THE MOST FORMIDABLE SECT IN THE WORLD
Winston Churchill certainly left his mark. There are few who
question the indomitable spirit of this half‑Jew; that in their eyes he
exemplified the so‑called British spirit during some of the darkest
days of World War II as the English responded to his rallying cry. It
is an unfortunate fact of history that it was his insistence upon the
destruction of Dresden (his so‑called "thunderclap of victory") which
resulted in the death of literally hundreds of thousands of women and
children in that open city. All this was in strict contradiction to
any concept of warfare as conducted by civilized nations. Therefore,
do not, by any stretch of imagination construe what is to follow as any
endorsement of Winston Churchill, but he did go through some
interesting phases.
CHURCHILL AND BRITAIN WILL NOT RECOGNIZE
HITLER SAVED BRITAIN!
"The real story of any great event in history is apt to be very
different to what appears at the time. That is especially the case in
war. The fate of millions of people turns on decisions that are taken
by one man, who may be influenced by the most curious of motives in
reaching a decision that changes the whole course of history.
The way he makes up his mind is known only by a few men behind the
scenes, who usually have good reason for keeping it quiet. The truth
sometimes leaks out later; sometimes never. When it emerges it often
bears out the saying that 'truth is stranger than fiction.' A novelist
has to appear plausible, and would hesitate to make use of such
astounding contradictions as occur in history through some extra
ordinary accident or twist of psychology.
Nothing could be more extraordinary than the way that the decisive
events of 1940 were shaped. France was overcome by an offensive in
which few of the higher executants had any faith, and the invasion only
succeeded through a belated change of plan on the German side that
happened to fit the situation produced by rigidity of plan combined
with over‑confidence on the French side. Stranger still was the way
that the British Army escaped, and Britain herself was preserved from
invasion. The truth here runs quite contrary to the popular picture.
It would have seemed incredible to most of Hitler's ardent
followers in Germany. Little indication of it emerged in the
revelations at Nuremberg. [But then Nuremberg was so that the Jews
could enrich themselves even more through lying holocaust propaganda!].
The bare facts were known to a small circle at the top of the German
Army, but the essential clue was held by only a few, not the topmost,
who were present one day at Rundstedt's headquarters when Hitler
disclosed the way his thoughts were running.
The escape of the British Army from France has often been called
'the miracle of Dunkirk.' For the German armored forces had reached
the Channel coast behind the back of the British Army while this was
still deep in the interior of Flanders. Cut off from its own bases,
and from the bulk of the French Army, it seemed likely also to be cut
off from the sea. Those who got away have often wondered how they
managed to do so.
The answer is that Hitler's intervention saved them...A sudden
order from him over the telephone stopped the armored forces just as
they were in sight of Dunkirk, and held them back until the retreating
British had reached the port and slipped out of their clutches.
Rundstedt and other generals concerned, as executive commanders or on
the higher staffs, gave me accounts from their different angles of this
staggering order and it effects.
But although the British Army thus escaped from the trap in
France, it was in no state to defend England. It had left most of its
weapons behind, and the stores at home were almost empty. In the
following months Britain's small and scantily‑armed forces faced the
magnificently‑equipped army that had conquered France, with only a
strip of water between them. Yet the invasion never came.
At the time we believed that the repulse of the Luftwaffe in the
'Battle over Britain' had saved her. That is only part of the
explanation. The last part of it. The original cause, which goes
deeper, is that HITLER DID NOT WANT TO CONQUER ENGLAND. He took little
interest in the invasion preparations, did nothing to spur them on, and
cancelled them at the first plausible excuse...(The German Generals
Talk, by B.H. Liddell Hart, pp. 105‑107)
HITLER'S "HALT" ORDER
"On wheeling north, Guderian's Panzer Corps headed for Calais
while Reinhardt's swept west of Arras towards St. Omer and Dunkirk.
On the 22nd, Boulogne was isolated by Guderian's advance, and next day
Calais. That same day Reinhardt reached the Aire‑St. Omer Canal, less
than twenty miles from Dunkirk ‑‑ the only escape port left to the
B.E.F. The German armored forces were much nearer to it than the bulk
of the B.E.F.
'At that moment,' Rundstedt told me, 'a sudden telephone call came
from Colonel von Grieffenberg at O.K.H., saying that Kleist's forces
were to halt on the line of the canal. It was the Fuhrer's direct
order and contrary to General Halder's view. I questioned it in a
message of protest, but received a curt telegram in reply, saying: 'The
armored divisions are to remain at medium artillery range from Dunkirk'
[a distance of eight or nine miles]. 'Permission is only granted for
reconnaissance and protective movements.'
Kleist said that when he got the order it seemed to make no sense
to him. 'I decided to ignore it, and to push on across the Canal. My
armored cars actually entered Hazerbrouck, and cut across the British
lines of retreat. I heard later that the British Commander‑in‑Chief,
Lord Gort, had been in Hazebrouck at the time. But then came a more
emphatic order that I was to withdraw behind the canal. My tanks were
kept halted there for three days.'
Thoma, who was chief of the tank side of the General Staff, told
me that he was right up forward with the leading tanks, near Bergues,
where he could look into the town of Dunkirk itself. He sent back
wireless messages direct to O.K.H., begging for permission to let the
tanks push on. But his appeal had no effect. Referring to Hitler's
attitude, he bitingly remarked: 'You can never talk to a fool. Hitler
spoilt the chance of victory.'
Meanwhile the British forces streamed back towards Dunkirk, and
cemented a defensive position to cover their reembarkation. The German
tank commanders had to sit and watch the British slipping away under
their very nose. 'After three days the ban was lifted,' Kleist said,
'and the advance was resumed ‑‑ against stiffening opposition. It had
just begun to make headway when it was interrupted by a fresh order
from Hitler ‑‑ that my forces were to be withdrawn, and sent southward
for the attack on the line that the remainder of the French Army had
improvised along the Somme. It was left to the infantry forces which
had come down from Belgium to complete the occupation of Dunkirk ‑‑
AFTER THE BRITISH HAD GONE.'" (Ibid. pp. 132‑133)
‑‑‑‑‑‑‑
"WE ARE NOT DENYING AND ARE NOT AFRAID TO CONFESS, THIS WAR IS OUR
WAR AND THAT IT IS WAGED FOR THE LIBERATION OF JEWRY...Stronger than
all fronts together is our front, that of Jewry. WE {Jews} ARE NOT
ONLY GIVING THIS WAR OUR FINANCIAL SUPPORT ON WHICH THE ENTIRE WAR
PRODUCTION IS BASED, WE ARE NOT ONLY PROVIDING OUR FULL PROPAGANDA
POWER WHICH IS THE MORAL ENERGY THAT KEEPS THIS WAR GOING. The
guarantee of victory is predominantly based on weakening the enemy
forces, on destroying them in their own country, within the resistance.
WE ARE THE TROJAN HORSES IN THE ENEMY'S FORTRESS. THOUSANDS OF JEWS
LIVING IN EUROPE CONSTITUTE THE PRINCIPAL FACTOR IN THE DESTRUCTION OF
OUR ENEMY. THERE, OUR FRONT IS A FACT AND THE MOST VALUABLE AID FOR
VICTORY." (Chaim Weizmann, president of the World Jewish Congress, in a
speech on Dec. 3, 1942 ‑‑ New York).
Thus, we can easily see that International Jewry has not only
overstepped the "bounds of propriety" but that it stands exposed,
"hoist on its own petard" so to speak and is presently coming under
public scrutiny as never before.
As more and more information is being passed out to the general
public by newsletters such as this one.
So new let me share with you, some of the thinking of this half‑
Jew before he learned the realities of politics, and sold his soul for
public recognition, by accommodating the wishes of International Jewry.
To begin, let us turn back the clock to November 5, 1919, where
Sir Winston Churchill is standing before the British Parliament,
addressing his colleagues:
"No sooner did Lenin arrive on his return to Russia than he began
beckoning a finger here and there to obscure persons in sheltered
retreats in New York, in Glascow, in Berne, and in other countries, and
he gathered together the leading spirits of a formidable sect, the most
formidable sect in the world, of which he was the high priest and
chief. With these spirits around him he set to work with demoniacal
ability to tear to pieces every institution on which the Russian State
depended. Russia was laid low. Russia had to be laid low."
Later, in a famous article in the Illustrated Sunday Herald,"
London, February 8, 1920, page 5, Churchill described in the following
words, "the most formidable sect in the world" and explained why
"Russia had to be laid low." This article was in part reproduced by
the B'nai B'rith News, Chicago, in its issue of May 1920 under the
heading of Some Indirect Compliments, Churchill wrote:
"The conflict between good and evil which proceeds unceasingly in
the breast of man nowhere reaches such an intensity as in the Jewish
race. The dual nature of mankind is nowhere more strongly or more
terribly exemplified. We owe the Jews in the Christian revelation for
a system of ethics which, even if it were entirely separated from the
supernatural, would be incomparably the most precious possession of
mankind, worth in fact the fruits of all other wisdom and learning put
together. And it may well be that this same astounding race may at the
present time be in the actual process of producing another system of
morals and philosophy, as malevolent as Christianity was benevolent,
which if not arrested, would shatter irretrievably all that
Christianity has rendered possible. It would almost seem as if the
gospel of Christ and the gospel of anti‑Christ were destined to
originate among the same people; and that his mystic and mysterious
race had been chosen for the supreme manifestations, of both the divine
and the diabolical...
There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of
Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution
by those international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is
certainly a very great one: it probably outweighs all others. The
majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal
inspiration and driving power comes from Jewish leaders. Thus
Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate
Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski
cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the
Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd), or of Krassin or Radek ‑‑ all
Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more
astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in
the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for
Combatting Counter Revolution has been taken by Jews. The same evil
prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during
which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been
presented in Germany (especially Bavaria), so far as this madness has
been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German
people. In all these countries the part played by the Jews in
proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing."
In the same article Churchill commented on the Jewish role in
revolutionary movements as follows:
"This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of
Spartacus‑Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky
(Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma
Goldman (United States), this world‑wide conspiracy for the overthrow
of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of
arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality,
has been steadily growing. As a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so
ably shown, it played a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of
the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive
movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of
extraordinary personalities from the underworld (criminal elements‑‑the
so‑called Costa Nostra or Mafia is totally controlled by Jews) of the
great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by
the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed
master of that enormous empire."
Realizing that the foregoing utterances by Sir Winston will come
as a surprise to many, we should mention the support given to these
allegations by one Maurice Samuel, himself a member of the tribe, in
his amazing frank You Gentiles (Harcourt Brace & Co. New York, Aug.
1924, page 155), where he states the following:
"WE JEWS, WE THE DESTROYERS, WILL REMAIN THE DESTROYERS FOREVER,
NOTHING THAT YOU DO WILL MEET OUR NEEDS AND DEMANDS. WE WILL FOREVER
DESTROY BECAUSE WE NEED A WORLD OF OUR OWN, A GOD‑WORLD, WHICH IT IS
NOT IN YOUR NATURE TO BUILD."
It would not be difficult to document an endless array of such
assertions but let us get on with the "rest of the story." First
however, and in light of so much that is happening, we wish to give
credit where credit is due and share some remarkable insights with you
given by Robert H. Williams in his final (early 1958) issue of the
highly informative Williams Intelligence Summary:
"I can assure you that millions more of our people today are aware
that we are in great danger, millions more are at least suspicious of
the identity of the revolutionaries than ever before. Like all power
movements of our time, both Communism and Zionism are racial...
Communism was launched as a destructive gangster apparatus for the cult
of Jewish bankers who also finance and use Zionism in the conquest of
governments. It was not for Jews, but to destroy the races and
governments, cultures and religions, making way for the Zionist
program.
It is the most motley mongrelization of races. Zionism, being
purely Jewish, must depend on non‑Jews or reveal its identity.
Eventually, it must expose itself anyway. It is impossible for it
to carry on the program of Communist‑like propaganda and terrorism
without eventually becoming conspicuous...This racial character of
Zionism is our guarantee that the Zionist masters cannot go on forever
with their destructive program. They will eventually be called to
account."
May we dare suggest that America today is witnessing the approach
of the final accounting? Bear with us for one more quote and then we'll
get down to the nitty gritty, so to speak.
The setting for this amazing revelation goes back a few years and
involves Norman Dodd, the individual who in large measure, implemented
the inquiries of the famous Reece Committee. In an experience which
rather paralleled that of Senator Jack B. Tenney of the California
State Fact Finding Subcommittee, Norman Dodd was offered invaluable
help by members of the Anti‑Defamation League ‑‑ UP TO A POINT. That
point being an investigation that appeared dangerous to International
Jewry. Thereafter, they quite brazenly made it clear they would (and
did) destroy the Committee. But prior to that event, a certain
intellectual tie had developed between Norman Dodd and a certain
person, which we will document and describe in the following, in
November 1953:
"My position was director of Research for the Reece Committee.
The setting (for this experience) was the cocktail bar of the Mayflower
(hotel) in Washington. I was there by invitation. My host was Herman
Edelsberg ‑‑ the Washington Representative of the Anti‑Defamation
League of B'nai B'rith. Our visit lasted more than two hours during
which in response to the interest I showed in his "work," so to speak,
he towards its end told this to me: 'We have a problem. It is this.
Because of the power which we have amassed, the best thing we should do
is to dissolve ‑‑ to liquidate. But ‑‑ this we will not ever do.
Therefore, the power which we have amassed will ‑‑ as such a power
always does ‑‑ ultimately destroy us. This we know. But the trouble
is that in the process it will destroy everything else. This too we
know.'"
After this astounding pronouncement, Norman Dodd states that
Herman Edelsberg went on to say the following:
"'We have an Achilles heel. As we succeed we get closer and
closer to the surface. This means our 'surfacing' is bound to be
picked up by someone who will treat it like the end of a loose string
by following it to where it leads. We think we will be able to spot
such a person before he gets too far and that we have enough power to
stop him going on.'"
That will have to suffice for the moment but it is becoming quite
clear that the "loose string" is clear to any who have eyes to see! And
of course to top it all we have David Ben Gurion, at that time Prime
Minister of the Israeli state happily proclaiming in an interview
granted to Look Magazine, January 6, 1962, that within twenty five
years (make that 1987) he anticipated that:
"...With the exception of the USSR as a federated Eurasian state,
all other continents will become united in a world alliance (That he
knew about, what President Bush calls the 'New World Order' in 1962
there is no question), at whose disposal will be an international
police force (the United States Military). All armies will be
abolished and there will be no more wars. In Jerusalem, the United
Nations (a truly United Nations ‑‑ and his timing was a little off but
we can see what he said is now quickly coming to pass) will build a
shrine of the Prophets to serve the federated union of all continents;
this will be the seat of the Supreme Court of Mankind, to settle all
controversies among the federated continents, as prophesied by Isaiah."
Think of the implication of this, if you will. A Prime Minister
of "Israel," a nation with whom we are told we have a "special
relationship" (it appears to be one of slave and master) can't resist
the temptation to "show off" and brag a little. He also anticipated
that the United States would be turned into a "...welfare state with a
planned economy," an eventuality that no longer seems remote, but is in
fact a reality!, but more pointedly, he pictured our nation being ruled
from "Israel!" Yet the President of the United States and bought‑and‑
paid for Congress never dare say a word!
Let's see if we can put the picture together and bring it to
current date. Because we know the ball of string is beginning to
unravel.
It is our contention that "Israel" comes very close to not having
a friend in the world, except the United States and Russia which the
Jews rule totally. Of course we must recognize, the fact, that
"Israel" has captured the means of mass communications throughout the
civilized world but there is a distinct undercurrent indicating that
those who had submitted to the pressures applied by the ADL and their
various Zionist masters, are deserting the ship. Thus we find the New
York Times, the Washington Post, Time, U.S. News and World Reports, and
Newsweek Magazines, all carrying spectacular stories highly critical of
"Israel." Also we have recently seen a documentary on CNN that was
highly critical of the bastard, murderous state of Israel. Having been
an ardent "Israel/Zionist/Jew" watcher for over a quarter of a century
we are hardly a disinterested party. But we assure you, the signs are
there. Let us share an extremely revealing article from the New York
Times of July 11th, 1986. Which shortly before this criticism, or
rather admission that "Israel" was slipping from grace, would have been
unthinkable!
NEW TACK ON CASES AGAINST ISRAEL?
By Stephen Engleberg ‑‑ Special to The New York Times: WASHINGTON,
July 10:
"There was once a time when allegations that the Israeli
Government had violated American law were handled with an eye to
preserving the close relationship between the United States and Israel.
Suspicions of misconduct by Israel typically did not end up in
front of grand juries but were resolved quietly through talks between
diplomats.
Matters are somewhat different now. In the last year, the
Israelis have been the subject of a series of well‑publicized
investigations involving allegations of espionage and illegal export of
American technology.
At no time in the history of the state of Israel have the United
States authorities been investigating more visibly embarrassing cases
involving charges of crimes by the Israeli government or its
representatives.
Senior Administration officials deny that this sudden spurt of
cases reflects a change in policy toward Israel. Some observers
contend, however, that the investigations are a sign that the White
House has failed to maintain discipline over the Government's law‑
enforcement agencies. Pro‑Israel lobbyists are privately asking
whether mid‑level officials in the Justice Department or United States
Customs Service have been disclosing the investigations as part of an
unauthorized vendetta against Israel.
Whatever the case, the relationship between Israel and the United
States does appear to be moving in several different directions at
once.
On Sunday, for instance, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, Admiral William J. Crowe Jr., was at the Israeli Embassy for a
ceremony honoring the departing military attache. Just a few days
later, Administration officials disclosed that the Customs Service and
the Justice Department were investigating a possible plan for illegally
exporting equipment used in making cluster weapons.
In a statement that suggested a longing for the days when such
cases were handled through diplomatic channels, the former Israeli
chief of staff, Rafael Eitan, said, 'If there was any substance to
these allegations, the Americans could have approached us quietly and
discreetly and clarified matters.'
The Israelis were particularly angry that the case had been
disclosed to the news media by unnamed officials before they were
notified of its existence.
Another case involving the possible illegal export of technology
for tank cannon barrels broke last December, and in that instance
camera crews from 'The NBC Evening News' accompanied the Customs
Service agents as they executed search warrants in upstate New York.
Steven Green, who has written critically of the Israeli‑American
military relationship, said that he was finding increasing numbers of
middle‑level officials in Washington who were willing to discuss what
they believe is a pattern of Israeli misconduct. 'I find that people
are more and more frequently willing to be cooperative to find informal
channels to get the word out,' Mr. Green said. 'It's from a feeling
of frustration.'
Supports of Israel contend that this willingness to disclose
information about investigations of the Israelis springs largely from
lower‑level officials. At the highest levels, they contend, the Reagan
Administration remains a staunch supporter of Israel.
'There has never bee a period with this much friendliness and
trust,' said Hymen Bookbinder, the Washington representative of the
American Jewish Committee. 'This is an unprecedented period of
friendship and there are a few people who don't like this.'
An official Israeli statement on Wednesday, however, suggested
that that the raising of the cluster weapon case caused 'serious
astonishments' that cloud 'overcloud the good relations prevailing
between the U.S. and Israel.'
The most prominent of the cases related to Israel involved
Jonathan Jay Pollard, the former Navy analyst who recently pleaded
guilty to spying for Israel. Former Justice Department officials say
they know of previous instances in which cases of Israeli spying in the
United States were handled without criminal proceedings. But Mr.
Pollard's behavior immediately before his arrest ‑‑ a dash into the
Israeli Embassy with F.B.I. agents trailing him ‑‑ made it impossible
to dispose of the incident quietly. Additionally, the justice
Department has taken a hard‑line stand against all espionage, and was
loathe to avert its eyes from Mr. Pollard just because he was working
for the Israelis.
The situation worsened when Justice Department officials concluded
they had been misled by the Israelis about the number of people
involved in the case. 'That whole thing left an extremely bad taste in
people's mouths,' said one official familiar with the case.
Mr. Pollard is now cooperating with the investigation and a grand
jury in Washington, D.C., is continuing to investigate.
Customs officials and the Justice Department have been looking
into allegations that American companies shipped technology for tank
cannon barrels to Israel in violation of export laws. That case is
still under investigation. Finally, a grand jury last year indicted a
California businessman, Richard Kelly Smyth, on charges of illegally
exporting to Israel 800 devices of the type used to trigger nuclear
explosions."
Space limitations preclude offering other than a cursory glance at
much of the material that has been amassed. But a sample follows:
Time, No Whitewash ‑‑ Pressures for a Probe, and we find a
relentless pressure being brought to bear on "Israel," due to the
murder of two Palestinian prisoners! What's so unusual about that! But
it was hung out on the clothesline in public view!
Next, the ongoing multi‑level exposure of the "Israeli" government
in the notorious Pollard affair! Were it any other country in the
world, by now we would be breaking off diplomatic relations but even
so, from the "Israeli" standpoint, there is no way they can put the lid
on the entire sordid affair. Why this reaches back to the 1960's and
the "Pennsylvania ripoff" of vast quantities of uranium that ended up
in "Israel." The same military officers involved at the time, were
operating as "controls" in the Pollard affair. Someone is going to
write a book on this business and it appears that it will be like
"Rambo" with parts one through four. Heads continue to roll and no one
in our government dares try to cover up the affair.
Newsweek gives us detailed and substantial information under the
heading "Israel: Leaders on the Spot ‑‑ a coalition in trouble" (of
that there can be no doubt ‑‑ the country is splintered and virtually
ungovernable) and this also is about two murdered Palestinians! The
Israeli's bragged openly about his murder of hundreds of men, women and
children in the Deir Yassin affair, yet our President invited the Prime
Minister to Camp David to determine how to continue to occupy
Palestine, in what they dare term "Israel!" Now, suddenly, this
orchestration of criticism for a government that is only doing what it
does best and naturally, that is to say, MURDER AND TORTURE, ON AN
UNPRECEDENTED SCALE.
Finally in Newsweek, in a full page article including a photograph
of an Israeli (retired?) general in handcuffs, we find: "A FRIENDSHIP
UNDER PRESSURE ‑‑ New charges that Israel is swiping (the word should
be stealing) U.S. secrets." The article deals with cluster bombs which
the Israeli government has proven it will use on helpless civilian
refugees! ISRAEL IS A GANGSTER NATION AND IS RULED BY IDENTIFIED
TERRORISTS WHO RICHLY DESERVE HANGING. The manner in which the
Zionists and the Anti‑Defamation League have blackmailed our Congress
is simply beyond belief. However, at long last there is every sign
that what was suggested by Robert Williams and outlined above is
actually beginning to happen. That it will be a slow process, goes
without saying, because the Jews have almost absolute control of the
news media. FOR AMERICAN JEWS HAVE PROVEN TO BE JUST AS TRAITOROUS AS
THEIR ISRAELI COUNTERPARTS, OTHERWISE THEY WOULD PUT A STOP TO IT.
We suggest that were it not for the incalculable harm done to our
government's ability to serve its American people through our foreign
policy ‑‑ this harm being directly traceable to the false doctrine
espoused by such fiends of "Israel" as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson.
We further suggest the William's "prophecy" would be happening faster.
Having correctly assessed the fact that the Zionists would end up
exposed to public scrutiny, he could not possibly have imagined the
sinister distortion of scripture that would lead untold millions to put
"Israel" above loyalty to either Christ or country. What a travesty!
The blood soaked Israeli leaders are truthfully able to say, "...We
have the Christians of America!" And Jerry Falwell urging eighty
thousand preachers associated with the so‑called Moral Majority, "To
stand against Israel is to stand against God." And as Ruth Mouly
pointed out in her article in the Humanist, May/June 1982 entitled "The
Religious Right and Zionism;"
"The degree of commitment which characterizes many Christian
Zionists is illustrated by the words of a pro‑Israeli Kansas
journalist, 'As a gentle American, as a Christian who considers loyalty
to God above all human commitments, if the choice ever comes between
loyalty to an American government and loyalty to Israel, I have no
choice. I must stand by Israel.'"
There are few men in the entire world more dangerous to your
liberties than Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell!
We close with the words of Richard Cotten who said: "FREEDOM IS
NOT FREE, FREE MEN ARE NOT EQUAL, AND EQUAL MEN ARE NOT FREE!"
Entity in Palestine
Author Unknown*
On May 1949, the General Assembly of International Security
Council recognized Israel as a state established on
Palestinian land. Israel's first government was headed by
David Ben Gorion. As a consequence, Palestine, particularly,
and Middle East region, generally, entered in a bloody conflict
which continues till the present day. The declaration of Israel's
State was not a sudden result of 1948‑War, but has much
deeper roots dating back to the old British imperialist
ovement.
The idea of establishing the State of Israel emerged in the
wake of what was later known by as the Balfour Declaration, in
which Arthur James Balfour, the British Prime Minister,
romised in 1917 that Britain will do its best to establish a
Jewish national home in Palestine. This ill‑omened Declaration
was the starting point for all events which preceded the
Declaration of the Israeli State.
Early this century, Britain's policy had been going towards
settling down the British presence in India, Egypt and vast
parts of Africa to protect the roads leading to these
ettlements. However, Palestine had a strategic position for it is
essential to protect the Sinai and the Suez Canal. Additionally,
it is located on the road between India and Africa. As a result,
Britain concluded that it is very necessary to put this region
under its control, through settling foreign people, which would
serve as a buffer zone. At the same time, the Zionist
Movement was seeking to establish a state. On the other hand,
in the Zionist First Summit, held in Basel, Switzerland in 1897,
23 Jewish leaders announced that Jews should establish a
Jewish state in Palestine and remove all the current
inhabitants.
As a result, the Zionist and the British interests had
intersected, and consequently, an alliance between these two
imperialistic powers had formed.
It is very obvious that the real dimensions of this alliance was
represented in statements and attitudes of Jewish and British
leaders. For instance, Ben Gorion said:" Britain is protecting
us, so we must not be at the back ranks. We have to form
Jewish Militia to protect ourselves and destroy Arabs. This will
not, simply, be achieved unless we received support and aid
from Britain". While Azar Weizman said in his memories:"
There was a confidential agreement in which Britain had
engaged itself to hand over Palestine without Arab people to
us in 1934". Churchill, British Prime Minister, said in response
to Arabs' demand of revoking Balfour Declaration:" They ask
for me to reject Balfour Declaration and haul Jewish
immigration. I can't do that, and I don't wish also. I think it is
much better for world, Jews, Britain and Arabs also to
mplement this Declaration. Establishing Jewish state on
Jordan's River bands with 4 or 5 million Jews will be in
Britain's interest".
prime Minister Churchill did not concern himself about the
fairness of removing an entire population from their homeland
but was more concerned about what is in Britain's interests.
his is not democracy or liberty but racism and colonialism. In
this way Britain, then Palestine's Mandatory Power, sought to
establish a Jewish state in the colony of Palestine.
On April 5th, 1920 the League of Nations decided that Britain
is going to be the mandatory power in Palestine, In its turn,
Britain had appointed the Jewish Herbert Samuel as its high
Commissioner who accepted the cooperation with the Jewish
rganization. On the other hand and inspite of the protests,
Balfour said:" Zionism is more important than 700,000 Arab
Palestinians".
Thus, Mandatory Power started to bring Jews from all over the
world and settled them in Palestine. Furthermore, the British
government had granted the Jewish Organization vast powers
to bring ten thousands of Jewish people a year. Also,
Mandatory Power helped Jews on dominating strategic
positions inside Palestine for establishing settlements. On the
other hand, this Power had forced the Arab farmers to sell their
lands because of their incapability to pay back the debts and
loans.
The Jews began to surge into Palestine. So, while their
number was 58 thousand in 1918, this number increased to 92
thousand between 1939 to 1945, then to 161 thousand
between 1946 and 1948 to reach to 4.2 million in 1992.
The British‑Jewish coordination continued until the Jews knew
that, unlike American Power, Britain's imperialistic power was
about to collapse. So, Jews went to the side of United States
which completely supported them. Rejecting U.S.A. to interfere
in the Palestinian issue, British government decided to refer
the subject to Security Council.
In 1947, Security Council issued its Resolution of Dividing
Palestine into two regions: Arab (11500 km.squar) and Jewish
(14100 km.sq.). As a result of Military clashes inside
Palestine, Security Council froze its Resolution on March
1948. The Jews began, on April 1948, their aggressions. As a
result, the Jews conquest most of Arab cities and villages after
they had evacuated them from Arab population. At this time,
Argon's gangs headed by Minahim Beigen committed a
terrifying massacre at Dair Yassine killing about 250 women,
children and old men. After the massacre, Beigen said:" Were
it not For victory of Air Eosin, Israel would not had been ever".
John Kimchi, Jewish writer, commented:" It is an ugliest
shameful stain in Jews' history".
Thus, we can see that the conspiracy was created by Zionism,
supported by Britain and sponsored by U.S.A.
So, killing, terrorism and displacing peoples are basic
elements on which Israel State established and grew in
addition to claim on an alleged religious right to Palestinian
and.
Before Zionist occupation, number of Jews in Palestine was
about 58 thousand who were living in peace with 642 thousand
Arab citizens, both Moslems and Christians.
In fact, not all Zionists, now presented in Palestine, are
Semitics. As Jewish sources say that about 82% of Zionists
who are, now, staying and governing Israel, are non‑Semitic
ews.