Aletho News


“Freedom of Religion” and Other Lies

Christian and Muslim persecution in Israel ignored by the White House


The United States government, in its incessant bullying of foreign nations to get them to see the world the way that the cabal that runs Washington sees it, ironically often cites such fictions as the “rule of law” that guarantees such “rights” as “free speech” and “freedom of religion” to justify its illegal actions. Right at the moment, the United States maintains garrisons illegally in both Iraq, where the country’s parliament has asked it to depart, and also in neighboring Syria where the government is fighting an insurgency that seeks regime change and is supported by both the US and Israel. The US invasion of Iraq in 2003 is analogous to what Russia has done in Ukraine though Moscow certainly had stronger compelling national security reasons for doing what it did while the United States had to construct a series of lies to provide as an excuse to topple Saddam Hussein, an objective strongly supported by Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, who added his own fabrications to the exchanges.

One has to look to the media to discern the reasons why some developments are wrapped in “religious freedom” or “democracy promotion” while other actions are ignored or even covered-up. Currently the right-wing Jewish extremists who have gained control of Israel’s government are engaging in something like genocide directed against the Palestinian population, many of whom are actually Israeli citizens though possessing second class rights when they are enforced at all. Israel regards itself legally as a Jewish state, so what is the “rule of law” for those who are not Jews and how does it perceive “religious freedom?” Considerable government pressure is being exerted to force the “terrorists,” as the Arab residents are frequently called, to emigrate or face the consequences if they choose not to. It is directed most particularly against those Palestinians who are leaders in their community and it has therefore focused on the major Arab religious groups, both the Christians and the Muslims.

Ironically, though one can read in the US media almost daily accounts of alleged surging anti-semitism and the myth of perpetual Jewish victimhood, the ongoing brutality against the Palestinians, including their religious foundations and practices, is hardly noticed. That is the fundamental problem as the silence or perhaps the willful connivance of the American media and entertainment industry, firmly in the grip of the Jewish community and its “standards,” has shaped the narrative and limited any propagation of contrary opinion. It is a process that is similar to what has taken place with any discussion of the Ukraine war in the mainstream media, where there is also a heavy Jewish footprint.

There have been two major incidents involving Jewish assertion of its occupation of and control over all of Jerusalem that have recently impacted on the country’s religious minorities during their holy seasons, Easter and Ramadan. The first consisted of two consecutive middle-of- the-night attacks by Israeli police and soldiers in full riot gear armed with stun grenades and clubs on Palestinians spending the night at the al-Aqsa mosque on Temple Mount in Jerusalem, the third holiest site for Muslims. The Palestinian men were there in part to protect the building from Jewish settlers who have been threatening to destroy it. The Palestinians inside were beaten by police, who had broken into the mosque, and as many as 350 mostly young men were later arrested for resisting.

The second incident was an order by Israeli police limiting the regular Christian gathering on Holy Saturday, referred to as the “Holy Fire” celebration, at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, which normally attracts 10,000 worshippers, to no more than 1,800 attendees. On the day of the ceremony, Israeli police reacted with heavy-handed tactics to block hundreds of Orthodox Christians from gathering at the church, which is at the center of the old Christian quarter of the city. Several Coptic Orthodox priests were particularly targeted in front of the church and beaten with batons. Israeli forces closed off access to the site with roadblocks and barriers at the gates of the Old City, permitting only small numbers of Christians and those with government permits to enter.

Both steps restricting freedom of religion were taken without any consultation with the respective communities and without any evidence that there would be disorder or violence without the police interventions. The Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the Israeli action as a “blatant attack on the freedom of worship” and a “flagrant attack on the existing political, historical and legal status quo in occupied Jerusalem and on Israel’s obligations as an occupying regime in Jerusalem” that
“violate international law, international humanitarian law and signed agreements.” The Christian churches’ leadership also separately objected to no avail and responded to the threat by observing that Palestinian Christians are themselves under increasing pressure from the Israeli government to force them to emigrate. Christians constituted 20% of the Israeli population in 1947 but now are fewer than 2%.

Indeed, since the rise this year of Israel’s most far-right government in history, Palestinian Christians frequently experience Jewish Israeli discrimination at all levels. They directly observe how their 2,000-year-old community in the Holy Land has come under increasing attack. In March, two Israeli men assaulted and beat a priest in the church sited at the Tomb of the Virgin Mary. In February, a statue of Jesus was vandalized by an American Jewish tourist at the Church of the Condemnation, where Jesus was flogged and sentenced to death while a month earlier, dozens of Christian graves were desecrated by two Jewish teenagers at the Anglican cemetery on Mount Zion, where Jesus’s Last Supper took place. In November, two soldiers from the Israeli army’s Givati Brigade spit at the Armenian archbishop and other pilgrims during a procession in the Old City. Christian clerics living in Jerusalem claim that they are frequently physically assaulted and spat on by settlers and other Jewish Israelis when they are walking in the streets. The Israeli government has also been increasingly confiscating church properties for various projects that benefit only the Jewish community. When Christians seek redress from the Israeli courts they are almost always denied justice.

Now one would think that the United States, with its dedication to “rule of law” and religious freedom would at a minimum condemn the Israeli actions, particularly the unprovoked violent attack on peaceful Muslims during their high holy days at al-Aqsa. But no, and this is how a State Department spokesman Vedant Patel described it: “We are concerned by the scenes out of Jerusalem. And it is our viewpoint that it is absolutely vital that the sanctity of holy sites be preserved. We emphasize the importance of upholding the historic status quo at the holy sites in Jerusalem and any unilateral action that jeopardizes the status quo to us is unacceptable. We call for restraint, coordination and calm during the holiday season.”

So the State Department believes that Israel did not initiate the violence, which is, of course, false. And Patel felt compelled to add an additional comment on recent home-made rocket attacks coming from Lebanon in the wake of the police and army actions: “We condemn the launch of rockets from Lebanon and Gaza at Israel. Our commitment to Israel’s security is ironclad and we recognize that Israel has the legitimate right to defend itself against all forms of aggression.” Don’t you love the frequent assertion of the claim that Israel has a “right to defend itself?” Patel was in fact wrong about Gaza firing missiles – that was a fiction invented by the Israeli government to explain why it had responded with a bombardment of its own directed against the long-suffering Gazans. The hostile rockets, which did little damage and injured no one, actually came from a Palestinian group in Lebanon. Apparently, the Palestinians and Israel’s neighbors do not have the right to defend themselves or to respond to Jewish violence. Rule of law and religious freedom appear to depend on who is attempting to exercise those rights and under what circumstances.

Interestingly, the New York Times had its own bizarre description of what took place at al-Aqsa. Their correspondent wrote how the crisis started when Palestinians “barricaded themselves” overnight inside the building before being “cleared” by police from the mosque in the middle of the night, to “protect Jewish worshippers” who were reportedly observing the Passover holiday in the vicinity. In other words, the violence was initiated by the Israelis but it was to prevent any threat against Jews, even though there is no evidence that anything like that was intended and why Jews were present at close quarters to a Muslim holy site is not clear. By one report, extremist Jews may have been preparing to sacrifice a goat.

On April 14th, to honor International Holocaust Remembrance Day, President Joe Biden demonstrated the he is not as brain dead as is often claimed. He knows exactly who owns him and knows how to pile it on. His proclamation reads: “During Yom Hashoah and throughout these days of remembrance, we mourn the 6 million Jews who were murdered during the horror of the Holocaust—as well as the millions of Roma and Sinti, Slavs, disabled persons, LGBTQI+ individuals, and political dissidents who were murdered at the hands of the Nazis and their collaborators. Together with courageous survivors, descendants of victims and people around the world, we renew our solemn vow: ‘never again.’”

Clearly Joe had not gotten the message that in America every day is de facto holocaust remembrance day as measured by the frequent appearance of that expression in the media. But he makes sure of the trans gay vote by including the LGBTQI+ folks as victims of the Nazis. Perhaps Joe should pay some attention to the Americans murdered by the Israelis, to include the 34 crewmen of the USS Liberty killed by the Israeli military in 1967, activist Rachel Corrie crushed by a bulldozer in 2003 and most recently Palestinian American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh killed by the Israeli army last May. Israel has not been held accountable for any of those deaths and it knows it can get away with anything, including targeting and killing US citizens.

Next week, the GOP will be doubling down on the message as Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy leads a delegation of twenty bipartisan fawning congress critters to Israel. He has carefully billed it as his first foreign trip as speaker, underlining what an important ally Israel is. He will address the Knesset on May 1st and there will no doubt be a lot of kissing and hugging with Bibi and many pledges of undying commitment to the Jewish state. The Israeli government is already describing it as “Speaker McCarthy’s speech in the Knesset will be a sign for the strong and unbreakable bond between Israel and the US.” And no doubt lots of money will appear in the pipeline so Israel can defend itself. Just don’t mention Israel’s recent premeditated murder of Shireen Abu Akleh back or “religious freedom.” And to hell with the Palestinian Christians. They have been hanging around for 2,000 years but are on their way out.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is

April 25, 2023 - Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Wars for Israel | , , , , ,


  1. Of course, no one was held accountable for Shireen Abu Akleh’s death. It was a deployment by the Mossad to silence forever this honest Journalist who dared tell the outside world the real story of the brutality inflicted on the Palestinian people by the Netanyahu government and its fascist shock troops. Yes, Fascists! Is there any difference between the tactics used by Hitler’s Gestapo against the Jews and the tactics being used by the IDF against the Palestinians?!! Netanyahu is carrying out his Father’s blood and soil dream of a Zionist State free of Muslims and Christians in the name of Eretz Israel. Make no mistake about it, Bibi’s brand of Zionism is Fascism. It makes Bibi’s relationship with the Biden administration and news media seamless. Without the ripple effect that assassinations and mass killings of Palestinians had tended to produce when Lukud wasn’t running things. Trump’s making Jerusalem the Capitol and his son-in-law’s involvement in the Abraham Accords was a mistake. Trump may not be a politician and out of his league, but he certainly isn’t a Statesman either. Taking this into consideration combined with how badly Lavrov was treated at the UN Security Council meeting, the United Nations might as well close up shop.


    Comment by Thomas Lee Simpson | April 26, 2023 | Reply

    “– According to famous historians like Josephus the Jewish people of the Bible were destroyed during the Jewish Roman war. The only Jews that survived were the few Christians and slaves that remained, and they were sold throughout the world. No one knows what happened to them. The modern-day Jews admit they are just Gentile/Khazars that converted to Judaism in the seventh through 10th centuries. This leaves futuristic dispensational teachings as false doctrine. There aren’t any Jews to return to. God’s people are any race that believe in him and have a relationship with him regardless of race.

    – Jewish Almanac 1980 p.3- the Jews admit that they are not descendants of the ancient Israelites. It’s under the heading a brief history of the term to Jew. Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a Jew or to call a contemporary Jew an Israelite or Hebrew. Jewish Almanac 1980 p.3.

    Thou Shalt Not Kill Who?
    Zionism comes from the bowels of the Bible. In a display of chutzpah even more galling than the Balfour Declaration, the first Zionists invented a god who commanded them to commit genocide. After declaring that their god gave them land which had belonged to other people for hundreds of years, the spiritual ancestors of today’s Zionists embarked upon a campaign of mass murder:
    ” In the cities of these peoples that the Lord your God gives you for an
    inheritance you shall save alive nothing that breathes, but you shall
    utterly destroy them, the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites, as the Lord your God has commanded” (Deuteronomy 20:16-17).

    The Jebusites were the people of Jerusalem, and like the other nations that were slated for destruction, they had no quarrel with the Israelites.

    Nevertheless, there can be no doubt that The People Of The Book were bent on genocide according to the modern definition of the word:
    ” They should be utterly destroyed and should receive no mercy but be
    exterminated, as the Lord commanded Moses . . Utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, infant and suckling “(Joshua 11:20 . . . First Samuel 15:3).

    Indeed, this was to be a Holocaust:
    And as explained by Maimonides, Judaism’s most respected scholar of the Bible, this Holocaust was a mandatory commandment from the god of Jacob, the patriarch whose name was changed to Israel:

    It is a positive commandment to destroy the seven nations, as it is said:
    “Thou shalt utterly destroy them.” If one does not put to death any of them that falls into one’s power, one transgresses a negative commandment, as it is said: “Thou shalt save alive nothing that breathes”
    (Maimonides’ Book of Judges, 5:4, circa. 1195).

    But the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule also come from the Bible. The most famous of the Ten Commandments is “Thou shalt not kill,” and the Golden Rule says “Love thy neighbor as thy self.” How can this be? In order to understand the heart of Zionism, this apparent contradiction must be understood in its original context. Consider three translations of Leviticus 19:18 — the biblical verse from which the Golden Rule has been extracted:

    “Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” [King James Version of the Bible, and the first Jewish Publication Society translation]
    ” You shall not take vengeance or bear any grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself.” [Revised Standard Version]
    ” You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against your countrymen.
    Love your fellow as yourself.” [TANAKH, most recent Jewish Publication Society translation] In context, “neighbor” meant “the children of thy people,” “the sons of your own people,” “your countrymen” — in other words, fellow Israelites.

    Keep this definition of “neighbor” in mind as we consider the proto-legal portion of The Ten Commandments (Deuteronomy 5:17-21):
    Thou shalt not kill.
    Neither shalt thou commit adultery.
    Neither shalt thou steal.
    Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour.
    Neither shall you covet your neighbor’s wife; and you shall not desire
    your neighbor’s house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or anything that is your neighbor’s.
    — and remember that there was no punctuation in the original. That is, the scrolls from which these words were translated have no periods, no commas, and no first-word capitalization.

    Here the question ‘Thou shalt not kill who?’ is answered: ‘Thou shalt not kill thy neighbor . . . the children of thy people . . . the sons of your own people . . your countrymen . . . fellow Israelis . . . fellow Jews’.

    How unconventional is this interpretation? Not very. The rabbis of the Talmud, Judaism’s most respected explication of the Bible, determined that an Israelite was not liable for murder unless he intentionally killed a fellow Israelite. Maimonides put it like this (Book of Torts 5:1:1 . . .
    ” If one slays a single Israelite, he transgresses a negative commandment, for Scripture says, Thou Shalt not murder. If one murders willfully in the presence of witnesses, he is put to death by the sword . . . Needless to say, one is not put to death if he kills a heathen”.

    This understanding of “Thou shalt not kill” allows us to see why the first Commander-and-Chief of the Israeli Defense Forces was not guilty of hypocrisy. According to the Bible, Joshua initiated the most successful campaign of genocide in world history — a campaign in which over 400 named cities were “utterly destroyed.” The first city to fall was Jericho, where every man, woman and child was “put to the sword” because they were not People of The Book. The second city to fall was much smaller, only 12,000 people, but Joshua took 30,000 soldiers to massacre Ai. After a long day of killing he gathered his troops and carved the Ten Commandments in stone — including “Thou shalt not kill” (Joshua 8:24 25, 30-32):

    When Israel had finished slaughtering all the inhabitants of Ai . . . and all of them to the very last had fallen by the edge of the sword . . . all who fell that day, both men and women, were twelve thousand, all the people of Ai then Joshua built an altar and they offered on it burnt offerings to the Lord . . . And there, in the presence of the people of Israel, he wrote upon the stones a copy of the law of Moses.

    Joshua was not a hypocrite because there is no conflict inherent to not killing “the children of thy people,” while killing other people’s children with enthusiasm. In fact, Joshua was greatly dismayed about his conquest of Ai because unlike Jericho, where he did not lose a single soldier, Joshua lost 3 Israelites for every thousand people killed at Ai.

    Today’s Zionists are more pleased by such kill ratios:
    “According to figures provided by Minister of the Interior Yosef Burg, in1980 ten Jews were killed by ‘terrorists’ and in 1981 eight. In contrast, we have killed about a thousand ‘terrorists’ in 1982, and caused the loss of life of thousands of inhabitants of an enemy country. If so, it results that for every 6-8 Jews sacrificed, we kill in return thousands of Gentiles. This is, undoubtedly, a spectacular situation, an uncommon success of Zionism.” (Aluf Hareven, former head of the Van Leer Institute, on Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, from Migvan, October/November, 1982)

    A proper understanding of “the law of Moses” even makes it possible to comprehend current interpretations of Israeli law ( New York Newsday 10/15/91, p 14):
    An Israeli Justice Ministry official suggested in a letter that a Palestinian benefited when Israeli soldiers killed his wife. The letter was written by Pliya Albeck, chief of the civil department at the attorney general’s office, legislator Yossi Sarid said. Israeli radio said the Palestinian woman, Safiyah Suleiman Gargour, 63, was beaten and then shot to death by soldiers in May, 1990 while working in her garden in Khan
    Yunis in the occupied Gaza Strip.
    “You should claim that the plaintiff has only benefited from the death of the deceased (his wife). He has benefited, because during her life, he had to provide for her, and now he does not have to do so.”

    So it is that from a Zionist perspective, when the brains of seven year-old Ali Jawarish came “oozing from a hole in his forehead where he had been shot at close range by an Israeli soldier firing on fleeing young stone-throwers,” it was not wrong. It did not disrupt “the grand opening of a new fortified complex encasing Rachel’s Tomb.” It did not dampen “The festivities, attended by hundreds of strictly Orthodox Jews, Defense
    Minister Yitzhak Mordechai and Israel’s two Chief Rabbis.” It did not violate any of the Ten Commandments while “Women in kerchiefs and long dresses and men in black coats and hats lighted memorial candles and swayed over prayer-books in separate prayer sections,” and “Followers of a Hasidic sect hawked religious books and danced to religious music blaring from loudspeakers” while Yitzhak Mordechai told the crowd “We have come to this place and we will never leave it, until the coming of the redeemer”
    (New York Times, November 12, 1997).

    No, to Zionists the killing of Ali Jawarish was not wrong. To Zionists the family of Ali Jawarish has only benefited, because during Ali’s life, they had to provide for him, and now they do not have to do so. For more secular Jewish and Christian Zionists, the killing of Ali Jawarish was not wrong because it was just one more unfortunate incident in the natural unfolding of history . . . it was just another day. But for religious
    Zionists, the killing a Ali Jawarish was not wrong because he was a heathen.

    * Dr. John Hartung is the author of “Love Thy Neighbor: the evolution of
    in-group morality” (Skeptic 3:4, 1995; also available at

    By John Hartung*
    The Sages perceived their god as having given his people a special fierceness. As explained by Rabbi Simeon:
    “There are three distinguished in fierceness: Israel among the nations, the dog among animals, and the cock among birds”
    (Bezah 25b).

    The Yanomamo Indians, who inhabit the headwaters of the Amazon, traditionally believe that they are fierce, and that they are the only fully qualified people on earth. The word Yanomamo, in fact, means man, and non-Yanomamo are viewed as a form of degenerated Yanomamo (Chagnon, 1992). A similar theme runs throughout Judeo-Christianity. Although many Jews have been killed by Christians who perceived their god to have changed his choice, the original theme of God’s chosen people was developed in the Torah and promoted a not-fully-human perception of out-group members.

    Maimonides had a penchant for omitting rulings and opinions that were not politically correct by 12th-century standards, yet he was often more explicit than the Talmud, especially when stating rules that the Sages assumed would be taken for granted. Consider his exegesis of the intent of the commandment against murder (Torts 5:1:1, 5:2:11):
    “If one slays a single Israelite, he transgresses a negative commandment, for Scripture says, Thou shalt not murder. If one murders willfully in the presence of witnesses, he is put to death by the sword…Needless to say, one is not put to death if he kills a heathen.”

    In most recent translations of Maimonides’ Codes, the words “single Israelite” are replaced by “human being” in the above passage (e.g., translation by Klein, 1954, p. 195 and note 1, p. 273), and the clarification regarding heathens is relegated to the editing room floor (e.g., Chavel, 1990). This suggests an effort to convert in-group morality into general morality by strategically mistranslating and editing original documents.

    However, in one of Maimonides’ hand-written manuscripts, referred to as The Oxford Codex, the text reads “single Israelite” as distinct from “human being” and cannot be translated otherwise unless a translator accepts the Talmudic argument that only in-group members qualify as human beings. Even then, such an ideological translation requires taking the liberty of inserting this understanding without putting readers on notice that the translation is not literal.

    The Sages were quite explicit about their view that non-Jews were not to be considered fully human. Whether referring to “gentiles,” “idolaters,” or “heathens,” the biblical passage which reads:
    “And ye my flock, the flock of my pasture, are men, and I am your God,” (Ezekiel 34:31; KJV) is augmented to read (italics in original): “And ye my flock, the flock of my pastures, are men; only ye are designated ‘men'” (Baba Mezia 114b). Or: “And ye My sheep the sheep of My pasture, are men; you are called men* but the idolaters are not called men.” [Footnote in original: “…only an Israelite, who as a worshipper of the true God, can be said to have been like Adam, created in the image of God. Idol worshippers, having marred the Divine image, forfeit all claim to this appellation” (Yebamoth 61a).]

    Or, again with explanation from a footnote (parentheses and italics in original):
    …in the case of heathens; are they not in the category of adam?-No, it is written: And ye my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are adam (man).” Ye are called adam but heathens are not called adam”. [Footnote reads: “…The term adam does not denote ‘man’ but Israelite. The term adam is used to denote man made in the image of God and heathens by their idolatry and idolatrous conduct mar this divine image and forfeitthe designation adam” (Kerithoth 6b).]

    Indeed, the Hebrew word adam appears 106 times in the Torah, referring to the character Adam only 14 times. The other 92 occurrences of the word adam translate as man or men, usually referring to Israelites generally, as distinct from designating gender.
    * Dr. John Hartung is the author of “Love Thy Neighbor: the evolution of
    in-group morality” (Skeptic 3:4, 1995; [For additional background read the book at:

    By Professor Israel Shahak*
    Dishonouring Christian religious symbols is an old religious duty in Judaism. Spitting on the cross, an especially on the Crucifix, and spitting when a Jew passes a church, havebeen obligatory from around AD 200 for pious Jews. In the past, when the danger of anti-Semitic hostility was a real one, the pious Jews were commanded by their rabbis either to spit so that the reason for doing so would be unknown, or to spit onto their chests, not actually on the cross or openly before the church. The increasing strength of the Jewish state has caused these customs to become more open again but there should be no mistake: The spitting on the cross for converts from Christianity to Judaism , organized in Kibbutz Sa’ad and financed by the Israeli government is a an act
    of traditional Jewish piety. It does not seize to be barbaric, horrifying and wicked because of this! On the contrary, it is worse because it is so traditional, and much more dangerous as well, just as the renewed anti-Semitism of the Nazis was dangerous, because in part, it played on the traditional anti-Semitic past.

    This barbarous attitude of contempt and hate for Christian religious symbols has grown in Israel. In the 1950s Israel issued a series of stamps representing pictures of Israeli cities. In the picture of Nazareth, there was a church and on its top a cross – almost invisible, perhaps the size of a millimeter. Nevertheless, the religious parties, supported by many on the Zionist “left” made a scandal and the stamps were quickly withdrawn and replaced by an almost identical series from which the microscopic cross was withdrawn.

    Then there was the long-drawn-out battle about Christian influence in elementary arithmetic. Pious Jews object to the international plus sign for it is a cross, and it may in their opinion, influence little children to convert to Christianity. Another “explanation” holds; it would then be difficult to “educate” them to spit on the cross, if they become used to it in their arithmetic exercises. Until the early 1970s two different sets of arithmetic books were used in Israel. One for the secular schools, employing an inverted “T” sign. In the early ’70’s the religious fanatics “converted” the Labour Party to the great danger of the cross in arithmetic, and from that time, in all Hebrew elementary schools and now many high schools as well) the international plus sign has been forbidden.

    Similar development is visible in other areas of education. Teaching the New Testament was always forbidden, but in the old time conscientious teachers of history used to circumvent the prohibition, by organizing seminars or sending the students to libraries (not the school libraries, of course). About 10 years ago there was a wave of denouncing such teachers. One in Jerusalem was almost sacked, for advising her history pupils, who were studying the history of Jews in Palestine around 30-40 AD, that it would be a good thing if they would read a few chapters of the New Testament as a historical aid. She retained her post only after humbly promising not to do this again.

    However in recent years, anti-Christian feelings are literally exploding in Israel (and among Israel-worshipping Jews in Diaspora too) together with the increase of the Jewish fanaticism in all other areas too.

    The real enemies of truth here, as in many other aspects of the Israel reality, are the socialists, “liberals”, “radicals”, etc. in the USA. Imagine the reaction of the US Liberals, and of such papers as The Nation and New York Review of Books, not to speak of the New York Times if in any state whatsoever, the government financed spitting on a Star of David? But when here in Israel, the government finances the spitting on a cross, they are and will continue to be, quite silent. More than this, they help to finance it. United States taxpayers, who are of course mostly Christians, are financing at least half the Israeli budget, one way or another, and therefore the spitting on the cross too.

    * Professor Israel Shahak is an israeli citizen, former concentration camp inmate during WW II, and the founder of Israel’s Human Rights League. His book:
    “Jewish History, Jewish Religion” about Jewish hatred and contempt toward Gentiles, is highly recommended.


    Comment by Pip | April 26, 2023 | Reply

    • Thank you for providing me with historical specificity behind the totem beliefs that fuel Zionist fanatics. For it is essentially a pagan belief structure that is behind the Zionist’s fanatical war on Islam and Christianity. “We against all others” ultra-Zionism that is ingrained in the culture of some of the Israeli officials and their followers who commit heinous crimes in Israel against Palestinians and Christians are committing no fewer crimes against humanity. And similarly, like at the Nuremberg Tribunal after WWII, like-minded fascist nazi party members were condemned to death. So too will they be at the next Nuremberg Tribunal. For they will not go unpunished forever, be they alive or deceased. For as long as civilization existed, when ten thousand years ago Vedic poetry and astronomy represented a people with a more perfect cultural matrix than what substitutes for Judeo-Christian ethics today, men and women of goodwill who represent the best that civilization has to offer, shall prevail. One of those figures, the late Lyndon LaRouche, lived at a time when he was not appreciated by many besides the relatively small number of people worldwide who were associates. His wife Helga Zepp-LaRouche carries on his lifelong work today.


      Comment by Thomas Lee Simpson | April 26, 2023 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: