As a new military confrontation
over Syria is impending, thought out by Israel, prepared by the British and
executed by the US, the West’s future depends greatly upon two mavericks, the
US President Donald Trump and the UK Opposition Leader Jeremy Corbyn. These two
men are as different as you can make. One is for capitalism, another one is a
socialist, but both are considered soft on Russia, at least they do not foam at
the mouth hearing Putin’s name. Both are enemies of Wall Street and the City,
both stand against the Deep State, against NATO, both are enemies of globalism
and of world government. One is a friend of Israel, another is a friend of
Palestine, but both are charged with racism and anti-Semitism.
It is a quaint peculiarity of
our time, that anti-Semitism is considered the great and unforgivable sin,
trading places with Christ Denial. Negative attitude to Christ-denying Jews had
been de rigueur at its time, and the Church, or its Tribunal, the Inquisition,
had tried the charged. Nowadays, the heavily Jewish MSM is the accuser, the
judge and jury, considering anti-Jewish attitude as a worst sort of racism. The
two leaders aren’t guilty as charged, but the MSM court dispenses no
acquittals.
Racism is indeed an ugly trend
(though greed is worse), and hatred of Jews qua Jews is not nice, either. (You
wouldn’t expect a different answer from the son of Jewish parents, would you?)
Jews are entertaining, clever, cunning, sentimental and adventurous folk, able
to do things. They can be good, that’s why the Church wants to bring them to
Christ. If they were inherently bad, why bother with their souls? Are Jews
greedy? Everyone would sell his grandma for a fistful of dollars, but only a
Jew would actually deliver, say Jews. Jews tend to preach and claim high moral
ground, but that is a tradition of the Nation of Priests. However, universalism
and non-racism is not their strong point, and it is amazing that they appointed
themselves the judges on racism.
Nazis were against Jews, ergo, Jews are the pukka
anti-Nazis, this is the logic behind the appointment. It is easier to deal with
ethnic or racial categories than with ideas. However, an easier way can lead to
wrong results, as we shall prove by turning… no, not to bad Netanyahu or Sharon,
but to the best of Jews.
Would you call “a leftist and a
liberal” a man who wants to create a reservation for Blacks, a separate state
for Blacks, to give them the voting rights in this separate state? A man whose
motto was “you are there; we are here”? Hardly. Depending on his colour, you’d
probably describe him a white racist, or a member of the Nation of Islam. But
for Jews, there are different standards.
The recently demised Israeli
peace activist Uri Avnery had been eulogised royally.
Many Israelis came to part with him before his body was cremated and the ashes
spread on Tel Aviv seashore. Mass media from all over the world, statesmen,
politicians, activists dedicated many words to his memory. A brave man, a noble
spirit, a fighter for peace, all that was said, and all that was true. But this
the most progressive, the most left-liberal man in the whole of Israel was the
godfather of the Separation Wall; he coined the slogan “you are there; we are
here”. He did not want to live with Arabs in one state. He pushed for creation
of ghetto for non-Jews.
He was fine to visit Arabs, to
play chess with Arafat as he did during the siege; to defend them if they were
mistreated by Jewish lowlifes. But to live with them as equal? No, no way.
Avnery’s attitude was that of an old-time Boer Nationalist, a Bantustan
creator. He would find himself at home with founders of Rhodesia.
There was a practical and
pragmatic reason: Avnery and his ilk had robbed Palestinians of their lands and
their livelihood in 1948, expelled them from their homes, corralled them into
reservations, and split the booty. They became rich. They did not want to allow
refugees back and give up the stolen loot, oh no.
Avnery believed peace was
possible, for the Arabs should be grateful if they were left in peace in their
Bantustans. He was for peace with Hamas, for he was sure they also will
gratefully accept keeping what’s they’ve got.
This is Israeli Left: people
who had got enough of Arab goods, and do not need more.
Avnery’s adversaries weren’t
Arabs; they were Jews who arrived in Palestine at a latter stage. They didn’t
share in the Big Robbery of 1948; they wanted to get something for themselves.
This is the Israeli Right:
people who want to squeeze more out of Palestinians, even if it means armed
conflict will go on.
The common ground of Israeli
Left and Israeli Right is their unwillingness to give Palestinians freedom and
restore the stolen goods. The difference is that the Left, wealthy Jews, wanted
to leave Palestinians in peace in their Bantustans. The Right, poorer Jews,
want to keep squeezing Palestinians.
The late Mr Avnery greatly
disliked the poorer Jews that migrated to Palestine after 1948. He denied they
were mistreated by his pals. The talk about Oriental (or Sephardi) Jews being
exploited and abused upon arrival annoyed him immensely.
He was, however, a very nice
man. Regretfully I must admit that wealthy men looking for peace (even while
keeping their booty) are more pleasant than poor guys keen on robbing somebody
else.
Uri Avnery was one of the best
of his kind. But he was not a liberal, nor a non-racist, neither a leftist by a
long shot. As Ron Unz made a point in his widely read piece on Jews and Nazis,
he was a living example of a Jew informed by Nazi Germany. He was brought up
there; and upon arrival to Palestine, he joined a fascist terrorist group that
courted Nazi Germany. He wrote in fascist newspapers, he actively participated
in ethnic cleansing, and he freely admitted that.
His attitude to Arabs was
similar of Adolf Eichmann to Jews in 1930s, mutatis mutandis. As Unz correctly
stated, Eichmann was a big fan of Jews and a top liaison with Zionists at that
time. He wanted Jews to prosper, just not in Germany. Avnery wanted Arabs to
prosper, but on the other side of the border.
If he was the best, you can
imagine the average of Israeli Left (Israeli Right is even worse). The previous
leader of Israeli Labour, Mr Isaac Hertzog, became the head of the Jewish
Agency and declared that
his main task is to fight “the plague of mixed marriages”, that is marriages
between Jews and non-Jews. The present leader of Israeli Labour, Avi
Gabbay, told a
meeting of party activists that “the Arabs have to be afraid of us”. He added:
“They fire one missile – you fire 20. That’s all they understand in the Middle
East”. He also vowed to never enter into a coalition with the non-Jewish party
(the Joint List, a Knesset group representing Palestinian citizens).
Such views are totally
unacceptable for any mainstream party in the US or the UK. Probably they are
too radical for KKK, too.
Now sit tight and prepare
yourself for a shock. This Israeli Labour Party, which would be considered a
Nazi party elsewhere, decided to cut ties with
Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party for British Labour is “anti-Semitic”, they said.
It is a shame that Corbyn hasn’t been the one to take this step first. If you
maintain ties with any Israeli party, you should have no problem to fraternise
with Hollywood Nazis, let alone the Ku Klux Klan. And Jeremy Corbyn quite
correctly compared Zionists with Nazis. Now he is being skinned alive by
British Jews.
They ran the same front page in
their three newspapers saying that Corbyn is an existential threat to British
Jews, because he does not agree with their definition of anti-Semitism. He is
not anti-Jewish, but he doesn’t worship the Jew. And he is not a Jew. A young
British Jewish Labour voter regretted that
Ed Miliband, the Jewish former Labour leader, is not in power, for “there
wouldn’t be Brexit, there wouldn’t be Jeremy Corbyn, and we’d just have a
lovely Jewish prime minister.” Isn’t it a racist sentiment? But Jews are pukka
anti-racists…
Corbyn had been trying his best
to accommodate the Jews. He expelled his staunch supporters whenever the Jews
demand their heads. He is going to a compromise after a compromise, he
denounced the Jews who stayed with him despite community pressure. All in vain,
because the Jews care little about definitions, but they are worried about
Corbyn’s hostility to banksters, by his excessive (in their eyes) sympathy to
British workers and by his unwillingness to fight wars for Israel. They can’t
say that openly, that is why they keep pushing anti-Semitism button hoping to
unseat Corbyn and return Blair-2.
My respected friend Jonathan
Cook, the great British journalist based in Nazareth, summed it up well:
“Besieged for four years,
Corbyn has been abandoned. Few respected politicians want to risk being cast
out into the wilderness, like Ken Livingstone, as an anti-Semite. Corbyn
himself has conceded too much ground on anti-semitism. He has tried to placate
rather than defy the smearers.”
Cook points out that
by conceding ground, Corbyn betrayed Palestinians and betrayed anti-Zionist
Jews who were expelled by droves from Labour. Even Tony Greenstein,
a Jewish nationalist though anti-Zionist, had been expelled; the same Tony
Greenstein who attacked me and
Gilad Atzmon for our anti-Semitism (I
responded to him here). He was also sent home
packing. The late Hajo Meyer, a Holocaust survivor and defender of Palestinian
rights, a personal friend of Corbyn, had been denounced. Palestinians were betrayed,
and we should care about them more than about Jewish fine feelings.
But why should we give a damn
about Corbyn and/or Palestinians if we aren’t British voters? I’ll tell you.
In the British establishment,
pro-Jewish forces decided to side with the Washington War Party to push us
close to war. The recent visit of the British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt
(the man on the shortlist of Israel’s
agents within the British establishment) to Washington
where Hunt delivered a speech calling for full-out war on Russia, “has been
read as an intervention on the side of the anti-Russian faction in the split
and divided US administration”, said the Guardian.
The speech is just an opening,
missiles will follow soon. Today, I was informed by my contacts, the Russians
have delivered a demarche to the State Department, warning the Americans to
desist from their plans to attack Syria. Russian intelligence learned that
eight tanks containing chlorine have been delivered to Halluz village of Idlib
province where the group of specially trained militants has already been
deployed in order to simulate the rescue of the victims of chemical attack. The
militants were trained by the British private military company Olive (which had
merged with the American Constellis Group.
The operation, the Russians
say, had been planned by the British intelligence services to justify an
impending airstrike directed against Syrian military and civil infrastructure.
For this strike, USS The Sullivans guided missile destroyer with 56 cruise
missiles onboard arrived to the Persian Gulf, and the US Air Force bomber B-1B
with 24 cruise Air-to-Surface Missiles had been flown to the Al-Udeid air base
in Qatar.
The idea is Israeli, the
operational plans are British, weapons and vessels are American, and a
possibility for confrontation grows stronger each day. The success of Corbyn
would put a stop to these plans of war. But will he have a chance?
ORDER IT NOW
Ron Unz wrote that
the British establishment together with Organised Jewry were able to push
unwilling America into the world wars twice, and perhaps they will be able to
repeat this feat a third time. It seems that the Question of Palestine, one of
the reasons for America’s entry into the world wars, is likely to unleash
another war.
Who is the master and who is
the slave of the two, Organised Jewry or English establishment? This is
the-chicken-and-the-egg dilemma, and there are conflicting answers.
* IndianaUniversity’s Professor
of Geography, Mohameden Ould-Mey provided strong arguments that English were
the Master. I presented his case here.
* The opposing view is that of
the late Times correspondent Douglas Reed,
presented in his Controversy of Zion,
a cryptic book. Proponents of both views had been banned beyond marginalizing.
You are just aren’t allowed to ponder it.
I do not intend to rule who is
right; however, the moot area where the twain intersect is definitely a trouble
spot. Conservative Friends of Israel and Labour Friends of Israel are the
groups within this intersection. Their desire for war against Russia sends us a
powerful signal of danger.
On the opposing side, there are
two intersecting groups: (1) friends of Palestine, and (2) opponents of Jews.
The racial and tribal
anti-Semites are of little value, for they are not particularly bright and are
easily misled and manipulated. They do not like Jewish noses, but who cares?
But people rejecting globalism,
rule of the banks, neoliberalism, impoverishment of native workers, uprooting,
Christ-denial, mass migration and population replacement, the “invite and
invade” mode – are the core of the resistance. They are called “anti-Semites”,
even if they never mention Jews, even if they are Jewish.
Some people who strongly reject
this paradigm prefer to dismiss a thought of Palestine. Bannon and his ilk, the
British Nationalists never fail to express their admiration of Israel. It shows
they are immoral and dishonest. As long as you choose between Banksters’ rule
and Zionists’ yoke, you will get both.
Palestine is the heart of the
matter. Palestine is why the Jews want the attack on Syria.
Palestine is the tool allowing
us to unmask the racist nature of our adversary and defeat him. This is the way
to compassion and the way to Christ.
If the only escape from
anti-Semitism label leads through betrayal of Christ and Palestine, I’d rather
bear this label with pride.
Trump and Corbyn are coming to
the point from different sides. They are fighting a strong and well-entrenched
adversary. Both are tired, both are full of imperfections, but they offer us a
chance to save our beautiful world from destruction. It would be silly if they
fail for antisemitism scare.
P.S. The first ever trial of a
Holocaust Denier in Russia is taking place now in Perm, the Doctor Zhivago
city. Roman Yushkov, a Perm University Professor, had been sacked; his social
accounts erased, his YouTube presentations removed; there is practically no
publicity at all. He reposted an article expressing doubt of the amount of
Jewish dead, and a local resident of Habad Chassid House reported him to
authorities. There is no law forbidding H denial in Russia, but there is a law
forbidding to cause interethnic wrangle. The verdict is expected on September
4. You can write to Prof Yushkov <roman@prpc.ru>
Israel Shamir can be reached
at adam@israelshamir.net
This article was first
published at The Unz Review.
