…by Jonas E. Alexis
Christmas has always been considered part of the American spirit and tradition, essentially associated with the celebration of the birth of Christ, and Christmas trees around public buildings were considered part of that tradition.
In fact, Christmas, as scholar Karal Ann Marling puts it, is “America’s greatest holiday.” This is also the case in many European countries and indeed much of the Western world. Books such as A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens were firmly planted in that tradition.
Furthermore, writers such as Dickens were either product of the Christian tradition or were Christians themselves who grew up in poverty. Dickens in particular was responding to the social condition and injustice of poor children and had implicitly portrayed a Christian message in A Christmas Carol.
Biographer Jane Smiley writes, “With power must come an inner sense of connection to others that, in Dickens’s life and work, comes from the model of Jesus Christ as benevolent Savior.” Smiley continues,
“Love, kindness, forgiveness, benevolence, celebration, mercy, joy, charity, and innocence all had their source, for Dickens, in Christ and Christmas.”
Dickens eventually revived the Christmas spirit and put it in its social context. The English priest Percy Deamer had this to say in 1926:
“A hundred years ago, Englishmen had almost forgotten about the Christmas spirit. They thought only of being respectable and making money as much as they possibly could; and the poor were oppressed, and their old Christmas ways of beauty and goodwill were despised and forgotten. Then there arose a great man, Charles Dickens, who grew up in poverty and neglect, and who love the good heart of the poor; and he made all men understand that to be jolly and generous is to be Christian.”
What we are seeing here is that Christ, an ethnic Jew who is “undoubtedly the best known and most influential human person in world history,” ended up being a blessing to the West and much of the entire World through Christmas.
But since “Jewishness is not a people but a religion,” as Shlomo Sand and the Gospels themselves point out, the Jewish people rejected Christ because he came to proclaim peace instead of perpetual wars (Matthew 5:9), reconciliation between man instead of plundering and pillaging (Luke 23:12).
As E. Michael Jones writes, the Jews rejected Christ largely because he was not a military leader, not because he was not an ethnic Jew. In fact, the antagonists in the Gospels were all ethnic Jews.
When Simon Bar Kochba showed up in the second century as a military messiah, the Jews fully embraced him, even though he led them to literal misery and despair.
Following in the footsteps of the old Rabbinic/Talmudic/Pharisaic ideology, the Jews are still waiting for a military savior (this is one reason why Jewish revolutionaries have embraced and created to messianic ideologies all through the centuries).
Since they have repudiated Christ, then anything that even remotely symbolizes his teachings must be dismissed and sometimes attacked vigorously and bitterly. Jewish writer David Klinghoffer himself argues that the Jewish rejection of Christ was “the turning point in Western history.”
If that thesis is right, then Western history is divided largely into two poles: the battle between those who accepted Christ and those who rejected him. Those who accepted him came to be known as Christians and those who rejected him theologically came to be known as “the Jews.”
By the time the book of Revelation was written, those who established the Pharisaic doctrine came to be known as “The Synagogue of Satan.” It was an ethnic Jew by the name of Paul who declared that “the Jews”
“both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men” (1 Thessalonians 2:15).
It was inevitable, then, that “the Jews” would begin to attack Christmas. No one, by the way, is forced to celebrate Christmas, although Jon Stewart (born Jon Leibowitz) implicitly made this ridiculous claim.
Even some staunch atheists such as Richard Dawkins appreciate the spirit of the Christmas season. In 2011, Dawkins sent a letter to Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain saying “Merry Christmas,” rejecting the “happy holiday” mantra that avoids mentioning the word “Christmas.” Dawkins continues,
“All that ‘Happy Holiday Season’ stuff, with ‘holiday’ cards and ‘holiday’ presents, is a tiresome import from the United States, where it has long been fostered more by rival religions than atheists.”
And in case you want Dawkins to read about Christmas, he will only do so with a King James Bible.
That Christmas tradition, however, was challenged in America primarily by Jewish organizations, as Jewish scholars Stephen Feldman and Murray Friedman have argued.
Dawkins probably did not know that Christmas was and still is not a problem for the vast majority of Americans, but it is a huge problem for organized Jewry:
“Jonathan Sarna, a preeminent historian of American Jewry, argued that American Jews have a ‘Christmas problem.’”
Jewish scholar Joshua Eli Plaut declares that American Jewry wants to “coop the Christmas season by reshaping it to reflect uniquely Jewish ideas, concerns, and practices and by developing a variety of strategies directed toward neutralizing Christmas in America.” Plaut continues,
“Befitting their status as one of America’s most successful constituent groups, Jews have reshaped Christmas and challenged society to broaden the December season to recognize festivities sponsored by secular and minority groups.
“Writing in 1990, Jonathan Sarna argued that Christmas is one barrier that Jews cannot overcome in their quest to be regarded of equal status with their American neighbors who celebrate Christmas.”
Plaut has seen the Jewish subversion of Christmas in his own life:
“In 1995, during my tenure as the rabbi of the Martha’s Vineyard Hebrew Center, a local public school advisory committee, which included residents of the Jewish faith, advised the local public schools board to eliminate the public celebration of Christmas in the Vineyard Haven public school.”
This is not just the public schools that had to be subverted—the U.S. Postal Service also had to change their stamp:
“In 1993, Myrna Holzman, a retired public school teacher in New York and an avid stamp collector, started a crusade to convince the U.S. Postal Service, a quasi-federal agency, to produce a Hanukkah stamp.
“Initially rebuffed by the Citizen’s Stamp Committee of the Postal Service on grounds that the U.S. Postal Service does not consider religious themes, Myrna reacted with skepticism.
“She counted many stamps that featured Christian icons, such as the Madonna and Child. Myrna then suggested that the postal service consider selecting a secular symbol such as the dreidel to commemorate Hanukkah….
“Ironically, Myrna Holzman’s Hanukkah stamp campaign, not the assorted legal battles that were being waged in the court system, finally resulted in the U.S. Postal Service’s released of a Hanukkah stamp in 1996. The postal service invited Holzman to the launching ceremony for the new Hanukkah stamp, the first stamp to be a joint-issue between the United States and Israel…
“In 2004, the postal service released another Hanukkah stamp, this time featuring a dreidel, as Myrna had originally suggested. And in 2009, the postal service issued a stamp bearing a more traditional menorah design.”
Plaut answers Dawkins’ dilemma in an indirect way by saying, “By the early twenty-first century, instead of wishing one another a ‘Merry Christmas,’ for example, Americans began to wish each other ‘Happy Holidays.’
“School programs and concerts began to be referred to as winter celebrations rather than Christmas festivals. Moreover, office celebrations during December became known as holiday parties rather than Christmas parties.”
The goal was not just to challenge the Christmas tradition in America, but to replace them with new ideologies that are anti-Western and irrational, and the ones that are promoted by many Jewish academics and intellectuals of various persuasions.
Moreover, the Jewish subversion of Christmas went even further. When Christmas trees could no longer be placed in public buildings, menorahs were to be substituted. Plaut writes:
“The purported winner in these and other court cases appeared to be the Chabad-Lubavitch group, which now possessed the legal foundation to seek enforcement of its right to place menorahs in public places of its own choosing.”
By the time the Jewish subversion of Christmas reached Hollywood, movies quickly became potent weapons in the culture war. And many Jews in Hollywood knew that the social fabric in America can take a different form through movies. For example, Barbra Streisand,
“when asked whether she might consider running for office so that she could bring about change, responded that she felt she could do more politically through her films than as an elected official.”
By the 1970s and 1980s, Hollywood began to portray Christmas as synonymous with pornography, prostitution and horror, as seen in movies such as Don’t Open Till Christmas, Silent Night—Bloody Night, Silent Night—Deadly Night, Black Christmas, Christmas Evil, etc.
By the 1990s and beyond, Jewish subversion of Christmas in movies such as Santa Claws, Santa’s Slay, and of course Silent Night (the remake of Silent Night—Deadly Night) was in full bloom. By the time we reach Jerry Seinfeld, sending Christmas cards to relatives and friends indirectly began to be viewed as synonymous with showing off women’s nipples.
Moving on to Woody Allen (born Allen Konigsberg), the story gets even more interesting. Even the word Christmas, at one point, was offensive to him. His longtime lover, actress Mia Farrow, star of the 1968 movie Rosemary’s Baby, recounted that he
“‘disliked Christmas;’ he disrupted the family Christmas meal by running a juicer at deafening decibel levels to drown out conversation. When Farrow mentioned how beautiful the Christmas carols were at a concert, Allen responded, ‘Pardon me while I puke.’”
Then by December 2013, no one is able to make a personal opinion anymore in a culture that proudly gives lip service to “diversity.” Phil Robertson, one of the stars of the A&E’s reality show “Duck Dynasty,” has recently opinionated that
“It seems to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying?”
You may disagree with the man, but does he have any right to voice his opinion in a “multi-cultural” society? I thought we were living in cultural relativism, which pretentiously believes that no one possesses the truth and therefore all opinions should be respected?
Is Robertson allowed to think for himself as the Enlightenment and essentially Masonic culture presumably advocates? Isn’t Robertson within his own right to say that he loves a woman’s vagina rather than a man’s anus?
Can Robertson be a free-thinker without stepping on someone’s toes? Does he have any right not to be gay and say something constructive about his own lifestyle? Well, according to Wilson Cruz, spokesman for the gay magazine GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation), the answer is no.
Conventional wisdom advocates that each individual has to be able to sexually and politically express himself/herself as he sees fit, but when Robertson—who by the way is a product of the sixties, which is another way of saying that he was also involved in drugs, sex, and rock and roll but dropped that lifestyle and became a Christian—follows that geometric progression to its logical ends, he gets to be told that he is wicked person!
GLAAD, which is essentially Jewish in its orientation, can tell people “what to watch,” but people are not allowed to say no to GLAAD’s ideology.
Robertson, because of his unpardonable sin, was suspended from the show. As Cyrstal Wright of the Washington Times rightly points out,
“GLAAD’s jihad response to Robertson’s expression of pride is a classic example of the war the gay lobby wages daily on 97% of Americans who lead a normal lifestyle.”
But how do Jewish ideologues and magazines frame the war on Christmas? They tell us over and over that organized Jewry is not subverting Christmas—Islam is! In 2009, Joe Kaufman of FrontPage Magazine wrote an article entitled, “Radical Islam’s Defiling of Christmas.” The argument and evidence? Listen to Kaufman:
“[W]hile Christians around the world are celebrating Christmas, radical Muslims will be gathering in Atlanta, Georgia for the beginning of their annual hate fest. The irony of this cannot be overstated, as the group sponsoring the event, ICNA, and its followers openly denounce Christians and propagate material cursing and calling for violence against Christians.”
Where is the evidence that the ICNA and its followers “openly denounce Christians and propagate material cursing and calling for violence against Christians”? Kaufman gave us none. His thesis indirectly proves that he does not need evidence to make a point. All he thinks he has to do is posit a radical axiom—no matter how ridiculous—and then argue accordingly.
Kaufman does not point out the fact that the driving force behind the war on Christmas has been of Jewish extractions: the American Jewish Committee, the American Jewish Congress, the Anti-Defemation League, the ACLU, and of course Jewish producers in Hollywood. Hollywood celebrities such as David Steinman, Brett Ratner, Bill Goldberg, etc., are not Muslims.
Moreover, those Jewish organizations are well funded, and some of their leading figures such as Abraham Foxman are well-overpaid.
Let us hear from Jewish scholar Benjamin Ginsberg of the John Hopkins University:
“Religious symbols and forms of expression that Jews find threatening have been almost completely eliminated from schools and other public institutions. Suits brought by the ACLU, an organization whose leadership and membership are predominantly Jewish, secured federal court decisions banning officially sanctioned prayers in the public schools and crèches and other religious displays in parks and public buildings.”
Jewish legal scholar Stephen M. Feldman makes similar references in his book Please Don’t Wish Me a Merry Christmas. 
Jewish columnist Burt Prelutsky wrote in 2005 in his article “The Jewish Grinch who Stole Christmas” that Christmas was never celebrated in his family, but he indeed enjoyed the Christmas season and spirit. Looking back at the roots of the problem, Prelutsky saw that organized Jewry was the culprit:
“But the dirty little secret in America is that anti-Semitism is no longer a problem in society – it’s been replaced by a rampant anti-Christianity… It is the ACLU, which is overwhelmingly Jewish in terms of membership and funding, that is leading the attack against Christianity in America.
“It is they who have conned far too many people into believing that the phrase ‘separation of church and state’ actually exists somewhere in the Constitution…
“I am getting the idea that too many Jews won’t be happy until they pull off their own version of the Spanish Inquisition, forcing Christians to either deny their faith and convert to agnosticism or suffer the consequences.”
The war on Christmas, argues Prelutsky, is spearheaded by
“my fellow Jews. When it comes to pushing the multicultural, anti-Christian agenda, you find Jewish judges, Jewish journalists, and the American Civil Liberties Union, at the forefront.”
Moving on to 2010, a Jewish “seder tradition” was celebrated in the White House. The following year, the Jewish Daily Forward reported that organized Jewry was even challenging the representation of crosses that were found in places such as the Marine Corps.
By December 6, 2013, Christmas trees were once again replaced by two menorahs in the White House.
A few days later, “judge says that giant cross must be removed [a] from San Diego mountain.” The cross has to be removed from the mountain, but two menorahs cannot be removed from the White House.
Why don’t people like Kaufman write articles saying this? Well, Kaufman does not want his readers to know that even Christmas Eve, in Jewish Kabbala, is a nightmare for some because
“On Christmas Eve, known in Jewish circles as Nitel Night, the klipot (shells) are in total control. The klipot are parasitical evil forces that attach themselves to the forces of good.
“According to kabbala (Jewish mysticism), on the night on which ‘that man’—a Jewish euphemism for Jesus—was born, not even a trace of holiness is present and the klipot exploit every act of holiness for their own purposes…
“The Knesset correspondent of the ultra-Orthodox newspaper Hamodia, Zvi Rosen, relates that celebrated Hasidic admorim (sect leaders) would cut a year’s supply of toilet paper for Sabbath use (to avoid tearing toilet paper on Sabbath) on this night.
“Actually, this disrespectful act has profound kabbalistic significance, because kabbalistic literature extensively discusses Christianity as waste material excreted from the body of the Jewish people.”
There is no doubt that Kaufman and others knew about the Jewish subversion of Christmas. In fact, this has been going on for decades. Decent rabbi and scholar Jacob J. Petuchowski, who died in 1990, was appalled at how Jewish organizations relentlessly wanted to wage a frontal “battle against Christmas symbols in public places.”
Petuchowski lamented that the “battle waged each winter by various Jewish organizations” against Christmas symbols was unnecessary. Petuchowski queried, why does the “celebration of the birthday of Jesus of Nazareth, including the public display of replicas of the Bethlehem creche, arouse such Jewish animosity?”
According to what he found, “the sign of the Cross is still a reminder of pogroms and persecutions.” Petuchowski continued to say,
“Such Jews seek alliances with all the other secularist forces in the country that want to denude the ‘public square’ of every last trace of religious influence. They keep insisting upon a strict enforcement of the separation of church and state–enforcement to a degree certainly never anticipated by the founders of the republic.”
Is it really logical to assume that Kaufman and FrontPage Magazine did not know any of this? Are they really that oblivious? Let us entertain the idea that they did not know. But surely they knew about Philip Roth’s book Operation Shylock: A Confession, in which the Jewish novelist declares:
“The radio was playing ‘Easter Parade’ and I thought, But this is Jewish genius on a par with the Ten Commandments. God gave Moses the Ten Commandments and then He gave to Irving Berlin ‘Easter Parade’ and ‘White Christmas.’
“The two holidays that celebrate the divinity of Christ – the divinity that’s the very heart of the Jewish rejection of Christianity – and what does Irving Berlin brilliantly do? He de-Christs them both! Easter he turns into a fashion show and Christmas into a holiday about snow.
“Gone is the gore and the murder of Christ – down with the crucifix and up with the bonnet! He turns their religion into schlock. But nicely! Nicely! So nicely the goyim don’t even know what hit ‘em. They love it. Everybody loves it. The Jews especially. Jews loathe Jesus.
“If supplanting Jesus Christ with snow can enable my people to cozy up to Christmas, then let it snow, let it snow, let it snow!”
This December, Daniel Greenfield of the same magazine shifts the issue a bit, arguing that “the left” is responsible for the war against Christmas. The neoconservative/neo-Bolshevik magazine the Weekly Standard did the same thing in 2012.
What Greenfield and others would never tell us is that the Left was another Jewish intellectual movement. First, it was Stalinism/Trotskyism, then that got split into different groups and subgroups, including Neoconservatism and Leftism.
The common denominator between them all is that they were largely Jewish from their inception and they wanted to turn America in particular upside down.
As philo-Semitic scholars Stefan Halper and Jonathan Clarke declare, the neoconservative movement is
“in complete contrast… to the general cast of the American temperament as embodied by the Declaration of Independence.”
Even Jewish scholar Russell Jacoby would later write that
“The Jewish contribution to the Left in the United States during the twentieth century ranks the highest of any immigrant or ethnic group…American Jewry has provided socialist organizations and movements with a disproportionate number—sometimes approaching or surpassing a majority—of their leaders, activists, and supporters.”
Barack Obama is both a product of the left (domestic policies) and the neoconservative movement (U.S. foreign policy).
The “Left” and the “Right” certainly cannot talk about these issues in those terms because that would ruin their political hermeneutics. What history has taught is that whenever the “Left” or the “Right” is in charge, the West and America suffer. Even Francis Fukuyama is now talking about “the decay of American political institutions.”
Fukuyama, the former flaming neoconservative at Stanford and other think tanks, is now saying that “there is no guarantee” that institutional reform “can be accomplished without a major disruption of the political order.”  Then Fukuyama indirectly drops the political bomb:
“Ordinary people feel that their supposedly democratic government no longer reflects their interests but instead caters to those of a variety of shadowy elites.”
Fukuyama knows the “variety of shadowy elites” is largely Jewish in its political and ideological weltanschauung, and this has precipitously led to perpetual wars, which got morphed into economic disaster in the U.S., and which quickly turned to child poverty, homelessness, eating disorders, etc.
More importantly, the new “Right” is another name for neoconservatism, which got its start in Stalinism and Leninism. As a corollary, “The conception of politics to which neoconservatives paid allegiance owed more to the ethos of the Left than to the orthodoxies of the [old] Right. Their ultimate ideological objective was not to preserve but to transform” America in particular into a super entity that resembles Leninist and Stalinist ideology.
As Andrew Bacevich rightly pointed out, Norman Podhoretz of Commentary quickly began to be engaged in an aggressively ruthless style that was ideologically inconsistent and incompatible with the rule of law and U.S. foreign policy.
“That style emphasized not balance (viewed as evidence of timidity) or the careful sifting of evidence (suggesting scholasticism) but the ruthless demolition of any point of view inconsistent with the neoconservative version of truth, typically portrayed as self-evident and beyond dispute….
“For the intellectual of neoconservative bent such as Podhoretz, the arena in which politics, culture, and morality converge is necessarily a place of no-holds-barred conflict. Within that arena, wisdom does battle against folly, right against wrong, and good against evil. With basic values at stake, the contest does not permit the taking of prisoners. There can be no quarter.”
Eventually, the neoconservatives ended up constructing “the intellectual foundation of the new American militarism.”
When that super entity was fully established, the only thing that mattered was the preservation of the neoconservative/neo-Bolshevik vision at any cost. For example, when he was asked that “cutting taxes might be at odds with invading Iraq,” Dick Cheney responded, “Deficits don’t matter.”
The “variety of shadowy elites” will not stop until they have established their heaven on earth. They have subverted Christmas, the political and social order, and recently they have single-handedly destroyed the economic structure of America and much of the Middle East through perpetual wars and usury.
The “variety of shadowy elites” has also destroyed the privacy of virtually the entire world through the NSA, which Angela Merkel recently compared to Stasi, “the ubiquitous and all-powerful secret police of the communist dictatorship in East Germany, where she grew up.”
In that sense, we are all in a war against these “shadowy elites,” and this war has been going for centuries. The “shadowy elites” are the party of lies, fabrications, hoaxes, and deceptions and subterfuge. They indeed roar like a thunder-clap and have been the central force in the destruction of the social and political order. Their weakness is that they do not possess the truth.
History teaches us that lies cannot triumph forever. Truth will win in the end. There is no doubt that the party of lies is currently winning. There is no doubt that the party of deceptions has swept across the land and has attracted people of various stripes. This has been their modus operandi.
But the party of lies has a bad end. As Lincoln put it, “You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time.” The party of truth will rise again, and it will be devastating for the party of lies.
Some have opinionated that perhaps only a military coup can destroy the party of lies at this late hour. Not so! If the West in general goes back to the rule of law, the “shadowy elites” will find themselves in a difficult position because the rule of law is a dangerous territory for them.
If the West applies the rule of law in foreign policy, then the party of lies will not like it and will more than likely act violently, irrationally and even nihilistically.
For example, when the NSA obviously could not come up with any reasonable excuses as to why they were snooping on virtually the entire world, most specifically Americans, NSA officials irrationally declared that they foiled plot which sought to destroy the U.S. economy!
Now former CIA Director James Woosley, feeling that Snowden has exposed the dark side of the “shadowy elites,” declared that Snowden, if convicted, “should be hanged by his neck until he is dead.” In the same vein, Zionist puppet John Bolton declared that Snowden ought to “swing from a tall oak tree.”
The recent events surrounding Russia and Syria are other classic examples that the shadowy elites are losing rational grounds.
The Syrian rebels/jihadists have recently gone into a town named Adra, “20 kilometers of Damascus,” and literally “slaughtered” civilians “like sheep.” Amnesty International has declared that the rebels/jihadists have established their own “brutal secret prisons” and slaughter houses. They
“executed dozens of civilians, including children, beheading them or burning them alive…Those who managed to flee the violence in Adra and reach Damascus say they saw the militants slaughtering Alawites, Druze, Christians and Shiites indiscriminately. Fearing their interviews might do harm to their relatives still in the occupied town, the fugitive survivors asked not to reveal their identities.
“One of [the witnesses who survived the attack] told RT that all of the officials in the town were killed ‘no matter what religious groups they belonged to. Among them were people who did not support any of the warring parties – neither the opposition nor the government. Nevertheless, they have been abused – they were terrorized and used as human shields.’”
Another witness declared,
“What is happening in Adra is unthinkable. Children are being slaughtered and thrown out of the windows. But no one is doing anything. The crisis in Syria continues in an environment where there is no international law, including those relating to the paramilitary operations.”
More than 80 civilians were killed, and many others were used as human shields. Earlier, “Al-Qaeda linked Islamists have kidnapped at least 120 Kurdish civilians from a village in Aleppo province near the border with Turkey…”
The same rebels/jihadists are training children—as young as 10 years old!—to become jihadists as well. This is not a secret mission. The rebels/jihadists make sure that the West got the message:
“Both Isis and Jabat al-Nusra have posted videos on Twitter and YouTube showing visits to Syrian classrooms by armed militants. One Isis video shows a man in conservative Arab dress leading several dozen children in Syria’s Aleppo province in denouncing a list of ‘infidels,’ including the Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, and Barack Obama. ‘Imagine we had here with us an Alawite, from al-Assad’s family or religion. Would we like him?’ asked the leader.
“‘No,’ the children replied.
“‘What would we do with him?’ the leader asks.
“‘Slaughter him,’ came the answer, in unison.
“The speaker congratulates his young listeners. ‘Slaughter him, right. Because he is an infidel,’ he says.”
Those jihadists are also involved in killing other rebels. Even those who had previously protested against the Assad government are now saying that the rebels have basically become Frankenstein.
Furthermore, they would not take orders from the U.S., despite the fact that the U.S. has been supporting them since last year. The goal of those Jihadists is well known: to establish an Islamic state in Syria in which the rule of law is a relic of the past.
More importantly, those jihadists have a long history of torturing children. As the British newspaper the Guardian recently pointed out,
“The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) – the al-Qaida-affiliated group in Syria – has been accused of widespread human rights abuses including torture and summary killings in the first detailed account of the conditions in the areas it controls.
“Among documented victims of ISIS are children as young as 13 who have been subjected to repeated floggings and other abuses, while eight-year-olds have been detained.
“In a report prepared by Amnesty International the group is charged with running a regime of terror in the secret prisons that it operates both in al-Raqqa governorate and in Aleppo which it operates under its own version of sharia law.
“Detailing violence against minors, the reports describes the case of one child whom ISIS had accused of stealing a motorbike who was flogged 30 or 40 times a day for several days. It also detailed cases of death penalties being handed down in hearings at sharia courts lasting less than a minute.
“In one of the most chilling parts of the report, witnesses described the ISIS judge’s practice of sitting in judgment wearing an explosive suicide belt at the Sadd al-Ba’ath prison at al-Mansura. The group accuses the judge of a reign of terror over the prison’s detainees. Among those held in the ISIS prisons are known to be a number of foreign journalists kidnapped by the group.”
In another report, the Guardian declared,
“The majority of those whose lives have been damaged, uprooted and sometimes ended by the war are not active participants. The death of Abbas Khan, the young doctor who wanted to save lives in Syria but only succeeded in losing his own, is undoubtedly a tragedy. But it is of course only a tiny fragment of the vastly larger tragedy which is Syria today. Since he was detained in Aleppo in November last year, thousands have died in that city alone.”
Those are the jihadists that neoconservatives like Daniel Pipes wanted to support. If that is not a form of Bolshevism, what is?
Yet despite all of that, the West (except Russia) stays silent. After all, Stephen Fidler of the Wall Street Journal had already blasted Putin a few months ago for saying that Russia is a light in European decadence.
Putin’s policy is certainly incompatible with the neo-Bolshevik view, for he vowed to protect persecuting Christians worldwide. Since this view is not congruent with the neo-Bolshevik principle, virtually every single neoconservative has tried to take a shot at Putin in one way or another.
Of all the neoconservatives who have attacked Putin in the past, Max Boot of Commentary is almost certainly the most ridiculous one.
Boot declared that Mikhail B. Khodorkovsky—the Jewish oligarch and former Russian oil tycoon who was arrested in 2005 for theft, fraud, embezzlement, tax evasion and for stealing at least $9.6 billion—“was arrested in 2003 on charges that were widely seen to be politically inspired, his crime being in essence to oppose Putin”!
In the same vein, Stephen Holder of the New York Times wrote that Khodorskovsky was in jail because of political persecution. In 2010, Elie Wiesel “launched a global campaign to free” Khodorskovsky because he “is not legally convicted.”
Steven Lee Myers and David M. Herszenhorn of the New York Times has recently written an article entitled, “secure in power, Putin frees rival, a jailed oil tycoon,” a remark which implicitly puts the blame on Putin and which suggests that Khodorskovsky was innocent.
Boot, Holder and Wiesel and others are certainly making the neoconservative movement and Jewish activity look dumb. Khodorkovsky was known to have funded the Russian Communist Party and at one point he admitted,
“I realized that my parents hated the Soviet government, but they shielded me from this, thinking that to do otherwise would be to ruin my life.”
The head of the Yukos’ security department was former KGB major Alexei Pichugin (real name Alexei Golubovich), who was arrested on the charges of “organizing the murders of a number of Yukos’ opponents… The order for the killings allegedly came to Pichugin from Leonid Nevzlin, a senior Yukos executive and one of Khodorkovsky’s longtime partners.”
Right after his arrest, Khodorkovsky split the company with Leonid Nevlin. But that did not work out well either, since Nevlin fled to Israel to escape charges. In 2003, Khodorkovsky, when he knew that the time of his arrest was coming, passed all his shares to Jacob Rothschild.
In 2004, a Moscow court issued a warrant on Nevlin, but Nevlin is still enjoying his luxuries in Israel. Nevlin declared that his charges are “laughable” and “nonexistent,” and that Russia is going back “to a period of K.G.B. agents persecuting those who disagree.”
In short, if the West goes back to the traditional principles of the rule of law, the “the variety of shadowy elites” would take a back seat.
For example, a number of scholars have advocated that the West ought to boycott Israel, and Israeli ambassador Michael Oren has quickly responded by saying that those scholars ought to be penalized for their unpardonable sin.
What we are seeing is that if the West happens to boycott the regime, it will more than likely start threatening and perhaps even bombing Western nations, as they have used terrorism in the past. Keep in mind what Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld said:
“We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force…. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.”
If the West upholds the rule of law, the party of lies and the “variety of shadowy elites” will seek to use Israel’s weapons to get their nefarious plan done. If party of lies responds by violently attacking the West, then the West will have reasons to act in self-defense. Much work has to be done on this issue.
Merry Christmas to all! Peace on earth and good will toward men!
Jonas E. Alexis has degrees in mathematics and philosophy. He studied education at the graduate level. His main interests include U.S. foreign policy, the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict, and the history of ideas. He is the author of the new book Zionism vs. the West: How Talmudic Ideology is Undermining Western Culture. He teaches mathematics in South Korea.