TEAR UP MOST OF WHAT YOU KNOW ABOUT THE WORLD, AS THE MAJORITY OF IT IS A MASSIVE
LIE, CREATED BY A CONTROLLED MEDIA AND THEIR PROPAGANDA TO ENSLAVE YOU FOR THE FINANCIAL GAIN OF THE
NEW WORLD ORDER MATRIX.
THE SAFEST DEPOSITORY "Who will govern the governors?"
There is only one force in the nation that can be depended upon to keep the government pure and the governors honest, and that is the people themselves. They alone, if well informed, are capable of preventing the corruption of power, and of restoring the nation to its rightful course if it should go astray. They alone are the safest depository of the ultimate powers of government.
Thomas Jefferson on Politics & Government
"... it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds..." Samuel Adams
ROBERT GREEN PRESENTS THE COVER UP OF HOLLIE GREIG SCANDAL
SCOTTISH ESTABLISHMENT'S COVER UP OF HOLLIE GREIG ABUSE SCANDAL
WEDNESDAY 24th MARCH 2010 - DOORS OPEN 7pm - PRESENTATION STARTS 7.30pm
ENTRANCE £3 ON THE DOOR
Reporter Robert Green was arrested in Aberdeen for the crime of seeking justice and an investigation into the case of Down's Syndrome girl, Hollie Greig, who says she was serially-raped over a decade by an establishment paedophile ring operating in Scotland.
Robert is now out on bail and with a gagging order against him in an effort to stop him naming the people that Hollie says were involved.
Come and here Robert speak out against the injustices heaped out upon Hollie and her mum Anne at the hands of the Scottish establishment and the complicity of the mainstream media and especially the BBC in conspiring to cover up these atrocious crimes.
The Hand Hotel, Llangollen, (Denbigh Suite)
BOOKING ADVISABLE 01978 861586 or 01824 750311
BLAIR'S FIGHT TO KEEP HIS £20MILLION OIL CASH SECRET
Former PM's deals are revealed as his earnings since 2007 reach £20million
Tony Blair waged an extraordinary two-year battle to keep secret a lucrative deal with a multinational oil giant which has extensive interests in Iraq.
The former Prime Minister tried to keep the public in the dark over his dealings with South Korean oil firm UI Energy Corporation.
Mr Blair - who has made at least £20million since leaving Downing Street in June 2007 - also went to great efforts to keep hidden a £1million deal advising the ruling royal family in Iraq's neighbour Kuwait.
In an unprecedented move, he persuaded the committee which vets the jobs of former ministers to keep details of both deals from the public for 20 months, claiming it was commercially sensitive. The deals emerged yesterday when the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments finally lost patience with Mr Blair and decided to ignore his objections and publish the details.
News of the secret deals fuelled fresh accusations that Mr Blair is 'cashing in on his contacts' from the controversial Iraq war in what one MP called 'revolving door politics at its worst'.
They will increase concerns that Mr Blair is using his role as the West's Middle East envoy for personal gain.
The revelations also shed fresh light on his astonishing earnings, which include lucrative after-dinner speaking, consultancies with banks and foreign governments, a generous advance for his forthcoming memoirs, as well as the pension and other perks he enjoys as a former Prime Minister.
The full extent of his income is cloaked in secrecy because he has constructed a complex web of shadowy companies and partnerships which let him avoid publishing full accounts detailing all the money from his commercial ventures.
Critics also point out that a large proportion of his earnings comes from patrons in America and the Middle East - a clear benefit from forging a close alliance with George Bush during his invasion of Iraq.
Last night Tory MP Douglas Carswell said of Mr Blair's links to UI Energy Corporation: 'This doesn't just look bad, it stinks.
'It seems that the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom has been in the pay of a very big foreign oil corporation and we have been kept in the dark about it.
'Even now we do not know what he was paid or what the company got out of it. We need that information now.
'This is revolving door politics at its worst. It's not as if Mr Blair has even stepped back from politics, because he is still politically active in the Middle East.
'I'm afraid I have no confidence at all in the committee that vets these appointments. It's no good telling us these deals may be commercially sensitive - we are talking about the appointment of our former Prime Minister and the public interest, rather than any commercial interests, must come first.'
Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker said: 'These revelations show that our former Prime Minister is for sale - he is driven by making as much money as possible.
'I think many people will find it deeply insensitive that he is apparently cashing in on his contacts from the Iraq war to make money for himself.'
The committee said yesterday that Mr Blair had taken a paid job advising a consortium of investors led by UI Energy in August 2008. The exact nature of the deal is unknown, but UI Energy is one of the biggest investors in Iraq's oil-rich Kurdistan region, which became semi-autonomous in the wake of the Iraq war.
Mr Blair's fee has not been disclosed but is likely to have run into hundreds of thousands of pounds.
The secrecy is particularly odd because UI Energy is fond of boasting of its foreign political advisers, who include the former Australian prime minister Bob Hawke and several prominent American politicians.
Mr Blair successfully persuaded the committee that the appointment was 'market sensitive' and could not be made public.
The committee agreed to suspend its normal practice and keep the deals secret for three months. Mr Blair then asked for a further extension.
When this ran out last year the committee repeatedly 'chased' Mr Blair about the issue without hearing anything. Eventually the committee's chairman, former Tory Cabinet minister Lord Lang, reviewed the papers and ordered the deal to be made public, along with a separate deal with Kuwait which had been kept secret at the request of the Kuwaiti government.
The decision to keep the deals secret will fuel concerns about the effectiveness of the committee, which has been repeatedly criticised for its failure to halt the revolving door between politics and industry.
The committee is supposed to ease public concerns about former public servants using their contacts for private gain.
Ministers have to have all jobs vetted within two years of leaving office. But the committee is packed with former politicians and Whitehall grandees and is thought never to have banned a former minister or senior civil servant from taking up a lucrative job in the private sector.
Earlier this month the Government quietly rejected calls for the committee to be beefed up with more figures from outside the world of politics.
Gordon Brown has so far refused to answer questions about whether Mr Blair's arrangements breach his responsibilities under the ministerial code.
A spokesman for Mr Blair said last night: 'Mr Blair gave a one-off piece of advice in respect of a project for UI Energy in August 2008.
'He sought, and received, approval from the Committee on Business Appointments before undertaking this project.
'It was UI Energy who requested of the committee that they delay public announcement, for reasons of market sensitivity.'
IT IS A FACT BRITAIN IS NOW BEING CONTROLLED BY A POLITICAL AND LEGAL MAFIA THAT ARE WORKING
FOR THE MASONIC ESTABLISHMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM AND ARE DESTROYING THOUSANDS OF LIVES
DAILY IN BRITISH COURTS WHILE THE MEDIA DISTRACT US WITH TERRORISM AND WARS OVERSEES.
THE BIGGEST TERRORIST THREAT TODAY ARE THE THUGS AND BULLIES THAT OPERATE ON BEHALF OF
A BRITISH GOVERNMENT THAT HAS BEEN STEALTHILY SEIZED BY MASONIC PLACE MEN LIKE BROWN AND
CAMERON.
BRITAIN NEEDS GUNS exists to promote responsible gun ownership in Britain for self-defence purposes and to lobby the government to relax gun laws so that decent, law-abiding people can protect themselves in the United Kingdom.
BRITAIN NEEDS GUNS also exists to dispel the untrue myths concerning gun ownership that have been put forward by the UK newspapers and other media.
In 1997 the UK governments imposed a nationwide ban on the purchasing and ownership of all handguns following the gun massacre in Dunblane, Scotland.
At the time we were told that such a ban would make the UK a safer place. When you consider that promise from politicians, it's clear that it has been a massive failure. In fact it's now made the UK into a far more dangerous place to live.
The fact is that when you ban weapons from society the only thing you succeed in doing is leaving decent law-abiding people defenceless. The criminals remain armed because they don't obey the law, remember - when guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns.
In turn this actually encourages criminals to commit more crime, as their job becomes much easier when they know they'll encounter no resistance from their victims.
One thing has become clear; we need to try a new and different approach to crime, as the current method is proving to have a perverse effect. We now live in a dangerous and completely disarmed country where criminals rule the streets and good, decent people live in fear.
The idea of allowing citizens to own and use firearms for self-defence purposes is controversial but despite what the media want you to believe it's proven to be very successful in reducing violent crime around the world, with particular success being noted in the United States.
Huge decisions such as this should be based on knowledge of the facts.
Unfortunately British attitudes regarding gun control are misguided, and there is a tremendous lack of knowledge in UK society towards guns as self-defence tools.
This is something that I hope to be able to change by presenting the facts surrounding responsible gun ownership in a clear and easy to understand manner.
Please take the time to explore Britain Needs Guns website before dismissing this idea, I think you'll be surprised at what you learn.
In a previous posting, the links between the organisation Common Purpose and convicted paedophiles was demonstrated. (URGENTinformation010110.doc)
In response to the avalanche of replies, it was explained that there was worse, much worse, to follow.
This presentation is the next on the same theme.
It could be happening in your area, right now.
The main subject of this document is a man called Matthew Byrne.
Matthew Byrne is listed as a member of the local advisory board of Common Purpose in Liverpool.
ABERDEEN SHERIFF GETS COURT ORDER TO SILENCE ABUSE CLAIMS
Would-be MP banned from making paedophile allegations
An Aberdeen sheriff has obtained a gagging order against a would-be MP who has accused him of abusing a young, disabled girl.
Sheriff Graham Buchanan was forced to resort to legal action after Robert Green continued to spread the allegations against him, despite two separate police investigations finding there was no truth in them.
Mr Green, who describes himself as a lay legal adviser, is representing Hollie Greig, who has Down’s syndrome and who alleges that she was systematically abused by a paedophile ring for 14 years from the age of six.
Mr Green has named a number of men and women, including Sheriff Buchanan and a now-deceased former senior policeman, as having taken part in the abuse.
The sheriff’s lawyers, Edinburgh-based Simpson and Marwick, have now successfully applied to the Court of Session in Edinburgh for an interim interdict preventing Mr Green from continuing his campaign.
The interdict also prevents Mr Green from claiming that the sheriff was involved in the “murder” of Hollie’s uncle, Robert Greig, who died in a car fire in 1997.
Grampian Police investigated the sex-abuse claims in 2000 and again late last year and concluded on both occasions that the accusations were baseless.
The day after the interim interdict was granted, Mr Green was arrested as he left a guesthouse in Aberdeen.
He appeared at Stonehaven Sheriff Court on February 15, following his arrest, charged with a breach of the peace. He made no plea and was released on bail. The case is expected to call again later this year.
Mr Green, 63, claims one of the bail conditions bars him from entering the north-east, which he says will hinder his plans to try to win the Aberdeen South seat at the general election, widely expected to be on May 6.
The Court of Session interdict, granted by Lord Emslie, bans Mr Green, of 4 Birchdale Road, Warrington, Cheshire, from communicating false and defamatory statements about the sheriff at Aberdeen Sheriff Court or anywhere else in Scotland.
The false statements are listed in papers as:
That the sheriff was involved in sexually abusing Hollie Greig.
That the sheriff has been involved in covering up the sexual abuse.
That he was involved in the “murder” of Hollie Greig’s uncle, Robert Greig.
The same restrictions apply to anyone acting on Mr Green’s behalf or on his instructions. The interdict also bars Mr Green from harassing the sheriff by making the claims at all.
Sheriff Buchanan – who has accused Mr Green of mounting a “campaign of harassment” – declined to comment yesterday.
Hollie claims she was abused for 14 years from the age of six and has given police the names of some of the men she says assaulted her.
The 30-year-old and her mother, Anne, have been campaigning for criminal proceedings since 2000.
The abuse is alleged to have taken place in Aberdeen, and Hollie and her mother claim to have made a statement at Bucksburn police station in July that year naming those allegedly involved.
The family moved to Shropshire and two Grampian Police officers travelled to Shrewsbury in September last year to re-interview Hollie at a special facility.
In January, the Crown Office said there was not enough reliable evidence to proceed with the case.
Despite no charges ever being brought, Hollie received £13,500 compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority in April last year.
It is understood that followed evidence from a Grampian detective inspector, who described Hollie as “a truthful witness to the best of her ability and an entirely innocent victim”.
Mrs Greig, 58, claims her daughter has experienced nightmares and panic attacks since she first told her about the alleged abuse.
THIS ARTICLE WOULD BE LAUGHABLE IF NOT SO SERIOUS WRITTEN BY THE HEAD OF LAWYERS IN BRITAIN WHO
HAVE MORE THAN ANY OTHER GROUP BEEN RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ENORMOUS HARM TO FATHERS AND THEIR
CHILDREN INCLUDING THEIR FUTURE INHERITANCE THANKS TO THE FLEECING OF MEN BY THE LEGAL MAFIA.
Legislation has effectively dismissed the contribution of half the population to the upbringing of the next generation, says Ruth Deech, the chairman of the Bar Standards Board.
There is a wealth of research showing that children need fathers
Over the last half a century there has been a sea change in society’s attitude towards same-sex relationships, marriage and the family. Homosexuality has moved from criminal status to legalisation, from legalisation to acceptance and the same respectfulness as heterosexual relationships. We have now reached the stage where, in the event of an election victory, the Conservative leader has promised that civil partners will benefit from extended paternity and maternity leave (in the case of adoption or artificial insemination babies). David Cameron has also promised that proposals to extend flexible working and married couples’ tax breaks would be granted as well. He has stated that the party is no longer hostile to same sex couples.
While changes to the law which have given homosexual couples the same rights and responsibilities as heterosexual couples are welcome, there are two issues involving modern society’s attitude towards children which give me unease.
One is the new possibility of birth certificates for children born to couples of the same sex, which name two persons of the same sex as their parents. This is logical following on the extension of rights to same sex couples, but there is an issue of principle here, which is the truth. Sections of the 2008 Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act (HFEA) even allow a dead woman, never known to the baby and not related, to be named with her previous consent on the birth certificate by the choice of the birth mother, while preventing the child from having a father. Birth registration is about genetic inheritance (albeit that sometimes the truth is not told) and about the welfare of the child, not about the relationship, legal or otherwise, between the adults whose will gave rise to it. The birth certificate that names two female parents will disclose to anyone perusing it that the child was necessarily born from donor sperm or a donor embryo or a surrogate mother. It could even result in deception to exclude the natural father where the mother conceived naturally but uses this provision to cut him out of the child’s life.
There are other ways for two adults of the same sex to gain parental responsibility over a baby, and it should not have to be through the birth certificate. It puts the demands of the adults ahead of the rights of children to know and benefit from both sides of their genetic makeup. It sits uneasily with the ending of donor anonymity in reproduction generally, and for the call for mothers to name fathers on birth certificates. This is not a moral issue; it is about disguising true facts, and it is about confusing biological parenthood with legal and social parenthood. Civil partnerships do still differ from marriage a little, and this is an area where the difference ought to be preserved with justification.
The other area of regret for me is the removal from the law of the provision in the 2000 HFEA that when a doctor is considering whether or not to give infertility treatment to a woman, he or she had to consider the welfare of the potential baby, “including the child’s need for a father.” It was removed on the ground that it was discriminatory against single mothers and lesbians, and replaced by the need to check for “supportive parenting”, whatever that may mean. Reproductive services are in fact quite readily available to single women, and it is thought that about 25 per cent of lesbian couples have children. I regret the downgrading of the father as a person of importance – the legislative dismissal of the contribution of half the population to the upbringing of the next generation. The removal of the requirement to consider the need for a father is to make a fresh statement that the child does not need a father, no matter how liberally the old law’s requirement was interpreted. It sends a message to men, at a time when many of them feel undermined as providers and parents, contrary to government policy in this field.
Government policy is that men should take financial responsibility for their children and stay in touch with them after separation; that they should take paternity leave and be involved. There is a wealth of research showing that children need fathers, not just two parents. Children need to see complementary roles, the relationship between the sexes, a microcosm of society, as they grow up. Recent reports have placed Britain at the bottom of international league tables for the welfare of children and we know that boys without fathers do worse at school and turn to worse role models. Research shows that their presence gives girls as well as boys advantages in educational and social development. The limit to same sex relationships is that they cannot be a reproductive unit in a way that is best for the welfare of the child if they cut out all contact with members of the other sex or falsify the birth registration. Tolerance of both types of parenting has to be ensured.
Baroness Deech is the chairman of the Bar Standards Board.
FATHER COMMITS SUICIDE BLAMED FOR DEATH OF DAUGHTER BUT CAUSED BY DOCTOR
A father committed suicide after a hate mob wrongly blamed the parents of a baby girl who was killed by an incorrectly prescribed dose of medicine.
Neil Jones and Maxine Winfield were driven from their home as neighbours suspected they were responsible for the death of four-month-old Abbie.
The house was trashed and all the dead baby's clothes, toys, jewellery and teddy bears were stolen, even the bootees she was wearing when she died.
Weeks later, Mr Jones took an overdose and died.
Today a coroner cleared Miss Winfield and her late partner of any blame over the death of daughter Abbie four years ago.
The inquest heard that Abbie, a Down's child, died after a series of errors by a doctor's surgery and a pharmacist resulted in her being given ten times the correct dose of medicine.
Abbie, who had a hole-in-the-heart which needed an operation, was prescribed Furosemide at four weeks after she had problems with breathing and keeping her feed down.
She was initially prescribed the special paediatric medication in twice daily doses of 5 mls but on March 10, 2006 this was changed by staff at the surgery to a mixture ten times stronger when Miss Winfield complained the baby was struggling to accept the fluid.
The concentrated version was supposed to be given to the baby in smaller amounts of 0.5 mls twice a day but nobody passed this information on to the mother.
The labels were correct for the first two prescriptions for the 'concentrated' medicine. For the final prescription, the two large bottles were wrongly labelled and so ten times overdoses were given.
Sheffield Coroner Chris Dorries is writing to the Chief Medical Officer, the Chief Pharmaceutical Officer and a company which provides computer software for GPs surgeries following the hearing into Abbie Jones' death.
The inquest heard staff at the surgery in Barnsley, South Yorkshire, made out an incorrect prescription for the drug Frusemide after Miss Winfield telephoned and asked for more of the medicine.
Receptionist Julia Dransfield overode a computer safety warning which flagged up if too much medicine was being prescribed.
The error was not spotted by GP Dr Dean Wawrocz, although Miss Dransfield told the doctor to check saying 'it's only a baby.'
Pharmacist Jeremy Power, who dispensed the wrongly labelled bottles, told the hearing he overheard his technician querying the strength of the dosage over the telephone with the surgery treating the baby, but admitted he did not check to see if the technician had spoken with a doctor.
Mr Power, of the former T and I White's chemists in Barnsley said: 'With hindsight I wish I had. I accept that a stronger intervention should have been made.'
Mother-of-four Miss Winfield, 30, unwittingly gave Abbie at least two doses of the diuretic medicine from a wrongly labelled bottle and the infant received another two doses in hospital before the mistake was realised by a consultant who called in the coroner.
Little Abbie was admitted to Sheffield Children's Hospital with dehydration and septic shock on May 1, 2006 but died on June 3.
Former forensic pathologist Professor Christopher Milroy told the hearing the incorrect dose could have caused the baby's death and certainly contributed to it.
Eight South Yorkshire Police officers spent ten months investigating the tragedy and a file was sent to the Crown Prosecution Service but no action was taken.
The practice manager Sandra Nicholson, Mrs Dransfield, Dr Dean Wawrocz and Mr Power were all interviewed under caution but no charges were brought.
Detective Sergeant Paul Wilcockson, of South Yorkshire Police, said: 'The CPS had the file for 18 months and decided there was insufficent evidence to justify bringing any charges against individuals or organisations.'
Recording a narrative verdict the coroner said Abbie died as a '[direct consequence of an overdose of prescribed Frusemide medication.'
He said: 'The prescription was wrongly generated on the surgery computer as a result of established or recognised procedures not being followed within the practice.'
He said there were 'insufficient safeguards' to prevent an unauthorised prescription being generated on the surgery computer system.
Afterward the inquest Miss Winfield's solicitor Siobhan Kelly said: 'She's very satisfied with the coroner's verdict. It is a relief to her.'
FIONA PILKINGTON TRAGEDY: 10 COPS FACE INVESTIGATION OVER FAILURES
THE MASONIC THUGS THAT CONTROL THE BRITISH COP MAFIA ARE LONG OVERDUE BEING JAILED FOR
THEIR UTTER FAILURE TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission have served disciplinary notices on the officers, who rank from constable to inspector, while inquiries into their conduct continue.
Leicestershire Police were contacted 33 times in 10 years about bullies harassing Miss Pilkington and her 18-year-old daughter, Francecca Hardwick, in the street where they lived in Barwell.
An inquest last September found that, despite the repeated pleas for help, the family received only eight visits from police officers.
After enduring a decade of violence, vandalism and taunts, Miss Pilkington, 38, killed herself and her daughter in October 2007.
A jury at the inquest into the deaths ruled police officers and council officials failed to properly share information.
The police also failed to offer Miss Pilkington and her daughter sufficient protection. These failings contributed to their deaths, the jury ruled.
Following the hearing, Chris Eyre, then temporary Chief Constable of the force, offered his "unreserved apologies" to Miss Pilkington's family.
The IPCC launched an inquiry into the way police had dealt with the family's complaints in the years before their deaths.
In an update on the investigation, the watchdog said: "We have now served advisory notices on a total of 10 Leicestershire Police officers and this situation is being kept under review.
"Such notices are not judgmental in any way, but are required under police misconduct regulations, and served on officers to advise that their conduct is under investigation."
The officers under investigation have not been suspended and remain on duty. It is understood that at this stage the investigations remain at a disciplinary level rather than potentially criminal.
An IPCC spokesman added: "We are progressing this rigorous investigation as swiftly as possible and will make our findings public in due course."
The IPCC is also investigating officers from the same police station over the case of Joanne Butler. The 38-year-old mentally ill woman was bludgeoned to death by an alcoholic neighbour at her home in Earl Shilton after police failed to respond to several 999 calls.
Although Zionism typically represents itself as the solution to anti-Semitism, the truth is less flattering. In fact, hostility toward Jews is indispensable to the cause of Jewish nationalism. If anti-Semitism didn't exist, Zionists would have to invent it. And in many cases that is precisely what they have done.
Contrary to the widespread perception that Zionism opposes anti-Semitism, its adherents have occasionally revealed a more ambivalent attitude to Jew-hatred. In 1895, Theodor Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism, prophetically wrote in his Diaries, "Anti-Semites will become our surest friends, anti-Semitic countries our allies." Even the suffering inflicted on European Jewry by the Nazi holocaust doesn't seem to have unduly tempered such cynicism. In 1995, Jay Lefkowitz, an American government official, told the New York Times Magazine, "Deep down, I believe that a little anti-Semitism is a good thing for the Jews- reminds them who they are."
If Zionist extremists can't provoke the desired level of anti-Semitism to advance their goals, they are even prepared to fake it. A 1952 article in Davar, the official organ of Mapai, the party of the then Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, suggested sending a team of saboteurs "to help redeem Jews" from the countries where they are "absorbed in sinful self-satisfaction."
"The task of these young men," the article explained, "would be to disguise themselves as non-Jews, and, acting upon the brutal Zionism, plague these Jews with anti-Semitic slogans, such as 'Bloody Jew,' 'Jews go to Palestine,' and similar 'intimacies.'"
Lest anyone doubt that the Israeli government would ever contemplate carrying out such a cynical plot to encourage Jews to move to Israel, the "rescue" of about 125,000 Iraqi Jews in the early 1950s involved far worse acts. "In attempts to portray the Iraqis as anti-American and to terrorize the Jews," wrote former CIA officer Wilbur Eveland in Ropes of Sand, "the Zionists planted bombs in the U.S. Information Service library and in synagogues. Soon leaflets began to appear urging Jews to flee to Israel."
Whatever about posing as "Arab anti-Semites," one might think that Zionists would draw the line at a post-Holocaust sponsorship of Nazism. Yet this is exactly what a leading Canadian Zionist organization has been accused of. "In the 1960s, the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) paid John Garrity, a small-time mercenary, to build up the fledgling Canadian Nazi Party," reveals Ezra Levant in Shakedown. When the embarrassing truth emerged, it was justified by the CJC as an attempt to learn more about neo-Nazism. However, the real purpose, according to the Jewish Canadian writer, was to provide "a pretext for the addition of 'hate' laws to the criminal code."
While "hate" sounds like something that all decent people would condemn, one man's hate may be another man's righteous indignation. Zionists, for example, tend to conflate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, and, therefore, as something that could be considered a "hate crime."
But are Professors Mearsheimer and Walt engaged in hate propaganda by documenting the harmful influence of the Israel lobby over US foreign policy? Or is former US President Jimmy Carter a "bigot" for comparing the Israeli occupation of Palestine to apartheid South Africa? Are the survivors of the USS Liberty who refuse to remain silent about Israel's deliberate attack on their ship merely motivated by hatred of Jews? Is Professor Norman Finkelstein a "self-hating Jew" for exposing the Holocaust Industry's corruption of history and memory in the service of an extortion racket? And is UN special rapporteur Richard Falk also "self-hating" for likening Israel's actions against the besieged Gazans to what the Nazis did to Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto?
In each of these cases, by no means an exhaustive list, the charge of anti-Semitism, rather than serving to protect Jewish people from defamation, has been used to obscure Zionist crimes.
However, as Zionist criminality becomes increasingly transparent, there will most likely be a sharp rise in anti-Semitism worldwide. No doubt much of it will be the result of genuine, albeit misdirected, anger as the extent of Zionist crimes against humanity becomes more widely known. But considering Zionism's history of faking attacks on Jews, we can expect at least some of this "hate" to be the work of Jewish extremists who disingenuously claim to be fighting anti-Semitism.
Perhaps it's time for those who are genuinely concerned about combating hatred in the world to heed the words of Israel Shahak. As the great Israeli humanist concluded in his classic Jewish History, Jewish Religion, "Although the struggle against antisemitism (and of all other forms of racism) should never cease, the struggle against Jewish chauvinism and exclusivism … is now of equal or greater importance."
* Maidhc Ó Cathail is a widely published writer based in Japan.
TWO FAMILIES HELD UP AS MORAL COMPASS BY THE CORPORATE MEDIA
There is something quite extraordinary going on with the mass media and highlights a perfect
example of how both America and Britain are being utterly corrupted by the dreadful programming
that sees the likes of Jordan(Katie Price) and Sharon Osbourne's families given extensive
time on national TV in the UK and USA.
What apparent talent have these two not so glamorous( without the make up on) wenches got?
Let's see now, Jordan? Apart from a very false pair of boobs NOTHING but a dysfunctional lifestyle
who can't remain married or with any one guy for to long.
How about Sharon Osbourne? Well apart from having a gangster of a father who made money from screwing
bands he managed and Sharon following in his footsteps with satan worshipper Ozzie of Black Sabbath
she like Jordan has a very dysfunctional lifestyle.
One thing they do have in common is they are both jewish and anyone who has been investigating
how much of the corporate media is owned and controlled by Zionists should not be surprised that
talentless nonenTITies should be filling the archives of TV schedules promoting Jewish run
families who are neither role models or moral compasses for the many women who BELIEVE the utter hype
and tripe purveyed by TV companies that also promote, in vast quantities, homosexual presenters
and performers as if that is the NORM.
One jewish nonentity who has made a massive killing on both sides of the atlantic is Simon Cowell,
NOT because he
has talent but because he happens to have the right Zionist connections and who
makes money from screwing musicians that sign dodgy contracts to the few record labels
run almost entirely by Zionist money and control.
Cowell has also been seen regularly in the Caribbean speeding around on a jetski with MASONIC
markings and is another arm of the Zionist control they have over many aspects of our lives.
One reason why they are also trying to control the internet.
THIS VIDEO REQUIRES TO BE VIEWED BY EVERY DECENT AMERICAN CITIZEN WHO HAS HAD A RUTHLESS
GOVERNMENT SYSTEM FORCED ON THEM BY THE MOST EVIL SCUMBAGS WHO CONTROL AMERICAN WEALTH AND POWER.
AMERICA AND ITS POPULATION HAVE BEEN BRAINWASHED BY A COMPLICIT MEDIA WHO PROVIDE THE PLATFORMS,
PROMOTION AND PROPAGANDA FOR MAJOR POLITICAL PARTIES WITH HIDDEN AGENDA'S AND WORK FOR THE LIKES
OF THEIR MASONIC BACKERS THE ROTHSCHILDS TO DO THEIR BIDDING AND NOT FOR THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE. AMERICANS WHO HAVE TOLERATED MASSIVE INJUSTICE WHILE VAST ARMIES OF THEIR CITIZENS ARE INCARCERATED
UNDER FALSE PRETENCES .
THE LAND OF THE SUPPOSED FREE JAILS MORE OF ITS PEOPLE THAN ANY OTHER COUNTRY IN
THE WORLD SO IT IS FAR FROM FREE WHEN IT IS RAPING AND PILLAGING THE WORLD FOR THE GREED OF
A SMALL SELF APPOINTED ELITE WHO THE AMERICAN PRESS DESCRIBE IS SOME SORT OF DEMOCRATIC PROCESS.
IT IS NOTHING OF THE KIND BUT A DICTATORSHIP THAT ENSLAVES AMERICANS AND THE WORLD FOR VAST PROFIT.
GOD BLESS THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WHO HAVE BEEN FORCED TO TOLERATE THE LEGAL AND POLITICAL MAFIA THAT HAVE
BROUGHT THEM TO THEIR KNEES AND CRIPPLED THE WORLD FOR THE GREED OF A FEW ULTRA-RICH SCUMBAGS.
EXPOSING CORRUPT GOVERNMENTS WHILE DEMANDING LEGAL,JUDICIAL AND POLITICAL REFORM TO ENSURE
PROPER ACCOUNTABLE DEMOCRACIES.A GROWING
RESISTANCE TO THE SATANIC CONTROL OF THE WORLD BY THE ILLUMINATI ,SKULL AND BONES,MASONS, BILDERBERGS, SPECULATIVE SOCIETY,KNIGHTS TEMPLAR AND ALL OTHER SECRET SOCIETIES ACTING
AS SHADOW GOVERNMENTS FOR WESTERN SO CALLED DEMOCRACIES.
THE NEW WORLD ORDER MOBSTERS WILL NOT GET AWAY
WITH THEIR PLANS TO ENSLAVE US ALL WITH THEIR EVIL SATANIC NETWORK OF CONTROL.
EXPOSING A WORLDWIDE
MASONIC AGENDA AND EVERY SINGLE PROMOTER OF ITS EVIL EMPIRE.
MASONIC RUN COMPANIES PROMOTING HIGH TECH STATE MONITORING SYSTEMS THEY ARE TRYING
TO FORCE ON US ALL.
