’s hate speech campaign, are exactly on the same page when it comes to Facebook. Both Ben Garrison and the B’nai Brith seek to constrain free speech on the Internet more tightly. Is this convergence of agendas a coincidence or are more calculated deceptions at play here? To publicize his desire that Facebook be more proactive in censoring the Internet, Garrison produced the following cartoon.

Ben Garisson Cartoon 61739

Facebook and Israel; Ben Garrison and the B’nai Brith

My FFWN co-host, Dr. Kevin Barrett, has evaluated the evidence surrounding the Garrison post and concluded it was “very likely produced by B’nai Brith itself, or other Zionist extremists of like mind, as a PR operation. No wonder they are “monitoring” the police to make sure they behave themselves.

Presenting his own version of the B’nai Brith’s highlighted image, Dr. Barrett continues

The absurd rant with its lurid references to “greedy hook-nosed kikes” and so on does not pass the smell test. Whoever created this image obviously did not do so with the intention of convincing the public to take action against Jews and/or Zionists. On the contrary, it appears to have been designed for the opposite purpose: To convince the public that crazed, foul-mouthed, murderous anti-Semites are a clear and present danger.

Virtually every time a swastika is spray painted on a synagogue, the culprit turns out to be a “self-hating” Jewish Zionist trying to conjure up the specter of an “anti-Semitic threat.” Would an investigation of the provenance of this image find something similar?

Dr. Barrett observes that“the manufactured incident smearing Tony Hall may be part of a coordinated program, orchestrated from Tel Aviv, to try to stop the rise of the ever-increasing virtual army of pro-Palestine social media users.”

As highlighted in Telesur, the government of Israel and Facebook have been represented at the highest level in a series of meetings aimed at conspiring to hold back the growing flood of social media posts subjecting Israel’s maltreatment of the Palestinians to sceptical public scrutiny.

fb telesur 7fd31

This recent development well demonstrates the specious nature of B’nai Brith’s characterization of Facebook as some kind of rogue agency unwilling to act immediately to pre-empt an existential threat emanating from Lethbridge. More likely the B’nai Brith’s alarmist posts in late August of 2016 were, in part at least, a ploy to divert attention from the reality that social media, but especially Facebook, is more and more being harnessed to Zionist goals and agendas.

Was the B’nai Brith’s deployment of the racist side of Ben Garrison’s dual public personae calculated to serve the double purpose of both smearing me and my school as well as leading interested parties to a surprising “libertarian” voice for the suppression of Internet freedom? What should be done about Internet trolls such as those at the B’nai Brith that have shown themselves to be unrelenting in planting lies and innuendo with the aim of silencing criticism of Israel?


Dr. Hall is editor in chief of American Herald Tribune. He is currently Professor of Globalization Studies at University of Lethbridge in Alberta Canada. He has been a teacher in the Canadian university system since 1982. Dr. Hall, has recently finished a big two-volume publishing project at McGill-Queen’s University Press entitled “The Bowl with One Spoon”.

September 22, 2016 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , , , , | 6 Comments

An Armenian American Group Caves in to the Anti-Defamation League

By David Boyajian | Dissident Voice | June 14, 2016

For several decades the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and other leading Jewish American organizations (AIPAC, AJC, B’nai B’rith, and JINSA) have deliberately colluded with Turkey and Israel to defeat U.S. Congressional resolutions on the Christian Armenian Genocide and to diminish the factuality of that genocide.

Yola Habif Johnston, a director at JINSA (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs), once admitted that “the Jewish lobby has quite actively supported Turkey in their efforts to prevent the so-called Armenian genocide resolution from passing.”

The hypocrisy is breathtaking given these organizations’ loud, endless demands for recognition of, and legislation on, the Jewish Holocaust.

455px-Lucine-kasbarian-no-place-for-hate-adlStarting in 2007, Armenian Americans in Massachusetts and elsewhere made international news by exposing the national ADL’s hypocrisy.  In disgust, 13 Massachusetts cities and the umbrella Massachusetts Municipal Association kicked out the ADL’s alleged anti-bias program, “No Place for Hate.” Human rights advocates and many honest Jews supported those efforts.  The Turkish government raged that its collaboration with Israel, the ADL, and other Holocaust hypocrites had been blown wide-open.

But in mid-May, a small group of Armenian Americans in Massachusetts — including the politically ambitious Sheriff of Middlesex County Peter Koutoujian and a few members of the Armenian Assembly of America (AAA) and the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) — struck a horrible “deal” with the two-faced ADL.

For his part of the “deal,” ADL National Director Jonathan Greenblatt casually “blogged” that his organization now “unequivocally” acknowledges the Armenian Genocide and “would support” (not “do support”) American recognition of that genocide.

Even Andrew Tarsy, former Director of the New England ADL, termed the pact “inadequate“. The ADL “ought to lead the conversation about reparations for these [Armenian] families … assets, land … everything that Holocaust reparations … has represented should be on the table.”

Of the many things wrong with this “deal,” let’s list a few.

The Horrible “Deal”

  • The “deal” was concocted behind the backs of the Armenian American community and the hundreds of activists — Armenian and non-Armenian — who started the campaign in 2007 and have battled the ADL since. Why haven’t the verbal or written details of the negotiations and “deal” been made public? Why the lack of transparency?
  • Greenblatt (former Starbucks VP and Special Assistant to Pres. Obama) isn’t the ADL’s highest official and may not have the authority to set policy. Have the ADL’s National Commission and National Executive Committee (its “highest policymaking bodies”) formally approved of Greenblatt’s “blog” post? We don’t know.
  • The ADL has long played word games with the Armenian Genocide. In 2007, for example, it disingenuously dubbed it “tantamount to genocide” but not genocide. Greenblatt’s conditional claim that “we would support U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide” is similarly suspect. Why not just “we support”?
  • The Armenian American activist website “NoPlaceForDenial.com” demands that the ADL “support U.S. affirmation of the Armenian Genocide, as it does with the Holocaust.” I authored those last six words years ago.  They mean that as partial atonement the ADL must work as hard for acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide as it has for the Holocaust.  Nothing in Greenblatt’s statement remotely suggests that the ADL would do that.
  • For three decades or more, the ADL has attacked Armenian Americans and worked with Turkey and Israel to defeat U.S. recognition of the Armenian Genocide. Yet the ADL has never apologized for its atrocious conduct.  Ironically, the only ADL apology came in 2007 when National Director Abe Foxman apologized to Turkey because publicity surrounding the Armenian issue had embarrassed that country.  The failure to obtain an apology from the ADL is scandalous.
  • Americans deserve to know the details of the ADL’s longtime Genocide-denial pact with Turkey and Israel. Where are the documents, and why was their release not part of the “deal”?

The Berman Affair

Armenian Americans won a major victory in 2014 when Attorney Joseph Berman, an ADL National Commissioner, lost his bid to become a Massachusetts Superior Court judge. Governor Deval Patrick had nominated him in 2013. I testified against Berman.

Following a widely publicized fight, the eight elected Governor’s Councilors refused to confirm Berman. His leadership position in the hypocritical ADL was one reason why Councilors opposed him.

While I was in close touch with several Councilors, an incident occurred that has never before been made public.

A Councilor who opposed Berman told me of receiving several calls asking that the Councilor vote for Berman. One such caller was Sheriff Peter Koutoujian, an Armenian American prominent in the recent ADL “deal.” I remain deeply troubled by that call.  Why would Koutoujian do such a thing?  I think I know, but only Koutoujian can answer that question. He did not return my recent call asking about his past activities in the campaign against the ADL.

The final Council vote on Berman was 4 to 4.  Had the Councilor voted as Koutoujian asked, the ADL’s candidate and the ADL would have triumphed, and Armenian activists would have been defeated.

That and other significant incidents raise questions as to whether the recent ADL “deal” was negotiated in the tough, adversarial way required to defend Armenian interests.

Failing to Confront

When a few activists and I launched the battle against the ADL in July 2007 and events were moving quickly, AAA and ANCA initially delayed even issuing a statement. Perhaps they were concerned about retaliation or being called anti-Jewish.

The following year, moreover, several activists and I became convinced that these organizations were not fully committed to the ADL fight.  At one point, we were told that at least one of the organizations would no longer try to convince cities to sever ties with the ADL.

In 2015, even the NoPlaceForDenial.com website, an essential news resource maintained by ANCA persons, disappeared. It reappeared after I persisted in complaining about its removal.

Indeed, the ADL came under renewed pressure months ago only because I informed ANCA and a pro-AAA person that Newton, MA had, perhaps unintentionally, invited in the ADL after having booted it out in 2007.

Sheriff Koutoujian himself has long been very close to various Jewish organizations. He once received an award from the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston. He has taken two trips to Israel.  The second one, last year, concerned “counter-terrorism.” It was organized by the ADL and funded by Israel’s Gal Foundation, which sponsors ADL programs. Of the 14 Massachusetts law enforcement personnel on the trip, Koutoujian was the only sheriff. Koutoujian later co-narrated a slideshow of the trip at a synagogue in Burlington, MA. Koutoujian has also spoken at other Jewish venues.

He recently wrote this on his Facebook page: “Thank you to the ADL and the Boston Globe for recognizing this terrible moment [Armenian Genocide] for what it is.” So after three decades of the ADL’s conspiring with Turkey to abuse Armenians, defeat Armenian Genocide resolutions, and damage the cause of genocide prevention, the ADL is thanked and all is forgiven, while hundreds of Armenian American activists get no thanks whatsoever? Incredible.

It’s well-known that Americans often interact with powerful Jewish American political organizations in two related ways. First, a person may hesitate to publicly disagree with such organizations due to concern about retaliation and being labeled anti-Jewish. On the other hand, being friendly and deferential to these organizations may advance one’s career in politics, academia, business, and other endeavors.

This question must be asked: Could these two types of interactions have adversely affected the post-2007 Armenian American campaign against, and the recent “deal” with, the ADL?

The Anti-Human Rights ADL

The ADL has an appalling anti-Armenian record.  Despite this, recent stories about the “deal” in the Boston Globe and an Armenian American newspaper depicted the ADL as now somehow virtuous. Neither told readers about the ADL’s three decades of hypocrisy and collusion with Turkey.

The ADL claims to be “the nation’s premier civil rights/human relations agency [which] protects civil rights for all.” What nonsense! If that were so, it would never have been in the business of covering up genocide. Nor can acknowledging the Armenian Genocide magically now make the ADL a human rights organization. Indeed, the Armenian issue is just one of many that have unmasked the ADL.

The ADL, therefore, is not about civil or human rights.  It’s just a Jewish political organization. For instance, it lobbied for an oil pipeline from Azerbaijan to Turkey. Human rights organizations don’t do that sort of thing.

What about nice-sounding ADL programs such as “No Place for Hate,” “World of Difference,” and “Combatting Bullying”?  They’re covers.  The ADL uses them to penetrate schools, colleges, corporations, and communities to enhance its visibility and political influence.

So that’s the organization that some Armenian Americans just made a “deal” with – a deal that was fatally flawed from the day it was conceived. True human rights advocates and perceptive Armenians reject it.

June 15, 2016 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | Leave a comment

Peace And Its Enemies

By Gilad Atzmon | January 18, 2016

Most people around the globe are relieved by the prospect of peace following the lifting the embargo against Iran. Two groups, however, are not so happy. The Saudis and the Jews. The Saudi unease is based on geopolitical terms: Sunni/Shia conflict, oil market competition, and so on. However, it is puzzling that NY Jewish leaders are pretty upset by the prospect of putting this never ending conflict to sleep.

The American Jewish Committee (AJC), a body that claims to represent American Jews, reacted to the nuclear deal with a statement that it should not mean a return to “business as usual.”

“We call on governments to make it clear – to their countries’ business sector – that the JCPOA does not represent a return to ‘business as usual’ with the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism. A range of tough US sanctions, which AJC supports, remains in effect; Iran’s non-nuclear activities, which are ongoing and destabilizing, are subject to continued – and likely escalating – sanctions,” read a statement by AJC on Sunday.

The AJC and the ADL are apparently concerned with ‘human rights’ issues. Both pointed to “Iran’s on going human rights abuses and expansionism in the Middle East, in part through proxies like Hezbollah.” One would actually expect these Jewish organisations to deal first with the inhumanity of their Jewish State that’s a leading force in abuse of human rights, brutal racism and expansionism.

AIPAC declared that the lifting of sanctions is a “dangerous moment for America and our allies.” The group called on policymakers to confront “regional proxies” while taking “firm action to support our allies, especially Israel.”

B’nai B’rith, yet another Jewish American institution, said the US decision to slap sanctions on Iran over its ballistic missile tests last October and December reinforced their skepticism about Iran’s willingness to go forward in compliance with the JCPOA. Seemingly American Jewish institutions are collectively distressed by the resolution of the conflict with Iran. Peace and reconciliation must be foreign to their lexicon. Perhaps someone should take a second and explain to these intrusive foreign lobbies that for America and the West, Iran is the last hope for stability in the region. Iran is the only regional power that can help to reverse the disaster created by the Jewish State and its lobby. But then it is not surprising to find Jewish lobbies locating themselves at the forefront of the pro war camp. As I have been saying for years, shalom doesn’t mean peace, it means security for the Jews.

American Jewish lobbies such as AJC, AIPAC, ADL and B’nai B’rith appear convinced that America fighting Iran is good for the Jews. However, it seems that, contrary to the wisdom of its Jewish lobbies, the American administration eventually gathered that peace is patriotic.

January 19, 2016 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment