By Ted Belman (first published on July 19, 2006)
The Secret War Against the Jews by John Loftus and Mark Aarons was published in 1994. It was sub-titled “How Western Intelligence Betrayed the Jewish People.”
I quote from Deane Rink’s review of this book.
“The modern world begins, the authors suggest, at the end of World War I, when British diplomat/adventurers Jack Philby (father of Soviet spy Kim Philby and legendary Arabist) and Lawrence of Arabia endeavour to unify a bunch of warring Bedouin tribes into nationhood, best represented by Saudi Arabia. Aware that black gold (oil) lies underneath the desert sands, Philby gingerly befriends Ibn Saud, and makes him the first Saudi king. But Philby is not solely interested in empire, even his own British one; he is interested in making money, and forges an alliance with an American intelligence agent in charge of Middle Eastern affairs, Allen Dulles.
By the 1930s, Ibn Saud and Philby are secret supporters of the Nazi rise to political power in Germany, and bring Dulles, a NYC-based corporate lawyer for Sullivan and Cromwell, in on their scheme. It is a triple game driven by their hatred of Zionism and the Jews, motivated by their obsessive seeking of profits, and designed to completely transform the landscape of the Middle East. […] This double-dealing by British and American corporations continues throughout World War II… “
The review continues with a synopsis of events in this war for the next fifty years.
Loftus, in his book, concludes by congratulating the Jews for having won the war.
I think he spoke too soon.
The conspiracy to destroy Israel is clearly reflected in the “peace process”. Prior to the Six Day War, President Johnson, an oil man, told Nasser that he would help him with intelligence and sent the USS Liberty to spy on Israel. Although Israel was confident that it would win handily, no one else was. The victory shocked the world and in the view of the conspirators, had to be undone. So when Resolution 242 was being drafted a few months later, by Under Secretary of State, Eugene Rostow and others, they sought to protect Israel and assure it of secure and recognized borders but they weren’t able to exclude the following. “Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war ..”.
This statement was and is legally and historically erroneous. Territory has always been acquired by war and a distinction has always been made between aggressive and defensive wars. It was bad enough that Israel was created in ’48 with ridiculous borders but it would be a catastrophe if Israel was allowed to retain the lands acquired by the ’67 war and so the conspirators set about cutting Israel down to size.
Israel was caught by surprise in the ’73 Yom Kippur War but still had a few hours opportunity to attack first and Kissinger counseled against it. During the war Kissinger delayed rearming Israel for a number of days as he wanted Israel to get a “bloody nose” first. Nixon prevailed and a massive airlift took place in time. Remember that Europe denied landing and refueling rights to this airlift requiring the US to strong arm Portugal into allowing the same.
When Israel dramatically turned the war around, it was Kissinger who prevented Israel from crushing the Egyptian Third Army or marching on Cairo or Damascus if it so choose. Kissinger argued at the time that in the interests of peace, the Arab’s should be enabled to save face.
On December 17, 1975, Henry Kissinger met with Sadun Hammadi, Iraqi Minister of Foreign Affairs. A transcript of this meeting has been published which discloses Kissinger’s attempts to assuage the concerns of Hammadi.
“Kissinger: I think, when we look at history, that when Israel was created in 1948, I don’t think anyone understood it. It originated in American domestic politics. It was far away and little understood. So it was not an American design to get a bastion of imperialism in the area. It was much less complicated: And I would say that until 1973 the Jewish community had enormous influence. It is only in the last two years, as a result of the policy we are pursuing, that it has changed,
“We don’t need Israel for influence in the Arab world. On the contrary, Israel does us more harm than good in the Arab world [..]
“We can’t negotiate about the existence of Israel but we can reduce its size to historical proportions.
“I don’t agree Israel is a permanent threat. How can a nation of three million be a permanent threat? They have a technical advantage now. But it is inconceivable that peoples with wealth and skill and the tradition of the Arabs won’t develop the capacity that is needed. So I think in ten to fifteen years Israel will be like Lebanon–struggling for existence, with no influence in the Arab world.
“You mentioned new weapons. But they will not be delivered in the foreseeable future. All we agreed to is to study it, and we agreed to no deliveries out of current stocks. So many of these things won’t be produced until 1980, and we have not agreed to deliver them then. [..].
“If the issue is the existence of Israe1, we can’t cooperate. But if the issue is more normal borders, we can cooperate.
“Aide: Your Excellency, do you think a settlement would come through the Palestinians in the area? ‘How do you read it? Is it in your power to create such a thing?
“Kissinger: Not in 1976. I have to be perfectly frank with you. I think the Palestinian identity has to be recognized in some form. But we need the thoughtful cooperation of the Arabs. It will take a year or a year and to do it, and will be a tremendous fight. An evolution is already taking place.
“Aide: You think it will be part of a solution?
“Kissinger: It has to be. No solution is possible without it. But the domestic situation is becoming favorable. More and more questions are being asked in Congress favorable to the Palestinians.”
In the same year according to Eurabia and Prof Eidelberg’s synopsis of it, the Euro-Arab Dialogue commenced and the Arabs set the conditions for this Euro-Arab symbiosis:
1) European policy would be independent from, and opposed to that of the United States;
2) recognition by Europe of a “Palestinian people,” and the creation of a “Palestinian” state;
3) European support for the PLO;
4) the designation of Arafat as the sole and exclusive representative of that so-called Palestinian people;
5) the de-legitimizing of the State of Israel, both historically and politically, its shrinking into non-viable borders, and the Arabization of Jerusalem.
This became European policy.
Francisco Gil-White thoroughly documents the US role in giving birth to a Palestinian state in his invaluable Understanding the Palestinian Movement
“What is beyond question is that, at least by 1977, the master-pet relationship between the CIA and Hajj Amin’s movement was firmly in place. In 1977, the US was holding high-level secret talks with Hajj Amin’s PLO/Fatah that violated a 1975 agreement with Israel not to do that.[77a]
“In public, US president Jimmy Carter worked very hard to give PLO/Fatah the dignity of a government in exile. The explicit point of Jimmy Carter’s diplomacy was to give international legitimacy to the demand for a PLO state in the West Bank and Gaza, and it was in fact Jimmy Carter who first proposed such a state, with the PLO obediently following about a week later, though up to this point the PLO had loudly rejected the idea of a PLO state in the West Bank and Gaza.[79]
“In 1978, when Israel tried to defend itself from PLO terrorist attacks coming from the PLO bases in southern Lebanon, vigorous US pressure forced the Israelis to back down.[80]
In 1981, against Israeli objections, Ronald Reagan pushed hard for a PLO state in the West Bank and Gaza.[81]
“In 1982-1983 the Reagan administration rushed into Lebanon to protect the PLO from being destroyed by the Israelis, after the Israelis invaded Lebanon once again to protect themselves from PLO attacks against Israeli civilians in the Galilee. The US exerted very strong pressure on the Israelis to back down, and then provided a military safe passage for the PLO so that they could make their new home in Tunis.[82]
“In 1985, certain Israeli politicians, following US wishes, tried hard to advance the political interests of the PLO. In the same year, some Italian politicians who, it has now been established, were part of a covert (pro-fascist) CIA effort in Europe, sacrificed their political careers for the sake of advancing the political image of the PLO against Israel. Meanwhile, Ronald Reagan denied the Holocaust. This was not Reagan’s senility: the entire administration was behind the effort.[83]
‘In 1987-88, the PLO launched the First Intifada in the West Bank and Gaza (though the media pretended it was a “spontaneous uprising”). The US cooperated closely with the effort to blame supposed Israeli brutality for the First Intifada, and to use the accusation as a reason to advance the project to create a PLO state in the West Bank and Gaza.[84]
“In 1989, with Dick Cheney leading the charge, the US began supporting a PLO state in the West Bank as supposedly the “only solution” to the Arab-Israeli conflict.[85]
“In 1991, a critical year, George Bush Sr.’s administration literally forced the Israelis — with threats — to participate in what became the Oslo so-called ‘peace’ process, the purpose of which was to bring the PLO out from Tunis and into the Jewish state, where it would become the government over the Arab population living in the West Bank and Gaza, from which position the PLO has been indoctrinating these Arabs into Hajj Amin’s genocidal ideology, and murdering any Arabs who disagree, as Hajj Amin also used to do.[86]
“In 1994, the same year that Yasser Arafat was given a Nobel Peace Prize (!!), and which saw the debut of the Oslo ‘peace’ process by bringing the PLO into Israel, Bill Clinton’s CIA was training the PLO. This, despite the fact that Arafat’s henchmen were explaining to the Western press, in English, in the same year of 1994, that they would use their CIA training to kill Jews and any Arabs who didn’t like that, in accordance with Hajj Amin’s ideology.[87]
“When Yasser Arafat died, the US enthusiastically endorsed his replacement Mahmoud Abbas (alias Abu Mazen), who, like Yasser Arafat, has always shared Hajj Amin’s ideology and therefore wishes to exterminate the Jewish people.[88]
“What is clear from all this is that the US the EU and the Arab League are supporting the PLO in its efforts to cut Israel down to “historical proportions” as promised by Kissinger some thirty years ago. In effect they condone terror as a means to bring this about.
“Many friends of Israel believe, and for good reason, that Israel can’t resist the combined onslaught of these forces and should give in to the inevitable and salvage what it can. Sharon and Olmert both came to this conclusion and so “disengagement” and “realignment” were born.
“Die-hards are entitled to ask whether such a policy will lead to real peace or Israel’s destruction. Kissinger himself forecasted that “in fifteen years Israel will be like Lebanon–struggling for existence…”
“So long as the US and the EU remain committed to the goal of returning Israel to the pre ’67 borders I don’t see how Israel can hold out.”
But the times they are achanging.
What is necessary is for the US to come to the conclusion that the creation of Palestine is not in its interest. The increasing influence of Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas and the Brotherhood are not just a threat to Israel but to America and her “friends” Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia too. This is recognized by all. So I don’t see a Palestinian state being created for years, if ever.
Because of this threat, Israel has a window of opportunity to chart its own course. Israel should enlarge Jerusalem and start building in E1. The US is too weak now and must hold the line against the Jihadists.
Accordingly I doubt it will seriously pressure Israel.
@Ted But T.E. Lawrence and and LBJ were pro-Zionist philosemites according to other sources.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/05/lawrence-israel-benjamin-weinthal/
https://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/front-page/who-was-the-first-genuinely-pro-israel-u-s-president/2017/08/30/
I am familiar with the Loftus book and have found it a bit of a stretch.
By the way, my name is spelled Sebastien. Seb or SZ will do if that’s hard.
@ yamit82:
I had given the two of you turkeys AMPLE opportunity to expressly disprove (or even just challenge) — right here, right now — anything I had written in refutation of your vicious calumnies against RR as a ‘Holocaust denier.’
Pursuant to that, I laid out immediate links to dozens of my archived remarks in this regard [post #12, above] — remarks which THEMSELVES had originally been offered in a direct defense against those same cheap slanders which you have made so many times in the past.
You claimed that what I had said on the subject was “mostly unresearched and mostly emotional defenses of RR” which ignored the “evidence” — but you offered not one explicit example of my doing that. So I directly CHALLENGED you to provide archived examples of that in what I had written.
Whereupon you not-so-deftly sidestepped the challenge and instead changed the subject by making the argument about ME and the supposedly ‘angry’ rhetorical flourish at the end of my comment [#37, above].
— Not a solitary SYLLABLE about the substance of the comment, mind you (nor about any of the archived ones) — just hockin’ me a tchynik w/ “angry,” “emotional,” “hysterical,” “borderline ad hominem,” “babbling nonsense,” etc, etc, ad naus. Very clearly a diversion from the substance, pure & simple.
It’s obvious that this is the sheerest projection on your part, since what you’ve said about me is precisely what you YOURSELF have done HERE when challenged to support your claim that my defense of RR was unresearched, emotional, and heedless of the facts.
The plainly demonstrated truth of the matter is that this is “how YOU do things when you can’t support factually your positions on anything.”
“Revision” of what? — the mainstream media drivel of that era?
dweller Said:
You defended your support for RR by attacking me and BR. That’s how you do things when you can’t support factually your positions on anything. Consequently it is you who have forced this discussion to be on a personal level and not reasoned and factual debate supported by sources beyond repute. You keep offering subjective opinion unsupported by the facts and twist those who do provide such support.
You impute all evidence contrary to your opinions as hostile leftist anti RR etc as evidence.
When you do supply anything it is conservative revisionist apologetic for the most part.
@ honeybee:
Wrong about what? — claiming to be a christian?
I’ve said I dig Jesus. Never said I thought he was ‘God.’
Not only did HE never say he was divine, but he also did say quite a bit indicating distinctly the contrary.
And in some seven or eight years’ worth of postings on this board you won’t find a single comment of mine suggesting otherwise; not a one — guaranteed, or your money back.
To be a ‘Christian,’ you HAVE to believe he was/is ‘divine.’ The Nicene Creed (and all the subsequent ones) leaves no wiggle room.
@ yamit82:
Think what you like.
Why? You think Reality is subject to opinion?
I know myself & I know what I was thinking when I wrote that.
No euphemism; it’s forensic fact. Ad hominem assaults are called that [“against the man”] because they are offered as substitutes for — in place of — argument on the merits. A personal assessment added ON to the substantive argument is not ad hominem.
Wrong again, Huff’n’puff. I have the reality very much in hand. It doesn’t take anger to backhand a smear-artist across the chops any more than it does to swat a fly. No reason for anger & a proper rebuke to always arrive on the same bus.
But you’re too caught up in your own rampant emotionalism to be able to make the distinctions in yourself or in anybody else. You think you’re energized by your anger, because it gives your ego the sensation of energy — but that’s an illusion; it’s actually compromising your health.
Meanwhile, as is typical for you, you’ve once again taken the thread off on a tangent (my purported ‘anger’), and left behind the matter under discussion at the point-of-departure: to wit, Prof F. Gil-White’s cheap, sleazoid, and thoroughly hollow claim that Reagan ‘denied the Holocaust.’
(You really don’t know how to stay on-point, do you, Huffy?)
dweller Said:
I think it was. Wanna take a poll of readers??
Youv’ve worn that euphemism to death.. Very stale but in the end it’s subjective projection on your part and you are always in denial… 5 Pinocchio’s for you.
Long on metaphors, short on truth and reality. 🙂
@ dweller:
If I am wrong, forgive me.
@ honeybee:
As a free man, I’m prompt & forthright in speaking my mind.
(When did I ever claim to be a ‘Christian’? Show me the post.)
@ yamit82:
There wasn’t a smidgeon of anger in my response.
Nothing of the sort. Calling a spade a spade is not ad hominem.
You’d like that, wouldn’t you? Sheer wishful thinking.
There’s no anger in swatting a fly trying to light on a freshly baked pie cooling in the fresh air.
@ dweller:
As a Christian, you’re quick to take offence !!
@ honeybee:
Throwing bones again, Twinkie?
dweller Said:
That’s an angry response and you know anger typifies emotion. Therefore your responses are emotional even if you deny it. Borderline ad hominem as well. You are getting hysterical and reduced to babbling nonsense. 😛
dweller Said:
And you wonder why you’re modified ?????
@ bernard ross:
Firstly, Ted is not a ‘mountain of patience’ — far from it, actually.
He has spoken of ‘losing’ his patience.
But if you can ‘lose’ it, then what you ‘lost’ wasn’t ‘patience’ in the first place.
Secondly, my posts often appear ‘long’ because they are long on the page, a different matter altogether.
My actual comment texts are rarely very long at all. Your OWN remarks are almost always longer (usually quite a lot longer).
My posts often run long on the page because, for the sake of online ease & clarity, I separate each discrete thought from the next by skipping a line.
And for the sake of continuity, I make a point of including the blockquoted remarks to which I’m replying — and that necessarily adds length (sometimes as much as 60%).
It is also a matter of courtesy since the post to which my reply responds is likely to appear on a previous page and cannot be easily accessed by just clicking on the reference atop the post, because the system won’t take you to a previous page, only the same page.
— in my actual comments, I am nowhere NEAR as long-winded as PresentCompany, however.
Oh? — show me an example.
Hogwash. There is nobody on this board who stays on-point more faithfully than I do. (If you have evidence to the contrary, produce it.)
If you are the kind of reader who feels ‘punished’ by reading my stuff, then there’s no need to suffer needlessly.
Don’t read it.
Problem solved.
Openers for what? I’m not going on a fishing expedition. If you have a specific argument to make and want to quote an excerpt from those links by way of support, fine; GO for it. But to just read it because YOU find it ‘interesting,’ no thanks.
Not unless you can find so much as a word therein which contradicts (let alone, ‘disproves’) anything stated in any of my archived comments cited in post #12 above. If you can, then excerpt it, w/ particularity HERE, and I’ll address it.
If you can’t, you’re just blowing smoke up everybody’s arse in furtherance of your Reagan hatred.
And you can take THAT and shove it up your OWN arse.
@ yamit82:
There wasn’t a word of emotionalism OR ad hominem in any of the post you cited.
All the emotionalism, excitement & ad hominem was in the post that YoursTruly referenced, here:@ yamit82:
dweller Said:
You always have enough opinions to account for masses of….”data” Even Ted, that mountain of patience, has commented that he doesn’t read your posts because they are too long. Your mountains of obfuscating “data” tend to lose the point and punish the reader.
Instead of mountains of….”data”, I suggest the following:
yamit82 Said:
I suggest reading those just for openers
@ dweller:
Much emotional outbursts and ad hominem in place of direct rebuttal with credible historical source references. Typical dweller MO.
@ y-a-m-i-t-8-2:
Nonsense, I refuted PLENTY — and you know it. I don’t have enough opinions on the era to account for the amount of data in those posts. I provided lots of verifiable, factual detail. You just refuse to ACKNOWLEDGE it, because it suits you to maintain a virulent hatred toward the man, and anything that fits outside that template must be cut away, discredited, or marginalized — by hook or by crook.
‘Emotional arguments’? —moi ??? LMSS.
It would appear that the man in the mirror is giving you backtalk these days. But then, perhaps he didn’t realize that it was this post of YOURS that he was referring to.
Oh? — and WHAT ‘confirmed’ historical record would that be?
@ Ted Belman:
Then you haven’t ‘refreshed’ it enough
— not NEARLY enough.
Suggest reading the posts I noted in #12 above, just for openers.
@ yamit82:
No, you can’t — not justly you can’t.
You can say pigs fly, and birds crawl on the bottom of the ocean, too.
Doesn’t make it so.
Show me what posts of mine employed that kind of crap.
I ‘ignored’ NONE of the evidence — and the historical record does unmistakably show the other side to have been quite DEFINITELY guilty of extreme malice toward RR. (Huff’n’puff sure-as-hell is.) What’s more, as my archived responses clearly show, some of the so-called ‘factual’ evidence provided by Prof F Gil-White WASN’T. . . ‘factual.’
I was never RR’s (or any other president’s) ‘acolyte’ — I merely asked for a fair hearing for him, as I do for everybody. . . .even those on this blogsite.
But I LIKEWISE invite any interested reader to consider the opposing arguments and judge for themselves. They’ll get a much more nuanced & reliable picture from my archived posts in the matter than from the noticeable axe-grinding of Prof F. Gil-White & Capt Huff’n’puff’s other favored character assassins.
No; those links [above] were NOT ‘most’ of the the links.
— QTC, those links (which refer to only 3 pgs of comments on just 2 threads, “High Stakes Poker” [2011] & “Pres Obama never visited Israel” [2012] — were but a fraction of the links. With more time, I could have pulled out a bustling boatload of ’em.
@ y-a-m-i-t-8-2:
Mine too. Or spammed.
Some have been awaiting retrieval for nearly two weeks.
Me neither.
Same here — on both counts.
@ honeybee:
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090821211642/hercxena/images/c/c4/Brunhilda2.jpg
Valkyrie—a warrior maiden of the supreme god Odin
😛
yamit82 Said:
https://search.yahoo.com/search?p=brunhilde+valkyrie&type=2button&fr=ush-mailn_02
@ honeybee:
Yes of course thanks!!!
Jewish women have always been both enigmatic and even intimidating… Viking women are easier to deal with. 😛
yamit82 Said:
Not Big Nose Kate, Ddarliin, Susan Marcus. Beware of Jewish women.
@ honeybee:
I know the story and the story of Wyatt Earp and Kate a real love story. Very American and interesting Earp died of old age with his boots on, so to speak. His real story in MO is much more interesting than all the fictional accts.
Kate is the real story because she tamed him,made him a mensch. I think he was a very intelligent character as was she.
@ yamit82:
Doc Holiday was “buried ” in Glenwood Springs, Co. where he died of TB. His girlfriend Big Nose Kate was ,I believe, Hungarian. Did you see Susan Marcus, a Vaudeville dancer and singer ? She was the daughter of Jewish Dry Goods Merchants from SF. She legally marred Wyatt, he was reputed married to a Dodge City, KS. prostitute, who later died of TB, at the time. Wyatt is buried in the Jewish cemetery in SF. Did he convert ?? Who knows !!!
@ yamit82:
thanks for the links
Ted Belman Said:
Its in YOUR posted article from F. G. White
honeybee Said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGNdnlCbfMs
@ yamit82:I had forgotten the negative things I was aware of regarding Reagan. Now that I have refreshed my memory I have to agree with you.
http://tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/96492/the-most-anti-israel-president
yamit82 Said:
IN VINO VERITAS !!!!!!!!!!! Darlin
yamit82 Said:
My Uncle Jack ,who lived in LA, was a friend of RR from his Army days. Uncle Jac admired RR as a man.
Ted every comment I post is moderated and I am not happy about it. I spend a lot of time researching my comments and if you want me off Israpundit just say the word.
@ Ted Belman:
@ bernard ross:
Interesting Reading
Pollard and Iran Contra
Secret war against the Jews with a whole segment on Reagan’s perfidy
dweller Said:
You refuted nothing!!! You stated your opinions as fact which they are not and never have been.
You approach criticism of RR in the same manner as you defend criticism against your biblical idols.
Mostly hot air with no basis in actual fact. You are not even very creative in your failed attempts to justify the lies you project and support against the factual truth where it can be demonstrated.
Emotional arguments, revisionist accounts of the confirmed and cited historical record are in fact non-argumets but an agenda driven attempt to put lipstick on your vile pet stinking PIG.
Stick with the facts and the truth will set you free… Maybe?? 😛
Veritas Vos Liberabit
@ Ted Belman:
I can’t say he was a Holocaust denier? I can say he was a Jew hater anti-Israel pro Nazi and pro Palestinian.
To absolve him of all the misdeeds and crimes by his admin is like absolving Obama and blaming his admin misdeeds like the IRS scandal only on some low level bureaucrats.
Did RR know about Iran Contra? Was he covering for G H Bush and others? Either way he was responsible and should have been impeached if for no other reason, plain STUPIDITY.
Loftus and Arons go deeply into their mechanisms and perfidy during this period.
All researchers that criticize RR will meet mostly unresearched and mostly emotional defenses of RR using popular anti Left arguments in RR defense. They ignore the factual evidence and rely on blaming the other side for extreme malice and bias against RR.
I suggest any reader including Ted Belman read opposing arguments submitted by me and the Reagan acolyte and judge for themselves. He did I think provide most of the links.
I don’t believe the Historical record supports Reagan as a denier of the Holocaust. Dweller seems to agree with me.
Another putrescent pile of pig plop. I’ve addressed & refuted this vicious claim many, many times on this blogsite. (References below.)
He’s right that it was not senility — but he’s fullovit in asserting that the “entire” admin was behind any effort at HC denial.
There was, in point of fact, an enormous struggle within the Admin over the Bitburg trip & aftermath — and in the end the facts showed that it wasn’t about HC denial on RR’s part. (See archival references, below.)
You need only to check the archives. Here are a few starters (among MANY more such instances going back more than 7 yrs) from YoursTruly:
https://www.israpundit.org/archives/36700/comment-page-1.
See (among others) posts #21, 26, 35, 41-43.
https://www.israpundit.org/archives/49931/comment-page-1#comments.
See (among others) posts #6, 37-45, 50.
https://www.israpundit.org/archives/49931#comments.
See (among others) posts #1, 3-5, 8, 12-16.
@ Bert:
US Jews want to believe that they are protected from violent antisemitism.
Then in the near future these Jews will have a new place to escape to: Mars.
As long as we refuse to confront reality, it is hopeless!
“Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war ..”. For Jews and Israel ONLY.
The book The Secret War Against the Jews came out in 1994. Co-author John Loftus went on a book tour to inform the public and especially the U.S. Jews. That book provided the ammunition for American Jews to confront the U.S. government and demand accountability for their treachery. There was NO reaction by U.S. Jews because they are cowards and fear to ever speak truth to power.
If the GOI cannot even punish this then they are pathetic and emasculated.
It appears to me that exactly the same thing is still going on today whereby foreign supported stooges parrot the mantras and aid the evil agenda of the foreign cabal.
I wonder what the reagan die hard supporters here think about this?
IMO the Bush dynastical clan has been aligned with Jew killers since grandaddy prescott secured investments for the nazis. Bringing the PLO and their families from Tunis was tantamount to unleashing a terror war on the Jews. Israeli politicians who participated in this horrible event which has taken the lives of many children should be shamed. They should put all their efforts into getting the PLO families out of Israel in order to make amends for their despicable participation in the murder of Jews. Certainly if it was not their intention at the time to see Jews murdered they have been able to see the impact of their decisions by now so any continuing touting of Oslo is a stain on their souls. The PLO were brought in under Oslo and with Oslo breached and dead should be ALL immediately deported with their families because without the cover of Oslo they are illegally in Israel. 🙁
SHmuel HaLevi 2 Said:
the incompetents who cannot even prevent a terror parade of hamas in the heart of Jerusalem on the Temple Mount are busy stalking Jews.
SHmuel HaLevi 2 Said:
Perhaps Pinochet was right, many are beyond redemption.
and in return 200 US marines were slaughtered in lebanon by terrorists. Reminds me of christian heads being chopped off by the jihadi pets of the BDS churches. In fact it appears that in spite of the array of evil genii trying to kill the Jews ALL of their plans have been thwarted and in many the perpetrators suffered.
The Jews globally are not getting the right education, they are prevented from seeing who are their real enemies.
@ SHmuel HaLevi 2:
Looks like Winter has been set up. I hope he has a good lawyer. I expect the religious right to abandon him as well. They always do….
I wish you would have added that the “Secret War Against the Jews” is a must read for all who want to sit at the table. It is a necessary background for those making the decisions.
A report has been released on Arutz 7 that a religious Jew, officer in the IDF has been targeted by the renegades in command over him. The officer, named Winter, released a call to his troops including a religious note into it during the Gaza last War. For that “crime” the Ya’alon called him to order. And apparently the unJews hunt against Officer Winter started.
It is high time to reverse the flow and go after the loosing, cowardly, enemies protectors renegades once and for all. They must be identified, tar and white feathered and exposed for expulsion from the IDF pending trials for conspiracy against a fellow officer. Those sabotaging activities by the renegades are widely known from other occurrences.
They must be removed from commanding our children at once.
Counter acted not by talking, articulating, whining, face making on TV, doing carton props and using red markers, etc. It is counteracted by acting assertively, expanding and removing enemies.
Netanyahu has never been or ever will be such leader.
We are facing mean bastards with a penchant of actually planning to destroying Jews, they are enemies of Jews.
We must be led by solid, dedicated, individuals, Mrs. Caroline Glick, Mr. Bennett, Dr. Landau, Ms. Sarah Honig, Professor Aumman. Professor Plaut, Yamit, Mr. Ross, Mar55, Professor J. Golbert, Mr. Aryeh Zelasco, Mr. Feiglin, you and me. Several other comments contributors are also of great potential to be part of a real government.
Remaining in the grasp of humiliating mediocrity, renegades, losers is not the ticket.