On the issue of the Bibi Netanyahu challenge on Hajj Amin el Husseini and his stirring reference to the role that the Arabs played inside of the Holocaust of the Jews from 1939 to 1945 I want this made into a great turning point. Everything that I say and do is translated through the concept of “leadership” and that “nothing every happens on ts own” in the field of leadership. This concept is Leninist and Trotskyist in inspiration, I am that in essence, but you dear Facebook friend do not have to be. We hold many concepts in our minds but find significant areas to join together and march forwards – never still.

From the very first words of Netanyahu on this I was stirred into immediate action. I tried to make it known on Facebook that those who claimed that Netanyahu was making an historical error were simply misinformed. It is they who were ignorant on the issue. Nor was Netanyahu acting like a “crafty fox” another way to say he was seeking publicity, or rather trying to make the hostile Media deal with the issue, which is valid but in this case is subsidiary because he was really being truthful. Yes he was speakiing the plain truth. The Nazis did have a policy of emigration of the Jews. They also invaded other countries and the invasion of Poland made emigration very difficult. The invasion of Russia in early 1941 led to the mass killing of millions of Jews, Communist Commisars and Russian peasants as the Russian Army withdrew to the centre. The closing of the borders to Jewish escapees by Europe and America made emigration less possible. In this context Walter Rauff in 1941 was instructed to develop the mobile gas killing vans. (Rauff later emerged under el Husseini in plan to murder all the Jews in Palestine) The call by the Arabs for mass killing of the Jews had preceded all of this… By many decades and in the long course of Islam by 1500 years.

(I interpose here an interlude in my writing on this. This concerns “Fascism” and this means that we have to undertake this task too – what is Fascism? In fact we cannot proceed without this fact/knowledge but let us anyway proceed)

It was thus a process. The Rauff Van led to the Zyklon B Death Camps. But in this context the alliance of the Mufti with Hitler was absolutely critical. The Mufti did not come to Berlin as an underling at all. He came with 1500 years of Jew Killing behind HIS cause.

It is most significant that the actual pivotal event came two and a half months after the Mufti visit and key meeting with Hitler in November 1941. The Wannsee Conference took place in vary late January 1942.

In this very bare narrative of events Bibi was totally correct in his assertion about the Arabs and their key role in the Holocaust of the Jews.

I have been following this issue for a very long time.

To proceed in a practical way I make two proposals concerning the next step – both of which involve study. First turn to where Professor Francisco Gil White has reorganised his material on this in a highly readable form (he is good at communication). Secondly if you are familiar with Amazon Kindle, and Kindle for PC or Mac which is auxiliary software if you do not want to buy the Kindle machine, and buy immediately the book: Nazi Palestine: The Plans for the Extermination of the Jews in Palestine [Klaus-Michael Mallmann, Martin Cuppers, Krista Smith] … It is very cheap to download a mere 10 euros. I have the book as well as the electronic download. This is most important to do and to begin systematic study of this issue.



The alliance of Russia with Assad, Hezbullah and Iran in the war in and for Syria is indeed a very serious matter for the world, and especially certainly for Israel. What this means for Israel is that their whole policy of sitting tight, closing their eyes, doing nothing, taking up no positions, relying on Obama/Bush and Europe, groping about in the dark with no moral or political strategic compass to guide them, an influence deep within Israel of being the servants of US Imperialism, and before that being servants of British Imperialism under Weizmann until forced to fight the British in 1947 to survive at all … all of that has come home to roost in the present.

For Jews Russia is the centre of Antisemitism but I challenge the Jewish narrative as preached by their so-called experts. it was the centre of deep Antisemitism for centuries under the Czars. The arrival of socialist revolution under the leadership of Lenin and Trotsky put its foot on Antisemitism from roughly 1917 to 1923. It is true that these leaders did not have a clear position on nation state but they did genuinely hate Antisemitism, in the Civil War they were forced to fight against British, French, American, japanese and scores of others, yet the “Whites” were the Antisemties. This effort wrecked the weak Russian state and it was out of that weakness that Stalin and Antisemitism reared its head again. Many of those Whites went on to form the Nazi Party. The Whites had carried Antisemitism, the Antisemitism of the Czars and the Leninists and Trotskyists (before Stalin) had made Antisemitism a capital offence in that very Civil War, and meant it.

Thus there is nothing good about Russia entering this war on the side of Assad. We on this organization warned specifically about this 3 years ago. We said essentially that Assad should be supported by Israel and the Jews because Assad was fighting for the Alawites and the Christians, and for the unity of Syria. Now a post-Communist and anti-Leninist in the shape of Putin has entered the situation very close to the Jews again.

Everything has come from that isolation that we warned so insistently about and against (at least half a dozen major articles). What was Assad, the Christians of Syria and the Alawites supposed to do? They had been given a big warning as to what the “Arab Spring” was really all about. For these people Assad had to find allies wherever he could. He had to find allies otherwise he and his Alawite/Christian peoples, millions in number, would be put to the sword in a genocide that would make the Armenian mild in comparision. Assad knew from the very beginning the nature of the forces that were against him. They were to be the forces of ISIS based on Mohammedan barbarity BUT BACKED BY OBAMA/HOLLANDE/CAMERON/HAGUE. the Israelis jsut kept their head down and rationalised that it was good that Syria was breaking up. But Isreali leaders, these dumb stupid people so unrepresentative of the greatness of Jewish history, forgot that chaos never ends in nothing – it always leads to and ends in SOMETHING (most basic Hegel)

This is now a deadly situation for Israel. The methods and policies of the Israeli elites have made Jews into a soft and bickering among each other lot. In contrast to the Jews of 1948 the present population could not fight its way out of a paper bag, as witness its present conduct of nowhere fighting for Jewish heritage, jailing its own youth, while allowing Muslim trash to walk all over them in Jerusalem’s Temple Mount.


Rev. Dr. Peter Miano of the United Methodist Church in Lexington, Mass. says that Judaism is only mentioned once in the Bible. This is most odd.

Click photo to download. Caption: Mark Braverman, the executive director of Kairos USA, a Christian organization that promotes an anti-Israel agenda, ascends the pulpit at the United Methodist Church in Lexington, Mass. Credit: Dexter Van Zile.

Click photo to download. Caption: Mark Braverman, the executive director of Kairos USA, a Christian organization that promotes an anti-Israel agenda, ascends the pulpit at the United Methodist Church in Lexington, Mass. Credit: Dexter Van Zile.

I am a Marxist and if Miano is correct then I must have been living in great ignorance all of my life because no matter what way you analyse the Bible I always understood it to be the story of a “people”, that people being the Jewish people, and given its great age some things will fade between myth and truth, but that is the case with the story of every people.

It was the not-religious person HG Wells in his Short History of the World who gave if I remember 3 chapers to the Jews and why on earth would that learned man do that if Miano is correct? That would be strange.

(There is a free download on

The best answer to Miano is in these chapters where in the first, chapter 21, HG Wells writes the following:

“XXI. The Early History of the Jews AND now we can tell of the Hebrews, a Semitic people, not so important in their own time as in their influence upon the later history of the world. They were settled in Judea long before 1000 B.C., and their capital city after that time was Jerusalem. Their story is interwoven with that of the great empires on either side of them, Egypt to the south and the changing empires of Syria, Assyria and Babylon to the north. Their country was an inevitable high road between these latter powers and Egypt. Their importance in the world is due to the fact that they produced a written literature, a world history, a collection of laws, chronicles, psalms, books of wisdom, poetry and fiction and political utterances which became at last what Christians know as the Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible. This literature appears in history in the fourth or fifth century B.C. Probably this literature was first put together in Babylon. We have already told how the Pharaoh, Necho II, invaded the Assyrian Empire while Assyria was fighting for life against Medes, Persians and Chaldeans. Josiah King of Judah opposed him, and was defeated and slain at Megiddo (608 B.C.). Judah became a tributary to Egypt, and when Nebuchadnezzar the Great, the new Chaldean king in Babylon, rolled back Necho into Egypt, he attempted to manage Judah by setting up puppet kings in Jerusalem. The experiment failed, the people massacred his Babylonian officials, and he then determined to break up this little state altogether, which had long been playing off Egypt against the northern empire. Jerusalem was sacked and burnt, and the remnant of the people was carried off captive to Babylon. There they remained until Cyrus took Babylon (538 B.C.). He then collected them together and sent them back to resettle their country and rebuild the walls and temple of Jerusalem.

Probably “put together” in Babylon, says Wells. I am no expert but I think he is right. The really key thing in what Wells says, and shows how far he is ahead of say Chomsky, and how Chomsky represents a false line in knowledge, is that in a later chapter he reckons that that was the making of the Jewish nation. They came back from Babylon, he reckons, as the finished product, meaning a nation, people drawn together on the basis of conscious experience.

You could say here that the Irish were drawn together through the experience of the 1916 Rebellion in which the British dramatically and foolishly executed all of the leaders, not really before that beloved, but soon to be very beloved. Or was it the Famine years of 1845 to 47 when the exodus to America took place in “coffin ships” crossing the Ocean. Or was it the United Irishman rebeliion led by the Prsbyterians Henry Joy McCracken and Wolfe Tone with the British up tot he mark again with their noted brutality. Although Oliver Cromwell, great man that he was in England, maybe had the major effect of all in making the irish conscious as a nation.

But these folks in this near deserted Methodist chapel in Lexington are not into history. They are making their own history based on what is “Palestinianism” and they are pushing the “Palestinians” because that is the cutting edge of the Nazi ideology, “Jews are evil and eliminate them from the face of the earth”.

They make this history out of their heads. the are indeed subjective idealists. The “idea” comes first for them – not the study of living reality, which is also the study of living reality represented by the study of history. So the field of archaeology is most important in combatting this subjective idealism.

It is necessary to write more but at another time, especially around the theme that Chomsky often looked to as a “Marxist” and Socialist Theoretician, is indeed an explicit hater of Marxism.

It is time to light a Fenian Fuse underneath these lies and explode them to hell.

Dexter Van Zile of does a great job of reporting this conference and he makes many great points. He says the conference took place on “three days last week” which is in mid September. These Christians had gathered together mostly Israel hating Jews like Chomsky as speakers. This is terribly significant. van Zile has this memorable paragraph describing one such speaker:

“The audience ate this stuff up, giving Roy, who failed to offer any real critique of Palestinian behavior, a standing ovation for denouncing her fellow Jews.”

Gosh a standing ovation for such rubbish!

He makes another very salient point in that the audiences on the 3 days were mostly 50 to 60 year olds. No youth! Where were the youth!???

The url is

Saw it on Richard Landes Facebook page



Marxism must support Christians against Jihad as we support Alawites, Yazedis, Kurds and Jews
marxists of opposes the Jihad at all times in all cases



The Yazidis are monotheists who believe in a benevolent peacock angel (Melek Taus) and whose ancient gnostic. The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and other extremists tend to view the peacock angel as the malevolent archangel Lucifer or Satan and label the Yazidis as ‘devil worshippers’.[8][9]

Under Islamic Law as observed by ISIL, Yazidis are officially given the choice to convert to Sunni Islam or die. They are not eligible for the jizya tax taken from “People of the Book” by ISIL that would allow them to continue observing their religion.[10]


What did Karl Marx who founded scientif socialism have to say about the religion of Islam?

Marx just by studying the historical record, the documents, all the empirical evidence he could unearth came to the clear conclusión that the Muslim religión differs from all others in that it divides the world into two camps. That is first of all the Muslim camp. Second All Others. And the Koranic Word for these others is “Infidels”.

For Sunni Jurisprudence the Shia also are Infidels. For Shia the Sunnis are Infidels. The Yazedis are infidels.

What about the Alawites of which Assad is the leader. He is also supported by the Christian Churches in Syria – consistently so.

The best authority to understand this is Daniel Pipes who in a learned article written back in 1989 quoted authorities to claim that the Alawites held many tenets which were directly opposed to Islam, and his article contains this revealing piece, but it is all revealing:

Some ‘Alawi doctrines appear to derive from Phoenician paganism, Mazdakism and Manicheanism. But by far the greatest affinity is with Christianity. ‘Alawi religious ceremonies involve bread and wine; indeed, wine drinking has a sacred role in ‘Alawism, for it represents God. The religion holds ‘Ali, the fourth caliph, to be the (Jesus-like) incarnation of divinity. It has a holy trinity, consisting of Muhammad, ‘Ali, and Salman al-Farisi, a freed slave of Muhammad’s. ‘Alawis celebrate many Christian festivals, including Christmas, New Year’s, Epiphany, Easter, Pentecost, and Palm Sunday. They honor many Christian saints: St. Catherine, St. Barbara, St. George, St. John the Baptist, St. John Chrysostom, and St. Mary Magdalene. The Arabic equivalents of such Christian personal names as Gabriel, John, Matthew, Catherine, and Helen, are in common use. And ‘Alawis tend to show more friendliness to Christians than to Muslims.

For these reasons, many observers – missionaries especially – have suspected the ‘Alawis of a secret Christian proclivity. Even T. E. Lawrence described them as “those disciples of a cult of fertility, sheer pagan, antiforeign, distrustful of Islam, drawn at moments to Christianity by common persecution.”

(The Alawi Capture of Power in Syria… and wrote on this in a  piece which was highly praised:


The Jewish Zionist movement for many years now has not fought on the basis of principle. The highest level they reached, and it was not really that high as I will explain later, was when Arik Sharon travelled to Washington to oppose right down the line the Bush/Cheney/Blair planned attack on Iraq in 2003 with the aim of taking out Saddam Hussein. This was a very high level of political analysis because Sharon knew that Saddam was an enemy of the Jews and Israel, an Antisemite, but he still argued with Bush to defend Saddam, because Saddam as a secular leader was one of those like Mubarak and Gadhafi, who were a block to the advance of Jihad. Especially a block to Iranian Shia Jihad.

That was the highest level and there has been none higher in Israeli political life for many, many decades. It was as I said above not THAT high because Sharon kept it all secret. Most fatal weakness! Thus Israel took the blame anyway. As always his country was divided. The highly rated Caroline Glick was IN the war as an embedded journalist, not an independent journalist, she was cheering on the American Fascists. Netanyahu was for the invasion as well but as usual he was covering himself by making some remarks about uncertainty of the outcome. Mainly for it but as usual with a get out clause!

Since that time it has been downhill. Israel has now reached the stage that all of its leaders – except a few around Sharon at that time – where it has lost all moral right to speak about anything. And what things have taken place since that 2003 invasion. The 2003 invasion of Iraq by US and Western Imperialism has ben followed by episodes of the greatest and worst bestiality known in human history. BUSH BLAIR GLICK HAVE THIS ON THEIR SHOULDERS.

I opposed as a Trotskyist very bitterly the 2003 war and the reason was close to that of Sharon. I also reasoned that Saddam was a clear enemy of the Iranian Fascist Clerical hegemony in the Middle East and the World. I came from a Trotskyist and Marxist tradition. Sharon came from a hands on realistic tradition of the Jews always facing such huge odds and bitter genocidal enemies.

This reasoning was the direct opposite to that of Chomsky and the Anti-War Movement. They opposed the war on Saddam not at all for the above reasons, but for the very direct opposite. They were defending Islam and defending Jihad. They were especially defending the Iranian Mullahs and their spawn in the so called “Palestinians”.

Also they were saying Israel was behind the war. Do you see now the great dangers that people like Caroline Glick was causing.

What was the alternative to people like Caroline Glick and Melanie Phillips? Yes there is an answer to this and it was for Israel to reach an independent position, that is especially independent from US Imperialism.

Can Israel ever be independent from US Imperialism? Yes it can but to do so need to go back to the principles behind the English, American, French and later Russian Bolshevik Revolutions, all inter-connected.

Can Israel do that UNDER PRESENT LEADERS? No a thousand times no it can not!

Assad is an Antisemite as was his father but not grandfather. Clearly and without ambiguity he must be guarded against.

But Assad as the leader of the Alawites and supported by the Christians in Syria against the Imperialist Muslim Jihad aided by Imperialist American capitalism has a full right to defend itself BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.

Israeli leaders must make that right clear to the world. But will not. Israeli leaders must stand for that right but can not.

And if Israeli present leaders cannot stand for THAT right then they hjave no right to stand for anything. Simple as that.

From that folows the right of Israel to defend itself from any attack being made on it. But will present leaders defend Israel? No they will not. That is the harsh truth.

Vladimir Putin deepens Russian stake in Syria …

One reader of the above wrote:

This is an example of the analysis of the situation in Syria, and in this context Israel’s national interest, which does not avoid the complexity of this Syrian situation, so to say neither on the Syrian soil nor in the air. And yes, there are many Jewish schmocks within the media world and Jewish intellectuals who have not an ability to bring about such complex thinking which is needed.

That is high praise indeed more so because the writer is Jewish.

The writer calls for the need for “complex thinking” and praises out piece on that basis.



(Latest martin Sherman article Into the Fray points out the amazing fact the grand majority of Americans oppose this deal bitterly but the deal is going through anyway – we Trotskyists are saying this fact alone exposes dictatorship with certainty of brutal dictatorship being on cards).



September 18, 2015

Into the Fray: POTUS vs US

By Martin Sherman, JPOST

The Security Council [d]emands… that Iran shall suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, to be verified by the IAEA Security Council Resolution 1696, July 31, 2006

Iran will become a nuclear power. The only mystery over how that will happen is whether Obama was inept or whether he deliberately sought to make the theocracy some sort of strategic powerProf. Victor Davis Hanson, Senior Fellow Hoover Institute, Stanford University, September 15

Those who support the deal should be ashamed of… the undemocratic tactics and bigoted arguments employed to avoid a real debate and a majority vote. Prof. Alan Dershowitz, The Jerusalem Post, September 11.

Barring some totally unforeseen development – like a sudden display of robust Republican resolve and resourcefulness – it seems little can prevent the implementation of the infamous Iran nuclear deal, hatched in Vienna under the orchestration of the Obama administration.

‘Refashioning definition of victory’

This has been described by some as a “victory” for President Barack Obama (POTUS). “Victory,” however, is a rather incongruous – indeed, almost perverse – term to describe the emerging outcome.

For if victory is the imposition of one’s will on one’s adversary – and assuming, in this case, the adversary was Iran – then, what transpired in Vienna was, in fact, a stinging defeat for POTUS. After all, it was he who manifestly abandoned his originally declared objectives and accepted Iranian demands, inconceivable at the start of the negotiating process.

Accordingly, it was the Iranian will that prevailed, to a large degree, if not completely, and POTUS who submitted, if not completely, then in large measure, to the adversarial will of the ayatollahs.

So, if victory is the imposition of one’s will on another, it seems that the only “victory” that the POTUS could claim was victory over the US legislature, who overwhelmingly opposed him, over some of the US’s closest allies and… over the American people, the majority of whom disapprove of the deal.

For, it was against their clearly manifest will – and not that of the Iranians – that he railroaded through the ill-concocted deal, by means of brazen abuse of a quirk in the US legislative procedures – which permitted a small minority to impose its will on the majority.

Thus, even the slavishly Obamaphilic New York Times (September 10) was forced to admit that “securing the deal – without the support of a single member of the party now in control of Congress – is refashioning the definition of victory.”

‘Refashioning?’ Really? Perhaps “misrepresenting” might be a touch more apt? Disregard for will of the people

Indeed, in pushing the Iran deal through, despite the fierce opposition of almost two-thirds of Congress, the Obama administration is also riding roughshod, not only over the will of the elected representatives of the American people, but over the will of the American people – which according to numerous polls disapprove of it by a proportion similar to that in the legislature.

Thus, according to a recent CNN/ORC poll (September 13) “59% disapprove of the way Obama is handling the US relationship with Iran, and about half would have preferred Congress reject the deal.”

Moreover – and arguably more disturbing— the poll found that “most Americans think Iran will ultimately violate the terms of the agreement, with 37% calling that extremely likely and 23% saying it’s very likely.” Only 10% think it not likely at all.

Similar public sentiments were reflected in a poll conducted just prior to the vote on the deal by the Pew Research Center.

Published under the title “Support for Iran Nuclear Agreement Falls,” the findings of the study revealed: “As Congress prepares to vote on the Iran nuclear agreement, public support for the deal has declined.

Currently, just 21% approve of the agreement on Iran’s nuclear program… Nearly half (49%) disapprove.” Waning public support

Significantly, it would appear that the more the public knows about the deal, the more it opposes it. Thus, the Pew study found: “When opinion about the Iran nuclear agreement is based only on those who have heard about [it], opposition to the agreement exceeds support by more than a two-to-one margin (57% to 27%).”

Moreover, as time passes, support declines and opposition rises. According to the Pew study: “Among those aware of the Iran deal, the share approving of the agreement has declined 11 percentage points since July, while the percentage disapproving has risen nine points.”

The Washington Post, hardly the most Obamaphobic media vehicle, posted a flurry of poll results, all showing disintegrating support and mounting disapproval over time.

Thus, for example, a YouGov poll found that the number of respondents wanting the Senate to approve the deal plunged from 45% in mid-July to 37% in mid-August to a mere 23% in early September; while those wanting the Senate to disapprove rose steeply from 27% to 34% and then to 43% respectively.

Comparison with the results of Pew polls, conducted in July and September, show support falling from 33% to 21%, with opposition rising from 45% to 49%.

Other polls reflected similar trends of sagging support for the deal and growing public resistance to it.

Waning support among supporters

Thus, as The Washington Post noted, “support for the agreement consistently dropped over the summer,” and more significantly, “…the polls also reflect declining support among Democrats. By the beginning of September, there was barely a poll that, outside the margin of error, indicated majority support for the deal, let alone ‘strong’ support.”

Not even the most devoted sycophantic Obamaphile could attribute this to the fiendish malevolence of Bibi Netanyahu rather than to the troubling defects of the deal that kept emerging with the passage of time.

Indeed, the fading enthusiasm for the deal is clearly conveyed in the evolving rhetoric of the talking points, parroted by its apologists.

Initially, we were told that it was a “good deal” that “cut off all Iran’s pathways to a weapon”. However, soon it emerged that such optimism was, at best, dubious and, at worst, totally unfounded – and the tune changed. Now it was conceded that the deal was “flawed,” but the only alternative to war. When this mantra became a little threadbare, another, equally unpersuasive “rabbit” was pulled from the pro-deal spin-masters’ hat: The US’s credibility.

So the deal was no longer “a good deal,” and no longer “a flawed deal.” Now its only alleged “virtue” was that it was “a done deal” – which if not approved, would gravely undermine the US’s international standing.

Credo quia absurdum?

Incredibly, we are now being asked to swallow that if the noxious brew of incompetence, capitulation and self-obstruction is not approved, US credibility will be undermined.

This is an “argument” (for want of a better word) strongly reminiscent of the Latin phrase “Credo quia absurdum” (“I believe because it is absurd.”) For the contention is so transparently ridiculous, it can only be explained by blind faith, independent of reason and adherence to dogma despite all logic.

Indeed, one can think of nothing else that would undermine US credibility more than acceptance of the deal. For it not only vacates a string of UN resolutions, which, as Henry Kissinger pointed out in an appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee, were designed “to deny Iran the capability to develop a military nuclear option,” but makes a mockery of previous robustly declared objectives of the administration itself.

After all, Obama himself pledged during his 2012 election campaign: “The deal we’ll accept is they end their nuclear program. It’s very straightforward.”

About a year later, the administration’s chief negotiator, Secretary of State John Kerry, told the House Foreign Affairs Committee that the whole point of imposing sanctions was to get “Iran [to] dismantle its nuclear program.”

It is difficult to conceive of anything that could erode US standing and credibility more than the dramatic abandonment of these clearly stated goals – unless of course it is the breathtaking incompetence with which the negotiations were conducted, the disingenuous manner in which they were presented, and the humiliating self-effacement with which their outcome was rationalized. Negotiating for defeat

Indeed, it is hard to avoid the impression that the Obama team, headed by Kerry, was not really conducting negotiations with Iran over the terms of the deal, but with domestic adversaries and, of course, with Benjamin Netanyahu.

After all, it is difficult to otherwise understand why they were so eager to articulate public warnings/threats that if a deal, any deal, was not cut with Iran, the sanctions regime – that brought the Iranians to the table – would disintegrate.

Or why they were so ready to express their reluctance to confront Iran with a credible military threat – thereby clearly conveying to Tehran that (in the words of Henry Kissinger and George Shultz), “[t]he threat of war… constrains the West more than Iran.”

This is no way to negotiate victory, certainly not in the “Middle Eastern bazaar” and certainly not with a protagonist such as Iran.

For this ensured the mullahs that they had little to fear, either economically or militarily. Thus, as The Washington Post’s Michael Gerson wrote this week in a trenchantly entitled piece, “Iran thumbs its nose at the United States”: “In practice, this means that Iran can do whatever it damn well pleases because it knows the Americans are too invested in the deal to blow it up.”

A deal US is neither part of, nor privy to

But perhaps the most startling – indeed, staggering – aspect of the administration’s enthusiastic endorsement of the “deal” is that, in fact, it is neither really part of, nor privy to it! Firstly, the terms of the deal – aka the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – specifically exclude US personnel from the inspection process of Iranian sites, which will be under the auspices of the IAEA. Secondly, there are significant “side-deals” between the IAEA and Iran regarding the implementation of JCPOA that the US is not privy to, nor has any one of its senior officials even seen them.

This was made disturbingly clear from the embarrassingly bumbling appearances of Kerry and US Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz before the Senate Armed Services Committee (July 29). Both Kerry and Moniz – central figures in concluding the deal with Iran – admitted to never even seeing these side deals, nor of being aware of their contents.

Thus, we have an almost surreal situation emerging, in which the US administration calls on the US legislature to approve implementation of an agreement, which the US will not only be unable to verify, but will be unaware of what actually should be verified!! Although limitations of space preclude providing a full transcript of the hearing, I would urge readers to view the videos of the grilling of Kerry and Moniz to gauge the astounding ignorance/ineptitude that emerges from their lame responses to questions that go to the heart of the Iranian deal.

Please don’t peeve the mullahs

Indeed, in many ways, the manner in which the deal was concluded turns what would have been expected to be the normal order of things on its head.

Thus, instead of Iran having to prove its trustworthiness, the administration warned that it was the US that would have to prove its good faith to the ayatollahs – who, even the deal’s proponents admit, have cheated on every previous agreement. Thus in an August 5 interview in The Atlantic, Kerry warned: “The ayatollah constantly believed that we are untrustworthy, that you can’t negotiate with us, that we will screw them. This [a congressional rejection] will be the ultimate screwing.”

In other words, no matter what the nature of the deal, the elected representatives of the American people should have no say in what is considered by many to be the “most consequential national security decision” in decades – regardless of how slovenly it was dealt with.

Moreover, instead of waiting for the Iranians to ratify the deal, before bringing it to Congress for approval, Obama rushed to the UN Security Council for endorsement of the deal – thereby undercutting the standing of the US legislature and the significance of its decision.

Now, with the sanctions regime essentially unraveled, what if the mullahs, who have yet to formally approve the deal, reject it? So much for concern for US credibility…

Can good faith be assumed?

Much has still been left unsaid. But even from what has been, troubling questions arise. After all, in the face of what seems almost incomprehensible incompetence, negligence and dereliction, it is becoming increasingly difficult to unquestioningly accept that the Obama administration conducted the negotiations with Iran in good faith.

we Trotskyists make some additional points

  1. It is not a “victory” for Obama, especially not a victory over the Republicans and Netanyahu. It is a defeat and a clear danger to the very future of humanity
  2. Sherman shows that it is against the will and as time goes on more and more against thedeepest STATED feelingsl of the great majority of the American people. So serious as this is, an existentialist question for Jews, it is also a question of brutal dictatorship waiting in the wings, or finding a way to avoid that dictatorship
  3. That the powerful president of the United States acts in this way, and the Congress of the US is unable to stop him, is a major defeat, for American democracy but also for all of humanity

I would like to add one more thing. Capitalism has pushed this Deal forward to the present dangerous stage represented in my points 1, 2 and 3 above.

Please emphasise and understand it is CAPITALISM not Islam because that(Islam) is the enemy involved. It is not feudalism, papacy, protestantism or any other entity. Capitalism has created this Deal.

If that is not emphasised nothing is gained.

The capitalist governments and large capitalist corporations have made a dash to complete this Deal even as the great majority are opposing it, and as time goes on opposing it bitterly.

They are:

Iran…yes Iran the cause of all the worry has a say but amazingly Israel in the greatest danger of all is excluded what sense could there be in that!!!

China…that is Stalinist Maoist China now totally capitalist


Russia…that is Stalinist Russia and without any doubt capitalist

United Kingdom

United States

PLUS Germany and the European Union

Iran is the centre of the Jihad. All the rest of these countries have a large Antisemitic content. The US is the exception in this regard…the elite is Antisemitic but its people are staunch friends of the Jews and their State of Israel (in broad terms true but needs unwinding in further elaborative discussion, but true for now)

Those are the countries who in this deal are bitter dangers to the Jews as happened before. This is the thing …we are not starting from scratch as it were…this situation did occur in our living history (1939-45)

What is the morive force – the real motive force in this: It is capitalist crisis. It is the capitalist system.

Let me take two other countries not involved in the discussions to clarify this point. They are Ireland and Spain. Ireland is a country now deeply socially divided because the economic near colapse of 2008 has driven its people into an almost barbaric austerity. Never so socially divided as in the past 7 years. Take Spain and consider this. The same collapse of 2008 ushered in a period of great tensions in the people with an offshoot of Basque and Catalonian Independence being pushed forward by that same crisis. The unemployment among all the working people of Spain has stood at about 25 per cent…now 23 something per cent. But most dramatically and the stuff of Nazi Fascism the unemployment among 18 to 25 year olds is about 60 and maybe even 70 per cent (things are confused by the usual means) and there has been MASSIVE emigration from Spain.


The reaon being they are under such internal pressures that they make a dash for profit. Within days the expert on what this deal means, Omri Ceren, was pointing out on a Youtube video…THE BRITS HAVE OPENED THEIR EMBASSY IN TEHERAN and Ceren elaborated “trade missions follow”

Therefore this Iran Deal is both direct and immediate danger of Nuclear Conflagration and/or expression of deep Arab and Muslim Jew Hatred leading to genocide of the Jews (again) and it is also a systematic issue of how capitalism actually works.

Can I put it more concretely…the petty little Irish capitalist concerns and the petty little Spanish concerns will support this deal as they make a dash for profit…to keep their system on the rails.

The deal calls for social revolution in the world because as Jews and all of us are threatened with Nuclear Conflagration and Antisemitism becomes a live issue for all, it is written into the deal in a side annex that is not even published!!! that the US is obligated to defend the Iranian Nuclear Programme if Israel, as indeed it must,decides to fight it in the only way that is left – attack Iran with everything that Israel has got.

That fact alone adds up to the need to overthrow the American capitalist system and advance towards a socialist/communist commonwealth in whatever way we can with whatever safeguards we can muster BECAUSE THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE.

This deal is as serious as that.




I maintain that it was the Bush war on Saddam that began the spiral towards the barbarities of ISIS and the ISIS Caliphate.

from 9/11 to ISIS Bush began it with his war on Saddam thereby promoting Iran causing the ISIS caliphate to arise with unspeakable barbarity

It is now 14 years since this horrific event. By early 2002 Bush and the Americans had went into Afghanistan, defeated the Taliban and dispersed Al Qaida

Bush and the Americans moved on. It was in January 2002 that Bush made the notorious State of the Unión Speech (or Address) in which he referred to the Axis of Evil Rogue States which included as the main ones : North Korea, Iran, Iraq.


I personally feel now that this Bush Speech was a carefully crafted lie, a fraud. It was a cover for the real aims of American Imperialism.

It has not been emphasised before except for a few people such as Francisco Gil White and Jared Israel…but the real aim of the Bush rhetoric in that awful speech was the promotion of Iranian hegemony in the Middle East,  and to this effect the removal of Saddam Hussein who was the main block to Shia hegemony in Iraq.

The Americans had looked at the situation carefully and rationally as they always do. Israel was more and more slipping as an ally of the US (if it ever really was)

The inclusion of North Korea is a joke…just not relevant.

Saddam and Iraq were of no use to America whatsoever because they were secular, also hihly unstable, and America was aiming at Jihad Fascism to control the masses and to créate Fascist Dictatorship (Sharia) – which alone could control the (hungry) masses. Also mark you America and Europe would proceed by bringing in millions of Sharia crazy Muslims into their OWN countries, thus destabilizing and driving to dictatorships in America and Europe. (Bat ye’or prescience proven in  action)

So the Iraq war of 2003 was, make no mistake about this, quite consciously waged in order to promote Iran and Shia Fascist Sharia Dictatorship.

From this war the Americans, Europe and NATO proceeded to remove all of the secular leaders who were Ben Ali in Tunisia, Mubarak in Egypt, Gadhafi in Libya, and Assad in Syria.

The days of Kings, then the old Baathist type alliances, also that type of Antisemitism, of Nasserism and its hostility to the Muslim Brotherhood, etc. were over.

Iranian Nuclear arming, Iranian Sharia Power, ISIS Caliphate, these kinds of ideas were never fearful to the American and European ruling clases. Why was this so.


A system (capitalism) in mortal peril has never been afraid of such things. AnyTHing is better for the capitalists tHan the communism notion and with it real threat.

There is no greater fear among the capitalists than communism. I can see this too inside these blogs and Facebook pages where these spooks who inhabit the anti-Jihad movement always introduce their hatreds of communism as a prime mover for them. They cannot leave it alone ever and it gives them away.


The anti-war stalinists and revisionists, such as the Chomskys of this world, opposed the war on Saddam because they thought the Americans would go on to attack Iran.

We true Trotskyists opposed the war on Saddam because we say America was leading towards an Alliance with the Iranian Mullahs.

We alone almost in the whole world, were definitely right, and the proof today is the Nuclear Deal with Iran. From 9/11 to the Iran Deal there is a DIRECT LINE if you know how to look. It is not so much conspiracy in any way, but pure logic, and learning from what they do not what they say.


Islamic Republic of Iran sentences man to have eyes gouged out, another has hand and foot amputated

reprinted from

Iran-eye-gouging-sentenceIran is simply following the Qur’an, which stipulates: “And We ordained for them therein a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds is legal retribution. But whoever gives charity, it is an expiation for him. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed – then it is those who are the wrongdoers.” (5:45)

And: “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides…” (5:33)

“Iran regime sentences man to have eyes gouged out,” NCRI, August 5, 2015:

NCRI – The mullahs’ inhuman regime in Iran has sentenced a young man to be blinded.

The cruel and medieval sentence was handed down on Saturday (August 1) to the 27-year-old man only identified by his first name Hamed.

Hamed had told the regime’s court that in March 2011, when he was 23 years old, he unintentionally caused an eye injury to another young man in a street fight, according to the official state-run Iran newspaper.

“It was around midnight and I was sitting at home when my mother called me and said that my father had gotten into a car accident. I rushed to the scene to help my dad, but I really didn’t intend to injure anyone’s eye,” Hamed told the regime’s court.

Following this sentence, Ms. Farideh Karimi, a member of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) and a human rights activist, said:

“It is deeply regretful that European governments are not protesting such cases of barbarity in Iran. These savage acts which constitute torture are enshrined in the Iranian regime’s laws. At least four people were hanged in public in Iran last month. Such public hangings also constitute a form of public torture. When people are urged to go to the scene, everyone who is faced with that sight is also tortured by that barbaric act. One must ask: Why has the EU closed its eyes to these atrocities.”

The Iranian regime’s judiciary officials have publicly defended limb amputations, eye gouging, and even stoning to death as a very real part of their judicial law.

Mohammad-Javad Larijani, the head of the Iranian regime’s ‘Human Rights Council’, said on April 10, 2014: “The problem is that the West does not understand that Qisas (law of retribution) is different from execution. We are not ashamed of stoning or any of the Islamic decrees.”

“No one has the right to tell a judge to avert some sentences because the United Nations gets upset. We should firmly and seriously defend the sentence of stoning.”

He has also said: “Retaliation and punishment are beautiful and necessary things. It’s a form of protection for the individual and civil rights of the people in a society. The executioner or the person administering the sentence is in fact very much a defender of human rights. One can say that there is humanity in the act of retaliation.”

The Iranian regime on Monday amputated the hand and foot of an inmate in a prison in Mashhad, northeast Iran.

The prisoner, only identified as Rahman K., had his right hand and left foot severed by the authorities. A second prisoner is awaiting the same sentence imminently….


An absolute outrage being carried out by the present Netanyahu Government witht he arrest above of the  Young Jewish patriot and grandson of the Jewish slain patriot Meir Kahane in which Mrs Shaked is up to her eyeballs

What an outrage! What an absolute outrage that this happens in the supposedly Jewish state of Israel. That the grandson of the late Rabbi Meir Kahane, outstanding patriot of the Jewish state, murdered by a Jihadist, should be so treated.


  1. Banned earlier this year from living in Judea and Samaria because he opposed the demolition of Jewish villages in Judea and Samaria by the IDF. Also had been banned from ENTERING JERUSALEM for six months due to expire in November
  2. Is being questioned about Friday’s arson attack in Duma where the Arab baby died. (Police first claimed it was done by Jews. This claim backed up by all Jewish political elites including Shaked. But just yesterday police admitted they had no clue and appealed to the public for help)
  3. The reactionary Government of Netanyahu is using extreme hate measures against JEWS. This involves all levels of this government which is SUPPOSED TO BE a patriotic government. Many Jews voted for this government in the recent election IN ORDER TO KEEP TRAITORS LIVNI AND HERTZOG from having their hands on state power. That was correct (just imagine what THEY would be doing now) but the betrayal of this Government is made all the worse seen against THAT background
  4. A special word of condemnation must be placed against the party of Bennett including Ayelet Shaked, who entered the government of Netanyahu to great fanfare from many conservative type Jewish political figures. On this issue in recent days Shaked has turned out to be the very worst of the worst, an absolute and complete TRAITOR TO THE JEWISH PEOPLE whose statements in recent days place her right at the centre of this hounding of the grandson of Meir Kahane. Bennett and Shaked and the other six of their dismal party so-called (What a joke!) Jewish Home, are right alongside Ya’alon in the persecution of this young Jew and grandson of Kahane.

Let me pause and consider precisely what Bennett and Mrs Ayelet Shaked of as from today ever cursed Jewish memory are standing alongside and these words really do speak for themselves SO PLEASE READ THEM CAREFULLY:



Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon said Monday that the government would not hesitate to jail Israelis under those conditions. “We will use [administrative detention] in cases where it is clear that individuals are involved in terror, but we do not have the evidence to arrest them,” he said at a press conference Monday. Ya’alon said that he was aware that the tool of administrative detention was a harsh – and controversial – one, but the events of recent days, especially the arson at the Arab village of Duma, left Israel with no choice. “This will be one of the more drastic tools that we can employ to fight Jewish terror, but it will be used if necessary in order to bring terrorists to justice and defend Israeli democracy,” he said.

“We intend to fight Jewish terror without compromise,” Ya’alon said. “This is a struggle for the image and being of the State of Israel, and we will not give up this struggle.”

Security agents interrogating Jewish activist Meir Ettinger on his involvement in ‘organizing extremist Jewish activities.’


By Yaakov Levi

8/3/2015, 8:45 PM


The central position that I as a Trotskyist take on the Middle East is that the Jews, that is Israel, are fighting against the ghastly Islamic Jihad.

This Jihad is worldwide and it is the same in the Middle East as it is in Nigeria BOKO HARAM or in Pakistan where a Christian Mother is sentenced to death for leaving Islam, as it is in Rotherham in the North of England where Muslim gangs rape and attack British girls.

Karl Marx was a very political, theoretical and studious person. He did take time to study Islam in the Ottoman Empire and he concluded that Islam divided the world into two parts, the world of the believers,a nd the world of the Infidel, and the Muslims waged war on all of the rest of humanity. He reached this conclusion and wrote about it in The Chigago Tribune.

That is still the main lesson today.

the war against Israel by Arabs called “Palestinians” is really nothing more or less than the Islamic Jihad, the same that Marx condemned in 1852. That is about 2015 – 1852 some 163

years ago, a very long time in politics or in modern politics anyway

So why have we not learned. This is because of ideology and vested interests. There are many people who back Arabs and Muslims because of money. One of these was George Bush and the whole of the Bush family had huge ties with Saudi Oil Businessmen. Jimmy Carter huge money from Arabs for his Foundation. The Clintons huge money again from the Arabs. Tony Blair huge money. The Tories same. The Spanish Parties all are tied to this Arab wealth.

And the ideology follows.

The lies follow the ideology which is following the money.

Then there is fear. Many of these and there are many in the world who are scared stiff of Jihad. This is especially the case of the Governments of Europe and America and you can see this especially among all of the Media like the BBC. In fact I heard

You have to be independent to be able to examine things today to look at the truth.



keep in mind jihad



The key evidence as to what happened in the arson attack that burned the young Arab child does not come from any of these politicians, who all seem to have an axe to grind, but from the evidence collected by a young settler who visited the village to pay his repects to the bereaved family.

Israeli society is split down the middle. It is split on this central question which is very similar to a massive split throughout western society as a whole. The question is: “ …Is the Palestinian Arab movement a true national movement or is it an expression of Muslim Jihadist Antisemitism? THAT is the issue. THAT is the issue that is splitting Jews in Israel and is the issue that needs to be cleared up”…

The Sharon disengagement from Gush Katif in Gaza and another area in the “West Bank” was not meant to be a one off but was meant to lead to a total disengagement from large areas of the West Bank and the creation of a unitary obviously Judenfrei “Palestinian” state.

However Sharon was very nearly not able to complete even the Gaza withdrawal because the Hamas rockets were raining down on the IDF even as they withdrew from Gaza and even more importantly the masses of Israelis especially Israeli youth were showing strong misgivings about the whole Gaza withdrawal. It was that movement of the Israeli (can I call it?) mass movement that stopped Sharon advancing towards his cherished aim of creating the Palestinian Arab State, imposing a dictatorship over the Israeli people, thus instituting Jihadism inside of the Arab segment, a Jihadism meant to solve that issue once and for all.

Sharon was thus that section of Israeli society which continued to deny the central fact mentioned above … that what Israelis were always facing was a facet of the Muslim Jihad, all carefully wrapped up inside the Arab “Narrative” of lies concerning Jews driving “Palestinians” from their homes in 1948 and 1967, a narrative never answered by the Israeli elites, who controlled the state coffers, and who always had the means to answer those lies but would not ever do so.

Thus this is the basic divide inside of Israeli society. Is the Arab Palestinian Narrative and Continual Agitation against the Israeli Jewish State part of that International Muslim Jihad, or is it not?

That is the divide in Israeli society and there is no other divide. Of course there are many other “disagreements” but they are not so central as this. Jews have always fallen into many brackets. There have always been Jews with strong religious convictions and there have been Jews with strong atheist convictions. They have always managed to rub along together just fine. There is no problem here and there never has been a problem for the good and simple reason that both a religious Jew and an atheistic Jew can be bound together in a devotion to a Jewish Homeland, which is another name for the internationally recognized concept of national liberation.

It was totally a similar situation in Yugoslavia during the 1990s. There a witchhunt was raised against Slobodan Milosevic on an international scale and from there the biggest lie in the history of humanity was constructed by the Media, that is the so-called “Srebrenica Massacre”. There are two main lessons:


LESSON 1 … that in Yugoslavia the central issue was that the Christian Serbs were fighting against especially and above all the Islamist Jihadist and anti-Serb bigot Izetbegovic. He wrote “there can be no peace or co-existence between the Islamic faith and non-Islamic societies and political institutions”. The struggle was against the Jihad just as the struggle in Israel is against the Jihad. Serb hatred, Jew hatred, these are the forms but the content is the Jihad which comes out of the religion/ideology of Islam

LESSON 2 … that having created the Big Lie of Srebrenica there can never be any going back by the Media. There are far too many journalists, Media Outlets, Newspapers, who have expended huge amounts of money and their own eputation. So the Big Lie needs to be continued and reconstructed anew day by day and week by week without end. There is no possibility of breaking through on this as long as the Big Media control the Narrative.

It will be the same in the Big Lie of the arson attacks in Duma. The key evidence, but evidence which has only been allowed on the pages of the Jewish patriotic Israel National News, and only once there, is that of the young Jewish “settler” who visited the place, a visit organized by left wing groups for their own Israel-hating ends.

Yonadav Tapuch travelled to Duma to pay his condolences to the family. He did so as part of a group of “settlers” who were used and who in the end were denied an occasion to speak to the family. These Jews well meaning from the Jewish villages were photographed in a certain way that propagandistically will be used against them.

However Yodadav Tapuch an ordinary Jewish man on that trip simply reported a few basic facts which are undeniable

1. There are reports that a feud existed inside this Muslim village between two families and going back 15 years. This can have great bearing on the truth of this affair.

2. The report from Duma itself said that two houses and not one was attacked. The first proved to be empty. Then these unknown arsonists found that the second house was not easy to enter or to firebomb from the front. They are said to have therefore went round the back, entered, had contact with the family, fired it, left, masked, oh and they had chosen houses in the centre of the village, so they had to make their way right out of that village, not an easy task for strangers. It seems that these arsonists had no fear, had all the time in the world, and they did all of this in a village which let them and let them have all of that time in the world to do this.

3. Our young Jewish chap had travelled out to the village by bus and on the bus he was alarmed at the hatred for the Jewish people in the villages of Judea and Samaria being expressed by those Jewish (activists against the settlers) people on the bus

Let me finish with the very revealing words of this young Jewish man in his twenties as to what he learned, and saw, all of which was and is immediately available to one and all who want to know the truth, but obviously truth here is not on the agenda at all:

“It was impossible to ignore some of the more curious aspects of the story. I would start with the fact that the two houses (I had always thought only one house was burnt) are located in the center of the village, and that in order to get there we had to travel a number of minutes from the entrance. Duma is spread out over a gigantic area, and the houses are situated at the end of a winding road, among fences and yards.
“According to the Duma version, the attackers burnt one house, then saw that it was empty, and so they went to set fire to the next house. The second house is enclosed by a fence, and the windows are covered by a dense lattice; a firebomb cannot be hurled through the windows, and in any event it is very hard to reach the windows behind the fence. The arsonists had to go around the house, enter the yard, and place the firebombs through the lattice. According to the Duma version, the attackers entered the house, stood over the parents and did not let them leave until the flames engulfed the house. Only then did the arsonists run away from the village.

“I can only say that when the arsonists are ultimately caught, we will get to hear a fascinating story of why they chose to navigate their way all the way into the middle of the village, and how they had time to set a house on fire, wait to find that it was empty, then walk around and enter another house and set it on fire, wait with the parents, spray graffiti in two places
including with a little design of a crown! and then run away through the middle of the village with all the townspeople surely already up and on their feet seeing the flames and hearing the family’s cries. Something here is very fishy…” ”





Most revealing to me is the position of Justice Minister Shaked when she said:

“”This attack is terrorism,” Shaked said, speaking on Israel Radio. “There is no connection between it and the right wing. This is terrorism, terrorism for its own sake, and we should treat it harshly.”

“It’s not about the Right, or ‘settlers’,” she stressed. “It’s the right of the Israel Security Agency to deal with terrorism, even if it is Jewish terrorism.” “Jewish terror against the State is even more harmful to security than Arab terrorism,” she continued.

“We have experienced very few attacks against the Arabs, but such an attack does do great harm to state security and we need to use all resources to handle it.” “

There is no indication from Shaked that this may be much more and may indeed be a false flag operation made to use for repression of Jews in Israel.

When Shaked says here that “Jewish terror is even more harmful…than Arab terrorism” she is inferring, going along with the heaps of international reactionary nonsense, that it was Jews who did this, despite a whole long record and history of Arab false flags against the Jews, one of the main ones being the el Dura affair of a few years back.

This confirms my opinion of Bennett and Shaked and their party as being a little like the Podemos in Spain, thrust forward by a mass protest movement but without any real political programme to meet the crisis.

She represents another branch of leadership in Israel without any political roots and anchorage based on programme. An ad hoc grouping that when the first serious test comes she caves in to the international Antisemitism and pro-Jihadism, which is what this is all about.

It is in moments of crisis that people are tested out and Shaked in htis one statement on this critical issue shows that she will betray and betray big time.

The main thing to understand about the events in the Middle East is that it is an Islamic or Muslim Jihad against the Jews and Christians

What is needed in Israel is the same as is needed in every country, essentially a youth movement which is based on programme, which seeks the truth at every turn, and which is never swayed by propaganda, and which is rock firm on principles.

there is a huge dividing line opening up here. From the evidence of Yonadav Tapuchi it is impossible for Jewish people to have carried out this firebombing of houses. How to get in how to get out? Just not possible in such an Arab vilage simple as that.

Shaked is now a HUGE LIABILITY to all Jews. Always seen from now on as a person who joined with the enemy when the pressure was on.

It was not a Jew who did the firebombing at all. Anybody with common sense says it was not a Jew.

But say for argument sake Jews did carry out such a firebombing? That falls into the political category of individual terrorism, they attempt to use terror against the enemy Jihad, because it is based on the individual. That is not something for moral outrage, that is something to be opposed because it is the wrong method to use in a real war, because it is also a method that can be adopted by the agent provocateur, and it is a method which leads to isolation.


These events surrounding this false flag arson of an Arab house, or an inter Muslim feud arson attack on a family fastened upon by dubious forces to blacken the name of Jews. Then to use that whole false flag situation to wage a war on patriots in Judea and Samaria in order to usher in a forced set of evictions and do the same as the Gaza Withdrawal, create a Judenfrei space for the Muslim Jihad against Jews. But this all carried out by a whole layer right across the board of trairorous Jews. The big lesson here is that patriotic Jews have nobody not even Bennett and Shaked who are providing the cover for Netanyahu and others. This affoirms what I said above. The youth of Israel is the youth everywhere in every country must become independent in a mass movement to challenge this old outdated system and its treacherous political leites. That is the perspective and path. It opens up hope not despair. The very opposite of despair all is to play for because change goes quick in todays world.

Cecil left behind 24 cubs, who will probably killed by rival males seeking to replace him as alpha

Cecil left behind 24 cubs, who will probably killed by rival males seeking to replace him as alpha

The righteous hatred for Palmer and disgust at what he did is shown in this picture of Americans outside of his petty Little dental practice

The last known photo of Cecil. cecil is at bottom.

Palmer is a specialist bow and arrow killer. He wounded VCecil then followed him for 40 hours. Ended in decapitation and skinning the animal. This comfortable living “dentist”