Zionist Ideological Warfare

Zionist_Control

Zionist_Control

The single greatest feat of Israel and its overseas missions has not been material success, or the military conquest of millions of unarmed Palestinians, it has been ideological – the widespread acceptance in the US of a doctrine that claims ‘Jews are a superior people’.

Apart from small extremist rightwing sects who exhibit visceral anti-Semitism and denigrate everything Jewish, there are very few academics and politicians willing to question this supremacist doctrine. On the contrary, there is an incurable tendency to advance oneself by accepting and embellishing on it.

For example, in August 2015, US Vice-President Joseph Biden attributed ‘special genius’ to Jews, slavish flattery that embarrassed even New York’s liberal Jewish intellectuals.

Israel’s dominant role in formulating US Middle East policy is largely a product of its success at recruiting, socializing and motivating overseas Jews to act as an organized force to intervene in US politics and push Israel’s agenda.

What motivates American Jews, who have been raised and educated in the US to serve Israel?

After all, these are individuals who have prospered, achieved high status and occupy the highest positions of prestige and responsibility. Why would they parrot the policies of Israel and follow the dictates of Israeli leaders (a foreign regime), serving its violent colonial, racist agenda?

What binds a majority of highly educated and privileged Jews to the most rabidly rightwing Israeli regime in history – a relationship they actually celebrate?

What turns comfortable, prosperous American Jews into vindictive bullies, willing and able to blackmail, threaten and punish any dissident voices among their Gentile and Jewish compatriots who have dared to criticize Israel?

What prevents many intelligent, liberal and progressive Jews from openly questioning Israel’s agenda, and especially confronting the role of Zionist zealots who serve as Tel Aviv’s fifth column against the interest of the United States?

There are numerous historical and personal factors that can and should be taken into account to understand this phenomenon.

In this essay I am going to focus on one – the ideology that ‘Jews are a superior people’. The notion that Jews, either through some genetic, biologic, cultural, historical, familial and/or upbringing, havespecial qualities allowing them to achieve at a uniquely higher level than the ‘inferior’ non-Jews.

We will proceed by sketching the main outline of the Jewish supremacist ideology and then advance our critique.

We will conclude by evaluating the negative consequences of this ideology and propose a democratic alternative.

Jewish Supremacism

Exponents of Jewish Supremacism (JS) frequently cite the prestigious awards, worldly successes and high honors, which, they emphasize, have been disproportionately achieved by Jews.

The argument goes: While Jews represent less than 0.2% of the world population, they have produced 24% of the US Nobel prize winners; over 30% of Ivy League professors and students; and the majority of major US film, stage and TV producers.

They cite the ‘disproportionate number’ of scientists, leading doctors, lawyers and billionaires.

They cite past geniuses like, Einstein, Freud and Marx .

They point to the founders of the world’s great monotheistic religions – Moses and Abraham.

They lay claim to a unique learning tradition embedded in centuries of Talmudic scholarship.

Jewish supremacists never miss a chance to cite the ‘Jewish background’ of any highly accomplished contemporary public figures in the entertainment, publication, financial fields or any other sectors of life in the US.

Disproportionately great accomplishments by a disproportionate minority has become the mantra for heralding a self-styled ‘meritocraticelite’…. and for justifying its disproportionate wealth, power and privileges – and influence…

Challenging the Myths of Jewish Supremacists

There are serious problems regarding the claims of the Jewish Supremacists.

For centuries Jewish ‘wisdom’ was confined to textual exegesis of religious dogma – texts full of superstition and social control, as well as blind intolerance, and which produced neither reasoned arguments nor contributed to scientific and human advancement.

Jewish scholarship of note occurred among thinkers like Spinoza who revolted against the Jewish ghetto gatekeepers and rejected Jewish dogma.

Notable scientists emerged in the context of working and studying with non-Jews in non-Jewish institutions – the universities and centers of learning in the West. The majority of world-renowned Jewish scholars integrated and contributed to predominantly non-Jewish (Moslem and Christian) and secular institutions of higher learning.

Historically, highly talented individuals of Jewish origin succeeded by renouncing the constraints of everyday Jewish life, rabbinical overseers and Jewish institutions. Most contemporary prestigious scientists, including the frequently cited Nobel Prize winners, have little or nothing to do with Judaism! And their contributions have everything to do with the highly secular, integrated culture in which they prospered intellectually – despite expressions of crude anti-Semitism in the larger society.

Secondly , Jewish Supremacists persist in claiming ‘racial credit’ for the achievements of individuals who have publically renounced, denounced and distanced themselves from Judaism and have dismissed any notion of Israel as their spiritual homeland. Their universal prestige has prevented them from being labeled, apostate or ‘self-hating’. Albert Einstein, often cited by the Supremacists as the supreme example of ‘Jewish genius’, denounced Israel’s war crimes and showed disdain for any tribal identity. In their era, Marx and Trotsky, like the vast majority of emancipated European Jews, given the chance, became engaged in universalistic organizations, attacking the entire notion that Jews were a ‘special people’ chosen by divine authority (or by the latter-day Zionists).

Thirdly, Supremacists compile a very selective list of virtuous Jews, while omitting areas of life and activity where Jews have disproportionately played a negative and destructive role.

After all is it Jewish ‘genius’ that makes Israel a leading exporter of arms, high tech intrusive spy systems and sends military and paramilitary advisers and torturers to work with death squad regimes in Africa and Latin America?

Among the winners of the Nobel Peace Prize are three Israeli Prime Ministers who waged wars of ethnic cleansing against millions of Palestinians and expanded racist ‘Jews only’ settlements throughout the occupied Palestinian territories. These include Menachem Begin (notorious career bomber and terrorist), Yitzhak Rabin (a militarist who was assassinated by an even more racist Jewish terrorist) and Shimon Peres. Among Jewish American Nobel ‘Peaceniks’ is Henry Kissinger who oversaw the brutal and illegal US war in Indo-China causing 4 million Vietnamese deaths;who wrote the ‘template for regime change’ by overthrowing the democratically elected government of Chilean President Allende and condemned Chile to decades of police state terror; and who supported Indonesia’s destruction of East Timor!

In other words, these Nobel recipients, who Supremacists cite as ‘examples of Jewish Supremacy’, have sown terror and injustice on countless captive peoples and nations – giving the Nobel Peace Prize a dubious distinction.

Among the greatest billion dollar swindlers in recent US history, we d find a disproportionate percentage of American Jews – curiously not mentioned by the Supremacists in their usual litany: Bernard Madoff pillaged over $50 billion from his clients, Ivan Boesky, Michael Milken and Marc Rich are well-known names adding the distinction of ‘Jewish genius’ to a list of financial mega-felons.

Among the less respectable notables whose material successes have been tarnished by personal weaknesses – we have the billionaire and pedophile pimp, Jeffry Epstein; IMF Boss Dominique Strauss Kahn, entrepreneur and ‘nudist’ Dov Charney, New York Governor and ‘repeat customer’ Elliot Spitzer, Congressman and exhibitionist Anthony Weiner and the fun-loving sports impresario who brought down FIFA, the piratical Chuck Blazer. Curiously, none of these extraordinarily successful notables have been cited as examples of Jewish Supremacy.

As we contemplate the millions of war refugees driven from the Near East and North Africa, we should credit the role of US neo-liberal and neo-conservative ideologues and policymakers –a disproportionate percentage of whom are Jews. Millions of Chilean workers suffered as Milton Friedman and his Chicago Boys ‘advised’ Chilean Dictator Augusto Pinochet on dismantling the welfare state (even if it required the murder of trade unionists!). Ayn Rand (Alyssa Rosenbaum) and her fanatical free market epigones have savaged all progressive social legislation and turned the most retrograde forms of selfishness into a religion of ‘superiority’!

The biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression was largely due to the financial policies of Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan. The trillion-dollar bailout of Wall Street by Ben Shalom Bernacke and Stanley Fischer, while Janet Yellen ignored the plight of millions of Americans who lost their homes because of mortgage foreclosures. In sum, Jewish Supremacists should proudly take credit for the American Jews who have been disproportionately responsible for the largest economic and foreign policy failures of the contemporary period – including the horrific suffering these have entailed!

Back in the more normal world of crime, Russian-Jewish mobsters dominate or share supremacy with the Italian Mafia in New York, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Miami and scores of cities in between. They display their unique genius at extortion and murder – knowing they can always find safe haven in the ‘Promised Land’!

On the cultural front, the finest Jewish writers, artists, musicians, scientists have emerged outside of Israel. A few may have immigrated to the Jewish state, but many other intellectuals and artists of note have chosen to leave Israel, repelled by the racist, intolerant and repressive apartheid state and society promoted by Jewish Supremacists.

Conclusion

The record provides no historical basis for the claims of Jewish Supremacists:

What has been cited as the disproportionate ‘Jewish genius’ turns out to be a two-edged sword – demonstrating the best and the worst.

Claiming a monopoly on high academic achievement must be expanded to owning up to the Jewish authors of the worst financial and foreign policy disasters – they too are ‘high achievers’.

Donations from financial billionaires, all ‘geniuses’, have financed the war crimes of the Israeli state and made possible the expansion of violent Jewish settlers throughout occupied Palestine – spreading misery and displacement for millions.

In fairness, the most notorious Jewish swindler in contemporary America was even-handed: ‘Bernie’ Madoff swindled Jews and Goys, Hollywood moguls and New York philanthropists – he wasn’t picky about who he fleeced.

The latest fashion among Jewish Supremacist ‘geneticists’ is to extoll the discovery of uniquely special ‘genes’ predisposing Jews to experience the ‘holocaust’ and even inherit the experience of suffering from long dead ancestors. Such ‘scientists’ should be careful. As Jazz artist and essayist, Gilad Altzmon wryly notes, ‘They will put the anti-Semites out of business’.

Ultimately, Jews, who have assimilated into the greater society or not, who inter-marry and who do not, are all products of the social system in which they live and (like everyone else) they are the makers of the roles they decide to play within it.

In the past, a uniquely disproportional percentage of Jews chose to fight for universal humanist values – rejecting the notion of a chosen people.

Today a disproportionate percentage of educated Jews have chosen to embrace an ‘ethno-religious’ Supremacist dogma, which binds them to an apartheid, militarist state and ideology ready to drag the world into a global war.

Never forget! Racialist supremacist doctrines led Germany down the blind ally of totalitarianism and world war, in which scores of millions perished.

Jews, especially young Jews, are increasingly repelled by Israel’s crimes against humanity. The next step for them (and for us) is to criticize, demystify and stand up to the toxic supremacist ideology linking the powerful domestic Zionist power configuration and its political clones with Israel.

The root problem is not genetic, it is collective political dementia: a demented ideology that claims a chosen elite can forever dominate and exploit the majority of American people. The time will come when the accumulated disasters will force the American people to push back, unmasking the elite and rejecting its supremacist doctrines. Let us hope that they will act with passion guided by reason.

 

Source:  Globalresearch.ca

MONSANTO Were Jewish Slave Dealers And Owners

MONSANTO Family Were Jewish Slave Dealers And Owners:

MONSANTO Family Were Jewish Slave Dealers And Owners

MONSANTO Family Were Jewish Slave Dealers And Owners

The Jewish Monsanto Family of Louisiana included Benjamin, Isaac, Manuel, Eleanora, Gracia and Jacob. They made frequent purchases of Blacks including twelve in 1785, thirteen and then thirty-one in 1787, and eighty in 1768.

In 1794, Benjamin sold “Babet,” a Black woman, to Franco Cardel. Manuel sold two Blacks from Guinea named “Polidor” and “Lucy” to James Saunders for $850 in silver.

As individuals they were owners of Africans whom they named “Quetelle,” “Valentin,” “Baptiste,” “Prince,” “Princess,” “Ceasar,” “Dolly,” “Jen,” “Fanchonet,” “Rozetta,” “Mamy,” “Sofia,” and many others. Isaac repeatedly mortgaged four of these when in financial trouble. Benjamin Monsanto of Natchez, Mississippi entered into at least 6 contracts for the sale of his slaves which would take place after his death. Gracia bequeathed nine Africans to her relatives in her 1790 will, and Eleanora also held Blacks as slaves.

Manuel Jacob Monsanto entered into at least 12 contracts for sale of slaves between 1787 and 1789 in Natchez and New Orleans, Louisiana.1135 “His family consists of himself and seven Negroes.”1136 Later, “Jacob Monsanto, son of Isaac Rodrigues Monsanto, one of the very first known Jews to settle in New Orleans, owner of a several-hundred-acre plantation at Manchac, fell in love with his slave, Mamy or Maimi William. Their daughter Sophia, grew up to be a lovely quadroon.” An excerpt of one of Benjamin’s many slave contracts follows:

“Be it known to all to whom these presents shall come, that I Benjamin Monsanto do really and effectually sell to Henry Manadu a negro wench named “Judy,” aged Eighteen years, native of Guinea, for the sum of four hundred Dollars in all the month of January in the year one thousand Seven hundred and ninety one; and paying interest at the rate of ten per cent for the remaining two hundred and fifty Dollars until paid; said negro wench being and remaining mortgaged until final payment shall have been made; wherewith I acknowledge to be fully satisfied and content, hereby renouncing the plea of non numerata pecunia, fraud, or others in the case Whatsoever; granting formal receipt for the same. For which said consideration I do hereby resign all right, title, possession and claim, in and to the said Slave, all of which I transfer and convey to the Said Purchaser and his assigns, to be, as his own, held and enjoyed, and when fully paid for, Sold, exchanged, or otherwise alienated at pleasure in virtue of these presents granted in his favor in token of real delivery, without other proof of property being required, from which he is hereby released, binding myself to maintain the validity of this present sale in full form and right in favor of the Purchaser aforesaid, and granting authority to the Justices of his Majesty to compel me to the performance of the same as if Judgment had already been given therein, renouncing all laws, rights, and privileges in my favor whatsoever. And I the said Henry Manadu being present, do hereby accept this Instrument in my favor, receiving said negro Wench as purchased in the form and for the consideration therein mentioned and contained, wherewith I am fully satisfied and content, hereby renouncing the plea of non numerato pecunia, fraud, or other considerations in the case Whatsoever; granting formal receipt for the same. Done and executed, in testimony thereof, at the post of Natchez, this nineteenth day of the month of February in the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety….”

Benjamin Monsanto, sold land and “a Dwelling House, Store, and two other buildings, for which I have received payment in a negro, named ‘Nat;’ to my full satisfaction.” Another contract stipulated “that Don Louis Faure is bound to defend the said sale in case the negro shall be claimed by any other Person.” In a 1792 contract, Benjamin mortgaged his Black slaves: “I do hereby specially mortgage three slaves to me belonging, namely Eugene and Louis, aged twenty four years each, the first named of the Senegal nation and the second of the Congo nation; and a Negro Woman named Adelaide, aged twenty eight years, also of the Congo nation; which said slaves I warrant free from mortgage or other incumbrance, as I have made appear by certificate from the Recorder of mortgages; and which said slaves I promise and engage shall not be sold nor otherwise alienated during the term of this obligation…”

========================

The following Jews were known dealers, owners, shippers or supporters of the slave trade and of the enslavement of Black African citizens in early New York history.

Issack Asher, Jacob Barsimson, Joseph Bueno, Solomon Myers Cohen, Jacob Fonseca, Aberham Franckfort, Jacob Franks, Daniel Gomez, David Gomez, Isaac Gomez, Lewis Gomez, Mordecai Gomez, Rebekah Gomez, Ephraim Hart, Judah Hays, Harmon Hendricks, Uriah Hendricks, Uriah Hyam, Abraham Isaacs, Joshua Isaacs, Samuel Jacobs, Benjamin S. Judah, Cary Judah, Elizabeth Judah, Arthur Levy, Eleazar Levy, Hayman Levy, Isaac H. Levy, Jacob Levy, Joseph Israel Levy, Joshua Levy, Moses Levy, Uriah Phillips Levy, Isaac R. Marques, Moses Michaels, (E)Manuel Myers, Seixas Nathan, Simon Nathan, Rodrigo Pacheco, David Pardo, Isaac Pinheiro, Rachel Pinto, Morris Jacob, Raphall Abraham Sarzedas, Moses Seixas, Solomon Simpson, Nathan Simson, Simja De Torres, Benjamin Wolf, Alexander Zuntz

Death Of Monsanto’s Seeds:

News organization allows government officials to censor

The New York Times Admits That Virtually Every Major News Organization Allows The News To Be Censored By Government Officials:

The New York Times Admits That Virtually Every Major News Organization Allows The News To Be Censored By Government Officials

The New York Times Admits That Virtually Every Major News Organization Allows The News To Be Censored By Government Officials

 

 

In one of the most shocking articles that the New York Times has ever put out, a New York Times reporter has openly admitted that virtually every major mainstream news organization allows government bureaucrats and campaign officials to censor their stories.  For example, almost every major news organization in the country has agreed to submit virtually all quotes from anyone involved in the Obama campaign or the Romney campaign to gatekeepers for “quote approval” before they will be published.  If the gatekeeper in the Obama campaign does not want a certain quote to get out, the American people will not see it, and the same thing applies to the Romney campaign.  The goal is to keep the campaigns as “on message” as possible and to avoid gaffes at all cost.  But this kind of thing is not just happening with political campaigns.  According to the New York Times, “quote approval” has become “commonplace throughout Washington”.  In other words, if you see a quote in the newspaper from someone in the federal government then it is safe to say that a gatekeeper has almost certainly reviewed that quote and has approved it.  This is another sign that “the free and independent media” in this country is a joke.  What we get from the mainstream media is a very highly filtered form of propaganda, and that is one reason why Americans are turning away from the mainstream media in droves.  People want the truth, and more Americans than ever realize that they are not getting it from the mainstream media. The following quote comes from the recent article in the New York Times mentioned above and it is absolutely jaw dropping….

The quotations come back redacted, stripped of colorful metaphors, colloquial language and anything even mildly provocative.

They are sent by e-mail from the Obama headquarters in Chicago to reporters who have interviewed campaign officials under one major condition: the press office has veto power over what statements can be quoted and attributed by name.

Most reporters, desperate to pick the brains of the president’s top strategists, grudgingly agree. After the interviews, they review their notes, check their tape recorders and send in the juiciest sound bites for review.

The verdict from the campaign — an operation that prides itself on staying consistently on script — is often no, Barack Obama does not approve this message.

This is an article that everyone needs to read.  If you have not read it yet, you can find it right here. What all of this means is that both the Obama campaign and the Romney campaign essentially have “veto power” over any quotes from those campaigns that we see in the newspapers. According to the New York Times, virtually every major news organization has agreed to submit their quotes for “quote approval”….

It was difficult to find a news outlet that had not agreed to quote approval, albeit reluctantly. Organizations like Bloomberg, The Washington Post, Vanity Fair, Reuters and The New York Times have all consented to interviews under such terms.

This is absolutely disgusting, and it goes against everything that our media is supposed to stand for. The following is what Joseph Farah had to say when he learned about this story….

All I can say about these people I once considered “colleagues” is that I am so ashamed of them. I am mortified. They are humiliating themselves and a vital institution for any free society.

It seems the biggest threat to the American tradition of a free and independent press is not government coercion. It’s the willing submission of the press to being handled and managed by government and politicians.

Keep in mind that Joseph Farah has been working in the world of journalism for decades.  He is deeply saddened to see what is happening to a profession that he deeply loves. But he is not the only one. Just check out what Dan Rather had to say during a speech back in 2009….

“At my age and stage I’ve finally reached the point where I don’t have to kiss up to anybody,” he said. “What a wonderful feeling it is.”

Even so, his talk emphasized what he believes is the erosion of quality journalism, because of the corporatization, politicization, and “trivialization” of news. Those three factors, Rather argued, have fueled the “dumbing down and sleezing up of news” and the decline of “great American journalism.”

Likening media consolidation to that of the banking industry, Rather claimed that “roughly 80 percent” of the media is controlled by no more than six, and possibly as few as four, corporations.

And Dan Rather is right.  The control over the media in the United States is more tightly concentrated than ever before. Back in the early 1980s, approximately 50 corporations essentially had nearly total control of the media in the United States. Today, just six monolithic media corporations dominate virtually everything you watch, hear and read. These six gigantic corporations own television networks, publishing houses, movie studios, newspapers, radio stations, music labels and video game companies.  Most Americans are absolutely addicted to information and entertainment, and those six massive corporations supply the vast majority of the information and entertainment that Americans take in. The amount of control that those six corporate giants have is absolutely incredible.  For example, the average American watches 153 hours of television a month.  If you can beam 153 hours of “programming” into someone’s head each month, that gives you an awesome amount of influence over that person. The six monolithic corporations mentioned above are Time Warner, Walt Disney, Viacom, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., CBS Corporation and NBC Universal. There are some areas of the media that are not completely dominated by those corporations, but even control over those areas is becoming more highly concentrated than ever. For example, Clear Channel now owns over 1000 radio stations across the United States.  The power that Clear Channel has over the radio industry in America is absolutely staggering. Even control over the Internet is becoming much more concentrated.  Giant corporations such as Facebook, Google, Yahoo and Microsoft are increasingly controlling what we see and hear online. But it really is the “big six” that dominate most of what we see, hear and read on a daily basis.

————————————————–

Today, six colossal media giants tower over all the rest.  Much of the information in the chart below comes from mediaowners.com.  The chart below reveals only a small fraction of the media outlets that these six behemoths actually own….

Time Warner

Home Box Office (HBO)
Time Inc.
Turner Broadcasting System, Inc.
Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.
CW Network (partial ownership)
TMZ
New Line Cinema
Time Warner Cable
Cinemax
Cartoon Network
TBS
TNT
America Online
MapQuest
Moviefone
Castle Rock
Sports Illustrated
Fortune
Marie Claire
People Magazine

Walt Disney

ABC Television Network
Disney Publishing
ESPN Inc.
Disney Channel
SOAPnet
A&E
Lifetime
Buena Vista Home Entertainment
Buena Vista Theatrical Productions
Buena Vista Records
Disney Records
Hollywood Records
Miramax Films
Touchstone Pictures
Walt Disney Pictures
Pixar Animation Studios
Buena Vista Games
Hyperion Books

Viacom

Paramount Pictures
Paramount Home Entertainment
Black Entertainment Television (BET)
Comedy Central
Country Music Television (CMT)
Logo
MTV
MTV Canada
MTV2
Nick Magazine
Nick at Nite
Nick Jr.
Nickelodeon
Noggin
Spike TV
The Movie Channel
TV Land
VH1

News Corporation

Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Fox Television Stations
The New York Post
Fox Searchlight Pictures
Beliefnet
Fox Business Network
Fox Kids Europe
Fox News Channel
Fox Sports Net
Fox Television Network
FX
My Network TV
MySpace
News Limited News
Phoenix InfoNews Channel
Phoenix Movies Channel
Sky PerfecTV
Speed Channel
STAR TV India
STAR TV Taiwan
STAR World
Times Higher Education Supplement Magazine
Times Literary Supplement Magazine
Times of London
20th Century Fox Home Entertainment
20th Century Fox International
20th Century Fox Studios
20th Century Fox Television
BSkyB
DIRECTV
The Wall Street Journal
Fox Broadcasting Company
Fox Interactive Media
FOXTEL
HarperCollins Publishers
The National Geographic Channel
National Rugby League
News Interactive
News Outdoor
Radio Veronica
ReganBooks
Sky Italia
Sky Radio Denmark
Sky Radio Germany
Sky Radio Netherlands
STAR
Zondervan

CBS Corporation

CBS News
CBS Sports
CBS Television Network
CNET
Showtime
TV.com
CBS Radio Inc. (130 stations)
CBS Consumer Products
CBS Outdoor
CW Network (50% ownership)
Infinity Broadcasting
Simon & Schuster (Pocket Books, Scribner)
Westwood One Radio Network

NBC Universal

Bravo
CNBC
NBC News
MSNBC
NBC Sports
NBC Television Network
Oxygen
SciFi Magazine
Syfy (Sci Fi Channel)
Telemundo
USA Network
Weather Channel
Focus Features
NBC Universal Television Distribution
NBC Universal Television Studio
Paxson Communications (partial ownership)
Trio
Universal Parks & Resorts
Universal Pictures
Universal Studio Home Video

———————————————————-

Please keep in mind that the list above is not exhaustive.  It only contains a sampling of the companies that those six corporate giants own. So are you starting to get an idea of how powerful they are? If you ever wondered why the version of “the news” that you get is so similar no matter where you turn, it is because control of the news is concentrated in just a very few hands. So who controls the “big six” media corporations? Would it surprise you to know that the boards of directors of those big media corporations have a tremendous amount of overlap with the boards of directors of large banks, large oil companies and large pharmaceutical companies? The following is from the Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting website….

Media corporations share members of the board of directors with a variety of other large corporations, including banks, investment companies, oil companies, health care and pharmaceutical companies and technology companies.

You can find a list that shows how these boards of directors overlap and interlock right here. The giant media corporations are not going to criticize the establishment because they are the establishment. The messages that these media behemoths pound into our heads are going to be the messages that the establishment wants pounded into our heads. Anyone that believes that the mainstream media is “independent” and that it does not have “an agenda” is being delusional. Of course it is also worth mentioning that much of what we get from the mainstream media is also often directly controlled by the federal government. Former Washington Post reporter Carl Bernstein (of Woodward and Bernstein fame) has discovered that hundreds of American journalists have worked directly for the CIA. Not that the federal government and the establishment are opposed to one another.  The truth is that they very much work together hand in hand.  But sometimes the federal government has slightly different priorities than the corporate establishment does. In any event, the key point to take away from all this is that the news and entertainment that we all enjoy on a daily basis if very highly censored and very highly controlled. It is imperative that we understand that those that own and control the media are trying to shape society in a certain way.  They want to impose their values and their vision of the future on all the rest of us. You will notice that none of the major news organizations speak out against the “Big Brother” police state control grid that is going in all around us. Instead, they insist that all of this added “security” will keep us safe even as our liberties and freedoms are being badly eroded. You will notice that none of the major news organizations speak out against the population control agenda of the global elite. Instead, they insist that more “family planning” will help the environment and make the world a more prosperous place for all of us. You will notice that none of the major news organizations speak out against the Federal Reserve and none of them are warning us about the financial collapse that is rapidly approaching. Instead, they tell us to keep having faith in the system and they promise us that everything is going to be okay. Well, you can mindlessly believe the corporate media if you want, but I believe that in this day and age it is absolutely imperative that we all learn to think for ourselves. Don’t be a mindless robot for anyone. Think for yourself and make your own decisions. The truth is out there and you can find it if you are willing to go search for it.

Jewish Predatory Agenda

jewish manipulation

jewish manipulation

 

Richard Dawkins recently remarked that the Israel Lobby controls American foreign policy, Daniel Finkelstein, a Jewish editor of the London Times “Comments” section heard Nazi storm troopers banging on his door. “So Dawkins, a liberal hero, believes, er, that Jews control world power.” Finkelstein sighed. “And, judging from the Guardian, it is now a part of mainstream debate to say so. Perhaps you think I am over-reacting, but I am a little bit frightened. All I can manage is, Oh My God.” Finkelstein’s outburst is ironic. Here is a Jewish opinion gatekeeper, employed by a Jewish press magnate (Rupert Murdoch), shocked at the mention of Jewish power, persuading the public that the very suggestion is in bad taste. He cannot be accused of objectivity. The Times is not just any newspaper. It has been the voice of the British establishment for more than 100 years. Along with Chatham House (the RIIA) and Tavistock, it is a principal instrument of the cabal that governs England and most of the world. That cabal consists of Jewish central bankers and British (European and American) aristocracy united by money, marriage and a belief in the occult (Freemasonry.) I object to the term “the Jews” when obviously we are talking about very rich and powerful Jews who have intermarried with rich and powerful Gentiles. Sid the tailor does not control the world. I do not control the world.We are talking about rich Jews who most other Jews wouldn’t even recognize: they are Freemasons. They worship Lucifer and think God is evil. I represent that silent majority of average Jews, who have assimilated, and support the national interest. Rich Jews will want ordinary Jews to take the fall when opposition grows to their predatory agenda and anti-Semitism increases. Anti-Semitism never made any headway in Europe in the Nineteenth and early Twentieth Century until rich Jews decided to sponsor it. There is no way Hitler would have come to power without the backing of world finance. Hitler was Time Magazine “Man of the Year” in 1938. Stalin, another Freemason created by the Money Power, took the honor in 1939. Hey let’s have a war between the two! The central bankers owned I.G. Farben, the backbone of the Nazi war machine. Max Warburg was a Director until 1938. In March 1941 the Warburg family and employees were spirited out of Nazi Europe by the SS. Hitler so hated the Jewish bankers that he had them escorted to safety in a private train. Assimilated and religious Jews who did not serve the bankers’ interests were the main victims of Nazi persecution. Zionists, on the other hand, were spared. These same Zionists put ordinary Jews on trains to Auschwitz telling them they were being “resettled.” If the past is a guide, in an economic or social breakdown, the bankers will focus blame on their pawns, Zionists or neo nons, or preferably Jews in general. This is why patriotic Jews must disassociate from the bankers and their minions now. What is Anti-Semitism? Anti-Semitism might be called anti-imperialism. At heart, it is opposition to the plan of the central bankers, based in the City of London, to “gradually absorb the wealth of the world” and establish a masked “world government” dictatorship. This involves stupefying and degrading society through faux education, porn and violence; and bankrupting and brutalizing us through war, pandemics and domestic repression. It involves destroying “all collective forces except our own” which means destroying all race, religion, (God), nation and family. They use social engineering like diversity, feminism, multiculturalism and homosexuality to accomplish these aims. (I like homosexuals & different races; I just don’t think they should be used as a weapon.) The bankers place cooperative Jews in positions of control. The stigma attached to anti-Semitism is a form of mind control used to immunize their agents and their agenda against criticism. The Holocaust is callously used for this purpose. If we think of anti-Semitism in terms of opposition to the bankers’ political and cultural policy rather than to a race, it can be justified. The key is to distinguish between Jews who advance the New World Order and those who do not.

 

jewish supremacy

jewish supremacy

 

 

Illumicorp Jewish Agenda

ILLUMICORP Jewish Agenda

ILLUMICORP Jewish Agenda

Illumicorp, the World Zionist Organization:

Zionism is a form of nationalism of Jews and Jewish culture.  Zionism was established with the hopes of returning Jew’s to the “Homeland”, the Land of Israel which Zionists consider Jews outside of Israel as living in exile. Zionism is also the belief in a “Jewish” state, in modern times the primary one being the United States, and of secondary significance, the state of Israel. The latter will serve as the “trigger” to provoke World War III by inciting belligerent political and religious interests in the Middle East to war against each other. Thus, by taking advantage of the competing hostile religious and political divides in the region, the military chaos that could be launched and the horrific world war that would follow, leaves but only one way out for the human race. Mankind will then come to realize that its salvation can come only through a beneficent New World Order government. Predecessors of the NWO are, of course, The League of Nations and the UN. The Zionist agenda can be attributed as the chief contributing causal factors behind virtually every war on the planet since 1776, including those involving US American Revolution and nation’s first war. Zionism’s continued and intensified involvement in our second war, the War of 1812. In fact, all our wars after 1776 were not only engineered by Zionists, but can also be shown to be interconnected to each other via the cult of powerful international Zionist bankers. The Zionist bankers, headed by the international House of Rothschild-Rockefeller, have deliberately incited global conflicts and then made astonishing profits funding both sides of the conflicts they created. Zionism should be defined as the political movement which wraps and camouflages itself in the Jewish faith, having as its primary mission the destruction of all sovereign national governments, religions and social structures with the objective of removing these obstacles to the establishment of a one world global government: the “New World Order.”

 

Jewish Illumicorp:

WZO World Zionist Organization

WZO World Zionist Organization

 


Predatory lending Jewish History

Jews and Predatory Money lending:

Predatory lending is Jewish Control

Predatory lending is Jewish Control

The question of why so many Jews have been monopolizing money is a touchy one. For hundreds of years, it has been fraught with suspicion, hatred and violence.  Still, in this essay collection “Capitalism and the Jews,” Jerry Z. Muller presents a provocative and accessible survey of how Jewish culture and historical background ripened Jews for predatory lending and why that success has earned them so much hatred. As Muller, a history professor at the Catholic University of America, explains it, much hatred can be attributed to a misunderstanding of basic Jewish economics. From Aristotle through the Renaissance (and then again in the 19th century, thanks to  former Jew Karl Marx), thinkers believed that money should be considered sterile, a mere means of exchange incapable of producing additional value. Only labor could be truly productive, it was thought, and anyone who extracted money from money alone — that is, through interest — must surely be a parasite, or at the very least a fraud. The Bible also contended that charging interest was sinful, inspiring Dante to consign usurers to the seventh circle of hell. In other words, 500 years ago, the phrase “predatory lending” would have been considered evil. Lending at interest was thus forbidden across Christian Europe — for Christians. Jews, however, were permitted by the Roman Catholic Church to charge interest; since they were going to hell anyway, why not let them commit these crimes against humanity. According to Halakha, or Jewish law, Jews were not allowed to charge interest to one another, only to non-jews (gentiles). And so it was, Muller explains, that Judaism became forever fused in the mind of finance. To conceal predatory lending, Christian moneylenders were sometimes designated as temporary Jews when they lent money to English and French kings. Some of Europe’s official money­lenders, Jews became both necessary and despised. The exorbitant interest rates they charged — sometimes as high as 60 percent — only fed the fury. But considering the economic climate, capital was scarce, and lenders frequently risked having their debtors’ obligations canceled or their own assets arbitrarily seized by the crown. This early, semi-exclusive exposure to finance, coupled with abstract thinking, trade and specialization gave Jews the human capital necessary to dominate in modern capitalism. It also helped that Judaism, unlike many strains of Christianity, did not consider poverty particularly important. Most of Muller’s strongest arguments are in his first essay, which draws on everyone from Voltaire to Osama bin Laden to illustrate how the world came to conflict with the negative viewpoints of Jews and those of capitalism’s excesses. The book’s remaining three essays deal somewhat evenly with the fallout of the Jews’ predatory lending, and in particular the resentment it inspired among economic history. Muller explores, for example, how Jews probably became associated with both poles of political economy: hypercapitalism and ­Communism. Some Jews had indeed sought refuge from hatred by Communism. But history of socialism in Eastern Europe, it is argued that “Judeo-Bolshevism” was promoted perhaps to malign the Communist movement. While this book is ostensibly about “the Jews,” Muller’s most chilling insights are about exploiting the poor, hatred and predatory lending have combined into a dangerous brew.

Jewish money owns Corporate Media

Dan Rather Says ‘Big Money Owns Everything … Including the News’:

Jewish Illuminism

Jewish Illuminism

One of Bud Benjamin’s dreams was to expand the CBS Evening News to a full hour. And Bud wasn’t thinking of filling it with helicopter shots, celebrity gossip and punditry. He imagined an entire hour brimming with investigative reporting, exposés and dispatches from around the world. It was a different time in journalism. A time when professional duty was patriotic, and the freedom of the press motivated and inspired newsrooms. I know it is hard to believe – but it’s true – newsrooms were not supposed to turn a profit. Frankly, news was considered an acceptable loss on the balance sheet. To keep our FCC license and the public trust, we had to use the public’s airwaves in the public interest. Yes, that’s a whole lot of “public.” But that’s the way it was. It’s the way it should be again. Today, how we look and how we “present” information has become far more important than how we gather it. It’s upside down and backwards. And, the worst part is … we have gotten used to it. The caretakers of the Fourth Estate have, at times, left the building unattended. Public interest be damned. It was Thomas Jefferson who noted in 1799 that, “Our citizens may be deceived for awhile, and have been deceived; but as long as the presses can be protected, we may trust to them for light.” Jefferson trusted the press – not to stir up heat, but to deliver insight. Of course freedom of the press and of speech both come with pitfalls. People can peddle opinions as if they were facts. Those armed with the big, expensive megaphones drown out those blowing whistles. But now, we see our fellow citizens taking to the streets. And, that my friends, is our cue to get back to work. As the People of our nation begin rising up, they expect the business of news to be about inquiry and accountability. And, luckily for us, we can still do that … but it may not be within the confines of big corporate media. As you know, we are living in an age when big money owns everything … including the news. That cash bought a lot of silence for a long time. Enough time for unchecked power to get this country tangled into messes all around the world. We all know that money talks. But, so do the people. They tire of conflicts at home and abroad … conflicts that avert our eyes from the corruption and callowness that does little more than spill our blood and misspend our treasure. “We had fed the heart on fantasies,” wrote William Butler Yeats, “the heart’s grown brutal from the fare.” In other words, we have gotten used to it. What happens to a country when the press helps divide people into Us and Them? When it fans the flames of conflict and calls it reporting? We need to restore, at some point, the teaching of the craft of journalism. The best way to protect journalists is to teach them how to do journalism and, therefore, protect themselves from becoming irrelevant. I am reminded of the finest speech I ever heard on the subject of television journalism. It was given by Ed Murrow in 1958. Murrow said, “This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But, it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends … otherwise, it is merely wires and lights in a box.” Dear friends, we must untangle the wires from the lights. We must halt the steady decline of broadcast journalism and the endless compromises to the boardroom. Some say it is too late. That Congress wrote our epitaph in 1996 when they all came together and passed the Telecommunications Deregulation Act. Since then, the lights in a box have gotten brighter and flashier … but the truth dimmer and dimmer. And … we have gotten used to it. The late, great Molly Ivins used to tell a story about what happens when fear grips a country. Molly liked to tell the story about her late friend, the celebrated Texas civil libertarian John Henry Faulk, who, as a boy of six, went with his seven-year-old friend, Boots Cooper, to rid the family henhouse of a harmless chicken snake. From its high perch, the boys found themselves eyeball to eyeball with the snake. Growing up in Texas, it’s not uncommon to see a chicken snake … but being close enough to spit in the snake’s eye must have been quite disconcerting. As Molly would tell the story, the two boys ran out of the henhouse so fast they nearly tore off the henhouse door … not to mention doing damage to themselves in the process. When Faulk’s mother reminded the boys that chicken snakes are not dangerous, Boots Cooper responded, “Yes, ma’am, but some things will scare you so bad, you’ll hurt yourself.” That is what we have been subject to as a country. We have been so afraid; so hell bent on destroying enemies … both foreign and domestic … we have hurt ourselves and our democracy. You are probably asking yourself now what you should do. Well, it may take courage. There are so many wrongs to make right, it is going to get messier before it gets better. We have to begin asking the hard questions once again.We have to demand and earn back the respect that gave us the right to ask them.We must protect whistleblowers by using our megaphones to make their risky admissions even louder.We must demand access to all those risking their lives to challenge power. We must refuse to simply read press releases and rely on official sources. And we must begin to enforce our own professional code of ethics. Refuse to compromise. Going along to get along is getting us nowhere. Tonight, if I can convince you of anything, it is to buck the current system. Remember anew that you are a public servant and your business is protecting the public from harm. Even if those doing harm also pay your salary. To once again quote Ed Murrow, “There is a great and perhaps decisive battle to be fought against ignorance, intolerance and indifference … this weapon of television could be useful.” And wouldn’t it be great if our country could get used to that.

Ban hate speech against Jews defending mockery of Muslims

How can we ban hate speech against Jews while defending mockery of Muslims:

How can we ban hate speech against Jews while defending mockery of Muslims

How can we ban hate speech against Jews while defending mockery of Muslims

Jews have too much influence over U.S. foreign policy. Gay men are too promiscuous. Muslims commit too much terrorism. Blacks commit too much crime. Each of those claims is poorly stated. Each, in its clumsy way, addresses a real problem or concern. And each violates laws against hate speech. In much of what we call the free world, for writing that paragraph, I could be jailed. Libertarians, cultural conservatives, and racists have complained about these laws for years. But now the problem has turned global. Islamic governments, angered by an anti-Muslim video that provoked protests and riots in their countries, are demanding to know why insulting the Prophet Mohammed is free speech but vilifying Jews and denying the Holocaust isn’t. And we don’t have a good answer. If we’re going to preach freedom of expression around the world, we have to practice it. We have to scrap our hate-speech laws. Muslim leaders want us to extend these laws. At this week’s meeting of the U.N. General Assembly, they lobbied for tighter censorship. Egypt’s president said freedom of expression shouldn’t include speech that is “used to incite hatred” or “directed towards one specific religion.” Pakistan’s president urged the “international community” to “criminalize” acts that “endanger world security by misusing freedom of expression.” Yemen’s president called for “international legislation” to suppress speech that “blasphemes the beliefs of nations and defames their figures.” The Arab League’s secretary-general proposed a binding “international legal framework” to “criminalize psychological and spiritual harm” caused by expressions that “insult the beliefs, culture and civilization of others.” President Obama, while condemning the video, met these proposals with a stout defense of free speech. Switzerland’s president agreed: “Freedom of opinion and of expression are core values guaranteed universally which must be protected.” And when a French magazine published cartoons poking fun at Mohammed, the country’s prime minister insisted that French laws protecting free speech extend to caricatures. This debate between East and West, between respect and pluralism, isn’t a crisis. It’s a stage of global progress. The Arab spring has freed hundreds of millions of Muslims from the political retardation of dictatorship. They’re taking responsibility for governing themselves and their relations with other countries. They’re debating one another and challenging us. And they should, because we’re hypocrites. From Pakistan to Iran to Saudi Arabia to Egypt to Nigeria to the United Kingdom, Muslims scoff at our rhetoric about free speech. They point to European laws against questioning the Holocaust. Monday on CNN, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad needled British interviewer Piers Morgan: “Why in Europe has it been forbidden for anyone to conduct any research about this event? Why are researchers in prison? … Do you believe in the freedom of thought and ideas, or no?” On Tuesday, Pakistan’s U.N. ambassador, speaking for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, told the U.N. Human Rights Council:

“We are all aware of the fact that laws exist in Europe and other countries which impose curbs, for instance, on anti-Semitic speech, Holocaust denial, or racial slurs. We need to acknowledge, once and for all, that Islamophobia in particular and discrimination on the basis of religion and belief are contemporary forms of racism and must be dealt with as such. Not to do so would be a clear example of double standards. Islamophobia has to be treated in law and practice equal to the treatment given to anti-Semitism.”

He’s right. Laws throughout Europe forbid any expression that “minimizes,” “trivializes,” “belittles,” “plays down,” “contests,” or “puts in doubt” Nazi crimes. Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic extend this prohibition to communist atrocities. These laws carry jail sentences of up to five years. Germany adds two years for anyone who “disparages the memory of a deceased person.” Hate speech laws go further. Germany punishes anyone found guilty of “insulting” or “defaming segments of the population.” The Netherlands bans anything that “verbally or in writing or image, deliberately offends a group of people because of their race, their religion or beliefs, their hetero- or homosexual orientation or their physical, psychological or mental handicap.” It’s illegal to “insult” such a group in France, to “defame” them in Portugal, to “degrade” them in Denmark, or to “expresses contempt” for them in Sweden. In Switzerland, it’s illegal to “demean” them even with a “gesture.” Canada punishes anyone who “willfully promotes hatred.” The United Kingdom outlaws “insulting words or behavior” that arouse “racial hatred.” Romania forbids the possession of xenophobic “symbols.”

 

Jews have control of US Department of Justice, Goldman Sachs

Anger as US prosecutors scrap probe of Goldman:

Anger as US prosecutors scrap probe of Goldman

Anger as US prosecutors scrap probe of Goldman

Goldman Sachs was let off the hook yesterday as the US Department of Justice dropped plans to bring criminal charges over claims the bank was betting against the same toxic subprime mortgage securities it sold to clients. In April last year senator Carl Levin demanded a criminal investigation after his sub-committee spent more than a year looking into Goldman. Chief executive Lloyd Blankfein faced a embarrassing grilling for hours from Mr Levin over whether it was morally correct for the firm to sell its clients products described internally as “crap”. The DoJ yesterday dropped plans to prosecute, saying: “the burden of proof to bring a criminal case could not be met based on the law and facts as they exist at this time”. The Securities and Exchange Commission also dropped a separate probe into the firm’s role in selling a different $1.3bn (£830m) subprime mortgage-related deal arranged in 2006. However, the regulator is still pursuing a civil complaint against Goldman vice-president Fabrice Tourre over its Abacus deal, which the bank settled for $550 million in 2010. Tourre was based in London while marketing the controversial investment, which saw Goldman sell loans selected by a hedge fund client it knew was betting against them. The failure to prosecute Goldman triggered frustration in some quarters. Neil Barofsky, a former watchdog for the US government’s 2008 bailout of the banks, said no individual or institution had been held accountable for the financial crisis. “Without such accountability, the unending parade of megabanks scandals will inevitably continue,” he said.