In Luc Besson's delightful film, The Fifth Element
(with perfect Milla Jovovich and supreme Bruce Willis, an
absolutely evil force, the Shadow, Messenger of Death, comes
from Outer Space to destroy human life on our planet. It is
impervious to bombs and missiles, and regardless of what people
do, it closes in, and its cover ever thicker upon the earth.
Yet in order to succeed the Shadow needs some human help.
Who will, for personal profit, assist the satanic Shadow in
his quest to destroy our Mother Earth? In the best tongue-in-cheek
tradition of Swift, Besson gave the monstrous volunteer, that
servant-of-profit, a scary name: Zog.
The
name of pre-war Albanian King, Zog is one of a few words
that kick the fearsome Thought Police of ADL into action,
activate FBI like Anthrax, and can send IDF assassins and
ARA punks in hot pursuit, for this king - like the Jewish
God - does not like his name to be mentioned. This name
came back to me with the impending instalment of General
Jay Garner as Viceroy of Iraq. Garner received his credentials
from the bloody hands of Ariel Sharon: he supported the
killing of the Palestinians by signing, in October 2000,
a letter that began: "We believe that the Israel Defence
Forces have exercised remarkable restraint in the face of
lethal violence orchestrated by the leadership of the Palestinian
Authority."[1] The letter was launched by JINSA,[2] "the
major link of the Israel lobby, the Washington-based and
Likud-supporting Jewish Institute for National Security
Affairs", as defined by Michael Lind of the New Statesman,
or "another thinly disguised Israeli espionage and recruiting
front", according to Washington observer Jeffrey Steinberg
of EIR.[3] Signing the letter was a good move on General
Garner's part: it will give him the rule of Iraq.
However,
he will not have too much money at his disposal. Despite
'NO WAR FOR OIL' slogans, Iraqi oil won't make Americans
rich. Iraq has a huge national debt - $70 billion to Russia
alone - and the Occupation Regime will have to cough it
up. Debt to France is over $30 billion, and it will have
to be paid. On top of this, the US Occupation Administration
will have to spend considerable amounts of money on repairing
the Iraqi infrastructure, destroyed by sanctions and war,
before paying one cent of commission to Dick Cheney and
his company. No, this war was not fought for the imperial
interests of the US or for its mammoth oil companies.
As
the head of the Occupation Administration, Jay Garner's
task is to create a new Iraq, friendly to Israel. The Jerusalem
Post, a hard-line Zionist daily published by Conrad
Black, friend of Pinochet and Sharon, carried an interview[4]
with one of his wannabe Quislings, Ahmad Chalabi's right
hand man, Musawi.
"Musawi
talks enthusiastically of his hopes for the closest possible
ties with Israel. There will be no place for Palestinians
in the new Iraq, for the large Palestinian community is
regarded by INC leaders (and presumably by their Zionist
instructors) as a loathsome fifth column. Instead, an
'arc of peace'; would run from Turkey, through Iraq and
Jordan to Israel, creating a new fulcrum in the Middle
East."
The
Occupation Regime in Iraq was installed by the US army in
the interests of Zionists, and it may be rightly called
ZOG, Zionist Occupation Government if anything. However,
this ZOG is also a Zog, a servant of Darkness and Annihilation,
for its first step was the destruction of Baghdad's libraries
and museums. A scholar of Zionism, Joachim Martillo, wrote:
"Zionism
has long taken a position of stripping target populations
of their cultural heritage and turning them into clay[5]
so that they can be remoulded in conformance with Zionist
ideology".
My
learned friend is right. This week I took myself to a lonely
hill near Mesecha, a small village in the heart of Biblical
Israel, where a few young ISM activists and villagers helplessly
watched the Caterpillar machines uprooting olive trees,
smashing lupines, devouring this unique Biblical landscape,
home and cradle of the people of Palestine. They did not
dare step out in front of the machines, for the American
volunteer Rachel Corrie was murdered in similar circumstances,
to the deafening sound of silence from Washington. Jeffrey
Blankfort, the analyst from California, had good reason
for calling Washington "the Zionists' Most Important Occupied
Territory".[6]
Thus,
the burned manuscripts of Baghdad and uprooted olive trees
of Mesecha lead to Zog ... and to ZOG. This homonymy points
to a telling semantic concurrence; as Kuang-Ming Wu said
in The Butterfly as Companion: "Words of a sound
flock together in sense; like sound, like sense".[7] Thus
witty Luc Besson, who borrowed the idea of the Five Elements
from Socrates, gave us a lesson: "ZOG is Zog".
II
For
a while, the Jewish establishment tried to deny its direct
involvement in the Third World War. They furiously rejected
references to high and mighty Jews pushing for war as, (you
guessed it) "antisemitism". But eventually the denial wall
was broken, and in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz,
the culprits, a "band of 20-30 Jewish intellectuals", the
Neo-Cons, admitted they did it. Afterwards, Michael Lind
summarised their powerful positions in the New Statesman,
while my countryman Gabriel Ash optimistically predicted:
"In a couple of months, when the role of the Zionists in
the war will become widely known, The New York Times
will publish an editorial sheepishly bemoaning the way some
Pentagon officials have let their personal views influence
U.S. policy".[8]
The
problem is, the US people have no way out of the Zionist
takeover. While Neo-Cons and Right-wingers are guilty of
starting World War Three, of introducing Fascist measures
against the American population, of premeditated aggression
against sovereign Iraq and of unrestrained support for the
racist Jewish State, it would be mistake to leave the buck
resting with them. Michael Moore's philippics against President
Bush are convincing only up to a point, for in his bestselling
book, The Stupid White Men, he regrets that Al Gore
was not allowed to enjoy the victory that was his by rights.
But if Al Gore and Joseph Lieberman were the White House
incumbents now, the US Marines would be in Baghdad nevertheless,
the National Library of Iraq and Iraqi museums would still
have been looted, and the olive trees of Mesecha uprooted
and the flow of American cash to Israel would be continuing
unabated.
Every
publicist, every internet user in America and Europe knows
by now that the 'only superpower' was taken over by the
Likudniks, the supporters of the right-wing Likud and its
bloody leader General Sharon. The team of Bush and Sharon,
or BuSharon, in internet parlance, horrifies the right-minded.
But is there an alternative in American politics? Al Gore
was a 'hand-picked and chosen disciple of Podhoretz' the
Zionist, Lieberman is a devoted Zionist. Democratic presidential
candidate Howard Dean, 'has a Jewish wife, and both his
children, 17-year-old Paul and 18-year-old Anne, have chosen
to identify as Jews', we were informed by JTA, the Jewish
Telegraphic Assn called The Global News Service of the Jewish
People. Kerry 'discovered his Jewish roots', and Kucinich
told the Jewish newspaper Forward that he "observes
kashrut,[9] has an ex-Israeli girlfriend and knows most
of the Haggadah (Passover narrative) by heart". Apparently,
the forthcoming elections in the US (as the previous ones)
are the elections for the front figure of Zionist-led America.
Left Zionists or Right Zionists - that is the only choice
for Americans, and, alas, for the whole world. Why did it
come to pass?
We
can find an answer in a short and sincere piece by Eric
Alterman,[10] a good Leftist, a journalist with the anti-war
Nation. He admits freely: "My own dual loyalties
-- there, I admitted it -- were drilled into me by my parents,
my grandparents, my Hebrew school teachers and my rabbis,
not to mention Israeli teen-tour leaders and AIPAC college
representatives. Whose interests come for me first, America's
or Israel's? I feel pretty lonely admitting that, every
once in a while, I'm going to go with what's best for Israel".
Bear
in mind: while the right-wing Jews were always shamelessly
chauvinist, the left kept up a universalist appearance.
If that is a voluntary admission of a progressive left-wing
journalist, you can easily guess what's on the mind of the
average American Jew. As an Israeli, I should be happy that
millions of American Jews stand for me. However, 'Israel'
in Alterman's confession stands for 'the People of Israel',
'the Jews', not for the Middle Eastern State of Israel.
If Alterman does not mind robbing his fellow Americans of
their hard earned cash in order to sustain Israeli occupation
(as he freely admits), he is probably ready to go much further
for the sake of his own community, American Jewry. And this
community is managed and represented by - not by the ostracised
Noam Chomsky, but by an extremely unpleasant bunch of billionaires,
media lords and warmongers.
If
Alterman were the only Jew in the media, one would be able
to dismiss his self-admitted bias as the normal influence
of an important community. If Jews in the media constituted
only 3% as their share in the general population, Alterman's
position would be affordable. But their share in the top
echelon of the media is in double digits; according to some
sources it approaches 60%.
Jeff
Blankfort writes, "Ardently pro-Israel American Jews are
in positions of unprecedented influence within the United
States and have assumed or been given decision making positions
over virtually every segment of our culture and body politic".
And he quotes Benjamin Ginsberg's "The Fatal Embrace: Jews
and the State":
"Jews
played a central role in American finance during the 1980s,
and they were among the chief beneficiaries of that decade's
corporate mergers and reorganizations. Today, though barely
2 % of the nation's population is Jewish, close to half
its billionaires are Jews. The chief executive officers
of the three major television networks and the four largest
film studios are Jews, as are the owners of the nation's
largest newspaper chain and the most influential single
newspaper, the New York Times".
Is
it a conspiracy of Jews to steal the Republic? No, no conspiracy
is necessary. In Jules Verne's juvenile novel, Children
of Captain Grant, a villain leads the captain's ship astray
by placing a magnet brick beneath the compass. The magnet
does not conspire: it constrains the compass. The sheer
mass of self-involved Jews in the media acts in a similar
way and draws the superpower off its normal course. For
the media is the nerve system of a modern state. Modern
democracy in practice in a very complicated society can
be compared to a sophisticated computer. Its machinery can
function successfully on one condition: there is a free
flow of information across the system. While every input
is instinctively checked and sieved on one criterion, whether
it is good for Jews, it is not odd that the machine produces
such freak output as revenge on Babylon for its destruction
of Jerusalem in BC 586.[11] Indeed, in long-gone 1948 the
first ruler of Israel, David Ben Gurion, promised: "We shall
mete historic vengeance to Assyria, Aram and Egypt". Now
it comes to pass, as Iraq, Syria and Egypt are targeted
by Zog.
Thus,
concentration of Jews in the media created the distortion.
A takeover of every other part of industry or trade would
be noticed and reported in the media; but there is no remedy
for media takeover. Discussion of this unbearable situation
is further stifled by the 'political correctness' taboo.
PC has its good sides, for it made life easier for a lone
outsider. However, this very good and useful device has
its limits of application. Otherwise, it could be used to
defend South African apartheid, or British colonial rule
in India. Isn't it anti-white racism to notice that the
political power in apartheid South Africa belonged to whites?
Surely there are poor and good whites? Gandhi could be condemned
as 'racist', for he 'noticed' the privileged position of
the British in India. By PC logic, a good American should
reply to Mahatma: yes, there are some rich and powerful
Brits in India, but there are also poor Tommy Atkinses,
governesses, honest administrators, writers like Kipling
and Orwell. On the other hand, there are powerful and rich
Rajas, important Brahmins. How do you dare, sir, to demand
'de-colonisation'! This is sheer anti-English racism!
An
old Indian Air Force officer Joe Thomas actually reminded
that, "while the population of the US today is approximately
the same as the population of India a century ago, the British
in India never numbered more than 50,000 and still ruled
India. They did not rule India by force but by dominating
Indian discourse. Indians fought for the British and put
down rebellions. During the two world wars, millions of
Indians fought as volunteers for Britain. If such a tiny
group could control India, then it is not strange that 100
times that number can influence the United States".
In
no way should we embrace racism. Au contraire, the anti-racist
fervour of America should be turned against the Jewish racists
- Elliott Abrams, Deborah Lipstadt and others of their ilk
- who publish treatises comparing intermarriage with a holocaust.
It should be turned against the Wolfowitz Cabal who push
for racist war in the Middle East for the sake of the racist
Jewish state. It should be turned against media owners who
employ disproportionate numbers of Jews and thus discriminate
against non-Jewish Americans. It should be turned against
the church leaders who agreed to the racist notion that
Jews are the only people in the world who do not need to
be baptised. It should be turned against the Jewish/non-Jewish
discrimination; for the present situation when a goy killer
of Klinghoffer the Jew is hunted by the CIA, but the Jewish
killer of Rachel Corrie goes scot-free is perversion of
natural justice. Jewish racism should be confronted; otherwise
America will forever have to choose between Likud and Meretz
on its way to Armageddon.
Jewish
dominance in the media should be redressed, among other
measures, by separating advertising and media. Advertising
media shouldn't carry news or articles, and non-advertising
media should be forbidden to carry advertising. Commercial
advertising in the general media was (according to Werner
Sombart) an 18th century Jewish invention. Apparently that
was 'good for Jews', but not for society in general, as
it turned the media away from readers towards advertisers.
The separation could be enforced by banning all forms of
media and business interaction, like we ban all interaction
of police and business. The media is more important than
police for the safety of society. It should be free from
undue influences. Media is the compass of society. It is
necessary to remove the magnet from its vicinity, in order
that the good ship of our society sail smoothly.
III
Such
a concentration of any minority group (be it Korean or Mormon)
in the media would be perilous. However, the concentration
of Jews has its specifics, for the Jews profess a different,
non-Christian, or even anti-Christian faith. Your average
Jewish editor or media lord is distinctly unhappy whenever
he encounters a reference to Christ or His Blessed Mother,
for their very names are subject to strong and explicit
taboo in his culture. At best, he will try to balance it
with a pro-Judaic piece or reference. If Christian Americans
were to refer often to Christ, the frequency of Judaic references
would grow also, disproportionately to the Jewish share
in the population. In our terms, 'the magnet brick of Jews-in-discourse
has turned the American boat towards forms of worship more
palatable for Jews'.
At
this moment many enlightened readers' interest begins to
wane. If Goebbels' hand automatically reached for his [Robert?]
Browning at the word 'culture', modern Western man is conditioned
to seek the Delete button at the name of Christ. However,
we shall try your patience with an even more severe test
and bring in the rich word 'Metaphysics'.
Young
drivers often disregard manufacturers' advice and use unsuitable
oil for their engines. Others use unsuitable fuel. They
say: 'my car functions anyway, so why I should pay more?'
Terms such as 'compression' and 'ignition' sound like Mumbo-Jumbo
to our young driver: he has never seen them. Only after
few unpleasant experiences is a driver is convinced that
invisible compression is a perfectly real phenomenon that
can manifest itself as sudden breakdown on the turnpike.
Metaphysics is exactly that: a hidden but perfectly real
force within the engine of our civilisation. M. Jourdain
of Moliere's Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme was amazed
that unbeknownst to himself he had spoken prose all his
life. We are equally amazed to learn that we apply some
metaphysical categories in our daily life. Indeed, our treatment
of our neighbours, our social behaviour depends on such
Mumbo Jumbo words as 'relationship of Man and God'.
The
Jewish concept of the Man-to-God relationship is metaphysically
different from the (say) Catholic one, as different as diesel
fuel and carburettor fuel. The prominence of Jews in Western
discourse causes the same sort of trouble that you would
experience if you were to refuel your diesel car with petrol.
The
Jewish faith as practiced by observant Jews might contain
many positive ideas shared by other religions, It also borrowed
a lot from other religious systems: for instance, sayings
of Christ were imported into Mishna and ascribed to Hillel
the Elder (according to Niebuhr). However, it is based on
troublesome metaphysics, and metaphysical level survives
even the present low level of Jewish religiosity. According
to its teaching, the One and Only God created This One and
Only World, and remained totally separated from the World.
It is stressed by the Cabalist term Zimzum, Contracting
Divinity; which holds that God's withdrawal from the meta-world
leaves some 'meta-space' to the Material World. God-less
World is the necessary partner of Other-Worldly God. Thus
the immanent World is cruel and ruthless, a place of eternal
warfare, while God is transcendental and unreachable. 'There
are no prophets', 'God can not intervene in our decisions',
'the Law is given to us and God can't change it' - these
maxims effectively create a Godless world. Sure, God exists,
but he does not manifest Himself.
In
Christian faith, Christ and His Mother bridged the World-God
divide by His Incarnation, and brought in Compassion and
Mercy. Since then, this World is full of the Light of Christ
that is a Divine Light. People became brothers-in-Christ,
His soul unites them, and an offence against a fellow man
is also offence against Christ. (I describe the ideal, paradigmatic
metaphysics of Christian faith, as different from reality
as the scheme of the engine in your manual differs from
the real engine of your five-year-old car).
In
the Godless world of Jewish metaphysics there was an island
of light, [the People of] Israel, crowned by the Torah.
'Israel' of the Jews corresponds to 'Christ' of the Christians.
The relationship between the people of Israel and themselves
is brotherly, for they are one family (descendents of Jacob),
and they recognise this spark of light in each other. It
is apparently similar to the brotherhood-in-Christ, but
metaphysically quite different, for while (in Christian
metaphysics) every son of Adam and Eve is entitled to the
Light of Christ, in Jewish metaphysics other people, non-Israel,
are absolutely God-less, all 'thinking beast'. In some esoteric
Jewish teachings non-Jews are denied even their descent
from Adam. There is no way to transform a non-Israel to
a member of Israel, for Jewish conversion is but the correction
of an error: certain Israelite was by mistake born into
a non-Israelite family, and his conversion is but the public
recognition of this error.
(Indeed,
there is a good real-life example, provided by two converts,
Jennifer and Andrew. Jennifer converted, and moved into
Gaza to defend the Palestinian cause. Andrew continued after
his conversion to defend Jews and Jewish terror in Palestine
on every Internet forum. I have to agree with the Rabbis:
Jennifer failed to convert because she was born with a Christian
soul, while Andrew was born a Jew, and conversion just authorised
it.)
Thus
difference between 'ours' and 'theirs', 'insider' and 'outsider'
in Judaism is much more rigidly drawn than in other major
religions (pace Zoroastrians, another fossil, in Toynbee's
terminology, that happily remained a sleeping fossil) as
non-Jews are absolutely profane while Jews are holy. A non-Jew
who describes a world without God is not too wrong, from
the Jewish point of view, for the non-Jew has no connection
to God. Such a non-Jew is preferable to a Christian, for
the Christian claims he is the equal of Jews, and that is
sacrilege for a Jew. That is why prominent Jews in the media
and universities outwardly support the doctrine of religious
indifference or atheistic materialism. 'All religions are
the same', or 'religion is not important' or 'religion is
a personal matter of an individual', or 'nobody has seen
God' are equal to saying 'all fuels are the same', 'fuel
makes no difference', or 'nobody has seen compression'.
Alexander
Dugin,[12] a contemporary Russian Traditionalist philosopher,
a follower of Rene Guenon, traced the original fault of
Jewish metaphysics to its 'extreme Creationism', the idea
of One and Only God (monotheism) that created totally separate
One and Only World (monocosmism) ex nihilo (out of nothing).
One could dismiss Dugin's view by claiming that Creation
is also a part and parcel of Christian dogma. However, in
Christian metaphysics the equivalent of Creation is Incarnation,
fruit of sacral union of the Godhead and mortal woman, while
pre-history described in the Old Testament is effectively
excluded from consideration or is re-interpreted through
the concept of Pre-figuration.
The
OT could not be accepted or rejected in toto by the Early
Christians, for the wonderful codex of the native Ancient
Palestinian poetry, liturgy, metaphysics, religion and tradition,
was heavily edited by the immigrant Soferim (the spiritual
precursors of Pharisees). Memory of this editing was preserved
in the Semitic world, and it was referred to by the Prophet
Muhammad, peace upon him. Old Palestinian tradition was
much more holistic, and its gods El and his spouse Ashera
were integrated into environment as the rain-sending Heaven
of Palestine and the fruit-giving Land of Palestine. Together,
they are the equivalent of 'God' of OT, and the Gospel preserved
for us the last words of Jesus on the Cross. He called to
El, not to Yahve.
The
Old Palestinian tradition and its younger gods, Baal the
Homeless ("Birds have nests, but Son of God has no home"),
who defied Death, was killed and Resurrected, and Anath
the Virgin, were perfect pre-figurations of the Gospel,
certainly better ones than those offered by Pharisees. (A
materialist would say that the Palestinian tradition had
influenced the Gospel writers and the founders of the Christianity.)
Early
Christians were aware of the problematic qualities of the
OT, but they had no tools to undo the Soferim-Pharisees'
editing and restore the Palestinian text. The Pharisees
(for the Pharisee teaching won the day among Jews) took
over the Palestinian heritage as surely as King Macbeth
took over Scotland.
(The
Jewish editing of the Bible did not stop to this very day:
CE Carlson[13] and Steven Sizer[14] noted that Scofield
Reference Bible published by Oxford University Press calls
for adoration of Israel in more explicit way with each new
edition being published: "With limitless advertising and
promotion, it became the best-selling "bible" in America
and has remained so for 90 years. Scofield chose not to
change the text of the King James Edition. Instead, he added
hundreds of easy-to-read footnotes at the bottom of about
half of the pages, and his notes weave parts of the Old
and New Testaments together as though they were written
at the same time by the same people". First edition was
arranged and financed by "Samuel Untermeyer, a New York
lawyer whose firm still exists today and one of the wealthiest
and most powerful Zionists in America". This Zionist edition
of the OT explains a lot of the strange phenomenon of Christian
Zionism.)
The
Early Christians decided to put far away the OT (the Church
forbade laymen to read it) but not too far. They relied
upon St Paul (and later St Augustine) that there is a way
to re-interpret the OT in the Christian spirit. It is true,
Mein Kampf can be re-interpreted as a Zionist text,
and it was actually done by some Zionist Nazi antisemites
from Adolf Eichmann to Donald Pauly, but I shall be first
to admit this is forced interpretation. It would be better
to restore the Palestinian reading of OT but it could not
be done easily in the reality of ideological struggle for
souls of Jews, against the Pharisee (and their heirs Tannaim)
establishment.
The
great Russian historian Leon Gumilev[15] asserted that the
OT remained as a latent part of Christian tradition for
historic reasons: in the First-to-Fourth-Centuries' ideological
warfare between Orthodoxy and Gnosticism, the OT was used
by the Church Fathers as a handy weapon against some esoteric
concepts of the Gnostics. The unbridled Gnostics considered
the Material world being evil, and were able to conceptualise
the world as a place as hostile to people as was the world
of the defeated Jewish paradigm. Indeed, late resurrections
of Gnosticism (Albigensian, Manichaean, Cathari heresies)
proved its social danger. The teaching of Evil World would
effectively extinguish all life on the planet.
However,
the sharp sword of the OT did not want to sleep in its sheath.
Massive import of Old Testament ideas by Protestants revitalised
the submerged Jewish paradigm and brought in the extermination
of Native Americans, 'the Canaanites of the New Promised
Land of the New Chosen People', and eventually the Rise
of the Jews to their present pre-eminence in American (and
through it, in Western) discourse.
(Here
is the place to explain that 'Jew' for this author is an
ideological and metaphysical construct, an abbreviation
of 'an adept of the Jewish paradigm'. Nobody has to be a
Jew, or indeed a Cathari, or a Dialectical Materialist.
The term has no racial meaning, despite the deep inherent
racism of the bearers of the Jewish paradigm. A racist-nationalist
derivation of a 'Jew' is Zionist, for Zionists concentrate
their attention on the actual historical Jewish People and
believe in their unique Chosen-ness. The Universalist derivation
of 'Jew' is 'Mammonite', for Mammonites accept and universalise
the outwardly aspects of the Jewish paradigm. An 'absolute
Jew' is a Zionist (for himself and other Jews) and a Mammonite
(towards non-Jews). A non-Jew can be (a mistakenly altruistic)
Zionist, or (an egoistic) Mammonite, but by embracing both
concepts he turns into a 'neo-Jew', like Conrad Black, the
owner of the bulk of British media. A 'perfect Christian'
is the antithesis of an 'absolute Jew', for he denies both
the 'divine right' of Jews to suppress non-Jews (in Palestine
and elsewhere), and the Mammonite egoism towards his neighbour.
A 'perfect Christian' is anti-Zionist, for actual historical
Jews are his dear potential brothers-in-Christ, who should
be enlightened, not isolated and locked far away. (That
is why racist antisemites are not 'perfect Christians')
A 'perfect Christian' is anti-Mammonite, for he treats everybody
as his neighbour. (That is why neo-liberals are not 'perfect
Christians').
In
America, with its predominance of Jews in discourse, 'perfectly
Christian' ideas are blocked and do not enter the discourse,
while 'partly-Jewish' ideas pass through the sieve of the
Jewish editors and professors. Thus, the ideas of von Hayek,
Popper and Soros that conform to the outwardly Jewish paradigm
are amplified and made central. Its American counterpart
is Objectivism, the philosophy of Ayn Rand, an American
best-selling (voluminous novels Atlas Shrugged and
The Fountainhead) guru writer, and its religious
offshoot, Californian Satanism as outlined in The Satanic
Bible by Anton LaVey, nee Levy, a Zionist-turned-Satanist.[16]
Their sites are full of praise of Israel and Zionism, and,
yes, of Satan. Among their adepts was President Ronald Reagan,
for this form of Satanism is the religion of Neo-Liberalism:
get what you can, do not care for the 'other'; the Chosen
are those that 'have', while the have-nots are damned sinners.
It explains the Americans' fear to be a 'loser', for a loser
is a sinner in the world of predestination.
Thus
the Jewish sieve in the media ushers in openly satanic themes.
The following excerpt illuminates the point: Madonna's manager,
who was thinking of signing up Manson, called Manson's manager
to inquire about whether the rocker had a swastika among
his many tattoos. 'Of course not,' said Manson's manager.
'One of the guys in the band is Jewish.' 'Oh, OK,' said
Madonna's manager. 'We don't have a problem with Satanism,
but we can't deal with any kind of Nazism.'"[17]
"Now
he insinuates that Jews have demonic nature!" - fumes my
Jewish reader. Well, demonic as in 'Maxwell demon'[18].
The Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell built a thermodynamic
model of a box with a tiny door operated by a demon. The
demon lets in fast molecules and lets out slow molecules.
Thus the box can be heated to any temperature even in coldest
atmosphere. In a similar way, Jews let into discourse 'good
for Jews' items and try to block the 'bad for Jews' items.
"It is done by all communities", - rejects my reader. Not
really. A writer may depict a bad Englishman or American,
Arab (any day!) or Muslim, and he will never receive a single
letter of objection. A writer may present a homosexual priest,
and he will never receive a letter saying 'Not every priest
is homosexual' or demanding to 'offset the bias' by showing
a saintly priest.
But
every negative depiction of a Jew will run into a Maxwell
demon. Dickens portrayed Fagin, the repulsive gang operator,
in his Oliver Twist, and came under barrage with
letters and questions of the sort "not every Jew is a Fagin".
Dickens never claimed it, but he was forced to apologise
to Jews at every lecture he made in America. It taught him
a lesson, and he refrained from showing Jews of less than
saintly qualities.
Since
then, a rare author dares to introduce a negative Jewish
character in his book. Le Carre managed to write a book,
Single and Single, about dismantling of the Soviet
Union and mass theft of Russian communal property without
a single Jew in it. This is like describing Mafia without
mentioning Italians.
Alexander
Solzhenitsyn encountered this problem,[19] as in his books
there are complex Jewish figures. They are KGB officers,
informers, top of prison administration. None is demonised,
but none is made a saint, either. He was immediately attacked
and offered a way out: to introduce a main character, a
'noble strong and daring Jew'. He ignored the advice.
Thus
the world we live in was created. Like the box managed by
the Maxwell demon, it is 'overheated', for the critique
of Jews is removed. There are bad guys of all persuasions
in the fiction and in the media, but hardly any Jews. "Jews
are like everybody else", my good Jewish friends would say
often. But in the mirror of the discourse, the Jews are
usually saints or martyrs. In order to normalise the discourse,
to save Palestine and the Middle East, to save the remnants
of Christianity in the West, the Maxwell Demon should be
removed.
The
Jews in the media are unable to permit critique of Jews,
be it of the media lords or of Israel, or of the evil neo-cons.
The sieve they form is about to cause the 'framing' of Christ
and Christians for Zionists' crimes. Sacked Baghdad is still
reeling after the strike, and already the left-wing Zionist
Saul Landau has published an article[20] subtitled "Shop,
Go to Church, Support Bush's War". Thus the most anti-Christian
regime of Bush and Wolfowitz is mis-presented as a manifestation
of Christianity.
Jeffrey
Blankfort (a strong and principled anti-Zionist voice, and
good proof that a descendent of Jews does not have to adhere
to the Jewish paradigm) noted: "Landau mentions not a word
about the role of the Jewish neo-cons or Israel's urging
of the US to pursue the war on Iraq, pushing the onus on
to the Born-Again Christians".[21]
This
brings us back, to the Fifth Element of Luc Besson,
for in the movie as in real life, Zog is not an independent
force. A slave of Mammon, a servant of the Shadow, he is
helping the Dark force fulfil its metaphysical task, to
blot out the Light of Christ and to turn our world into
Godless desert. That is why he sends bulldozers to wipe
out flowers in Palestine, sends troops to sack Baghdad and
Damascus, threatens Paris and Moscow, perverts Christianity.
Is
there a remote chance to save the world from the Shadow?
One feels that the rule of King Zog is as secure in Washington
as it was in pre-war Albania, as secure as the rule of King
Macbeth in his Scotland, for no ordinary man can defeat
him. But on Palm Sunday I walked down the Mount of Olives
from Bethpage, where Our Lord (not an ordinary man) mounted
the donkey, to the Lions' Gate of Jerusalem, in the midst
of a huge procession of all denominations, for miraculously,
the great Churches of the East and the West decided to celebrate
Easter in Palestine together.
This
had an all-important message, for the Orthodox Church puts
emphasis on Christ the God, while the Latin Church emphasizes
Christ the Man, as our Muslim brothers praise the Holy Spirit
of God, and all of us are united in love for the beautiful
Land of Palestine and Her Lady. So we walked, city folk
of Jerusalem and Nazareth, Bethlehem and Jaffa, peasants
from Taybeh and Abboud, and nuns and monks and priests,
waving palm branches and calling Hosanna, and it looked
like Birnham Wood coming to Dunsinane...
FOOTNOTES
- Michael Lind: New Statesman, April
7, 2003
- http://www.yellowtimes.org/print.php?sid 55
- February 21, 2003 Executive Intelligence
Review
- Jerusalem Post, 'No place in new
Iraq for Palestinians' By Douglas David Apr. 10, 2003
- clay, homer was the term Zionists
used to describe Jewish Arabs during the 1950s. The same
word, homer, is used in Hebrew liturgy at describing creation
of Man
- "Occupied Territory" - Congress,
the Israel Lobby and Jewish Responsibility
by Jeffrey Blankfort, City Lights Review, "War after War",
1992, City Lights Books
- http://laetusinpraesens.org/docs00s/assmeta.php
- http://www.yellowtimes.org/print.php?sid=1155
- Jewish dietary law
- The Nation -- Issue
of April 21, 2003 http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030421&s=alterman
- quoted by Bar Zohar,
in his biography of Ben Gurion.
- See his works at
www.arctogaia.com
- Why Most Christian
Evangelicals Favor War by C. E. Carlson www.whtt.org/articles/02080.htm
- http://virginiawater.org.uk/christchurch
- Rf Lev Gumilev, Russia and the
Great Steppe
- For instance, http://www.slip.net/~wolf/vad/satan/cos/ayn_rand.txt
- Leah Garchik, "Oh, the romance
of it," San Francisco Chronicle, November 7, 2002
- hypothetical intelligent being
(or a functionally equivalent device) capable of detecting
and reacting to the motions of individual molecules. It
was imagined by James Clerk Maxwell in 1871, to
illustrate the possibility of violating the second law
of thermodynamics. Essentially, this law states that heat
does not naturally flow from a cool body to a warmer;
work must be expended to make it do so. Maxwell
envisioned two vessels containing gas at equal temperatures
and joined by a small hole. The hole could be opened or
closed at will by "a being" to allow individual molecules
of gas to pass through. By passing only fast-moving molecules
from vessel A to vessel B and only slow-moving ones from
B to A, the demon would bring about an effective
flow from A to B of molecular kinetic energy. This excess
energy in B would be usable to perform work (e.g.,
by generating steam), and the system could be a working
perpetual motion machine. By allowing all molecules to
pass only from A to B, an even more readily useful difference
in pressure would be created between the two vessels.
About 1950 the French physicist Léon Brillouin exorcised
the demon by demonstrating that the decrease in
entropy resulting from the demon's actions would
be exceeded by the increase in entropy in choosing between
the fast and slow molecules. (EB)
- based on his Jews in Russia and
USSR, 1967, published 2001.
- 'The Last Days of Born-Again History'
on CounterPunch site
- Blankfort also mentions: "Israel
has always been Landau's weak point as it has to most,
but happily not all, Jewish leftists. Twenty years ago
he wrote that the two old Palestinian women who were shown
(in a documentary) crying for their destroyed homes and
the killing of their loved ones in Gaza did not seem genuine.
I wonder what he would say if someone wrote that about
Jewish survivors of the WW2 Jewish Holocaust?"