THE WEST LOST ITS MORAL COMPASS (WHICH IT RARELY USED FOR CENTURIES) WITH THE ASSASSINATION OF PATRICE LUMUMBA.... THEN CAME THE ASSASSINATION OF JFK... 

Patrice Émery Lumumba[e] (/pəˈtriːs lʊˈmʊmbə/ ⓘ pə-TREESSluu-MUUM-bə;[3] born Isaïe Tasumbu Tawosa;[4] 2 July 1925 – 17 January 1961) was a Congolese politician and independence leader who served as the first prime minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (then known as the Republic of the Congo) from June until September 1960, following the May 1960 election. He was the leader of the Congolese National Movement(MNC) from 1958 until his assassination in 1961. Ideologically an African nationalist and pan-Africanist, he played a significant role in the transformation of the Congo from a colony of Belgium into an independent republic.

Shortly after Congolese independence in June 1960, a mutiny [WE SUSPECT THIS WAS BROKERED BY THE CIA] broke out in the army, marking the beginning of the Congo Crisis. After a coup, Lumumba attempted to escape to Stanleyville to join his supporters who had established a new anti-Mobutu state called the Free Republic of the Congo. Lumumba was captured en route by state authorities under Joseph-Désiré Mobutu, sent to the State of Katanga and, with the help of Belgian mercenaries, tortured and executed by the separatist Katangan authorities of Moïse Tshombe. In 2002, Belgium formally apologised for its role in the execution, admitting "moral responsibility", and in 2022, they returned Lumumba’s tooth to his family. He is seen as a martyr for the pan-African movement.

https://yandex.com/search/?text=patrice+lubumba&lr=10145&search_source=yacom_desktop_common

A TOOTH !!!!!

===========================

INFO COMING FROM THE JERUSALEM POST-CRAP....

Dozens of white storks were severely injured in northern Israel during April after colliding with overhead power lines, Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael-Jewish National Fund (KKL-JNF) reported on Wednesday.

According to the organization, most incidents occurred in the Golan Heights, particularly in areas where new power lines and wind farms have been built.

Since the start of the spring migration season, numerous reports have been received of dead or seriously injured storks. Many were evacuated to KKL-JNF’s Wildlife Acclimation Center in poor condition, suffering from open fractures and extensive bleeding.

https://www.jpost.com/environment-and-climate-change/article-853103

NO MENTION OF THE GENOCIDE COMMITTED BY ISRAEL IN THIS RAG-SHIT....

========================

U.S. has lost its moral compass so Russia will prevail in Ukraine
John Floyd

The United States has lost its moral compass. America, in the not-too-distant past, possessed unequivocal and correct morals founded on the principles of appropriate conduct toward other Americans.

Right and wrong seem to have had definition changes as evidenced by Wall Street transgressions; entertainment industry lifestyles, using that word loosely; political scandals perpetuated by self-serving politicians; sports figures who conduct themselves more like hooligans than athletes; ministers who support their existence promoting racism; thieving doctors in the medical community; a legal system out of control; and a national media that has lost all sense of objectivity. This is only a partial list of individuals and organizations in the United States that have seemingly sold their soul to the devil.

I don’t mean to broad brush the listed organizations, but there are certain segments and individuals that should be excised from the professions they represent. There are individuals on Wall Street, and I use this term to represent the business community, who destroy livelihoods of common Americans. With all their get-rich schemes, someone has to lose, and it is usually the man on the street, the most vulnerable of all investors.

I personally know individuals who thought they had money for retirement but watched it disappear because of the actions of men like Bernie Madoff, king of all Ponzi schemes. Madoff will be incarcerated for the rest of his life, but that doesn’t do anything for investors who lost their life savings.

The entertainment industry, “Hollywood”, does great harm to both children and adults, in other words, the entire spectrum of American life. Many of America’s children consider Hollywood figures as role models, absolutely the worst example young people could choose.

The entertainment industry’s lifestyle is so foreign to mainstream America one has to wonder why vile speaking drug abusers can have such a dramatic influence on both children and adults. Could it be that mainstream America, after broadside after broadside, has become de-sensitized to the sex, murder, and mayhem that are a continuing and expanding product of Hollywood?

One cannot keep up with sports figures unless you know their jail numbers. Professional basketball and football leagues seem to be internship training for murder and other grievous manifestations against people who support their exalted existence. Professional sports role models exist for America’s young people but are few and far between. For every true role model, there are 20 hooligans.

So-called religious ministers in the United States continually inflame the American public about racism because racism is their “raison d’etre”, reason to be. If these ministers couldn’t keep the flames of racism fanned, their existence as religious leaders would be questionable. Much worse are the predatory priests of the Catholic Church. Predatory priests have committed the most egregious of crimes hiding behind the cloak of Christianity.

The medical profession through actions of many medical professionals has become one of the biggest drug pushers in America. Doctor after doctor has been charged with issuing prescriptions under very questionable circumstances. Some doctors treat patients for non-existent illnesses and perform unnecessary surgeries, both to generate tainted income.

The legal profession plays games with laws of the United States. Lawyers look for any loophole that will generate income for them individually or for their firm. Unprincipled lawyers have created a legal environment of questionable sustainability.

The United States is reaching overload on frivolous lawsuits that suffocate the court systems and cause important litigation delays. That may be good with the soft-headed judges now populating the judiciary system.

The media of the United States, both print and television, need to do a self-analysis of how news is being presented to the American public. Too much attention is paid to the personalities presenting the news, and not enough attention is paid to news content.

In the United Kingdom, where I lived for four years, the newscasters there were called news readers. The network basically read the news as it happened and left the interpretation of the news to the listener. That is the way it should be in the United States

Last but not least, the contemptible and miserable politicians who populate Congress and the American government couldn’t find the word “morality” in the dictionary.

Loss of morality in the United States did not start in the Obama Administration, but it has accelerated under this do-nothing president. It is not what Obama has done. He doesn’t know anything to do but jump on Air Force One and give an eloquent speech.

Only one speech I have ever heard changed a nation, and that was President John F. Kennedy’s speech when he asked a nation not what your country could do for you, but what could you do for your country. President Kennedy’s speech was a unifying call that was heeded by most Americans.

Conversely, President Obama has created a division among classes and races that can lead to the failure of this once-great nation.

John Adams warned the United States about Presidents like Obama. He said, “Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide.” The United States is presently on track to making John Adams a prophet. We are already through the “wastes phase” and are now becoming “exhausted.” America began murdering itself long ago.

The murdering process started when people had to start locking their doors. It started when a young person could no longer go to a movie without being in danger, and police, our protectors, being treated by the judicial system as the enemy. The murdering process accelerated when President Barack Obama chose to pit white against black instead of acting as a unifying influence. It accelerated dramatically when he decided to separate Americans by class.

I don’t care whether you are black or white, liberal or conservative, rich or poor. Please take an objective look at what President Obama has allowed to happen to our country. I say allowed because he has not been totally responsible.

Moral destruction acceleration is the product of a left-leaning bureaucracy put in place by the President and left-leaning members of the Democrat Party. The leftist bureaucracy drafts questionable and restrictive legislation for Congressional Democrat robots to pass.

I long for a time when a 10 year-old boy could walk the nation’s streets without fear.

Do citizens of the United States have the ability or desire to recover moral values of past years? It had better!

I would like to add that a nation that manipulates election results in foreign countries, and the one responsible for the coup in Ukraine has no moral standing to ask Russia to withdraw from Crimea. Russia and other countries will continue to brush aside the U.S. forever till the U.S recover their moral values. EU and Israel and other countries should learn from the U.S and change their wicked immoral ways or I fear the worst.

The same thing which happened to the Roman Empire seems to choke the U.S.

https://earlytoday.wordpress.com/2014/03/09/u-s-has-lost-its-moral-compass-so-russia-will-prevail-in-ukraine/

===================================

THEN COMES THE HYPOCRISY OF THE 7ISRAEL NATIONAL NEWS

Do we deserve this barbarity?
The West has lost its moral compass. What does it expect?
Giulio Meotti

Can the killing of a gorilla in a zoo in Cincinnati, committed to save the life of a child, unleash more emotion and more media coverage than the decapitation of 21 Christians in a beach in Libya? Yes.

The Media Research Center reveals that mainstream television stations dedicated six times as much air time to the death of the gibbon Harambe than they did to the barbaric execution by the Islamic State of 21 Coptic Christians.  

Saturday, May 28, security officers fired at the gorilla to protect a three year old child who fell into the cage. In the five days after the death of the animal, the three major US networks devoted to this story 1 hour, 28 minutes and 17 seconds.

In February 2015, a group of Islamist thugs dressed in black slaughtered 21 Coptic Christians on a beach near Tripoli. The Media Research Center has calculated that ABC, CBS and NBC spent a total of only 14 minutes and 30 seconds to report the massacre of those Christians: less than one-sixth of the time spent on the transmissions about the gorilla.

The sadness over the death of a beautiful animal has been transformed into a platform for feelings directed against the child’s parents from the working class. From CNN to MSNBC, the media whipped up hysteria against the “negligence” of the parents of the child who ended up in the cage, Deonne Dickerson and Michelle Gregg. An online petition asking the State of Ohio to remove the custody of children from his parents raised 400,000 signatures, an impressive number.

How many signatures were collected in favor of the Eastern Christians?

A group of protesters distressed by the death of the gorilla organized vigils at the zoo to mourn the animal. For Christians, only silence. For Yazidis, greater silence.

We don’t recall the same hysteria against the parents of European volunteers who joined the Islamic State; indeed, there was even understanding towards them when their children left to become members of the Middle East butchers.

Jack Hanna, a zookeeper, said in a statement to the media: “I bet my life on this, that child would not be here today”, if zoo’s officials would have not killed the gorilla. Unless your name is Peter Singer, there is a precise distinction between the value of the life of a gorilla and that of a child.

What the media lacks is at least the same compassion for the Christian victims of the butchers of ISIS. But perhaps the media just gives us what people want: “bread and circuses” as was said by the Romans.

Is it possible that the killing of that caged primate moves public opinion more than 19 Yazidi girls burned in a cage by Islamist rapists?

Do not be surprised that the next step was Orlando. 

We deserve barbarity in this world turned upside down! 

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/347615

=====================

Two reservists seriously wounded in Samaria shooting attack
Shooting attack at the Reihan Checkpoint west of Jenin wounds 2 reservists, shortly before another terrorist attempts to ram pedestrians in the Hebron Hills, injuring 1

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/407989

AS FAR AS I COULD READ, THE 7ISRAEL NATIONAL NEWS MAKES NO MENTION OF THE DEATH OF MANY PALESTINIAN WOMEN, MEN (NON-HAMAS) AND CHILDREN (60,000 SO FAR COUNTED) FROM THE FOREVER ISRAEL BOMBING... AS WELL THERE IS NO MENTION OF NETANYAHU'S INTENTION TO RAZE GAZA AND DISPLACE THE REMNANT OF THE POPULATION TO WHEREVER, AS LONG AS IT'S NOT IN ISRAHELL.... ALL OF WHICH AMOUNTS TO A GENOCIDE... GOD FORBID, THE 7ISRAEL NATIONAL NEWS WONT MENTION THIS WORD... EXCEPT FOR THE JEWS PERISHING AT THE HANDS OF THE GUILTY GERMANS, YEARS AGO...

YES, THE MORAL COMPASS HAS BEEN LOST BY ISRAEL AND THE MUSLIM TERRORISTS... BUT NONE OF THESE HAD ANY MORAL COMPASS TO START WITH, THUS THEY LOST NOTHING... THE AMERICAN EMPIRE HOWEVER HAD A TINY ONE... AND I DON'T MEAN A SMALL DICK. I MEAN A MORAL COMPASS THAT WAS TRADED FOR A BIG DICK...

AS FAR AS THE WHOLE WESTERN CIVILISATION, THERE ARE BITS OF THE BROKEN MORAL COMPASS LYING EVERYWHERE....
MOST OF THE COMMENTATORS TEND TO EQUATE MOARILITY WITH RELIGIOUS FERVOUR... OFTEN MENTIONING KARL MARX'S "USEFUL IDIOTS"...

SAY:

--------------------

Writing about morality in 2024 is risky business — especially in less than 800 words. Any subject encompassing religion, belief systems, norms and the titanic struggle between good and evil is inherently fraught.  

But at a time when democracy is under assault, authoritarianism is on the rise, and people are torn apart by conflict, we must ask: Are Americans “good” people? What is “good?” Who sets our moral code? 

Prominent historians and philosophers have argued for centuries about the core moral nature of human beings, from Aristotle’s virtue ethics to Immanuel Kant’s duty-based ethics, and the power of human reasoning in setting a moral compass. You can read Plato’s ethics, or those outlined by David Hume, the brilliant 18th-century philosopher who famously stated that “reason is the slave of the passions.”  

There are multiple theories on how morality is determined — from above, as in God; from below, as in individuals; through systems of governance and law, policy or legislation; or via cultural norms and customs. 

As we think about our own morality and mortality, it is useful to look at countries whose systems we oppose.

READ MORE:

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/4729996-america-moral-compass/

PLEASE NO. DON'T LOOK AT OTHER PEOPLE TO DEFINE YOUR OWN SHIT. A MORAL COMPASS SHOULD BE INTRINSIC AND DEFINED BY OUR HUMANITY IN CARE, FOR OURSELVES AND OTHERS... 

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

An Open Letter to Liberals
DAVID SKRBINA

My Dear Friends,

It’s a hard time to be a liberal. I know, because I used to be one. Or rather, I still am one, but a true liberal, unlike the many fake liberals out there. Allow me to explain.

Long ago, as an idealistic college student, I valued my high moral principles, my faith in the vague notion of human equality, my trust in authorities, and my open-mindedness. I believed that most people in positions of power were well-intentioned, if a bit misguided, and that political and economic situations ran into trouble mostly because of bad luck or the occasional bad actor. I believed that people had to be judged as individuals, and that any assessment of entire groups constituted a sweeping generalization or a caricature that lacked merit. I believed all people and all races could live together; I believed that we owed something to the less-fortunate of society, no matter who they were. I believed that, by and large, the American system worked, and that the best would move up in society and prosper. And I believed that most everyone shared these views.

But I later found out that I was wrong on nearly every count. Years of hard thinking, research, discussion, personal experience, and observant daily life proved the deficiency of my former views; one by one, they eroded away. I found out that group characteristics are real and objective, and that they are indicative of broad social trends, even if there exist many individual exceptions. I saw systemic actions in academia, media, government, and business to promote certain values, to disparage other values, and to advance a certain worldview or mindset that benefited specific people. I realized that corruption in social institutions was far deeper and more entrenched than I dared believe. I came to see that religion—and specifically Christianity—was a malevolent force in society, one that again served to benefit a certain group of people at the expense of many others. I came to understand that much of history was distorted, misrepresented, or outright falsified. I thought I lived in a largely open-minded and liberal world, but I discovered, to my dismay, that I lived in a controlled and manipulated world.

The final straw, for me, was the realization that many people in positions of authority also knew about many of these things but that they either said nothing, covered them up, or actively participated in them. In short, I realized that I had been lied to or otherwise deceived on a massive scale, for years, by people at virtually every level of society—people that I trusted and respected.

I don’t know about you, my liberal friends, but if there is one thing I hate in this world, it is being lied to by people in authority. I can forgive ignorance and I can forgive naiveté, but willful deception is unforgiveable. “You knew better,” I said (figuratively) to people in power; “You knew this was wrong, you knew what was going on, but you said nothing.” Worse: “You sustained it, and you profited from it.” This permanently destroyed my simple-minded liberalism.

Let me offer a few specifics, starting with the question of race. I had virtually no contact with Blacks growing up, at least until late high school. I vaguely considered this a good thing, given that my limited knowledge of Black culture was based on those living in our inner city, which was a decidedly unpleasant place to live. But they had their sphere of life, we had ours, no big deal. Then when I came to apply for college, I ran into the issue of affirmative action, which was just coming to a head at that time; racial quotas were ruled illegal, but race could still be used as a factor in college admissions. I was admitted with no problem, but other classmates did not get in, and it is unclear how many lost places to otherwise less-qualified Blacks or other minorities.

The official justification for affirmative action in university admissions has always been “to remedy past and current discrimination”; but how does that relate to the less-qualified Black who got in? Was it discrimination that caused him to be less-qualified in the first place? And why penalize my 18-year-old friend who never discriminated against anyone? Are the children paying for the sins of the fathers? (How very Old-Testament!)

And was it really helping the less-qualified Blacks, to let them in, only to have them struggle and fail at disproportionately high rates? According to recent data, 68% of Whites graduate within six years of university study, versus just 45% of Blacks. Why is that? Can it be “systemic racism”?

Be that as it may, affirmative action might be tolerable if there were an actual plan with actual objectives. But there was not; there never is, with our liberal administrators. If they had said, “Look, we need affirmative action to break the cycle of Black families without college degrees. So, we need to do this for 20 years, to raise a full generation of degreed Blacks. Then, everything will be even, and we can go back to normal, merit-based admissions.” Had they said this, and provided some data supporting it, I might have gone along. But of course they said no such thing. Obviously—does any sane person think that after 20 years of preferential treatment, that Blacks would thereafter perform at levels equal to Whites? Of course not! Thirty years? Fifty years? Of course not. The reality is that our liberal overseers want affirmative action forever.

This is an admission of failure. It is an admission that Blacks are congenitally incapable of performing at levels equal to Whites, and that American Whites must pay for the “sins” of slavery forever. In short, there is no solution to the “Black problem” in America. Short of ridding ourselves of Blacks, we must pay the price forever. Or such is the liberal state of affairs.

And then there was history. I had always been a sort of World War Two buff, and was always fascinated by the German story, by Hitler’s life, and by the drama and grandeur of the entire event. So it took me a while to realize that World War Two shows up a lotin popular discourse—in fact, far more than might reasonably be expected from an event that was several decades ago and was largely played out on other continents. And of course, the coverage was so routinely slanted that, for a long time, I never really noticed it. It took me years to ask myself very basic questions: Why is it that every aspect of Hitler’s Germany gets negative coverage? Why is Hitler the universal measuring rod for evil? Why is ‘Nazi’ synonymous with ‘bad’? Why do we hear so much about the Holocaust?

At about the same time, as I was progressing in my “liberal” education, I started thinking more about the Jewish situation. Growing up, I had never known any Jews—or at least, none that were public. Once in college, I encountered a fair number of guys in the residence halls that were, shall we say, rude; they were known to us as “the guys from New York.” They were loud, pushy, obnoxious. … Oh well, I said to my liberal self, people are people. Just stay out of their way. And don’t make any plans to visit NYC!

Only late in my schooling did I realize that “the guys from New York” were all, to a man, Jewish, and that this fact might well be significant. I then discovered that my campus was something like 15% Jewish—in a state that was maybe 1% Jewish. Wait, how does that happen? Then I realized that my university president was a Jew, that nearly half of the Board of Regents were Jews, and that a large chunk of my humanities professors were Jews—wait a minute, how does that work? Common sense and basic liberal values dictate that if 1% of my state is Jewish, that roughly one out of a hundred of my fellow students and teachers should be Jews, that one out of a hundred college administrators should be Jews, and so on. If that were not the case—as it clearly wasn’t, by a factor of 10 or more—then that could only be due to some “systemic racism” in favor of Jews. Is that fair? Could all those buildings named after wealthy Jewish donors have something to do with it? No, never, I told my liberal self.

As I progressed into grad school, earned a PhD in philosophy, and became a lecturer at my alma mater, I became aware of the “BDS” movement—the campus efforts to boycott, divest, and sanction Israel over actions in the occupied territories. Objectively, the case was clear: Israel was in violation of international law, flouted UN resolutions for decades, engaged in periodic episodes of abuse and torture of the Palestinians, inflicted collective punishment, and committed murder, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. It was an open-and-shut case; of course, any thinking, ethical person would have to agree that Israel was in the wrong—criminally so—and that any moral institution would want to dissociate itself, at least, from such evil. This was the bare minimum.

So why, then, was virtually all BDS action led by students? Or so I wondered. Aren’t faculty ethical as well? Don’t they claim to be liberal also? Didn’t many of them have personal histories with Vietnam War protests? Why weren’t they active in BDS? And the same with the administrators—the nominal “leaders” of the university. Shouldn’t they be blazing the trail, pushing for BDS on all fronts? Wouldn’t that be the best of all messages, from a liberal institution to its liberal student body: that we refuse to invest in, and profit from, cruelty and injustice? Wouldn’t that be a real lesson for the students?

Oh, no! The faculty—apart from myself and a literal handful of brave individuals—were invisible on the topic; “we don’t want to get political,” they said. And the university administration was worse: they actively opposed BDS. They began imputing ill motives to student and faculty leaders on BDS; they began rigidly enforcing “campus security” rules that no one had ever seen before; they worked to marginalize campus support; and they ensured that no word of publicity got out about any BDS actions. (If there is one thing that universities hate, it’s bad publicity.) When pressed for explanations for their resistance, administrators routinely spouted lines about how their investments are “not political” and how “donors give money for specific reasons” and therefore, somehow, the university could not divest from Israel—even though they did precisely that to South African apartheid years before. And purely academic boycotts against Israeli scholars or institutions never got so much as a single word of support.

And this, my liberal friends, was 20 years ago!

It was also in spending time with our Arab students that I heard murmurings about the “so-called Holocaust.” Whoa, what’s up with that? I did a little digging and quickly realized how little I knew, and also how hard it was to find straight answers to apparently simple questions—questions that no one else apparently considered important. Like: When and how did they determine that 6 million Jews died? Where were they killed? By what means? How did those infamous gas chambers work? And where are the bodily remains today? I was frankly shocked to learn how little clear information was available on this most-important historical event. As I researched the topic, it quickly became obvious that much of the current story was wrong. The many false witnesses, the internal contradictions, the biased and coerced “confessions,” the technical impossibilities, and the practical absurdities—not to mention the striking fact that claims of “6 million suffering Jews” had been in the news for years, decades, before WW2; all this was highly damning for the conventional story, in my opinion.

As a now-waning liberal, I assumed that others would be curious about this as well. But when I began to even mention this to my liberal friends, they said things like, “Well, that doesn’t matter,” or, “Everyone knows that the 6-million story is false.” Really?  Everyone? But we all just pretend like it’s true? Why? To placate whom? And if it doesn’t matter, why is it thrust into our face so often? Why are Holocaust books mandatory reading in our schools? Why does every third film seem to have some reference to Hitler, Nazis, or the Holocaust? Why is simply asking questions about it prohibited by law in 19 countries? Why is that? My liberal friends had no good answers.

A bit more digging on my part, and other troubling questions arose. Why does the US pump $3 billion to $6 billion annually to Israel as “foreign aid”? Why do we so often vote alone, or with a handful of client nations, with Israel in the UN? Why do we provide them with diplomatic cover? Why are so many of their enemies also ourenemies? Why are so many of our recent military engagements targeted against Israel’s enemies?

Thus I ran directly into the Israel Lobby—otherwise known as the Zionist Lobby or the Jewish Lobby. I quickly realized that most of the major players in the Israel Lobby were Zionist Jews, that most American Jews were Zionists, and that there was near-unanimity that Jewish interests must be protected at home and Israeli interests protected abroad. This unanimity is transferred to Congress, where, depending on the context, between 90% and 100% of Representatives and Senators regularly vote in favor of Jewish/Israeli interests. This is not speculation; it is a matter of public record.

Why? Money. I soon learned that at least 25% of Republican money, and at least 50% of Democratic money, comes from Jewish sources. This, to me, was truly astonishing. According to Open Secrets, there are something like 13,800 lobbying organizations in Washington. And yet, of all these, one group donates between 25% and 50% of all campaign funds. Imagine if you were living off regular donations from 13,000 wealthy friends; and that one friend consistently gave you half of all your money each year, and that the other half was divided amongst the other 12,999 friends. Which friend would be your best friend? Who would you listen to the most? Who would you most like to please? No surprises there.

In an interview with Tucker Carlson from last year (20 June 2024), US representative Thomas Massie made some interesting statements about the leading component of the Jewish Lobby, AIPAC. Every congressman, he said, has an “AIPAC minder” or “babysitter,” who watches over you, tracks what you do, and makes sure you do “the right thing.” And if you don’t do “the right thing,” they will slander you in the press and they will fund a pro-Israel opponent in your next election. No other lobby does anything close to this. Perhaps you should watch this interview, my liberal friends—but no! You absolutely hate Tucker Carlson! Neither he nor his guests can possibly have anything of value to say!

We need to realize what this means. It means we have one lobby that works on behalf of American Jews, who constitute perhaps 2% of the US population, and that their interests totally dominate everyone else’s interests: seniors, students, other minorities, the needy, the disabled, environmentalists. And I mean, totally dominate; unless your interests happen to align with American Jews, you have almost no chance of getting a fair hearing. It also means that we have one American lobby that works, globally, on behalf of Israeli Jews, who constitute some 0.19% of the world’s population, to the detriment of the remaining 99.8% of humanity. What’s up with that, my liberal friends? Are you satisfied with that situation? Is it fair? Is it just? No? What are you doing about it?

Perhaps you have been a bit too bamboozled by our American, and Western, media—a media that uniformly operates on behalf of Jewish and Israeli interests. Do you doubt me? Why are no anti-Israeli or anti-Jewish viewpoints or opinions allowed in any branch of mainstream media? Why has that been true, for decades, at least? Do you need proof? Why are all five of the major American media conglomerates—ABC/Disney, Warner Discovery, NBC/Universal, Fox Corp, and Paramount—owned or operated by Jews or Zionists? (Shall we check the names? Oh, no, never that!) Why are the top five Hollywood studios—Disney, Universal, Sony Pictures, Paramount, and Warner Bros.—run by Jews or Zionists? In a fair and just world, only 2% of these corporations would be Jewish-owned—which means, in all likelihood, none of them; but in fact, Jews own or manage all of them. Why is that, my liberal friends? Do you not care? Do you not believe in fairness and justice?

My friends: Let’s bring this up to the present day. It is clear and beyond dispute that Jews in America, and in Europe, have a virtual monopoly on the press, on academia, and on our so-called democratic governments. Any monopoly is dangerous, but a Jewish monopoly is deeply and profoundly dangerous, as the world can see in Gaza. To date, officially over 50,000 people, mostly women and children, have been killed. Likely the actual numbers are double or triple that. Some may have been armed fighters, but surely 95% were unarmed civilians. And yet America, and the world, does nothing, says nothing. Mass murder and genocide before our eyes, and…nothing. Worse than nothing: America supplies weapons and cash to the killers, and political cover in the UN, and the world does…nothing.

What are individual Jews doing? Worse than nothing; they support the action. According to surveys from last year, around 80% of American Jews and perhaps 90% of Israeli Jews support the ongoing war effort. Yes, they want their (now) 59 hostages back, but they think nothing of the 50 or 100 Gazans killed every day, on average, over the course of the year-and-a-half slaughter. “Cease fire for the hostages!” they scream; but they want neither true peace nor true justice. If and when they get their hostages, then the ethnic slaughter will surely press ahead unimpeded. It is Old Testament vengeance in the 21st century.

And what are you doing about all this, my liberal friends? Wringing your hands? Feeling badly? Silently condemning it? How is that working?

And what are you saying or doing to those who are taking serious, direct action against the Jewish monopoly that has a stranglehold on America and Europe? Are you helping those people? Praising them? No!  You are condemning them! You call them ‘evil,’ ‘Nazis,’ and ‘far-right extremists’! You call them ‘haters,’ ‘bigots,’ and best of all, ‘White supremacists’! Why, the Jewish Lobby couldn’t do a better job themselves if they tried! And there you are, doing their job for them, attacking those who might expose the danger. Why? Are Jews threatening you? Holding a gun to your head? No? Then why do you work so hard on their behalf—my “liberal” friends?

Here is how I see it: The state of affairs in the world today is like a big sandbox. And the powers-that-be need to contain your thinking and your outrage, and so they direct it away from the actual cause—themselves—and toward other things. In this way, they confine you to half the sandbox. The liberal, leftist Jews who donate to, and run, the Democratic Party, and who monopolize the mainstream media, want you to see the Republicans, or Trump, or conservatives, or White men, as the enemy. They do everything in their power to demonize these groups. One need only glance at CNN, or MSNBC, or the New York Times, or the Washington Post, to see that this is true. For their part, the ‘right wing’ media (Fox) and the Republicans are just as anxious to demonize the leftist Democrats; again, watch any episode of Fox’s evening commentary shows.

But strangely enough, both parties, who hate each other with such vehemence, are in agreement on just one special issue: Jewish and Israeli interests, which they both bend over backward to serve. Recall any presidential debate of the past few decades: all candidates and all parties are emphatic that they alone are the “true friends of Israel,” and that they alone can best tackle “the evil of anti-Semitism.” And you, the viewer, are left with choosing between a left-leaning “friend of Israel” and a right-leaning “friend of Israel.” Some choice, isn’t it?

In this way, they trap you in half the sandbox: You only see the enemy of their choosing: either “the right” or “the left.” But never “the Jewish Lobby.” That’s the half that you are missing. In fact, you are not even allowed to know that that half exists. Anyone who dares venture there is, by definition, a “far-right extremist” and “a hater”; and since both the left and the right agree on that, it seems like a unanimous decision. Clever, isn’t it?

But the Gaza war is a true eye-opener, isn’t it, my liberal friends? Your fellow liberals have been raised from birth to be hyper-sensitive to everyone’s needs, everyone’s concerns, everyone’s feelings. Slavery was wrong (of course); colonialization was wrong (yes); and it is the Whites of the world who inflict “systemic racism” on all the people of color (wrong). Every oppression of a “person of color,” every attack on a vulnerable minority, was seen as the gravest of social ills—until Palestine. Then, everything changed. There, the “people of color” are now terrorists, or terrorist sympathizers, or supporters of terrorism, and thus need to be shot, bombed, burned, and otherwise destroyed by the righteous Israeli Jews. The 2.4 million people of Gaza are now to be held collectively responsible for the actions of a few resistance fighters. They will be moved here, moved there, and finally removed, as the Israeli Jews complete their ethnic cleansing. And they will do so with the support of 80% of American Jews and 90% of Israeli Jews.

And what if you should object to these state crimes, my liberal friends? Oh, I’m sorry, you’re screwed. Should you choose to join an encampment on your local campus, the university police will haul you off to jail, perhaps expel you from school, and perhaps get you fired—as happened to one young Arabic lady just last week, at my own esteemed alma mater. Also, the local Hillel Jewish students will photograph you, identify you, and post your personal information online, just to make it harder for you to get a job, join a social group, or become active in any way. And if you happen to be a foreign student, or a foreigner of any kind, you risk getting booked and deported—by our Jewish-friendly president Trump. All for protesting a genocide!

So: Where does this leave us, my liberal friends? Or perhaps you no longer call yourselves ‘liberal’? A wise move, my friends! But are you now conservative? Oh no, of course not—another wise move. You are coming to learn that simplistic, dualistic, Manichean terms like ‘liberal,’ ‘conservative,’ ‘left,’ and ‘right,’ are now almost meaningless, so distorted has their meaning become. Perhaps you are learning that the power structures of America and the West have such a notable Judean orientation that this fact alone becomes decisive in thinking about social dilemmas and social conflicts. Perhaps you are learning that those “liberals” in academia and politics are really only liberal when it serves their interests; otherwise, they become positively authoritarian. Perhaps you are learning that Israeli brutality in Gaza is not a consequence of one bad leader but rather a reflection of the mindset of an entire people. Perhaps you are learning that ‘far right’ is a functional synonym for ‘opponent of the Jewish Lobby.’ And perhaps you are learning that many on the ‘far right’ are at least partially justified in their righteous indignation at the national and global state of affairs.

For my part, call me a true liberal: from the root word liber, ‘free.’ I prefer to live free, think free, speak free, and act free. But I can’t do this in present-day America, or in present-day Europe, or else the Jewish-oriented powers-that-be will come down upon me with an Old Testament vengeance. This is a fact. Therefore, let us (1) openly state this fact, (2) openly state our objection to this fact, and (3) work to create a society and a world where this is not a fact. What could be more important than that—my liberal friends?

David Skrbina, PhD, is a former senior lecturer in philosophy at the University of Michigan. He is the author or editor of several books, including The Metaphysics of Technology (2015) and most recently, The Jesus Hoax (2nd edition, 2024).

https://www.unz.com/article/an-open-letter-to-liberals/

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

NSW antisemitism inquiry. Jewish organisations reject Zionist claims
by Emma Thomas

Submissions to the NSW antisemitism inquiry show large cohorts of Jewish people reject the attempts at conflating Zionism with Judaism and criticism of Israel with antisemitism. Emma Thomas reports.

Coming out of NSW’s ‘summer of racism’, the inquiry seeks to investigate and combat an “alarming rise in antisemitism, including record levels on university campuses and in schools, [which] threatens both public safety and community cohesion’,” according to committee chair, Robert Borsak, of the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party.

Despite this a priori framing, a large number of the published submissions challenge the inquiry’s narrow framework, calling instead for nuanced approaches to tackling antisemitism that are attentive Jewish Australians’ diverse experiences and opinions.

Of the 66 published submissions, 35 – almost all from Jewish individuals and organisations – explicitly reject the conflation of (political) Zionism with Judaism and the attendant assertion that criticism of Israel is inherently antisemitic. This includes the submission from the Great Synagogue, which advocates for education on “the distinction between criticism of Israeli government policy and antisemitic speech or behaviour.”

“Judaism existed for 3000 years before Zionism,” reads one submission,

and many Jews are not zionists and do not support Israel’s genocidal war.

Members of the state’s Jewish community express concern that antisemitism is being ‘politicised’ and ‘weaponised’ to ‘suppress pro-Palestine speech’, ‘curtail our civil rights’, and to shield Israel from legitimate political criticism.

“To object to the genocide and slaughter of innocent Palestinian lives is NOT antisemitic,” writes a long-term resident of NSW, born and raised in Israel.

Established Jewish bodies’ failure to represent what one Jewish organisation calls “the full diversity of opinion in the Jewish community” is a common theme. As another Jewish group notes, the inquiry itself is largely limited to addressing “concerns from conservative Jewish community members” (emphasis added).

This lack of representation is especially pronounced when it comes to the range of Jewish political opinion on Israel and Palestine. A son of Holocaust survivors voices his ‘disgust’ at ‘Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian population’ and refutes ‘the claims by The Executive Council of Australian Jewry to represent the voice of all Australian Jews.’ A Jewish resident of regional NSW writes:

“Individuals have occasionally assumed that I had some association with Israel, which is profoundly offensive and undoubtedly motivated by the antisemitic conceit that all Jews have some inherent connection with that country and that it somehow represents our interests, a conceit, I hasten to add, that Israel and most Jewish “communal” bodies are keen to inculcate.”

Media and government are also accused of upholding that conceit, with one submission stating, “Jewish opponents of Israel’s actions against Palestinians are currently finding it hard to have our voices heard in the public media and by our Governments.”

One Sydneysider, descended from Holocaust survivors, describes it as “perverse that mainstream Jewish organisations, as well as public institutions, the media, politicians and public figures,

routinely conflate Jewish identity with support for Israel and Zionism.

According to the submissions, Zionists – Jewish and Christian – are among the perpetrators of antisemitism levelled at members of Australia’s Jewish community who openly express solidarity with Palestinians.

One person reports being called a ‘self-hating Jew’, a ‘Jewish traitor’ and an ‘antisemite’ for opposing Israel’s actions in Palestine. Another writes of how Israel’s supporters denigrate those who hold different political beliefs as ‘not “real Jews”’.

A descendent of survivors of the Holocaust and Armenian genocide writes of being labelled a ‘kapo’ (an offensive reference to concentration camps prisoners used as functionaries by the Nazis), a ‘fake Jew’, a ‘neo-nazi’ and a ‘traitor to [his] people’. This person reminds the inquiry that the prominent lawyer and former president of the Zionist Federation of Australia, Mark Liebler, has publicly denounced pro-Palestine Jews as ‘repulsive and revolting human beings’ and ‘[vicious] antisemites’.

A Jewish resident of Sydney’s Inner West states that “Since October 7th, the only fear I have regularly experienced has come from Zionists, both Jewish and not.”

Collectively, the submissions to the inquiry substantiate that Australia’s Jewish community is “not a monolith” and that Australian Jews “do NOT speak with a single voice.” One writer even asks the Inquiry to ‘Please stop seeing the Jewish community as homogenous.’

In moving forward with its inquiry, the NSW Parliament should engage in broader “consultation across the Jewish community (beyond only mainstream institutions),” says one Jewish group. Another, noting that the Inquiry’s limited terms reflect only some views within the Jewish community, cautions against “focusing on some narratives and sidelining more complex discussions.”

Or, as one Jewish woman in the Inner West puts it:

Simply, not all Jews think the same; to assume otherwise is fundamentally racist.

Parliamentary hearings into the inquiry are scheduled to take place later this month and in June. The committee is due to report its findings by 1 September 2025, not 7 October 2025, as originally proposed.

https://michaelwest.com.au/nsw-antisemitism-inquiry-jewish-organisations-reject-zionist-claims/

HERE THE MORAL COMPASS IN THE JEWISH COMMUNITY HAS FOUND ITS TINY MORAL NEEDLE IN THE MIDDLE...

THE FACT REMAINS THAT JEWISH OPPOSING VOICES TO NETANYAHU AND HIS MURDERERS ARE FAR TOO FAINT IN THE CACAOPHONY OF THOSE JEWISH PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT THE ANNIHILATION OF THE PALESTINIANS...

IN THE INNER WEST, SYDNEY, MOST PEOPLE LEARN TO SHUT UP WHEN A PLANE FLIES OVERHEAD...

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

SEE ALSO: