Mainstream America’s steadfast opposition to politically planned changes directed at our Constitution targeting secure borders, gun control, abortion on demand and the most recent source of concern, forced vaccinations, might have derailed the progressive’s once reliable tactic of sneering accusations of conspiracy theory, but that doesn’t mean the woke progressive focus on our destruction is going away.
Increasingly self-evident to a growing number of Americans is:
A) The reality of the burdensome impact on U.S. communities by the UNannounced and more importantly, the UNvetted appearance of complicators from foreign lands with a history of an inability to deal with their corrupted, disrupted and failed socialism,
B) The increasing awareness of how armed citizen interventions can minimize mass shooters before they get started and
C) Conceding to the Rockefeller decision that the United States had no further need for population growth was wrong in so many ways.
The dawning of such realities are triggering the wake up call Americans are hearing as they recognize the conspiracy theory accusations were and no doubt, will again, be propaganda BS based pre-positioning manipulations.
These days, however, we are being dealt with by the tyrannically legal and heavy-handed dismissals of our right to be heard through the ‘Have No Standing’ status rulings that, at the same time we’re being shut down our domestic enemies are afforded the opportunity to fallaciously claim moral, social and intellectual superiority as they debase our personal beliefs with accusations that malign our National history and character.
They are able to do that because our leaders have steadily been ignoring the basic tenets of our government’s purpose starting with our Constitution’s
preamble by allowing and even participating in malefic political activities designed and acted out by the minuscule to challenge and repudiate the majority’s vital belief in the Christian God we have relied on for guidance throughout our history.
Having made further inroads with their attacks on God, the progressively enlightened moved on to their next tactic, denying novel events in our history.
The overall intent of this post is to show where the energy that took control during the 20th Century was derived from and how it is reshaping our intended participation in the Great Experiment while turning US into an instrument of evil.
The origins of this effort were born out of a not so recent response I made to Jeff Hurvitz, the author of an article, “ Israel, and the burden of being Jewish” published at https://broadandliberty.com/2023/11/01/jeff-hurvitz-israel-and-the-burden-of-being-jewish/ who questioned my reply to another commentator.
Mr. Hurvitz took issue with my mention of the attack on the USS Liberty and the dancing Israeli’s on 9-11 with the burning Twin Towers in the background when I questioned the comments others made in their comparisons of Palestinians and Israel.
Hurvitz wrote that my sense of history is warped and an “…inability to see the evil of Hamas and the western values of Israel unmasks your built in prejudice.”
Asking for a clarification of his accusations only elicited a sardonic comment about the Israeli partnership with Hamas made years ago, another event I pointed out. My response to that must have undergone some intense moderation:
john ryan says: November 17, 2023 at 7:20 am Your comment is awaiting moderation.
COMMENT *
Jeff: There is so much anti-semitism to learn about it’s taking me longer than I expected. I did leave a comment regarding that Hamas supported by Israel story but it spent all week in moderation and just timed out I guess. This is my reply but you will also see it soon at https://www.bucksafa11.org/
What do you mean? You’re fine with Bibi’s partnership with Hamas? What kind of expert commentator are you? Here are a couple of news articles you can read to get familiar with how fine the Israeli’s are feeling about that coalition. Don’t skip the comments.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces
No comment about the USS Liberty story?
I’ll ask again, what is your conclusion about my inability to see evil based on? I gotta thank you for that, it’s prompted me to look deeper into the roots of anti-semitism.
Reply
Leave a (Respectful) Comment
Reply to Jeff hurvitz
I wasn’t complaining about the delay. It did give me time to look into the roots of anti-semitism and the opportunity to explore what evil is since Jeff, while he accused me of being unable to recognize evil, refuses to answer my ‘what is evil’ question to him; though I must admit it’s been some time since I checked.
I’ll start with the unable to recognize evil accusation, an inability in this day and age that just might provide cause to put many more Americans in a treatment gulag if said Americans favor a more factual view as opposed to a view controlled by political announcements and AI.
First, a definition is needed.
This https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/evil will provide a fair display of evil defined by dictionary.
a
: morally reprehensible : SINFUL, WICKED
an evil impulse
I was raised Catholic and schooled on evil impulses.
b
: arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct
a person of evil reputation
This evil I recognize.
a
archaic : INFERIOR
who isn’t inferior to half of humanity?
b
: causing discomfort or repulsion : OFFENSIVE
an evil odor
You wouldn’t believe some of the smelly places I’ve been and outside of Tijuana I never thought of them as evil. Maybe San Diego.
c
: DISAGREEABLE
woke late and in an evil temper
Except for pirates that’s usually an exaggeration,.
From the Cambridge dictionary:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/evil definition:
Meaning of evil in English
evil
adjective
US /ˈiː.vəl/ UK /ˈiː.vəl/
B2 bad, cruel, or very unpleasant
a
: causing harm : PERNICIOUS
the evil institution of slavery
I never owned a slave. But a number of Jews have according to
Bertram W. Korn whose stated intent on writing Jews and Negro Slavery in the Old South was:
… to attempt to survey the following themes: Jews as planters, and as owners of slaves; the treatment of slaves by Jews; the emancipation of slaves by Jews; Jews as harsh taskmasters; business dealings of Jews with slaves and free Negroes; Jews as slave dealers; cases of miscegenation involving Jews and Negroes; and opinions of Jews about the slave system.
Should Hurvitz think of the Southern Jewish slaveholders as evil? Should I? If I didn’t because the passing of time makes hating ante-bellum slaveholders irrelevant to me, should I be branded as evil? Should you?
Should Hurvitz be branded evil if he thinks of most ante-bellum slaveholders as evil but not the Jewish slaveholders?
What if Hurvitz and I thought the Southern Jewish slaveholders of the ante-bellum south were not evil for different reasons? Would one of us be more evil than the other?
Most people are aware of the ancient roots of slavery; 6000 years, that’s a long time. Ancient cultures… Sumer, Babylon, Assyria even Israel (after they emerged about 4000 years ago) all had laws regulating slavery. The Old Testament regulated Israel’s use of slaves that included rules providing for the proper treatment of slaves (Dt 15) their release (Lev 25) and slaves who were happy being slaves (Ex 21).
If those questions sound absurd you need an introduction to an advanced Progressive Woke state. Have you ever seen The Death of Stalin?
2b
: marked by misfortune : UNLUCKY
Perhaps bad luck is the basis of Hurvitz claim that I have an “…inability to see the evil of Hamas but he’d be wrong there, too. I think Palestinians were terribly unlucky when Hamas partnered up with Israel’s politicians years ago. I just never identified bad luck as an inherent evil.
I’m including a more extensive definition from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/concept-evil/ to broaden awareness of evil’s applications. It is a bit of a read (19 pages + notes) but I’m on a mission. Ride along if you dare.
On the first plato.stanford page is
1.1 Evil and the Supernatural
The concept of evil is often associated with supernatural powers or creatures, especially in fictional and religious contexts. The monsters of fictions, such as vampires, witches, and werewolves, are thought to be paradigms of evil. These creatures possess powers and abilities that defy scientific explanation, and perhaps human understanding. Many popular horror films also depict evil as the result of dark forces or Satanic possession. We find similar references to supernatural forces and creatures when the term ‘evil’ is used in religious contexts. Some evil-skeptics believe that the concept of evil necessarily makes reference to supernatural spirits, dark forces, or creatures. According to these theorists if we do not believe that these spirits, forces, or monsters exist, we should only use the term ‘evil’ in fictional contexts, if at all (See Clendinnen 1999, 79–113; Cole 2006, 2019).
Evil-revivalists respond that the concept of evil need not make reference to supernatural spirits, dark forces, or monsters. There is a secular moral concept of evil which is distinct from fictional or religious conceptions, and it is this secular conception of evil that is meant most often when the term ‘evil’ is used in moral and political contexts (see Garrard 2002, 325; Card 2010, 10–17). Evil-revivalists seek to offer plausible analyses of evil which do not make reference to supernatural spirits, dark forces, or monsters, but which fully capture secular uses of the term ‘evil.’ Evil-revivalists believe that if they are able to offer plausible analyses of evil which do not make reference to the supernatural, they will have successfully defended the concept of evil from the objection that ascriptions of evil necessarily imply unwarranted metaphysical commitments (see sections 3 and 4 for secular accounts of evil).
1.2 Evil and Explanatory Power
Some evil-skeptics argue that we should abandon the concept of evil because it lacks explanatory power and therefore is a useless concept (see, e.g., Clendinnen 1999, 79–113; Cole 2006, 2019; Baron-Cohen 2011). The concept of evil would have explanatory power, or be explanatorily useful, if it were able to explain why certain actions were performed or why these actions were performed by certain agents rather than by others. Evil-skeptics such as Inga Clendinnen and Philip Cole argue that the concept of evil cannot provide explanations of this sort and thus should be abandoned.
According to Clendinnen the concept of evil cannot explain the performance of actions because it is an essentially dismissive classification. To say that a person, or an action, is evil is just to say that that person, or action, defies explanation or is incomprehensible (see Clendinnen 1999, 81; Baron-Cohen 2011, 5-7; see also, Pocock 1985). (Joel Feinberg (2003) also believes that evil actions are essentially incomprehensible. But he does not think that we should abandon the concept of evil for this reason.)
I am not an evil-skeptic. That evil is defined pretty well in various dictionaries is good enough proof of its existence for this humble traveller. However, the above second paragraph recognizes that evil is also used to describe a person or an action that defies comprehension.
Is it possible that many law abiding people have been, or are being, defined as evil simply because the enemies of our Republic, based upon their reconstructed concept of law and making use of those trained in the rhetoric of those concepts that reconstructed the law enables them, in particular cases, to view those of US holding normal beliefs, in opposition to the Republic’s enemies position, as evil; normal beliefs those enemies repudiate as incomprehensible to them as they explain ad nauseam their position into what they believe is understandability (ex. global warming), thus making their position tenable to the media and finally acceptable to a shrugging, unaware of the lurking danger, public.
In a more closely related sense regarding the inability to recognize evil is this National Institute of Health paper titled “The Cognition of Severe Moral Failure: A Novel Approach to the Perception of Evil”. It can be read at
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5920199/
In the abstract:
I describe the perception of evil as a categorization judgment, based on a prototype, with extensive feedback loops and top-down influences. Based on the attachment approach to moral judgment (Govrin, 2014, 2018), I suggest that the perception of evil consists of four salient features: Extreme asymmetry between victim and perpetrator; a specific perceived attitude of the perpetrator toward the victim’s vulnerability; the observer’s inability to understand the perpetrator’s perspective; and insuperable differences between the observer and perpetrator’s judgment following the incident which shake the observer no less than the event itself. I then show that the perception of evil involves a cognitive bias: The observer is almost always mistaken in his attributions of a certain state of mind to the perpetrator. The philosophical and evolutionary significance of this bias is discussed as well as suggestions for future testing of the prototype model of evil.
And in the introduction…
The term “evil” is often used to encourage an intolerant and extreme stance toward an enemy, or someone who violently opposes you. Over a period of thousands of years, the concept of evil was closely linked to a religious view of life. In Judaism and Christianity evil is viewed as human conduct in defiance of God’s Commandments. An act of evil violates that holy code.
But aren’t most zionists secularist? Cutting through their necessary verbiage and the limitations of the JPost article,
https://academic.oup.com/jaar/article/88/1/35/5733647?guestAccessKey=42f388a9-6b86-446c-8906-e6ce4a6f922a&login=false
secularism is both politically useful and prone to miscommunication. Secularization, its cognate, faces the same challenge…
The following JPost article provided both substantiation of the politically useful application and a touch of acceptable miscommunication of secularism.
Secular Zionist’s assert their zionist application is the only way the Jewish people can ensure their safety, security and success and they say that without measuring the value of God’s Providence; while the religious Zionists introduce God’s Providence as the most important factor in Israel’s past, present, and future success.
Choice… it keeps everybody happy; although https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cu9izRis0CA shows evidence choice appears capable of eventually being applied only in the category of do or die.
https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-742927
There are many differences between secular and religious Zionism. At their most fundamental levels, there is one unique difference between the two forms of Zionism which overshadows all others. Secular Zionists maintain the only way the Jewish people can ensure their safety, security and success is by the Jewish people taking matters into their own hands and working towards Israel’s advancement.
Secular Zionists maintain that Jews taking responsibility for themselves has, is, and will always be the only way the Jewish people can guarantee a homeland for themselves. They maintain that the success of today’s Jewish state is due to the Zionist’s efforts of draining the swamps, developing the land and creating the infrastructure that led to the successful place the Jewish people are today.
Religious Zionists agree that it was Zionists that created the State through their backbreaking labor and admirable courage. They agree that it is today’s Israelis who take responsibility for Israel’s future that are ensuring Israel’s security and success. Religious Zionists maintain the most important factor in Israel’s past, present, and future success isn’t human effort but rather God’s Providence.
According to the conditions laid out in https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5920199/ abstract it is Israel that meets the requirements that project the perception of evil and this time the world reaction is based on the resultant perception of those conditions, not the expected progressive propagandized messages of beheaded babies.
1)Extreme asymmetry between victim and perpetrator; check
2)a specific perceived attitude of the perpetrator toward the victim’s vulnerability; check
3)the observer’s inability to understand the perpetrator’s perspective; check
4)and insuperable differences between the observer and perpetrator’s judgment following the incident which shake the observer no less than the event itself; check
My point is Jeff, I did recognize evil; it just wasn’t the evil you see. It wasn’t difficult for me to recognize it, either. I’ve seen it before in 1967 and again after the fog of deception surrounding September 11 almost immediately started dissipating. Those events I’ll never forget.
Currently, we’re being told to look the other way as they destroy the homes and businesses of the Palestinians, both Muslims and Christians, because Israel cannot be criticized and they want US to fund their murserous foray. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47754
In October the Senate https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4264928-senate-unanimously-adopts-resolution-stating-support-for-israel/resolved to speak
…“in one voice that Israel is our friend, that Hamas’ attack is reprehensible, and that we will stand with our friends to defend themselves.”
For some reason Schumer felt it necessary to repeat himself:
“Hopefully the Senate will speak in one voice that Israel is our friend, that Hamas’ attack is reprehensible, and that we will stand with our friends to defend themselves,” he added.
Congress’ recently passed resolution https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-resolution/888
H. Res. 888
“In the House of Representatives, U. S.,
November 28, 2023.
Whereas the Jewish people are native to the Land of Israel;
Whereas throughout history and across the reign of multiple kingdoms, the Jewish people were persecuted and expelled from the Land of Israel, forced to live as minority diaspora communities in other lands;
Whereas Jewish diaspora communities were historically violently persecuted in, and in some cases expelled from, other countries throughout the Middle East, Europe, Africa, and Asia due to their religion;
Whereas the Nazis attempted to annihilate the entire Jewish population of Europe during the Holocaust, murdering 6,000,000 Jews during this time;
Whereas this genocide provided new urgency to re-establish a Jewish homeland for the Jewish people following the Holocaust, where they would not be a vulnerable minority, where they could freely practice their faith, and where something like the Holocaust could never happen again;
Whereas the modern State of Israel was established on May 14, 1948;
Whereas even after the establishment of the State of Israel, other countries and terrorist entities continued to attack Israel, reject its right to exist, and call for its destruction; and
Whereas Israel is the only Jewish State, and therefore, despite persistent external threats, the existence of Israel provides Jews a place to live free from persecution and discrimination: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives—
(1) reaffirms the State of Israel’s right to exist;
(2) recognizes that denying Israel’s right to exist is a form of antisemitism;
(3) rejects calls for Israel’s destruction and the elimination of the only Jewish State; and
(4) condemns the Hamas-led terrorist attack on Israel.
Attest:
Clerk.
Locally, the congressional representative’s reply turned into a sermonized news release that turned a deaf ear to the question about the Balfour agreement’s inclusion of this statement…
…it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
From: “Rep. Bill Huizenga”
Date: 12/7/23 12:31 PM (GMT-05:00)
To:
Subject: Response from Congressman Bill Huizenga
Thank you for contacting me regarding a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war. I always appreciate hearing from constituents and welcome this opportunity to respond.
On October 7th, on the Jewish Holiday of Simchat Torah, the governing body of Gaza and foreign terrorist organization known as Hamas launched a surprise assault on Israel. This barbaric attack resulted in the massacre of women, children, and the elderly, as well as the taking of hostages back to Gaza. At this time, the State Department reports over 1,400 deaths, including at least 32 Americans, with many people sadly still unaccounted for.
In an interview on October 24th, a senior Hamas official, Ghazi Hamad, vowed Hamas will repeat the attacks of October 7th until Israel is destroyed. He went on to say, regarding the deaths of civilians in Gaza, they are ready to pay the price as a nation of martyrs. Furthermore, Hamad said, “nobody should blame us for the things we do. On October 7, October 10, October one-millionth, everything we do is justified.”
A temporary ceasefire occurred from November 24th to November 30th. During this, 105 hostages were released from Hamas captivity in exchange for 210 Palestinian prisoners. Fighting has since resumed. Israel has the clear right to defend itself. However, Israel must also strive to minimize civilian casualties as it pursues the Hamas terrorists who participated and supported the attack on October 7th. Moving forward, I will continue to encourage the Biden Administration to work to ensure the safe return of all American and Israeli hostages.
Again, I appreciate you contacting me, and please do not hesitate to do so again in the future.
Sincerely,
Rep. Bill Huizenga
Member of Congress
Even the walk on president released a national strategy to combat anti-semitism
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/05/25/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-releases-first-ever-u-s-national-strategy-to-counter-antisemitism/
All that snorting and pawing the ground wouldn’t have anything to do with with the Gaza marine gas fields play would they?
Or would it have to do with the zionists long planned Step Beyond Balfour?
https://www.un.org/unispal/history2/origins-and-evolution-of-the-palestine-problem/part-i-1917-1947/
Foremost among Jewish critics was Sir Edwin Montagu, Secretary of State for India and the only Jewish member of the British Cabinet. His dissent from the political nature of Zionist aims stemmed from conviction that Judaism was a universal faith, distinct from nationality, and that in the era of the modern nation-State the Jewish people did not constitute a nation. He questioned the credentials of the Zionist Organization to speak for all Jews. In secret memoranda (later made public) he wrote:
“Zionism has always seemed to me to be a mischievous political creed, untenable by any patriotic citizen of the United Kingdom … I have always understood that those who indulged in this creed were largely animated by the restrictions upon and refusal of liberty to Jews in Russia. But at the very time when these Jews have been acknowledged as Jewish Russians and given all liberties, it seems to be inconceivable that zionism should be officially recognized by the British Government, and that Mr. Balfour should be authorized to say that Palestine was to be reconstituted as the ‘national home of the Jewish people’. I do not know what this involves, but I assume that it means that Mohammedans and Christians are to make way for the Jews, and that the Jews should be put in all positions of preference and should be peculiarly associated with Palestine in the same way that England is with the English or France with the French, that Turks and other Mohammedans in Palestine will be regarded as foreigners, just in the same way as Jews will hereafter be treated as foreigners in every country but Palestine … When the Jews are told that Palestine is their national home, every country will immediately desire to get rid of its Jewish citizens, and you will find a population in Palestine driving out its present inhabitants, taking all the best in the country …
“I deny that Palestine is today associated with the Jews or properly to be regarded as a fit place for them to live in. The Ten Commandments were delivered to the Jews on Sinai. It is quite true that Palestine plays a large part in Jewish history, but so it does in modern Mohammedan history, and, after the time of the Jews, surely it plays a larger part than any other country in Christian history …
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/text-of-the-balfour-declaration
Foreign Office
November 2nd, 1917
Dear Lord Rothschild,
I have much pleasure in conveying to you. on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.
His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.
Yours,
Arthur James Balfour
What isn’t in question is our political leaders support an Israel at all cost position. The Zion first messages from our ‘bipartisan’ leadership clearly subordinates our First Amendment right of free speech in favor of a foreign country in order to support their side of everything. In this case, it’s an eye for an eye attack the Zionist forces allegedly received warning of the year before and yet, for all their superior intelligence acumen, they gave it no credence.
Starting to smell fish, yet? This might help to clear the air a little.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR400/RR498/RAND_RR498.pdf
This study seeks to use historical narrative to inform the reader’s understanding of choices both past and present, over several decades in which the U.S.-Israel relationship has grown far closer and deeper.
For these purposes, we may think of Israeli leaders as falling into two categories: confronters and consulters. Israeli Prime Ministers DavidBen-Gurion and Menachem Begin presented the United States with faits accomplis in 1956 and 1981, running serious risks in the bilateral relationship; by contrast, Levi Eshkol and Ehud Olmert took pains to try to see if Washington would resolve Israel’s security dilemmas in 1967 and 2007. In neither instance did consultation result in a U.S. use of force on Israel’s behalf, but in both cases, it did yield considerable dividends of U.S. understanding when Israel ultimately took matters into its own hands.
From Suez on, one thing has not changed: Superpowers do not like being surprised.
It looks to me that quality led to an understanding that resulted in a game plan both sides work for their gain. Their gain, not their citizens well-being.
Have you ever wondered why it is the world is constantly reminded to never forget the Jews that perished in the camps but the propaganda arm of the zionists rarely publicizes their appreciation for, certainly not on the level of Holocaust mentions, nor do they offer any regular mention of the heroic efforts made by gentiles who organized and/or carried out efforts that successfully saved thousands of people from the camps?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_of_Jews_during_the_Holocaust offers such tributes.
Nor is any mention of the successful ransoms paid by the Jewish American organizations spearheaded by the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee with roots going back to 1914 and the Great War.
A fascinating account of their activity can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/19475020.2014.901183?
and details of JDC’s success are proudly shared as this outline of their accomplishment is described:
…the leaders of the JDC were esteemed New York-based bankers and lawyers who had proven their dedication to philanthropy and, in the JDC’s case, to Jewish service specifically…
…These individuals derived their authority from their personal philanthropy and their ability to undertake such efforts as writing letters to the US President and expecting it to be read by him personally, calling on the Secretary of State, obtaining appointments with representatives of foreign governments, or making successful appeals before USCongressional committees…
…The system of relief forged by the JDC primarily consisted of its chairman, FelixWarburg, who was also a partner in the New York banking house of Kuhn Loeb, sending money designated by the JDC’s executive committee via his personal banking connections to central locations in Europe, whereupon the money would be transferred to other localities or immediately distributed to its intended recipients. Felix’s brother, Max, ran the M.M. Warburg bank in Hamburg, Germany. While the United States remained neutral,Felix transferred Max all the money collected by the JDC that was designated for the regions of Galicia and Poland located in German and Austrian-occupied territories.
Felix not only leveraged his personal financial connections to facilitate the distribution of JDC funds but also sent notes through the diplomatic pouch of the US State Department to Max explaining how the money was to be used and forwarded. This arrangement established between the JDC and the State Department to safeguard and expedite transatlantic communications reflected the special connections leading American humanitarian organizations often enjoyed with the US government…
That doesn’t sound kosher to me.
Having received the JDC’s funds from Felix Warburg, Max Warburg would then typically turn over a portion of the funds to the Hilfsverein der Deutschen Ju ̈den, an established relief organization of well-to-do German Jews, and credit some of the monies to an account in Vienna for distribution by a similar organization there.7 These German and Austrian Jewish relief organizations would then direct the distribution of funds for Polish and Galician Jews, who were in distress, many having fled their homes to escape invading armies. Encamped in congested quarters in Vienna, Warsaw, Budapest, Vilna, and other cities, Jewish refugees relied extensively on the assistance of these relief organizations for supplying basic provisions in cities where they were scarce and the prices tremendously inflated. Before the United States entered the war in April 1917, the JDC had sent about 2.5million dollars to Poland and 1.5 million to Jews in Austria-Hungary
Well that should shut down any users of the conspiracy theory rebuttal that argues it is ridiculous to believe so few men have the ability to change the course of history. This Jewish guy https://www.jstor.org/stable/23880523?even arranged the Sino-Russian war because he hated the Czars.
But the money networks involved raises this question. If the world is required to never forget the 6,000,000 killed by National Socialists, why aren’t we constantly reminded of those killed by communists?
https://reason.com/volokh/2022/11/09/data-on-mass-murder-by-government-in-the-20th-century/
As the tables indicate, mass murders are perpetrated by dictatorial regimes of various stripes. Communist regimes are far away the most murderous. The tables list 17 communist regimes that murdered at least 100,000 people. Overall, the communists murdered approximately 168,759,000 from 1900 to 1987…
Speaking of Bolshevism
https://yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Communism
Another explanation of the relative popularity of radicalism among Jews is that this is a way they fight antisemitism. In societies where antisemitism is rife, one way of getting rid of it is to change society radically. One of the appeals of socialism was that it promised a classless society where ethnicity and religion, both inventions of the oppressing classes who found them useful tools for controlling the proletariat, would disappear. Logically, ethnic and religious hatreds would also become obsolete. The “Jewish problem” would be solved along with all other ethnic, racial and religious “problems.”
Thus, Jews in the United States have continued to vote for the Democratic Party and for candidates closer to the political left long after they have been widely accepted in American society and have achieved high levels of income, education, and social status. It is argued that this behavior will eventually change, though change may be slowed by the continued adherence to traditional values of social justice.
…The prominence of Jews in the Cheka, whose mission was to eliminate the enemies of the regime, strengthened the impression that “the Jews had seized power” in Russia.
https://isj.org.uk/the-bolsheviks-and-antisemitism/
The Bolshevik Evgeny Preobrazhensky had moved the Russian Revolution’s original foundational statement on antisemitism at the First Congress of Soviets in June 1917. It was carried unanimously by over a thousand delegates representing millions of workers, peasants and soldiers. It instructed “all local soviets…to carry out relentless propaganda and educational work among the masses in order to combat anti-Jewish persecution.” But it also warned of the “great danger” posed by the “tendency for antisemitism to disguise itself under radical slogans”…
…Though small in number, this group of previously anti-Bolshevik Jewish socialists “actualised and often sustained” the Soviet response to antisemitism during the Russian Revolution, building upon Bolshevism’s “unquestionably…inbuilt opposition to antisemitism”…
…This was a revolution that promised liberation from antisemitism; its actuality, however, overdetermined them as Jews. No one, it seems, escaped the racialising logic of the “Jewish question” in the Russian Revolution…
https://www.bard.edu/library/arendt/pdfs/Gurian_Bolshevism.pdf
…Upon the success in Russia Bolshevik the name Bolshevism, which previously had been known only to students of the Russian Socialist movement, was used universally.
What appeared before 1917 to be a fanatic sect, ascribing to itself the mission of realizing socialism and of destroying existing society, had now become a real world danger. After the October Revolution the Bolsheviks seriously threatened to impose Communism on many countries , even on the whole world.
…To comprehend the development, the successes and the dangers of the Bolshevist-Communist movement, it must be understood as a social and political secular religion, for it is not exclusively concerned with the conquest of power and the achievement of social and political changes. It demands absolute dominance over every realm of life — spiritual as well as secular.
The Soviet regime does not regard itself simply as one among many possible regimes, but as a regime based upon a specific doctrine which corresponds to a necessary development in history and society. This doctrine alleged[l]y is the only true guide to action, one destined to bring about justice for all men and to shape, besides, all human knowledge and behavior. What believers of traditional religions ascribe to God and what Christians ascribe to Jesus Christ and the Church, the Bolsheviks ascribe to the allegedly scientific laws of social political, and historical development, which they alone know and have formulated in the doctrine established by Marx and Engels, Lenin and Stalin.
Therefore, their acceptance of these doctrinal laws and the policies called for by what they insist is the necessary development of society towards Socialism and Communism, can be characterized as a secular religion: earthly existence and the struggle to make it perfect are the sole aims of human life and of world history.
That is my response to a Jewish response to my observations about an act of war I’m supposed to accept just because they want me to. They screwed up and have a history of screwing up and it’s spread to our Country through the democrats and that sucks.
As for the roots of anti-semitism, if you read this post, you’d have to agree that the roots of antisemitism go back to the manipulating zionist propaganda machine. It’s a psyche weapon they use with cruel efficiency and it empowers every single zionist. Our politicians are scared witless of them; US, they’ve proven they can handle.
The suck stops here and I got another 100 links to back up the facts of this matter if anybody doubts what they’ve read.
Semper Fi!