by Israel Shamir – January 28, 2007
Publication of Jimmy Carter's Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid
is a great event for America and for all of us. It's not that Carter had said something we did not know about Palestine. Before Carter came, we knew
that the Zionists established a racist apartheid regime in the Holy Land where Jews have rights, and goyim have duties. Before Carter came we knew
a native Palestinian has no right to vote, move, work freely in his land, that he is locked up behind the twenty-foot wall. Before Carter came we knew
that the US support allowed the atrocities to occur and the apartheid regime to entrench. But we did not know that there are prominent Americans who would dare the wrath of organised Jewry and spell it out loud.
Why did President Carter do it? Why did he risk his peaceful old age and gently fading glory to endure an attack of Israel's Fifth Column as merciless as the Four Columns' onslaught on Gaza? He was moved by compassion, by this supreme Christian virtue of feeling together with the suffering and the oppressed. He saw the suffering of Palestine and he could not keep his quiet. He upheld a honourable American tradition: that of Mark Twain who condemned the US atrocities in Philippines, that of Henry Thoreau speaking against the Mexican War. This is a universal tradition, too: Multatuli unmasked the Dutch atrocities in Indonesia, Roger Casement did it to the Belgians in Congo, Radishchev bewept the fate of a Russian peasant. And their voices changed our world, though not immediately. Carter is not a radical; a man of hotter temper would call to terminate the infamy called «The Jewish State» altogether. Carter's message was soft and gentle; so soft and compassionate that only an arrogant and power-intoxicated won't be able to live with it. Others (including me) were more hard and explicit, but then the others weren't the US presidents.
Why now? The apartheid in Palestine was bad enough ten years ago to warrant his intervention, but this despondent helplessness we witness now is a new phenomenon. Hope ever kept alive up by Camp David, by peace with Egypt, by Madrid and Oslo conferences is dead. A year of severe blockade brought forth a confrontation between the Palestinian parties and the Jewish wet dream, an inter-Palestinian civil war, is about to come. The Holy Land is on the verge of collapse. President Carter is 82, and he is not afraid of anything. In this age, and at this stage of life, statesmen are likely to speak their mind, like the Malaysian PM Mohammad Mahathir did after his retirement. This is the time for unpalatable truth: the ideological and spiritual guidance of the West while dislodged from the hands of the Church, passed over to the usurpers of Zion. While they rule, Palestine has no chance.
Though most ordinary US Jews are sane and sensible, the decisions are made by super-rich, super-powerful, super-chauvinist Jews who are anything but. They are the power pushing for war. Carter wanted to stop the disaster in the Middle East, by convincing the sane and rebutting the arrogant. Thus the President joined the fracas, as the traditional WASP America tries to regain the lost ground and save the country they love from destruction. The WASPs, with all their immense property holdings, traditions and roots found themselves marginalised by the Jews with their dead hold on media and universities: indeed the spirit rules over matter. Baker-Hamilon
Iraq Study Group and Walt - Mearsheimer report
are the first salvos in this WASP Intifada. A Jewish American columnist (resident in Israel and writing for Israel’s Haaretz
) Burston correctly stated that “Carter's true intended target was the organized American Jewish community.” Carter pointed out the main reasons for apartheid in the Holy Land, says Burston:
* Jewish control of [the US] government: “It would be almost politically suicidal for members of Congress to espouse a balanced position between Israel and Palestine, to suggest that Israel comply with international law or to speak in defense of justice or human rights for Palestinians.»
* Jewish control of the [US] media: “What is even more difficult to comprehend is why the editorial pages of the major newspapers and magazines in the United States exercise similar self-restraint, quite contrary to private assessments expressed quite forcefully by their correspondents in the Holy Land.”
After Carter spoke, he was immediately counterattacked by organised Jewry. This was not a sight to miss. In my native Siberia, in its short and furious summer you may see swarm of gnats attack a horse, each tiny bloodsucker eager for his piece of action. In a while, the blinded and infuriated animal rushes headlong in mad sprint and soon finds its death in the bottomless moors. The Jews developed the same style of attack. It is never a single voice arguing the case, but always a mass attack from left and right, below and above, until the attacked one is beaten and broken and crawls away in disgrace.
Each attacker is as tiny and irrelevant as a single gnat, but as swarm they are formidable. Observe them separately: Dershowitz, an advocate of torture
and of hostage killing, an apprehended plagiarist
who never was elected to any position of authority and commands no respect, demands to debate the president. It is indeed beyond chutzpah; but Dershowitz is supported by other Jews in prime positions and his ridiculous demand is seconded by university and media until this thieving nonentity gets equal time on a TV channel to present “his case”. Another gnat is a Deborah Lipstadt, a nonentity
brought forth by the Washington Post
. Plenty of others are even smaller than these two, for instance 14 Jews who gave up their positions at Carter Center. If they would not keep media in their hands, they wouldn't be heard but by their spouses.
Their technique is quite simple. They switch the focus of argument onto the personality of their adversary. Thus, instead of discussing apartheid in Israel, we discuss Jimmy Carter, whether he is a bigot and antisemite (thus Foxman, a bad Jew) or he is not (Avnery, a good Jew). The correct answer is “irrelevant”: Carter’s love of Jews or lack of it has no bearing on the question of apartheid in Palestine. Likewise, if we discuss the situation in Bosnia or Kosovo, we do not go into our sentiments towards Serbs, Albanians or Croats. But Jews are different.
, General Wesley Clark said that rich Jews, the great donors of Washington politicians, push for war with Iran. Well, it can be discussed, maybe denied, but instead, they derail the discussion into another topic, whether Clark is an antisemite. Matthew Yglesias provides
the sources for the whole kosher hog, from comparison with The Protocols
, to inevitable quote from Foxman who says Clark had “bought into conspiratorial bigotry”. From this moment, Clark will stick to defending himself, and the guys will take care that his hands will be full. Here again, the correct answer is a polite shrug: who cares whether Clark is a bigot? Maybe he is also a paedophile and usurer, but this ad hominem has no bearing on what he said. And an accusation “you do not love Jews” is not much different from “You do not love your aunt”, and you probably have learned to live with it at the age of six.
A good book to accustom oneself to this sort of attack is Michael Bulgakov’s The Master and Margarita
: this marvellous book shows a Jewish critics’ swarm attack on a writer who dared to write about Christ. Indeed, whoever mentions Christ will experience it sooner or later.
I also tried the taste of swarm attack. During the Tsunami disaster in Thailand I discovered that the Jewish undertakers, Zaka, forced the Thais to delay mass burial of victims for a day or two, despite the real and immediate danger of epidemic diseases, in order to avoid a real calamity: holy Jewish bodies may be inadvertently buried together with the goyim. I was told so by the members of the Zaka team who were quite proud of their feat. I wrote about it (Tsunami in Gaza
). It was republished by a few sites. Then, a British Jew named Manfred Ropschitz began an ad hominem campaign – against me. Other Jews joined the fray, discussing whether I am a Jew, or a “Swedish-Russian Nazi antisemite”, as if it has any bearing on the tsunami story. Instead of shrugging it off, other supporters of Palestine switched to this piquant subject. They carried their discussion from The Times to their email lists, until eventually, another Jewish “antisionist” commented with deep satisfaction: “Shamir is marginalised and brought into disrepute”.
Ropschitz did not try to disprove the story, for the story was true. He wrote: “With an army of journalists crawling over the Tsunami story I'd expect to have heard such shocking news by now – if it's true. I am a journalist and I don't believe it.” No, gentlemen, you won’t hear a true story if it is not acceptable to Ropschitzes of this world. They will hunt you to the far-away corner of the world, and there are not many people who care to risk their well-planned attack. Indeed one should be a real kamikaze to enter this fight. The Ropschitzes, these quite ordinary Jews who fully identify with their community, are the key to the swarm attack. There are many Jewish media-lords, even more editors, but it is the Ropschitzes that clinch the party line. These willing executioners of our freedom, the foot-soldiers of the media lords, automatically defend “the Jews” i.e. the organised Jewish community at any price. Ordinary human beings of Jewish origin can be of any opinion. Likewise, ordinary Americans do not decide whether their country will attack Iran or not. But Bush and Cheney alone can’t fight Iraqi war, and the Jewish media lords would be powerless without their willing executioners of freedom.
The Gentile philosemites are even worse, noticed Eustace Mullins, the legendary American writer whose best-selling books (running into the millions) were never published or distributed by the mainstream. He wrote:
“It has long been common knowledge since the incorporation of the three [US] major national television networks that each of them was owned, operated and controlled by Jews. Now at last, or so it seemed, the Christians of America would have their own Christian television network on which they could observe the tenets of the Christian religion. Or so it seemed. And when the CBN began its daily broadcasting, what was its daily message? We must love the Jews. We must support the State of Israel in all its depredations and its immoral devastation of the Holy Christian Shrines in the Birthplace of Our Saviour. We must help the Jews, and we must, above all, avoid the greatest sin, the sin of 'anti-Semitism', whatever that is. Even the Jewish networks do not broadcast as blatantly pro-Jewish propaganda as the Christian Broadcasting Network.”
A man died this week in France, a real saint, who was known by affectionate appellation “Abbč Pierre”, a priest who fought with the Resistance, helped homeless, provided for the poor and was a great friend of Palestinians. In 1996 he was hounded almost to death after he expressed his support for another friend of Palestine, Roger Garaudy who wrote a book The Founding Myths of Israeli Politics
A victim of Jewish swarm attack, he went into seclusion to Italy and to Switzerland, deserted by the people he fought for. His sorry fate should be remembered by the French and bother their conscience. If the Maid of Orleans was executed by the British Occupation regime (though using French collaborationists) no such excuse is available for those who ostracised the Abbč Pierre: they just got frightened by the swarm attack.
This fear of Jewish swarm attacks already brought much sorrow to mankind. In 1930s, the famous American aviator Charles Lindbergh called the US to stay out of the coming war in Europe. He was attacked by the Jewish media as a Nazi and a Hitler sympathiser, was besmirched and “overnight Lindbergh went from cultural hero
to moral pariah”. Now again, the US is being pushed by the same forces into a new war, this time in the Middle East. Let us try and stop it by being fearless, for as a Jewish Hassid spiritual song hath it, “haikar lo lefahed bihlal”, the most important is not to be afraid at all. Carter brought us hope that there is an America the world can live with, a non-aggressive, democratic America, whose policies aren’t decided by the rich donors, but by the ordinary Americans who voted against the war, and who today gather in Washington calling to stop escalation.
Last updated 31/01/2007