Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Teaching Holocaust

Don’t know much about history

By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • July 16, 2019

A friend of mine recently commented that if the current trend to reduce the study of history in schools to easily digestible politically correct soundbites that are being successfully pushed by social justice warriors continues, we will soon be limited to discussing how horrible slavery was, the Stonewall Inn riots and the so-called holocaust. Indeed, it seems that those who complain the loudest are the only ones listened to and no one complains more often or at greater volume than American Jewish groups intent on preserving the benefits that are derived from always being able to claim their perpetual victimhood.

Recent media accounts from Florida detail how low pandering to Israeli and Jewish interests can go. A high school principal identified as Dr. Willian Latson was removed from his position after he revealed to a parent that he considered the holocaust to be a belief and not a demonstrated fact. According to statement made by the school district, the action was taken “out of an abundance of concern” for students and staff after Latson had “made a grave error in judgment.” It added that “In addition to being offensive, the principal’s statement is not supported by either the School District Administration or the School Board.”

The story took place in the School District of Palm Beach County. Latson, now the ex-principal of Spanish River High School in West Palm Beach, presided over his school in a heavily Jewish district that includes Boca Raton. Latson is currently being considered for reassignment by the school district though there are have also been recurring calls from county and state legislators to fire him, which will undoubtedly occur.

The tale is somewhat convoluted and there are some disagreements about what actually took place, but it goes basically like this: roughly one year ago a high school parent, unidentified but presumably Jewish, emailed Latson asking him to confirm that holocaust education was a top priority in Spanish River H.S. He responded by email that the school has a “variety of activities” for holocaust education but “Not everyone believes the Holocaust happened. And you have your thoughts, but we are a public school and not all of our parents have the same beliefs.” He added that an educator has “the role to be politically neutral but support all groups in the school… I can’t say the Holocaust is a factual, historical event because I am not in a position to do so as a school district employee.”

After the emails were revealed to school officials, presumably by the parent, a year-long investigation commenced in which Latson apologized for having caused offense, saying his emails “did not accurately reflect my professional and personal commitment to educating all students about the atrocities of the Holocaust.” The school board initially ruled that he had not done anything meriting disciplinary action or a reprimand, but the story did not end there. Simultaneously, an online petition which eventually included 6,000 signatures was initiated demanding Latson’s replacement and he was subsequently removed from his position. The school board officials justified their change of course by citing his apparent unwillingness to comply with instructions, stating that they previously had ordered him to “expand the Holocaust curriculum at Spanish River and ordered him to spend ‘several days at the United States Holocaust Museum to increase his personal knowledge.’”

Latson responded that his emails and comments were not “accurately relayed” to the media: “I have been reassigned to the district office due to a statement that was not accurately relayed to the newspaper by one of our parents. It is unfortunate that someone can make a false statement and do so anonymously and it holds credibility but that is the world we live in.”

His statement implicitly blaming a school parent generated new problems for Latson with two Palm Beach County state lawmakers and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) calling for his firing because he had not groveled sufficiently. ADL stated that “ADL had hoped his apology was sincere and Latson could learn from his mistakes. Given that he cannot take responsibility for his actions, Latson should resign, and if not we believe the district should end his employment.”

The two state officials, Senator Kevin Rader and Representative Tina Polsky issued a statement saying “By his latest email, Dr. Latson has shown no remorse for his actions and we call on the district to immediately terminate him.”

The publication of Latson’s comments also unleashed heavy criticism from a broad range of other Florida public officials. Governor Ron DeSantis, who calls himself the most pro-Israel governor in American, joined in with “Look, to act like the Holocaust is a matter of debate, I mean, is just absurd.”

Senator Rick Scott called Latson’s comments anti-Semitism and tweeted that the “fact that someone charged with educating children would be unable to speak unequivocally on the realities & horrors of the holocaust is incredibly concerning.” Jewish State Representative Randy Fine, who recently introduced legislation officially banning “anti-Semitism” in Florida public schools, said “the law does not allow a Holocaust-denier to serve as a public school principal.” In a published statement he expanded on that point, writing that “anti-Semitism by public employees in our K-20 public education system must be treated the same as racism.”

The controversy inadvertently revealed the extent to which state law now requires the holocaust to be taught in all Florida public schools. Ironically, Spanish River High has one of the country’s most rigorous holocaust education programs with the subject being taught both in ninth- and 10th-grade English classes as well as a component of both U.S. and world history. There is also an elective course as well regular holocaust assemblies for the entire school featuring keynote speakers. After the Latson controversy started, the school district required all 10th graders to read “Night” by Elie Wiesel. There are now plans to add multiple annual assemblies for students in every grade in the school district this year.

So, if you go to school in Florida your English and history courses will be about the holocaust and you will have to attend holocaust assemblies just in case some alleged atrocity has not been described extensively enough in class. Well, when does it end? When does the almost incessant pandering to Zionists and Jewish groups become too much for the deliberately kept-in-ignorance American public to tolerate?

The so-called holocaust was an historical event that took place in Europe seventy-five years ago. It has an established but very debatable narrative that pretty much has been contrived over the past fifty years for political reasons, see Professor Norman Finkelstein’s brilliant deconstruction of it in his book “The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering.” Those inconsistencies in the holocaust story and its general lack of credibility may have been what Latson was referring to.

The imposed holocaust narrative is full of holes and contradictions in terms of who was killed and how, but it is impossible for genuine academics to critique it if they want to stay employed. Books like Wiesel’s “Night” are largely works of fiction. The narrative exists to perpetuate the belief in Jewish suffering, which brings with it a number of practical advantages. First, it is regularly deployed to excuse the horrific treatment of the Palestinian people by Israel – Jewish suffering means that the creation of a homeland is a debt that all the world owes to the Jews without regard to what has been done to the area’s other inhabitants. Second, guilt over the alleged holocaust means that reparations from countries involved must be continued indefinitely. Currently the Poles are resisting new Jewish claims while the Germans have been paying for years. It is now being asserted that the descendants of so-called holocaust survivors have been genetically psychologically damaged, in the womb as it were, so reparations will presumably continue forever.

Third, holocaust guilt is used in the United States to counter any criticism of what Israel and Jewish groups are up to, as they use their wealth and access to power to corrupt America’s institutions and drive the country to needless wars. One might well ask, when confronted by the taxpayer funded holocaust museums that appear to spring up like mushrooms, why so much interest in a possible crime that has nothing to do with the United States? Where are the museums and courses in Florida schools discussing the mass killing that happened on our own shores, the genocide of the native Americans?

Lest we forget, the holocaust industry operates everywhere in America, particularly in the education system. Eight states already have laws mandating holocaust education (California, New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Florida, Illinois, Indiana and Michigan) and there is considerable pressure to make it universal in the United States. An alarmed World Jewish Congress (WJC) is urging required holocaust education for everyone everywhere “citing statistics from a 2018 poll revealing half of millennials can’t name a single Nazi concentration camp.”

A currently circulating WJC petition in Congress expresses concern over the rise in anti-Semitism, with a warning that “the horrors of the Holocaust are fading from our collective memory…” A bill to brainwash students so they will not forget, ‘The Never Again Education Act’, is currently making the rounds in the House of Representatives. It would make holocaust study mandatory in public schools and set up a Department of Education program that would train teachers to properly instruct students about the story of Jewish suffering.

Yes, the “Never Again Education Act” will soon be sucking up taxpayer money like an enormous vacuum cleaner and creating lots of new jobs for holocaust instructors, who will, of course, all be Jewish. Public schools will be teaching the next generation about what a great place Israel is and how the holocaust justifies vigilant groups like AIPAC and ADL, though it will not mention how they have corrupted the U.S. government and turned America’s foreign policy into an Israeli wag-the-dog. But who’s complaining? It’s good for the Jews, isn’t it?

So Dr. William Latson will be unemployed and possibly unemployable because he spoke the truth, a lesson to all of us that one must never cross the red lines established by the wielders of Jewish power in America. One might reasonably currently expect that serial pedophile Jeffrey Epstein will use the holocaust get-out-of-jail-free card in his defense, claiming that his recollection of the event has so traumatized him that he did bad things that he would not have otherwise considered. Poor Jeffrey. He has suffered so much.

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 councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org

July 15, 2019 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

Israeli firm spying on Palestinians says it only works with ‘democratic countries’

RT | July 15, 2019

An Israeli facial recognition firm secretly tracking Palestinians in the West Bank says it only works with ‘democratic countries’, ironically dismissing Israel’s own human rights abuses against the Palestinians.

Anyvision Interactive Technologies is a company with Microsoft funding, a former head of the Defense Ministry’s security department as its president, and a former Mossad head as his adviser. Its facial recognition software is used by the Israeli Army at checkpoints in the West Bank, allowing soldiers to check whether Palestinians have work permits for Israel. It also has a more secretive project with the army that installs its software in cameras inside the West Bank to surveil Palestinians.

Anyvision addressed concerns about facial recognition software by saying it “only works with democracies,” and doesn’t “operate in China” or “sell in Africa or Russia,” with CEO Eylon Etshtein explaining, “We only sell systems to democratic countries with proper governments,” Haaretz reports.

Anyvision’s dismissal of countries like China and Russia is at odds with the fact that its software is secretly being used by the Israeli military to spy on Palestinians in the West Bank, which is under Israeli occupation and subject to Israeli checkpoints and surveillance, despite being Palestinian territory.

Israel has been accused of a series of human rights violations against the Palestinians it is spying on, and its continued building of Israeli settlements within the West Bank violates UN resolutions and the Fourth Geneva Convention. The UN has said it may have committed war crimes for the killing of protesters, medics, and journalists at the Gaza March of Return demonstrations. Israel does not use Anyvision’s spying software in Israel or the Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

Israel holds democratic elections for its citizens, but not all of the over 13 million people under its control. No Palestinians in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, can vote, even though Israel controls much of their movements, security, water, roads, and building permits. Israeli settlers living in the West Bank can vote, however.

When asked about arguments that the West Bank is not governed democratically, Etshtein said, “It’s really a huge dilemma, but I’m not the guy to ask this,” adding the company does “the maximum so that its technology isn’t misused.”

July 15, 2019 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , | Leave a comment

The Incredible Disappearing Country

By Helen Buyniski · July 13, 2019

Americans celebrating Independence Day last week did so amidst levels of domestic discord unprecedented in their lifetimes. With the media establishment openly scoffing not merely at the “founding fathers,” who could stand to be removed from their pedestals once in a while, but at the Declaration of Independence itself and even at the notion of declaring that independence, Americans who never thought of themselves as patriots were nevertheless placed on the defensive. One need not believe in “my country right or wrong” to bristle at the idea that said country shouldn’t exist. But would-be defenders of the American Way are finding themselves increasingly at a loss for words. What does America actually stand for now that the “freedoms” once guaranteed its citizens are rapidly fading into the rearview mirror?

we’re so jaded. except when it comes to war. we like war.

The New York Times led the parade of mainstream outlets sneering at America on its birthday, posting a sarcastic video showing the US’ poor performance against other developed countries on metrics like education and healthcare. But as usual, the Times left out the most important parts — the parts that would implicate it as guilty in the full-on plundering of the American dream. The Fourth Estate — the self-appointed watchdog of the people’s freedoms — was bribed with CIA steaks to lie down while craven opportunists dismantled the country and left a second-rate replica in its place. The Times went one better, actually aiding and abetting the neocon warmongers who lied the US into war — in Iraq, but also in Syria, Libya, and, they hope, Iran. For the Times to complain now that the country, out $6 trillion thanks to the “War on Terror” it enabled and cheered at the top of its lungs, is broke and broken, is hypocritical in the extreme.

Bill of rights, or bill of goods?

Freedom of speech, so important to the national identity it leads the Bill of Rights, has been so vilified in the media that the very notion of “defending free speech” has come to be associated with the extreme Right in establishment reporting. This is no accident, of course — truth is the first casualty of war, and anyone who speaks it has been told in no uncertain terms that they are next on that casualty list. The looming extradition of Julian Assange is a warning to all adversarial journalists and publishers that they are no longer protected by the laws that once enshrined press freedom in the country’s heart, and even those who never set foot in the US can be treated as disposable if they oppose its imperial project. The internet, once a refuge for those silenced by the bought establishment organs, has been quietly scrubbed of those same troublemakers thanks to private corporations doing the government’s dirty work. And the only group more enthusiastic about the police state than the government itself is the clique of Big Tech bandits that receive fat government contracts to enable it.

Private corporations can get away with a lot that governments can’t, even beyond the legal restrictions on the state imposed by the Bill of Rights. Thanks to “free market” orthodoxy, regulation of the private sector is considered borderline criminal, un-American even, allowing companies to do whatever they want — financially, legally and ethically. And Americans have a certain reverence for successful corporations that they have never had for their government. They were livid when they learned their government was spying on their phone calls and emails through the NSA’s StellarWind program, but when it’s Amazon doing the spying through an Alexa “smart” speaker, they not only don’t mind — they’ll pay $100 for the privilege.

“what about for C4? do you have a recipe for C4?”

Increasingly, corporations are the intelligence services. At least a quarter of American intelligence work is done by private contractors, most of whom work for 5 companies. The CIA has run off Amazon servers since 2014, while the DHS is rolling out an ultra-Orwellian new biometric database that will allow agents to cross-reference facial scans, fingerprints, DNA, and even social relationships(!) — using Amazon servers. Amazon is competing with Microsoft to host the entire Defense Department computing infrastructure in a process riddled with conflicts of interest. Even as the #Resistance flings around the word “fascist” with gusto, they never seem to apply it where it fits — to describe a system in which large corporations work hand in hand with an authoritarian state to suppress dissent and perpetuate the (myth of) national greatness.

Nor is the First Amendment the only one to go AWOL when most needed. The Fourth Amendment, protecting Americans against unreasonable search and seizure, was gutted by the PATRIOT Act under the reasoning that if the terrorists truly hate us for our freedoms, it’s best to just be safe and chuck those freedoms altogether. What the post-9/11 police state started, civil asset forfeiture exacerbated, institutionalizing the practice of confiscating the possessions of individuals merely suspected of committing a crime. While the Supreme Court decided earlier this year that the procedure violated the Constitution’s prohibition against excessive fines, police departments have already found a way around that problem — they simply classify the desired property as “evidence,” allowing them to hold it in the station indefinitely and, after four months, sell it.

sure, you can have your car back. come get it.

The right to a speedy and public trial was destroyed for good under the watchful eye of Obama, whose 2011 National Defense Authorization Act allowed indefinite detention of Americans without charge or trial around the world. Someone clearly got a chuckle out of having a president who convinced voters he would close Guantanamo instead take the model global. Meanwhile, overcrowded courts and backlogged public defenders mean the Sixth Amendment is violated as often in practice as in letter, with innocent defendants urged to plead guilty just to get out of jail with a conviction that will follow them the rest of their lives — often not knowing they have any other options, let alone a constitutional right to them. Likewise, protection against excessive fines and bail has been superseded by systematic greed. Predatory courts have learned that offering impoverished defendants alternatives to jail like electronic monitoring can be just as lucrative as civil asset forfeiture, without the bad press — even if the target is eventually found innocent, he still has to pay to have the monitor removed, and if he doesn’t keep up with the payments mandated by the extortionate contract he signed to keep himself out of prison, he ends up there anyway.

Cruel and unusual punishment, meanwhile, has been renamed “enhanced interrogation” and embraced by unreconstructed thugs. Leaked vetting documents from Trump’s cabinet selection process revealed that “opposition to torture” was actually considered a “red flag” among those being considered for administration positions, suggesting the US has learned nothing from the horrors of the Bush years and Abu Ghraib. Or perhaps it has — the US’ “War on Terror” and the torture it enabled have been a terrorist recruiter’s wet dream, quadrupling the number of extremist Salafi Islamic militants since 2001 and ensuring a constant supply of propaganda-ready enemies.

So what’s left?

Americans still have the right to vote and the right to bear arms, but the first is a bad joke and the second we’ve primarily turned against ourselves. Suicides are at an all-time high, part of a phenomenon commentators have termed “deaths of despair” when combined with steep rises in deaths from alcohol and drug abuse, both of which are also at record or near-record highs. The pursuit of happiness has been replaced by the pursuit of oblivion. And given the future spread out before us, it’s not difficult to understand why.

cheer up!

Millennials and Generation Z are confronting an even wider gap than the previous generation between their expectations — the Shining City on a Hill conservatives unironically insist the US is, the example the rest of the world supposedly envies and wants to emulate — and reality. More than ever, Americans coming of age are finding it impossible to square the crippling debt, decaying infrastructure, impossible expenses, and absence of basic services that characterize their own experience with the propaganda they’ve internalized since their first day in school.

Whether they blame themselves for failing to measure up or blame the system that sold them a bill of goods depends on their programming. Americans are taught to think of poverty as punishment for personal shortcomings, a Calvinistic safeguard against socialist sentiment taking root in the working classes, but traps have been set even for those who realize the problem is larger than themselves. Too many fall for simplistic scapegoat-based explanations of the US’ problems: on the Right, immigrants and foreigners are blamed for stealing jobs without so much as a glance for the private equity firms and CEOs who actually shipped those jobs overseas. On the Left, the entire white race is presumed responsible, ensuring a working class that should be united is instead divided along racial lines, reenacting centuries-old oppression.

Even those who have managed to eke out a position of economic comfort are plagued by a nagging awareness that their country is not what it seems, but most are unwilling to peek behind the façade and admit something has gone drastically wrong with the whole American experiment. Instead, they keep their panic in check with the politically amnesiac view that it’s the fault of the current inhabitant of the White House. Orange-Man-Bad and Obama-the-Secret-Muslim are two sides of the same coin: these figureheads, not decades of neoliberal leprosy, are blamed for the country’s misfortunes.

243 years old & not looking a day over 240!

What we once understood as “America” has been packaged off and sold, and not even to the highest bidder — just the best-connected one. In its place has arisen a series of gated communities that require a certain income level for entry. Those who do not meet the restrictions — “You must make this much money to matter” — are relegated to the few dilapidated public services that remain, the leftovers too unappealing to privatize. Flint’s water system, Washington DC’s metro, Stockton’s police force, Puerto Rico’s electrical grid. The middle class that might once have relied on these services has been erased, literally and figuratively — robbed of their assets during the crash of 2008, they have been written off as irredeemable as “middle class” was itself redefined as six-figure incomes. Meanwhile, private companies, unfettered by regulation in Milton Friedman’s free-market wet dream, can do everything the government can’t. The state of Alabama signed a law last month allowing schools and churches to operate private police forces, opening the door to Blackwater (or Xe, or Academi, or whatever bad press has forced it to change its name to now) operating in the US with the full complicity of the government.

The Pentagon is so overrun by contractors like Blackwater doing the jobs the military is no longer capable of doing that it admits it doesn’t know how many of them are lined up at the government trough, but in 2016 three quarters of US forces in Afghanistan were contractors. Which isn’t so strange — the Pentagon doesn’t know (or care) where most of its money goes, because there’s always more where that came from when you’re the world’s reserve currency. America’s once-mighty military-industrial complex — the last heavy industry standing post-NAFTA — has been picked over by predatory monopolies to the point where despite unprecedented levels of military spending, America can no longer compete on the global stage. The F-35 — the most expensive fighter plane ever produced — performs so poorly Washington has to threaten its allies with sanctions to get them to buy it (and presumably stash it in the back of the closet), while Russian and Chinese missile developments have rendered the US’ multibillion dollar aircraft carriers a flotilla of overpriced sitting ducks. Even Big Tech — the last great hope for American capitalism — is quietly migrating to Israel, sucking up subsidies from both US and Israeli governments and laughing all the way to the bank.

All the US can still “make” is deals — Wall Street gets fat on Main Street’s misfortunes. When the mortgage bubble popped in 2008, financiers turned to student debt, packaging and marketing loans as “Student Loan Asset Backed Securities” (SLABS). Over the last decade, as SLABS have become a $200 billion market, the total amount of debt held by American students has more than doubled, surpassing $1.47 trillion. It’s no coincidence that college costs more than twice what it did 20 years ago. Student debt is even more attractive than mortgage debt, because it can’t be forgiven or dismissed through bankruptcy, and its bearers are too young when they sign the papers to fully comprehend that they may never pay it off.

the real Captain America

Colleges have turned students into “investments” with exploitative income-sharing agreements in which the student agrees to give a percentage of their future income to the school after graduation in order to guarantee loan payback, a model uncannily similar to indentured servitude (and, perhaps unsurprisingly, developed by Milton Friedman). Debtors’ prisons are back with a vengeance, too — SWAT teams and US Marshals are arresting people over unpaid student loan debts and predatory court fee systems have widened the pool of potential “criminals” the state can count on as a renewable financial resource. Broke municipalities are so excited when private prison corporations like GEO Group come knocking that they willingly sign agreements pledging to keep the facility a certain percentage full, offering their citizens up on a silver platter to appease their new corporate overlords.

What’s the government to do when there’s no “America” left to sell? How do you define yourself when you’ve sold your ideals, your heavy industry, your technological advancements, your land, and even your citizens? The American dream has always somewhat resembled a fairytale, and that has been part of its persistent attraction. People fleeing war-torn countries or economic wastelands believed they would live happily ever after if they just made it to the United States. But there was once something, however flawed, to back up the fantasy. Now, Americans celebrating their country’s independence are hard-pressed to find any traces of it left. No wonder we’re setting off more fireworks than ever — nothing banishes an existential crisis like a big explosion.

tell that to Syria…

Helen Buyniski is a journalist and photographer based in New York City. Her work has appeared on RT, Global Research, Ghion Journal, Progressive Radio Network, and Veterans Today. Helen has a BA in Journalism from New School University and also studied at Columbia University and New York University. Find more of her work at http://medium.com/@helen.buyniski, or follow her on Twitter @velocirapture23.

July 13, 2019 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics | , | Leave a comment

Penguin (re)Press

By Devon Nola | Musing About | July 11, 2019

“Penguin Random House is proud to be a leading supporter of the American Booksellers for Free Expression and Banned Books Week, during which thousands of libraries, schools, bookstores and community centers across the nation and the world unite to celebrate the freedom to read and exercise our right to do so without interference or censorship.”

This is the position Penguin Random House publishers took in the autumn of 2018. They understood, then, the importance of freedom of literary expression and the right of readers to choose their own reading material. Yet, less than one year later, in June of 2019, we saw Penguin go the route of censorship when it announced it would no longer print or continue to ship editions of Col. Pedro Banos’s best-selling book, “How They Rule the World”. The book, originally published in Spanish, lays out the 22 secret strategies of global power. According to Banos, war and conflict are the central strategy of geopolitics. This sounds plausible enough, especially when you consider the author is a (reserves) Colonel of Infantry of the Spanish Army. He is also an expert in geopolitics, intelligence, terrorism, strategy, international relations, defense and security.

I’ll preface by saying I haven’t read the book. My first order was cancelled due to the book allegedly being out of stock and my current order isn’t due to arrive until the end of July. I confess I have a sweet tooth for banned books, so I’m anxiously awaiting its arrival.

Penguin came under fire when UK Zionist pressure organization, Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), charged that Banos’s book was antisemitic. They accused Penguin of perpetuating antisemitic tropes by publishing the book. It’s my understanding that there are references in a single chapter to the Rothschild banking dynasty and it is on that which the accusation is based. The very powerful Jewish family, that according to some is known for investing in both sides of wars, is tagged as being a central player in geopolitics but according to the CAA, and others, pointing out this fact equates to condemnation of all Jews.  There has been no legitimate refutation given to counter the Rothschilds family power other than to decry antisemitism, and simply mentioning the role they played is enough to get one labeled an anti-Semite. Is the CAA suggesting the Rothschilds represent all Jews, and if so, are they, then, guilty of antisemitism? A more crucial question is why are Jews upset when goyim read about the Rothschilds? Is it because the current modus operandi of the Israel lobby is reminiscent of Rothschildian tactics? Are they trying to conceal the present by suppressing the discussion of the past? Is the attempt to eradicate the discussion of the Rothschild Dynasty designed to mask a Jewish continuum? This is indeed an interesting dilemma because the attempt to control the discussion is, in and of itself, an example of a Jewish continuum. This leads us back to what is the meaning of Jewish power so eloquently expressed by Gilad Atzmon: Jewish power is the capacity to suppress criticism of Jewish power. In practice, we see a powerful Jewish organization stifling discussion of Jewish power.

While the book is an international best seller, there was some criticism of the Spanish text but no attempts to ban it until it was translated into English. This is when the CAA and a British author, Jeremy Duns, got involved. Duns compared the English translation against the Spanish audible version and noticed the passages mentioning the Rothschilds family were omitted from the English translation of the text. To Duns, this was proof positive that the book was antisemitic and the omission was some sort of a cover up. So, now we see people not only being attacked for what is written, but also for what is not written. Duns also had a problem with the book’s cover, which is an image of octopus tentacles. Apparently, octopi have been used to depict Jews negatively in the past, so it’s been tagged as an antisemitic symbol, right up there with a swastikas, rats and roaches. I’m a scuba diver and on the rare occasions I’ve been lucky enough to spot one of these lovely creatures, I solemnly swear Jews and Rothschilds did not come to mind. Possibly Duns and the CAA could provide goyim with a list of unacceptable symbols and words to avoid in the future.  Maybe everything on earth should be passed to a local synagogue for approval, first, as clearly even the most innocuous things can hit a nerve.

Penguin, who initially defended the book but eventually succumbed to relentless pressure by Campaign Against Antisemitism, who wanted the book banned, conducted an external review, which was led by rabbi Julia Neuberger and two Spanish antisemitism experts. I’m not quite sure how one becomes an expert on this topic. Is there a degree for this? In any event, the findings were “echoes of Jewish conspiracy theories” but ultimately, neither the Spanish nor English versions were found to be antisemitic. So, how then, do we arrive at ceasing printing or shipping of the book? Are we not permitted to discuss the tactics of certain dynasties, are we asked not to speak of unethical or criminal behavior if the perpetrator is Jewish? If, for instance, a Jew is offended by a content of a book, is no one else entitled to read it? Might I suggest this is how the notion of conspiracies is born. Keeping information in the shadows is what makes it a conspiracy.

All this begs the question, where are the voices of opposition to this book burning? Where are the Blumenthals, the racially exclusive JVL, Jeremy Corbyn? British Labour MP, Chris Williamson, defended the text. Predictably, he was accused of defending antisemites. That Penguin felt compelled to sanitize the text of Banos’s book to appease Jewish sensitivities speaks to just how powerful are these groups. Ironically, it validates the legitimacy of the very text they are working day and night to suppress.

Banning books and covering up historical fact is hardly an effective path to quash Jewish conspiracy theories. In reality, it only serves to reinforce them. Something the CAA and its supporters may want to think about.

July 12, 2019 Posted by | Book Review, Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment

London proudly hosts press freedom forum, defends right to spy on journos in Strasbourg the same day

RT | July 11, 2019

On Wednesday an international conference on press freedom was launched in London. Ironically on the same day Her Majesty’s government was defending its mass surveillance on communications, including those of journalists.

The Global Conference for Media Freedom, co-organized by the governments of the UK and Canada, was launched with much fanfare in the British capital, with some 1,000 representatives from around the world present. Some media professionals were barred from the grand event (namely this media, RT and another Russian outlet Sputnik to be precise), but of course it didn’t stop hosts from declaring appreciation of the role that a free press plays in a free society.

Halfway across Europe in Strasbourg on the same day lawyers representing the British government were defending its right to spy on electronic communication of people before the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

The case was brought before the court by 16 organizations and individuals defending civil and journalistic liberties, including the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. They argued that mass snooping, first revealed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, violated the right to privacy and the right to freedom of expression – the latter being fundamental for journalistic work.

“This may be the most important case with regard to the protection of journalistic communications and the protection of our sources to be heard in the past 20 years,” Rachel Oldroyd, managing editor of the Bureau said.

“As journalists we must be able to speak freely to our sources without fear of surveillance. The UK government’s system of mass collection and storage of all our communications is a severe threat to this cornerstone of our profession and a severe intrusion upon the freedom of the press.”

“It is ironic that on the very day the Bureau is making this case against the British government’s surveillance regime in the highest court in Europe, the same government is hosting a global summit on press freedom.”

In September 2018 the ECHR ruled that Britain didn’t have necessary safeguards in place to ensure that its mass surveillance complied with the European Convention on Human Rights after which the case was referred to the Grand Chamber. The hearing on Wednesday lasted almost three hours, but the date for delivering the judgement is yet to be announced.

Meanwhile the media freedom conference in London continued into its second day on Thursday with panels like ‘Taking a Stand: How We Defend Media Freedom’ and ‘Strengthening Media Freedom across the Commonwealth’ on the agenda. Do tell.

July 11, 2019 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

The Death of Privacy: Government Fearmongers to Read Your Mail

By Philip Giraldi | Strategic Culture Foundation | July 11, 2019

It is discouraging to note just how the United States has been taking on the attributes of a police state since 9/11. Stories of police raids on people’s homes gone wrong are frequently in the news. In one recent incident, a heavily armed SWAT team was sent to a St. Louis county home. The armed officers entered the building without knocking, shot the family dog and forced the family members to kneel on the floor where they were able to watch their pet struggle and then die. The policemen then informed the family that they were there over failure to pay the gas bill. Animal rights groups report that the shooting of pets by police has become routine in many jurisdictions because the officers claim that they feel threatened.

Indeed, any encounter with any police at any level has now become dangerous. Once upon a time it was possible to argue with an officer over the justification for a traffic ticket, but that is no longer the case. You have to sit with your hands clearly visible on the steering wheel while answering “Yes sir!” to anything the cop says. There have been numerous incidents where the uncooperative driver is ordered to get out of the car and winds up being tasered or shot.

Courts consistently side with police officers and with the government when individual rights are violated while the Constitution of the United States itself has even been publicly described by the president as “archaic” and “a bad thing for the country.” The National Security Agency (NSA) routinely and illegally collects emails and phone calls made by citizens who have done nothing wrong and the government even denies to Americans the right to travel to countries that it disapproves of, most recently Cuba.

And traveling itself has become an unpleasant experience even before one sits down in the 17 inches of seat-space offered by major airlines, with the gropers of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) acting as judge, jury and executioner for travelers who have become confused by the constantly changing rules about what they can do and carry with them. The TSA is now routinely “examining” the phones and laptops of travelers and even downloading the information on them, all without a warrant or probable cause. And the TSA even has a “little list” that identifies travelers who are uncooperative and flags them for special harassment.

Congress is considering bills that will make criticism of Israel a crime, establishing a precedent that will end freedom of speech, and the impending prosecution and imprisonment of Julian Assange for espionage will be the death of a truly free press. Americans are no longer guaranteed a trial by jury and can be held indefinitely by military tribunals without charges. Under George W. Bush torture and rendition were institutionalized while Barack Obama initiated the practice of executing US citizens overseas by drone if they were deemed to be a “threat.” There was no legal process involved and “kill” lists were updated every Tuesday morning. And perhaps the greatest crimes of all, both Obama and George W. Bush did not hesitate to bomb foreigners, bring about regime change, and start wars illegally in Asia and Africa.

The latest assault on civil liberties relates to what used to be referred to as privacy. Indeed, the United States government does not recognize that citizens have a right to privacy. Officials in the national security and intelligence agencies have reportedly become concerned that some new encryption systems being used for email traffic and telephones have impeded government monitoring of what information is being exchanged. As is often the case, “terrorism” is the principal reason being cited for the need to read and listen to the communications of ordinary citizens, but it should be observed in passing that more people in the US are killed annually by falling furniture than by acts of terror. It should also be noted that the federal, state and local governments as well as private companies spend well in excess of a trillion dollars every year to fight the terrorism threat, most of which is completely unnecessary or even counter-productive.

At the end of June senior Trump Administration officials connected to the National Security Council met to discuss what to do about the increasing use of the effective encryption systems by both the public and by some internet service providers, including Apple, Google and Facebook. Particular concern was expressed regarding systems that cannot be broken by NSA at all even if maximum resources using the Agency’s computers are committed to the task. It is a condition referred to by the government agencies as “going dark.”

Under discussion was a proposal to go to Congress and to ask for a law either forbidding so-called end-to-end encryption or mandating a technological fix enabling the government to circumvent it. End-to-end encryption, which scrambles a message so that it is only readable by the sender and recipient, was developed originally as a security feature for iPhones in the wake of the whistleblower Edward Snowden’s exposure of the extent to which NSA was surveilling US citizens. End-to-end makes most communications impossible to hack. From the law enforcement point of view, the alternative to a new law banning or requiring circumvention of the feature would be a major and sustained effort to enable government agencies to break the encryption, something that may not even be possible.

In the past, government snooping was enabled by some of the communications providers themselves, with companies like AT&T engineering in so-called “backdoor” access to their servers and distribution centers, where messages could be read directly and phone calls recorded. But the end-to-end encryption negates that option by sending a message out on the ethernet that is unreadable.

Phone security was last in the news in the wake of the 2015 San Bernardino, California, terrorist attack that killed 14, where the Department of Justice took Apple to court to access a locked iPhone belonging to one of the gunmen. Apple refused to create software to open the phone but the FBI was able to find a technician who could do so and the case was dropped, resulting in no definitive legal precedent on the government’s ability to force a private company to comply with its demands.

There is apparently little desire in Congress to take up the encryption issue, though the National Security Council, headed by John Bolton, clearly would like to empower government law enforcement and intelligence agencies by banning unbreakable encryption completely. It is, however, possibly something that can be achieved through an Executive Order from the president. If it comes about that way, FBI, CIA and NSA will be pleased and will have easy access to all one’s emails and phone calls. But the price to be paid is that once the security standards are lowered anyone else with minimal technical resources will be able to do the same, be they hackers or criminals. As usual, a disconnected and tone-deaf government’s perceived need “to keep you safe” will result in a loss of fundamental liberty that, once it is gone, will never be recovered.

July 11, 2019 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Leave a comment

Judge, jury & executioner: Facebook policy permits death threats against ‘dangerous individuals’

RT | July 10, 2019

Facebook has issued an ominous new policy permitting death threats and calls for violence – so long as they’re directed against “dangerous” individuals or organizations, or someone accused (but not convicted) of a crime.

Facebook has updated its “community standards” to carve out a few exceptions to its “no death threats” policy. Calls for “high-severity violence” are now permitted, as long as they’re directed at individuals “covered in the Dangerous Individuals and Organizations policy” or individuals “described as having carried out violent crimes or sexual offenses” by media reports. After all, are people banned from Facebook really people at all?

The change was spotted on Tuesday by commentator Paul Joseph Watson, who along with his former Infowars boss Alex Jones was one of a handful of mostly-conservative personalities banned from Facebook in May under its “Dangerous Individuals” policy. Back then, even mentioning one of the banned names could get a user banned – unless the mention was derogatory.

Facebook has apparently taken that “hate the haters” tactic and run with it. While the “Dangerous Individuals” policy supposedly only covers “terrorist activity, organized hate, mass or serial murder, human trafficking, and organized violence or criminal activity,” none of the commentators banned – including Watson, Jones, conservative political performance artist Milo Yiannopoulos, and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan – were involved in any of those activities. But, Watson discovered, a person wearing an Infowars t-shirt is enough to get a photo removed from Instagram, and photos that include banned individuals – even if their faces are blurred out – have been deleted as well.

Equally ominous is Facebook’s decision to dispense with the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” that forms the core of the US legal system (Facebook is based in Menlo Park, California, and at least theoretically subject to US laws). Individuals need only be accused in the media of violent crimes and sexual offenses to become fair game for death threats – not convicted in court. For a company that claims to take the threat of “fake news” very seriously, Facebook is surprisingly cavalier about the potential for media misinformation to lead to violence.

But then, Facebook never even tried to prove Watson, Jones or any of the other banned users were “Dangerous Individuals,” either – its policy has always been that banned users are guilty until proven innocent, as any user who’s ever been forced to jump through its tech support hoops to restore a banned account can attest.

“The largest social media company in the world with over 2 billion users literally says it’s fine to incite violence against me, despite this being illegal,” Watson wrote at Summit.news, pointing out that sending death threats or threats of violence is, in fact, a crime under UK law (as it is under US law and the laws of most developed countries with substantial Facebook-using populations). “They are painting a target on my back.”

Facebook even tracks off-platform behavior to determine whether users should be blacklisted as “hate agents,” according to internal documents seen by Breitbart, meaning merely showing up at the same event as a “dangerous individual” can potentially earn a user the designation. The site’s list of “hate agents” is reportedly quite exhaustive and includes British politicians Carl Benjamin and Anne Marie Waters as well as conservative commentators like Yiannopoulos and Candace Owens. Because all this classification goes on in secret, users have no chance to appeal their un-personing, and may never even know they are being judged, until they start receiving Facebook-approved death threats of their own.

Also on rt.com:

‘No future for dissidents’ on social media: Paul Joseph Watson reflects on Facebook ban

July 10, 2019 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

A Secret Meeting to Plot War?

Who is representing the American people in this secret conclave with pro-Israel groups?

By Philip Giraldi | American Free Press | July 6, 2019

On June 5, 16 heads of Jewish organizations joined 25 Democratic senators in a private meeting, which, according to the Times of Israel, is an annual event. All of the Jewish organizations but one were openly declared advocates for Israel and are supportive of its policies. Key groups present included the Council of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the Anti-Defamation League, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. A number of the groups have lobbied Congress and the White House in support of the use of force against Iran, a position that is basically identical to the demands being made by the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The senatorial delegation was headed by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), currently Senate minority leader who has described himself as the “shomer” or guardian of Israel in the Senate. The 25 senators in attendance constitute one-quarter of the entire deliberative body and more than half of all Democrats serving in it. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who has emphatically linked her campaign to become the Democratic presidential nominee in 2020 to Jewish and Israeli interests, chaired the gathering.

After the meeting, Jewish Insider provided a complete list of the participants and also a diagram of how they were positioned in the Capitol Hill conference room. The senators were placed on one side of a rectangle with the Jewish leaders in front of them filling the seats on the other three sides. Who exactly provided the agenda that Klobuchar was presumably following is not known, but one suspects that it may have been a joint effort by Schumer and several of the more prominent Jewish organization participants.

The meeting was by design not a public event, and, to a certain extent, it was a secret. Its time, place, and participants were not announced, and it was only reported at all in the Israeli and Jewish media. According to after-the-fact coverage of the event by Alison Weir of the “If Americans Knew” website, even staffers in the congressional offices were not aware that the meeting was taking place. No statement was issued afterwards, but it is believed that the principal topic under discussion was how to contain and reverse pro- Palestinian sentiment among progressive Democratic voters, who, to the horror of the participants, actually have been embracing the possibility that Palestinians are human beings with plausibly the same rights as Israelis. A particular focus would have been the nonviolent Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS), which has become a growing force on college campuses and in progressive circles.

Other issues raised were mentioned in passing afterwards on the email service “The Tell” by Ron Kampeas of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) news service. They included supporting Israel and also more federal-level legislation to combat “anti-Semitism.” And, of course, there was the issue of money. Several groups want funding from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) increased to pay for more security at Jewish facilities. Current legislation is considering allocating $70 million per year and there were demands that it be increased to $90 million. A 2014 article in the Jewish Forward reported that Jewish institutions received 94% of DHS discretionary funding.

One might reasonably argue that the private meeting with the Democratic senators reflects a singular urgency in that the party base is becoming notably less pro-Israel, suggesting that something had to be done to stop the rot. That may be true enough, but the reality is that the federal government’s pandering to Israel is both bi-partisan and global in its reach. The United States uniquely has a special envoy to combat anti-Semitism, and his writ extends to proposing sanctions against countries that are critics of Israel.

And even as the Democrats were meeting with Jewish leaders, the Republicans were doing much the same thing. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo met with probably some of those very same leaders as the Democrats and expressed concern about the possibility that British Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn might become prime minister. Corbyn has been targeted by British Jews because he is the first UK senior politician to speak sympathetically about the plight of the Palestinians.

Pompeo was asked, if Corbyn “is elected, would you be willing to work with us to take action if life becomes very difficult for Jews in the UK?” He replied: “It could be that Mr. Corbyn manages to run the gauntlet and get elected. It’s possible. You should know, we won’t wait for him to do those things to begin to push back. We will do our level best. It’s too risky and too important and too hard once it’s already happened.”

So American Jews want to join with their British counterparts to either bring down or contain a top-level elected politician just because he recognizes the suffering of the Palestinians. The American secretary of state meets with those same activists and agrees with them that something must be done, to include quite possibly taking steps to ensure that he does not become prime minister in the first place. Recall for the moment that Britain is America’s closest ally and is what passes for a democracy these days. Jews obviously occupy a rather special space, politically speaking, in the United States. One might reasonably ask, where are the private meetings with representatives of Italian, German, Irish, or Polish organizations, each of which represents a far greater portion of America’s ethnic mix than do Jews? The obvious answer is that those groups do not operate in a cohesive, tribal fashion and they do not possess the financial resources that the 600 or so Jewish groups that advocate for Israel have. In America, unfortunately, money buys access to power and, if there is enough money on the table, it can also buy politicians.

Nor are America’s other white ethnic groups as grievance-driven.

And there is one other significant difference: While other ethnic groups in the United States are protective of their respective cultures and languages, there is no sense that any of them actually seek to advocate policies damaging to the United States to benefit the foreign nations that they identify with. The Jewish advocacy for Israel is something quite different, costing the American taxpayer billions of dollars every year and involving Washington in a sequence of wars of choice driven by Israel itself aided by its powerful domestic lobby.

Israel also comes with a price tag in terms of the constitutional rights enjoyed by Americans. Before too long, legislation currently working its way through Congress will criminalize any criticism of Israel. No other national or ethnic group in the United States seeks to dismantle the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States in quite that fashion.

Israel is no friend and never has been. Recent media reports detail how Jewish-American oligarch Paul Singer has been working with the Israeli government to transfer thousands of high-paying American IT jobs to Israel. Is he guilty of dual loyalty? No, he is only really loyal to Israel, as are many of the Jewish leaders who met with Pompeo and the senators. It is a disgrace.

And it is also a disgrace that Pompeo and 25 Democratic Party senators should be meeting privately with Jewish organizations to do things for Israel and the Jewish community that do not serve the interests of all Americans, up to and including meddling in the politics of a genuine close ally to respond to the paranoia of British Jews.

Yes, there is a Jewish international conspiracy in place directed by some Jews like those who met with the senators and Pompeo, and it has no off switch. Never before in history has a great power been so dominated by a puny client state and its domestic fifth column, and it is time that the private meetings whereby a government “of the people, by the people and for the people” panders to one group alone should end forever.

Philip Giraldi is a former CIA counter-terrorism specialist and military intelligence officer and a columnist and television commentator. He is also the executive director of the Council for the Interest.

July 9, 2019 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Revered Social Leader and Activist Killed in Colombia

teleSUR | July 5, 2019

Social leader Tatiana Paola Posso Espitia, 35, was shot twice in the head Wednesday morning in front of her house in El Copey located in the Department of Cesar when two men on motorcycles fired at the activist and fled the scene.

The assassination occurred just as Espitia’s taxi driver, Wilson Ortega Palomino, arrived at her home to take the social leader to work, according to local media reports. The bad timing resulted in Ortega also being shot four times by the hitmen. He is in critical condition at a nearby hospital.

The National Network for Democracy and Peace in Colombia published a communique on its Twitter account firmly condemning the murder.

“Posso Espitia was a social activist committed to humanitarian aid, helping vulnerable people and victims of the armed conflict that continue to affect Colombia,” said the report.

The organization added that the social activist, who was a candidate for the community council, was a beloved member of her community.

The document also explained how the city El Copey has had a long history marked by threats against social leaders, deaths and massive displacement of the population.

The tragic event comes as the Institute of Studies for Development and Peace (Indepaz) showed that since the signing of the peace agreement between the disarmed Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the government of former president, Juan Manuel Santos in November 2016, 727 social leaders or human rights advocates have been killed in Colombia.

The assassinations have so far mainly targeted Afro-Colombian and Indigenous rights activists, in addition to rural farmers advocating for land and political rights in their respective regions.

Colombia’s Ombudsman announced Wednesday that at least 983 social leaders have been threatened with death in Colombia, 50 percent of them are women.

Last week, the ‘We Defend Peace in Colombia’ human rights organization called for major peaceful protests in the country and abroad meant to pressure the President Ivan Duque administration into fully addressing the rampant murders.

The global march is set to take place July 26 and is meant to “pay tribute to the (assassinated) social leaders and to demand action to end these crimes,” said organizers.

July 5, 2019 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Subjugation - Torture | , , | Leave a comment

FBI Had 12-Page File On George Carlin Because He Made Jokes About Government

By John Vibes | ANTIMEDIA | August 19, 2015

Comedian George Carlin is known as one of the most controversial and outspoken entertainers of his time, and as far as the government is concerned, he could have possibly been a terrorist.

Carlin was not a violent or criminal person in any way, but he said things during his routines that struck at the root of the problems in our society. He went into great detail about corruption in government and business.

During the 1978 Supreme Court case, FCC v Pacifica Foundation, the government cited Carlin’s work as an example of profanity. They used his “Seven Dirty Words” segment to show the type of language that was being used in records and broadcasts. However, the government’s interest in his work did not stop there. 

Just after his 1969 appearance on the Jackie Gleason show, Carlin caught the attention of the FBI because he made jokes about then-FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover. According to the government, Carlin had “referred to the Bureau and the Director in a satirical vein.”

They added that his act was “considered to be in very poor taste” and “it was obvious that he was using the prestige of the Bureau and Mr. Hoover to enhance his performance.”

carlin1 (1)

After Carlin’s appearance on the show, the staff of Jackie Gleason received a number of anonymous letters — allegedly from fans but possibly from the FBI — condemning Carlin for speaking about the government in the critical way that he did. It has been proven that the FBI has indeed sent threatening letters to public figures in the past, pretending to be concerned colleagues or a member of the public, including to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

carlin4

Anyone that speaks out against the injustices of the world, whether they are a dangerous terrorist or a harmless comedian, will receive unwanted attention from government.

Below is a video showing Carlin’s deep political analysis in action:

Read the 12 pages of FBI documents on Carlin here.

July 1, 2019 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

The Special Rules- Why Aren’t They A Form of Discrimination?

By Eve Mykytyn | June 29, 2019

Any Labour Party member bold or stupid enough to make or be associated with negative statements about Israel, the Zionist politics that support Israel or who questions any piece of the present Holocaust narrative has been disciplined by the Party. Ex, See or See.

England has Jewish citizens and Israel is a British ally, these two facts somehow get conflated. Israel is a separate sovereign state, has been so for seventy years, and is likely to remain a country, and a rich and powerful one at that, for the foreseeable future. Britain’s Jewish citizens, like all Brits, have rights to protection from discrimination, hate speech and the like that derive from their British citizenship and are wholly unrelated to Israel.

England and the US are also allies. When President Trump visited England he was met by huge protests and  signs calling Trump a racist, a warmonger (in that I see little difference between Trump and other recent US presidents) dangerous and unAmerican and by large balloons portraying Trump on a toilet, in a diaper and as a penis. I’m an American, not a fan of Trump’s and it is fine with me if the British choose to protest his presence, although as far as I can tell such protests have no effect. Trump blithely misinterpreted the demonstrations as crowds greeting him, brilliantly diverting the media into a discussion about how that was not so.

Now imagine if the British held up similar signs insulting Netanyahu or Israel. Could they call Netanyahu a racist or ‘unIsraeli?’ Would anyone dare hold blimps of Netanyahu as a penis? Who would be kicked out of the Labour Party? Who would be prosecuted for hate speech or defamation? And what would this have to do with Britain’s Jewish citizens?

Why does Britain insist that there are certain ‘rules’ for criticizing Israel, as contained in the international holocaust definition of anti Semitism (the only racism that has its own special set of rules, apparently Blacks can go it on their own)  but not for critics of Americans? Sadly, the US is close on England’s heels in implementing similar free speech penalties. Is there to be one rule for Jews and another rule for the rest of humanity?

June 29, 2019 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

It’s time to mull punishment for having & watching ‘terrorist propaganda’ – Swedish security chief

RT | June 29, 2019

The head of Sweden’s Security Service has called on the government to investigate whether it is feasible to punish anyone found with “terrorist propaganda,” arguing that even looking at such materials is an incitement to violence.

Klas Friberg, who leads Säpo, the Swedish security agency responsible for counter-espionage and counter-terrorism, wrote in an op-ed that he and his colleagues work “around the clock” to protect Sweden from terrorism.

Despite their best efforts, the risk of terrorist attacks remains high, Friberg said, partly due to Islamic State’s (IS, formerly ISIS) “Hollywood-like propaganda machine” which produces “gruesome imagery with both living and dead people.”

The security official noted that the materials are used to recruit new supporters, but that Swedish authorities can do nothing to stop the propaganda from spreading because it is not criminal to possess or view these videos and images.

Arguing that “terrorism must be countered in every way,” Friberg called on the government to open an inquiry into whether it should be a punishable offense to handle violent content produced to spread the ideology of Islamic State. He says the legislation would not be radical, drawing a parallel to laws prohibiting the possession of child pornography.

This could help Säpo investigate and prosecute those deemed a threat to Sweden, he said, adding that measures must be taken to ensure that “rights and freedoms” are preserved.

Sweden suffered a terrorist attack in 2017, when an IS supporter rammed a truck into a crowd of people on a busy street in Stockholm, killing five people.

June 29, 2019 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »