Jan 13, 2010

Firm stand by Turkey forces Israel to apologize

 

January 13, 2010
 
 
ReportersNotebook memo: Perhaps the Quisling Arabs could learn a lesson.
 

BBC NEWS
Israel 'sorry' over Turkey snub

Israel has apologised to Turkey in an effort to defuse a row over the treatment of its envoy in Tel Aviv.

Israel's prime minister said he hoped this "would end the affair".

Ankara had threatened to withdraw the ambassador unless it received a formal apology from Israel by Wednesday evening.

The row began when the envoy was summoned to Israel's foreign ministry over a Turkish TV series portraying Israeli agents kidnapping babies.

Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon summoned Ambassador Oguz Celikkol to rebuke him over the fictional television series Valley of the Wolves, popular in Turkey.

Mr Ayalon ensured the ambassador was seated on a lower chair and removed the Turkish flag from the table.

Turkish President Abdullah Gul said the ambassador would "return on the first plane" on Thursday unless Israel issued a public apology.

In the letter of apology, Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "again expressed his concern over the cooling of the ties between Israel and Turkey" and instructed officials "to find ways to prevent this trend", according to a statement from his office.

The Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Turkey had received the apology it "wanted and expected in diplomatic terms."

But at a news conference he added that "Israel must put itself in order and must be more just and more on the side of peace in the region."

'Repeated provocation'

Footage of Mr Ayalon urging journalists to make clear the ambassador was seated on a low sofa, while the Israeli officials were in much higher chairs, has been widely broadcast by the Israeli media.

He is also heard pointing out in Hebrew that "there is only one flag" and "we are not smiling".

ANALYSIS 
Jonathan Head, BBC News, Istanbul

The diplomatic stunt had the potential to escalate into a serious breach between Israel and Turkey.

Clear splits have emerged within Israel's coalition government over how to handle the Turkish government, which has become an increasingly strident critic of Israel at the same time as it has moved closer to Iran and Syria.

It is less clear what Turkey's long-term aims are with Israel, for decades a close military and trading partner, but the governing party has said it no longer sees its relationship with Israel as a priority.

"In terms of the diplomatic tactics available, this was the minimum that was warranted given the repeated provocation by political and other players in Turkey," he said, according to Reuters.

One Israeli newspaper marked the height difference in a photo, and captioned it "the height of humiliation".

Last October Israel complained over another Turkish series, which depicted Israeli soldiers killing Palestinians. In one clip, an Israeli soldier shoots dead a smiling young girl at close range.

The row comes ahead of a planned visit by Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak to Turkey on Sunday.

Turkey has long been an ally of Israel, but relations have deteriorated as Ankara has repeatedly criticised Israel for its offensive in Gaza a year ago.

Rights groups say about 1,400 Palestinians died during the operation, which Israel said had been aimed at ending rocket fire by Hamas.

Thirteen Israelis died during the violence.



--
NOW AN AMAZON KINDLE BOOK ON YOUR PC, iPHONE OR KINDLE DEVICE

Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides By Thomas Dalton

In this remarkable, balanced book, the author skillfully reviews and compares "traditional" and "revisionist" views on the "The Holocaust."

On one side is the traditional, orthodox view -- six million Jewish casualties, gas chambers, cremation ovens, mass graves, and thousands of witnesses. On the other is the view of a small band of skeptical writers and researchers, often unfairly labeled "deniers," who contend that the public has been gravely misled about this emotion-laden chapter of history.

The author establishes that the arguments and findings of revisionist scholars are substantive, and deserve serious consideration. He points out, for example, that even the eminent Jewish Holocaust scholar Raul Hilberg acknowledged that there was no budget, plan or order by Hitler for a World War II program to exterminate Europe's Jews.

This book is especially relevant right now, as "Holocaust deniers" are routinely and harshly punished for their "blasphemy," and as growing numbers of people regard the standard, Hollywoodized "Holocaust" narrative with mounting suspicion and distrust.

The author of this book, who writes under the pen name of "Thomas Dalton," is an American scholar who holds a doctoral degree from a major US university.

This is no peripheral debate between arcane views of some obscure aspect of twentieth century history. Instead, this is a clash with profound social-political implications regarding freedom of speech and press, the manipulation of public opinion, how our cultural life is shaped, and how power is wielded in our society.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_0_8?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=debating+the+holocaust&sprefix=DEBATING

Peace.

Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
.

__,_._,___

"Double Trouble"

 

From: <GiuseppeFurioso@aol.com>
Date: Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 2:53 PM
 
"Double Trouble"

Dear Friend,

There are more than a few parallels between the current claim of human responsibility for " global warming " and the Holocaust claim that the Third Reich had a deliberate policy to exterminate Jews that resulted in six million deaths. Below are some of the similarities that immediately come to mind.
 
1. Proponents of the Holocaust allege that it was a unique historical event; two thirds of Europe's Jews, some six million individuals where exterminated as result of a systematic program of genocide by the Third Reich. For their part, the believers in global warming insist that the earth has been experiencing a significant rise in temperature since the onset of the Industrial Revolution, which if not reversed, will trigger climate changes of such magnitude as to pose an unprecedented threat to all of mankind.
 
2. For both the Holocaust and global warming, it is white people who are responsible. In the case of the Holocaust, it is primarily the Germans who are to blame with descending degrees of culpability assigned to their allies, conquered subjects, neutrals and even their opponents in the Second World War. In the case of global warming it is the white people of the industrialized West; Americans and Europeans, who are the perpetrators of this impending global catastrophe.
 
3. Gas plays a pivotal role in both assertions; for the Holocaust it is hydrogen cyanide that is the principal homicidal agent, for global warming it is carbon dioxide and the other so-called "green house gasses " that are the lethal agents.
 
4. Ovens are part of the iconography of both the Holocaust and global warming . In the former, ovens ( crematoria ) were used to dispose of the victims of hydrogen cyanide, in the case of global warming , it is the unchecked flow of " green house " gasses into the atmosphere that will ultimately turn the entire earth into an oven.
 
5. For both, an insidious ideology contributed to an intellectual environment that made their respective depredations possible. It was the chronic anti-Semitism of the West that paved the road to Auschwitz; similarly it is the West's fanatical faith in predatory capitalism and industrial expansion that is responsible for the global warming that is leading mankind to disaster.
 
6.The "official " chroniclers of the Holocaust maintain that six million Jews were deliberately killed by the Nazis. To say that most died of "natural causes " will get you labeled a "Holocaust denier ". Similarly if one concedes that there is global warming, but that it is a consequence of natural factors rather than of man's actions, that is sufficient to get you labeled a " global warming denier ".
 
7. Both assertions have highly visible and hypocritical spokesman ; the Holocaust has Elie Wiesel and global warming has Al Gore. Both of these Jeremiahs have an almost cult like following and both have profited enormously from their respective promotions . The parallel goes even further in that both were the recipients of the highly politicized Nobel Peace Prize. There are even unsubstantiated rumors that they both have the same agent.
 
8. Both the promoters of the Holocaust and global warming insist that respective narratives have been settled and there is no need for further debate. They characterize those who take issue with their positions as " deniers " who are either misguided fools i.e. "flat earthers " or those who wish to resurrect the discredited ideologies of national socialism ( Holocaust ) or unbridled predatory capitalism (global warming ).
 
9. In spite of their impressive academic credentials, scholars who question the official narrative of both the holocaust and global warming, have been marginalized by the academic and political establishment and denied access to academic forums and journals. In the case of so-called Holocaust deniers, publishing their points of view has been criminalized in at least eleven so-called democratic countries. Although not a crime in the United States, any public figure or academic who publicly expresses skepticism of the Holocaust will find his career in ruins and possibly his travel plans as well if his destination is the Federal Republic of Germany where a jail cell would await him. Although not so draconian ( yet ), those who challenge the assertions of global warming are becoming increasingly subject to societal sanctions and vilification by both the media and the political leadership.
 
10. The purveyors of both the Holocaust and global warming insist that their respective " deniers " are motivated largely by a right wing political agenda. In the case of the Holocaust " deniers " this agenda is racial supremacy and in the case of the global warming deniers it is corporate greed.
 
11. The promoters of the official narratives of both the Holocaust and global warming use the religiously freighted term "denial" to demonize those who disagree with their position .
 
12. For both assertions the victim is totally innocent; in the case of the Holocaust it is the Jews, the self-described "chosen children of God " ; for global warming it is " Mother Earth ".
 
13. Many Holocaust revisionists are not really " deniers " but instead scholars who question the uniqueness of the Holocaust by pointing out that National Socialism's ideological opposite, Communism, was responsible for exterminating a far greater number of human beings during its historically documented reign of terror. Similarly, many climate scientists, while receptive to the consequences of global warming, point out that geologic record shows that "global cooling" , even by a few degrees, presents a far greater threat to human existence.
 
14. Finally, in a disingenuous effort to prove their case , the court historians of the Holocaust are forever showing film footage of the horrific conditions the Allied Armies encountered in the concentration camps within the borders of Germany proper e.g. Dachau, Bergen-Belsen etc. even though virtually all Holocaust historians now agree that the so-called "death camps "of the " final solution" were located exclusively in occupied Poland e.g. Auschwitz, Treblinka etc. Furthermore, the public is exposed to a continuous parade of elderly Holocaust survivors who recount their gut wrenching ordeals at the hands of the Third Reich on the talk show circuit and in a veritable blizzard of unsubstantiated personal memoirs and testimonies.
         
Similarly the " global warmers " are forever trotting out stock footage of melting glaciers, parched desert landscapes and floods of biblical proportions in an effort to substantiate their dire predictions. Mercifully however, no polar bears have been asked to tell their story on Oprah nor have they penned any memoirs for Steven Spielberg to turn into a movie!

Peace.
--joe
GiuseppeFurioso@aol.com

--
NOW AN AMAZON KINDLE BOOK ON YOUR PC, iPHONE OR KINDLE DEVICE

Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides By Thomas Dalton

In this remarkable, balanced book, the author skillfully reviews and compares "traditional" and "revisionist" views on the "The Holocaust."

On one side is the traditional, orthodox view -- six million Jewish casualties, gas chambers, cremation ovens, mass graves, and thousands of witnesses. On the other is the view of a small band of skeptical writers and researchers, often unfairly labeled "deniers," who contend that the public has been gravely misled about this emotion-laden chapter of history.

The author establishes that the arguments and findings of revisionist scholars are substantive, and deserve serious consideration. He points out, for example, that even the eminent Jewish Holocaust scholar Raul Hilberg acknowledged that there was no budget, plan or order by Hitler for a World War II program to exterminate Europe's Jews.

This book is especially relevant right now, as "Holocaust deniers" are routinely and harshly punished for their "blasphemy," and as growing numbers of people regard the standard, Hollywoodized "Holocaust" narrative with mounting suspicion and distrust.

The author of this book, who writes under the pen name of "Thomas Dalton," is an American scholar who holds a doctoral degree from a major US university.

This is no peripheral debate between arcane views of some obscure aspect of twentieth century history. Instead, this is a clash with profound social-political implications regarding freedom of speech and press, the manipulation of public opinion, how our cultural life is shaped, and how power is wielded in our society.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_0_8?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=debating+the+holocaust&sprefix=DEBATING

Peace.

Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com



__._,_.___
.

__,_._,___

Tom Sunic, "Race and Religion: Awkward Friends of the White Man," Part II, The Occidental Observer, Jan 13

 

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Sunic-RaceReligionII.html#TS


Race and Religion: Awkward Friends of the White Man, Part II 

Tom Sunic 

January 13, 2010 

A non-White immigrant residing in Europe or America must be bewildered, bedeviled and bemused by the spectacle offered by his White hosts. On the one hand he must be scared to death of those unpredictable, self-assured, conceited White males and their attractive White women who are capable of walking on the moon and curing plague in his jungle or his desert. On the other, he gleefully rejoices when he hears stories of endless religious and ideological conflicts amidst his White hosts. The pristine, pastoral and puerile picture of the White race, so dearly longed for by modern White nationalists, is daily belied by permanent religious bickering, jealousy and character smearing within the White rank and file. Add to that murderous intra-White wars that have rocked Europe and America for centuries, one wonders whether the proverbial and much vaunted Aryan, Promethean, and Faustian man, is worthy of a better future.

For the Greater Glory of God

Surely, the White man saved Greco-Roman Europe from the Levantine Hannibal's incursion, which nearly resulted in a catastrophe in 216 b.c. at Cannae, in southern Italy. The White man also stopped Attila's Hunic hordes on the Catalaunian Fields in France in 451 a.d. The grandfather of Charlemagne, Charles Martel, defeated Arab predators near Tours, in France in 732. One thousand years later in 1717, a short and slim Italo-French Catholic hero, Prince Eugene of Savoy, finally removed the Islamic threat from the Balkans.

But the unparalleled White will to power, couched later on in Christian millenarianism, had also prompted large crusades against "infidels." Their commander in chief, the pious Godfrey de Bouillondid not have pangs of consciousness after his knights had put to the sword thousands of Muslim civilians in captured Jerusalem, in 1099 a.d.  All was well meant for the greater glory of Yahweh! 

The power of the newly discovered universal religion and the expectancy of the "end of history," later to be followed by bizarre beliefs in "global democracy," often eclipsed racial awareness among Whites. As a rule, when White princes ran out of Muslim or Jewish infidels — they began whacking each other in the name of their Semitic deities or latter day democracies. The  6'4" tall Charlemagne, in the name of his anticipated Christian bliss, went on the killing spree against his fellow pagan Germans. In 782 a.d. he decapitated several thousand of the finest crop of Nordic Saxons, thereby earning himself a saintly name of the "butcher of the Saxons" (Sachsenschlächter).

And on and on the story goes with true Christian or true democracy believers. No Jews, no Arabs, no communists have done so much damage to the White gene pool as Whites themselves. The Thirty Years War (1617–1647) fought amidst European Christians with utmost savagery, wiped out two thirds of the finest German racial stock, over 6 million people. The crazed papist Croatian mercenaries, under Wallenstein's command, considered it a Royal and Catholic duty to kill off Lutherans, a dark period so well described by the great German poet and dramatist Friedrich Schiller. Even today in Europe the words "Croat years" ("Kroatenjahre") are associated with the years of hunger and pestilence.

Nor did Oliver Cromwell's troops — his Ironsides — during the English civil war, fare much better. Surely, as brave Puritans they did not drink, they did not whore, they did not gamble — they only specialized in skinning Irish Catholic peasants alive.  Not only did their chief, the Nordic looking fanatic Cromwell consider himself more Jewish than the Jews — he actually brought them back from continental Europe, with far-reaching consequence both for England andAmerica.

A slim, intelligent, Nordic looking, yet emotionally unstable manic depressive, William Sherman, burnt down Atlanta in 1864 — probably in the hopes of fostering a better brand of democracy for the South. We may also probe some day into the paleocortex of the Nordic skull of an airborne Midwest Christian ex-choir boy, who joyfully dropped fire bombs on German civilians during WWII. The results may not be too difficult to detect considering that the same Biblical mindset was reenacted in 2002 in Iraq by G. W. Bush and his advisors enraptured by Talmudic tales of "weapons of mass destruction."  Biblical or liberal-democratic crimes, when couched in political choseness and theological messianism are perfect tools for a perfectly good consciousness.

Many European White nationalists are dazed at good looking Nordic men and women from the Bible Belt raving, ranting and dancing on TV in trance to Christian-Zionist tunes. Equally stunned are American White nationalists when they observe blood-stained victimhood quarrels pitting Irish against English nationalists, Serb against Croat nationalists, Ukrainian against Russian nationalists, Walloon against Flemish nationalists, Polish against German nationalists, and so on and on. 

The Faith or the Sacred?

No subject is so dangerous to address among White nationalists as the Christian religion. It is commendable to lambast Muslims, who are on the respectable hit-parade of the Axis of Evil. Jews also come in handy in a wholesale package of evil, which needs to be expiated — at least occasionally. But any critical examination of Judeo-Christian intolerance is viewed with suspicion and usually attributed to distinct groups of White people, such as agnostics or modern day self-proclaimed pagans.

Why did the White man accept the Semitic spiritual baggage of Christianity even though it did not quite fit with his racial-spiritual endowments? The unavoidable racialist thinker Hans Günther — a man of staggering erudition and knowledgeable not only of the laws of heredity, but also of comparative religions — reminds us that the submissive and slavish relation of man to God is especially characteristic of Semitic peoples. In his important little book, The Religious Attitudes of the Indo-Europeans, he teaches us about the main aspects of racial psychology of old Europeans.  We also learn that Yahweh is a merciless totalitarian god who must be revered — and feared.  

Ancient Europeans did not believe in any kind of salvation. They believed in inexorable destiny. Gods were their friends and enemies, as seen in ancientGreece and Rome. Among old Europeans the notion of polarity between Heaven and Earth, between soul and body, i.e., dualism of any kind, was nonexistent. Man was part of an organic whole, embedded in his tribe and race, and tolerant of others' religious ideas:   

Mutual tolerance of religious forms is a distinctive feature of the Indo-European. The memorial stones in the Roman-Teutonic frontier region reveal through their inscriptions that the Roman frontier troops and settlers not only honoured their own Gods, but also respected the local deity of the Teutons, the genius huius loci.  (p.36) 

The messianic, chiliastic, or "communistic" mindset was unknown among ancient Europeans. They could not care less which gods other races, other tribes or other peoples believed in. Wars that they fought against the adversary were bloody, but they did not have the goal of converting the adversary and imposing on him the beliefs contrary to his racial heritage. Homer's epic the Iliad is the best example. The self-serving, yet truly racist liberal-communistic endeavour, to wage "final and just war" in order to "make the world safe for democracy," was something inconceivable for ancient Europeans. 

Zeal to convert and intolerance have always remained alien to every aspect of Indo-European religiosity. In this is revealed the Nordic sense of distance between one man and another, modesty which proscribes intrusion upon the spiritual domains of other men. One cannot imagine a true Hellene preaching his religious ideas to a non-Hellene. (p.36) 

A German-British racialist author of the early 20th century, Houston Stewart Chamberlain in his The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century writes that"a final judgment shows the intellectual renaissance to be the work of Race in opposition to the universal Church which knows no Race (p. 326). Unlike Christianity, which preaches individual salvation, for ancient Europeans life can only have a meaning within the in-group — their tribe, theirpolis, or their civitas. Outside those social structures, life means nothing.     

In the 1st century, words of far-reaching consequence for all Whites were pronounced by a Jewish heretic, the Apostle St. Paul, to the people of Galatia, an area in Asia Minor once populated by the Gauls (i.e., Celts). Galatia was then well underway to become a case study of multicultural debauchery — similar to today's Los Angeles:  "You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ JesusIf you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." (Galatians 3:28).  

Christianity became thus a Universalist religion with a special mission to transform the Other into the Same. The seeds of egalitarianism — albeit on the religious, not yet on the secular level — were sown. The pagan notion of the mystical sacred was gradually being displaced by the dogmatic notion of one omnipotent faith:

Yahweh in the Bible is not just the only and unique god who wields power. He is only and unique in the sense of his Absolute Otherness. He is only and unique in his own kind — that is to say he is the Absolute Other away from this world. The essence of biblical monotheism is its constitutive dualism …. Where paganism establishes bridges and links, the monotheism of the Bible creates fractures, ruptures, and forbids anybody to span them. Yahweh forbids mixtures between Heaven and Earth, between Man and the Divine, between humans and other living beings, between Israel and the "nations."  (Alain de Benoist, "Sacré païen et désacralisation judéo-chrétienne" in Quelle religion pour l'Europe?[Which Religion for Europe?]1990, pp 30-31, my trans.)

Although Christian Churches never publicly endorsed racial miscegenation, they did not endorse racial segregation either. This was true for the Catholic Church and its flock, as observed by the early French sociologist and racialist Gustave Le Bon. Consequently, Catholic Spaniards of White racial stock in Latin America could not halt decadence and debauchery in their new homelands as WASPs in North America did — at least prior to the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Naturally, it is not only in politics that decadence of the Latin race, which inhabits the south of America, manifests itself. It is in all elements of its civilization. If they were reduced to themselves, these unhappy republics would return to barbarism. All industry, all commerce is in the hands of foreigners, English, Americans and Germans. Valparaiso has become an English town. Nothing would remain of Chile if its foreigners were removed. (p. 86). Gustave Le Bon,  Lois psychologiques de l'évolution des peuples, 1895, my trans.).

Later, in 1938, in light of eugenic and racial laws adopted not only in Germanyand Italy, but also in other European countries and many states in America, Pope Pius IX made his famous statement: "It is forgotten that mankind is one large and overwhelming Catholic race." This statement was to become part of his planned encyclical under the name "The unity of the human race."

"The unity of the human race", as noble as these words may sound, is a highly abstract concept. On a secular level communist and liberal intellectuals constantly toy with it — in order to suppress real tribes, real nations, real peoples and their real racial uniqueness.  Even if this white race, constantly defamed as "wicked", "racist" , "bigoted" and "fascist," disappeared from the face of the earth, non-White immigrants know that they would soon have to climb back onto their native tree or return to their despotic cave.

To be continued.

Tom Sunic (http://www.tomsunic.info;  http://doctorsunic.netfirms.com) is author, translator, former US professor in political science and a former Croatian diplomat. He is the author of Homo americanus: Child of the Postmodern Age (2007). His new book of essays, Postmortem Report: Cultural Examinations from Postmodernity, prefaced by Kevin MacDonald, will soon be released.  Email him.

Permanent link: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Sunic-RaceReligionII.html




--
NOW AN AMAZON KINDLE BOOK ON YOUR PC, iPHONE OR KINDLE DEVICE

Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides By Thomas Dalton

In this remarkable, balanced book, the author skillfully reviews and compares "traditional" and "revisionist" views on the "The Holocaust."

On one side is the traditional, orthodox view -- six million Jewish casualties, gas chambers, cremation ovens, mass graves, and thousands of witnesses. On the other is the view of a small band of skeptical writers and researchers, often unfairly labeled "deniers," who contend that the public has been gravely misled about this emotion-laden chapter of history.

The author establishes that the arguments and findings of revisionist scholars are substantive, and deserve serious consideration. He points out, for example, that even the eminent Jewish Holocaust scholar Raul Hilberg acknowledged that there was no budget, plan or order by Hitler for a World War II program to exterminate Europe's Jews.

This book is especially relevant right now, as "Holocaust deniers" are routinely and harshly punished for their "blasphemy," and as growing numbers of people regard the standard, Hollywoodized "Holocaust" narrative with mounting suspicion and distrust.

The author of this book, who writes under the pen name of "Thomas Dalton," is an American scholar who holds a doctoral degree from a major US university.

This is no peripheral debate between arcane views of some obscure aspect of twentieth century history. Instead, this is a clash with profound social-political implications regarding freedom of speech and press, the manipulation of public opinion, how our cultural life is shaped, and how power is wielded in our society.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_0_8?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=debating+the+holocaust&sprefix=DEBATING

Peace.

Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
.

__,_._,___

Dead upto 500,000 from Tuesday's quake in Haiti.

 


------------------------------
-----------------------------------
 CBS News: Breaking News Alert  Jan. 13, 2010
------------------------------
-----------------------------------

Haitian officials are estimating the dead at between 100,000 and 500,000 from Tuesday's quake in Haiti.


Read full story:
http://ct.cbsnews.com/clicks?t=521042650-5c8ffed3e191bfd481dc8a25fd931a92-bf&brand=CBSNEWS&s=5


Complete coverage of quake:
http://ct.cbsnews.com/clicks?t=521042651-5c8ffed3e191bfd481dc8a25fd931a92-bf&brand=CBSNEWS&s=5


Peace.

Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
.

__,_._,___

Gilad Atzmon takes on Yehuda Bauer

 


Debunking Antisemitism Studies
And Yehuda Bauer In Particular Yad Va Shame On You!
By Gilad Atzmon  12-17-9

Holocaust studies is an emerging pseudo intellectual, academic trend. It basically allows rabid Zionists to elevate their discussions on 'what is really wrong with the goyim' into a university qualification. I recently learned about the 'Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Antisemitism'. I also learned about a similar institute at the University of London.

Antisemitism Studies has the potential to be a valuable field of research if it could, for example, elaborate and scrutinize Jewish culture and history in an attempt to grasp what it is that evokes anti Jewish feeling. It could try to establish if there is a Jewish ideological, political or cultural pattern that may be amended. In fact early Zionists(1) tried to dwell on the subject. They tried to diagnose the 'cause' of Antisemitsm so that they might learn why it invariably and repeatedly matured into host cultures regarding Jews as a parasitic force. Early Zionists insisted that Aliya would bring about a new productive, ethical and civilized new Jew.

However, contemporary Antisemitism scholars have a very different agenda in mind. They build their research on the axiom that Jews are categorically innocent. They then try to understand why the Goyim behave immorally and even murderously.

But here is a clear embarrassing catch: considering humanity is comprised of Goyim, Antisemitism scholars who attempt to grasp 'what is wrong with the Goyim' actually ask 'what is wrong with humanity?' This is in fact a legitimate question, unless we leave one conspicuous group out. As things stand, in the new Judeo-centric 'academic' field namely 'Antisemitism studies', a Zionist is there to review the Goy as a pathological case. This is slightly odd to say the least. It is even peculiar that such departments exist in Yale and at a London University. However, since academic institutes thrive on corporate donations and other funding sources, we can no longer expect the academic world to lead intellectual discourse or even commit itself to any form of ethical integrity.

One of the leading scholars of Antisemitim and the Holocaust is Professor Yehuda Bauer of Jerusalem University and a director at Yad Vashem, the Israeli Holocaust Museum. Prof. Bauer is a world expert in the hatred and destruction of 'one people,' namely the chosen. I have recently found this video and I would urge every humanist to watch it. It is a lecture about the origin of Antisemitism given by Professor Bauer in Hawaii in 2005.

Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqo9HyFMGFI&feature=player_embedded - t=1003

(Bauer's talk starts around 16 minutes and 30 seconds)

Bauer initially comes across as a charming and open minded person. He even makes some crucial observations. For the first twenty minutes it is possible to believe that one is witnessing a genuine authentic intellectual.

'Antisemitism', says Bauer, is a 'wrong term' there is no such animal for there 'are no Semites'. For Bauer there are no Semitic people and he acknowledges that the Jews are not exactly a homogenous racial group anyway. He agrees that the ideology that was brought to life by Wilhelm Marr in the late 19th century, is confusing. Antisemitism is nothing but 'anti Jewish' feelings or practice.

Where does Antisemitism start? Interestingly enough, Bauer goes back to the Book of Esther(2). He suggests it is an "allegory of fear of annihilation of the Diaspora Jew". Esther, according to Bauer, is a tale of Jewish fear of their surrounding environment. "The origin of anti Jewishness is the fact that Jewish civilization and culture is different to its surroundings". I myself would take it further and argue that the Book of Esther is where Jewish Lobbying and Jewish power matures into a vivid cultural paradigm. The moral of the story is rather clear. If Jews want to survive, they better infiltrate the corridors of power. With Esther in mind, AIPAC, Lord Levy and the Labour Friends of Israel look like an embodiment of a deep Biblical and cultural ideology.

Yet, Bauer, the exemplary Judeo-centric intellectual, fails to enlighten us on the specific ways in which Jewish civilization and culture is different. After all, if Antisemitism is a 'unique' form of hatred, then Jews must be 'uniquely' different from all the other 'minorities' that have endured prejudice across the centuries. I would expect an Antisemitism scholar to elaborate on this crucial issue and suggest some answers. Bauer fails to do so. The reason is simple. Bauer is a Zionist and Zionism is a solution for the Diaspora Jews. If you do not want to be different, just come home and dwell with us on Palestinian stolen land.

Bauer then moves on and asks: what are the types of crisis that lead towards Antisemitism? Christian Antisemitism is not too problematic to grasp. "Christianity had to differentiate itself from Judaism" says Bauer. However, Christianity is not a major problem. "Christianity doesn't like Jews, it discriminates against Jews yet due to its theology, it prevents genocide." In fact, according to Bauer, the genocidal tendency in Europe emerged with the secularization of Christian communities. One is left with Christian Antisemitism but a version lacking the theology that curtails murderous inclinations. Again, in Bauer's trivial world, the Jews are innocent. It is always the Goyim who fail morally and ethically.

Racism wasn't born in 19th century Europe, says Bauer, "there is some evidence of racism in the Iberian Peninsula from the 15th century". Someone better remind Bauer that, as far as Judaism is concerned, he can trace evidence of racism in every religious source whether it is the Torah or the Talmud.

"Racism turned against the Jews" says Bauer "because we are a different race" because we are the "paradigmatic Other". But then contradicting himself, he also insists on dismantling the notion of race in general. "There is no such thing as race, humanity comes from Africa, we are all Africans." Let's for a second agree with Bauer that race is a "pseudo scientific concept". Yet, the problem with race is not the attempt to divide the world into racial groups or trace people's anthropological origins. Race becomes a problematic issue when racism is introduced. Racism is the belief that one group of people is better than another. Devastatingly enough Judaism and Zionism are both saturated with racism. Bauer is right to argue that Jews are not a race, but Jewish ideology, both secular and religious, is racist and supremacist to the bone.

'The Israeli Palestine conflict, how important is it'? 'Very important' says Bauer. Would a resolution of the Israeli Palestinian conflict decrease Antisemitism? Yes, concludes Bauer, yet, Antisemitism won't disappear. Bauer is probably correct. According to his philosophy Antisemitsm is the product of Jewish otherness and this fact may never change. As long as Jews maintain their chosen tribal identity, they will always preserve their 'difference'.

Bauer is rather concerned with the "Antisemitism of the chattering classes, the media, intelligentsia, universities, the doctors". He contends that we have seen a "sudden rise 'of it' along with the 2nd Intifada". Obviously, the chances of Bauer winning an argument in intellectual circles, is rather limited. However, it is pretty reasonable that thinkers within the media, intelligentsia and academic circles would oppose the Jewish state, especially when evidence of Israeli genocidal barbarism is mounting.

It takes a few good minutes before Bauer, the proud owner of a rabid Zionist mind, shows his real colours. 'Is it okay to criticize Israel'? Yes, for sure, says Bauer. The Israeli press are the first to criticize Israeli politics. Condemnation of Israel is not Antisemitic unless one describes Israel as a 'Nazi state'. This is exactly where Bauer relinquishes his last drop of intellectual integrity. Are there any rules that we must employ when criticising the 'Jewish State'? Is there any intellectual obligation that we have to take into consideration when referring to a racist Jew-only, expansionist, murderous state? Surely, the 45% of Europeans who regard Israel as an exterminatory state do so for a reason. Israel and the Zionists better learn to take responsibility for their actions. They may then understand why almost half of the Europeans equate them with Nazis.

Bauer says political criticism is legitimate, yet when you turn the attack on the people and the state, you then shift into "genocidal territory". The truth of the matter is very simple. Within the Palestinian and anti Zionist discourse no one I can think of suggests annihilating any Jews. Many of us argue that the Jewish state doesn't have the right to exist at the expense of other people. Yet, we do not talk of or suggest the 'extermination' of anyone. We are talking about a change of political setting that will mature into a "state of its people". We believe in equal rights. We believe in the Palestinian right of return. If Jews want to form a Jew-only state, they should find a 'desert island' to do so, or even better a different planet.

How do you fight Antisemitism? "The ADL and the AJC are doing excellent work", says Bauer. But what about a hypothetical case of rising Antisemitism in a different territory, for instance the USSR? Could the ADL influence the Soviet Union? Bauer thinks not but Jews could make an impact "together with non Jews". Things changed in the Soviet Union because the USA mounted pressure on the USSR. "The Jews have to find allies and the allies will come when they understand that Antisemitism just starts with the Jews".

In some very simple words Bauer explains the current Zionist ideology. Jews must find new allies. They must bond with emerging powers. It is almost amusing that Bauer, an expert on Antisemitism, fails to see that this is exactly the root cause of resentment to Jewish power. This endless seeking of influence and domination is exactly where Jews buy enemies.

Bauer ends his talk with a fierce attack on 'radical Islam'. "Radical Islam is not just Antisemitic, it is Antisemitic in a genocidal way." He then reads the famous Hamas Charter (3). He brings to life the quotes about Jewish Power, world domination and so on. Some of the quotes are facts. Others sentences are accepted views. Some ideas are slightly over the top. But there is one thing Bauer fails to do: provide a single genocidal quote.

Bizarrely enough Bauer ends his talk saying "since 1982 I have tried to convince the Israeli government to find allies to fight that thing. Only now things start to happen." In fact Yehuda Bauer himself proves that the Hamas Charter is a genuine description of Jewish tribal activism. The 'seeking allies' which Bauer pushes for is exactly what the Hamas Charter refers to in the following lines:

"They took advantage of key elements in unfolding events, and accumulated a huge and influential material wealth which they put to the service of implementing their (Zionist) dream" (Hamas Charter 1988)

Is not finding 'new allies' a reference to seeking influence via media and political movements? The Hamas Charter describes it eloquently indeed:

"..take over control of the world media such as news agencies, the press, publication houses, broadcasting and the like. [They also used this] wealth to stir revolutions in various parts of the globe in order to fulfill their interests and pick the fruits." (Hamas Charter 1988)

Considering the lecture was given in 2005, four years into the 'war against terror', and 2 years into the Iraq war where American and British soldiers ended up fighting Zionist wars, combating the enemies of Israel, I think that by now we all have a glimpse of understanding of what Prof. Bauer refers to when he talks about 'allies'.

Prof. Yehuda Bauer is an academic adviser to the Israeli Holocaust Museum Yad Vashem. Maybe, Bauer should reflect on the fact that the Holocaust Institute he represents is located on Mt. Herzl on the lands of the Palestinian village of Ein Karem, 1,400 meters south of the Palestinian village of Deir Yassin, the scene of a Jewish atrocity against the native Palestinians. If Bauer contemplates this fact alone he will understand why as many as 37.4% of Europeans would find it hard to buy an old car from him, let alone his disingenuous Judeo-centric, pseudo academic ranting. (4)


***

(1) Here are a few examples of Early Zionists take on Antisemitism:
Theodor Herzl, Max Nordau, Ze'ev Jabotinsky

(2) http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/purim-special-from-esther-to-aipac-by-gilad-atzmon.html

(3)"The enemies have been scheming for a long time, and they have consolidated their schemes, in order to achieve what they have achieved. They took advantage of key elements in unfolding events, and accumulated a huge and influential material wealth which they put to the service of implementing their dream. This wealth [permitted them to] take over control of the world media such as news agencies, the press, publication houses, broadcasting and the like. [They also used this] wealth to stir revolutions in various parts of the globe in order to fulfill their interests and pick the fruits. They stood behind the French and the Communist Revolutions and behind most of the revolutions we hear about here and there. They also used the money to establish clandestine organizations which are spreading around the world, in order to destroy societies and carry out Zionist interests. Such organizations are: the Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, Lions Clubs, B'nai B'rith and the like. All of them are destructive spying organizations. They also used the money to take over control of the Imperialist states and made them colonize many countries in order to exploit the wealth of those countries and spread their corruption therein. As regards local and world wars, it has come to pass and no one objects, that they stood behind World War I, so as to wipe out the Islamic Caliphate. They collected material gains and took control of many sources of wealth. They obtained the Balfour Declaration and established the League of Nations in order to rule the world by means of that organization. They also stood behind World War II, where they collected immense benefits from trading with war materials and prepared for the establishment of their state. They inspired the establishment of the United Nations and the Security Council to replace the League of Nations, in order to rule the world by their intermediary. (Hamas Charter Article 22http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/www.thejerusalem
fund.org/carryover/documents/charter.html)

(4) According to new research conducted by Bielefeld University "about 37.4% (Europeans) agree with the following statement: Considering Israel's policy, I can understand why people do not like Jews." (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3815828,00.html)



--
NOW AN AMAZON KINDLE BOOK ON YOUR PC, iPHONE OR KINDLE DEVICE

Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides By Thomas Dalton

In this remarkable, balanced book, the author skillfully reviews and compares "traditional" and "revisionist" views on the "The Holocaust."

On one side is the traditional, orthodox view -- six million Jewish casualties, gas chambers, cremation ovens, mass graves, and thousands of witnesses. On the other is the view of a small band of skeptical writers and researchers, often unfairly labeled "deniers," who contend that the public has been gravely misled about this emotion-laden chapter of history.

The author establishes that the arguments and findings of revisionist scholars are substantive, and deserve serious consideration. He points out, for example, that even the eminent Jewish Holocaust scholar Raul Hilberg acknowledged that there was no budget, plan or order by Hitler for a World War II program to exterminate Europe's Jews.

This book is especially relevant right now, as "Holocaust deniers" are routinely and harshly punished for their "blasphemy," and as growing numbers of people regard the standard, Hollywoodized "Holocaust" narrative with mounting suspicion and distrust.

The author of this book, who writes under the pen name of "Thomas Dalton," is an American scholar who holds a doctoral degree from a major US university.

This is no peripheral debate between arcane views of some obscure aspect of twentieth century history. Instead, this is a clash with profound social-political implications regarding freedom of speech and press, the manipulation of public opinion, how our cultural life is shaped, and how power is wielded in our society.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_0_8?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=debating+the+holocaust&sprefix=DEBATING

Peace.

Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
.

__,_._,___

Scheuer the Role-model

 

Jan. 10, 2010

Michael:

Thank you for circulating the remarks of Michael Scheuer (note the spelling) that Greg found. It would be helpful, especially to non-Americans, to recall just who he is and his past high post in the CIA. His remarks are explosive because in terms of rank and authority they may as well have been said by the Director of the CIA. Here is the Wikipedia description of him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Scheuer

Michael F. Scheuer is a former CIA employee. In his 22-year career, he served as the Chief of the Bin Laden Issue Station (aka "Alec Station"), from 1996 to 1999, the Osama bin Laden tracking unit at the Counterterrorist Center. He then worked again as Special Advisor to the Chief of the bin Laden unit from September 2001 to November 2004. Scheuer became a public figure after being outed as the anonymous author of the 2004 book Imperial Hubris, in which he criticized many of the common United States and Western world assumptions about the motives for Islamic terrorism, and put these into the context of greater Western-Islamic relations.

Scheuer left The Jamestown Foundation in February 2009 from a position as Senior Fellow. He claimed in an anti-war.com article that he was fired by the organization for his outspoken views on US-Israel relations.[1] Jamestown's current president, Glen Howard, has pejoratively likened Scheuer's views to those of congressman Ron Paul.[citation needed]

--AR 




--
NOW AN AMAZON KINDLE BOOK ON YOUR PC, iPHONE OR KINDLE DEVICE

Debating the Holocaust: A New Look at Both Sides By Thomas Dalton

In this remarkable, balanced book, the author skillfully reviews and compares "traditional" and "revisionist" views on the "The Holocaust."

On one side is the traditional, orthodox view -- six million Jewish casualties, gas chambers, cremation ovens, mass graves, and thousands of witnesses. On the other is the view of a small band of skeptical writers and researchers, often unfairly labeled "deniers," who contend that the public has been gravely misled about this emotion-laden chapter of history.

The author establishes that the arguments and findings of revisionist scholars are substantive, and deserve serious consideration. He points out, for example, that even the eminent Jewish Holocaust scholar Raul Hilberg acknowledged that there was no budget, plan or order by Hitler for a World War II program to exterminate Europe's Jews.

This book is especially relevant right now, as "Holocaust deniers" are routinely and harshly punished for their "blasphemy," and as growing numbers of people regard the standard, Hollywoodized "Holocaust" narrative with mounting suspicion and distrust.

The author of this book, who writes under the pen name of "Thomas Dalton," is an American scholar who holds a doctoral degree from a major US university.

This is no peripheral debate between arcane views of some obscure aspect of twentieth century history. Instead, this is a clash with profound social-political implications regarding freedom of speech and press, the manipulation of public opinion, how our cultural life is shaped, and how power is wielded in our society.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_0_8?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=debating+the+holocaust&sprefix=DEBATING

Peace.

Michael Santomauro
Editorial Director
Call anytime: 917-974-6367
ReporterNotebook@Gmail.com

__._,_.___
.

__,_._,___