"Don't Mention the Jew," shows how the Zionists/Jews have taken over the public airwaves of the BBC, yet no one is allowed to point this out, for fear of being ostracized from the BBC and have that tired-ass canard of being "anti-Semitic" hurled at them for eternity.
Or worse, as some tombstones can attest to.
Here in the states, we have the same problem, only to a larger degree.
NPR, once a decent TV and radio show supported in part by public money, is now Zhid Central, with numerous Jew experts, think tanks and writers holding court explaining to us GOY why the Jews are misunderstood and BTW, we're a great bunch of peace loving folks and how the Arabs/Muslims/Palestinians are nothing more than a bunch of dusky skinned terrorists, who hate us because we're so free...
The prime dwelling place of Zhid Central, The American Enterprise Institute, places maniacs like Robert Kagan on NPR on a regular basis where the not slightly deranged Kagan espouses more wars for that shitty little country, always under attack by those meanie Palestinians.
Most people think NPR stands for National Public Radio...wrong.
It stands for "Negative Palestinian Reporting."
On another state sanctioned media outlet, FUX News, it's as bad if not worse.
FUX parades an endless display of Zionists Jews, who always seem to be hyperventilating over the thought of America fighting more wars for Israel and how, by Jehovah, we need to fight them now.
Who hasn't seen the sickeninly sweet grinning facade of Bill Kristol, pumping up the volume for more wars for Israel, after all, we're Israel's only buddy, right?
CNN isn't much better.
Anyone who is still capable of using their head for other things besides parking an NRA cap on it, realizes that the Jews have taken control of the American MSM.
How else is one to explain that a large mayority of the commentators are either Jews, or support whatever homicidal actions that nation of religious bigots are up to?
And this from a group that is less than 2% of Americans by demographics?
Yes, I know to think this, let alone say it, is to be branded as being "anti-Semitic."
Call it what you will, but I call it being "pro-American."
To hell with Israel and that nation of bloodthirsty psychos, who could never be content to live in peace, since that would mean they wouldn't have any human sacrifices to offer up to their demonic god by either invading neighboring countries or staging false-flag attacks against the USA so Israel's enemies will become our enemies.
Funny, but I can't help but to think that before Israel came into existence, the US had NO enemies in the Middle East
Lasha Darkmoon – September 2, 2008
A few years ago a friend of mine, “C”, an expert on Eastern Europe, wrote an article for the New Statesman on the Russian oligarchs. Knowing little of these matters at the time, I was not particularly excited to learn that Putin had systematically dismantled the oligarchs’ political power, that he had taken over Berezovsky’s and Guzinsky’s media empire in 2000, and that he had ordered the arrest of Yukos owner Mikhail Khodorkovsky in 2003 on charges of fraud.
However, a light suddenly went on in my mind and all the pieces of the jigsaw suddenly fell into place, when I read a SINGLE SENTENCE which “ought not to have been written!” — a sentence which was to cause a veritable furor in the British press — including shrill complaints of “anti-Semitism” from the likes of Jewess Melanie Philipps, author of the anti-Islamic tract “Londonistan: how Britain is creating a Terror State Within” (2006).
What crime had my friend “C” committed? What faux pas had his editor condoned? It was this. In a moment of madness, “C” had let the cat out of the bag. He had revealed the hitherto carefully concealed fact that SIX of the seven oligarchs who had stolen the Russian family silver were JEWS!
This was clearly unforgivable. To mention the word “Jew” in this context, raged the frenzied Ms Phillips, was tantamount to encouraging a second Holocaust.
Why do I bring this up now? For this reason. We have recently had an armed conflict in Georgia. TV, radio, and the press have reported these events in wearisome detail. Only ONE thing they consistently fail to mention: that Georgia is overrun with Jews, that it is a hotbed of Jews, and that Israeli advisers and arms are to be found everywhere in Georgia ad nauseam.
They have omitted to mention — for of course it would be anti-Semitic to do so! — that Georgian Prime Minister Vladimir Gurgenidze is Jewish! — that his Defense Minister Davit Kezerashvili is a Jew who enjoys Israeli citizenship! — that the former Georgian ambassador to Israel is Jewish and that half his family are domiciled in Israel! — and, finally, that tens of thousands of Israelis flock to Georgia every year where they own second homes! (See Dr Hesham Tillawi, ‘Georgia: Israel’s Home Sweet Home’.)
These facts, it seems, must on no account be revealed to the public at large. Too much knowledge is anti-Semitism. A blissful ignorance of these matters is apparently a passport to philosemitism.
* * *
As a rider to the above comments, I would like to add a few words on Melanie Phillips. Ms Phillips writes for British newspapers and magazines. Her strident voice is to be heard weekly on BBC Radio 4’s The Moral Maze. Her mad eyes appall the viewer on BBC One’s Question Time. She is everywhere — and she is altogether abhorrent. She is one of David Icke’s reptiles wrapped in human skin.
She describes Mearsheimer and Walt’s brilliant exposé, ‘The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy’, as “a particularly ripe example of the global Zionist conspiracy libel”, and she accuses its authors of “misrepresentation and distortion.” She accuses the Archbishop of Canterbury of “anti-Semitism” for complaining about the plight of Bethlehem Christians under Israeli occupation. She insists that his failure to criticize the President of Iran for “his desire to destroy Israel” is “paving the way for a second Holocaust”. She says the Palestinians are an “artificial people” who can quite rightly be subjected to collective punishment for “acts of terrorism committed by Islamic terrorists”. (This therefore entails, contrary to international law, the wanton destruction of innocent civilians). She describes Jimmy Carter and James Baker as “kept creatures of the Arab world”, adding that “they are intent on smoothing the path to Israel’s destruction.” Anyone carrying a Quran or wearing a hijab is a potential terrorist in this frothing fruitcake’s eyes.
My source for much of the above is Wikipedia, so discount it if you wish. I have no idea if she is still poisoning the airways on radio and television, since I gave up watching TV and listening to radio long ago. Suffice it to say that this maniacal crank, mad as a March hare, is given free rein in our country to poison the minds of the masses. There is no one to stop her.
All this must seem pretty remote to my American, Canadian and Australian cousins. All I can say is this: this is an international disease, a universal scourge, a plague for which there appears to be no remedy.
Every country has its Melanie Phillipses. They are the ones who are licensed to misinform us. We who refuse to listen to them are vilified as nutty extremists.
In a word, it is the lunatics who are in charge of the asylum.
* * *
Why have I made such a song and dance over Melanie Phillips? What has Ms Phillips to do with the central thesis of my article — the naming and shaming of the machinatory Jew? After all, Ms Phillips is just another “bad Jew”. You will understand shortly that my concern over Ms Phillips is not that she is a Jew, but that the FACT that she is a Jew is kept hidden from an ill-informed public. Her jewishness, in other words, is supposed to be “irrelevant”; and if anyone on the BBC, where this dangerous crackpot is allowed to hold forth freely, should have the temerity to say to her, “Madam, you are a Zionist Jew! — and that is why you think you can spout your Islamophobic hate speech, while singing the praises of that shitty little country Israel!” — if anyone said that to her on a BBC program, well, jiminy crickets! — he or she would instantly be denounced as “anti-Semitic” and blacklisted from appearing on the BBC ever again!
Before leaving this subject, it would be instructive to consider the BBC program The Moral Maze in greater detail and ask whether or not there is something distinctly “suspicious” about this program. That the BBC never loses an opportunity to put in a good word for Israel, no matter how appallingly Israel behaves, can hardly be doubted by anyone of moderate intelligence. But let us consider The Moral Maze, a weekly program where ethical issues are discussed and guest witnesses aggressively questioned on their views. Now let’s say a Palestinian professor or some defender of Rachel Corrie were to appear on the program: what reception would he receive from the four regular panelists? Would it be a polite one? Would it be a fair one? Well, judge for yourself.
First, let it be said that the Jews constitute less than half of one percent of the British population, but there are times when two out of the four panelists on this influential program are Jews. That’s fifty per cent! Are the public informed that 50 per cent of the interviewing panel are Jews? No, this fact is regarded as “irrelevant”. To mention it would apparently be “anti-Semitic”. So it is kept concealed. Even Wikipedia has noticed this anomaly and opined somewhat dryly: “It [the program] has attracted criticism for not properly detailing the politics and sympathies of its panelists, for instance in presenting Melanie Phillips as a ‘journalist’ and not as an advocate of the Israeli hard right.”
Another regular panelist on The Moral Maze is (or has been) the Tory politician Michael Gove, a fanatical Zionist and Islamophobe. Anyone who has read Gove’s ridiculous book ‘Celsius 7/7’ cannot but wonder how Gove is still at large and not incarcerated in a lunatic asylum. Author William Dalrymple has described Celsius 7/7 as a “confused epic of simplistic incomprehension” and pointed out that “contrary to the claims on the book’s jacket that Gove was an authority on Islamic terror, he had never in fact lived or traveled in an Islamic country, knew little about Islamic history or theology, and showed no sign of having met or talked to any Muslims.” (Wikipedia).
And guess who defends Gove to the hilt for drooling forth his Islamophobic idiocies and spreading his poison among the simpleminded masses?
Step forward, Melanie Phillips!
A final word before I leave this distasteful subject. Apart from other Jewish gatekeepers on this program — the Rabbi Hugh Gryn and Prof. Steven Rose — some of the other panelists on The Moral Maze, though not overtly Zionist, nevertheless appear to act as spokespersons for those malign ideologies closely associated with the so-called “Jewish world conspiracy”: overly permissive attitudes to pornography, for example, and an enthusiastic and indulgent attitude to homosexuality. Thus one of the program’s panelists has been English historian David Starkey: ill-mannered, arrogant, and flauntingly gay. Another kook is Claire Fox, who has been accused of “supporting Gary Glitter’s right to download child porn.” (See Stuart Jeffries, “Infamy’s Child”, Guardian; Andrew Billen, Interview, Times.)
Am I angry? Yes, I am! It is because I am paying the BBC a fat license fee for my own indoctrination! My mind, and the minds of my fellow sheeple, are being messed with! Those bending our minds and brainwashing us in this way are in large part Jews — and we are not allowed to mention this fact? Why, pray tell! Forsooth, because it is “anti-Semitic” to do so!
Shush! Be quiet! Button your lip! Mum’s the word! DON’T MENTION THE JEW!
* * *
This brings me back to the central question with which this article is concerned: is it right to conceal an individual’s Jewishness if he or she is involved in black propaganda or criminal activity? I do not argue that it is right to do so in all circumstances. To make any such claim is to expose oneself to the charge of anti-Semitism. It is clearly wrong to identify as Jewish, for example, a criminal charged with mugging or indecency on the subway. What possible motive could one have for ‘outing’ such a malefactor as a Jew unless one has a grudge against Jews in general? — unless one wished to maliciously suggest that Jews had a tendency to such crimes? In point of fact, blacks are more often involved in mugging incidents on the subway. As for sex offences on trains, this appears to be common to all nations, with the Japanese appearing to have a particular penchant for such crimes.
Again, is it right to identify history’s greatest serial killer, Dr Harold Shipman, as a Jew? I think it is wrong to do so. One does not, after all, go out of one’s way to say of a particular serial killer; “Oh, by the way, he’s Irish.” So why venture to point out that Dr Harold Shipman was a Jew? That he was Jewish is surely irrelevant. I certainly believe, then, that the indiscriminate naming and shaming of Jews involved in particular crimes can and should be regarded as anti-Semitic.
Having said this, however, it is clear that there are other instances in which FAILING to mention that a particular individual or group is Jewish is misguided; in fact, it is wrong. If the New York Times promotes a Zionist agenda and gets America into war on false pretences, surely it is relevant to point out that this newspaper is owned by a Jewish family, the Sulzbergers, who also own eighteen other newspapers including The International Herald Tribune and the Boston Globe? Surely it is permissible to point out that those who write for the paper and consistently lie for it (e.g., Judith Miller) are Jewish? If Fox News never hesitates to promote Islamophobia and wars on behalf of the Jews in the Middle East, surely it is only right to point out that Fox News is owned by crypto-jew Rupert Murdoch? If Hollywood and the mass media in general are under Jewish control, if foreign policy is being directed on behalf of Israel at the expense of America, then surely one is entitled to point out that this is hardly surprising — given that Hollywood is run by Jews, given that the mass media is under Jewish control, given that Jews are to be found everywhere in the higher echelons of the government and legislature? Pray, tell me: why is it a crime to mention these things?
To conceal the fact of a person’s Jewishness as a matter of policy and under the pretence that such information is of no relevance, only serves, in my opinion, to distort reality. A Jewish person ought not in all circumstances to be able to give the false impression that he is a gentile and that he has no Jewish connections. This is unfair, you could say, to the goyim.
Too much truth can lead to hate, however, and hate is dangerous. So if one wished to preserve the peace at the expense of the truth one could argue:
It is perhaps best to conceal from the public the fact that six of the seven Russian oligarchs — who stole much of the Soviet Union’s “family silver” — happen to be Jewish.
It is also best not to advertise to the world that the crooked financier Robert Maxwell was Jewish, as was the equally dishonest Dame Shirley Porter who swindled the British taxpayer of $74 million and then took refuge in Israel.
Nor is it wise to mention the fact that the number of Jews in the pornography industry is overwhelmingly high — in fact, quite out of all proportion to their numbers.
To remain silent about all this is unfortunately necessary if we wish to retain our credentials for political correctness. However, it seems to me only fair, in the interests of historical accuracy, that, if we are to be told how many Nobel Prize winners — how many famous novelists and film directors and actors — are Jewish, then we ought to be told about all the other Jews who are equally outstanding for their infamy. Otherwise we are guilty of double standards. Why put the good Jews on parade and sweep the bad ones under the carpet?
It is my hope that this article will not be regarded as anti-Semitic. Like so many people nowadays, I have good Jewish friends and indeed once entered into an intimate relationship with a brilliant Jewish academic at my university. I was a student, he a lecturer. It was in fact my Jewish lover who introduced me to Neturei Karta, the Haredi Jewish anti-Zionist organization, and to the works of those Jews who have dared to speak out against Israel and its demonic agenda: Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, Israel Shamir, Gilad Atzmon, not to mention the older anti-Zionists whose names I can barely remember now . . . Isaac Breuer, Hillel Zeitlin, Aaron Asmuel Tamares, Elazar Shapiro, Joel Teitelbaum, to mention only a few. It was my Jewish lover who taught me to love the Palestinian people. It was he and he alone — my long dead lover and eventual betrayer — who taught me that Israel was built on stolen land.
Thanks to this renegade lover of mine, I learnt that it is by no means compulsory to love all Jews! Some Jews are hateful, abhorrent, detestable: Jews such as the war criminal Ariel Sharon — Jews such as Baruch Goldstein, who burst into a mosque in Israel and brutally massacred dozens of innocent Muslims in cold blood — Jews such the man who drove his bulldozer over the head of peace activist and martyr Rachel Corrie.
If it is “anti-Semitic” to hate such Jews — if it is compulsory to love them — then count me as an anti-Semite.
--MORE--"