No War for Israel!

[Gość: PART #2]

Back in 1996, long before the current push for war, a prominent Zionist group
led by Richard Perle wrote a report titled: A Clean Break: A New Strategy for
Securing the Realm. (http://www.israeleconomy.org/strat1.htm) It called for
war on Iraq. It was written not for the United States but for the incoming
Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. The report basically argues how
destruction of Iraq will protect Israel's monopoly of nuclear weapons and
give Israel a free hand to defeat the Palestinians and impose whatever
colonial settlement Israel has in store.

Not only have Jewish agents in the government pushed for this war, but they
drive the media push for war. The war could not be possible without the
massive support it has gotten from the media. A great deal of the news
reporting around the world is biased for the Iraq war and against the
Palestinians. In America, there is an unrelenting call for war by thousands
of pundits, editorial writers, news editors and pro-war reporters. And, make
no mistake about it, there is no shortage of Jewish supremacists among them.


The fact is that almost all of the major media in America, and much of it in
Europe, have been cheerleaders for this war. For instance, most of those in
media never challenge any of the basic premises of the war.

When it is alleged that we must go to war against Iraq because it violated UN
Resolution 1441, no major pundits retort by saying that if this is a valid
reason to go to war, then we must go to war against Israel, a nation that has
violated far more UN resolutions than has Iraq. For instance, for 35 years
Israel has violated Resolution 242, a UN resolution that demanded that Israel
leave the occupied West Bank, a resolution that was even supported by the
United States.

When it is stated that Iraq must be attacked because it has, quote, "weapons
of mass destruction," why do no television news authorities respond by
saying, "If we go to war against Iraq for having weapons of mass destruction
then we also must go to war against Israel, which has one of the world's
biggest arsenals of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons."

When it is said that there must be inspections in Iraq, no newspapers suggest
that if we demand inspections of Iraq, the same demand should be made of
Israel, a nation that has one of the world's deadliest arsenals of
biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons. On this score, Iraq cooperates on
this vital matter while Israel does not.

When it is said we should go to war against Iraq because its regime has
invaded other countries, killed thousands of civilians and tortured thousands
more in their jails, no TV networks suggest that we must also go to war
against Israel, a nation led by war criminal Ariel Sharon and guilty of the
same crimes.

When it is said that we should go to war against Iraq for not allowing
freedom and self-government, no journalists suggest that we also must go to
war against Israel for their brutal military occupation over 3 million
Palestinian civilians, people not allowed even elementary freedoms.

This same news media tells us constantly, quote, "at least Israel is
democratic," but we hear no voices responding by saying "How can Israel be
called democratic, when 3 million Palestinians suffer under brutal military
occupation for 35 years and are not allowed democratic control of their own
society?"

In truth, Jewish supremacists in the media have even controlled the anti-war
debate. They make a number of issues off limits. One is allowed to argue
whether or not Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. One can argue whether or
not Iraq is in material breach of UN resolutions. One can argue whether
inspections should be given more time. But, it is forbidden to mention
Israel's horrendous arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, Israeli's refusal
to allow inspections, or even that Israel violated far more UN resolutions
than has Iraq.

It is also off limits, of course, to suggest that the great weight of Jewish
ownership and management of the mass media creates the media bias for war,
and that this Jewish influence actually helps to shape the anti-war debate
itself. It is verboten to point out the conflict of interest by the many
Jewish supremacists who are key advisers to both Bush and Blair. Yes, there
are certainly Gentiles who support the war for varying reasons, but how many
of them have been influenced by the weight of Jewish power? Gentiles in
government and media learn very quickly what they can and cannot say. If they
go along with the Jewish hawks, they will prosper handily, but if they dare
to expose Jewish supremacism, it is practically an act of self-immolation.

It is not big oil or capitalism that it leading the pro-Israel, pro-war voice
of the media and government. It is Jewish supremacism.

These same Jewish media powers have decreed that it is quote, "anti-Semitic,"
unquote, to suggest that many of these Jews in the media and in critical
positions in government could be more loyal to the interests of Israel than
to the nations in which they live. In last week's broadcast, I quoted the
words of Stephen Steinlight, the former head of national affairs of the
largest and most influential Jewish organization in the United States, the
American Jewish Committee. In a Jewish magazine article, Steinlight recently
wrote that as a typical Jew of his generation, he was taught from childhood
to salute a foreign flag, sing foreign national songs, to view Israel as the
true homeland and that Gentiles are inferior to Jews.

It is true that in spite of the fact that Jews comprise the great bulk of the
media and political forces driving it on, there are some Jews who oppose this
war. They should be applauded, but even most of them don't talk about the
real issues I discussed earlier. There is too little said about the real
reasons we are being driven to war. You see, the pro-Israel media has made it
permissible to oppose the war based on the "no war for oil argument." One can
say that without incurring the wrath of the Jewish media.

If fact, the Israel-Firsters who are busily promoting this war must smile a
little bit when they hear the oil argument, first because it is easily
refutable, and secondly, because it deflects attention from the real driving
force behind the war. War with Iraq, and upcoming wars with Iran, Syria,
Lebanon and even Saudi Arabia have been long-standing objectives of Israel
and its loyal servants in the United States.

So one can say, "No War for Oil," but just don't say, "No War for Israel,"
for if you do, all hell will break loose on you.

It is similar to the deception the Jewish media used after the attack on the
World Trade Center. The kosher word-shapers of the media immediately told
Americans that we were attacked, quote, "because the hijackers hated
freedom!" In his many interviews before 911, bin Laden never criticized
America's freedom: he criticized the fact that Americans had let themselves
be controlled by the Zionists. Bin Laden and the hijackers had no hatred of
freedom. Their hatred of America was born from America's support of Israel's
brutal suppression of the Palestinian people.

One must respect the cleverness of these Jewish supremacists. If the world
was told the truth that we were attacked because of our support of Israel, it
might just dawn on millions of Americans to ask the unaskable: if supporting
the criminal acts of Israel is really worth it? Is it worth the economic cost
estimated by a writer for the Christian Science Monitor: one trillion dollars
since the founding of Israel? Is it worth the thousands of lives lost on
September 11? Is it worth the terroristic attacks of Israel against the
United States such as the attack on the USS Liberty and the terrorism ag