“The two aims of the Party are to conquer the whole surface of the earth and to extinguish once and for all the possibility of independent thought”—George Orwell, 1984
…by Jonas E. Alexis
The Washington Times declared at the end of last March that “The 2009 cyber-attack by the U.S. and Israel that crippled Iran’s nuclear program by sabotaging industrial equipment constituted ‘an act of force’ and was likely illegal under international law, according to a manual commissioned by NATO’s cyber defense center in Estonia.”
What the Washington Times probably did not know or did not want to tell its readers was that the attack was indirectly mapped out by one of the leading neoconservative think tanks in the United States, the Brookings Institution. In a 2009 paper entitled “Which Path to Persia?,” a number of writers at the same institution declare:
“A policy determined to overthrow the government of Iran might very well include plans for a full-scale invasion as a contingency for extreme circumstances. Certainly, if various forms of covert and overt support simply failed to produce the desired effect, a president determined to produce regime change in Iran might consider an invasion as the only other way to achieve that end.
“Moreover, the United States would have to expect Iran to fight back against American regime change operations, as it has in the past. Although the Iranians typically have been careful to avoid crossing American red lines, they certainly could miscalculate, and it is entirely possible that their retaliation for U.S. regime change activities would appear to Americans as having crossed just such a threshold.
“For example, if Iran retaliated with a major terrorist attack that killed large numbers of people or a terrorist attack involving WMDs—especially on U.S. soil—Washington might decide that an invasion was the only way to deal with such a dangerous Iranian regime.
“Indeed, for this same reason, efforts to promote regime change in Iran might be intended by the U.S. government as deliberate provocations to try to goad the Iranians into an excessive response that might then justify an American invasion.”
In other words, the Zionist regime has been in the process of provoking Iran, and if Iran does react to the provocation in a negative way, that would be a legitimate way to invade Iran and ask for a regime change.
The Zionist regime has used this form of weapon before in Iraq under Bush. Two months prior to the invasion of Iraq, Bush was so concerned that he would not find WMDs there that he thought about provoking Hussein and forcing him to get into a conflict:
“In a five-page memo stamped ‘extremely sensitive’ dated January 31, 2003, that summarized the discussion at the meeting (a summary the Bush administration has never challenged), [David] Manning wrote that Bush and Blair expressed their doubts that any chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons would ever be found in Iraq, and that there was tension between Bush and Blair over finding justification for the war that would be acceptable to other nations.
“Bush was so worried about the failure of the UN inspectors to find hard evidence against Hussein that, unbelievably, he talked about three possible ways, Manny wrote, to ‘provoke a confrontation’ with Hussein, one of which, Bush said, was to fly ‘U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, [falsely] painted in U.N. colours. If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach’ of UN resolutions and that would justify war.”
To borrow Professor David O. Friedrichs’ title, we have a number of trusted criminals in office. The Zionist regime has turned virtually every elected official in to a monster, most specifically with respect to the Middle East. Cheney just came out and admitted that the NSA program was under his supervision in 2001.
Haim Saban, who started the Saban Center at the same institution, unapologetically declared, “I’m a one-issue guy and my issue is Israel.” Both Saban and former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon were good buddies. Sharon declared,
“To me he will always be a dear personal friend. Haim Saban is a great American citizen and a man who always stood by Israel and the Jewish people in times of need. His contribution to strengthening ties between Israel and American political leaders from all parties has been quite remarkable and outstanding.”
Now there is a new lie coming from Netanyahu: Iran is seeking to build “200 bombs. They’re building ICBMs [international ballistic missiles] parallel to developing their nuclear weapons program. The ICBMs are not intended for us, they’re intended for you. Within six to eight years, they intend to be able to reach the continental United States.”
Netanyahu continued, “This is a regime that is building nuclear weapons with the expressed purpose to annihilate Israel’s 6 million Jews… Does Iran want to destroy the state of Israel, first and foremost its Jews? The answer is yes.”
When will this man say something coherent and truthful? When will the West unanimously rise up and stop supporting this madness? While Netanyahu is mouthing lies and fabrications, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov declared that Iran is willing to halt its 20 percent uranium.
Moreover, if Netanyahu cannot get enough sleep over this issue, what about Israel’s nuclear bombs? The “Synagogue of Satan” has already possessed hundreds of those bombs and can send them to any Western country.
In other words, you can forget about Stalin’s extermination of more than twenty million people, many of them Christians. You can forget about Jewish revolutionary activity in the twentieth century alone, which wiped out more than hundred million people. You can forget about Stalin literally starving more than ten million peasants in less than three years.
As we are currently witnessing, the West has faced a formidable challenge, and that challenge is the Zionist regime. This regime ideologically seeks to rule the world with an essentially Mephistophelian agenda. Virtually every Western country has to sacrifice its soul for the regime, and virtually every Western country has been completely silent about the crimes the regime has inflicted upon both the West and the Middle East.
The Zionist Kingdom Is Powerful but Fragile
If the Edward Snowden case teaches us something, it shows that the Zionist regime, though powerful, is fragile. John Kerry himself has already said that what Snowden has done is “deeply troubling.”
According to president emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights Michael Ratner, the United States is “bullying countries all over the world, even where they have no basis for doing so…so that they can get Ed Snowden rendered to the United States where he can be prosecuted.” Joe Bidden even threatened the president of Ecuador, Raphael Correa, with economic embargo if he provides asylum for Snowden.
The U.S. got even more upset when Putin made it clear that if U.S. officials think that Snowden would be extradited, they’ve got another thing coming. “Russia never gives up anyone to anybody and is not planning to,” Putin declared. Putin also said that Snowden must stop publishing classified documents if he wants to stay in Russia. But the fact that Putin is not willing to extradite Snowden infuriated Zionist shill Lindsey Graham even more.
“We’re really becoming a joke in the eyes of a lot of people in the world,” he said. “There’s a way to be tough. The president of the United States has the strongest voice in the world. Use that voice. Stand up to Putin.”
What does he really want the president to do? Attack Russia or place sanctions on the entire country? Or should Russia pay a price for sheltering Snowden, as Zionist puppet John McCain recently declared?
John Kerry urged Russia to “live by the standards of the law, because that’s in the interest of everybody.” By the rule of law? The Obama administration keeps violating the rule of law and now Kerry is summoning the rule of law to propagate his Zionist dream.
U.S. News and World Report declares, “The Department of Defense is blocking online access to news reports about classified National Security Agency documents made public by Edward Snowden. The blackout affects all of the department’s computers and is part of a department-wide directive.”
At the same time, former Facebook security chief Max Kelly went to work for the NSA. And then this: “Facebook has admitted accidentally giving out the phone numbers and email addresses of six million users in a data breach which has been going on for around a year.”
Neoconservatives vs. Snowden
Rick Moran of the neoconservative American Thinker declared, “I tremble at the notion that this man-child has access to many secrets – some probably not related to NSA snooping – and that he is in a position to decide whether or not to release information that could damage US national security even more than he already has.”
If Moran trembles at the thought that Snowden holds classified documents on the palm of his hands, then he needs to tremble at the thought that our Constitutional rights are being trampled by an Israeli-run NSA. And 72% of Americans say that the NSA violated the Constitution.
The simple fact is that neoconservatives in general do not care about protecting the U.S. Constitution. Torossian writes, “Whether the government is right or wrong, our great republic must be protected.”
In a slightly different tone, Thomas Sowell of the Hoover Institution writes,
“But what if the NSA program has in fact thwarted terrorists and saved many American lives in ways that cannot be revealed publicly?
“Nothing is easier than saying that you still don’t want your telephone records collected by the government. But the first time you have to collect the remains of your loved ones, after they have been killed by terrorists, telephone records can suddenly seem like a small price to pay to prevent such things.”
Sowell has been a neoconservative shill for some times now, and it is high time we confront his interesting ideology. We will do so more fully in the next article.
Let us grant Sowell the premise for a moment that the NSA actually thwarted many terrorist activities by spying on Americans, although there is not a shred of reputable evidence for this flimsy assertion. What does that actually mean?
That means the government, according to Sowell’s own premise, can suspend the U.S. Constitution so long they say that they are supposedly saving lives! In other words, any administration can dismiss the Constitution by playing semantics.
Sowell continues, “The millions of records of phone calls collected every day virtually guarantee that nobody has the time to listen to them all, even if NSA could get a judge to authorize listening to what is said in all these calls, instead of just keeping a record of who called whom.”
That’s not the question. The question is simple: Is this behavior congruent with the Fourth Amendment or not, and if it is not, then Sowell and his cohorts are supporting a different amendment as set forth by Israeli companies.
Then Sowell drops a bombshell that literally undermines his own ideological principles: “Moreover, Congressional oversight by members of both political parties limits what Barack Obama or any other president can get away with.”
Ladies and gentlemen, Thomas Sowell has been writing about how the Obama administration has violated many of the principles that hold the American government together for years. At one point, Sowell even suggests that the Obama administration lies too much to be trusted. He even summoned the Constitution to make his point.
“Although President Obama complied with this requirement when he appointed Cabinet members, he also made other appointments to powerful positions created by Executive Orders—people aptly called ‘czars’ for the vast, unchecked powers they wielded, in some cases greater than the powers exercised by Cabinet members.”
Now we are being told that “Congressional oversight by members of both political parties limits what Barack Obama or any other president can get away with.” So which one is it?
“The Constitution of the United States requires transparency as well. When people are nominated by a President to become Cabinet members, the Constitution requires that they be confirmed by the Senate before they can take office, so that facts about them can become known before they are given the powers of their offices.”
In other words, if Sowell means business, he would be on the opposite side of the spectrum saying that the NSA should have told the American people that they were spying on them. As we shall see in the next article, Sowell cannot be taken seriously on this particular issue.
China, Washington, and the Neoconservative Hawks
China made no apology for sheltering Snowden. One of the newspapers praised Snowden for “tearing off Washington’s sanctimonious mask.” Even after Snowden revealed that the U.S. government has spied on China for years, the U.S. was expecting China to extradite Snowden.
Chinese officials responded,
“Not only did the US authorities not give us an explanation and apology, it instead expressed dissatisfaction at the Hong Kong special administrative region for handling things in accordance with law…in a sense, the United States has gone from a ‘model of human rights’ to ‘an eavesdropper on personal privacy’, the ‘manipulator’ of the centralized power over the international internet, and the mad ‘invader’ of other countries’ networks.”
Seth Mandel of Commentary declares that by letting Snowden flee, the Chinese were being anti-American. NSA director Keith Alexander said something similar, that Snowden has betrayed the trust of the American people.
What Mandel and Alexander didn’t want to say is that the Chinese government or Snowden was being anti-Zionist, not anti-American. In other words, Snowden is the Zionist’s creation!
Snowden is not even entirely against spying. He made it clear that the U.S. would be much better if they collect information on “legitimate military targets.” The U.S., Snowden continued,
“hasn’t declared war on the countries [it is collecting information on]—the majority of them are our allies…And for what? So we can have secret access to a computer in a country we’re not even fighting? So we can potentially reveal a potential terrorist with the potential to kill fewer Americans than our own Police?”
Snowden should agree to be extradited on certain conditions: if the U.S. is going to charge the Israelis for spying on millions of Americans, if the U.S. is going to charge the NSA for violating the U.S. Constitutions, if the U.S. is going to charge the neoconservatives for lying about their perpetual wars in the Middle East, if the U.S. is going to charge Bush and others for their crimes in the Middle East, then Snowden should accept the offer.
David Gregory of NBC made an interesting statement about the astute journalist Glenn Greenwald that ought to be taken at face value here. Gregory declared, “To the extent that you have aided and abetted Snowden, even in his current movements, why shouldn’t you, Mr. Greenwald, be charged with a crime?”
Once again Greenwald should have accepted the challenge. According to Gregory’s unspoken assumption, if a person happens to support a perceived enemy of the United States, then that person must be charged with a crime.
The whole Bush administration supported terrorist groups such as the MEK. Obama is currently supporting the Syrian rebels/terrorists, despite the fact that the vast majority of Americans (70%) are opposed to arming those terrorists, despite the fact that the rebels have committed terrorist and atrocious acts (including cutting the heart of a dead body and taking a bite), and despite the fact that those same terrorists have killed Christians.
As Glenn Greenwald rightly points out,
“It seems clear that the people who are actually bringing ‘injury to the United States’ are those who are waging war on basic tenets of transparency and secretly constructing a mass and often illegal and unconstitutional surveillance apparatus aimed at American citizens – and those who are lying to the American people and its Congress about what they are doing—rather than those who are devoted to informing the American people that this is being done.
“The Obama administration leaks classified information continuously. They do it to glorify the President, or manipulate public opinion, or even to help produce a pre-election propaganda film about the Osama bin Laden raid. The Obama administration does not hate unauthorized leaks of classified information. They are more responsible for such leaks than anyone.
“What they hate are leaks that embarrass them or expose their wrongdoing. Those are the only kinds of leaks that are prosecuted. It’s a completely one-sided and manipulative abuse of secrecy laws.
“It’s all designed to ensure that the only information we as citizens can learn is what they want us to learn because it makes them look good. The only leaks they’re interested in severely punishing are those that undermine them politically. The ‘enemy’ they’re seeking to keep ignorant with selective and excessive leak prosecutions are not The Terrorists or The Chinese Communists. It’s the American people.”
Chomsky continued to say on a different occasion,
“The Obama administration is dedicated to increasing terrorism; it’s doing it all over the world. Obama is running the biggest terrorist operation that exists, maybe in history: the drone assassination campaigns, which are just part of it […] All of these operations, they are terror operations.”
In other words, the American people are under siege by a Zionist police state which allows no alternative views. Even more recently the Atlantic declared that the U.S. is spying on Americans with drones.
In his defense of the NSA, Jewish writer Liel Leibovitz, a visiting assistant professor at New York University, declares, “the NSA’s alleged spying extends no further than the reams of data each of us voluntarily provides to major corporations every hour of every day for the explicit purpose of use in advertising…”
Nonsense. Did millions of Americans consensually give the NSA permission to spy on them? Who gave the NSA that right? The Constitution? Or the Zionist regime? Moreover, do advertising companies listen to private conversations among U.S. citizens?
Yet new documents have revealed that the U.S. government, under the auspice of the Zionist regime in Israel, has already usurped Fourth Amendment. In the process, they are trying to control much of the West. The German newspaper Der Spiegel has revealed that the U.S. spied on Germany as well by gaining access to the European Union internal computer networks.
“The document outlines how the NSA bugged offices and spied on EU internal computer networks in Washington and at the United Nations, not only listening to conversations and phone calls but also gaining access to documents and emails.” In the process, hall a billion German phone calls were tapped, and Germany, the United States’ biggest European ally, was on the same boat with China as a target.
The U.S. judges have already signed off on documents “which allow the NSA to make use of information ‘inadvertently’ collected from domestic US communications without a warrant. This document explicitly called the EU ‘a target.’”
In response, Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn declared, “If these reports are true, it’s disgusting. The United States would be better off monitoring its secret services rather than its allies. We must get a guarantee from the very highest level now that this stops immediately.”
In a similar vein, the European Parliament, Martin Schulz, declared that he was “deeply worried and shocked” by the report. Viviane Reding, the European Union’s commissioner for justice, declared that “partners do not spy on each other.”
Snowden told the South China Morning Post that the U.S. constantly spies on Chinese mobile phone companies and even steals data from SMS. In 2009, the U.S. hacked computers in Hong Kong, owned by Pacnet.
If Iran is the true enemy of the West, how is it that it has not been able to approach such covert activities?
The U.S. has also spied on other allies such as France, Italy, Greece, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, India, Turkey, and even South Africa. Virtually every leader in Europe was upset and demanded an explanation.
What does that tell us? In the Zionist world, no one is spared. Whether you are an ally or a perceived enemy, you will be spied upon. It also tells us that the Israelis are doing their dirty work and let the United States get all the blame. The New York Times, the Washington Post, the Jerusalem Post, among other media outlets, never mention that the Israelis were behind the spying programs.
Jennifer Stisa Granick of the Stanford Center for Internet and Society and Christopher Jon Sprigman of the University of Virginia School of Law declare that “It’s time to call the N.S.A.’s mass surveillance programs what they are: criminal.” If this is a criminal case, then the NSA must be prosecuted like any other criminal activity. Next, the people behind the NSA, the Israelis, must be prosecuted as well.
U.S. Terrorist Crimes Are Seen by All
It has been declared that “seven of nine key rebel combatant groups are Islamist.” Moreover, many of those terrorists have recruited teenagers and taught them to glorify what happened on 9/11. As James Antle of the American Conservative has pointed out, we are fighting terrorism by arming terrorists.
Sarah Palin recently declared that the U.S. should stay out of Syria and exclaimed,
“Militarily, where is our commander in chief? We’re talking now more new interventions. I say until we know what we’re doing, until we have a commander in chief who knows what he’s doing, well, let these radical Islamic countries who aren’t even respecting basic human rights, where both sides are slaughtering each other as they scream over an arbitrary red line, ‘Allah Akbar,’ I say until we have someone who knows what they’re doing, I say let Allah sort it out.”
Palin was the former vice presidential candidate of John McCain, and McCain, from time immemorial, has been an advocate of arming the Syrian rebels. Moreover, the neoconservative hawks have been proposing the same thing.
Why didn’t Palin mention any of them? Why did she fail to mention even one neoconservative? It is simply because Palin cannot be taken seriously. Since she is locked up in the Zionist matrix, she is able to pronounce some of the most pathetic statements ever. Just one example.
In 2010, Palin declared, “We have to realize that, at the end of the day, a nuclear weapon in [Iran] is not just Israel’s problem or America’s problem—it is the world’s problem. It could lead to an Armageddon. It could lead to that World War III that could decimates so much of this planet.”
With the advent of the Zionisme, both democrats and republicans have progressively become totalitarian regimes. Der Spiegel recently published an article entitled, “Obama’s Soft Totalitarianism: Europe Must Protect Itself from America.”
What is actually missing in all these articles is that the Israelis were largely behind this “soft totalitarianism.” The articles fail to mention that the largest spying agency in the world is indirectly run by the Israelis. Moreover, those articles do not tell us that the Obama administration is a Zionist cell.
The Neoconservative Madness Is Still With Us
With respect to Syria, a number of neoconservatives have come up with some interesting ideas. Attorney and law professor Shoula Romano Horing, an Israeli-born American, offers this fabulous idea:
“Neither the Sunni rebels nor the Assad-led Shiites who are involved in the Syrian civil war are friends of the United States or Israel. Israel and the US’s best strategy should be to help maintain the status quo where neither Assad nor the rebels are strong enough to defeat the other militarily.”
Jewish neoconservative Daniel Pipes offers something very similar. He declared,
“Western governments should support the malign dictatorship of Bashar Assad. Here is my logic for this reluctant suggestion: Evil forces pose less danger to us when they make war on each other. This keeps them focused locally, and it prevents either one from emerging victorious and thereby posing a greater danger. Western powers should guide enemies to a stalemate by helping whichever side is losing, so as to prolong their conflict.”
In other words, the Western world should not ask for peace between the two parties. Assad and the rebels/terrorists should fight until they kill each other. If Assad is winning, we should increase support for the rebels; if the rebels are winning, we should increase support for Assad!
And who is going to pay for this perpetual madness? The average American who is struggling to put food on the table. And who is going to suffer from this madness in the Middle East? The Syrian civilian population and the small minority of Christians.
The six-trillion-dollar war was not enough. We need more perpetual wars. The West and the precious Palestinians and Muslims have to give their last blood to Israel and the Zionist regime. In just one month alone, almost 300 Afghan police and soldiers lost their lives.
At the same time, the Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom tells us that “Israel will be the first country to receive F-35 stealth jet fighter” from the U.S. If Israel happens to torture Palestinian children and use them as shields, we should not say anything. More recently, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz declares,
“Palestinian children arrested by (Israeli) military and police are systematically subject to degrading treatment, and often to acts of torture, are interrogated in Hebrew, a language they did not understand, and sign confessions in Hebrew in order to be released….
“Hundreds of Palestinian children have been killed and thousands injured over the reporting period as a result of the state party military operations, especially in Gaza where the state party proceeded to (conduct) air and naval strikes on densely populated areas with a significant presence of children, thus disregarding the principles of proportionality and distinction”
To use a theological phrase, this is diabolical in its literal sense. And people who are propagating this Mephistophelian madness should be trialed and jailed precisely because they have committed crimes against humanity.
It has been reported that there is a plant which actually produces chemical weapons in Iraq and the terrorist groups there have been using it to send chemical weapons to the Syrian rebels/terrorists.
The Zionist World vs. the Rational World
What does that all tell us? It means that you cannot live in the Zionist matrix and still remain rational. Remember what Obama previously said: “nobody is listening to your phone calls.”
Now “born-again neocon” Obama declared that “We know of at least 50 threats that have been averted because of this information, not just in the United States but in some cases threats here in Germany.”
I thought “nobody was listening to your phone calls”? How can you seriously stop at least 50 threats when no one is paying attention to what you said? Once again, Obama is a lawyer and is not that stupid. He is living in a Zionist world which gives him no chance to think straight.
And why didn’t Obama tell us what those terrorist threats are? He already lied to us about the NSA, so why should we take this seriously with no evidence? German justice minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger makes this important point that can hardly be dismissed, “If EU offices in Brussels and Washington were indeed monitored by US intelligence services, that can hardly be explained with the argument of fighting terrorism.”
With respect to the NSA, Obama told Charlie Rose,
“What I can say unequivocally is that if you are a US person, the NSA cannot listen to your telephone calls … by law and by rule, and unless they … go to a court, and obtain a warrant, and seek probable cause, the same way it’s always been, the same way when we were growing up and we were watching movies, you want to go set up a wiretap, you got to go to a judge, show probable cause.”
What the documents say unequivocally is that Obama lied to Charlie and the American people. Moreover, NSA officials have come out and declared that they have “mistakenly intercepted the private email messages and phone calls of Americans who had no link to terrorism.”
There’s more bad news:
“Top secret documents obtained by the Guardian illustrate what the Fisa court actually does – and does not do – when purporting to engage in ‘oversight’ over the NSA‘s domestic spying. That process lacks many of the safeguards that Obama, the House GOP, and various media defenders of the NSA are trying to lead the public to believe exist.
“Many of the reasons these claims are so misleading is demonstrated by the law itself. When the original Fisa law was enacted in 1978, its primary purpose was to ensure that the US government would be barred from ever monitoring the electronic communications of Americans without first obtaining an individualized warrant from the Fisa court, which required evidence showing “probable cause” that the person to be surveilled was an agent of a foreign power or terrorist organization.
“That was the law which George Bush, in late 2001, violated, when he secretly authorized eavesdropping on the international calls of Americans without any warrants from that court. Rather than act to punish Bush for those actions, the Congress, on a bipartisan basis in 2008, enacted a new, highly diluted Fisa law – the Fisa Amendments Act of 2008 (FAA) – that legalized much of the Bush warrantless NSA program.
“Under the FAA, which was just renewed last December for another five years, no warrants are needed for the NSA to eavesdrop on a wide array of calls, emails and online chats involving US citizens. Individualized warrants are required only when the target of the surveillance is a US person or the call is entirely domestic. But even under the law, no individualized warrant is needed to listen in on the calls or read the emails of Americans when they communicate with a foreign national whom the NSA has targeted for surveillance.
“As a result, under the FAA, the NSA frequently eavesdrops on Americans’ calls and reads their emails without any individualized warrants – exactly that which NSA defenders, including Obama, are trying to make Americans believe does not take place.”
NSA and Jewish Organizations
In light of all of these events, what do Jewish organizations have to say about the NSA? Listen to Rob Eshman of the Jewish Journal:
“If you ever needed a sign that Jews feel fully integrated and accepted by society, consider this: Not one major Jewish group made a peep over the revelations of National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance.”
Eshman concludes, “yes, we Jews also have to admit we’re not reflexively opposed to the NSA tracking, because most of the people they’re tracking are on a jihad specifically against us.” Most American people “are on a jihad specifically against us”?
Instead of getting behind the American people in supporting the Constitution with respect to spying, Jewish groups are asking U.S. officials to fight what they perceive to be anti-Semitism in countries such as Hungary. Why?
We have come to an intolerable situation. In the Jewish Century, what is rational is irrational, and what is irrational becomes rational. While Jewish ascendency is sending Germany into a monetary abyss every year with respect to what happened in Nazi Germany, a U.S. judge throws out of court claims brought by four Iraqis who were detained and tortured at Abu Ghraib.
In other words, Gentile Nazism is wrong and must be punished. Jewish Nazism is good and must be tolerated in the name of self-defense and in the name of fighting so-called terrorism.
Kicking Jews out of Europe is anti-Semitism, but kicking Palestinians out of their homes is self-defense. Gentile racism is bad, but Jewish racism is good. Nazi concentration camps are monstrous, but Gaza concentration camps are reasonable. Spying on Jews at the dawn of the twentieth century in Germany was wrong, but Jewish spying on virtually the West is self-defense.
In a nutshell, what Rabbi Ovadia Yosef said back in 2010 is being accomplished: “Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that they have no place in the world… They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat. That is why gentiles were created.”
Do you think Yosef’s diabolical doctrine will ever be challenged publically any time soon by the Zionist regime, by the neoconservative hoodlums, by “born-again neocon” puppet Barack Obama? The answer is a resounding no. They are too busy chasing whistleblowers like Snowden and General James Cartwright. Cartwright got into trouble because he declared that the attack on Iran’s computers was a marriage between the Americans and the Israelis.
 Kenneth M. Pollack, Daniel L. Byman, Martin Indyk, Suzanne Maloney, Michael E. O’Hanlon, and Bruce Riedel, “Which Path to Persia?: Options for a New American Strategy Toward Iran,” The Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, Number 20, June 2009.
 See for example Avner Cohen, Israel and the Bomb (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998); The Worst-Kept Secret: Israel’s Bargain with the Bomb (New York: Columbia University Press, 2010); Seymour M. Hersh, The Samson Option: Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal & American Foreign Policy (New York: Vintage, 1993).
 See for example Jean-Louis Panne et al, The Black Book of Communism: Crimes Terror, Repression (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999); Steven Rosefielde, The Red Holocaust (New York: Routledge, 2010).
 Michael Kelley, “Cyber Expert: The NSA Has the Means and Motive to Spy on Everyone,” Business Insider, June 10, 2013; Tyler Durden, “How the NSA Collects Contents of Internet Traffic in Four Charts,” Business Insider, June 30, 2013.
 http://www.people-press.org/2013/06/17/public-remains-opposed-to-arming-syrian-rebels/; http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/26/fox-news-poll-voters-disapprove-arming-syrian-rebels/?test=latestnews.
 I would love to see the following people to face prison time: George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Barak Obama, Condoleezza Rice, and nearly all the neoconservative hawks who fabricated the Iraq war for Israel, theologically known as “The synagogue of Satan.”)No doubt that Irish politician Clare Daly has already described Obama as a “war criminal.” Quoted in Marie O’Halloran, “Daly Attacks ‘Slobbering’ Over Obamas,” Irish Times, June 19, 2-13.
 Stephen Castle and Eric Schmitt, “Europeans Voice Anger Over Reports of Spying by U.S. on Its Allies,” NY Times, June 30, 2013; Stephen Castle and Eric Schmitt, “France and Germany Piqued Over Spying Scandal,” NY Times, July 1, 2013.
 Quoted in David A. Patten, “Palin Warns of ‘Armageddon,’ ‘Third World War’ in Exclusive Newsmax Broadcast,” Newsmax.com, October 11, 2010; see also Sean Alfano, “Sarah Palin Says If Iran Gets a Nuclear Weapon, It Could Lead to Armageddon or World War III,” New York Daily News, October 12, 2010.
 Detroit in particular is already ruined with a 2.5 billion-dollar debt. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/15/emergency-manager-detroit-wont-pay-25b-it-owes/.
 As one Israeli spokesman declared, “If someone simply wants to magnify their political bias and political bashing of Israel not based on a new report, on work on the ground, but simply recycling old stuff, there is no importance in that.” Ibid.
 Even Ron Paul views Gaza as a concentration camps. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYNLXYLM44c.