These are two views on antisemitism which I noted down to publish. They were made as comments on Israpundit. I will place them under the category “antisemitism defined”.


The remarkable wisdom of Anne Frank

A Classic Attempt to Attribute Anti-Semitism to Happenstance

In his book Why the Jews? author Dennis Prager cites a glaring example of an attempt to sell the public on the idea that there is nothing Jewish about anti-Semitism:

On April 11, 1944, in an observation that demonstrates an uncanny wisdom that far surpassed her age, Anne Frank wrote in her diary:

Anne Frank knew why/Who has made us Jews different from all other people? Who has allowed us to suffer so terribly until now? It is God Who has made us as we are, but it will be God, too, Who will raise us up again.

Who knows — it might even be our religion from which the world and all peoples learn good, and for that reason and that reason alone do we now suffer. We can never become just Netherlanders, or just English, or representatives of any other country for that matter. We will always remain Jews.

Anne Frank made a point of stressing that Jews have something of special value to give to the world, and that is precisely what the world has resented, and that is why people have persecuted Jews. Anne Frank identifies anti-Semitism as a hatred of Jewishness, a loathing altogether different from the bigotry or racism that other peoples experience.

Yet, Dennis Prager points out, when Anne Frank’s story was reconstructed by Lillian Hellman into a Broadway play, her words were completely changed. “Why are Jews hated?” asks Anne. “Well, one day it’s one group, and the next day another. . . .”

On Broadway, audiences were made to believe that Anne Frank felt that Jews have been hated just as any other people has been hated. Producers capitalized on the integrity of an Anne Frank to promote the view that there is nothing Jewish about anti-Semitism.

Comment by yamit82 — August 20, 2009





The dishonesty of today’s antisemites

People are only called antisemitic when they are

Israel haters plaintively wail that just because they oppose the Jewish State does not mean they are anti-Semitic.
Of course it does.
There are 212 countries.
One is Jewish.
They only want to eliminate one country.
The Jewish country.
Quite the coincidence, eh bubby?
There are 56 Islamic countries.
If I support dismantling just 56 of the 212 countries – the Muslim ones – might that be construed as Islamophobic?
Wouldn’t our liberal friends cry “Racism” and stagger across the room like Fred Sanford, clutching his heart and calling to his dear departed Elizabeth?
Anti-Semites are not just malicious…they are dishonest and gutless.
I actually prefer the Farrakahn variety of Jew hater to the Obama model – at least Farrakahn doesn’t cravenly pretend to tolerate Hebrews.

Comment by ayn reagan — August 21, 2009



August 31, 2009

Frontpage Magazine did an interview with Kenneth Levin. It is remarkable because it gives a clear insight into the way that the US Government is now embarked on the most anti Israel campaign ever. It has done this often in the past but never with such open hostility to the Jewish state. It is also working on totally illegal grounds but more on that later. The headings in brackets are mine…FQ


The anti-semites, the Palestinians and Islamists can be counted on to call Israel a Nazi nation or Israelis Nazis, when in fact it is they who are filled with racist hatreds of Jews and exemplify in their words and deeds Nazi ideology in that regard.

at Harvard Medical School, a Princeton-trained historian, and a commentator on Israeli politics. He is the author of The Oslo Syndrome: Delusions of a People Under Siege.

FP: Kenneth Levin, welcome back to Frontpage Interview.

I would like to talk to you today about how and why Israelis, many of whom previously invited American pressure on their government, have responded in so unified a way — and so negatively — to the pressure from Obama.


But first, let’s set the stage a bit with the Obama administration’s disposition toward Israel.


A recent piece in the Washington Post noted that the only country in the world with which the U.S. has worse relations since Obama took office is Israel.


Why do you think this is?


[Israeli people beginning to hate the US Government]

(headings like this are by me…FQ)


Levin: The Post was referring to a recent poll by the Pew Global Attitudes Project which found that, of 25 countries surveyed, only in Israel was the public image of the United States worsening.


Obama picked fight with Israel over “settlements”

The Post editorial attributes this to President Obama’s having picked a very public fight with Israel over building in settlements. He has also rejected understandings concerning the parameters of construction within settlements that had been in place under former American administrations and were defined more explicitly with the Bush Administration.


In addition, Obama has made no comparable demands on the Palestinians, even though the so-called Roadmap, advanced by the Quartet of the U.S., Russia, the UN and the EU and supposedly embraced by Obama, requires steps by the PA “at the outset.” These include security measures aimed particularly at ending all anti-Israel terrorism and dismantling terrorist infrastructures and independent militias; institution-building intended to establish a “strong parliamentary democracy “; and an end to anti-Israel incitement.


FP: And the Palestinians have done what with these required steps?


[Abbas and Hamas continue to promote terror]


Levin: There has, of course, been virtually no movement by the Palestinians on any of these steps. On the contrary, Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah, as well as Hamas, continues to promote anti-Israel terror and to praise terrorist “martyrs.” It also continues to employ its media, mosques and schools to attack Israel’s legitimacy and call for its destruction. Indeed, Abbas himself has refused to endorse Israel’s legitimacy, demands a Palestinian “right of return” that would transform Israel into yet another Arab-dominated state in the region, and continues to honor those who died attacking Israeli civilians.


Not only has the Administration not put any public pressure on the PA to meet its Roadmap obligations, but President Abbas has demonstrated he feels under no pressure to do so. While in Washington for meetings with President Obama and Administration officials, he stated that he intends to take no steps toward accommodation but will essentially wait for what he expects will be Obama’s “delivering” Israel.


FP: Why has Obama taken this path of abandoning prior Israeli-American understandings and engaged in a high-profile attack on Israeli policy while making no corresponding demands of the Palestinian side?


[Obama reaches out to Islamofascism]

Levin: The President has clearly given a high priority to reaching out to the Muslim world and particularly to the Arab states and Iran. Publicly pressuring Israel is consistent with that priority. Of course, his outreach is most focused on appeasing those Muslims hostile to America, and this inexorably involves some abandonment of those who are well-disposed to America but are also targets of that hostility, including, ironically, many Muslims.


For example, President Obama initially refused to criticize the Iranian regime for its brutal response to popular demonstrations against the apparently fraudulent “election” of Ahmadinejad to a second term as Iranian president. Obama was more concerned with reaching out to Ahmadinejad. Only after being shamed into changing his stance did the President begin to offer some criticism of Iranian actions against anti-government demonstrators. It is very likely that if the Pew poll were extended to Iran, the Iranian people would also voice diminishing esteem for the United States.


[Obama supports Sudan’s genocida in Darfur]

Similarly, while Obama the candidate promised to give high priority to ending Sudan’s genocidal policies against the people of Darfur, Obama the President has focused on ingratiating himself with Sudan’s allies and has done nothing to alleviate the suffering in Darfur. Even some Obama advocates have publicly condemned his reneging on his pre-election promises vis-à-vis Darfur. Democratic operative and columnist Kirsten Powers published a piece on the issue entitled “‘Bam’s Darfur Sins.” In contrast, President Bush led the way in drawing the world’s attention to Sudan’s murderous policies in Darfur and labeling it a genocide. It’s fair to guess that if the Pew poll were conducted in Darfur, there, too, it would find a decrease in people’s estimation of the United States.


[Those close to Obama have rabid anti Israel views]

As has been noted by many observers, President Obama has long been close to people harboring and promoting rabidly anti-Israel views, including – to name but a few – Rashid Khalidi, Reverend Wright, and Samantha Power. He’s appointed Power to a position on the National Security Council. It is not entirely surprising that he has demonstrated a willingness to initiate a public confrontation with Israel and to abandon U.S.-Israel agreements forged by previous administrations as he seeks to appease America’s – and Israel’s – enemies in the Muslim world. Nor have other steps by Obama favoring the positions of those dedicated to the destruction of the Jewish state been very surprising.


FP: Some examples?


[Obama hides Arabs turning to Hitler and German Nazism]

Levin: Take a look at elements of Obama’s speech to the Muslim world in Cairo, where he suggested that Israel’s founding was a response to the Holocaust and failed to note the Jews’ more than 3,000-year connection with their ancestral homeland. He likewise said nothing of the fact that the modern international endorsement of recreation of the Jewish state dates to the post-World War I establishment of numerous national homelands as part of the breaking up of pre-war empires, including Arab homelands; or the fact that the Arabs allied themselves to European fascists in the 1930’s and used the rise of Nazism to stymie the creation of the Jewish state. Obama essentially parroted Arab claims that, in Israel’s creation, the Arabs were being forced to pay a price for European crimes.


[Obama is playing down the Holocaust]

Also in his Cairo speech, Obama implicitly equated the Holocaust to Palestinian Arab displacement in the context of the war the Arabs initiated to destroy the nascent Jewish state – a morally obscene comparison.


FP: Ok., so let’s narrow in on the Israelis’ reaction. Give us some insight into how Israelis are resisting the bullying coming from Obama.


Levin: If we’re talking about the general Israeli response, the polls are most significant as a measure of the change in Israeli opinion over the last decade and rejection of Obama’s pressure.


[Obama freezes all construction. He decides what is a “settlement”]

President Obama has demanded a total freeze on all construction in whatever his Administration chooses to characterize as a “settlement.” He has not only reneged on former Israel-U.S. agreements on the parameters of continued construction, particularly agreements reached between President Bush and Prime Minister Sharon, but has also lumped together all communities beyond the pre-1967 armistice line – unauthorized outposts, isolated settlements and major settlement blocs – as “illegitimate.” He has indicated a rejection of President Bush’s formally declared support for Israel’s retention of large settlement blocs and does not appear to share the recognition by a number of former presidents of Israel’s need for defensible borders.


[Obama opposes all Jewish settlement. Obama likes Judenfrei]

The Smith Research poll in June that showed only 6% of Israelis viewing Obama as pro-Israel also showed 69% opposing a construction freeze in major settlement blocs. The poll demonstrated Israelis clearly making distinctions between, for example, unauthorized outposts and settlement blocs, that Obama has refused to make.


The Obama administration’s subsequent highly publicized attacks on the eviction of some Arab families from Jewish-owned homes in east Jerusalem after they had stopped paying rent – evictions pursuant to a court order and not even involving the Netanyahu government – only broadened Israeli distrust of Obama. So too did the Administration’s complaints about Jewish housing units being built in a Jewish-owned building in the Sheikh Jarrah section of Jerusalem.


[Netanyahu answers Obama with utterly reasonable demands]

Prime Minister Netanyahu, in his much anticipated speech at Bar Ilan University on June 14, elaborated a policy of insisting upon defensible borders for Israel, recognition of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, a united Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty, and opposition to a Palestinian so-called “right of return.”


Netanyahu declared that, should the Palestinian Authority establish stable civil institutions and the rule of law, undertake, finally, to fight terror and end anti-Israel incitement – essentially the steps demanded of the Palestinians “at the outset” in the Roadmap – he was prepared to pursue a peace treaty. He offered to support a Palestinian state provided it is demilitarized, it is genuinely committed to peace with Israel, and the conditions under which it is established – including its demilitarization – are guaranteed by the international community.


According to a Haaretz-sponsored poll, 71% of Israelis supported the speech. This support spanned most of Israel’s political spectrum. For example, in the wake of the speech, 49% of those polled who had voted in the last election for Kadima – now the main opposition party – favored Kadima joining Netanyahu’s coalition.


66% of Israelis supporting military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities]

On another matter, a May poll co-sponsored by the Anti-Defamation League and the Begin-Sadat Center showed 66% of Israelis supporting military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Of these, 75% said they would support such action even if the U.S. opposed it.


None of this discounts the great weight Israelis generally, including the present government, give to a strong U.S.-Israeli relationship and to the importance of Israel’s working to promote and sustain that relationship. Polls of Israeli opinion leave no doubt on these points.


[…even if that means resisting pressures coming from an American administration]

But the polls also demonstrate a more clear-sighted vision among Israelis of Israel’s strategic circumstances and vital national interests, and wide support for the government’s defending those interests even if that means resisting pressures coming from an American administration. The consensus is now against taking potentially suicidal steps to please others, including the Obama administration. The great majority of Israelis are not prepared to see Israel play Czechoslovakia to Obama’s Neville Chamberlain.


Of course, this popular sentiment strengthens the government in its dealing with the Obama Administration. It allows it to make some concessions to reach compromises with the Administration but also provides support for the government’s standing firm on issues of existential import. This is true with regard both to measures toward reaching agreements with the Palestinians and the wider Arab world and to a strategy for addressing the Iranian nuclear threat.


FP: Illuminate for us why so many Israelis have responded in this way.


Levin: The explanation lies largely in the evolution in Israeli political thinking over the past decade and the dramatic shift from the perspectives embraced by at least half the nation a decade earlier.


In the early 1990’s large numbers of Israelis, worn down psychologically by the persistent Arab siege – the Arab refusal to recognize Israel and ongoing determination to destroy the Jewish state – chose to look away from such unpleasant realities and instead embrace delusions of Israeli control over the nation’s predicament vis-à-vis its neighbors. They embraced the delusion, despite all the evidence against it, that Arab hatred was actually due to past Israeli missteps and fault and that if Israel would only make sufficient amends, especially retreat to the pre-1967 armistice lines, then Arab hostility would be assuaged and peace would ensue. They insisted that Israel would then not need to concern itself with defensible borders as, in the context of peace, there would be nothing to defend against.


They rushed en masse to endorse the Oslo agreements and embrace arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat and his cadres as their “peace partners.” On the September, 1993, evening after the signing of the initial Oslo accords on the White House lawn, Arafat declared in a broadcast to his Palestinian constituents and to the wider Arab world that they should understand Oslo as the first step in implementing the PLO’s 1974 plan. This was a reference to the “plan of phases,” which called for taking whatever land could be gained by negotiations and using that territory as a base for pursuing Israel’s annihilation. But Israel’s Oslo enthusiasts ignored Arafat’s speech and celebrated the outbreak of “peace.”


In the ensuing months, and more particularly after Arafat’s arrival in the territories, Israel suffered the worst level of terror attacks it had ever endured. Arafat openly praised those responsible for the terror. The Palestinian Authority used its media, mosques and schools to declare Israel’s existence illegitimate, teach Palestinian children they must devote themselves to the nation’s destruction, and prepare the entire Palestinian population for incessant war against Israel. Still, half of Israel ignored all this and continued to focus its gaze on its rosy delusions.


FP: The turning point?


[Oslo enthusiasts in large numbers began to free themselves from their erstwhile delusions]

Levin: It was only in 2000, when Arafat and his associates rejected Israel’s dramatic concessions at Camp David, rejected as well President Clinton’s bridging proposals, refused to offer any counter-proposals and instead launched their terror war against Israel, that Oslo enthusiasts in large numbers began to free themselves from their erstwhile delusions. The numbers of the disabused grew as the terror war increased in viciousness, claiming more victims on buses, in restaurants, in markets and outside schools.


[majority of Israelis understand they have no “peace partner]

Still more abandoned their delusions when Israel unilaterally evacuated all its citizens and soldiers from Gaza and got in return intensified rocket and mortar attacks onto Israeli towns and villages near the Gaza border.


Today, the great majority of Israelis understand they have no “peace partner.” They understand the agenda of Hamas, which explicitly declares in its charter, in its media, in its mosques, in its schools, its dedication not only to the annihilation of Israel but to the murder of all Jews, and daily seeks to translate its words into acts. They understand that so-called “moderate” Mahmoud Abbas, while talking at times of peace, makes clear to his own people and to those in the West who will listen that he and his Fatah movement will likewise not reconcile themselves to Israel’s existence. Rather, they will refuse to recognize the legitimacy of Jewish self-determination and a Jewish state, will continue to insist on a “right of return” intended to overwhelm Israel and render it part of yet another Arab entity, will continue to praise murderers of Jews as heroes to be emulated, and will continue to educate Palestinian children on their obligation to dedicate themselves to Israel’s destruction.


[numbers have been reduced to a relatively small minority]

There are, of course, still many Israelis who cling to their Oslo era delusions, people who still insist that sufficient Israeli concessions will somehow transform the Middle East. But their numbers have been reduced to a relatively small minority.


It is this that accounts for the overwhelmingly negative Israeli response to Obama’s abandonment of previous American-Israeli agreements and heavy-handed public pressure on Israel for unilateral concessions, and to his distortions of historical realities about the Arab-Israeli conflict as reflected in his Cairo speech. This is why a recent poll of Israeli opinion revealed that only 6% of Israeli Jews regard the Obama Administration as pro-Israel, and the Pew poll revealed a worsening image of the U.S. among Israelis.


[Obama’s tack very much resembles the stance pursued by Israel when it embraced the delusions of Oslo]

That worsening image also reflects a reaction to Obama’s overarching tack of apologizing in foreign venues for America’s past policies and seeking to appease America’s enemies. Even aside from its direct relevance to the Arab-Israeli conflict or to the threat from Iran, this strategy can hardly comfort Israelis, the vast majority of whom regard a strong, confident United States as a vital, necessary force for good in the world. Moreover, Obama’s tack very much resembles the stance pursued by Israel when it embraced the delusions of Oslo, a stance which cost it so dearly and of which it has been so painfully disabused. Most Israelis today cannot respect, or trust, an American administration embracing similar delusions.



 [The great majority of Israelis are not prepared to see Israel play Czechoslovakia to Obama’s Neville Chamberlain]


by Felix Quigley

August 27, 2009 

4international issues an open challenge to Moshe Feiglin [head of the Likud’s Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) faction]



Feiglin is of course in many ways a very progressive Jewish man and leader. We specifically opposed Netanyahu in trying in the past election to bar Feiglin from participating fully.


Feiglin at the centre of his campaign inside Likud also calls for the revival of Jewishness and any progressive and revolutionary socialist who has the interest of the Jews at heart will support that totally.

After all we fight on 4international for Jews to create their Homeland in Israel and to have full rights to live there as THEY decide!


But this is still not a political strategy in the context of today’s complex world politics where fascist power and socialist power are being posed.






Basically Feiglin is confused and confusing.


Feiglin calls for the development of Jewishness. He is most progressive in this.


But then Feiglin claims that this development of Jewishness will create or will be a political strategy. It will not. Unfortunately the world is far more complex.


Really what Feiglin has to still do is to spell out his political programme for the Jewish people and for Israel and it is on this that he is weak and totally deficient. If you wish to put it stronger he is bankrupt.


There are many ways to approach Feiglin and to understanding his politics. But essentially in the end there is only way and that is to counterpose the revolutionary socialist programme to that Israeli bourgeois type politicians.


For that purpose this is a paragraph from out of a report ( on the meeting which Bogey Yaalon had with the Feiglin group when Bogey was on his tour of speaking engagements.


[start extract here]


At the meeting, Bogey spoke about how peace is impossible for now, since the other side has not recognized Israel as the national home of the Jewish people. What he seemed to miss, however, is that to Feiglin, this is completely irrelevant. Whether the other side is ready for peace, willing to make compromises or anything else, plays no role in Feiglin’s thought. “Peace is not my objective,” he replied to Bogey. He continued, “There is no country on the entire planet, except us, that has peace as its national objective. The minute that peace is your national objective, you lose it.” The Zionism of old doesn’t interest him either. “Zionism has reached the end of its road,” he says. “It is time for the next level – the one based on faith and the God of Israel. If we don’t build the second level, we will lose the whole thing.”

[end extract here]


Actually Feiglin you are dead wrong! Re Zionism we on 4international have in no way whatsoever reached the end of its road. In fact its true road is only at the beginning stage.


In any case in the historical cycle it is not that long since Herzl and Zionism has been in existence anyway for 3000 plus years.





Feiglin sounds dramatic but is confusing


He is right in parts, wrong on fundamentals.


Right that “Peace” is a meaningless bullshit word when the world is dominated by Imperialism and by anti-Semitism!


But he offers no real political strategy at all, much less a revolutionary socialist political strategy.


His aim is to keep Imperialism chugging along, just that Imperialism does not do “chugging along”. Imperialism is in crisis and the total Imperialist world scene is what is causing such death-traps for the Jews of Israel and the world.


Feiglin does not offer any political strategy, even discussion, to meet this. THAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH FEIGLIN!


No political strategy equals certain defeat!


Remember these words from the above paragraph of Feiglin>


“It is time for the next level – the one based on faith and the God of Israel. If we don’t build the second level, we will lose the whole thing.”



As the majority of Jews in Israel or in any Western country are tending towards atheism.


What then! ???


It is a political position of bankruptcy.


This is very different to what we on 4international say. Full freedom of religious expression! But no ramming of religion down anybody’s throat either!




Bogey Yaalon the former IDF chief of staff and now part of the Netanyahu Government has called the “Peace Now” camp in Israel a virus. We on 4international believe he is right and we join the call of Bogey Yaalon absolutely completely with all of our might and resources.


“Peace Now” is a reactionary anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist movement inside Israeli politics.


The true measure of “Peace Now” is that it links up with “peace woman” Mairead Maguire who was given the Nobel Peace prize by the ever reactionary Norwegians.






Maguire it was who linked up with the British Army of occupation in Ireland as part of the reactionary “Peace Movement” which led on to the horrific Good Friday Agreement of Clinton and Blair, which forced into power the totally reactionary Sinn Fein of Adams and McGuiness, a leadership in Sinn Fein which is riddled with actual British State paid agents.


So we know where Maguire comes from. And we know too where “peace Now” with its associations with the anti-Semitic Palestine Solidarity Campaign comes from!


Maguire can often be found on these boats which are used as anti-Semitic propaganda ploys against Israel over Gaza, always hiding that Israelis left Gaza, handed it over to Arab Palestinians, but the Arabs then used Gaza as a base for terrorist attacks on Jews. Quite simply Maguire stinks! Total liar!


In many ways Israel is a sick society. But its sickness does not come from Zionism, it comes from those who have given in to the pressure of the US State Department on Israeli society and created traitors out of Jews!.



Peace Now is one of the results of that US State Department pressure. Peace Now is riddled with all kinds of state agents, agents of the Palestine Solidarity anti-Semites etc.


Then there is a very small minority of Jewish people in Israel who hate their own Jewishness.


This again is not new and indeed how could it be new! For at least 2000 years Jews have been bombarded with the message that they are lesser than other humans.


Some of this had rubbed off, was bound to rub off. Result is the “Peace” Now crowd.


Always ready to link up with the anti-Semitic enemies of Israel and Jews.


No different really to those Kapos in the Holocaust era who gave their services to the Nazis against their own people.




By Felix Quigley

August 23, 2009



Is it possible that the present so called “Left” has been totally taken under the control of US Intelligence and the US state?


Recently we have the example of a Human Rights Watch leader who is exposed as a definite Israel and Jew hater.


This man Joe Stork (deputy director of Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa division) is important because he has formed part of the anti Israel propaganda machine against Israel, which also includes people like the Irish Nobel Peace winner Mairead Maguire, also known as Mairead Corrigan.


We are all familiar with this form of extreme Israel and Jew hatred, their calls for boycott of Israeli produce in Ireland etc.


But one thing has gone unnoticed. That is that when Jewish organizations have criticized Stork then they have referred to Stork as a “Marxist”, an “extreme Marxist”, a “Marxist Revolutionary” and so on.


I think that US Intelligence has set up this situation in its broad outlines. I do not mean every exact detail is planned. That would fall into the realm of conspiracy. But every detail does not have to be so planned if the general outline is laid down


Anybody can see the US Intelligence machine achieving their aims here. Killing 2 birds with the one stone as it were.


  1. The American ruling class hate Jews, hate Israel and is obsessed with Israeli and Jewish power. So they have infiltrated the “Left” as anti-Semites
  2. Then when these “Left” anti-Semites do their dirty work they are labelled by the Media and also by ignorant Jewish people as “Marxists”


It is thus a classic piece of CIA strategic and tactical thinking. Investigate Philip Agee and you will see that this is not in any way fanciful. These are typical CIA programmes and here remember that the British Intelligence are not far behind the Americans, and the Germans also.



There are a number of questions about World War 2 which will not go away


  1. Hitler had wide support in Europe and America so long as he was fighting Bolshevism. He was opposed only on strategic territory issues.
  2. The British and the Americans had full knowledge of the Holocaust, as had the Vatican, and of the killing of the Jews. They knew everything about the death camps. They understood the railway system which made it possible. Yet although messengers from the Polish Underground sent messengers to urge them to bomb the railway lines (they actually flew over the lines daily!) they refused to do a thing


In all of this what then is the relevance of the Christopher Simpson book “Blowback” in understand the War and in understanding if US and British Intelligence worked to take over the “Left” as part of its anti-Semitic agenda and as part of its drive to negative the real Left


Next article in this series will ask:


What really changed in 1945? From Nazi rule to what?


The book referenced here:



America’s recruitment of Nazis,
and its disastrous effect on our domestic and foreign policy

by Christopher Simpson

Collier / Macmillan, 1988






The Swedish Foreign Ministry backs the Blood Libel



Sweden is an avowed enemy of Israel’s

By David Frankfurter

I am sure that you have been following the war of words between Sweden and Israel. A Swedish newspaper repeated rumor and innuendo that Israeli soldiers were harvesting organs from Palestinians. Sweden (which currently heads the EU) has refused to condemn this blood libel, confusing freedom of speech with hate speech. The Swedish Foreign Ministry even distanced itself from criticism of the article by its own Embassy staff in Israel.

Sweden is a major sponsor of antisemitic NGO’s

Friend, Gerald Steinberg argues that this is consistent with Sweden being a major sponsor of anti-Semitic NGOs which consistently defame Israel with lies, innuendo, propaganda and spin. Gerald expresses the hope that this furore will somehow teach the Swedes a lesson, and that they will stop this destructive funding.


Sweden and blood libel for over a decade

In March of 2004, I highlighted reports from Swedish newspapers that showed that Sweden had, from 1997 to 2004, deliberately and consistently classified as secret their own reports that their donations to Arafat’s Palestinian Authority were being diverted to corruption and the creation of a police state. Why? So that they could continue to knowingly channel billions of crowns to Palestinian corruption and violence. Also hidden from view of the Parliament was tens of millions in donations to the Palestinian Negotiations Support Unit. An organization which had stopped negotiating and had become a pure Palestinian propaganda agency. Swedish politicians were “shocked” – but the money kept flowing.

Later that same year, Lisa Abramowicz and I published an article highlighting the fact that the Swedish government was funding a conference in Gothenburg aimed at finding ways to fund Palestinian terrorism.

Sweden funding the propaganda and physical war against the Jews

For well over a decade, Sweden has deliberately and carefully looked for and found ways to secretly and openly fund the Palestinian propaganda and physical war against the Jews. And the Israeli government thinks that they can get the Swedes to change their ways with a bit of diplomatic pressure. They forget that the Swedes may live in a cold country, but they have proved that they can take the heat.


Conclusión: Frankfurter is right. These antisemitic traits are deeply ingrained incide the old countries of Europe which Either carried out the Holocaust or stood by and did nothing. Frankfurter knows that Israeli diplomatic effort will not stop antisemitism, a classic example being the heroic efforts of the Israeli ambassador to Ireland mailing to stop Irish antisemitism


by Felix Quigley

August 9, 2009

We believe that there must be a United Front created to stand with Jews, Serbs and many others against the US and EU Empire which are in alliance with Islamofascism.


Israel has no alternative but to strike against the Iranian Fascist Nuclear bomb and call on the Iranian people, especially the youth, for understanding and support.

A United Front means that there is unity against that comon enemy but inside the United Front there is freedom of discussion.


It seems that the issue centres on this


[begin quote here]

It was a packed audience at the Begin-Sadat Center in Bar Ilan University, and all eyes of the world were looking on. As reported, Netanyahu, not unlike many of his predecessors, agreed at least in principle to the creation of a Palestinian state. The conditions he laid out – recognition of Israel as a Jewish homeland and a demilitarized “Palestine” – though, are probably conditions that the Palestinians cannot and will not fulfill. The Palestinian people are controlled not by one, but by two terrorist organizations, which curse Zionism and deny Israel’s right to exist. In view of the Prime Minister’s words, one has to question whether this is something he understands.

During Netanyahu’s speech, regarding the subject of Israel’s peace partners and enemies, he contradicted himself in a major way. At one point, he stated, “I appeal to you, our Palestinian neighbors, and to the leadership of the Palestinian Authority. Let us begin peace negotiations immediately…” This, while towards the end of the speech, he strongly declared, “Israel will not sit at the negotiating table with terrorists who seek its destruction.”

The reason why the two statements contradict one another is because the organization Prime Minister Netanyahu is pursuing peace talks with, the Palestinian Authority (PA), is run by Fatah, a terrorist organization which “seeks” Israel’s “destruction” – precisely the type of group that he insists Israel will not sit with!

[end quote here]

 The article then goes into lots of detail about this very murky movement. Read it, study it, yourself.



It seems that the Fatah was supposed under Arafat to have changed its founding rules. But that was a bit of fakery. It has not.


The result is that Fatah is till calling for the destruction of Israel.


At times this is slightly covered by calling for the destruction of Zionist Israel.


These people in Fatah were trained in the Stalinist school of lies, actually they werre trained physically in Moscow.

The big lie of the times was that Zionism was Nazism etc.


But Zionism has always been Jewish nationalism, the nationalism of the Jewish people.


No different to Irish or any other nationalism.



The other thing about this Fatah is that on their websites and speeches they tend to have one version in English, one in Arabic. They are not the same!


This is the bind that Israeli elites are in. Reach an agreement with who, with a group which is out for your destruction

Continue reading