Ofiterul CIA Philip Giraldi – Recrutand spioni americani pentru Israel si Mossad.


Israel never loses an opportunity to promote what it perceives to be its interests. That any nation would do just that most of the time should surprise no one, but Israel is perhaps unique in terms of how assiduously it works at creating situations that favor it through the use of corruption of foreign governments and subversion of existing institutions. For most countries, the actions of a minority that seeks to advance the interests of a foreign nation would face strong resistance, but Israel manages to get away with what it does due to the presence of powerful and wealthy diaspora communities, most particularly in the Anglophone countries, but also in France.

The Israel Lobby in the United States has been subjected to some scrutiny thanks largely to the impetus provided by Professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt’s groundbreaking study The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. More recent revelations have come from undercover journalism undertaken by al-Jazeera, which has demonstrated how British Jewish groups and parliamentarians have worked together with Israeli Embassy intelligence officers to remove public officials believed to be critical of Israel. Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the Labour Party, has been on the receiving end of a campaign to replace him for his alleged anti-Semitism solely because he has condemned Israeli oppression of the Palestinians. A second al-Jazeera investigation demonstrated how The Lobby, cooperating with the Israeli Embassy, has been controlling discussion of the Middle East in the United States, which should have surprised no one.

Europe indeed appears to be a hotbed of anti-Semitism, or so Israel and its friends would have us believe. Leaders in France, Germany and Britain feel compelled to frequently address the issue, making the equivalent of a war on anti-Semitism a principal objective of government. The United States has joined this effort, appointing a Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism whose job includes reporting other countries’ treatment of Jews and Israel.

The newest wrinkle comes under the category of Lawfare. It consists of hate crime laws that are directed against anyone criticizing Jews and, increasingly, Israel. In fact, any criticism of Israel is frequently being seen as a criminal offense, a trend that is also evident in the United States at the national, state and local levels, where Jewish groups have also been quick off the mark in claiming that anti-Semitism is surging. Freedom of speech in the western world has been diminished as a result.

Diaspora Jews are well entrenched in the media, which has enabled them to promote a narrative favorable to Israel no matter what it does, to include a repetitive dose of holocaust guilt that plays out from Hollywood and elsewhere in the media. The assiduously cultivated message for the public is that Jews are always the victims, never the aggressors, even when IDF snipers shoot Arab children and medical workers during protests.

Perhaps more seriously damaging are the technology thefts and deliberate export of American jobs to the Jewish state by Israelis and their diaspora billionaire friends, as well as general interference in and spying on the U.S. government at all levels. But perhaps the most outrageous initiatives engaged in by the Jewish state are the direct attempts to manage U.S. policies by subverting individual Americans who are or will be well placed to influence U.S. government decision making. It is well known how new Congressmen and spouses are treated to an all expenses paid trip to Israel by an affiliate of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which is little more than a propaganda exercise designed to influence their thinking about what is going on in the Middle East while at the same time impressing them regarding the power and wealth of The Lobby. The pandering to Israel is frequently extreme. Late last month, Florida’s governor Ron DeSantis, who has declared himself the most pro-Israel governor in the U.S., held a possibly illegal meeting of his state’s governing cabinet in Jerusalem.

A recent article in the Jerusalem Post demonstrates another aspect of how extensive Israeli efforts to infiltrate and corrupt American institutions to their benefit actually are. The article describes how “Close to 40 American cadets and officers wrapped up a two-week long trip to Poland and Israel on Monday, meeting with high-ranking military officers to learn about the Jewish State and the reality of its security situation. The trip, organized by Our Soldiers Speak (OSS), left a deep impression on the visiting service members who hail from the West Point Military Academy, the Air Force Academy, and the Virginia Military Institute, with some even voicing their readiness to fight and if necessary die alongside IDF troops.”

It was the third such visit to Israel by a group of representative military cadets. The travelers were treated to guilt first with stops at concentration camps in Poland. They then were subjected to the Israeli point of view through “high-level briefings from current and former policymakers and commentators from across the spectrum in the areas of security, strategy, international relations, law, politics, and more.”

Make no mistake, the entire exercise was a scarcely concealed bid to set up what one might regard as the recruitment of future Israeli spies within the U.S. military. Such spies, who will plausibly be able to promote policies favorable to Israel, are referred to as “agents of influence.” Benjamin Anthony, the Director of OSS, admitted as much, saying that “This unparalleled experience enables American cadets to learn about hot-button issues and matters of utmost strategic importance in the Middle East firsthand. By forging bonds between the cadets and Israeli military officers, we are laying the groundwork for future understanding and productive interactions. We wanted to impact people who will be in leaderships positions a short time after the trip to Israel. All of them will be in command positions two or three years after this trip and they will be better informed about America’s greatest ally in the Middle East and the world.”

The cadets, who apparently received no pre-trip briefings from their respective institutions regarding Israeli spying, naively accepted everything they were presented with and appear to have believed they were hearing the unvarnished truth about the Middle East. They even compared the Jewish state favorably to their own country. One cadet, Stephen Marn of the Virginia Military Institute, enthused that “Israel has so many enemies knocking on their back door yet the people in Jerusalem were happy, enjoying life… it was an amount of true patriotism that I don’t see in America today. I got pretty emotional.”

Marn, who will receive a commission in the U.S. Army, said that he can “absolutely” see himself fighting alongside IDF officers. “No question, without a doubt,” he said with a smile. West Point cadet Travis Afuso agreed, saying “Absolutely. We have a shared understanding of the threats, a shared set of values based on freedom and democracy and those are the things which will allow us to fight together and if necessary to die by each other’s side if that’s what it comes to. If that is what my country asked of us, if I was sent here, I would be proud to stand by the soldiers of the IDF.”

Afuso also admired how “Every soldier we spoke to had a deep need to serve. They understand that there will be no Israel unless people are willing to die for Israel. A lot of people in America need to understand that nothing is free and you have to work for it.”

The comments of the cadets are regrettably similar to the effusions by U.S. Air Force Lieutenant General Richard Clark, who has enthused that American soldiers are “prepared to die for the Jewish state” and also added that they would “probably” be under the command of Israeli Air Force General Zvika Haimovitch, who would decide on the involvement of U.S. personnel. Haimovitch commented “I am sure…we will find U.S. troops on the ground…to defend the state of Israel.” The two generals were referring to the fact that the U.S. already has airmen stationed permanently at Israel’s Mashabim Air Base in spite of the fact that the two countries have no defense agreement of any kind. The Americans, though few in number, would serve as a trip wire to guarantee that Washington would become involved in any war that Israel chooses to start.

The fact that future military officers are so naïve as to accept a dog and pony show presented by a foreign government that urgently needs uncritical American support is discouraging. The VIP tour they took was no doubt escorted by good looking young Israeli male and female soldiers, the food they ate was probably exceptional, and one might bet that the high officials they spoke to actually pretended to care about the cadets on a personal level. Once those cadets become military officers in responsible positions a few years down the road good buddy Benjamin from the IDF will show up with a dinner invitation to talk about old times. At dinner, Ben will ask for a favor. That is how an intelligence operation targeting certain groups or demographics works. Relax, we love you.

But what is really surprising is how the trip was organized and paid for. In spite of all the activity by the organization being focused on Israel and its interests, OSS is not Israeli. It is American, funded by the usual Jewish oligarchs and organizations. The “Our Soldiers” referred to are Israelis, demonstrating one again where the actual loyalty of some American Jews resides. OSS is somewhat similar to the odious U.S.-based Friends of the Israel Defense Forces, which routinely raises millions of dollars in gala events in Hollywood and New York City.

Both of the Israeli front organizations are IRS approved 501(c)3, a status normally granted to groups that are either educational or charitable. Donations are tax exempt, which means that the American taxpayers are footing part of the bill for organizations that are plausibly recruiting spies within the United States government and also supporting a military that is in no way allied with the U.S. It would be very interesting to ask a Congressman how that came about, but he or she would be too terrified to respond, while inquiries to Treasury would undoubtedly land on the desk of the same Jewish bureaucrat who granted the exemptions in the first place. Unfortunately, in Washington some things never change.


Ofiterul CIA Philip Giraldi – Cum a inceput un razboi care nu este necesar.


I confess to being mystified by those Americans who lean conservative, like myself, who continue to think that President Donald J. Trump is somehow doing a good job. To be sure, the economy continues to add mostly low paying jobs but claims that the new tax law benefits the middle class are a bit hard to swallow as the elimination of a whole category of deductions for state and local taxes means that I and many other middle-income types will be paying more. And there are whole policy-categories where the Trump record is appalling, to include the federal deficit, trade disputes that are alienating friends and allies, and sheer obstinate idiocy regarding the environment and climate change. Meanwhile, the president’s unrelenting moronic tweets and ridicule of critics have demeaned the office that he holds and made him look like a buffoon.

But Trump was not elected necessarily to create jobs or provide clean water, to make international trade more fair, or to pay attention to the weather. He was elected on two issues. The first was immigration, which energized folks in working class communities who were watching the America they grew up and the jobs that sustained it disappear in a confrontation with an unassimilable wave of mostly Latin American illegal immigrants. Trump promised to put a stop to the flow of immigrants across the border by building a wall if necessary while also catching and deporting illegals currently in the country.

The second issue was foreign policy, and more specifically the termination of the never-ending war legacy that Trump inherited from George W. Bush and Barack Obama, which motivated people like myself to vote for him. He exploited legitimate concerns over “Hillary the Hawk” and promised to disengage from existing conflicts in Afghanistan and Syria while more-or-less pledging not to get involved in further democracy promotion or regime change.

To no one’s surprise, perhaps, after more than two years in office the border wall is not built and the United States is confronting an increased flow of refugees coming from Mexico, inclusive of Central Americans and even Africans who are now into the game of claiming asylum in the U.S. To be sure, much of the problem rests with Congress, which refuses to authorize money for increased border security or pass sensible legislation to change America’s awful immigration system. Indeed, Trump is in fact deporting more illegals, but the deportations cannot keep up with the numbers of new arrivals.

Regarding foreign policy, Trump has not started any new wars though he has twice attacked Syria and he came very close to a serious escalation last Thursday when, for reasons that remain obscure, he stopped a planned attack on Iran at the last minute. And he is still in Syria-Iraq and Afghanistan in spite of somewhat confused assertions that he would be drawing down the number of troops in both theaters. And the absence of new wars is demonstrably not for lack of trying, witness the constant belligerence expressed towards all competitor nations as well as the comic opera coup attempt orchestrated in Venezuela.

Whatever Trump’s better angels might be, if he has any, the appointments of Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State and John Bolton as his National Security Advisor would seem to confirm that the president is disdainful of diplomacy and inclined to threats of military responses to “contain” or change the behavior of countries counted as adversaries. But, at the same time, the president is painfully aware that another indecisive war in the Middle East could cost him re-election, so he is hesitant to pull the trigger.

Most disappointing of all, the relationship with Russia, which Trump pledged to improve, is worse than it was during the Cold War due to a complete failure to engage President Vladimir Putin in an adult and serious fashion. But if there is one area of foreign policy where Trump has been unwavering, it is his expressed hatred for Iran, which was hinted at during his presidential campaign when he kept referring to the “terrible” nuclear agreement entered into in 2015 by President Obama with that country. Pundits have blamed his subsequent repudiation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) on hostility for Obama and all his works, but the real reason more likely has to do with money. Israeli-American casino multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson pumped tens of millions of dollars into the Republican Party in 2016, effectively buying it for Israel.

Adelson is the most despicable type of Israel-firster, barely concealing his singular loyalty to the Jewish state. He served in the U.S. Army but has said that he is ashamed of that service and would have preferred to be in the Israeli Army. He has also advocated dropping a nuclear weapon on Iran to send a message. Adelson, unfortunately, has Trump’s ear as well as his wallet, the two men reportedly exchanging telephone calls on a weekly basis.

Trump’s argument for the withdrawal from the JCPOA adhered closely to the Adelson/neoconservative line that Iran has been cheating on production of a weapon and would, in any event, be “guaranteed” to develop one as soon as the agreement expires in 2030. Trump also opposed returning Iran’s own money, which had been frozen in U.S. accounts under sanctions, claiming that it would be a “windfall” used to buy and upgrade weapons. The new president insisted that he would be able to negotiate a “better deal,” but the White House walked away from the agreement even though nearly every high official at the Pentagon and State Department argued that it was beneficial to U.S. interests to continue. At the time of the withdrawal and still to this day, Iran was and is subject to an invasive inspection regime and has been reported to be fully compliant with the terms of the JCPOA.

The JCPOA withdrawal chiefly benefited Israel, and it is just possible that it actually was planned there, as a naïve Trump was consistently outmaneuvered and manipulated by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Adelson. Once out of the nuclear agreement, the march towards a real, shooting war began and has been deliberately escalated ever since, particularly after Mike Pompeo and John Bolton became major players in the cabinet.

No one in the White House has ever made the effort to explain exactly how Iran threatens the United States, apart from repeated offhand comments about having to protect Israel or “send a message.” Urged on by Israel and Saudi Arabia, the United States has been playing the unwitting fool in its willingness to take the lead in denying Iran any legitimate role in the Middle East region. After pulling out of the JCPOA, the U.S. re-instituted punitive sanctions and then punished other countries for dealing with Iran or abiding by the JCPOA agreement. The Administration, including the president, boasted how the severe sanctions would cause the Iranian economy to collapse. Trump has also several times threatened to completely destroy Iran. As the punishment being meted out has increased, the Administration has also heated up its own rhetoric, claiming that it was Iran and not the U.S. that had become more aggressive and threatening.

Last month, the White House initiated a complete blockade on Iranian energy exports, also threatening secondary sanctions on anyone seeking to ignore the restrictions being unilaterally declared and coming out of Washington. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) was also declared to be a foreign terrorist organization, leading to still more sanctions and the dispatch of an aircraft carrier and strategic bombers to the Middle East followed by still more troops last week to defend against Iranian “hostile behavior.”

The Administration has accused Iran of several recent attacks on tankers, but the lack of evidence has even made it difficult for media friends and many Iran-hating congressmen to believe the claims. But make no mistake, the situation is approaching the boiling point with Pompeo and Bolton reportedly driving the process behind the back of a largely disengaged Trump. Meanwhile, the Iranian shoot-down of a U.S. drone on Wednesday produced even more calls for a military response. The New York Times’ leading Zionist columnist Bret Stephens called for an attack by U.S. forces to sink the Iranian navy. Senator Tom Cotton, a Trump ally, urged a “retaliatory military strike,” while Pompeo warned that any killing of an American soldier or sailor in Syria or Iraq will be blamed on Iran and a U.S. military response will follow.

Those calling for action almost got what they wanted last week, but perhaps the most dangerous moves being made by the Administration relate to how the United States goes to war. The War Powers Act of 1973, passed after the fraudulent Gulf of Tonkin incident of 1964 which led to escalation in Vietnam, permits the president to respond with armed force against an imminent threat or an actual act of war by an adversary. But he must inform congress within 48 hours, detailing why he acted as he did, and between 60 and 90 days afterwards he must remove the troops or obtain a declaration of war by Congress to continue the conflict.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, obviously representing the Administration viewpoint, is now claiming that the War Powers Act is not relevant as Iran is covered under the Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF). Pompeo sought to convince a group of congressmen that the AUMF, which contains a blanket approval to use force against al-Qaeda and associated groups, also includes Iran because it has connections to al-Qaeda. This is an argument that has been made in the past, but the congressmen and even the media covering the story were not convinced by it.

If the White House has its way in this instance, it will be able to start wars anywhere at any time just by citing the AUMF no matter how implausible the argument being made is. And worse still would follow even if Congress then does the right thing and impeaches Trump. That would make Mike Pence president.

And, of course, no one in the White House has any idea what comes next after the bombs begin to fall.


Ofiterul CIA Philip Giraldi – Neoconii si noua agenda a razboiului global. Marionetele lui Joe Biden si evreului Kagan.


Voters looking ahead to 2020 are being bombarded with soundbites from the twenty plus Democratic would-be candidates. That Joe Biden is apparently leading the pack according to opinion polls should come as no surprise as he stands for nothing apart from being the Establishment favorite who will tirelessly work to support the status quo.

The most interesting candidate is undoubtedly Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, who is a fourth term Congresswoman from Hawaii, where she was born and raised. She is also the real deal on national security, having been-there and done-it through service as an officer with the Hawaiian National Guard on a combat deployment in Iraq. Though in Congress full time, she still performs her Guard duty.

Tulsi’s own military experience notwithstanding, she gives every indication of being honestly anti-war. In the speech announcing her candidacy she pledged “focus on the issue of war and peace” to “end the regime-change wars that have taken far too many lives and undermined our security by strengthening terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda.” She referred to the danger posed by blundering into a possible nuclear war and indicated her dismay over what appears to be a re-emergence of the Cold War.

In a recent interview with Fox News’s Tucker Carlson, Gabbard doubled down on her anti-war credentials, telling the host that war with Iran would be “devastating,” adding that “I know where this path leads us and I’m concerned because the American people don’t seem to be prepared for how devastating and costly such a war would be… So, what we are facing is, essentially, a war that has no frontlines, total chaos, engulfs the whole region, is not contained within Iran or Iraq but would extend to Syria and Lebanon and Israel across the region, setting us up in a situation where, in Iraq, we lost over 4,000 of my brothers and sisters in uniform. A war with Iran would take far more American lives, it would cost more civilian lives across the region… Not to speak of the fact that this would cost trillions of taxpayer dollars coming out of our pockets to go and pay for this endless war that begs the question as a soldier, what are we fighting for? What does victory look like? What is the mission?”

Gabbard, and also Carlson, did not hesitate to name names among those pushing for war, one of which begins with B-O-L-T-O-N. She then asked “How does a war with Iran serve the best interest of the American people of the United States? And the fact is it does not,” Gabbard said. “It better serves the interest of people like [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Bibi Netanyahu and Saudi Arabia who are trying to push us into this war with Iran.”

Clearly not afraid to challenge the full gamut establishment politics, Tulsi Gabbard had previously called for an end to the “illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government,” also observing that “the war to overthrow Assad is counter-productive because it actually helps ISIS and other Islamic extremists achieve their goal of overthrowing the Syrian government of Assad and taking control of all of Syria – which will simply increase human suffering in the region, exacerbate the refugee crisis, and pose a greater threat to the world.” She then backed up her words with action by secretly arranging for a personal trip to Damascus in 2017 to meet with President Bashar al-Assad, saying it was important to meet adversaries “if you are serious about pursuing peace.” She made her own assessment of the situation in Syria and now favors pulling US troops out of the country as well as ending American interventions for “regime change” in the region.

In 2015, Gabbard supported President Barack Obama’s nuclear agreement with Iran and in 2016 she backed Bernie Sanders’ antiwar candidacy. More recently, she has criticized President Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal. Last May, she criticized Israel for shooting “unarmed protesters” in Gaza, a very bold step indeed given the power of the Israel Lobby.

Tulsi Gabbard could well be the only genuine antiwar candidate that might truly be electable in the past fifty years, and that is why the war party is out to get her. Two weeks ago, the Daily Beast displayed a headline: “Tulsi Gabbard’s Campaign Is Being Boosted by Putin Apologists.” The article also had a sub-headline: “The Hawaii congresswoman is quickly becoming the top candidate for Democrats who think the Russian leader is misunderstood.”

The obvious smear job was picked by ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, television’s best known Hillary Clinton clone, who brought it up in an interview with Gabbard shortly thereafter. He asked whether Gabbard was “softer” on Putin than were some of the other candidates. Gabbard answered: “It’s unfortunate that you’re citing that article, George, because it’s a whole lot of fake news.” Politico the reported the exchange and wrote: “’Fake news’ is a favorite phrase of President Donald Trump…,” putting the ball back in Tulsi’s court rather than criticizing Stephanopoulos’s pointless question. Soon thereafter CNN produced its own version of Tulsi the Russophile, observing that Gabbard was using a Trump expression to “attack the credibility of negative coverage.”

Tulsi responded “Stephanopoulos shamelessly implied that because I oppose going to war with Russia, I’m not a loyal American, but a Putin puppet. It just shows what absurd lengths warmongers in the media will go, to try to destroy the reputation of anyone who dares oppose their warmongering.”

Tulsi Gabbard had attracted other enemies prior to the Stephanopoulos attack. Glenn Greenwald at The Intercept described how NBC news published a widely distributed story on February 1st, claiming that “experts who track websites and social media linked to Russia have seen stirrings of a possible campaign of support for Hawaii Democrat Tulsi Gabbard.”

But the expert cited by NBC turned out to be a firm New Knowledge, which was exposed by no less than The New York Times for falsifying Russian troll accounts for the Democratic Party in the Alabama Senate race to suggest that the Kremlin was interfering in that election. According to Greenwald, the group ultimately behind this attack on Gabbard is The Alliance for Securing Democracy (ASD), which sponsors a tool called Hamilton 68, a news “intelligence net checker” that claims to track Russian efforts to disseminate disinformation. The ASD websiteadvises that “Securing Democracy is a Global Necessity.”

ASD was set up in 2017 by the usual neocon crowd with funding from The Atlanticist and anti-Russian German Marshall Fund. It is loaded with a full complement of Zionists and interventionists/globalists, to include Michael Chertoff, Michael McFaul, Michael Morell, Kori Schake and Bill Kristol. It claims, innocently, to be a bipartisan transatlantic national security advocacy group that seeks to identify and counter efforts by Russia to undermine democracies in the United States and Europe but it is actually itself a major source of disinformation.

No doubt stories headlined “Tulsi Gabbard Communist Stooge” are in the works somewhere in the mainstream media. The Establishment politicians and their media component have difficulty in understanding just how much they are despised for their mendacity and unwillingness to support policies that would truly benefit the American people but they are well able to dominate press coverage. Given the flood of contrived negativity towards her campaign, it is not clear if Tulsi Gabbard will ever be able to get her message across. But, for the moment, she seems to be the “real thing,” a genuine anti-war candidate who is determined to run on that platform. It might just resonate with the majority of Americans who have grown tired of perpetual warfare to “spread democracy” and other related frauds perpetrated by the band of oligarchs and traitors that run the United States.


Ofiterul CIA Philip Giraldi – Edmund Burke.


A new pro-Israel group that is pretending to be a standard bearer for conservative opinion in the United States was founded in January, a fortuitous bit of timing as it will not have to reveal its sources of income until next year. The Edmund Burke Foundation describes itself as “a new public affairs institute” having “the aim of strengthening the principles of national conservatism in Western and other democratic countries. The Foundation will pursue research, educational and publishing ventures directed toward this end.”

The Foundation’s launch will be at an open-to-the-public conference that will be held at Washington’s Ritz-Carlton on July 14-16, 2019. So as not to confuse the possible audience unduly over who Edmund Burke was or what he stood for, the conference is being advertised somewhat lamely as “National Conservatism: A Conference in Washington D.C.” on its website nationalconservatism.org. Note that neither the name of the foundation nor the promotion of its stellar cast of speakers includes the word “Israel,” but the Jewish state is really what it is all about.

The conference website explains that

“Politics in America, Britain, and other Western nations have taken a sharp turn toward nationalism—a commitment to a world of independent nations. This has been disorienting to many, not least the American conservative movement, which has, since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, grown increasingly attached to a vision of a global ‘rules-based liberal order’ that would bring peace and prosperity to the entire world while attenuating the independence of nations.

“The return of nationalism has created a much-discussed ‘crisis of conservatism’ that may be unprecedented…The conference on ‘National Conservatism’ will bring together public figures, journalists, scholars, and students who understand that the past and future of conservatism are inextricably tied to the idea of the nation, to the principle of national independence, and to the revival of the unique national traditions that alone have the power to bind a people together and bring about their flourishing.”

It is obvious to most actual conservatives that nationalism has never really gone away, but what the conference organizers are really getting at is a revival of unabashed nationalism as the excuse for countries when they behave badly while promoting their own interests without regard for the interests of others. Israel and the United States are the prime examples of such behavior and the argument that they have a special entitlement to justify their actions is frequently made, most notably by other Israel-firster groups like the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD). FDD argues that democracy promotion by force is a legitimate foreign policy of powerful countries like the United States, while threatened democracies like Israel must be protected. That, of course, is a complete misrepresentation regarding just how democratic the two countries actually are and the idea that being democratic empowers some sort of leadership role or exempt status is in itself ridiculous.

Why do I suggest that the Edmund Burke Foundation is just another pro-Israel puppet? Look at the people running it. Its President is David Brog, who is also the executive director of the Maccabee Task Force, “an effort launched in 2015 to combat the anti-Israel BDS movement. He also sits on the Board of Directors of Christians United for Israel (CUFI), were he served as executive director for its first ten years. Before CUFI, Brog worked in the United States Senate for seven years, rising to be chief of staff to Senator Arlen Specter and staff director of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He has also worked as an executive at America Online and practiced corporate law in Tel Aviv, Israel and Philadelphia, PA. Brog is the author of Standing with Israel: Why Christians Support the Jewish State (2006) and In Defense of Faith: the Judeo-Christian Idea and the Struggle for Humanity (2010). In 2007, the Forward newspaper listed Brog in its ‘Forward 50’ most influential Jews in America.”

The Edmund Burke Foundation’s Chairman is an Israeli Yoram Hazony, who describes himself as a “Jewish philosopher.” He resides in the Jewish state and is a well-known Israeli nationalist, having written that nationalism empowers “the collective right of a free people to rule themselves.” He declares that “We should not let a hairbreadth of our freedom be given over to foreign bodies under any name whatsoever, or to foreign systems of law that are not determined by our own nations.” He adds “My first concern is for Israel.”

In other words, for Hazony all external criticism of what Israel is and does is illegitimate while Brog is what might be described as someone who has made a career out of being Jewish, along the way advancing what he perceives as Israeli interests. So why are they heading an ostensibly American foundation?

Indeed, it doesn’t require a Trumpean level of genius to see what this is all about and where it is going. If there is an unfortunate development arising from the National Conservative conference it is the inclusion as speakers of some genuine conservatives among the crowd of usual Zionist hacks, with National Security Bloviator John Bolton leading the dark side of the list. The real conservatives, who are invited to give the event credibility, should know better and ought to avoid the Edmund Burke Foundation like the plague. I will not call them out by name here and now but they can be identified from the speakers’ list. One has to wonder if they are being paid for their services…

In fact, new organizations dedicated to defending and promoting Israel are not exactly unusual. They tend to pop up in the United States and Western Europe like wild mushrooms in the spring time. By one estimate, there are 600 such organizations in the U.S. alone, running the gamut from the liberal left to the conservative right. They exist because there is a certain paranoia on the part of prominent Jews and leading Jewish organizations due to fear that the American people are finally waking up to the fact that they have been getting used and abused by a vast Zionist conspiracy for the past 70-plus years.

Why do some American Jews betray the interests of their own country to support another nation that is manifestly a pariah due to its own behavior? It might just be because to do so is painless and can, on the contrary, lead to personal advancement. Brog’s career demonstrates how it works, particularly if one can latch on to a Jewish Zionist Senator like Arlen Specter along the way. And the benefits for Israel are enormous, amounting to hundreds of billions of U.S. Treasury dollars as well as a de facto commitment for American soldiers to fight and die for Israel even if Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu starts a war for no reason whatsoever.

Taken together, all of the pro-Israel groups constitute a veritable political juggernaut that seeks to advantage Israel and benefit it directly without regard for the damage done to American democracy and to actual U.S. interests. They should rightly be seen as organizations that regard their loyalty to the United States as negotiable, but they try to obfuscate the issue by claiming, wrongly, that there exist compelling reasons why Israel and the U.S. should continue to be best friends due to “shared values.” And, as self-defined leading democracies, the Israel-apologists argue that both are immune to criticism because they are acting on the basis of legitimate nationalist interests. It is a compelling argument for some, but ultimately false in that it suggests that there are no restraints on the behavior of either government. The Israelis have, for example, used the argument to justify the killing by army sniper fire hundreds of unarmed Palestinian demonstrators.

Promoting “democratic nationalism” to pander to Israel without any real understanding of actual interests has led the United States into a seemingly bottomless Middle Eastern quagmire. And, the sense of invulnerability that America’s uncritical support has encouraged among some Israelis also will not benefit the Jewish state in the long term. The creation of the Edmund Burke Foundation is just one more card in a losing hand and it hopefully will run out of steam as abruptly as it was created.


Nu aveti idee cati au incercat sa sara la gatul SIE si le-am rupt picioarele! Asa ca idee…


Apare un om ca mine, nu-l cunoaste absolut nimeni din sistem – nici macar din SIE!, si va intoarce pe dos atat de rau incat va faceti cruce: „Cine este?”. Asta v-am spus tot timpul: stati in banca voastra!

Au fost o multime care au incercat sa faca ce nu trebuie vis-a-vis din SIE si aveti incredere in ce va spun: dupa un timp s-au lasat pagubasi, in prima instanta, dupa care au fugit cu coada intre picioare! Traiti cu impresia ca „jocul cu fantome” este pentru oricine? Bai, baieti, aveti grija sa nu va rupeti gatul…

Din tot sistemul, SIE este privit cu cea mai mare ura: „Sunt cu nasul pe sus si nu se amesteca cu nimeni!”. Serios? Chiar asa sa fie? Dar cand unul din noi isi pierde viata, mii de kilometri distanta de Romania, voi pe unde sunteti? Ascunsi in birouri? La o cafea prin Centrul Istoric? Daca va scoate cineva in afara tarii, la modul operativ, dupa doua zile incepe sa miroasa pe langa voi a frica si comportament de genul: „Aoleu, mamica, vreau acasa!”. Simplu: nu sunteti in stare sa faceti aceasta munca, pentru a apara ce este al Romaniei!

De zeci de ani ne batem de la egal la egal cu cele mai bune servicii secrete de pe planeta si traiti cu impresia ca in Romania exista cineva care sa ne poate face fata? Va ofer exemplul meu: de unul singur am luptat de la egal la egal cu SRI si Ministerul de Interne, recunosc ca nu cu toti – doar o parte dintre ei, va rog sa va ganditi ce pot face alti oameni din Serviciul de Informatii Externe aflati de zece ori mai sus ca mine? Hm? Cam ce?

Uite in ce i-am transformat pe adunatii de prin boscheti din Ministerul de Interne – Politie si Jandarmerie: clovni cu acte, i-am rupt in doua de unul singur! Pentru ca asta inseamna Serviciul de Informatii Externe: reusesti singur sau cazi la datorie! Repet: singur, pe teren nu este nimeni langa tine! 

Mai doreste cineva sa inceapa un razboi? Resursele noastre sunt nelimitate si in umbra asteapta alti zeci de „DeVeghePatriei”…fantome din cimitir!


Ofiterul CIA Philip Giraldi – Rolul Israelului, in atentatele de la 9/11. Cititi cu atentie!


The tale of 9/11 will just not go away, largely because it is clear to anyone who reads the lengthy 9/11 Commission Report that many issues that should have been subject to inquiry were ignored for what would appear to be political reasons. The George W. Bush Administration quite obviously did not want to assume any blame for what had happened and that bias also extended to providing cover for U.S. “allies,” most particularly Saudi Arabia and Israel. Those who have sought the truth about 9/11 have been persistent in their attempts to find out information that was suppressed but they have been blocked repeatedly in spite of numerous FOIA requests.

Now, eighteen years after the event, there has been something like a breakthrough, penetrating the wall of silence erected by the government. FBI reports on the possible Israeli role in 9/11 were released on May 7th and they serve to support speculation by myself and other former intelligence officers that Israel, at a minimum, had detailed prior knowledge of what was to take place. More than that, Israeli intelligence officers working in the United States might well have enabled certain aspects of the conspiracy.

To recount some of what is already known and suspected, one should first examine the 2016 release of a heavily edited and redacted 28 pages long annex to the 9/11 Commission Report that explored the Saudi Arabian role in the terrorist attack . The section concluded that the Saudi government may have played a direct role in 9/11 by assisting two of the hijackers, including a dry run exercise intended to learn how to get into a plane’s cockpit. There was also considerable evidence suggesting that wealthy Saudis and even members of the Royal Family had been supporting and funding al-Qaeda.

But far exceeding the Saudi role is the involvement of the Israeli intelligence service Mossad, which was not subject to any serious inquiry or investigation by U.S. intelligence or police agencies. Israel, in spite of obvious involvement in 9/11, was not included in the 9/11 Commission Report despite the existence of an enormous Israeli intelligence operation freely working in the United States that was known to the FBI. Some of those Mossad officers were notably filmed celebrating as the Twin Towers were burning and collapsing.

In the year 2001 Israel was running a massive spying operation through a number of cover companies in New Jersey, Florida and also on the west coast that served as spying mechanisms for Mossad officers. The effort was supported by the Mossad Station in Washington D.C. and included a large number of volunteers, the so-called “art students” who traveled around the U.S. selling various products at malls and outdoor markets. The FBI was aware of the numerous Israeli students who were routinely overstaying their visas and some in the Bureau certainly believed that they were assisting their country’s intelligence service in some way, but it proved difficult to actually link the students to undercover operations, so they were regarded as a minor nuisance and were normally left to the tender mercies of the inspectors at the Bureau of Customs and Immigration.

American law enforcement was also painfully aware that the Israelis were running more sophisticated intelligence operations inside the United States, many of which were focused on Washington’s military capabilities and intentions. Some specialized intelligence units concentrated on obtaining military and dual use technology. It was also known that Israeli spies had penetrated the phone systems of the U.S. government, to include those at the White House.

In its annual classified counterespionage review, the FBI invariably places Israel at the top for “friendly” countries that spy on the U.S. In fact, the pre-9/11 Bureau did its best to stay on top of the problem, but it rarely received any political support from the Justice Department and White House if an espionage case involved Israelis. By one estimate, more than 100 such cases were not prosecuted for political reasons. Any Israeli caught in flagrante would most often be quietly deported and most Americans who were helping Israel were let off with a slap on the wrist.

But the hands-off attitude towards Israel shifted dramatically when, on September 11, 2001, a New Jersey housewife saw something from the window of her apartment building, which overlooked the World Trade Center. She watched as the buildings burned and crumbled but also noted something strange. Three young men were kneeling on the roof of a white transit van parked by the water’s edge, making a movie in which they featured themselves high fiving and laughing in front of the catastrophic scene unfolding behind them. The woman wrote down the license plate number of the van and called the police, who responded quickly and soon both the local force and the FBI began looking for the vehicle, which was subsequently seen by other witnesses in various locations along the New Jersey waterfront, its occupants “celebrating and filming.”

The license plate number revealed that the van belonged to a New Jersey registered company called Urban Moving Systems. At 4 p.m. the vehicle was spotted and pulled over. Five men between the ages of 22 and 27 years old emerged and were detained at gunpoint and handcuffed. They were all Israelis. One of them had $4,700 in cash hidden in his sock and another had two foreign passports. Bomb sniffing dogs reacted to the smell of explosives in the van, which had very little actual moving equipment inside.

According to the initial police report, the driver identified as Sivan Kurzberg, stated “We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.” The four other passengers were Sivan’s brother Paul, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner and Omer Marmari. The men were detained at the Bergen County jail in New Jersey before being transferred the FBI’s Foreign Counterintelligence Section, which handles allegations of spying.

After the arrest, the FBI obtained a warrant to search Urban Moving System’s Weehawken, N.J., offices. Papers and computers were seized. The company owner Dominick Suter, also an Israeli, answered FBI questions but when a follow-up interview was set up a few days later it was learned that he had fled the country for Israel, putting both his business and home up for sale. The office space and warehouse were abandoned. It was later learned that Suter has been associated with at least fourteen businesses in the United States, mostly in New Jersey and New York but also in Florida. Suter and his wife Omit Levinson Suter were the owners of 1 Stop Cleaner located in Wellington Florida and Dominick was also associated with Basia McDonnell, described as a Polish “holocaust survivor,” as a business partner in yet another business called Value Ad. Florida was a main focus for the Israeli intelligence operation in the U.S. that was directed against Arabs.

The five Israelis were among 140 Israelis arrested after 9/11, most of whom had military backgrounds, including some who were trained in “intelligence.” The five were held in Brooklyn, initially on charges relating to visa fraud. FBI interrogators questioned them for more than two months. Several were held in solitary confinement so they could not communicate with each other and two of them were given repeated polygraph exams, which they failed when claiming that they were nothing more than students working summer jobs. The two men that the FBI focused on most intensively were believed to be Mossad staff officers and the other three were volunteers helping with surveillance.

The Israelis were not exactly cooperative, but the FBI concluded from documents obtained at their office in Weehawken that they were targeting Arabs in New York and New Jersey, most particularly in the Paterson N.J. area, which has the second largest Muslim population in the U.S. They were particularly interested in local groups possibly linked to Hamas and Hezbollah as well as in charities that might be used for fund raising. The FBI also concluded that the Israelis had actually monitored the activities of at least two of the 9/11 hijackers.

To be sure, working on an intelligence operation does not necessarily imply participation in either the planning or execution of something like 9/11, but there are Israeli fingerprints all over the place, with cover companies and intelligence personnel often intersecting with locations frequented by the hijackers.

Apart from the interrogations of the five men from Weehawken, the U.S. government has apparently never sought to find out what else the Israelis might have known or were up to in September 2011. There are a lot of dots that might well have been connected once upon a time, but the trail has grown cold. Police records in New Jersey and New York where the men were held have disappeared and FBI interrogation reports have been inaccessible. Media coverage of the case also died, though the five were referred to in the press as the “dancing Israelis” and by some, more disparagingly, as the “dancing Shlomos.”

Inevitably, the George W. Bush White House intervened. After 71 days in detention, the five Israelis were released from prison by Attorney General John Ashcroft, put on a plane, and deported. Two of the men later spoke about their unpleasant experience in America on an Israeli talk show, one explaining that their filming the fall of the Twin Towers was to “document the event.” In 2004 the five men sued the United States government for damages, alleging “that their detention was illegal and that their civil rights were violated, suffering racial slurs, physical violence, religious discrimination, rough interrogations, deprivation of sleep, and many other offenses.” They were represented by Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, who in the previous year had founded the Shurat HaDin Israel Law Center which seeks to bankrupt groups that Israel considers to be “terrorists.” Shurat HaDin is closely tied to the Israeli government.

Now it is just possible that the Urban Moving Israelis were indeed uninvolved in 9/11 but nevertheless working for Mossad, which the Israeli government even subsequently admitted, but the new evidence suggests that the Israelis almost certainly had considerable prior knowledge and were likely involved in what developed. The new information reveals that minutes after the first plane struck the World Trade Center, five Israelis had taken up position in the parking lot of the Doric Apartment Complex in Union City, New Jersey, where they took pictures and filmed the attacks while also celebrating the fall of the towers and “high fiving.” One eyewitness interviewed by the Bureau had seen the Israelis’ van circling the building parking at 8:00 a.m. that day, more than 40 minutes prior to the attack, indicating prior knowledge of what was about to happen.

The eyewitness testimony is supported by copies of photos taken by the men that the FBI seized. The photo reproductions were obtained via a FOIA request made by a private citizen and are of poor quality, deliberately made so by the FBI to conceal faces and other details. They constitute only 14 of over seventy photos taken by the Israelis. Nevertheless, they clearly demonstrate that a celebration was going on. One photo, intriguingly, shows Sivan Kurzberg holding a lit lighter in front of the Manhattan Skyline on September 10th, one day before 9/11. It was apparently taken at the Doric Complex on a reconnoitering visit made on that day and suggests that Kurzberg was simulating the attack on the towers on the following day.

Why would the Israelis do it? Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described 9/11 initially as “a good thing.” He was later quoted as saying somewhat more expansively “We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq.” To be sure, 9/11 was a gift to Israel and it is a gift that keeps on giving. America is at war in a number of Muslim countries and its troops blanket the Middle East, to include a base in Israel dedicated to the defense of that country. It is all a result of the Global War on Terror and the GWOT started with 9/11. And just maybe it was a fire that was ignited by Israel.


Alesii cui? Un excelent articol despre tribul khazar din Israel.


Această națiune are trei caracteristici definitorii: oamenii ei sunt miloși, smeriți și buni” spune Talmudul (Gemara, Yevamot 79a). Mai clar de atât nu cred că se poate. Gemara formulează într-un mod ce nu lasă loc de prea multe interpretări – poporul evreu este identificabil prin trei trăsături reprezentative ale tendințelor sale morale specifice. În altă parte (Beitza 32b), Gemara spune „Oricine are milă de creațiile lui Dumnezeu, se știe că este un urmaș al lui Avraam.” Referiri la g’milut chasadim – actele de binefacere – se fac și în Mișna (Peah 1:1) și Talmud (Shabbos 127a) și sunt incluse în binecuvântarea asupra studiului Torei. G’milut chasadim fac parte din derekh Hashem, din calea Domnului – omul trebuie să caute să imite atributele divine, după cum se spune în Sota 14a: „«Urmează-L pe Domnul Dumnezeul tău» (Deuteronomul 13:5) – Este posibil ca omul să urmeze prezența divină…Mai bine spus, să Îi imite acțiunile…” Când Geneza se referă la faptul că Dumnezeu a creat omul după chipul și asemănarea Sa, la asta se referă. Dumnezeu a creat omul să oglindească atributele Sale. Să fie bun, drept, milos, iubitor de oameni. Dumnezeu are milă și iubire pentru fiecare suflet, deoarece toate sunt creația Lui. De aceea este aberantă presupunerea că textele sacre ale iudaismului fac referire numai la a-l iubi și a avea milă de vecinul evreu. Dumnezeu iubește și are milă de toți oamenii, evrei și ne-evrei. Atunci când textul Talmudului de exemplu, face referire strictă la cum trebuie să se comporte evreul față de aproapele său evreu nu înseamnă că acel cod comportamental se referă numai la evreu. Este firesc să fii solidar mai întâi cu cine ți-e cel mai aproape, dar ceea ce Domnul cere de la tine este să extinzi modul în care îl tratezi pe cel mai apropiat ție și la apropiatul mai îndepărtat.
Dumnezeu poruncește (Deuteronomul 10:19) „Să iubiți pe străin, căci și voi ați fost străini în țara Egiptului” –„Va’ahav’tem et-hager ki-gerim heyitem b’eretz Mitz’raim. Mi se pare incredibil și indecent cum încearcă unii să răstălmăcească sensul acestor cuvinte. Există o întreagă dezbatere pe tema cuvântului „ger”, străinul. Astăzi a ajuns să desemneze convertitul, străinul care trăiește în mijlocul poporului lui Israel și care a adoptat religia și legea evreiască, dar Dumnezeu nu la convertiți se referea când a rostit vorbele acelea. Relația dintre poporul lui Israel și Egipt când acesta a fost înrobit nu era relația dintre un potențial convertit sau convertit și poporul lui Israel, ci aceea de străin în Egipt. De străin care a avut de suferit în Egipt. Repet, este firesc ca solidaritatea să se manifeste față de cei ce îți sunt cei mai apropiați (relația pe care o am cu familia nu este aceeași ca relația pe care o am cu vecinul de bloc sau omul de pe stradă, dar dacă vecinul de bloc sau omul de pe stradă are nevoie de ajutor și stă în puterea mea să îl ajut sau să încerc să îl ajut, Dumnezeu îmi poruncește să o fac), dar nu este firesc să nu se extindă și la apropiatul mai îndepărtat.
Când Dumnezeu l-a ales pe Avraam, i-a promis că purtarea și caracterul său vor servi drept binecuvântare pentru întreaga omenire. „Din Avraam cu adevărat se va ridica un popor mare şi tare şi printr-însul se vor binecuvânta toate neamurile pământului, că l-am ales, ca să înveţe pe fiii şi casa sa după sine să umble în calea Domnului şi să facă judecată şi dreptate; pentru ca să aducă Domnul asupra lui Avraam toate câte i-a făgăduit”. (Geneza 18:18-19) Însă a fi ales, este o cale cu sens dublu. După cum ne învață Midrash (Bereishit Rabba 38-39), mai înainte ca Dumnezeu să-l aleagă pe Avraam, Avraam L-a ales pe Dumnezeu.
În Biblie, Avraam este numit primul evreu (ivri), ceea ce înseamnă „cel ce a trecut peste.” El a trecut peste imaginile populare despre Dumnezeu ale vremilor sale, făcute din lut, la un Dumnezeu fără de imagine ce pătrunde întreaga realitatea și dincolo de ea. Ca preludiu la povestea biblică a lui Avraam care își începe călătoria departe de lumea plină de idolatrie a tatălui său, tradiția orală spune că Avraam avea grijă de prăvălia cu idoli a tatălui său când a luat o bâtă și a spart toată marfa. A lăsat un singur idol neatins și i-a pus bâta în mână. Când tatăl său s-a întors, a rămas șocat văzându-și toată marfa distrusă și i-a cerut socoteală fiului său. Acesta a explicat că cel mai mare dintre idoli i-a distrus pe ceilalți idoli.
„Astăzi, Domnul Dumnezeul tău îţi porunceşte să împlineşti legile şi poruncile acestea; să le păzeşti şi să le împlineşti din toată inima ta şi din tot sufletul tău. Astăzi, tu ai mărturisit înaintea Domnului că El va fi Dumnezeul tău, că vei umbla în căile Lui, vei păzi legile, poruncile şi rânduielile Lui şi vei asculta de glasul Lui. Şi, azi, Domnul ţi-a mărturisit că vei fi un popor al Lui, cum ţi-a spus, dacă vei păzi toate poruncile Lui, şi îţi va da asupra tuturor neamurilor pe care le-a făcut: întâietate în slavă, în faimă şi în măreţie, şi vei fi un popor sfânt pentru Domnul Dumnezeul tău, cum ţi-a spus.” (Deuteronomul 26:17-19) Prin faptul că Dumnezeu l-a ales pe Avraam și pe urmașii săi să Îi fie popor vine la pachet cu o responsabilitate: și Avraam și poporul său trebuie să aleagă calea Domnului (derekh Hashem) și a poruncilor Sale. Trebuie să se ridice la înălțimea așteptărilor Domnului.
În plus, copiii lui Avraam aveau să se bucure de niște beneficii speciale, deși acestea sunt limitate la unii dintre urmașii săi. Când Avraam trebuie să-l alunge pe Ișmael, cel mai mare fiu biologic al său, Dumnezeu îl liniștește, „”Să nu ţi se pară grele cuvintele cele pentru prunc… pentru că numai cei din Isaac se vor chema urmaşii tăi.” (Geneza, 21:12) Gemara (Nedarim 31a) explică, „În Isaac – dar nu tot al lui Isaac.” În esență, numai printr-unul din copiii lui Avraam și numai printr-unul din nepoții săi, Iaacov, va fi realizată binecuvântarea specială a urmașilor lui Avraam.
Tot ceea ce s-a întâmplat strămoșilor este gravat în istoria copiilor acestora și are un rol în formarea structurii noastre interioare. Putem spune că Avraam nu este numai „tatăl” nostru; la un anumit nivel, el există în fiecare din noi. S’fat Emet (Toledot 5632) spune că fiecare evreu are o esență interioară (nekkudah) specială, cea a lui Avraam, pe care o poartă în sine, și că această esență este inclusă în rugăciunile noastre atunci când ne referim la Dumnezeu ca la Magen Avraham (Scutul lui Avraam), protectorul acestei nekkudah a lui Avraam din iecare evreu.
Rav Moshe Chayim Luzzato a scris o lucrare intitulată Derekh Hashem (Calea Domnului). Acolo, el vorbește cum Dumnezeu a creat lumea cu diferite stadii ale omenirii. După ce aparent perfectul Adam, primul om, scade statutul omenirii prin păcatul său, Dumnezeu hotărăște că va exista o perioadă inițială a omenirii, menită a servi drept rădăcini ale progeniturii sale, fondând diferitele națiuni ale lumii. Aceste prime 20 de generații ale omenirii hrănesc viitoarele generații și împart acestora nivelele perfecțiunii pe care ele însele au fost în stare să le atingă. În cea de-a douăzecea generație, a lui Avraam, Dumnezeu a creat națiunile. Rav Moshe Chayim Luzzato scrie „În acea vreme, Dumnezeu s-a uitat în jur pentru a vedea nivelul atins de diferiți indivizi. Potrivit înaltei Sale judecăți, a reieșit că niciunul nu s-a ridicat peste nivelul degradat setat de Adam și copiii săi prin păcat. Cu o singură excepție, Avraam. El a reușit să se ridice pe sine și ca rezultat al faptelor sale, a fost ales de Dumnezeu. Astfel că Avraam a fost stabilit drept un arbore excelent, superior, conform celui mai înalt nivel al omului. El avea să fie capabil să producă ramuri și să zămislească o națiune care să îi posede caracteristicile.”
Acesta a fost nu doar începutul procesului prin care Avraam a fost ales, ci al moștenirii anumitor aspecte ale personalității sale de către copiii săi, ramurile. Ce aspecte ale personalității sale am moștenit? Păstrarea căii Domnului, pe care Tora o definește folosind termenii tzedaka și mishpat, virtute și dreptate. Dumnezeu a ales poporul evreu prin virtutea faptului că este urmașul lui Avraam, independent de acțiunile poporului evreu. Poporul evreu va avea întotdeauna o relație unică cu Dumnezeu, deoarece există un legământ ce nu poate fi rupt. Însă, pentru a se bucura de beneficiile iluștrilor săi strămoși, trebuie să calce pe calea pe care aceștia au pășit, derekh Hashem, calea Domnului.
Totuși, predispoziția unică a poporului evreu poartă în sânul ei și o provocare. După cum scrie renumitul talmudist Maharsha, numai două dintre cele trei trăsături definitorii pentru caracterul unui evreu de care vorbeam la început (mila, smerenia, bunătatea) sunt moștenite de la Avraam. Smerenia este o stare ce poate fi obținută numai prin studiul Torei. După cum subliniază Maharsha, poporul evreu nu este cunoscut pentru smerenia sa, dimpotrivă, prin însăși opusul, azzim – mândru, încăpățânat, obraznic. De fapt, Gemara spune în Beitza 25b, „De ce i s-a dat Tora poporului lui Israel? Deoarece este azzim.” Tora trebuie să contracareze această puternică predilecție și să smerească inima, spune Rashi. Tot Gemara (Nedarim 20a) menționează că smerenia este o trăsătură pe care am dobîndit-o în momentul primirii Torei: „Dacă cuiva îi lipsește smerenia, este clar că acela nu a stat pe muntele Sinai.”
„Căci cu lumina încuviințării Tale ne-ai dat tu, Doamne, Dumnezeul nostru Tora vieții și o iubire de bunătate, virtute, binecuvântare, compasiune, viață și pace.” Dincolo de imaginea divină comună întregii omeniri, poporul evreu se bucură de această lumină specială. Parte din ea se manifestă în legătura dintre evreu și Tora, dar primele sale raze sunt dreptul nativ ca urmași, copii ai lui Avraam, marele iubitor de bunătate. Vedem și că Dumnezeu a orchestrat istoria poporului evreu așa încât acesta să beneficieze de o educație care să-l deprindă cu nevoia colectivă de a face bine. Pentru ca poporul evreu să devină națiunea ce va învăța omenirea despre importanța binefacerii, el a trebuit să treacă printr-o etapă, care, deși dificilă, se va dovedi esențială pentru misiunea sa.
„Dar pe voi, Domnul v-a luat şi v-a scos din cuptorul de fier al Egiptului, ca să-I fiţi un popor pus deoparte, cum sunteţi azi.” (Deut 4:20) Rashi spune că acest „cuptor de fier” este aici un vas folosit pentru rafinarea aurului. Suferința din Egipt a fost menită a rafina și epura caracterul evreiesc, înlăturând zgura impurităților morale și mărind sensibilitatea etică a poporului. Experiența egipteană a fost necesară pentru a învăța poporul evreu ce este mila, pentru ca la rândul lui să-i învețe pe ceilalți. Rabbi Nehemiah scrie în Midraș „Sclavia din Egipt a avut mare valoare pentru noi, deoarece a servit să implanteze în noi bunătatea și mila.” Compasiunea este o caracteristică distinctă a poporului evreu (cu siguranță e menită a fi), dar este în primul rând o expresie naturală a omului creat după chipul și asemănarea lui Dumnezeu, un atribut posedat de întreaga omenire.

Ofiterul CIA Philip Giraldi – Crimele Israelului, socheaza omenirea!


Israel’s public face, sustained and propagated by a wealthy and powerful diaspora that has significant control over the media, insists that the country is the Middle East’s only true democracy, that is operates under a rule of law for all its citizens and that its army is the “most moral in the world.” All of those assertions are false. Israel’s government favors its Jewish citizens through laws and regulations that are defined by religion. It in fact now identifies itself legally as a Jewish state with Christians and Muslim citizens having second class status. Israel’s army, meanwhile, has committed numerous war crimes against largely unarmed civilian populations in the past seventy years, both in Lebanon and directed against the Palestinians on the West Bank and Gaza.

In response to the past year’s Great March of Return protests staged by Gazans along the fence line that separates them from Israel, Israeli army snipers have shot dead 293 Palestinians and wounded seven thousand more. Twenty-thousand other Gazans have been harmed by other weapons used by the Israelis, to include canisters from the volleys of tear gas and rubber bullets. The numbers include hundreds of children and medical personnel trying to help the wounded, which reportedly have been particularly targeted.

The United Nations has reported that many of the wounded have been shot in their legs, which the Israeli army regards as “restraint” on its part. Many of those injured will likely need to have limbs amputated because Gaza lacks the medical facilities required to properly treat their wounds. Israel has bombed hospitals and blocked the importation of medical supplies into Gaza while also not allowing Gazans to leave the enclave for medical treatment elsewhere in the Middle East.

One hundred and twenty amputations have already been performed this year. Jamie McGoldrick, the U.N. Humanitarian Coordinator for the Occupied Territories explained “You’ve got 1,700 people who are in need of serious, complicated surgeries for them to be able to walk again…[requiring] very, very serious and complex bone reconstruction surgery over a two-year period before they start to rehabilitate themselves.”

The U.N. would like to provide $20 million in assistance to enable medical treatment rather than amputations but the United States has refused to support emergency funding for the Palestinians through the Relief Works Agency (UNRWA), a step presumably taken to benefit Israel by punishing the Palestinian people.

Interestingly, a document has recent re-surfaced describing in chilling terms the Israel Army’s viewpoint on shooting protesting Arabs. One year ago former British diplomat Craig Murray posted on his blog, “Condemned By Their Own Words”, which provided a translated from Hebrew-to-English transcript of an Israeli radio broadcast that had taken place on April 21st. An Israeli Brigadier-General, named Zvika Fogel, was responding to reports of the killing by soldiers of an unarmed fourteen year-old boy. He explained in some detail why his soldiers are absolutely doing the right thing to shoot to kill Palestinians who approach the barrier separating Gaza from Israel.

General Fogel’s comments are reflective of the Israeli government view of how to control the “Palestinian problem.” Only the rights, including the right to life, of Israeli Jews are legitimate and Arabs should be grateful for what the Jewish state allows them to have.

Fogel responded to interviewer Ron Nesiel’s first question “Should the IDF [Israeli army] rethink its use of snipers?” by saying that “Any person who gets close to the fence, anyone who could be a future threat to the border of the State of Israel and its residents, should bear a price for that violation. If this child or anyone else gets close to the fence in order to hide an explosive device or check if there are any dead zones there or to cut the fence so someone could infiltrate the territory of the State of Israel to kill us …”

Nesiel: “Then, then his punishment is death?”

Fogel: “His punishment is death. As far as I’m concerned then yes, if you can only shoot him to stop him, in the leg or arm – great. But if it’s more than that then, yes, you want to check with me whose blood is thicker, ours or theirs. It is clear to you that if one such person will manage to cross the fence or hide an explosive device there …”

Nesiel: “But we were taught that live fire is only used when the soldiers face immediate danger. … It does not do all that well for us, those pictures that are distributed around the world.”

Fogel: “I know how these orders are given. I know how a sniper does the shooting. I know how many authorizations he needs before he receives an authorization to open fire. It is not the whim of one or the other sniper who identifies the small body of a child now and decides he’ll shoot. Someone marks the target for him very well and tells him exactly why one has to shoot and what the threat is from that individual. And to my great sorrow, sometimes when you shoot at a small body and you intended to hit his arm or shoulder it goes even higher. The picture is not a pretty picture. But if that’s the price that we have to pay to preserve the safety and quality of life of the residents of the State of Israel, then that’s the price.

“[And] look, Ron, we’re even terrible at it [at suppressing those pictures]. There’s nothing to be done, David always looks better against Goliath. And in this case, we are the Goliath. Not the David. That is entirely clear to me. … It will drag us into a war. I do not want to be on the side that gets dragged. I want to be on the side that initiates things. I do not want to wait for the moment where it finds a weak spot and attacks me there. If tomorrow morning it gets into a military base or a kibbutz and kills people there and takes prisoners of war or hostages, call it as you like, we’re in a whole new script. I want the leaders of Hamas to wake up tomorrow morning and for the last time in their life see the smiling faces of the IDF. That’s what I want to have happen. But we are dragged along. So we’re putting snipers up because we want to preserve the values we were educated by. We can’t always take a single picture and put it before the whole world. We have soldiers there, our children, who were sent out and receive very accurate instructions about whom to shoot to protect us. Let’s back them up.”

One might reasonably suggest that Fogel’s comments reflect a consensus among Israelis on how to deal with the Arabs. And the United States is fully complicit in the slaughter. American Ambassador to Israel David Friedman has repeatedly praised the restraint of the Israeli armed forces and has blamed the Gazans for their plight. The United States continues to subsidize illegal Israeli settlements that fuel the conflict and is putting the final touches on an Israeli approved peace plan that will now and forever make the Palestinians a non-people, without a nation of their own and without any hopes for the future. Meanwhile, they are target practice for Israeli snipers. The world should be mortified by Israeli arrogance and behavior and the United States should bow its head in shame each time a pandering American politician comes out with the line “Israel has a right to defend itself.”


Ofiterul CIA Philip Giraldi – Ce sunt desenele animate?


Israel and its friends in Washington and New York never miss the opportunity to exploit the news cycle to tighten the screws a bit more, rendering any criticism of the Jewish state unacceptable or even illegal. Israel’s Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon has been persistently demanding that what he describes as anti-Semitic speech be criminalized. Danon declared that “The time for talking and having a conversation is over. What Israel and the Jewish community around the world demand is action – and now.”

How exactly Danon would enforce his definition of acceptable speech is not clear, but the demands to eliminate any negative commentary regarding the holocaust or on Israel and/or the behavior of diaspora Jews have been promoted for some time, resulting in laws in Europe that inflict harsh punish on those who dare to speak out. The latest incident in the campaign to eliminate the First Amendment in America took place oddly enough on the pages of the New York Times, which, in its international edition, ran a cartoon by a Portuguese cartoonist showing a dog with the face of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on a leash leading a caricature of Donald Trump wearing a yarmulke and a blind man’s glasses. The Netanyahu-dog had a tag on its collar featuring a Star of David.

There are several ways to interpret the cartoon. It is, of course, an insult to dogs to have them depicted in such a fashion as to suggest that they might behave like the monstrous Israeli Prime Minister. No dog would sink so low. One observer, commenting from a dog’s point of view, noted that “We canines share that saying that ‘the eyes are the window to the soul.’ Look into our eyes and you’ll see love and trust. Look into Netanyahu’s eyes you see cunning and deceit so why stick his head on our body?”

On the other hand, one might see in the cartoon a serious message, that Netanyahu has been able to “wag the dog” with an ignorant and impulsive United States president who is so desirous of pandering to Jews both in Israel and in the U.S. that he is blind to his obligation to do what is best for the American people. Trump, who is the first president within memory not to own a dog, would rather stroke the head of the disgusting casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson than an intelligent and loyal Labrador retriever.

The cartoon was immediately blasted as being anti-Semitic, of course, because the definition of that “hate crime” has now been expanded to include criticism of anything that is even remotely Jewish. The Times twice went into full apology mode, promising never to do anything like that again and implying that heads would roll. The paper’s spokesperson stated that the publishers were “deeply sorry” and elaborated that “The image was offensive, and it was an error of judgment to publish it. Such imagery is always dangerous, and at a time when anti-Semitism is on the rise worldwide, it’s all the more unacceptable. We are committed to making sure nothing like this happens again.”

But in spite of the abasement, the critics kept piling odd, some even claiming thatthe newspaper has a history of anti-Semitism. It was an odd assertion as the NYT has been Jewish owned since 1896, is home to numerous Jewish journalists, and its news coverage on the Middle East often serves as a mouthpiece for the Israeli Foreign Ministry.

All-Jewish all-the-time Times columnist Bret Stephens was in particularly fine form, attacking his own employer, writing in an op-ed entitled “A Despicable Cartoon in the Times” that appeared within hours of the cartoon’s surfacing. He demanded that the Times should engage in “some serious reflection as to how it came to publish that cartoon,” which he described as “an astonishing act of ignorance of anti-Semitism.” He elaborated how the cartoon shows “The small but wily Jew leading the dumb and trusting American. The hated Trump being Judaized with a skullcap. The nominal servant acting as the true master. The cartoon checked so many anti-Semitic boxes that the only thing missing was a dollar sign.” It might also be noted that the Times published on Sunday a photo that might be considered highly offensive to Catholics without any commentary by Stephens or from the paper’s editorial apologist.

Well, for once Stephens gets something right. The cartoon encapsulates the reality of U.S. policy in the Middle East and the relationship between Trump, who has made concession after concession to Israel, and his apparent masters. And yes, a few million Benjamins scattered around would have underlined why Trump misbehaves as he does.

And, in a demonstration that no crisis is too small to be exploited by the Trump Administration, Vice President Mike Pence tweeted, “We stand with Israel and we condemn antisemitism in ALL its forms.” Donald Trump himself followed up with his own tweet on the following day, writing that “The New York Times has apologized for the terrible Anti-Semitic Cartoon, but they haven’t apologized to me for this or all of the Fake and Corrupt news they print on a daily basis. They have reached the lowest level of ‘journalism.’”

The furor over a cartoon was useful as it covered up the latest outrage conducted by Israel against the Palestinians. The Israelis are again attacking Gaza, a story which the New York Times briefly reported in their Saturday edition. The Times headline in the online edition was “Gaza Militants Fire 250 Rockets, and Israel Responds With Airstrikes” before reporting that “Palestinian militants launched about 250 rockets and mortars into southern Israel from Gaza on Saturday, and the Israeli military responded with airstrikes and tank fire against targets across the Palestinian territory… Four Palestinians — including one militant, another man, a pregnant woman and her young daughter — were killed in Israeli strikes… That would bring the total number of Gazans fatally struck by Israeli fire since Friday to eight.”

Note how the Times reports the story. It gives the impression that the Gazans initiated a major attack by firing hundreds of missiles while Israel “responded” to Palestinian initiation of violence. Framing it in that fashion is a replay of the Israeli Foreign Ministry version of events, uncorroborated by any independent observers. Other accounts differ as to who started what and whom to blame. In reality, the Israelis have been threatening Gaza for months and have been moving troops up to the fence line for what is expected to be a final push to kill alleged “militants” in the Strip. The Times also wastes no time on humanizing the Arab casualties – the Palestinian baby that was killed was fourteen months old and named Seba Abu Arar. Her pregnant mother also died.

That the media in the United States should follow the Israeli line in reporting what takes place in the Middle East should surprise no one. It is called self-censorship and it will do until real laws can be drafted that will make speaking or writing anything unpleasant about Israel illegal. Referring back to the Times cartoon, the death of free speech is the reality that we American will eventually arrive at due to the actual power relationship that lies behind the metaphor of the wily Israeli dog leading the big, dumb American blind man.