Protocols of the Elders of Goyion

by Ariadna Theokopoulos

Monday, May 7th, 2012

 

I am not one easily duped by conspiracy theories like 9/11 “Truth” or “Jews control the major world powers,” but I am not a Zionist either. I consider myself an anti-zionist and a progressive endowed with clear-eyed objectivity. This is not a statement to propitiate the audience of an anti-zionist site but to indicate that a conspiracy detected by me should be taken seriously.

I call it The Protocols of the Elders of Goyion because I like the irony of the allusion: this one is real! Here are the facts:

I did not suspect Nelson Mandela (now 93) for being an anti-semite when he accused Israel of apartheid and claimed that “the problem of Palestine” began not in 1967 but in 1948, that the right of return of Palestinian refugees is the “major component” of the problem or when he harped on so-called similarities between Israel’s [alleged] and South Africa’s apartheid.

Why did he have me fooled? Because he is the legendary leader of South Africa’s anti-apartheid struggle and the recipient of awards for peace and justice, too many to list.

I did not suspect Desmond Tutu (now 82), another self-proclaimed apartheid connoisseur, for being an anti-semite when he also accused Israel of apartheid and went even further by attacking what he called “Jewish power” in the US (“People are scared in this country to say wrong is wrong because the Jewish lobby is powerful.”) and used anti-semitic slurs and insults like -

Jews think they have a monopoly on God,”

Jews have cornered the market on suffering.”

Why did he have me fooled? Because he is a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, recipient of the Albert Schweitzer Prize for Humanitarianism and the Ghandi Peace Prize and also an iconic figure in the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa.

I merely thought that these two men had their minds enfeebled by old age and that, like all African blacks, they see apartheid everywhere. I admit I had also given them some slack, as we Americans always do when it comes to blacks—it is called PC and I deplore it although I, too, am guilty of it.

I did, however, instantly recognize virulent anti-semitism in Gunther Grass (now 85) when he published his outrageous poem that attacked Israel in what amounted to a blood libel, claiming it threatens world peace and brazenly calling upon his government to stop delivery of German submarines that can be equipped with nuclear heads to Israel.

Why did I manage to nab him? Because unlike Mandela and Tutu he has no pigmentary shield and worse: he is German, a biological fact that his Nobel Prize for Literature and his various past activities in the peace movement cannot dilute. As they say, blood does tell.


From left: Hillel Schenker, Prof. Johan Galtung,
Dr. Hassan Dweik and Ziad AbuZayyad.

I also easily identified Prof. Johan Galtung (now 82) as an anti-semite when he espoused his belief in “Jewish power” controlling the media, by resorting to the crude tactic of counting Jews (“Six Jewish companies control 96% of the media”). It stands to reason that any Goy who identifies Jews in positions of power as “Jews” and counts them is an anti-semite. If a Jew or a even a Goy has that kind of curiosity there are trustworthy Jewish sites on the internet like “Jew or not Jew?” that count Jews without bias and bigotry.

He also said about the Protocols of the Elders of Zion that:

It is impossible to [read it] today without thinking of Goldman Sachs.

Most recently he went so far as to claim that the Mossad could have conceivably been connected to the Breivik attack in Norway.

He was exposed as an anti-semite by the Wiesenthal Center and even more ably by Ronald Lauder, President of the World Jewish Congress and, more importantly, the mogul of the cosmetic giant Estee Lauder—who better to paint the right face on anti-semitism?

Why was it easy for me to identify Galtung? Because, despite the much-vaunted Peace Research Institute in Oslo he set up as a cover in 1964, despite his much ballyhooed theories of conflict resolution, structural violence and his various contributions in several sciences, despite the various honors he received (like The Alternative Nobel Prize, what a laugh), his anti-semitism and desire to delegitimize Israel come through loud and clear in his statements, as does his anti-Americanism (after the fall of the Soviet Union he “predicted that the US will no longer be a functioning superpower”).

Last but not least, he is a Norwegian and I read on wikipedia that Norwegian anti-semitism goes back to the Middle Ages, proven by the fact the “Jews were mentioned unfavorably in the Icelandic Sagas,” likely among his childhood readings.

What do these men have in common, other than old age? It is a multi-national, multi-racial group and all are internationally respected. Two of them are Nobel Prize laureates. They might have hoped that their reputations would immunize them against being unmasked as anti-semites.

I am not one of those people who knock the Nobel Prize indiscriminately for being politicized. After all they do get it right so often, as can be seen in a few illustrious examples of Peace Prize laureats: Kissinger, Begin, Wiesel, Peres, Obama. Nevertheless I do not allow a prize named after the inventor of dynamite to blind me.

What these men really have in common, other than advanced age, is that they are Goyim and they are anti-semites. It pains me to say it but the last two go together virtually always (with extremely few exceptions, like myself) as an innate trait.

A conspiracy is a confluence of ideology and activities even if the conspirators do not know each other, as is probably the case here, except for Mandela and Tutu to whom, again, I have to cut some slack because, being black they would tend to hang out together. The conspirators do not need written Protocols. Unless we find them, which brings me to my last point:

This is still work in progress and I need all the help I can get from like-minded anti-zionist progressives by way of providing me with what others make so much of: “proofs.” I would specifically appreciate help in dealing with an “outlier” in my theory, namely the existence of a number of internationally well-known and highly respected (most likely for the wrong reasons) people who are neither old nor Goyim and yet espouse the same pernicious views.

Among many such sad examples there is one who has been called “Israel’s enemy #1” by none other than Prof. Dershowitz, a distinguished American lawyer, expert in difficult “husband-kills-wife” celebrity defense cases.

I shall not identify Israel’s enemy by name here because I do not wish to help promoting his book:


The Wandering Who?—available from amazon.com for $10.06, Kindle edition, $7.60 plus shipping (varies by state).


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

William A. Cook: "In Defense of Guenter Grass"

William A. Cook
Al-Manar



“Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted, the indifference of those who should have known better, the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most, that has made it possible for evil to triumph”
Haile Selassie

“Have our Jewish sisters and brothers forgotten their humiliation? Have they forgotten the collective punishment, the home demolitions, in their own history so soon? Have they turned their backs on their profound and noble religious traditions? Have they forgotten that God cares deeply about the downtrodden”
Bishop Desmond Tutu


These two cautionary admonitions capture the thrust of Guenter Grass’ electrifying poem, “What Must Be Said,” that has brought an avalanche of invective – some scurrilous, some vituperative, some even personal vilification – against the man who warns the people of the world as well as the Jewish people of the dangers inherent in the actions of the Zionist controlled government of the State of Israel.

Such condemnations avoid direct rebuttal of Grass’ pointed cries of despair as he contemplates continued indifference to the slow yet calculated genocide that exists in Israel’s occupation of Palestine reverting instead to derogatory innuendo, ignorance of conditions prevalent in the occupied territories, ignorance of those determined to destroy Israel, and personal guilt as a German. There is no reflection on the worst sin human kind can inflict on their fellow human beings, the silence of indifference to the plight of the Palestinians or to the potential danger facing the people of the mid-east should Israel preemptively strike Iran.

The title of his poem, “What Must Be Said,” echoes the prophets of old, cries of those weeping in the wilderness to heed the obvious, to hear the hypocrisy that masks the reality of a nation that cries for peace as it stealthily steals more land, that demands dismantling of Iran’s nuclear plants as it declares its right to Demona and untold weapons of mass destruction, that denounces with all brazen duplicity, indeed silences those who criticize the state of Israel while they are free to attack them as anti-Semitic.
“Why silence so long,” Grass asks of himself and answers, as must we all, that we are “slaves to an oppressive lie,” what cannot be said without condemnation because Israel has the “right” to demand and defend what it will. Is it wrong to criticize the obvious? Is it wrong to bare truth when silence once before begot a holocaust? Is it wrong for the German people to mark what they have learned through decades of reflection and reparation and not reveal what they have lived and learned? Is it wrong to speak when devastation threatens, when arrogance buries truth, when the weak have no voice, when the unknown consequence of brutal, raw, preemptive power is imminent?

I would have Guenter Grass speak for me, my children and grandchildren, and all others who could suffer yet another World War, by noting the obvious that has been silenced so long:

• a state provided with the fourth greatest military machine in the world to defend less than 6 million people,
• a nation, the only nation in the mid-east with weapons of mass destruction,
• a nation that refuses to sign the mid-east nuclear non-proliferation agreement,
• a nation that has demonstrated its willingness to invade its neighbors in Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, and drools to bomb Iran,
• a nation that occupies a land provided for it by the same United Nations that gave Israel license to declare itself a nation,
• a nation that damns Iran for proclaiming that it will “wipe Israel off the map,” when in fact it never made such a declaration yet innocently hides its own declaration in the Likud Party Platform that the state it professes to want peace with, Palestine, shall never have a state west of the Jordan,
• a nation that is of such demonstrable threat to world peace that if it is not condemned would be a blot on all who remain silenced and thereby complicit in its crimes,and for such inaction, such indifference we must accept responsibility and condemnation; let the indignant ring their bells of anger and hatred, truth will prevail.
Who better to speak than a citizen of a country that supplies Israel with nuclear submarines capable of terrorizing its neighbors if not the world, submarines provided as reparation to a people destroyed so they can become the destroyer. “Why silence so long?” because “this must be said” with strength, conviction, integrity and honesty, and without personal fear or trepidation because the silence has been broken by a voice that resounds throughout the world in righteous thunder against the greatest danger the world now knows, an Israel that can act with impunity to crush whomever they determine to be their enemy.
Let me close this defense of Guenter Grass with a story told by Professor Michael Klein years after he had escaped death at Auschwitz. Klein’s brief narrative is titled “Breaking Silence.” It captures what I believe is the real essence of Guenter Grass’ plea, both in time and shame. The story reflects on Klein’s close friend, Salamon Abshalom, who had attempted escape and was to suffer death as a consequence. The story is a parable that parallels our time; what if voices had told of the Jewish plight before the trains took them to the death camps; maybe Salamon Abshalom would still be alive.
“My friend Salamon Abshalom was let out. He was barely able to walk; his hands were tied behind his back. An SS guard took him to the back of the camp yard. … He was led to the gallows and made to climb onto what looked like a stepladder. The noose was tied around his neck.
We stood paralyzed, in bewildered despair. How could the Heavens allow this to happen on this holy Yom Kippur evening? Did the Germans set up the execution specifically for Yom Kippur to humiliate the God of Israel and His people? The silence of the Heavens screamed out in our hearts and in our souls. The desecration of the God of Israel, of the people of Israel, of Yom Kippur, and the humiliation of man created in the image of God proceeded in silence as the German hangman, the Camp's SS commander, stood over Salamon Abshalom.
Suddenly, as if from nowhere, a powerful, high pitched voice rang out over the camp yard. It sent chills down our spines, as we heard the cry of "Sh'ma Yisrael...", Hear O Israel", as Salamon Abshalom declaimed the eternal proclamation of the Jewish people's belief in one God….
With his prayer of Sh'ma Yisrael arising from his last breath, he raised all of us standing Zaehlappell to the highest spiritual level. Even as his life was extinguished by the brutal murderer to whom nothing was holy, he still proclaimed the eternity of the Jewish People, in defiance of evil, in defiance of the Germans, in defiance of the silence of humanity, and in defiance of the silence of the Heavens. Salamon Abshalom proclaimed the Godliness of the Jewish People even at a time when God seemed to be totally absent.
I slowly calmed my emotions and tried to analyze my thoughts. The Germans murdered Salamon Abshalom, but I was guilty having been silent in spite of the promise we made to each other in the camps that we will tell the world of what happened. I had kept Salamon Abshalom's memory a secret for all these years.”
Silence sacrifices the innocent because it allows continuation of slaughter; silence rests in the soul as it acidifies into self-shame; silence speaks no language, offers no aid, but ensures that time will extinguish both hope and guilt. Silence is the voice of the coward and the accomplice. Silence must be extinguished.River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

What Anglicans need is another Tutu as top cat

Redress

---

By Stuart Littlewood

21 April 2010

Stuart Littlewood views the silence of the head of the Anglican Church, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, over Palestinian suffering, especially in Gaza, which he had promised to visit but had not been heard to mention since. He contrasts this with Mr Rowan’s fawning over Israel and the Holocaust.
My ears pricked up when I heard the Archbishop of Canterbury was planning a visit to Gaza last February, and Lambeth Palace (his headquarters in London) was "actively engaged in humanitarian relief and advocacy".

I asked for more information.

Whom would he meet? Would he see the health minister? Would he sit down and talk with elected Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, man of God to man of God, Mr Haniyeh being an imam? I’d like to be a fly on the wall at such a meeting.

Would he "do Gaza proud by spending a generous amount of his time with senior members of the Islamic faith"?

And would he look up Fr Manuel Mussallam, the redoubtable old priest who was a mainstay of the Christian community throughout Gaza's darkest hours and tells it straight?

His office didn't reply.
Looking at his website again now, I see he did none of those things. At least, he doesn't mention them if he did.

The Archbishop of Canterbury is Britain’s “Mister Christianity”, the top cat in the Anglican Church. His website explains that his role as a figure of unity in the worldwide Anglican Communion, which is represented in over 130 countries, means that "he is in a unique position to bring the needs and voices of those fighting poverty, disease and the effects of conflict, to the attention of national and international policy makers and donor agencies".

"...can we hope to see this shaggy-bearded prelate standing on the prow of the leading ship in the flotilla that will soon set sail to break the siege of Gaza?"





He started his Ecumenical letter this Easter by saying: "Christians need to witness boldly and clearly“, and ended with: "The world will not be saved by fear, but by hope and joy... In whatever way we can, we must seek to communicate this joy, however dark or uncertain the sky seems."
Hope and joy? Tell that to the Palestinians, especially those in Gaza.

Since his return has he said anything about Gaza in the House of Lords, where he has a voice in Parliament? It seems he hasn't opened his mouth there for over a year, hasn’t spoken in any debates and hasn’t voted. He’s a below-average performer.

So what was all that about bringing the needs of people suffering the aftermath of conflict to the attention of policy makers?

The archbishop said in a press release that peace would not be achieved without sacrifice on all sides because the interests of one were intimately bound up with the interests of the other.

Sacrifice? How much more must Palestinians sacrifice, one wonders...?

He urged a greater awareness of the humanitarian crisis and isolation, to ensure that the people of Gaza were not forgotten.

That’s where a few well-chosen words in the House of Lords might have helped.

He also pledged the continuing prayers and support of the Anglican Communion as a whole, and his personal support and prayers for all who felt so little hope for the future: "God's faithfulness is sure and will never fail.”

Drinking at the Palestinians’ well

While in Jerusalem he had no hesitation in meeting the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, and off they all went afterwards to Yad Vashem to lay a wreath “in recognition of the abiding significance of the Holocaust and as a commitment to the struggle against the continuing evil of anti-Semitism and all racial hatred and bigotry” (my italics).

Did he meet senior Islamic figures? No mention of it.

So much for interfaith engagement, then.

But he talked with the president of Israel about “the current state of relations between Israel and Palestine ... and a range of environmental issues, including water”. What excuses did nice Mr Shimon Peres offer, I wonder, for stealing 80 per cent of the Palestinians’ water at gunpoint so that Israeli settlers can enjoy a 24/7 supply, fill their swimming pools and wash their cars, then sell what’s left back to the Palestinians in strictly rationed dribs and drabs, forcing some to go without?

We’re not told.
Is that the archbishop’s idea of “witnessing boldly”?

If he’s a filmgoer he’ll remember the powerful scene in Lawrence of Arabia where Lawrence (Peter O’Toole) and his guide are drinking from a well. Sherif Ali (Omar Sharif) rides out of the shimmering heat of the desert and shoots the guide dead. Lawrence remonstrates.

This is my well, says Ali.
I have drunk from it, says Lawrence.
You are welcome.
He was my friend, insists Lawrence, pointing at the dead man.
That! He was nothing. The well is everything. The Hasimi may not drink at our wells. He knew that.

Expulsion of Christians from West Bank

And what, I wonder, does the archbishop make of the new Israeli military order that came into effect on 13 April and is designed to deport Palestinians who are resident in their homeland, the West Bank? We have already seen how students from Gaza, like Berlanty Azzam, attending university in the West Bank are arrested and dumped back in Gaza when only weeks away from graduating.

The wording of the order is so vague that Israeli human rights organizations say every Palestinian in the West Bank may find him or herself in danger of being criminally prosecuted and deported or being deported without appeal or review.

It defines anyone present in the West Bank, regardless of his status, as an "infiltrator" if they do not possess a permit given by the military commander or on his behalf – a permit whose exact nature is not defined in military legislation at all. In fact, the vast majority of individuals now living in the West Bank have never been required to possess any sort of permit.

In short, the order allows the Israeli military to empty the West Bank of all Palestinians, if it wishes, without the need for any inconvenient process like hearings. This of course hits Christians as well as their Muslim friends and neighbours.

Kairos Palestine describes the new order as:

• A flagrant display of military power;
• A destructive and cynical command that reduces thousands of people into “illegal aliens” in their own homes;
• A threat that, regardless of the extent of its implementation, will confine Palestinians in their villages and further sever them from vital economic, health, education, and social centers and is
• Another improper step toward creating demographic changes in the West Bank and entrenching a regime which discriminates between people on the basis of religion and nationality.

As well as defying basic human rights, says Kairos, the military order "arrogantly violates various terms of international law, including Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibiting the forcible transfer or deportation of protected civilians in an occupied territory, and the principle of self-determination stipulated by general international law".

Kairos is a group of Palestine Christians who recently produced a document entitled “A Moment of Truth” - their word to the world about the occupation and an expression of their faith, hope and love from the heart of Palestinian suffering. It is a call for solidarity to end over six decades of oppression.

Kairos Palestine calls on churches worldwide, church-related organizations, Christians and the wider international community to "condemn these shameful developments and work to restore the justice that is both our calling and our right".

I feel sure the archbishop knows about this. It’s Holy Land business and central to his faith. What has he to say? Will he show leadership?

And can we hope to see this shaggy-bearded prelate standing on the prow of the leading ship in the flotilla that will soon set sail to break the siege of Gaza?

That’ll be the day! Our “Mister Christianity” needs to be someone like Desmond Tutu who’ll take the bull by the horns.

---

Stuart Littlewood is author of the book Radio Free Palestine, which tells the plight of the Palestinians under occupation. For further information please visit www.radiofreepalestine.co.uk

River to Sea
Uprooted Palestinian