Indeed Dr M – that is the problem faced by ideologues/'revolutionaries' who make it to the top of the pecking order, then fall for the hedonistic life-style where the maxim: 'keep it simple', does not apply anymore…and the wheel turns inexorably…to where? As to the Islamic banking sham, in Iran it's not called interest but a service fee!
FT
From: Ardeshir Mehta [mailto:ardeshir@mac.com]
Sent: Sunday, 29 August 2010 4:09 AM
To: Fredrick Toben; Adelaide Institute
Cc: kziabari@gmail.com; news-sense; Global_Media_Lightning_Headlines@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Did anyone not sread this? ("Fredrick Toben: Materialism that Sustains the Western Democracies is Exhausting Itself")
Dr T??,
While I do not disagree with the main thrust of your interview with the Iranian journalist Kouroush Ziabari (quoted below), I wonder if you have thought about the UNSPOKEN aspects of your interview, and in particular the potential that Iran (and indeed all other Islamic countries) possess to overthrow the zionists - and their puppeteers, the Rothschilds - altogether, and within just a few years, by simply offering GENUINELY interest-free loans and mortgages to all people all over the world?
The NSDAP could also have done that early in the 1930s, and would have emerged victorious without having to fight a single shot. But they did not: I can't fathom why.
And even today, and even with the strongly-worded injunctions of the Qr'an and the Prophet Muhammad against usury, no one in the Islamic world bothers to do this, either.
I might mention in this regard that "Islamic Banking" as practiced today is an utter sham. As I have written in my short article entitled "The abolition of Interest on Loans" (which can be found in its entirety at <http://homepage.mac.com/ardeshir/AbolishInterest.html>):
[QUOTE]
"ISLAMIC BANKING" AS PRACTISED TODAY IS A SHAM
However, [...] I would like to mention that what is called "Islamic Banking" today is a total sham, and not at all in keeping with the spirit of Islamic teaching, which is totally against every kind of interest, by whatever name it may be called. In today's sham "Islamic Banking", for instance, if you take out a mortgage from an "Islamic" bank to buy a home, instead of charging you interest, they charge you so-called "rent" for inhabiting the home. Every year you have to pay back, not only the principal, but this "rent" in addition. The implication is that since the "Islamic" bank has put up the money to pay for the home, at least in part, you are living in what is at least partly the "Islamic" bank's home, and not in your own.
But even a little thought reveals that this is a total sham. If the "Islamic" bank has actually loaned you the money to buy the home, well then the home you bought with the money they lent you ought rightfully to be yours, not the "Islamic" banks, even partly! And you would, as a result, have no obligation to pay rent on it to anyone. Why would you pay rent to an "Islamic" bank to live in your own home?
Either the "Islamic" bank loans you the money at no interest - in which case the home you bought with it is yours, and you shouldn't have to pay "rent" for living in it - or else they don't loan you the money, but rather buy a home for you to live in ... in which case yes, you would have to pay rent to them. But in the later case, why should they call it a "loan"? It's not a loan at all. Calling it an "interest-free loan" is a sham and a fraud.
[END QUOTE]
The ONLY reason people the world over bow to the zionists is because the zionists - and especially their string-pullers, the Rothschilds and their cronies - have MONEY ... lots and LOTS of money. "The Golden Rule is that those that have the Gold make the Rules!" Take away their MONEY, and they would be as powerless as are, say, the Gypsies, the Inuit or the Naskapi today. And Iran (and indeed the Muslim world in general) has the ABILITY to take away the zionists' money ... but do absolutely NOTHING about it.
I don't know about you, but *I* personally consider this on-going INACTION on the part of the Muslim world as a much WORSE betrayal of human rights than the West's feeble - and, as a result, only partially successful - attempts to stifle free speech about the Holocaust(TM).
Kindest regards.
+++++
On 28-Aug-10, at 6:00 AM, Fredrick Toben wrote:
{QUOTE}
Fredrick Toben: Materialism that Sustains the Western Democracies is Exhausting Itself
15. AUG, 2010 
2 COMMENTS
By: Kourosh Ziabari
Dr. Fredrick Toben is a German author and founder and former director of the Adelaide Institute. He has written numerous books on education, political science and history and is best known as a historical revisionist who has extensively argued the veracity of Holocaust accounts by the Jewish historians. Due to his holocaust denial, he has been imprisoned three times in Germany, United Kingdom and Australia.
This is an in-depth interview with Dr. Toben in which weve discussed his viewpoints regarding holocaust, the unconditional supports of the United States for Israel, the plight of Palestinian nation under the Israeli occupation and the fate of Middle East peace process.
Kourosh Ziabari: Western politician usually boast of their commitment to liberal values and democratic principles such as the freedom of speech and human rights; however, you were sentenced to prison two times as a result of expressing your viewpoints and ideas. Should the same case happen in a third-world, non-aligned country such as Iran, one can hardly imagine the extent of international condemnations and criticism that would come next. Aggregately, you spent 12 months in prison and this should be very painful. Tell us about your experiences in the prisons of Germany, United Kingdom and Australia.
Fredrick Toben: I think the best way to begin answering this question is by repeating my sometime misunderstood quip: The world is my prison. This realization has been strengthened by my regularly visiting Iran since 1999 when I left Mannheim Prison after seven months and spent a week in Teheran. I was impressed with the Iranian youth who had a strong national bond with their country, so different to the Germans and other peoples in the so-called western democracies.
This difference is one of mindset. In the West we have pushed the hedonistic-consumer life-style to the point where individuals self-destruct through substance abuse and nihilistic thought processes that suggest life is fun and games. As a teacher I opposed such a world view because the act of thinking about things is actually hard work. Admittedly, for some it is easier than for others but all of us should have to think about our value system, the guide that enables us to lead a productive and balanced life.
I was impressed how determined Iranian students are in their attitudes towards life. Admittedly, it helps that there are still some legal constraints that support a form of public modesty, something we have lost in the west. I was also impressed by the wisdom they expressed, for example, some could not understand why in the West an individual who has personal problems, as if that is an abnormal thing, goes off and pays money to a stranger who then listens to his personal problems, often about his most intimate problems. I was informed that in Iran this matter is handled by a person visiting family and friends, cousins, aunts or uncles, who then advise on how best to solve a pressing problem. I have been advised that now there is also a new growth industry psychological counseling, which is a brain-child of the Freudian mindset, and in turn its wellspring is found in Talmud, the Jewish moral guide. It is little wonder that too many individuals cannot accept such thoughts intruding into their value system and becoming a part of their Weltanschauung-world view.
Just getting back to freedom as such, if we use the concept freedom then we must always ask the questions: freedom from what and freedom for what? In the West we have the freedom to self-destruct, this being the logical consequences of consumer societys motor that predatory capitalism has constructed for us. I have just returned from a seven-week American tour and saw the tragedies being played out as the financial system is crashing all around and vainly trying to resurrect itself. The home foreclosures are a catastrophe, but as is fitting within the hedonistic blame-game, the individuals who received loans from banks that they could never repay are blamed for causing their own destruction. This is sad because we should be looking at the system operating in one of the wealthiest countries in the world that permits poverty and homelessness to flourish while individuals within that system receive millions of dollars in performance bonuses.
As far as my prison time is concerned, I refuse to adopt a victim mentality because that is unproductive. As Captain Eric Mays wife, Gretchen, reminded me when I visited them in July this year in Houston, as she tended to her totally disabled husband, Its useless to sit on the pity-pot and better to get on with the job. Thats the imperative, to get on with the job, and if your body gives up on you, then it is the brain that sees you through. This is also true of prison itself. The authorities may have your body but they still do not have your mind, not yet. There were moved afoot to declare individuals who refuse to believe in the Holocaust as delusional, the first step to have them psychiatrically committed. But then we know how such a story tragically ends, as in the 1962 novel, One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jReNeEHH2lQ
In 1999 I spent time at Yalta, Crimea, where I met a psychiatrist who informed me how he had to certify insane any Soviet Union dissenter. Anyone who refused to go along with Marxism as a state ideology would be given the treatment. In Poland up to 1989 it was a dogma to believe that the Germans perpetrated the Katyn Massacre, when in fact it was the mainly Jewish staffed Soviet secret service that did it. The Holocaust has reached this stage in a number of European countries and we have to ask ourselves why this is so.
The usual response is that questioning the holocaust is hurtful to the survivors and it is defaming the memory of the dead, and it is also diminishing the Nazi war-crimes and will lead to a re-surgence of Nazism. All of these reasons are baseless because history does not repeat itself in any such detail. Further, any Holocaust trial is a mere show-trial reminiscent of the Soviet show trials where the accused is already guilty but where a confession of guilt helps to minimize the sentence. During the witch trial era a show of contrition and remorse helped to make the execution a little swifter because it eliminated torture sessions prior to being executed.
Any country that enacts such laws on the pretext of protecting the Holocaust is perverting its legal system. The Austrians, Germans and Swiss have done it, but the Anglo-Common Law countries are resisting it vehemently because they can see that it could have a backlash on its own system of law, which guarantees basic individual rights.
But it must be remembered that all western democracies have that far more subtler mechanism of imprisonment for its people, namely the financial straight jacket. In todays world the only value that a person needs to develop is his credit worthiness, while such things as character are irrelevant. A persons credit rating supersedes all, until one begins to question the underpinning ideology of this financial system, which, among others, is upheld by the Holocaust ideology.
KZ: Lets talk about the main issue of our concern. Some scholars and thinkers believe that, in order to escape from the responsibility of hosting the Jewish immigrants who were displaced following the Second World War, Canada, the United States, Germany and Britain, planned the establishment of a Jewish state on the Palestinian land so as to get away with the burden of receiving the Jewish refugees themselves. What do you think about this viewpoint?
FT: The Second World Wars legacy is still with us to this day and that is why it is important to have an historical perspective on all this, namely that World War One and World War Two were actually a 30-year war period, which can be called a European civil war. The outcome was the establishment of the State of Israel that is quite clear when one asks: who benefited from this conflict? The Zionist program of the 1890s had come to fruition at the expense of the Palestinians. The fabricated Holocaust narrative assists in cementing the myth that Palestine was a land without people, and the world knows that to this day ethnic cleansing continues unabated with the western democracies not lifting a finger to stop this process.
When White House correspondent of over 50 years, Lebanese Helen Thomas, was asked about the Palestinian crisis she responded honestly: send the Jews back home. Where is home, she was asked. Germany and Poland, she replied. The next day she apologized and lost her job.
It must be remembered that any kind of war is multi-faceted, as we witnessed in our time with the Iraq-Iran war, the 2003 Iraq invasion by the Anglo-American-Zionist forces, the Afghan conflict and the current intention by these forces to attack Iran.
The ideological battle lines are still national versus international, and not the false dialectic of left and right-wing politics, as Anthony Lowenstein wishes to believe. As a Jew Lowenstein opposes the Zionists but believes in the Holocaust ideology-lies as well as in the Marxist-Trotskyist nonsense that is based on Talmud thinking.
KZ: Your viewpoint regarding Holocaust has been usually distorted and misrepresented. Whats your exact stance on it? Did the mass killing of Jews by the Nazi forces in concentration camps take place? Has its extent been exaggerated by the Israelis to attract the commiseration of the Western powers? Is it being employed as an instrument of subjugating and oppressing the Palestinian people?
FT: I follow Professors Arthur Butz and Robert Faurisson in their deliberations on this topic, and both conclude that the premise, pillars on which the Holocaust narrative rests, 6 million Jews killed, systematic state extermination policy, murder weapon a gas chamber, cannot be sustained as being the truth of the matter. As Butz says, it is rubbish to hold such a view, and Faurisson calls it a lie. It is not for Revisionists to prove their assertions but for those who believe in the Holocaust to prove their case, which to date has not been done. Faurissons challenge: Show me or draw me the homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz has not been taken up by anyone. What does happen is legal persecution that leads to personal and financial ruin and imprisonment. That speaks for itself, and then there is the defamation of those who refuse to believe in the Holocaust with the following shut-up words, hater, Holocaust denier, antisemitic, racist, Nazi, and even terrorist.
It is thanks to the courageous Iranian President, Dr Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who informed the world that the Holocaust is being misused by those who oppress the Palestinian people. This linkage is fundamental in solving the crisis facing the Middle East, and only after its resolution will the area come to rest. The focus on Iran as a rogue nuclear state is a mere pretext used by the Anglo-American-Zionist powers to retain the myth of the Zionist entity called Israel.
KZ: Youve proclaimed that Germans never gassed anyone during World War II and have no need to feel guilty about anything except for neglecting their cultural roots. We may accept the notion that Holocaust did not happen during the Second World War and was minimally a lie which the Zionists fabricated to take advantage from Europe; however, we have a number of renowned Holocaust survivors such as Elie Wiesel,W?adys?aw Bartoszewski, Eric Kandel, Jack Triemel and Arek Harsh who have retold their own accounts of those days and even seen the demise of their relatives and family members in person. What do you say about that?
FT: The fact that serious Holocaust questioners are routinely legally silenced speaks for itself. Only in the USA with its First Amendment is there still absolute freedom to discuss this topic. But even now there are moves afoot to eliminate the First Amendment, and the recent appointment of Elena Kagan to the US Supreme Court may cause this to happen.
In my book Arbeit Macht Frei: Impertinent Incarceration, I make reference to a television program, ABC Good Morning America, 18 February 2009, where a Herman Rosenblat admits he has not been telling the truth about his concentration camp experience, but for him this made-up story was truthful because he imagined it to be true! Such nonsense is well documented as typical Holocaust material.
The above individuals would have great problems in a court of law where truth-telling is still demanded. For example, in the 1988 Zndel Toronto court case Professor Rauol Hilberg, the author of the definitive 1985 book: The Destruction of the European Jews, stated that the mentioned two written Hitler orders did not exist. We are thus led to believe that Germans began the extermination process without a plan, without an order, without anything except an intuitive feel of what Adolf Hitler wanted them to do. Such premise is a nonsense because anyone who knows how societies work and how bureaucracies dont move unless there is a written order.
That Elie Wiesel is a fraudster has been well established and Google will produce the goods on this, but he has academic tenure, which protects him, and so the mythology will continue until he is no more.
KZ: Why does the United States support Israel so unconditionally? In actuality, Israel has been immune to all of the international laws and regulations without being questioned by any of the international bodies. It has attacked Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Tunisia since its establishment and recurrently subjugated the Palestinian people, killing the innocent civilians, destroying their homes, building illegal settlements and above all, possessing nuclear weapons in violation of the UNSC resolution 487. What would happen if any country rather than Israel had committed such inhumane crimes?
FT: Essentially, Israel embodies the New World Order that emerged out of the World War Two conflict, and this NWO is crumbling because of its own internal contradictions, something that the Iranians have recognised so well. However, the materialism that still physically sustains the western democracies is exhausting itself. This is so evident by the number of countries where US troops are stationed. This physical overreach has a negative impact on the US itself, one being that its physical infrastructure is falling apart. The Arizona effort to secure its won borders from Mexico is a mere symptom of a national resistance against the internationalism preached by the proponents of the NWO.
An additional problem to this is that the proponents of this new internationalism in the form of the New World Order requires a steady tax life-line. The aim of the carbon tax that was supposed to help us fight climate change/global warming/greenhouse effect/ozone hole, etc. was designed to give the NWO that steady sustaining tax income. It has not happened and one consequence in Australia of that failure was a change in Prime Minister. Mr Kevin Rudd was a strong proponent of this internationalism in the form of the climate change ideology. His attendance at the 2009 Copenhagen conference aimed to establish a global tax system that the World Bank or the IMF would administer.
KZ: On March 14, you quoted Herald Scotlands reporter Rob Edwards as writing that hundreds of powerful US bunker-buster bombs were shipped from California to the British island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean in preparation for a possible attack on Iran. Do you take these actions seriously? Israel and United States, over the past 6 years, have been threatening Iran with an imminent war recurrently; however, their threats never went beyond mere propaganda. Will the United States and Israel be attacking Iran over its nuclear program?
FT: The problem faced by the western predatory capitalistic war machine is the financial collapse that is built into its faulty model. The cycle is grow and bust, then plunder and recede and enjoy. The 9:11 tragedy of 2001 managed to hide one such a bust but by 2008 there was another one and the end is not yet in sight. Countries that are reasonably self-sufficent will survive the crash, while others dependent on world markets will not.
Such economic model; was opposed by the National Socialists under Adolf Hitler who withdrew from international financial agreements because it was causing too much fain for its people. The new policy was to become AUTARK, self-sufficient and not as is the case so markedly, a network of interdependent enterprises that produce goods as cheaply as possible without having any allegiance to a community, except that of the international banking systems set of values, which is profits above social wellbeing of individuals.
The scenario for war against Iran is a logical step within the Anglo-American-Zionists war machine strategic planning, and the Iraq and Afghan wars are not enough to sustain the global economy. The overreach is becoming evident as, for example, US soldiers return from tours of duty totally crushed by the hopelessness of the situation, by the conflict dragging on too long.
Such weariness is also felt in Israel where individuals cannot anymore participate in being members of an army that is administering a state. The flight of Jews from Israel to Germany, the USA-Canada, Britain and Australia-New Zealand is seriously undermining morale. It is only a matter of time that there will not be any one willing to continue the occupation. We see similar trends within the US military where aliens join up to fight and their reward is receiving US citizenship. This gives the notion of a mercenary army, as was the French Foreign Legion, a new meaning. It is essentially an outsourcing of military services, something detrimental to a national state.
The Iranian nuclear program issue, like the Holocaust is a smokescreen that hides far deeper issues with which the Anglo-American-Zionist war machine has to come to terms with.
KZ: Do you differentiate between Zionists as the followers of an expansionistic, racist ideology whose ultimate objective is establishing a state with its frontiers spanned from Nile to Euphrates and the Jews as the followers of a monotheistic, divine religion? Its been seen frequently said that the Zionists and Jews have been conflated unjustly. Whats your take on that?
FT: My academic training has been in philosophy and that enables me to think and work in universals, truth, honour, justice, etc. I have difficulties thinking in racial terms because I follow Carl Jungs mindset, as opposed to Siegmund Freuds infantile emphasis on sexual matters. Jungs archetype thinking postulates that humans have a common denominator that expresses itself in character types.
I vividly recall my teaching time in Nigeria where I came across individuals who were eager to learn and develop their minds, and for a teacher this is inspirational. As I retuned to Australia I came across students who didnt want to learn because for them thinking was hard work and they were not imbued with such mindset because our education philosophy is still based on hedonism, learning has to be fun. To that I say, yes, lets have fun but then lets also do some serious thinking, and thats hard work.
The Jews are not a race and to have Zionists calling themselves Jewish is a contradiction in terms. It is much like Antony Lowenstein fighting the Zionists-nationalists but at the same time calling himself an atheist but also a Jewish Trotzkyist who believes in the Holocaust. Out of this Talmudic mindset emerges a victim mentality that is played to the full when it is a matter of the battle-of-the-wills. If a person does not get their way, then they play victim, of discrimination, etc. When they get their way, they become tyrannical in their behaviour, as we see the Zionists behaving in Palestine. It is the case of the man who kills his parents, then pleads before a judge for mercy because he is now an orphan.
I cannot discriminate against individuals who hold a firm and sincere religious belief, and that is why I cannot accept that being Jewish is a racist matter. For example Sir Yehudi Menuhins son, Gerard, who wrote the Introduction to my book 50 Days in Gaol, is anything but a Zionist and like his father opposed the settlements. In 1991 before the Israeli parliament he said, among other things:
This wasteful governing by fear, by contempt for the basic dignities of life, this steady asphyxiation of a dependent people, should be the very last means to be adopted by those who themselves know too well the awful significance, the unforgettable suffering of such an existence. It is unworthy of my great people, the Jews, who have striven to abide by a code of moral rectitude for some 5,000 years, who can create and achieve a society for themselves such as we see around us but can yet deny the sharing of its great qualities and benefits to those dwelling amongst them. Jerusalem Post, 6 May 1991.
Nathan Chofshi of Herliza, one of the pioneer Jewish settlers in Palestine, said in the Jewish Letter, New York, February 9, 1959: We came and turned the native Arabs into refugees, and still we dare to slander and malign them, to besmirch their name. Instead of being ashamed of what we did and trying to undo some of the evil committed.we justify our terrible acts and even attempt to glorify them. This is what the Zionists did to the world, which then bowed down to them.
This above quotations, of course raises further issues but it follows the line of reasoning that the UN Security Council gave on 1 April 1948: The occupant does not in any way acquire sovereign right in the occupied territory but exercise a temporary right of administration on a trustee basis.
But its not only the Jewish world that is at fault, and my quip: Dont blame the Jews, blame those that bend to their pressure, still holds. For example, there are Israels supporters who let all this happen at the expense of the peoples them residing in Palestine.
Think of the following: The Provisional Government of Israel consisted of international Zionists gangsters, aliens from many foreign countries throughout the world; How could Israel possible convert robbery, looting and its acts of crime into an act of benevolence or transmit them into acts of decency and transform aggression into peace-loving? Many leading Americans defended and praised this atrocity. Voices such as the following were in the minority: Father Ralph Gorman, Editor of the Sign Magazine, wrote in February 1960: We aided and abetted the Zionists and Israelis who drove nearly a million Arabs from their homes and replaced them with a million Jewish immigrants.
The UN Charter admits as a member A peace-loving State which accepts the obligations of the Charter is able and willing to carry out these obligations. This the Jews have never recognized but instead have ignored the UN and the Security Council ever since. In any case a so-called state of Israel never existed in fact or in law or in history and so it is nothing but an illegal proclamation and an illegal occupation of Palestinian land.
The demographic factor in this area, of course, is also of importance and were there any democratic solution drawn up in time the Palestinians would outbreed the Jews living in Israel and a solution would emerge where Arabic-speaking Palestinians would hold the majority vote. For the ultra-Orthodox Jews this is untenable because they want to be by themselves, even not associate with their secular Jews. This latter point could develop into a societal implosion, something that has already begun with Israel relying on migrant workers to keep the country going. Add to that the legal definition of who is a Jew and many more societal problems will emerge, which perhaps will rescue the dogmatic into yielding to the inevitable a one-state solution as proposed by Iran.
Finally: Lets remember that the international Zionists leaders led by David Ben-Gurion committed war crimes and crimes against humanity in Palestine as defined by Article 6 of the Nuremberg Charter by which the German National Socialist leaders were convicted by the International Military Tribunal and hangedbut there is a pragmatic and non idealistic mindset that aims to establish physical facts on the ground that sets a new dialectic, then physical force enables them to exercise power over others. The latest example that particularly succeeded before the lie became evident was the insider-job of 9:11, which pitted the so-called western democracies against the world of Islam on the pretext that the west is bringing freedom and democracy to the Muslim world where there is no freedom and democracy. But thinking along such lines goes beyond this current interview and I thank you for the opportunity for giving me a say.
Kourosh Ziabariis an Iranian freelance journalist. He has interviewed political commentator and linguist Noam Chomsky, member of New Zealand parliament Keith Locke, Australian politician Ian Cohen, member of German Parliament Ruprecht Polenz, former Mexican President Vicente Fox, former U.S. National Security Council advisor Peter D. Feaver, Nobel Prize laureate in Physics Wolfgang Ketterle, Nobel Prize laureate in Chemistry Kurt Wthrich, Nobel Prize laureate in biology Robin Warren, famous German political prisoner Ernst Zndel, Brazilian cartoonist Carlos Latuff, American author Stephen Kinzer, syndicated journalist Eric Margolis, former assistant of the U.S. Department of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts, American-Palestinian journalist Ramzy Baroud, former President of the American Motion Picture Arts and Sciences Sid Ganis, American international relations scholar Stephen Zunes, American singer and songwriter David Rovics, American political scientist and anthropologist William Beeman, British journalist Andy Worthington, Australian author and blogger Antony Loewenstein, Iranian geopolitics expert Pirouz Mojtahedzadeh, American historian and author Michael A. Hoffman II and Israeli musician Gilad Atzmon.
{END QUOTE}
Abe Foxman, the National Director of the Anti-Defamation League, is probably very sorry by now that he waded in to the quagmire of controversy over the construction of the Cordoba House mosque near Ground Zero in New York.
This isn't the first time that the League, one of the most powerful Jewish organizations in the world, has been tainted by scandal under Foxman's 23-year stewardship, but it doesn't seem that any of the previous uproars have so fundamentally brought into question the role of the ADL, which was founded in 1913 "to stop the defamation of the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment to all," and today bills itself as the United State's "premier civil rights/human relations agency."
It's not that the opposition to building the new mosque near the site of the biggest mass-murder carried out by Islamist terrorists is totally without merit - far from it. As Foxman pointed out, the families of the 9/11 victims who feel deeply offended and hurt by what they see as an insensitive project certainly deserve a hearing.
And not enough has been done to question the murky motives of the mosque's imam, Feisal Abdul Rauf, who believes that the American administration shares part of the blame for the attack on the World Trade Center and sympathizes with some of the worst Islamic elements, including Hamas and the Iranian regime.
But the debate around the mosque in the U.S. has become an ugly mud-fight in which bigotry and political opportunism are the main motives.
When Foxman was forced to respond the angry critics of the ADL's opposition to the mosque, he said that he condemned those who were against it for the "wrong" reasons and tried to highlight all the ADL's projects designed to improve relations with Muslim communities in the U.S. But these were weasel words; the ADL had no business getting into this from the beginning if it didn't feel capable of supporting Cordoba's basic civil right to build a mosque wherever it liked.
Just at Foxman was mistaken in calling upon Richard Goldstone to repudiate his report on the Gaza operation. Just as he was mistaken dragging the ADL into the argument over Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer's book, The Israel Lobby, two years ago, when he accused them of "using anti-Semitic tropes."
And just as he was mistaken when he almost tore the organization apart three years ago by opposing a Congressional resolution that would have officially labeled the murder of 1.5 million Armenians at the hand of the Turkish government during the First World War a "genocide."
The Goldstone report was so ridiculously one-sided that even left-wing Israeli human rights groups such as B'Tselem criticized it, but where exactly does biased criticism of Israeli military tactics fit into ADL's charter?
And while the Walt and Mearsheimer's book was certainly malicious, if Foxman thought it was anti-Semitic then he should have just said so outright. Instead he simply gave ammunition to those who accuse Jewish lobbyists for using the anti-Semitism card at every criticism of Israel.
In his Armenian intervention, he actively enlisted the ADL in a campaign that subscribed to the anti-Semitic notion that the Jewish money rules Washington.
The 'Elders of Zion' fantasy
As one Israeli diplomat told me at the time, "The Turkish government sees the ADL as an agency of Jewish power, so Foxman thought that if he would allow members of the League to support the resolution, it would harm Israel's strategic relationship with Turkey. He thought he was helping Israel but he simply reinforced the Turks' 'Elders of Zion' fantasy."
I wonder if Foxman still feels proud of himself for working as Ankara's lobbyist.
But the loss of direction at the ADL is not simply a result of Foxman's hubristic posturing and it goes even deeper than just a failure to reconcile its disparate roles as a civil rights movement, crusader against anti-Semitism and Israel advocacy group.
When the League was founded nearly a century ago, discrimination against Jews was still institutional in many respectable quarters and the Klu Klux Klan was a mainstream movement.
Many leading figures in politics and business were openly and proudly anti-Semitic and there was a real need for an influential, well-funded organization to battle them on a national level.
In recent decades, the ADL has made credible efforts to evolve and become a major force in fighting other forms of bigotry and working to improve ties between different minorities and religious groups.
In some cases, the ADL has even gone so far as to criticize Israeli rabbis and politicians for their more overtly racist anti-Arab statements, but their knee-jerk responses to every real and imagined manifestation of Judeophobia is still at the basis of their public image and often takes them to the borders of absurdity. As when it condemned a book of humoristic knitting patterns for finger puppets including a "knitler" with a tiny mustache.
Not every flippant use of Nazi imagery is Holocaust denial, nor is every disproportionate criticism of Israel, or even musings on the legitimacy of the Jewish state, necessarily motivated by Jew-hatred. But the ADL and the rest of the anti-anti-Semitism industry carry on crying wolf because it obviously helps with fundraising.
Anti-Semitism is still here, even if its overt versions are no longer fashionable in western society. But the ADL's methods of fighting it are not only outdated, but often counterproductive and have certainly devalued the currency of their accusations. Is there a better way than Foxman's sledgehammer tactics? Maybe we don't need another way.
President Shimon Peres has a standard answer whenever Jewish leaders from around the world tell him of anti-Semitism in their countries: "It's not your problem," he says. "Anti-Semitism is a sign of backward underdeveloped societies, that's the Goyim's problem. Jews have more important things to be worried about."
Anshel Pfeffer Edmund Connelly
Jews Mocking the Tribe?
For instance, our goyische "expert" tells her audience to
Imagine my money-related stress as the most disgusting terrifying creature I can think of. I'd like to imagine an ugly, greasy little creature with a hooked nose and oily black hair. I call him the Grabbler because he's a greedy little monster who wants to grabble up all your money. Now think of all the problems. He invented interest rates like the ones on your credit card. He's taking the jobs because Grabblers only hire their own kind."
That's hitting a little too close to home, isn't it, messieurs Madoff, Blankfein and Soros?
Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman Sachs
The next part clearly mocks goyim for our penchant of sticking our heads in the sand rather than face up to real problems. Better, it mocks us because rather than face our problems and deal with them, we resort to puerile tactics such as shifting our focus to happy, sappy things. Like, say, rather than dealing with the fact that a gang of Black punks has just knifed your neighbor's 16-year-old, you light candles, hug each other and visualize a world filled with nothing but love. Goyim can be really, really stupid.
In the case of this video, our expert beseeches us to imagine yourself in a peaceful field full of lilies. Meanwhile, the banner at the bottom of the screen reinforces this: "Picture Yourself In A Quiet Space Free Of Grabblers, Such As A Field Or A Church."
Get it? A church is where goyim go.
The expert than asks us to expunge idea that grabblers are scheming or trying to rob you. The power of positive thinking. How utterly stupid. But of course a grabbler by nature schemes and tries to rob people. You've just imagined away any defense from these grabblers. I guess that's funny to some people.
Therapist Christine moves next to "Blabblers," "people who love to argue and complain in a nasal voices. They're always lurking like rats." Here's the image:
The first thing that came to my mind when hearing the world "blabbler" was an image of Barbra Streisand who is affectionately known as "Babs."
The mock interview ends with host Haggerty plugging guest Christine Eckard's latest book. We then get a close-up of the title: The Solution: Kill all the Grabblers.
So our expert with the German-American sounding name, Christine Eckard, has genocide in her eyes, quite appropriate for anyone with German blood. Ha ha ha.
As I've said, there is a lot going on in this short video, and I'm far from reaching any conclusions.
A Google search turns up a few hints. A site called Subverted Nation, for one, argues that
to your conscious mind, it all sounds just as silly as it's presented. The problem is that your subconscious mind only sees things in a literal sense. It does not have the ability to reason, and it is completely unable to use any logic whatsoever. So, when you are told to visualize these problems simply fading away, and replacing the imagery with something soft and sweet, this is exactly what your subconscious mind does.
It's very subtle, but this kind of neuro-linguistic programming works extremely well, and your enemy is seasoned in this practice in ways many of you are unable to imagine. These are the kinds of techniques taught in the secret mystery schools to all of their kind. This is the stuff you often miss, that is playing a vital role in their battle for your mind, bodies, and souls.
This writer also argues that "90% of the people on planet Earth do not know who this enemy really is, they do not recognize the "grabbler" as the Jew, and they are utterly clueless as to how serious of an issue this really is." I simply can't agree with that. I refuse to believe that anything close to such a majority of fellow Americans are clueless about such stereotypes about Jews. Could it be possible? Again, I'd like to hear from readers.
An acquaintance seemed to think it possible, though. He told me that "Most people watching the 'Grabbler' sketch don't see it with our [Jew-wise] eyes. Indeed, one could come up with a PC, philo-Semitic reading of the spoof: it reveals that all gentiles have anti-Semitic fantasies and thus are in need of sensitivity re-education." If he's right about this reading, then we're in deeper trouble than I had realized.
In closing, let me proffer one last hypothesis for the Jewish medium known as television for offering negative but fairly accurate depictions of Jews: Could these Jews be crying out to get caught? Naaaaawwww.
Edmund Connelly (email him) is a freelance writer, academic, and expert on the cinema arts. He has previously written for The Occidental Quarterly.
Permanent Link:http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Connelly-Grabblers.html
Edmund Connelly
Jews Mocking the Tribe?
For instance, our goyische "expert" tells her audience to
Imagine my money-related stress as the most disgusting terrifying creature I can think of. I'd like to imagine an ugly, greasy little creature with a hooked nose and oily black hair. I call him the Grabbler because he's a greedy little monster who wants to grabble up all your money. Now think of all the problems. He invented interest rates like the ones on your credit card. He's taking the jobs because Grabblers only hire their own kind."
That's hitting a little too close to home, isn't it, messieurs Madoff, Blankfein and Soros?
Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman Sachs
The next part clearly mocks goyim for our penchant of sticking our heads in the sand rather than face up to real problems. Better, it mocks us because rather than face our problems and deal with them, we resort to puerile tactics such as shifting our focus to happy, sappy things. Like, say, rather than dealing with the fact that a gang of Black punks has just knifed your neighbor's 16-year-old, you light candles, hug each other and visualize a world filled with nothing but love. Goyim can be really, really stupid.
In the case of this video, our expert beseeches us to imagine yourself in a peaceful field full of lilies. Meanwhile, the banner at the bottom of the screen reinforces this: "Picture Yourself In A Quiet Space Free Of Grabblers, Such As A Field Or A Church."
Get it? A church is where goyim go.
The expert than asks us to expunge idea that grabblers are scheming or trying to rob you. The power of positive thinking. How utterly stupid. But of course a grabbler by nature schemes and tries to rob people. You've just imagined away any defense from these grabblers. I guess that's funny to some people.
Therapist Christine moves next to "Blabblers," "people who love to argue and complain in a nasal voices. They're always lurking like rats." Here's the image:
The first thing that came to my mind when hearing the world "blabbler" was an image of Barbra Streisand who is affectionately known as "Babs."
The mock interview ends with host Haggerty plugging guest Christine Eckard's latest book. We then get a close-up of the title: The Solution: Kill all the Grabblers.
So our expert with the German-American sounding name, Christine Eckard, has genocide in her eyes, quite appropriate for anyone with German blood. Ha ha ha.
As I've said, there is a lot going on in this short video, and I'm far from reaching any conclusions.
A Google search turns up a few hints. A site called Subverted Nation, for one, argues that
to your conscious mind, it all sounds just as silly as it's presented. The problem is that your subconscious mind only sees things in a literal sense. It does not have the ability to reason, and it is completely unable to use any logic whatsoever. So, when you are told to visualize these problems simply fading away, and replacing the imagery with something soft and sweet, this is exactly what your subconscious mind does.
It's very subtle, but this kind of neuro-linguistic programming works extremely well, and your enemy is seasoned in this practice in ways many of you are unable to imagine. These are the kinds of techniques taught in the secret mystery schools to all of their kind. This is the stuff you often miss, that is playing a vital role in their battle for your mind, bodies, and souls.
This writer also argues that "90% of the people on planet Earth do not know who this enemy really is, they do not recognize the "grabbler" as the Jew, and they are utterly clueless as to how serious of an issue this really is." I simply can't agree with that. I refuse to believe that anything close to such a majority of fellow Americans are clueless about such stereotypes about Jews. Could it be possible? Again, I'd like to hear from readers.
An acquaintance seemed to think it possible, though. He told me that "Most people watching the 'Grabbler' sketch don't see it with our [Jew-wise] eyes. Indeed, one could come up with a PC, philo-Semitic reading of the spoof: it reveals that all gentiles have anti-Semitic fantasies and thus are in need of sensitivity re-education." If he's right about this reading, then we're in deeper trouble than I had realized.
In closing, let me proffer one last hypothesis for the Jewish medium known as television for offering negative but fairly accurate depictions of Jews: Could these Jews be crying out to get caught? Naaaaawwww.
Edmund Connelly (email him) is a freelance writer, academic, and expert on the cinema arts. He has previously written for The Occidental Quarterly.
Permanent Link:http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Connelly-Grabblers.html
