Lieberman: U.S. to accept any Israeli policy decision

The Obama Administration will put forth new peace initiatives only if Israel wants it to, said Israel's Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman in his first comprehensive interview on foreign policy since taking office.

"Believe me, America accepts all our decisions," Lieberman told the Russian daily Moskovskiy Komosolets.

Source:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1080195.html

---

COMMENT

Lieberman is an honest Jew: he wants a "clean" Palestine without an Arab in sight, he wants to spare precious Jewish blood in the war against Iran and use us for their dirty job (or else we are evil-anti-semites-who-killed-six-million-jews), he knows how servile western politicians are and he reads the mind of entire Jewry, which is why he was elected in the first place. The only difference from any other "honest jew" is that he is able to openly express those "tolerant" feelings without facing any sort of diplomatic or military repercussions.

Just imagine what would happen if any other country would claim of controlling America...

Vatican officials object to Iranian president's remarks on Israel

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- The Vatican has criticized Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's remarks about Israel at a U.N. conference on racism as "extremist and unacceptable" and said the comments promote an atmosphere of conflict.

At the same time, Vatican officials, including Pope Benedict XVI, emphasized the importance of participation in the conference, which was being boycotted by the United States and several other Western countries.

Ahmadinejad told conference participants in Geneva April 20 that Israel had "resorted to military aggression to make an entire nation homeless under the pretext of Jewish suffering" and had established a "totally racist government in the occupied Palestine." His comments prompted a temporary walkout by dozens of diplomats in attendance.

The Vatican spokesman, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, told Vatican Radio April 20 that "statements like those of the Iranian president do not go in the right direction, because even if he did not deny the Holocaust or the right of Israel to exist, he expressed extremist and unacceptable positions."

Source:
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0901787.htm

---

COMMENT

Muslims or Iran or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad have never insulted Christianity, while Jews do it every time they breathe. Remember the recent episode with that Israeli Jew smearing Christ and his mother? By all streaches of immagination, the Catholic church should have issued a condemnation not against the one who insulted its idols, but also against the state (Israel) who not only allowed, but promoted the "show" on television. But what happened instead? The church barely said anything: no outcries, nothing, just a bare "regret" from the traitorous pope.

Now when Mahmoud points out the way Israel has "resorted to military aggression to make an entire nation homeless under the pretext of Jewish suffering" would make a solid case for "racism", the Church reacts with full gear against such "extremist and unacceptable" views. This gives a perfect measure over how useless and benign Christianity has become these days...

Ahmadinejad’s Remarks at U.N. Conference on Racism

Although today many proponents of racism condemn racial discrimination in their words and in their slogans, a number of powerful countries have been authorized to decide for other nations based on their own interests and at their own discretions. And they can easily ridicule and violate all laws and humanitarian values, as they have done so.

Following World War II, they resorted to military aggression to make an entire nation homeless on the pretext of Jewish sufferings. And they sent migrants from Europe, the United States, and other parts of the world in order to establish a totally racist government in the occupied Palestine… And in fact in compensation for the dire consequences of racism in Europe… Okay, please. Thank you. And in fact in compensation for the dire consequences of racism in Europe, they helped bring to power the most cruel and repressive, racist regime in Palestine.

The Security Council helped stabilize this occupation regime and supported it in the past 60 years, giving them a free hand to continue their crimes. It is all the more regrettable that a number of Western governments and the United States have committed themselves to defend those racist perpetrators of genocide whilst the awakened conscience and free minded people of the world condemn aggression, brutalities and bombardments of civilians in Gaza. They have always been supportive or silent against their crimes. And before that, they have always been silent with regard to their crimes.

Distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, what are the root causes of U.S. attacks against Iraq or invasion of Afghanistan? What are the root causes of U.S. attacks against Iraq invasion of Afghanistan? Was the motive behind the invasion of Iraq anything other than the arrogance of the then U.S. administration and the mounting pressures on the part of the owner of wealth and power to expand their sphere of influence, seeking the interests of giant arms manufacturing companies, affecting a noble culture with thousands of years of historical background, eliminating potential and practical threats of Muslim countries against the useful Zionist regime, or to control and plunder energy resources of the Iraqi people? Why, indeed almost a million people were killed and injured and a few more millions were displaced and became homeless. Why, indeed the Iraqi people have suffered enormous losses amounting to hundreds of billions of dollars. And why was hundreds of billions of dollars imposed on the American people and its allies as a result of these military actions? Wasn’t the military action against Iraq planned by the Zionists and their allies in the then U.S. administration in complicity with the arms manufacturing companies and the owner of the wealth?

The invasion of Afghanistan; restore peace, security, and economic well being in this country. The United States and its allies not only have failed to contain in Afghanistan, but also the illicit cultivation of narcotics multiplied in the course of their presence. The basic question is: What was the responsibility of the job of the then U.S. administration and its allies? Did it represent the world? Have they been mandated by them? Have they been authorized on behalf of the people of the world to interfere in all parts of the globe? And of course mostly in our region aren’t these measures a clear example of egocentrism, racism, discrimination, or infringement upon the dignity and independence of nations?

Source:

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22462.htm

---

COMMENT

Our masters must be very upset seing their own concoction ("racism"), which has been used to extort guilt in "western democracies" since its invention by a Jew (Magnus Hirschfeld), is now being used against Israel, which normally stands above criticism but qualifies entirely to the definition of racism (nation state, ethnic cleansing, colonialism, intolerance).

Despite the eloquence wasted in this worthless "conference", whose entire purpose was ultimately to strengthen Jewish power, Mahmoud's message goes to deaf ears, as neither Jews, nor their servants, are interested in logical consistency or meaningful dialogue (a word voided of meaning in the west, implying variation on a single state-sponsored Semitic "truth"). What the latter cannot destroy by means of force, or by using the "free media" to smear (in absence of giving the wounded part the space to defend itself), they answer by employing the ostrich tactic of claiming "moral high ground" which gives them right to insulate themselves from criticism and thus be extempted to squeeze a dishonest answer, while their utter evilness and deshonesty stands exposed.

CNN's Lary King Interview with Iran's President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

---

COMMENT

Once again we are able here to see the contrast between the Iranian politician, who stands out in words AND deeds for his people, and the Western politician, who stands out in words for all people, while in deeds only cares about himself (which means his own status and wealth) and thus serves the Jew in order to be graced by the media and be elected. Another thing that stands out is the honesty of Mahmoud opposed to the dishonesty of the Jewish reporter, who, to his credit, remains civil throughout the dialogue and by doing that gives the viciously smeared Iranian president ground to show what an admirable man he is: calm, thoughtful, friendly and soft spoken. Mahmoud chooses to address the root problem indirectly, without placing guilt on the Jew, which would trigger an "evil antisemite" pavlovian response. Every single thing he said is right, of course, and nobody who saw this interview can disaggree with his arguments unless commiting high treason to logic.

Jews complaining: From the Holocaust to Decimating Israel

Later this month, on April 21, Holocaust Remembrance Day or Yom Hashoah will be commemorated in memorial rallies in major U.S. communities. Politicians will declare their commitment to combat hate crimes, church leaders will sermonize against all hatred, and yet despite all of these annual efforts, the oldest hate-anti-Semitism is as pervasive as it has ever been. 

According to the FBI Biased Motivated crimes in the U.S. for 2007 by religion a total of 1477 such bias crimes were committed, of that 1010 were committed against Jews, 65 against Catholics, 59 against Protestants, and 133 against Muslims. Jews were targeted almost 10 times more than Muslims.

Sixty-three years after the Holocaust, Jews in Britain, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany and elsewhere on the Continent are at risk of being physically attacked if and when they wear identifying symbols such as a Star-of-David, a skullcap, a beard, etc. For the Jews in Europe it is the 1930’s all over again, except that this time the threats and actual violence are not coming from governments, but from local Muslims. 

In the Judenrein Arab Middle East, racist anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial are preached in mosques, featured in the media, and taught in schools. In Latin America, particularly in Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela, anti-Semitism has become pervasive, albeit under the guise of anti-Zionism. 

The genocidal declarations emanating from Tehran by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's in his repeated calls to "wipe Israel off the map," as well as a recent remark by the country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to the effect that Israel was a "cancerous tumor," are reminiscent of the dark days of Hitler’s Nazi Germany. Except that now it is no longer the individual Jew who is targeted as a “vermin” that needs to be destroyed, but the “collective Jew” in the form of the Jewish State of Israel.

In Europe and America, the Catholic Church has done a magnificent job in combating latent ant-Semitism. The effects of Vatican II and Nostra Aetate transformed Catholic-Jewish relations. Popes John XXIII and John Paul II contributed a great deal to that historical healing between Catholics and Jews. Pope John XXIII convened the Second Vatican Council and Pope John Paul II came to Rome’s synagogue to proclaim Jews as “our elder brothers.” Additionally, Pope John Paul II established diplomatic relations between the Vatican and the Jewish State. Aberrations still occur however, particularly when Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications of four traditionalist bishops, including that of a Holocaust denier Richard Williamson. 

While 2000 years of Christian anti-Semitism cannot be wiped out in a generation or two, religiously motivated European anti-Semitism has been significantly reduced while anti-Semitism stemming from an unholy alliance of radical Islam and the radical Left is flourishing. This alliance, which fuels anti-Jewish hatred in the guise of anti-Zionism, has been playing out on campuses throughout Europe and North America. Latent anti-Semitism among politically and socially liberal mainline Protestant churches has found expression under the guise of caring for the Palestinians, and it has resulted in Israel bashing. 

On 10 December 1948, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The declaration was specifically aimed at preventing a recurrence of the horrors of the Holocaust. In the second paragraph of the preamble we read, “Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people…” Anti-Semitic hate speech however was certainly not a consideration of the framers of the declaration.

Now 61 years later, the same hatred and anti-Jewish calumnies that resulted in the Holocaust have reappeared worldwide. While racism has become taboo in American society- a very positive development-the taboo against Anti-Semitism has eroded. Obsessive criticism of Israel that seems to borrow freely from the classic anti-Semitic repertoire, coupled with treating Jewish victimization as a moral ideal from which modern Israel has “sadly deviated,” became a standard operating technique.

At the United Nations sponsored Durban Conference on Racism in 2001, just days before the 9/11 attacks on the U.S., racist anti-Semitism was on full display. A precedent for the conference was set in 1975 with the notorious U.N. Resolution 3379 equating “Zionism with Racism.” Nobel Peace Prize laurite and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel called the Durban conference “an enterprise of disgrace and a moral catastrophe.” Wiesel wrote, “The content was wholly unadulterated hatred and cruelty, whose expressions ought to outrage any decent and cultured human being." He reminded us that, “Hatred is like a cancer. It spreads from cell to cell, from organ to organ, from person to person, from group to group." In Durban, the racism ignored against the Jews makes racism against others ever more likely to flourish

Israel’s recent defensive operation against the rocket attacks by the Palestinian Hamas terrorists in Gaza, targeting Israeli civilians, unleashed violent anti-Semitic demonstrations throughout Europe and in the U.S. led by radical Muslims and their western radical leftists allies. By appropriating Nazi symbols to attack Israel’s legitimate self-defense, these cynical propagandists on campuses, and in the press, in mosques and in some churches, not only abused the memory of the victims of the Nazi Holocaust, but show a dangerous ignorance of history and, in so doing pave the way for another Holocaust to occur.

It is time for fair-minded people in the West, particularly those in the media, in liberal Protestant churches, and on the campuses, to realize that paying lip service to “the victimized and murdered Jews of the Nazi Holocaust” while bashing and demonizing the Jewish State is morally repugnant. These bashers of Israel are simply saying “We tolerate dead Jews, but cannot tolerate living ones, especially those able to defend themselves.”

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=D820BA19-EF5F-4EBE-906B-5D6F9E7205AB

The story should be read that, despite the propaganda geared in their favor, glimpses of Jews' true motivations have surfaced after the Gaza slaughter, and now they are getting desperate. As you see, Jews really have absolutely no problem killing palestinian civilians (that is called self-defence), but have a problem with 1400 Jews CLAIMING of being victimized in US (which equals sentence, since the Jews are always right - says American "justice"), a number they use to "argument" a worldwide conspiracy against their well being... Add to that some pukish references to Holocaust, a "Nobel Peace Prize laurite" who has never expressed anything but hatred towards non-Jews (unless the latter are servants to Jews) and yet has the audacity to make a call for "an outrage any decent and cultured human being" when someone dares to question this people's murderous motives.

Jewish behavior stands as sufficient proof for "Anti-Semitism".

Israeli Snipers wear T-shirts depicting killing pregnant Palestinian women and kids.

		A T-shirt printed at the request of an IDF soldier in the sniper unit reading 'I shot two kills.'

The office at the Adiv fabric-printing shop in south Tel Aviv handles a constant stream of customers, many of them soldiers in uniform, who come to order custom clothing featuring their unit's insignia, usually accompanied by a slogan and drawing of their choosing. Elsewhere on the premises, the sketches are turned into plates used for imprinting the ordered items, mainly T-shirts and baseball caps, but also hoodies, fleece jackets and pants. A young Arab man from Jaffa supervises the workers who imprint the words and pictures, and afterward hands over the finished product.

Dead babies, mothers weeping on their children's graves, a gun aimed at a child and bombed-out mosques - these are a few examples of the images Israel Defense Forces soldiers design these days to print on shirts they order to mark the end of training, or of field duty. The slogans accompanying the drawings are not exactly anemic either: A T-shirt for infantry snipers bears the inscription "Better use Durex," next to a picture of a dead Palestinian baby, with his weeping mother and a teddy bear beside him. A sharpshooter's T-shirt from the Givati Brigade's Shaked battalion shows a pregnant Palestinian woman with a bull's-eye superimposed on her belly, with the slogan, in English, "1 shot, 2 kills." A "graduation" shirt for those who have completed another snipers course depicts a Palestinian baby, who grows into a combative boy and then an armed adult, with the inscription, "No matter how it begins, we'll put an end to it."

There are also plenty of shirts with blatant sexual messages. For example, the Lavi battalion produced a shirt featuring a drawing of a soldier next to a young woman with bruises, and the slogan, "Bet you got raped!" A few of the images underscore actions whose existence the army officially denies - such as "confirming the kill" (shooting a bullet into an enemy victim's head from close range, to ensure he is dead), or harming religious sites, or female or child non-combatants.

In many cases, the content is submitted for approval to one of the unit's commanders. The latter, however, do not always have control over what gets printed, because the artwork is a private initiative of soldiers that they never hear about. Drawings or slogans previously banned in certain units have been approved for distribution elsewhere. For example, shirts declaring, "We won't chill 'til we confirm the kill" were banned in the past (the IDF claims that the practice doesn't exist), yet the Haruv battalion printed some last year.

The slogan "Let every Arab mother know that her son's fate is in my hands!" had previously been banned for use on another infantry unit's shirt. A Givati soldier said this week, however, that at the end of last year, his platoon printed up dozens of shirts, fleece jackets and pants bearing this slogan.

"It has a drawing depicting a soldier as the Angel of Death, next to a gun and an Arab town," he explains. "The text was very powerful. The funniest part was that when our soldier came to get the shirts, the man who printed them was an Arab, and the soldier felt so bad that he told the girl at the counter to bring them to him."

Does the design go to the commanders for approval?

The Givati soldier: "Usually the shirts undergo a selection process by some officer, but in this case, they were approved at the level of platoon sergeant. We ordered shirts for 30 soldiers and they were really into it, and everyone wanted several items and paid NIS 200 on average."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1072466.html

What the World Rejected: Hitler's Peace Offers of 1933-1939

Germany's enemies maintain today that Adolf Hitler is the greatest disturber of peace known to history, that he threatens every nation with sudden attack and oppression, that he has created a terrible war machine in order to cause trouble and devastation all around him. At the same time they intentionally conceal an all-important fact: they themselves drove the Leader of the German people finally to draw the sword. They themselves compelled him to seek to obtain at last by the use of force that which he had been striving to gain by persuasion from the beginning: the security of his country. They did this not only by declaring war on him on September 3, 1939, but also by blocking step for step for seven years the path to any peaceful discussion.

The attempts repeatedly made by Adolf Hitler to induce the governments of other states to collaborate with him in a reconstruction of Europe resemble an ever-recurring pattern in his conduct since the commencement of his labors for the German Reich. But these attempts were wrecked every time by reason of the fact that nowhere was there any willingness to give them due consideration, because the evil spirit of the Great War still prevailed everywhere, because in London and Paris and in the capitals of the Western Powers' vassal states there was only one fixed intention: to perpetuate the power of Versailles.

A rapid glance at the most important events will furnish incontrovertible proof for this statement.

When Adolf Hitler came to the fore, Germany was as gagged and as helpless as the victors of 1918 wanted her to be. Completely disarmed, with an army of only 100,000 men intended solely for police duties within the country, she found herself within a tightly closed ring of neighbors all armed to the teeth and leagued together. To the old enemies in the West, Britain, Belgium and France, new ones were artificially created and added in the East and the South: above all Poland and Czechoslovakia. A quarter of the population [2] of Germany were forcibly torn away from their mother country and handed over to foreign powers. The Reich, mutilated on all sides and robbed of every means of defense, at any moment could become the helpless victim of some rapacious neighbor.

Then it was that Adolf Hitler for the first time made his appeal to the common sense of the other powers. On May 17, 1933, a few months after his appointment to the office of Reichskanzler, he delivered a speech in the German Reichstag, from which we extract the following passages:

"Germany will be perfectly ready to disband her entire military establishment and destroy the small amount of arms remaining to her, if the neighboring countries will do the same thing with equal thoroughness.

... Germany is entirely ready to renounce aggressive weapons of every sort if the armed nations, on their part, will destroy their aggressive weapons within a specified period, and if their use is forbidden by an international convention.

... Germany is at all times prepared to renounce offensive weapons if the rest of the world does the same. Germany is prepared to agree to any solemn pact of non-aggression because she does not think of attacking anybody but only of acquiring security."

No answer was received.

Full article here:

http://www.wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/archives/nothanks/wwr00.html