“Our way must be: never knowingly support lies! Having understood where the lies begin—step back from that gangrenous edge!
“Let us not glue back the flaking scale of the Ideology, not gather back its crumbling bones, nor patch together its decomposing garb, and we will be amazed how swiftly and helplessly the lies will fall away, and that which is destined to be naked will be exposed as such to the world.” Alexander Solzhenitsyn
…by Jonas E. Alexis
We know that the Zionist movement is powerful and has had a grip on the West for quite a long time, and we know that its wicked consequences have sent aesthetic terrorism virtually across the world. Hollywood is no exception.
For example, at least 200 Hollywood moguls and TV hosts (including Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone, Sarah Silverman, Roseanne Barr, Bill Maher) have recently signed a petition supporting Israel’s recent genocide.
Israeli historian Ilan Pappe of the University of Exeter has recently argued that
“This Israeli narrative is totally rejected in the world of cyber activism and alternative media. There it seems the condemnation of the Israeli action as a war crime is widespread and consensual.”
J. J. Goldberg of the Jewish Daily Forward has reported,
“Six weeks into a Gaza conflict that continually lurches from cease-fire to live fire and back again, Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is facing what could turn into the greatest challenge of his political career.
Pressure is building in the Knesset and in the security services for a criminal investigation into the leak in early August of a top-secret military briefing.”
The European Jewish Press has declared that
“The Commission announced that because it does not recognise Israel Agriculture Ministry activity beyond the pre-1967 borders (West Bank, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem), food from these areas is considered unregulated.”
The Israeli regime has been widely criticized for its “Hannibal procedure” in Gaza. The BBC tells us that at least 300 Jewish survivors of Nazi Germany have recently condemned the recent genocide. 
And more decent Jewish people are coming out saying that enough is enough.
Perhaps one of the most vigorous critiques of Israel’s carnage thus far came from the pen of Henry Siegman, a Jewish scholar of the University of London, a former Senior Fellow on the Middle East at the Council of Foreign Relations, and a former National Director of the American Jewish Congress.
Siegman said his family escaped from Nazi Germany, and back in 2010 he also called Gaza “an open-air prison.” Those who placed Gazans in that sinkhole, said Seigman, “incredibly are survivors of the Holocaust, or their descendants.” He moved on to say,
“Fully 80% of Gaza’s population lives on the edge of malnutrition, depending on international charities for their daily nourishment…
“This obscenity is a consequence of a deliberate and carefully calculated Israeli policy aimed at de-developing Gaza by destroying not only its economy but its physical and social infrastructure while sealing it hermitically from the outside world…
“How would Jews have reacted to their tormentors had they been consigned to the kind of existence Israel has imposed on Gaza’s population? Would they not have seen human rights activists prepared to risk their lives to call their plight to the world’s attention as heroic, even if they had beaten up commandos trying to prevent their effort?”
Recently, Siegman has walked through the Zionist matrix and still found it pestilential. He writes,
“The slaughter of Palestinian civilians and the Dresden-like reduction to rubble of large parts of Gaza by Israel’s military forces in the name of its own citizens’ security has exposed the hypocrisy at the heart of Israel’s dealings with the Palestinians.
“Israel’s claim to the right of self-defense in order to prevent its victims’ emergence from under its occupation is the ultimate definition of chutzpa…
“Without entering the debate over whether those rocket assaults were precipitated by Israel’s own violations of truces and cease-fire accords it negotiated with Hamas…srael’s claim to self-defense is based on a glaring falsehood.
“An occupying power is under obligation in international law to do two things: to end the occupation, and until it does so, to protect the population under its occupation.
“Israel is in blatant violation of both of these obligations. The security threats to its own citizens it invokes to justify its assaults which regularly result in the killing of far more Palestinian non-combatants than militants are triggered by its occupation.
“An occupied people told by its occupiers its subjugation is permanent, and that they will never be allowed to exercise the right to national self-determination and sovereign existence on territories recognized by the international community as their rightful patrimony, has every right to resort to resistance, including violent resistance, to achieve its freedom, for they are reacting to the violence that is keeping them illegally under occupation. It is a right exercised by the Jewish people when their own struggle for statehood was challenged.”
If you think Siegman is just pulling your leg, listen to Yaacov Lozowick, the state archivist of Israel: “Lesson of this war [Gaza]: The Jews will defend themselves even if it means killing children. Just like every warring nation in history.”
Upon reading this, Philip Weiss sent Lozowick a message, which read in part: “[Y]ou omit me in your declaration of what ‘The Jews’ do. I’m a Jew and I don’t want to be part of a collective that makes these types of determinations.
“And I feel great concern about having anyone — even the distinguished state archivist of a “warring nation” — announce to my non Jewish neighbors how many children I need to kill to keep my nation going. It’s actually a kind of blood libel– again from a distinguished state archivist.”
Listen very carefully to Lozowick’s response, which he claims to be “the fundamental truth”:
“In Zionism the Jews set out to re-create a national existence on the political playing field, in their ancestral homeland, and Israel is its expression, or outcome, or whatever you wish to call it.
“The fact that about 50% of the world’s Jews live in Israel strengthens this, (the proportion will soon tip over to more than 50%), and the fact that a majority of self-identifying Jews among the non-Israelis are Zionists, bolsters its strength, but doesn’t change it.
“You can’t have Jews pining for Israel over millennia and then going there, and not have it be the most important development in all those millennia.
“You can rail against this for every remaining day of your life (until 120, as we Jews say), and it still won’t make the slightest difference, not even if you gather around you thousands or tens of thousands of like-minded American Jews…Live with it, Phil, because there’s nothing you can do to change it. Nothing…
“So here’s a thought experiment. Say that in order to end Nazism you had to kill 70,000 (not a few hundred) innocent, non-German civilians, Frenchmen, say. Would that be defensible?
“70,000 dead French civilians, all innocent, many children, to end Nazism and as a by-product also end the Holocaust? Would that be moral? Permissible? Defendable in some later discussion?
“I ask because it’s not a thought experiment, it’s what the USA and UK did in 1944 as they went through France so as to destroy Nazism in Germany. Some goals, my friend, justify even horrible side effects, or collateral damage, or whatever you wish to call it.
“The reason being that the alternative, of allowing Nazism to stay in place, would have been far worse. So If Israel has to choose between its own safety or refusing to kill any innocent bystanders whatsoever, we’ll choose to defend ourselves. You bet.”
In that sense, Lozowick is right in line with Israeli military historian Martin van Cleveld, whom we have cited in the past saying,
“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.
“Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: ‘Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.’
“I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third.
“We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.”
Jewish neocon Jonathan S. Tobin actually knows that an anti-Zionist storm is growing. Yet since Tobin has a history of using ridiculous statements to make a point, he axiomatically declares that “anti-Zionism always equals anti-Semitism.”
Anti-Semitism, Tobin further argues, has nothing to do with Israel’s action and behavior and has virtually everything to do with people just hating Jews.
The simple fact is that Tobin is trying to have it both ways. Is he really saying that those 300 Jewish survivors are anti-Semites? Is he implicitly asserting that Siegman is a vicious Jew-hater? If so, then Tobin implicitly redefines the word anti-Semitism by defining it away.
We will deal with the actual meaning in a future article, but our concern here is how people like Tobin use anti-Semitism as a powerful tool.
For him, the logic is pretty clear: if you do not like what your opponent is saying and you do not have a serious argument, just call him names. If he is a coward, calling him an anti-Semite will shut him up or minimize his credibility. Former Israeli Minister Shulamit Aloni put it best:
In any event, we can ignore Tobin’s self-serving assertion here. The issue is that Tobin seems to feel that the anti-Zionist movement is catching up. This has been a current theme in many media outlets. In an article in the Economist, we read that Israelis
“are united behind their soldiers and have the firm backing of America’s Congress. Yet, though Israel is winning the battle, it is struggling in the war for world opinion.”
The article continued to lament that
“a generation ago, Israel has the best argument…But as the occupation of Palestinian territory has dragged on, sympathy has seeped away.
“In a poll published in June, before the destruction of Gaza, the citizens of 23 countries put the balance of those who think Israel is a good or bad influence on the world at minus 26%, ranking it below Russia and above only North Korea, Pakistan and Iran.
“A growing number of Europeans call Israel racist (with the sinister flourish that Israelis, of all people, should know better).
“And even in America, where a solid majority backs Israel, the share that thinks its actions against the Palestinians are unjustified has risen since 2002 by five percentage points, to 39%. Among 18- to 29-year-olds, Israel is backed by just a quarter…”
In the same vein, the Jewish Telegraphy Agency lamented,
“Polls conducted in late July by Gallup and the Pew Research Center found that support for Israel is weaker among younger Americans and Democrats than among Americans generally.
“Add to that the results of a recent focus group culled from 12 congressional staffers — a small but very influential cohort — and pro-Israel activists are worried about the long-term sustainability of broad U.S. support for Israel in Congress.
“Last Friday, a select group of Jewish institutions was sent a confidential summary of the staffers discussing the recent Gaza conflict. The tone of the summary, which was obtained by JTA, was one of alarm.
“‘Congress is supposed to be our fortress,’ wrote authors Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi and Meagan Buren, the founder and a former top aide, respectively, at The Israel Project.
“‘While Israel faces Hamas tunnels, it appears that the negativity and lack of support among young people is tunneling its way into congressional offices, even while the congressmen and senators remain steadfast on the surface.’ Mizrahi and Buren left The Israel Project in 2012.”
Haaretz reported last March that Israel “is losing its grip on evangelical Christians…” Haaretz continued to say,
“Support for Israel is weakening among evangelical Christians, prompting a new struggle for the hearts and minds of younger members of America’s largest pro-Israel demographic group.
“While hard numbers are not available, evangelical leaders on both sides of the divide on Israel agree that members of the millennial generation do not share their parents’ passion for the Jewish state; many are seeking some form of evenhandedness when approaching the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“‘What is happening is that the hard line of Christian Zionists was not successfully passed forward to the next generation, because it was based on theological themes that are now being questioned by younger evangelicals,’ said David Gushee, professor of Christian ethics and director of the Center for Theology and Public Life at Mercer University in Atlanta.
“The grip of Christian Zionists over young evangelicals has been loosening for several years, according to observers within the community.”
This is certainly good to hear. Things did not go well for the Israeli regime when they slaughtered the family of a man who actually saved Jews in World War II. The Associated Press reported that
“A 91-year-old Dutch man honoured by Israel for shielding a Jew from the Nazis has handed back his medal after six of his relatives were killed in a Gaza air strike.
“Henk Zanoli returned his Righteous Among the Nations award to the Israeli ambassador in The Hague… after an Israeli F-16 destroyed his great niece’s Gaza home, killing all inside.
“‘It is with great sorrow that I am herewith returning the medal I received as an honour and a token of appreciation from the State of Israel for the efforts and risks taken by my mother and her family in saving the life of a Jewish boy during the German occupation.’
‘The great-great grandchildren of my mother have lost their grandmother, three uncles, an aunt and a cousin at the hands of the Israeli military. It is particularly shocking and tragic that today, four generations on, our family is faced with the murder of our kin in Gaza. Murder carried out by the State of Israel.’”
Tobin knows that Zanoli’s story with respect to World War II is legitimate, but he defends the recent genocide in Gaza by saying,
“During the course of World War Two, bombs dropped by Allied planes killed millions of Europeans, both Germans as well as the citizens of countries occupied by the Nazis.
“While postwar moralizing about the Allied strategic bombing campaign has become a staple of scholarly ruminating, the consensus at the time and among sensible scholars since then is that responsibility for these deaths primarily belong to the Germans, not the nations struggling to free Europe from their tyrannical grip.”
This bizarre and historically dumb statement came from an article entitled, “Israel’s Critics Echo Nazis, Not the Zionists.”
As we saw in a previous article, Glick is a woman who is willing to deny her own genocidal history in order to propagate her Zionist agenda.
But sometimes when you dissect what she desperately and hopelessly tries to convey, she tells the truth in a perverse way. For example, in her recent post, she writes,
“The power of anti-Semitism is beginning to have a significant impact on Israel’s relations with other democracies.
“Outside the US, throughout the Western world, anti-Semitism is becoming a powerful social and political force. And its power is beginning to have a significant impact on Israel’s relations with other democracies.
“Consider South Africa. Following a lopsided vote by the University of Cape Town’s Student Union to boycott Israel, Jewish students fear that their own student union will be barred from operating on campus.
“Carla Frumer from the South African Jewish Student Union told The Times of Israel, ‘If they prove we are a Zionist organization and support Israel, they can have us banned and seek to de-register us.’”
For Glick, anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism. And we have already seen how she mixed people like John Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt with anti-Semites. But if we just replace her “anti-Semitism” with “anti-Zionism,” she would be right.
Thought police Deborah E. Lipstadt has recently made an indirectly similar argumentation. Lipstadt concluded her article by saying,
“The telegram has arrived. Jews are worrying. It is time for those who value a free, democratic, open, multicultural and enlightened society to do so, too. This is not another Holocaust, but it’s bad enough.”
I am really puzzled. Let us suppose that Glick and Lipstadt are right in saying that anti-Semitism is ubiquitous. Haven’t we been told ad nauseam that people like Glick and Lipstadt have “greatness” in their DNA?
If so, why is it so hard for them to figure out where this so-called anti-Semitism stems from?
Perhaps Glick and Lipstadt need to pick up a copy of Bernard Lazare’s book. Lazare, a French Jewish writer, wrote in 1894 that
“it must needs be that the general causes of anti-Semitism have always resided in Israel itself, and not in those who antagonized it.”
“Israel’s public diplomacy efforts have been unsuccessful in penetrating, let alone dismantling the edifice of lies that constitutes the Western narrative about the Palestinian war against us because our underlying strategy for contending with it is directed at the wrong goal.”
Glick, as we have already demonstrated in a previous article, truly believes that criticizing Israel is tantamount to anti-Semitism, even though the critics themselves are largely Jews. We have received the same indictment here at Veterans Today.
But that accusation has become so lame that we now should take it as a compliment. One individual by the name of Howard Sobel has recently sent an email to VT saying,
“I just wonder how many of your writers are Jew haters. I rarely if ever see anything about Arab leaders doing anything constructive in securing a peace.”
To which one of our staff responded,
“I think you have us confused. We are a U.S. Veterans site. We are NOT Israeli Veterans.
“If you want a rah rah site for Israel, visit the IDF official site. You can find all kinds of unchallenged pro-Israel stuff there.
“As for your concern for Judaism, be advised that critic of the policies of the State of Israel has NOTHING to do with religion or hating Jews, Christians or Muslims. It has to do with being against the interests of the US citizens who are paying for the crimes against humanity.
“Moreover, be advised that Israel is 20% non-Jewish; add in the occupied residents and the non-Jewish population is over 50%. In fact, most Jews don’t even live in Israel and they do NOT ever want to live in Israel.
“Furthermore, as you know, all Arabs are Semites and NOT all Jews are Semites. So get with it and use the phrase ANTI-JEWISH and not Anti-‘Semite’ when you aim to peg someone as a bigot. That would be clear.
“When you figure it out and realize we are US VETERANS and not Israelis, come back to us and put AMERICA FIRST, not Israel. After all we are sick and tired of watching our US tax dollars go to Tel-Aviv instead of Detroit. Come back to the USA.”
And then this immature and unintelligible litany by a certain Daniel Ralston:
“DEAR VETS: I am sorry to have to say that your website is incredibly biased. In the several weeks that I have been receiving your info, it is clear that you are totally anti-Semite, Israel bashers and although I am not totally in bed with all that the Israelites do, I find your lack of focus on who and why there is the current military situation in Gaza deserves a balanced reporting.
“The list of Arab extremists from ISIS, Al Queda, Hesbola and Hamas will do all in their twisted version of Islam to destroy Israel. If your Veterans Today editors want any kind of credibility then they will publish the incredible danger all of these organizations represent not only to the Jews but also to any Christians that inhabit the near east.
“Further, I find it totally amazing that your web site is not covering the growing unrest in America due to the inability for the Obama administration to seal our southern border, stop the flow of illegal immigrants and punish those illegal aliens that have broken our immigration laws. I sincerely hope you start spending your editorial diatribes on the immigration issue and stop bashing Israel.”
Ralston probably did not know that ISIS is the creation of both the Zionist regime in Israel and America, an issue we have addressed at length in previous articles. He did not know that the Zionist regime cannot exist without supporting terrorist cells such as MEK and the Syrian rebels.
John McCain for example was caught red-handed taking pictures with the Syrian terrorists who had ties with Al-Qaeda. But how did McCain explain this terrorist activity? This is Senator McCain at his best:
“I have met with these brave fighters, and they are not Al-Qaeda. To the contrary: They are Libyan patriots who want to liberate their nation. We should help them do it.”
Journalist Julie Levesque wrote then,
“One of the rebels’ leading figures was Abdel Hakim Belhaj (picture below), a member of the defunct Libyan Islamic Fighting Group LIFG), a terrorist organization on both the UN Security Council and the US State Department lists.
“[McCain’s] claim that the ‘brave fighters’ in Libya were not Al Qaeda is in overt contradiction with an authoritative 2007 US Military Academy document entitled, Al Qaeda’s foreign fighters in Iraq, indicating that Benghazi was a hotbed of Islamic militancy..”
Doug Bandow, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and who worked as special assistant to President Ronald Reagan, declared that the Justice Department should have investigated the claim, and
“as much as I oppose vague and ambiguous criminal enactments by the federal government, I would enjoy seeing Senator McCain in the dock. It would be cosmic justice for his support of the catastrophic invasion in Iraq and endless occupation of Afghanistan.”
How can you fight terrorism while supporting terrorism at the same time? Can you seriously build with your left hand while your right hand seeks to destroy? One needn’t be an intellectual to see that this is generally irresponsible and morally repugnant.
And this is the issue that my esteemed colleague Michael Shrimpton doesn’t seem to get or is not prepared to address. In response to my recent article, he once again posits axiomatically that “Boots on the ground is the only way to defeat Islamic State, as they are now calling themselves.”
Yet again who created ISIS? Iran? Russia? China? North Korea? Fidel Castro? Why can’t Shrimpton stop positing one dogmatic statement after another without serious examination and address the actual issue?
As a lawyer, doesn’t he owe his readers some historical and serious scholarship? Shouldn’t he present his case with serious evidence as opposed to repeating previously refuted dogmas? Does he really think that some of his statements will stand in a court of law?
And how can Shrimpton explain the perennial contradiction that the U.S. is now “giving intelligence to Assad for targeting ISIS commanders”? Why is Obama now “considering airstrikes in Syria against Islamic state”?
Haven’t the Zionist/neoconservative mafia been telling us that the Assad government is a terrorist regime? Why are they supporting them now?
Furthermore, it is morally irresponsible for Shrimpton to say that
“There has been no genocide in Gaza. Operation Protective Edge is a legitimate and proportionate counter-terrorism operation, prompted by the indiscriminate, terrorist, aerial bombardment of a democracy using rockets supplied by Iran.”
As we have already seen, Human Rights Watch and Jewish writers and activists have unanimously condemned Israel’s acts. Yet since HRW does not agree with Shrimpton, here is how he dismisses the whole organization:
“If HRW are independent, my great aunt’s a Dutchman, no offense intended. Amnesty are idiots, who are actually opposed to the death penalty.”
Is that how a scholar should make a serious case? If the price of being a neocon is irrationalism, then I will leave him up to it.
Shrimpton moves on to say,
“The difference is that Hamas are aiming their rockets at civilians, whereas the IDF are aiming at terrorists. No one who knows the IDF could possibly suppose that they want to hit women and children, any more than Bomber Command wanted to hit women and children in World War II.”
Really? So killing more than a thousand people (many of them are women and children) is just an accident?
Perhaps Shrimpton needs to read Gideon Levy’s recent article entitled, “Behind the IDF Killing of a 10-Year-Old Boy.” Or perhaps he should call Uri Avnery or Miko Peled and discuss this issue during dinner.
Let us hear from Israeli historian Ilan Pappe again:
“The Israeli strategy of branding its brutal policies as an ad hoc response to this or that Palestinian action is as old as the Zionist presence in Palestine itself. It was used repeatedly as a justification for implementing the Zionist vision of a future Palestine that has in it very few, if any, native Palestinians.
“The means for achieving this goal changed with the years, but the formula has remained the same: whatever the Zionist vision of a Jewish State might be, it can only materialize without any significant number of Palestinians in it.
“And nowadays the vision is of an Israel stretching over almost the whole of historic Palestine where millions of Palestinians still live…
“With the decades, Israel differentiated between areas it wished to control directly and those it would manage indirectly, with the aim in the long run of downsizing the Palestinian population to a minimum with, among other means, ethnic cleansing and economic and geographic strangulation…
“Ever since 1994, and even more so when Ariel Sharon came to power as prime minister in the early 2000s, the strategy there was to ghettoize Gaza and somehow hope that the people there — 1.8 million as of today — would be dropped into eternal oblivion.”
So, is Shrimpton really saying that the bombing of Dresden for example was just an indirect consequence of the war and not a premeditated act? Is that a historically defensible position?
Furthermore, is Shrimpton really saying that the allies were the “good guys”? How about raping more than a million Germans (including children and really old women) in the most brutal and humiliating way after the war?
How about uprooting 12 to 14 million Germans from their homes (many of them ended up dying of starvation, disease, and ill-treatment)? Was that good? Well, according to Shrimpton’s analysis, it was!
“Just as the bombing of Dresden saved lives in the long run by hastening the defeat of Germany, so too will Operation Protective Edge hasten the defeat of Hamas.”
The evidence for this risible statement? Shrimpton gives us none. Is that how one should adjudicate competing theories and hypotheses? Why does Shrimpton keep positing one dogmatic statement after another and then magically leave the scene without a shred of convincing evidence.
I frankly do not think Shrimpton really believes this. If I am wrong, then one must say that Shrimpton hasn’t even crack-opened as serious historical work on what happened in the Soviet Union and Communist China.
According to archival documents, the Communist regime in China under Mao for example brutally and sadistically liquidated at least 40 million people in less than six years! Many of the stories are so brutal that they require a strong stomach.
The Bolshevik regime was not much better. The goal of the regime was, in the words of historian Sheila Fitzpatrick, “to destroy the old world and to create a new world and a new man,” and those who cherished the old world simply had to go.
Stalin’s terrorism began as early as 1918, when “he ordered the execution of all suspected counter-revolutionaries. Stalin burned villages in the countryside to intimidate the peasants and discourage bandit raids on food supplies a decade before he became Red tsar.”
Even after World War II, Stalin did not stop terrorizing the peasants. Minority groups such as the Greeks, Germans, Turks, Orthodox Christians, Lithuanians, and Vlasovites also fell prey to Stalin’s ethnic cleansing.
Is Shrimpton going to deny all this and still cling to the belief that Nazi Germany was “the most merciless in history”? If he does, then we have no reason whatsoever to take him seriously and further exchange will only make things worse.
Even if we grant Shrimpton the idea that Nazi Germany was the most merciless in history, the recent events in the Ukraine obviously ruin the integrity of the statement. Tom Parfitt of the British newspaper The Telegraph writes that
“the western-backed government in Kiev is throwing militia groups – some openly neo-Nazi – into the front of the battle…The Azov men use the neo-Nazi Wolfsangel (Wolf’s Hook) symbol on their banner…”
One of the key members openly declared, “Personally, I’m a Nazi…We have one idea: to liberate our land from terrorists.”
Jewish president in the Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, “called one of them a hero.” Jewish neocon Victoria Nuland has supported those people and has spent at least $5 billion in destabilizing the country.
There is more. Journalist Kazbek Basayev has recently reported,
“Angel Davilla-Rivas, a Spaniard who came to east Ukraine to fight alongside pro-Russian rebels, proudly shows off two big monochrome portraits of Soviet leaders Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin, tattooed on the right and left side of his torso.”
Is Shrimpton willing to denounce Victoria Nuland for taking tax dollars and supporting Neo-Nazis? Is he going to help us fight those Neo-Bolsheviks who are destabilizing Russia?
There are certainly too many historical fallacies with Shrimpton’s interpretation and it is hard to deal with them because Shrimpton now has a reputation of positing extraordinary claims with little and sometimes no historical references and rigorous examination.
For example, he ignored many of the key issues I raised in the previous article—a classic one would be the so-called chemical weapons used by the Syrian government—and then tried to make a point saying things like “polls don’t mean much.”
Why doesn’t he tell this to those who are going to vote in 2016? We are talking about the most disastrous events in the history of America, namely perpetual wars in the Middle East, and Shrimpton is going to dismiss polls with just one sentence? Is that a sound argument?
Here is another classic example:
“Of course the Iraq War came in way over budget, but that’s because it lasted way too long. That’s partly because the terrorist insurgency inside Iraq was sponsored by Germany, Syria and Iran.”
Terrorist insurgency inside Iraq was sponsored by Germany, Syria and Iran? With all due respect, this is preposterous. And how does Shrimpton explain the fact that the Bush administration trained terrorist organizations such as the MEK, which sought to destabilize the Iranian government from within?
When Shrimpton does produce some reference, they tend to conflict with the actual accounts. For example, he writes,
“IMHO, the best book about the links between Osama bin Laden, 9-11 and Saddam is ‘The Terrorism Game’ (London: Al-Rafid, 2001), by H.E. Dr Hamid al-Bayati, later Deputy Foreign Minister of Iraq and Iraqi Ambassador to the UN.
“This well-informed book also reveals the links between the Iraqi Mukhabarat and the Oklahoma City bombing, and the attack on the USS Cole, for which Saddam supplied the shaped charge.
“This book was so explosive the CIA ran interference on the US diplomatic bag and intercepted Ambassador Bolton’s copy, with which I had presented him, which he instructed be sent to Washington in the bag.”
He’s got to be kidding. Even the CIA and 16 other U.S. intelligence officials sent the Bush administration one document after another saying that there was no link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11!
And Shrimpton would use Bolton to support his assertion? Bolton explicitly say that he would lie to protect the “truth”! Listen to this:
I made the statement that the U.S. economy is presently a “dismal failure.” Shrimpton responded by saying that “It’s actually the world’s greatest economic success story.”
I will not expand on this here because obviously Shrimpton has not been keeping up with the economic situation and seems to have no clue about the events leading up to the economic collapse in 2008
Moreover, he seems to have no clue about the U.S. debt deficit, which already reached the $1.48 trillion mark by 2011.
By the summer of 2012, the U.S. debt has already reached the $16 trillion mark. Moreover, Shrimpton seems to forget about the six-trillion dollar war, which his Neoconservatives/Neo-Bolsheviks have brought upon us all.
Those who would like pursue the issue surrounding the U.S. economy further, I will cite a few references in the footnotes.
If Shrimpton means to say that the economy is a success story because it is good for the Dreadful Few, and because they can get away with the most evil act without facing criminal charges, I would agree.
Finally, Shrimpton posits that “A Neocon is simply a liberal who accept facts, i.e. a rational liberal.” Again, he’s got to be kidding.
If that were the case, why can’t Shrimpton accept the fact that the Syrian rebels are largely terrorists? Why can’t he accept the fact that the Mossad supported terrorist activities and even worked with former Nazis? Why can’t he accept the fact that Israel has been a terrorist state from its inception?
Will he ever even consider the possibility that Simon Elliot, aka Al-Baghadadi, is a Mossad agent? Will he accept the fact that the Israeli regime worked with terrorists to assassinate Iranian scientists in 2010?
It has been reported that some of the MEK’s funding came from the Mossad. This is highly plausible, since the MEK has also reportedly been involved in the assassination of several Iranian scientists.
By 2012, Iranian officials had arrested at least fifteen Mossad-linked spies and terrorists. The MEK was involved in “savage reprisals against those who rose up against the Iraqi tyrant in 1991.”
Members of the group have been involved in “bombings, kidnappings and assassinations in Iraq…The MEK has proven itself during the First Gulf War and afterward as a ruthless, immoral terrorist group which could be hired to kill.”
Not only that, there were numerous reports in Iraq in which it was described how the MEK continued their terrorist acts from 2003 until 2009, but those reports never made it into the New York Times or onto CNN. So, the U.S. trained a terrorist group, which is a felony under the U.S. law, punishable by 15 years to life.
To return to Ralston, he probably did not know that Israel has exploited dumb Christian Zionists. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz wrote an article in 2004 entitled “Christians in Jerusalem want Jews to stop spitting on them.”
In 2011, the same newspaper declared, “Ultra-Orthodox spitting attacks on Old City clergymen becoming daily.”
The only so-called Christians who feel safe in Israel are the Christian Zionists, the John Hagee and Pat Robertson types. Christians United for Israel is basically a Bar Mitzvah party, where everyone congratulates each other and uplifts one another for Israel.
Also, the same organization frequently features people like Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli ambassador Ron Dermer, former CIA director James Woosley, Charles Krauthammer, William Kristol, IDF members, etc.
Ralston’s last complaint with respect to immigration in America is quite stunning. In response, I sent him a message naming the key players and ideological forces behind the immigration laws.
For example, I pointed out the fact that it is Jewish organizations that are behind illegal immigration in America. For example, the Jewish Daily Forward has put out an article last June entitled, “Jews Unite Behind Push for Immigration Reform.”
Back in 2011, the same magazine also declared in one of their headlines: “Immigration Reform is Our Jewish Responsibility.” And listen to these titles: “For Jews, a Permanent Stake in the Immigration Debate”; “Immigration Debate Prompts Growing Jewish-Latino Ties”; “[Jewish] Immigration Critic Cries ‘McCarthyism”; “[Jewish] Immigration Activists Retrench for Another Round of Debate.”
I told Ralston to read those articles and get back with me with a serious response. I never heard from him again. Perhaps he is still trying to swallow his own medicine. Or perhaps he is walking back and forth trying to chew on his own words and saying,
“If I have to fight against illegal immigration, then I must fight against the Jewish organizations that are supporting this madness. If I fight against Jewish organizations, they probably will call me an anti-Semite.
“If they call me an anti-Semite, I will be on the same camp with people like Alexis, and he will applaud me and say things like, ‘Welcome to the club.’ Boy, I don’t think I can handle that.”
That seems to be the case, and Ralston probably realized that you can’t be a consistent Zionist and remain rational or you can’t fight illegal immigration and say nothing about the essentially Talmudic forces behind the movement.
Lastly, if Shrimpton wants to know the root of “uncontrolled illegal immigration,” then he will have to criticize those Jewish organizations as well. Is he prepared to be called an anti-Semite? Hmm…
 Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Solzhenitsyn Reader (Wilmington, DE: ISI Books, 2006), 558.
 Marisa Fox-Belivacqua, “Hollywood stars sign petition in support of Israel,” Haaretz, August 24, 2014.
 See for example Patrick Cockburn, “Israel’s Propaganda Machine Is Finally Starting to Misfire,” The Independent, July 29, 2014; David Palumbo-Liu, “Millennials are over Israel: A new generation, outraged over Gaza, rejects Washington’s reflexive support,” Salon.com, August 1, 2014; Sudarsan Raghavan and Ruth Eglash, “In deaths of civilians in Gaza, U.S. weapons sales to Israel come under scrutiny,” Washington Post, August 23, 2014.
 Ilan Pappe, “The Historical Perspective of the 2014 Gaza Massacre,” The Plymouth Institute for Peace Research, August 21, 2014.
 J. J. Goldberg, “Who Leaked Israel’s Top-Secret Briefing About Reoccupying Gaza?,” Jewish Daily Forward, August 22, 2014.
 Yossi Lempkowicz, “From September 1, Israeli dairy and poultry products from areas beyond the pre-1967 borders will be banned from entering the EU,” European Jewish Press, August 18, 2014.
 “Holocaust survivors condemn Israel’s Gaza ‘genocide,’” BBC, August 23, 2014; Whether the claim that those people are actual survivors of Nazi Germany I do not know
 Henry Siegman, “Israel’s Greatest Loss: Its Moral Imagination,” Haaretz, June 10, 2010.
 Quoted in “The War Game,” Guardian, September 21, 2003.
 Jonathan S. Tobin, “Anti-Zionism Always Equals Anti-Semitism,” Commentary, August 18, 2014.
 Jonathan S. Tobin, “Israel Doesn’t Cause Anti-Semitism,” Commentary, August 20, 2014.
 “Winning the Battle, Losing the War,” Economist, August 2, 2014.
 Ron Kampeas, “Ebbing Support for Israel Among Key Groups Stirring Alarm,” Jewish Telegraphic Agency, August 5, 2014.
 “Israel is Losing Its Grip on Evangelical Christians,” Haaretz, March 11, 2014.
 See also Christopher F. Schuetze and Anne Barnard, “Resisting Nazis, He Saw Need for Israel. Now He Is Its Critic,” NY Times, August 15, 2014.
 Jonathan S. Tobin, “Israel’s Critics Echo Nazis, Not the Zionists,” Commentary, August 18, 2014.
 Caroline B. Glick, “Column One: Anti-Semitism and Its Limitations,” Jerusalem Post, August 14, 2014.
 Deborah E. Lipstadt, “Why Jews Are Worried,” NY Times, August 20, 2014.
 If you think this is the case, perhaps you should read how operating officer of Facebook Sharyl Sandberg got into Harvard and how she ended up getting some of the high-ranking jobs in the country. See Michael Timmons, “Jewish Feminism,” Culture Wars, July/August 2014.
 Bernard Lazare, Anti-Semitism: Its History and Causes (New York: Cosimo, 2005), 8.
 Caroline B. Glick, “Column One: Why Israel Is Losing the Information War,” Jerusalem Post, August 20, 2014.
 For a recent development, see Ariane Tabatabai, “Beware of the MEK,” National Interest, August 22, 2014.
 Jon Soltz, “McCain Poses With Alleged Terrorists — Proof That Involvement in Syria Is a Bad Idea,” Huffington Post, May 30, 2013.
 Doug Bandow, “Did John McCain Provide Material Support for Syrian Terrorists?,” Cato Institute, May 31, 2013.
 Tom Porter, “US Gives Intelligence To Assad For Targetting Isis Commanders,” International Business Times, August 23, 2014; see also Patrick Cockburn, “West poised to join forces with President Assad in face of Islamic State,” The Independent, August 22, 2014.
 Dave Boyer, “Obama considering airstrikes in Syria against Islamic State,” Washington Times, August 22, 2014.
 Gideon Levy, “Behind the IDF shooting of a 10-year-old boy,” Haaretz, August 24, 2014.
 Pappe, “The Historical Perspective of the 2014 Gaza Massacre.”
 For historical studies on this issue, see for example Jorg Friedrich, The Fire: The Bombing of Germany, 1940-1945 (New York: Columbia University Press, 2006).
 For historical studies on this, see for example Jean-Louis Panne, Andrzej Packowski, et., The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999); Robert Conquest, The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-Famine (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987); Miron Dolot, Execution by Hunger: The Hidden Holocaust (New York: W. W. Norton, 1987); Steven Rosefielde, Red Holocaust (New York: Routledge, 2010); Frank Dikotter, Mao’s Great Famine: The History of China’s Most Devastating Catastrophe, 1958-1962 (New York: Walker & Company, 2010).
 See Frank Dikotter, Mao’s Great Famine: The History of China’s Most Devastating Catastrophe, 1958-1962 (New York: Walker & Company, 2010).
 Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Soviet Russia in the 1930 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 2.
 Rosefielde, Red Holocaust, 40.
 Ibid., 50.
 Ibid., 20.
 Ibid., 44.
 Ibid., 42.
 Ibid., 46.
 Ibid., 79-80; see also Norman M. Naimark, Stalin’s Genocide (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010).
 Tom Parfitt, “Ukraine crisis: the neo-Nazi brigade fighting pro-Russian separatists,” The Telegraph, August 11, 2014.
 Kazbek Basayev, “Spanish civil war nostalgics join fight alongside Ukrainian rebels,” Reuters.com, August 8, 2014.
 For studies on this and other related issues, see for example Paul R. Pillar, Intelligence and U.S. Foreign Policy: Iraq, 9/11, and Misguided Reform (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011); John J. Mearsheimer, Why Leaders Lie: The Truth About Lying in International Politics (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011); Bob Drogin, Curveball: Spies, Lies, and the Con Man Who Caused a War (New York: Random House, 2007); Vincent Bugliosi, The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder (New York: Perseus Books, 2008); Bob Woodward, Plan of Attack: The Definitive Account of the Decision to Invade Iraq (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004).
 Richard Cowan and Kim Dixon, “Budget Deficit to Hit $1.48,” Reuters.com, January 27, 2011.
 Ashley Southal, “As Convention Opens, Debt Clock Ticks,” NY Times, August 27, 2012.
 John Quiggin, Zombie Economics: How Dead Ideas Still Walk Among Us (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010); Paul Craig Roberts, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism (Atlanta: Clarity Press, 2013); David A. Stockman, The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America (New York: Public Affairs, 2013);
 See for example Greg Smith, Why I Left Goldman Sachs (New York: Grand Central Publishing, 2012).
 Philip Giraldi, “The MEK’s Useful Idiots,” Antiwar.com, March 8, 2012.
 Alexander Abad-Santos, “Report: The U.S. Trained Terrorists as Part of the War on Terror,” Atlantic, April 6, 2012; “Israel
Teams with Terror Group to Kill Iran’s Nuclear Scientists, U.S. Officials Tell NBC News,” NBC News, February 9, 2012.
 “Iran Has Foiled Israeli Terrorist Plots,” Tehran Times, April 17, 2012.
 Anne Singleton and Massoud Khodabandeh, The Life of Camp Ashraf: Mojahedeene-Khalq—Victims of Many Masters (Iran- Interlink, 2011), 129-130.
 Ibid., 129-130.
Glenn Greenwald, “U.S. Trained Terror Group,” Salon.com, April 6, 2012.
 See for example Diarmaid MacCulloch, “Why Won’t the West Defend Middle Eastern Christians?,” Daily Beast, October 27, 2013.
 Amiram Barkat, “Christian in Jerusalem Want Jews to Stop Spitting on Them,” Haaretz, October 12, 2004.
 Oz Rosenberg, “Ultra-Orthodox Spitting Attacks on Old City Clergymen Becoming Daily,” Haaretz, November 4, 2011.
 Rick Richman, “Interview with Pastor John Hagee, founder of ‘Christians United for Israel,’” Jewish Journal, August 18, 2014.
 Rex Weiner, “Jews Unite Behind Push for Immigration Reform,” Jewish Daily Forward, June 26, 2013.
 Gideon Aronoff, “Immigration Reform Is Our Jewish Responsibility,” Jewish Daily Forward, May 17, 2011.
 Morris J. Vogel, “For Jews, a Permanent Stake in the Immigration Debate,” Jewish Daily Forward, October 20, 2010.
 Nathan Guttman, “Immigration Debate Prompts Growing Jewish-Latino Ties,” Jewish Daily Forward, January 27, 2010.
 Anthony Weiss, “Immigration Critics Cries ‘McCarthyism,’” Jewish Daily Forward, April 8, 2009.
 Nathan Guttman, “Immigration Activists Retrench for Another Round of Debate,” Jewish Daily Forward, September 18, 2008.
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.