Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Israel revokes Jerusalem Residency Rights Of Imprisoned Palestinian-French Lawyer

IMEMC | DECEMBER 1, 2022

On Wednesday, the Israeli Prison Authority informed imprisoned Palestinian-French lawyer, held under Administrative Detention without charges or trial, that it revoked his Jerusalem ID card and stripped him of all residency rights in occupied Jerusalem, and will be deporting him to France upon his release.

The Israeli occupation imposed a three-month Administrative Detention order against the imprisoned lawyer, Salah Hammouri, 37, and renewed the order in June 2022, then renewed it again in September 2022.

Hammouri, a lawyer and a field researcher with the Ad-Dameer Prisoner Support And Human Rights Association, spent more than eight years in Israeli prisons, starting when he was abducted in 2001 and was sentenced to five months in prison.

In 2004 he spent four months under arbitrary Administrative Detention orders without charges, then was abducted again in the year 2005 and was imprisoned for seven years, and then in the year 2017, he was abducted yet another time and spent 13 months under Administrative Detention orders, and upon his release, he received an order barring him from entering the rest of the West Bank for two years.

On June 6, 2022, Salah received another three-month Administrative Detention order just hours before his scheduled release after being imprisoned for three months under a similar order.

The decision to revoke his residency was made in October of last year, 2021, after accusing him of “breeching loyalty to the state” for his human rights and legal work in defending Palestinian political prisoners.

Salah was born to a Palestinian father from Jerusalem where he grew up and lived, and his mother is a French national.

Several years earlier, Israel deported his French wife to her country after detaining her at the airport in Tel Aviv for three days when she returned to Jerusalem. Salah and his wife have two children.

Palestinians born in occupied Jerusalem are only granted “residency” status and not citizenship of Israel despite Israel’s constant claims of “unified Jerusalem as its capital.” Children born to Jewish parent/s in any part of the world are entitled to become citizens of Israel.

December 1, 2022 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | 2 Comments

Israel calls on world leaders to oppose ICJ opinion on occupation

The Cradle | November 29, 2022

On 29 November, acting Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid sent a letter to more than 50 world leaders, demanding them to oppose a Palestinian bid at the United Nations regarding an advisory position of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Israel’s occupation of Palestine.

“This resolution is the result of a concerted effort to single out Israel, discredit our legitimate security concerns, and delegitimize our very existence,” Lapid said in the letter.

Among the recipients were the heads of government of the United Kingdom, France, Croatia, Romania, Bulgaria, the Netherlands, Slovakia, Latvia, Georgia, Brazil, Uruguay, Peru, and Vietnam.

With a majority of 98 votes in favor and 17 against, a committee of the UN General Assembly approved a resolution on 11 November requesting the ICJ to “urgently” issue a stance on the effects of Israel’s illegal occupation and colonization of Palestinian territories, The New Arab reported.

In the coming weeks, the resolution has to be voted on for a second time by the plenary of the General Assembly.

The acting Prime Minister stated that this resolution resulted from a “biased campaign” by the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva and its Commission of Inquiry, which have repeatedly denounced human rights abuses against the Palestinians.

According to Lapid, the “status of the disputed territory must be subject to direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.”

However, Israel has illegally expanded its territory since the 1967 Arab-Israeli war and built settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem for over 700,000 settlers, clearly violating international law.

On 13 November, Israeli authorities announced their plans to construct 9,000 new illegal settlement units over the ruins of Palestine’s Jerusalem International Airport.

The settlement plan was initially submitted for discussion last year by the Israeli-run Jerusalem Municipality but then halted due to pressure from EU member states and several rights groups; however, the plan has been revived and is under review by the municipality.

On 8 November, the ‘Elad’ settlement association in occupied East Jerusalem received roughly $7.9 million to support illegal settlements in the Palestinian town of Silwan.

November 30, 2022 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , | 10 Comments

‘Deliberate ambiguity’: Israel’s nuclear weapons are greatest threat to Middle East

By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | November 28, 2022

As western countries are floating the theory that Russia could escalate its conflict with Ukraine to a nuclear war, many western governments continue to turn a blind eye to Israel’s own nuclear weapons capabilities. Luckily, many countries around the world do not subscribe to this endemic western hypocrisy.

‘The Conference on the Establishment of a Middle East Zone Free of Nuclear Weapons and Other Weapons of Mass Destruction’ was held between November 14-18, with the sole purpose of creating new standards of accountability that, as should have always been the case, be applied equally to all Middle Eastern countries.

The debate regarding nuclear weapons in the Middle East could not possibly be any more pertinent or urgent. International observers rightly note that the period following the Russia-Ukraine war is likely to accelerate the quest for nuclear weapons throughout the world. Considering the seemingly perpetual state of conflict in the Middle East, the region is likely to witness nuclear rivalry as well.

For years, Arab and other countries attempted to raise the issue that accountability regarding the development and acquisition of nuclear weapons cannot be confined to states that are perceived to be enemies of Israel and the West.

The latest of these efforts was a United Nations resolution that called on Israel to dispose of its nuclear weapons, and to place its nuclear facilities under the monitoring of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Resolution number A/C.1/77/L.2, which was drafted by Egypt with the support of other Arab countries, passed with an initial vote of 152-5. Unsurprisingly, among the five countries that voted against the draft were the United States, Canada and, of course, Israel itself.

US and Canadian blind support of Tel Aviv notwithstanding, what compels Washington and Ottawa to vote against a draft entitled: “The risk of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East”? Keeping in mind the successive right-wing extremist governments that have ruled over Israel for many years, Washington must understand that the risk of using nuclear weapons under the guise of fending off an ‘existential threat’ is a real possibility.

Since its inception, Israel has resorted to, and utilised the phrase ‘existential threat’ countless times. Various Arab governments, later Iran and even individual Palestinian resistance movements were accused of endangering Israel’s very existence. Even the non-violent Palestinian civil society-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement was accused by then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 2015 of being an existential threat to Israel. Netanyahu claimed that the boycott movement was “not connected to our actions; it is connected to our very existence.”

This should worry everyone, not just in the Middle East, but the whole world. A country with such hyped sensitivity about imagined ‘existential threats’ should not be allowed to acquire the kind of weapons that could destroy the entire Middle East, several times over.

Some may argue that Israel’s nuclear arsenal was intrinsically linked to real fears resulting from its historical conflict with the Arabs. However, this is not the case. As soon as Israel finalised its ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their historic homeland, and long before any serious Arab or Palestinian resistance was carried out in response, Israel was already on the lookout for nuclear weapons.

As early as 1949, the Israeli army had found uranium deposits in the Negev Desert, leading to the establishment, in 1952, of the very secretive Israel Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC).

In 1955, the US government sold Israel a nuclear research reactor.  But that was not enough. Eager to become a full nuclear power, Tel Aviv resorted to Paris in 1957. The latter became a major partner in Israel’s sinister nuclear activities when it helped the Israeli government construct a clandestine nuclear reactor near Dimona in the Negev Desert.

The father of the Israeli nuclear program at the time was none other than Shimon Peres who, ironically, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994. The Dimona Nuclear Reactor is now named ‘Shimon Peres Nuclear Research Centre-Negev’.

With no international monitoring whatsoever, thus with zero legal accountability, Israel’s nuclear quest continues until this day. In 1963, Israel purchased 100 tons of uranium ore from Argentina, and it is strongly believed that, during the October 1973 Israel-Arab war, Israel “came close to making a nuclear preemptive strike”, according to Richard Sale, writing in United Press International (UPI).

Currently, Israel is believed to have “enough fissionable material to fabricate 60-300 nuclear weapons,” according to former US Army Officer, Edwin S. Cochran.

Estimates vary, but the facts about Israel’s weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) are hardly contested. Israel itself practices what is known as ‘deliberate ambiguity’, as to send a message to its enemies of its lethal power, without revealing anything that may hold it accountable to international inspection.

What we know about Israel’s nuclear weapons has been made possible partly because of the bravery of a former Israeli nuclear technician, Mordechai Vanunu, a whistleblower who was held in solitary confinement for a decade due to his courage in exposing Israel’s darkest secrets.

Still, Israel refuses to sign the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), endorsed by 191 countries.

Israeli leaders adhere to what is known as the ‘Begin Doctrine’, in reference to Menachem Begin, the rightwing Israeli Prime Minister who invaded Lebanon in 1982, resulting in the killing of thousands. The doctrine is formulated around the idea that, while Israel gives itself the right to own nuclear weapons, its enemies in the Middle East must not. This belief continues to direct Israeli actions to this day.

The US support for Israel is not confined to ensuring the latter has ‘military edge’ over its neighbours in terms of traditional weapons, but to also ensure Israel remains the region’s only superpower, even if that entails escaping international accountability for the development of WMDs.

The collective efforts by Arab and other countries at the UNGA to create a Middle East Zone Free of Nuclear Weapons are welcomed initiatives. It behoves everyone, Washington included, to join the rest of the world in finally forcing Israel to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty, a first but critical step towards long-delayed accountability.

November 30, 2022 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Timeless or most popular | , | 2 Comments

Israeli officials slam director over ‘propaganda’ claim

RT | November 29, 2022

Israeli officials tore into their countryman, filmmaker Nadav Lapid, after he condemned popular Indian film The Kashmir Files as “propaganda” and “vulgar” before an audience at the International Film Festival of India in Goa. Lapid had been invited to lead the jury of the festival, which is funded by the government and counts many politicians and other VIPs among its attendees.

“We were all disturbed and shocked by the 15th film, The Kashmir Files, that felt to us like a propaganda, vulgar movie inappropriate for an artistic competitive section of such a prestigious film festival,” Lapid said during the closing ceremony. The film dramatizes the flight of Hindus from Kashmir in the 1990s amid an armed Muslim uprising, and has galvanized Islamophobic sentiment in the country.

“You should be ashamed,” Ambassador Naor Gilon chided Lapid via tweet on Tuesday, accusing the filmmaker of abusing “the trust, respect, and warm hospitality [the International Film Festival of India] have bestowed upon” him.

“It’s insensitive and presumptuous to speak about historic events before deeply studying them and which are an open wound in India because many of those involved are still around and still paying a price,” Gilon continued, suggesting that by publicly casting aspersions on The Kashmir Files’ version of history, Lapid was encouraging Indians to question the Holocaust.

Former ambassador to India Danny Carmon agreed, calling for Lapid to “apologize for the personal comments on historical facts without sensitivity and without knowing what he is talking about.” Consul General of Israel to Midwest India Kobbi Shoshani was quick to reassure local media that Lapid’s words were “not the opinion or the attitude of the government of Israel,” declaring “we completely don’t accept such speeches.”

While Lapid clarified he meant his comment as an artistic rather than personal criticism – “I feel totally comfortable to share openly these feelings here with you on stage since the spirit of the festival can truly accept also a critical discussion, which is essential for art and for life,” he said – that did little to blunt the attacks that came his way, from Indians as well as Israelis.

Lapid was denounced as “a Hindu-hating bigot who whitewashes ethnic cleansing” and as “not less than a Nazi enabler” by Abhinav Prakash, head of the Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha youth movement, while Aditya Raj Kaul, executive editor of the TV9 network, questioned whether the filmmaker would “call Holocaust a propaganda [sic]” or say the same about Holocaust films Schindler’s List and The Pianist.

November 30, 2022 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Film Review, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , | 1 Comment

Russia, China slam Israel’s ‘disproportionate use of force’ against Palestinians

Press TV – November 29, 2022

Russia and China have strongly denounced Israeli regime’s excessive use of force against Palestinians amid heightened tensions in the occupied territories.

Speaking at a UN Security Council briefing on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian issue, Russia’s deputy UN ambassador Dmitry Polyanskiy slammed Israel’i regime’s “disproportionate use of force” in the occupied Palestinian territories.

He also warned that the regime’s “unilateral steps”, including expansion of settlements, seizure of Palestinian property, demolition of Palestinian-owned housings, arbitrary arrests, violation of the status quo of al-Quds’ holy sites continue to create “irreversible facts on the ground”.

Polyanskiy further noted that Israeli regime’s “arbitrary illegitimate actions reach beyond the limits of West Bank and Gaza and affect the neighboring Arab states, whose sovereignty was violated on numerous occasions”, referring to Israeli strikes against Syria and Lebanon.

The envoy also slammed Washington, Tel Aviv’s staunch ally, for repeatedly blocking UN Security Council resolutions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“The Palestinian problem is … being driven out of the international agenda by the United States, who blocked the efforts of the Quartet of international intermediaries for the Middle East and precluded adoption of any meaningful decisions by the Security Council,” he asserted.

Speaking at the same meeting, China’s Ambassador to the UN envoy, Zhang Jun, also expressed his country “deep concern” about the deteriorating security situation in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Referring to 2022 being the deadliest year for Palestinians in the West Bank since 2005, Zhang said Beijing condemns “all indiscriminate attacks on civilians, deplores the grave violations against children, opposes the excessive use of force by security forces”, and called for holding the perpetrators accountable.

The ambassador also referred to dire humanitarian and economic situation in the Gaza Strip, urging Israel to lift its 15-year blockade on the coastal enclave.

“We call on Israel to ease restrictions on the movement of people and humanitarian, reconstruction materials into and out of the Gaza Strip, to lift the blockade on Gaza as soon as possible, and to effectively create conditions for the development of Palestinian communities in the West Bank,” said Zhang.

He also called for an end to Israeli settlement activities that he said is a roadblock in so-called two-state solution to the conflict.

“The continued expansion of settlement activities that encroach on the Palestinian land, swallow up Palestinian resources and violate Palestine’s right to self-determination have made a contiguous, independent and sovereign state of Palestine even more elusive,” he said.

“China urges Israel to cease all settlement activities and return to the right track of the two-state solution.”

Zhang urged the UNSC to “support the Palestinian people in restoring and exercising their inalienable rights”, saying “On issues concerning the future and fate of the Palestinian people, no one has the right to veto.”

Israeli forces have recently been conducting overnight raids and killings in the northern occupied West Bank, mainly in the cities of Jenin and Nablus, where new groups of Palestinian resistance fighters have been formed.

November 30, 2022 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , | 2 Comments

“Jewish Power” Exists — Genocidally — in Israel

Head of the Jewish Power Party Itamar Ben-Gvir
BY KEVIN BARRETT • UNZ REVIEW • NOVEMBER 28, 2022

Dave Chappelle recently joked that there are “two words in the English language that you should never say together in sequence. And those words are ‘the’ and ‘Jews.’”

But that isn’t the only banned two-word sequence. Another is “Jewish power.” As the Israeli-born musician-philosopher Gilad Atzmon says, “Jewish power is the power to suppress discussion on Jewish power.” So when Kanye West tried to talk about Jewish power, powerful Jews united to destroy him—as if that would somehow prove that Jewish power doesn’t exist.

Jewish power in North America and Europe mainly stems from the disproportionate presence of Jews in powerful positions in media, politics, and finance—a phenomenon best explained by such traditional Jewish values as education, ambition, and ethnic nepotism.* But nobody is allowed to mention nepotism. As Chappelle said, “If they’re black it’s a gang. If they’re Italian it’s a mob. If they’re Jewish it’s a coincidence and you should neeever speak about it.”

But there is one place where Jewish Power is openly discussed: Occupied Palestine. The new kingmaker in Israel is Itamar Ben-Gvir, the leader of the far-right Jewish Power Party. Ben-Gvir’s party secured 14 Knesset seats in the November elections, making it the third-largest party in Israel and the intimate partner of Benyamin Netanyahu in his return to the Prime Minister’s office.

In so-called Israel, Jewish Power means genocide. The Jewish Power party openly yearns for the extermination/expulsion of all non-Jews from historic Palestine. And though that position is not materially different from the unspoken policy of all of Zionism’s leaders since the beginning of the 20th century, Ben-Gvir and his party are now saying it in public—and working to hasten the advent of the “final solution to the Palestinian problem.” As Jewish Power continues to expand its influence, the slow-motion genocide of Palestine threatens to speed up exponentially.

Jewish Power leader Itamar Ben-Gvir clearly wants to kill every Arab he can get his bloody little Zionist hands on. Ben-Gvir practically worships the Zionist terrorist Baruch Goldstein, who murdered 29 praying Palestinian Muslims and wounded another 125 in the 1994 Hebron massacre. The Jewish Power leader actually hung a portrait of Goldstein in his living room, where it remained for years until his political advisors told him to take it down.

Paradoxically, Israel’s transformation into an admittedly genocidal entity could make its genocide of Palestine more difficult.

The Zionists have gotten away with their slow motion genocide of the Palestinians by posing as victims. Now that they are proudly proclaiming themselves genocide perpetrators, the occupiers of Palestine are alienating most of the world, including their Western supporters. Even the liberal and moderate Jews who constitute a significant element of Jewish power in the West are starting to waver—and younger Western Jews are beginning to turn away from Zionism entirely.**

Tellingly, one of the most fanatically pro-Zionist Jews in the American Establishment, Thomas Friedman, now says “The Israel We Knew Is Gone.” The previous Israel that Friedman “knew” was the one that practiced deniable genocide, and Friedman was one of the leading genocide deniers. Now that the Zionist genocide of Palestine is no longer deniable, Friedman is out of a job, and he isn’t happy about it.

Friedman cites US Senator Bob Menendez, who says the triumph of Jewish Power in Israel will “seriously erode bipartisan support in Washington.” How much erosion actually occurs remains to be seen. In 2015, during the height of Netanyahu’s feud with then-president Obama, the Israeli PM drew 28 standing ovations in a 47 minute speech to the US Congress—the most abject display of treasonous sycophancy in the history of the Republic. If he returns to Washington next year as head of an openly genocidal government, will Netanyahu only get a standing ovation every five minutes instead of every two minutes? Will a few dozen of the more than 500 congress-traitors remain seated and offer only tepid applause? That might hurt Bibi’s feelings. But it won’t erect any significant obstacles to the acceleration of Zionist ethnic cleansing.

In the past, Israel’s outrageous behavior, including its repeated attacks on the United States and murders of Americans, has been covered up by the Jewish-dominated mainstream media, America’s heavily Jewish-funded politicians, and, when necessary, Jewish-dominated organized crime groups working in sync with Israeli intelligence agencies and their American assets.*** Israel launched terrorist attacks against American targets in Egyptmurdered the Kennedys, slaughtered 34 sailors and wounded 174 in its attack on the USS Liberty, and was probably the primary force behind the September 11, 2001 false flag that killed nearly 3,000 people and tricked the US into launching a two-decade war on Israel’s enemies. Israeli forces have murdered Americans including Rachel Corrie and Shireen Abu Akleh without eliciting any meaningful protests from the US government or the Jewish-power-dominated mainstream media. Since Israel has literally gotten away with murder so many times, it seems unlikely that the US would ever stop Netanyahu and Jewish Power from accelerating the genocide of Palestine.

So who will stop the genocide? The Palestinians themselves, together with their regional and global supporters. The Axis of Resistance, consisting of Islamic Iran and its allies, has developed the military and political strength to deter the Netanyahu-Jewish Power axis of genocide. First consider the military equation. If genocidal Zionist extremists were to attempt the sudden large-scale murder and expulsion of Palestinians, the combined power of Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups, backed by the ever-expanding rocket reach of Hezbollah and the newly hypersonic-rocket-equipped Iranian military, has the power to resist at each step up the escalation ladder. That means that Israel’s regional nuclear monopoly has been effectively neutralized by the Axis of Resistance, which has achieved a Mutual Assured Destruction style balance of power by non-nuclear means—namely through its immense fleets of rockets with conventional warheads, including the new hypersonic missiles, that are sufficiently advanced and numerous to ensure that the Zionists’ leaky Iron Dome defense could not prevent Israel from being reduced to rubble if it came to an all-out-exchange.

Under the umbrella of its military deterrent, the Axis of Resistance will likely enjoy an ever-improving geopolitical balance of forces for the foreseeable future. Iran’s mending fences with Hezbollah, joining the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), cementing its de facto alliances with Russia and China, and dialing down tensions with Saudi Arabia should combine to benefit the Palestinian resistance against the newly-elected ultra-genocidal Zionists in Tel Aviv. (It is hard to imagine Saudi Arabia and the other Zionist-friendly Arab regimes actively assisting Netanyahu and Ben-Gvir in any “final solution to the Palestinian problem” scenario, especially now that the Saudis seem to be declaring their independence from the Zionist-infested US empire.)

The world, if not the dying US empire, is already displaying disgust with the almost-daily murders of young Palestinians by the proudly genocidal new regime. Citizens of various nations have been visibly shunning Israelis at the World Cup in Doha; countless videos show Israeli reporters being disgustedly rebuffed by World Cup attendees. JapaneseBrazilians, Qataris, and others have made it clear that the genocidal Zionist entity is not welcome in the community of nations. The triumph of Jewish Power in Tel Aviv seems to be sparking widespread revulsion against Zionism that may evolve into a de facto boycott of all things Israeli by an ever-increasing segment of the world’s population.

So the ever-more-brazen, ever-more-fanatical Zionist project, whose end goal has always been the extermination of the Palestinians and the replacement of Palestine by “Israel,” is digging its own grave. The harder it works to destroy Palestine, the greater the forces that arise against it. As the Qur’an states, “They plot and Allah plots, and Allah is the best of planners.”

Will the collapse of the psychopathic avatar of Jewish power in Palestine stimulate Jews to meditate, repent, return to God, and use what power they may possess for good rather than evil? One can only say insha’Allah. And Allah knows best.


*For illuminating discussions of Jewish ethnic nepotism, see Philip Weiss’s “Do Jews Dominate in American Media? And So What If We Do?” and the second half of Ron Unz’s “Challenging Racial Discrimination at Harvard.”

**The presence of justice-seeking Jews in powerful positions shows that Jewish power can have positive as well as negative repercussions, as illustrated by the disproportionate Jewish presence in the civil rights struggle and opposition to the Vietnam war during the 1960s. But of course it is only the negative aspects of Jewish power that we are not supposed to talk about.

**Whitney Webb’s One Nation Under Blackmail: The Sordid Union Between Intelligence and Crime That Gave Rise to Jeffrey Epstein traces the history of the secret government of the United States, which is dominated by Israel-loyal denizens of the overlapping worlds of intelligence and organized crime.

Video Link

November 29, 2022 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | 1 Comment

‘Hate Speech’ laws: Welcome to Stasi Ireland!

John Waters Unchained | October 31, 2022

‘Hate speech’ laws are not simply censorship. Their deeper purpose is to terminate equality under the law, so the normative indigenous members of a nation are made to feel like an alien underclass.

Pawns Take Out the Kings & Queens

Those who have doubted that Western Civilisation is in the process of being dismantled are about to receive their definitive reply. The supposedly ‘unavoidable’ fire-brigade damage inflicted on our freedoms in the Spring of 2020, which has never been repaired or reversed, is about to be consolidated. The shout of ‘Emergency!’ was at that time sufficient to quiet most objections and provide reassurance that this was indeed a temporary imposition. Now, two and a half years later, the maintenance vans pull up and the workmen start to scrutinise the damage done by the firemen — the windows shattered by their axes, the shards of glass still protruding dangerously upwards, the splintered frames. As we look on expectantly, imagining that they are about to replace the broken glass and repair the damaged frames, another convoy of vehicles pulls up, this time bearing men with sledgehammers, crowbars, pneumatic drills, wonder bars, angle grinders — and, bringing up the rear, a scammel transporter with a large crane and wrecking ball. It becomes clear that what the workmen have in mind is not reconstruction, but demolition.

Thus, the ‘emergency’ is signalled as over and the Era of Permanent Despotism begins. Now we move into the world predicted two years ago by one Larry Fink, the CEO of the world’s leading assets management behemoth, BlackRock: ‘Markets don’t like uncertainty. Markets like, actually . . . totalitarian governments, where you have an understanding of what’s out there, and obviously the whole dimension is changing now with a democratisation of countries. And democracies are very messy.’

Since those fateful days in the Spring of 2020, this was always going to happen, being baked into the lockdown cake. This is because, if an ‘authority’ suspends supposedly inalienable rights and freedoms, and then, after a long period of withholding them without objectively discernible justification, trickles their simulacrum back out under the rubric of concession, it soon becomes clear that these rights and freedoms have ceased to exist. After that, it is only a matter of carting the husks away.

The portents of this were present from the beginning —  in the absence of appropriate responses from media and ‘civil liberties’ bodies, in the strange mutism that gripped the familiar voices of objection and dissent — the poets, artists, philosophers — in the vacuum created by dogs not barking. It is like — as we have so often repeated in mutating sentences to ourselves, as though trying to hit upon a new formulation that would magic some new apprehension of the meaning of things — we have awoken in a world after a long, oblivious sleep, to find that the world has not merely changed but turned into something like the opposite of what we recall from the moments before unconsciousness. Out in the street in search of clues as to the dateline, we make eye-contact in the hope of encountering someone as troubled by what we are finding as ourselves, but receive back merely blank, indifferent stares. The New Normal is already normalised, and our memories of freedom and reason are as though increasingly unreliable, if not actual signs of derangement.

On mature reflection, it becomes clear that the era of freedom was not a stage along the way to Utopia, but a brief experiment that has now been abandoned as a failure. Only certain elements of the Freedom Revolution have been deemed worthy of retention: the right of the richest to stay rich; the rights of nonces and perverts to have their evil ways with children; the right of those claiming victimhood to plunder the reserves of those entitled to make no such claim. All this was set out in advance in the loosely framed prospectus known as Cultural Marxism. Even those who took the warnings on this score seriously did not take them seriously enough, for this new formula for human co-existence was in deadly earnest, whereas we thought it had something to do with the passing disgruntlement of the young or the ideological fancy of some of life’s losers. Now, or at least soon, we shall begin to see that it is all meant to be permanent and, once accomplished, irreversible.

Each former nation and its former citizens will soon discover their own concrete examples of what is a universal project of reversing the presumed gains made within Western civilisation going back to the Magna Carta. Some 30 months ago, we passed the terminus of the period of personal freedom, barely even remarking the moment, which occurred on perhaps an evening in late February or early March of 2020. Since then, we may have noticed in fits and starts that most of what we had always taken for granted about our terms of existence in the public world had changed utterly. The assumption that, as free people, we had the right to walk unfettered down a road or street, answerable to no one; or speak our minds on matters that struck discordantly our sense of justice or truth; or speak casually using possessive adjectives like ‘my’ or ‘our’ in respect of a house or a country — all this was coming to an end. In the interval between the initial sledgehammer blows to the windows of our liberty and the arrival of the demolition crews to take down the remnants of Western civilisation, we had gotten accustomed to being, you might say, pampered serfs, a condition that perhaps had some residual harmonic in the tom-tom rifts rippling through from back the ancestral line. We were ready for the next bulletin from on high. And now it has arrived, or is about to arrive, to a notice board near you, and the chief ‘takeaway’ is that the pampering is about to come to an end.

This week, in my country, Ireland, the bulletin board has overnight been posted with a new set of instructions, concerning what may be written, said or — in the first analysis — thought. It is called the  Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill, 2022, and relates to the issue that has become known as ‘hate speech’, which refers to the manner in which the citizenry is henceforth to be permitted to speak to and about certain named categories of ‘protected minorities’ whom we awoke not long ago to find unexpectedly in our midst. A quarter of a century ago, most of these minorities were unrepresented in our country, and no one dreamed that it might be necessary to introduce ‘hate speech’ legislation to protect the population from the various categories of ‘hate’ going around at that time. Since the turn of the millennium, however, our political class, under instructions from unseen external masters, has been diluting our population with indifferent aliens, more or less randomly selected or self-selecting, and delivered here for the purpose of sundering the claimed attachment of the Irish to the country they once thought of as ‘theirs’ — this country called ‘Ireland’. The Irish in general did not react with hostility to the newcomers, but that may have been because neither did they understand that the influence of new arrivals here was merely the first step in a much more elaborate and ominous process. This moment of the commencement of the Era of Permanent Despotism, however, brings a new dimension: the news that these outsiders are not merely hopeful newcomers, to be welcomed or tolerated or resented or embraced, but in fact the legal inheritors of what we once thought of as ‘our’ country. The Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill, 2022 makes this abundantly clear: These people are not in any sense to be regarded as having come here as mendicants or aspirants, but as the legally protected instruments of a new order that essentially excludes those who were here all along.

The idea of Ireland belonging to the Irish is now legally dead — the Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill, 2022 makes that quite clear. The idea of ‘my’ or ‘our’ country is dead too: It’s with O’Leary in the grave.

I confess that, having warned at some length about the dangers of the Irish manifestation of ‘hate speech’ laws — well in advance of their arrival — (see here and here),

I had lapsed into a distracted complacency at the moment of their publication in draft form last week. Bizarrely throwing myself at the mercy of jounaliars — a word I actually invented! — I read a number of media accounts that appeared to suggest that the sting of the proposals had been pulled — possibly on legal advice — and what remained was merely a reheating of existing lip service provision concerning ‘incitement to hatred’, which had barely if ever been used in its prior manifestation.

This article from the Irish Mirror, sent to me by a friend, provides an example.

Its description of the draft legislation expressly states that its primary purpose is to augment existing law with regard to crimes perceived to have an aggravating element of prejudice — or ‘hatred’ — based on, for example, race or sexual identity.

The report states:

The new Bill will create, for the first time in Ireland, specific hate crime offences.

They will be in the guise of aggravated forms of existing criminal offences where offenders are motivated by hatred of a protected characteristic such as race, colour, nationality, religion, ethnic or national origin, sexual orientation, gender expression, gender identity and disability.

The report, citing a Department of Justice statement, later elaborates:

‘All offences that were aggravated by a hate element will incur penalties that are higher than the ordinary form of the offense [sic], unless the penalties are already set at the maximum possible.

‘The Bill also provides that in any offence, other than the specific aggravated offences, where the Court determines that the perpetrator was motivated by prejudice in carrying out the offence, the Court shall treat that as an aggravating factor in sentencing the person.’

Even allowing for the article’s extreme tendentiousness and sensationalist mode of expression, it was hard, reading it, to see how such a measure could be any more than tedious, a nod toward multiculturalism, progressivism, et cetera, and therefore no great cause for concern. Perhaps our commentaries at the preliminary stages had had some effect? After reading the article, I responded reassuringly to what I thought my friend’s somewhat overwrought response to it, foolishly using the Mirror report as my point of reference:

In my estimation it will have no effect: The new Act is a paper tiger, which has been radically watered down from the early proposals and drafts of the Bill. This legislation requires an actual crime to have been committed, which may then be deemed to be of greater gravity by virtue of some ‘hate’ dimension. So it will only be relevant if, for example, someone assaults another person and it emerges that they were motivated by racism, or whatever. The sole area in which it might have relevance for commentators arises if the police were to engineer a situation where a crime was committed and could be linked to some utterance of a public figure. If someone beats up some nonce, for example, and offers as a defence that he was inspired to do it by Gemma O’Doherty, John Waters [et cetera]. But such prosecutions are already provided for in the 1989 Incitement to Hatred Act, which has been used about half a dozen times in 33 years, and never for this purpose. It is clear that the legal advice the Government was receiving made clear that they had no constitutional basis for creating the law they were seeking to, in which someone could have someone else prosecuted for ‘hate speech’ on the basis that he or she was ‘offended’ by something that person said, even if the ‘offence’ was targeted at someone else who was not offended. This Act is a very long way from that, and is clearly a face-saving exercise intended to reassure the Combine that ‘something is being done about hate speech’, when in reality little or nothing is altered.

Wrong, wrong, WRONG! I cannot say whether the article — and others of a similar nature that I have come across — was intended as a piece of deliberate misdirection, or whether it was simply a lazy co-option of a departmental press release with perhaps a similar objective, but either way it could scarcely have been pitched at a further remoteness from the truth. Certainly the author of the article does not appear to have had a copy of the draft Bill in front of him as he wrote his prejudicial diatribe, since virtually all of the article is directed at the provisions contained in the second half of the Bill, so that he would have had to plough his way through the most radical and important elements in order to construct the article as he did. This may indeed be part of a deliberate strategy to lull the public into a false sense of complacency — insofar as the public is exercised in the matter at all, which to a high degree it is not. In any event, it briefly lulled me into something that does not flatter me. It was several more days before I came to read the draft Bill, and what I found therein rattled me to the core of my being.

********************

Having since had an opportunity to read the draft Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill, 2022, I believe it to be extremely dangerous and, in fact, capable of, in the first instance, entirely deleting what is left of public debate or discussion on a number of issues: viz, race, ‘colour’, sexuality, what is called gender, Islam, atheism, et cetera — i.e. ‘protected characteristics’, which essentially means characteristics protected under Political Correctness/Cultural Marxism — as well as, purely tokenistically, nationality, disability and ‘descent’, whatever that may be.

Essentially, the Bill identifies and lists (though mostly without defining) the qualifying ‘protected characteristics’ which entitle a person to enhanced protection from the critical opinions of others under such headings.  Instead of ‘critical opinions’, however, the Bill uses the term ‘hatred’, an amorphous term that is nowhere defined other than tautologously, as follows:

‘hatred’ means hatred against a person or a group of persons in the State or elsewhere on account of their protected characteristics or any one of those characteristics.

The Bill co-opts ideological definitions like ‘colour’ and ‘gender’ without defining them legally or in everyday terms. Instead it presents a series of inter-linking reiterative terms that simply assume the definitions to be already clear.

‘Gender’, for example, is ‘defined’ as follows:

‘gender’ means the gender of a person or the gender which a person expresses as the person’s preferred gender or with which the person identifies and includes transgender and a gender other than those of male and female.

To the apocryphal man arrived from the Moon, this might refer to anything from hair-colour to horsepower.

In some contexts, by way of offering clarification, readers of the Bill are referred to the EU Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of November 2008, dealing with ‘combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law’. (Confirming that the Bill is, accordingly, the expression of EU policy and mandates.) However, the Framework Decision tells us very little else, its ‘definitions’ being just as tautologous as those in the Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill, 2022, which lazily informs that ‘A word or expression that is used in this Act and is also used in the Framework Decision has, unless the context otherwise requires, the same meaning in this Act as it has in the Framework Decision.’

‘Hatred’, for example, is defined in the Framework Decision as follows:

‘Hatred’ shall be understood as referring to hatred based on race, colour, religion, descent, or national or ethnic origin.

This is in no sense a definition of ‘hatred’. In fact, it tells us nothing of what hatred is, assuming that everyone already knows. The trouble is that, when the law starts to trick around with notions that ‘everyone already knows’, we very rapidly descend into subjectivism, arbitrariness, and — yes — prejudice.

Other critical words, terms and concepts are not defined at all. The concept of ‘incitement’, for example, is nowhere spelt out as to its meaning or particularities in either the Bill or the EU Council Framework Decision. What are to be the thresholds between acceptable public discourse (said to be protected in the Bill, but never defined) and what is called ‘hatred’? Who decides, and on what basis, is never specified.

Due to the paucity of adequate definitions, the Bill, once passed, would place virtually all consideration of the relevant issues in the hands of judges —  all or most of whom are likely to be in sympathy with the Cultural Marxist agenda, or at least aware of which side their bread is buttered on — or juries likely to be prejudiced by relentless, expensively-purchased propaganda and NGO agitation.

In relation to the headline ‘offence’ of ‘incitement to violence or hated to persons on account of their protected characteristics’, the Bill would in effect render unsafe any commentary at all on certain contentious issues — for example transgenderism, immigration and the activities of homosexuals and/or LGBT activists. This is because the framework of the legislation is so hastily sketched out that it would be a matter ultimately for the subjective appraisal of a judge as to whether the alleged offence constituted a ‘hate crime’ or not, requiring would-be critics of the policy or campaign in question to err on the side of extreme caution. The result would be an inevitable chilling of all commentary in these areas.

The same will apply in respect of the consequence of the section headed ‘Offence of condonation, denial or gross trivialisation of genocide, etc., against persons on account of their protected characteristics’

The introduction of such an offence would, I believe, destroy any possibility of achieving revision of established understandings of key historical events, even if new information were to become available,  rendering the existing interpretations cast in stone. Indeed, it is possible that, in certain circumstances, it might open up the possibility of rendering the use of the word ‘genocide’ illegal for all usage except in respect of those formally approved prior episodes in which it is already an agreed definition (i.e. ‘events specified in Article 6 of the Rome Statute’ — issued by the International Criminal Court in Rome on July 17th, 1998). This might mean, for example, that someone describing the Covid vaccination programme as ‘genocide’, in a context in which ‘hatred’ of some individual or group covered by the ‘protected characteristics’ provision was in the mix, might find themselves on the hook under this heading also and thereby liable, on summary conviction, to a sentence of up to 12 months, or, in the case of convictions on indictment, a sentence of five years imprisonment.

The offence of incitement would mean, in effect, that anyone who, in seeking to comment on certain controversial matters, risked ignoring the new underfoot conditions might be subject to prosecution on foot of the actions of random or unknown individuals which had simply been associated by the prosecutorial authorities or some (not necessarily implicated) complainant with some statement of that person at any time in the past. The connection could be made subjectively and would only need to satisfy a test of ‘reasonableness’, whatever that might mean.

It also seems that someone could be convicted under this legislation for simply possessing material likely to incite hatred — for example, a book by an author — such as Douglas Murray’s books about mass immigration and Woke insanity, for example — who is critical of issues implicating individuals or groups with ‘protected characteristics’.

The relevant section here specifies that a person shall be guilty of an offence of inciting violence or hatred if he/she ‘prepares or possesses material that is likely to incite violence or hatred against a person or a group of persons on account of their protected characteristics or any of those characteristics with a view to the material being communicated to the public or a section of the public, whether by himself or herself or another person . . . or being reckless as to whether such violence or hatred is thereby incited.’ It shall be a defence to plead that the material was purely for the defendant’s own use, but if ‘it is reasonable to assume that the material was not intended for the personal use of the person’, the person shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, to have been in possession of the material for the purposes of disseminating it to others.

In any particular case where allegations are made under the provisions of this legislation, if passed into law, concerning incitement to violence or hatred, or condoning or trivialising genocide, a search warrant may be obtained to search any premises at which any relevant material is alleged to exist. If a judge of the District Court is satisfied by information on oath of a police officer that there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that evidence of, or relating to, the commission of an offence is to be found in a particular place, the judge may issue a warrant for the search of that place and any persons found there. The investigators may use ‘reasonable force’ to enter the place named in the warrant, to search it and anyone found there, and to ‘examine, seize and retain anything found at that place, or anything found in possession of a person present at that place at the time of the search’, that the investigating officer(s) reasonably believe(s) to be evidence of, or relating to, the commission of an offence.

The legislation will also permit the seizure and retention of any such material — for example a computer or document — ‘for so long as is necessary’. The officer conducting the search may open and operate any computer found at the location or require anyone present to supply relevant passwords or encryption keys, or operate a computer for the purpose of enabling a search of its contents, and, if requested, to produce the information accessible by the computer ‘in a form in which the information is visible and legible, or . . . in which it can be removed and in which it is, or can be made, visible and legible.’

In other words, Welcome to Stasi Ireland, changed utterly in the name of progress and ‘tolerance’: totalitarianism bearing down on all in the name of defending the sensitivities of noisy minorities.

Incidentally, the generality of the Bill’s provisions refers to material being disseminated ‘to the public’ and to ‘a section of the public’, suggesting that it shall not be a defence to argue that the commentary was — in whatever sense — ‘in-house’ — even if the location of the alleged offence was a private house: it is entirely probable that the law will be applied to statements made in a private dwelling where non-family members are present and have elected to file a complaint.

The religious aspects are confusing (religion is, nominally at least, a ‘protected characteristic’) and likely to be of no benefit in protecting any aspects of Christian culture or belief. For the first time, atheism becomes a protectorate of Cultural Marxism. Since the Government has already taken steps to remove anti-blasphemy legislation and its constitutional underpinning, it is scarcely credible that the effect of this law would be to restore it in substance, other than for groups (like Muslims) that are protected under another characteristic as well.

The supposed ‘free speech provision’ of the Bill is meaningless and toothless, since it offers only the promise that consideration of a reference to a person or group on the basis of protected characteristics shall not ‘solely’ be the basis of the court’s decision. Again this is ringed around with non-specific concepts and loose definitions. There is supposedly a provision allowing for ‘reasonable and genuine contributions’, in the contexts of literary, artistic, political, scientific, religious or academic discourse, and we are told that this means ‘a contribution that is considered by a reasonable person as being reasonably necessary or incidental to such discourse.’ Again, who decides this? How is ‘reasonably necessary’ to be measured? In a highly-charged, propagandised culture such as Ireland has recently been converted into, how can this be regarded as offering any guarantee of protection to someone seeking to advance unpopular, untested or culturally unsupported viewpoints? And, since the public discourse occurs primarily to support the advancement of tentative and often esoteric ideas, how can this be described as a protection for freedom of expression and commentary where it might matter? It is interesting, here, that the term ‘reasonable person’ has hitherto been mainly associated, legally speaking, with defamations, where at stake in the judicial process would be the reputation of a specific individual. In such circumstances, the complained-of commentary would be defensible by dint of truth or fair comment, but here, since the entire crucible is decked out in ideology, anyone who detects disparagement of himself under a ‘protected characteristic’ will be able to trump any defence of free expression by virtue of his hurt feelings. Before writing, saying something — and yes, according to the Bill, ‘displaying’, ‘publishing’, ‘distributing’, ’disseminating’, ‘showing’ or ‘playing’ such communications, or ‘making the material available in any other way including through the use of an information system to the public or a section of the public’ — the would-be cultural critic will therefore need to think about how his remarks will go down with the most ideologically-slanted person in the (court)room.

Indeed, the restriction is likely to go much further in practice, since the text of the legislation refers to problematic ‘behaviour’ as well as statements.

For the purposes of this Part, a person’s behaviour shall include behaviour of any kind and, in particular, things that the person says, or otherwise communicates, as well as things that the person does and such behaviour may consist of a single act or a course of conduct.

What this means is anyone’s guess, but it is certain that, by ‘behaving’ — i.e., by being alive and breathing in a public space — a person may be liable to prosecution under this legislation. It all depends on how his ‘behaviour’ or ‘communications’ is/are interpreted by the most angry/paranoid individual in the vicinity. For once in this piece of draft legislation, we have stumbled upon a reliable — if accidental —  definition, for this is the precise definition of totalitarianism.

Under the heading of ‘incitement to hatred’, the Bill supplants the Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred Act, 1989, which will be repealed in the new law, if it is passed. This crime, it appears, can now be committed either with intent or inadvertently, since the criteria include inciting violence or hatred against a protected group or person with or without the intention of doing so. The criterion, again, will be whether some unspecified observer, applying some unspecified non-definition, believes that such an incident of incitement has occurred. Here, the Bill again provides for the defence of ‘genuine contribution to literary, artistic, political, scientific, religious or academic discourse’, but nothing of this is defined, and already the NGO lobbyists are screaming blue murder against any such defence being permitted. Indeed, the incorporation of ‘bodies corporate’ within the scope of the Bill’s prosecutorial reach will mean that theatres, media organisations, cinemas, art galleries, political organisations, churches, schools and colleges, and scientific bodies may be held responsible for anything said or communicated, or any behaviour of any person on its property, that is found to fall under the heading of ‘hatred’.

A body corporate shall be liable if the relevant offence is ‘attributable to the failure, by a director, manager, secretary or other officer of the body corporate, or a person purporting to act in that capacity, to exercise, at the time of the commission of the relevant offence and in all the circumstances of the case, the requisite degree of supervision or control of the relevant person.’ In such circumstances, the body corporate shall be guilty of an offence.

As regards jurisdiction, the Bill stipulates that its provisions should apply to all material placed on any information system, ‘whether or not the offence involved material hosted on an information system in the State’, or ‘whether or not the person was in the State when the offence was committed.’ This would seem to mean that any person, in any country, might be liable to prosecution in Ireland for anything posted on any such information system, regardless of the location of that system. Again, total totalitarianism.

All in all, it is an extremely dangerous piece of legislation every bit as bad as was promised by the various projections and drafts we saw coming through over the past couple of years. In effect, anyone seeking to speak publicly about any of the issues relating to ‘protected characteristics’ (chiefly Cultural Marxist obsessions) would be taking their liberty in their hands.

Let us be straightforward: The Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill 2022 is essentially a Bill to protect the pursuit of the externally imposed policy amounting to a programme for the destruction of Ireland from any internal commentary or criticism.

A friend observes: ‘Even in the Arts (theatre, literature, painting, film-making, etc), anything that ‘offends’ those protected anti-Christian minorities will be deemed a hate crime offender, hence, culture is f****d. If they carry out this law in a draconian way and start jailing people, Ireland will become unliveable. Basically, it’s a law that prevents heteronormative people and Christians from expressing the truth.’

This, of course, is entirely correct. The vagueness of the legislation will, if anything, exacerbate its intrinsically tyrannical nature, imposing a chilling cautiousness on those who might be disposed to challenge proposed initiatives and developments, especially those proposing the most radical changes to Irish society. These laws will therefore enable even the most far-reaching of reality-reshaping measures to be pushed through the institutions of society without any possibility of proper discussion or debate.

But, over and above all that, the proposed law is a charter for the disincorporation of each and every existing Irish-born person as a proprietorial shareholder of the nation of Ireland, from which flows the inevitable effect of winding up the Irish nation as a community of people sharing the same island space. ‘Hate speech’ laws are not simply censorship — their deeper purpose is to terminate equality under the law, so that the normative indigenous members of a nation are made to feel like an alien underclass, while the actually imported underclass, and the State-sponsored disaffected, are used as battering rams to decimate the native culture and existing societal structures — the pawns taking out the Sovereign People, Kings and Queens alike.

This has, finally, triggered the vindication of the fear expressed by the great Irish journalist and patriot, Thomas Davis:

‘This country of ours is no sand bank, thrown up by some recent caprice of earth. It is an ancient land, honoured in its archives of civilisation, traceable into antiquity by its piety, its valour, and its sufferings. Every great European race has sent its stream to the river of Irish mind. Long wars, vast organisations, subtle codes, beacon crimes, leading virtues, and self-mighty men were here. If we live influenced by wind and sun and tree, and not by the passions and deeds of the past, we are a thriftless and a hopeless people.’

The Government, of course, has such contempt for the intelligence of the Irish public that it will claim that what it is seeking to achieve is a kinder, gentler Ireland for everyone. This is nonsense: The way to achieve a kinder, gentler Ireland would have been to control inward migration to whatever was necessary to meet the needs of the economy, and the limits of what the culture could bear. At the very least, it would have entailed consulting the population concerning what a succession of governments since the turn of the millennium has imposed. By dint of stealth and moral blackmail, the political class has, for more than 20 years, been flooding the country with indifferent aliens who come here seeking benefits and are coached on arrival by NGOs to treat the host population as inherently racist. This, too, is a key element of the Cultural Marxist agenda, which seeks to impose burdens of guilt on ‘white’ populations on foot of the mixed history of Western imperialism. Ireland, however, far from having an imperial past, was itself, for hundreds of years, the casualty of English colonialism, having had much of its culture, including its language annihilated by barbaric laws, and its population periodically decimated by genocide camouflaged as natural disaster. These calamities also, of course, provoked the mass exodus of population to the New World and Britain, leaving Ireland in the early years of the third millennium semantically helpless before the disingenuous charge that, its own people having been ‘welcomed’ in these places, the Ireland of 2010 and 2020 had a responsibility to repay the favour to the universe. What is never allowed is that Irish people went abroad with little or no chance of ever returning home, to work like Trojans in menial jobs in inhospitable places, leaving their native land to stagnate for want of youthful energy and creativity.

Ireland, then, itself a sufferer at the hands of globalist colonialism, has in recent years been force-fed a diet of imported ideology, including Critical Race Theory, which creates a public discussion bearing the almost constant insinuation that Ireland is on a par with Alabama in its past treatment of black and coloured people. The truth could hardly be more different, but truth has been among the most recent emigrants from the Emerald Isle. The result is that the Irish Government, under instructions from the EU bureaucrats, now invites the world to our shores, with promises of free houses, incomes without obligation, immunity from all kinds of legal consequences for wrongdoing — and now: cultural protection from the merest slight of a disgruntled native who is himself entitled to none of these benefits. This week, homelessness among Irish people approached 11,000 — the highest ever recorded — while a massive building near Castlebar was being prepared to house a further tranche of (alleged) Ukrainians. Irish people live in tents and cardboard boxes while Ukrainians, supposedly ‘fleeing a war zone’, but without encountering any process of vetting or verification, move into duplex apartments at the taxpayer’s expense.

Among the true objectives of the ‘hate speech’ legislation is to protect a treasonous political class against criticism from its own taxpaying population for the crimes it is committing against them, its treachery against the heroes of the long struggle to achieve freedom at a cost invariably paid in blood and life-force, and ultimately the destruction of one of the oldest and intellectually richest cultures in human history.

But even this is not the deepest, most malevolent of the reasons why the Irish political class — Irish-born men and women who have been privileged to be entrusted with care of their country and its inheritance, are in 2022 seeking to impose these new Penal Laws on their own people. The deepest reason has to do with facilitating powerful and already wealthy outsiders in plundering Ireland of everything worth taking, nailed down or otherwise.

The proposed law will destroy — as is the uppermost intention behind it — the concept of equality before the law. It need hardly be pointed out that the Bill, while presenting itself as a charter for increased tolerance and societal gentleness, is in reality a charter for the dominance of minorities over the pre-existing population. In each individual case, it will defend, uphold or elevate that which is alien, esoteric or abnormative, which means that the normal, the here-before and the undemanding get stuffed and silenced every time. It is obvious that anyone who imagines they will be able to use the law to defend themselves from attacks on their Catholicism/Christianity would be barking up the wrong tree. Similarly anyone imagining that it offers some kind of protection from what the new gender ideology classes as ‘cis gender’ persons (i.e. those who wish to remain as they were made) had better think again. The law will benefit listed minorities only, and everyone else will be laughed out of court by the occupiers of a now all but totally corrupted Bench. Because this is a Cultural Marxist-inspired law, it is designed to weaponise the grievances of minorities so as to silence and thereafter dispossess the indigenous former majority. The trick is that it empowers each individual only in particular sub-divisions of his existence — sexuality, colour, et cetera — while simultaneously denying him as much as anyone else the generic rights that citizens of Western democracies (now ‘former democracies’) took for granted until the day before yesterday. Even the most ‘protected characteristic’ endowed beneficiaries will be entitled to prosecute their grievance only on the narrow basis of particular, singular characteristics, and in other contexts have the same rights as everyone else, which is to say practically none. The Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill, 2022 will not restore to any person walking upon the sand bank of 2023 Ireland the rights which the political class stole from the Irish people in 2020, with no intention of restoring.

Once the Bill passes into law, what for the moment we might call the ‘native Irish’ will immediately become second-class legal citizens, being in a sense the prisoners and slaves of newcomers boasting legally superior ‘protected characteristics’ that give them exalted protection in any dispute with a native Irish person. Each surviving member of the native Irish will thereafter live on tenterhooks, waiting for the moment of accusation, to be followed hard in the ideological kangaroo courts of post-Irish Ireland by conviction, punishment, incarceration, and thereafter lifetime ignominy. Placing this alongside other imminent measures, such as the banning of public protests under certain headings (abortion, for example), the ‘delimiting’ of private property, and the seizure by the State of rights over every drop of water in the land, what we are observing is the introduction of a new charter of Penal Laws directed at the indigenous people of Ireland, albeit this time framed and implemented not by a monstrous occupier by their own elected ‘representatives’, the ‘monsters with human faces’ who smile as they help the robber barons to steal our children’s birthright. Be in no doubt: The ultimate purpose of this is the wholesale plunder of all resources that have not already been transferred into the ownership/control of the Combine.

What is happening, then, amounts to the final dispossession, re-plantation and re-colonisation of Ireland and the re-enslavement of the indigenous Irish people, using indifferent aliens baited by fistfuls of toytown money, as the principal instrument of plunder.

The present moment is a little analogous to what occurred a decade ago, when the Irish electorate was persuaded to annul the parental rights of parents, essentially transferring them in their entirely to the State, in the name of giving ‘rights to children’. This cleared the way for gay marriage, gay parenting and ‘legal’ gay families, at the expense of the normative and natural definitions arising from procreative heterosexuality. In a somewhat comparable fashion, enforced mass migration is an instrument of rights-stripping in the context of the nationhood of the individual: each newcomer is set against each indigenous person, who is thereby cancelled out and reduced to a free-floating nomad in his own former country. That much of this process will be effected on an ostensibly ‘voluntary’ basis — i.e, people surrendering to the chilling intent of the legislation — is all part of the plan. When it is all done and dusted, and the old Irish take belatedly to recrimination, they will be told that there was nothing in the least coercive about the handover: They went along with everything of their own free will, and have no one to blame but themselves.

It is important to stress that what is happening is in no sense or respect intended to be to the ultimate benefit of the newcomers, who are simply being used as proxy occupiers so as to effect the first, and most difficult, stage of dispossession. To loosen the grip on Ireland of a people who, in many instances, can trace their lineage there for hundreds or thousands of years, is a massive undertaking. The purpose, in the first instance, as already stated, is to dislodge the Sovereign People, and the proxies are here used as pawns to take out the Kings and Queens who have lived here all their lives and thought of this, their metaphysical home, as being no sand bank thrown up by some recent caprice of earth.

November 27, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular | , | 3 Comments

Netanyahu hands control of police ministry to supremacist Ben Gvir

The anti-Arab Religious Zionist party will also be in charge of the expansion of illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank

Knesset member Itamar Ben-Gvir, who heads the Religious Zionism party is held back during a special session on 13 June, 2021. (Photo: EMMANUEL DUNAND/AFP – Getty Images)
The Cradle | November 25, 2022

Israel’s Likud party, led by Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu, on 25 November reached its first coalition deal with the Jewish supremacist ‘Religious Zionist’ (Otzma Yehudit) party.

As per the agreement, anti-Arab zealot Itamar Ben Gvir will serve in the newly created role of National Security Minister – an expanded public security minister role – and will have a seat in the security cabinet.

“We took a big step tonight toward a full coalition agreement, toward forming a fully, fully right-wing government … I am happy that the agreement on the ministries that Otzma Yehudit will receive will allow us to realize our election promises,” Ben Gvir said in a statement.

While Likud and the Religious Zionist party have so far only signed an annex to a coalition deal, the agreement will also give Ben Gvir’s extremist group control of the ‘Development of the Negev, Galilee, and National Fortitude Ministry;’ the role of deputy minister in the Ministry of Economy; chairmanship of the Knesset’s Public Security Committee; and rotating chairmanship of the Special Committee for the Israeli Citizens’ Fund (which oversees state revenue from gas drilling).

The ‘Negev and Galilee Ministry’ will specifically be responsible for regulating the expansion of illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.

Moreover, Ben Gvir’s freshly minted National Security Ministry will also be handed control over the West Bank Border Police, while a new “expanded southern law” will be implemented that will permit Israeli troops to shoot Palestinians “caught stealing weapons from military bases.”

During this month’s elections, the Religious Zionist party helped Netanyahu secure a commanding 64-seat majority in the Knesset.

The far-right party has on previous occasions called for the formal annexation of the entire occupied West Bank – in violation of international law – as well as the seizure of the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in occupied East Jerusalem to place it under Jewish ownership.

Ben Gvir himself has led several violent incursions into the Muslim holy site under police protection and has overseen the expulsion of Palestinian worshippers.

Weeks before the election, Ben Gvir made headlines for pulling a gun on Palestinians in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of East Jerusalem, urging settlers to shoot at the locals.

He is also an outspoken proponent of creating a “deportation law”  that would target anyone who is “disloyal” to the State of Israel.

Earlier this month, Israeli media reported Ben Gvir asked for tougher conditions for Palestinian prisoners, as well as unfettered access for settlers into Al-Aqsa Mosque, during early coalition talks with Likud.

On top of this, just this week, the firebrand lawmaker called for the resumption of targeted assassinations of Palestinians in the wake of a bomb attack in occupied Jerusalem.

November 25, 2022 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Reneging on Abraham Accords, Netanyahu authorises ‘soft annexation’ of West Bank

MEMO | November 24, 2022

Israel’s designate Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has been accused of breaking his agreement with Arab countries that normalised relations with the Occupation State during the current coalition negotiations. The Likud leader is reported to have agreed to move the civil administration in the West Bank from Israeli Ministry of Defence to the Ministry of Finance to appease far-right member of the Knesset, Bezalel Smotrich.

Religious Zionism will be handed the civil administration portfolio, according to Haaretz. The Ministry is hugely significant for Palestinians, as it oversees coordination of Israel’s activity in the Occupied West Bank. The agreement was reached as part of the ongoing coalition talks between Netanyahu’s Likud and Religious Zionism, which stalled once more after the parties failed to reach agreement on several other key issues.

Though details of the talks are yet to be disclosed, Likud is said to have acceded to Religious Zionism’s demand for some of the powers of the civil administration, which is under the Defence Ministry. The deal will mean that Smotrich, who is an advocate of Israel’s illegal settlement enterprise, will be handed power in approving Palestinian construction plans and settlement construction in Area C. Decisions around illegal outposts, illegal construction and work permits for Palestinians falls under the remit of the administration.

The biggest prize for Religious Zionism, which became the third largest party with 14 Knesset seats, is to seize control over affairs in the Occupied West Bank. Although past Israeli governments showed reluctance to annex the territory completely over concerns around backlash from the international community, Religious Zionism has no such fear.

Officials in Religious Zionism claimed, Wednesday, that the Party acceded to Netanyahu’s requests to forgo the defence portfolio in exchange for the Finance Ministry. The condition for the agreement is that the responsibility for settlements and the civil administration is transferred from the Ministry of Defence to the Ministry of Finance. Under International law, the West Bank is occupied, which means that the military of the occupying power oversees the territory.

Netanyahu has been accused of reneging on his deal with the Arab States by agreeing to the transfer of the civil administration. “Moving the civil administration in the West Bank from Israeli Ministry of Defence to the Ministry of Finance will be a ‘soft annexation’ of the WB & violation of the commitment Netanyahu gave the US & UAE to suspend his annexation plan,” said Israeli journalist, Barak Ravid on Twitter. “It could harm the Israel-UAE peace treaty,” Ravid added, referring to 2020 normalisation deal.

Referred to as the “Abraham Accords,” the UAE hailed the deal as victory for the two-state solution. Abu Dhabi defended its decision to normalise relations with the Occupation State by insisting that it had prevented Israel from annexing the West Bank, a threat which Netanyahu, who was the Prime Minister at the time, had issued.

It is not clear what steps the UAE will take in response. UAE Foreign Minister, Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed (ABZ) raised his concerns over Religious Zionism becoming part of a coalition with Netanyahu, during a recent visit to Israel.

November 25, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , , | 2 Comments

Israel to expand regional activities with US army

The Cradle | November 25, 2022

On 24 November, the Israeli Chief of Staff, General Aviv Kochavi, announced a significant expansion of joint activities with the US army in the region, indicating that Israel would work at a faster pace against the “positioning” of the Iranian government in the Middle East, according to Al-Arabiya news.

“To enhance our capabilities in the face of the challenges in the region, joint activity with CENTCOM will be significantly expanded in the near future. At the same time, the IDF will continue to act at an accelerated pace against the Iranian regime’s entrenchment in the region,” he said.

Kochavi returned from the United States on 24 November and met with US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley, with whom he discussed strengthening cooperation between the two military forces, according to Al-Arabiya.

The White House announced that US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan met with Aviv Kochavi in ​​Washington and discussed several issues during the meeting.

National Security Council spokeswoman Adrienne Watson said in a statement on 21 November that Sullivan “affirmed the US administration’s firm support for Israel’s security, and the two sides exchanged views on a broad range of regional security issues of mutual interest.”

“Sullivan affirmed US President Joe Biden’s commitment to ensuring that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapon,” she added.

Meanwhile, The Times of Israel reported that Kochavi told US military officials that the two countries should accelerate what he described as “offensive operations plans” against Iran.

On 19 November, US Forces Central Command (CENTCOM) chief Michael Erik Kurilla announced in Bahrain that a US task force will deploy more than 100 unmanned vessels by 2023 to “help ensure maritime security” in the Gulf region’s strategic waters, according to Mehr News Agency.

“By this time next year, Task Force 59 will bring together a fleet of over 100 unmanned surface and subsurface vessels operating together, communicating together, and providing maritime domain awareness,” Kurilla announced during the annual Manama dialogue conference.

The Pentagon has also been collaborating with Israel, Saudi Arabia, and other nations in West Asia over the past eight months to create a network of unmanned drones to counter Iran in the Persian Gulf.

November 25, 2022 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , , | 2 Comments

US concessions to Palestine always work in Israel’s favour

Joe Biden and Mahmoud Abbas in Bethlehem, West Bank on July 15, 2022. [Palestinian Presidency – Anadolu Agency]
By Ramona Wadi | MEMO | November 24, 2022

Further proof of US President Joe Biden reneging on his electoral promises with regard to Palestine is the ongoing refusal to reopen the US Consulate in occupied Jerusalem for use by Palestinians, and opting instead for creating a new role of Special Representative for Palestinian Affairs, which has been given to Hady Amr. Amr served as deputy assistant secretary of state for Israeli and Palestinian Affairs, and is known mostly for insisting that Israel devises ways to strengthen the Palestinian Authority; for Israel’s benefit, of course.

Equally clear is that PA Leader Mahmoud Abbas is acquiescing to US demands, despite his lamentations that the Biden administration is also employing the waiting tactic, which has stalled Palestinians’ political trajectory for decades. The PA’s delight at Biden’s election win was just a brief interlude; it soon became clear that his predecessor Donald Trump’s legacy would not be rescinded, apart from the US decision to allocate some financial support for Palestinian humanitarian needs.

According to Axios quoting an unnamed US State Department official, “The Washington-based Special Representative for Palestinian Affairs will engage closely with the Palestinians and their leadership and, together with Ambassador [Thomas] Nides and his team, continue to engage with Israel on Palestinian-related issues.”

While Israeli media is describing the move as an upgrade of US-Palestinian relations, diplomatic engagement between the US and the PA remains one that prioritises colonial collaboration, given that despite promises to bring the US back to the fold of international consensus regarding the two-state compromise, Washington remains tied to Trump’s political legacy. The international community has also aligned itself with the Abraham Accords, since the plans mirror mainstream engagement with Israel. The PA, on the other hand, simply bleats its opposition and backs down before accepting concessions in return for its subjugation.

Amr will be working under Barbara Leaf, the US Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs who, last September, stated that improving economic conditions in the occupied West Bank was crucial to “sustain improvement in security conditions.” Israel’s security, that is. Diplomatic relations with the PA, as far as the US is concerned, are only valid as long as it means that security coordination will remain “sacred”, as Abbas puts it. Outside of the security coordination parameters, the PA is a main player that only exists as an entity that fails to take political steps against Israel’s colonial expansion.

The US has stated repeatedly its purported commitment to reopen its consulate in Jerusalem, yet appointing Amr as special representative is another indication that the Palestinian request will go unheeded for the time being. Hence the creation of a role that purportedly champions Palestinian affairs and diplomatic relations with Washington. Yet another “concession” to Palestine that works in Israel’s favour.

Former US Special Envoy for Israeli-Palestinian Negotiations, and former Ambassador to Israel, Martyn Indyk described the US move as “a signal to the Palestinians of their importance”. Yet, the US does things differently with Israel. It doesn’t offer concessions to Israel; it offers military, financial and economic support, while Palestinians remain tethered to a humanitarian project that only serves Israel’s expansionist plans and interests. Importance does not necessarily have a positive connotation. In this case, the Palestinians’ “importance” is not directed towards their political rights, but the means through which Israel and the US can further their diplomatic engagement behind a facade that generates less criticism and fewer allegations of American bias towards the colonial-occupation state.

November 24, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | Leave a comment

Portland: Anti-Defamation League Covertly Worked To Get White Good Samaritan Falsely Indicted For Murder

By Eric Striker | The Main Street Tribune | November 19, 2022

Portland Prosecutors, the Anti-Defamation League and the Anarchist Violent Extremist organization Rose City Antifa colluded to indict an innocent white man of murder, recently leaked grand jury documents show.

On July 29th, a white man named Jascha Manny was working as a doorman at Mary’s Club, a strip club in Portland’s Old Town neighborhood.

During his shift, he witnessed a group of black men threatening a couple of homeless people. The aggressors were also shining a high-powered strobe light into the eyes of the random indigent citizens.

As the encounter escalated, Manny rushed to confront the bullies in hopes that they would leave the people alone.

It was then that 19-year-old Lauren Teyshawn Abbott Jr pulled out a firearm and began shooting at Manny. The bouncer responded by returning fire, killing Abott and injuring his associate, 23-year-old Kolby Ross.

The entire incident was caught on video from multiple angles and witnesses supported Manny’s testimony, but thanks in part to the ADL’s intervention, left-wing District Attorney Mike Schmidt called a grand jury in August in an attempt to indict him for murder and assault.

During the proceedings, prosecutors centered their argument for criminal charges on prejudicial information secretly provided to them by the ADL’s “Center on Extremism,” which asserted that Manny had pro-white political beliefs.

The Jewish group, which works closely with local law enforcement and the FBI, had laundered this specious information from Rose City Antifa, a domestic extremist group that openly avows violence and was actively involved in organizing Portland’s brutal 2020 riots.

There was never any evidence that Manny was motivated by race when he decided to return fire against the blacks shooting at him. The goal of the ADL’s intervention in this case appears to have been to offend the assumed political sensibilities of jurors into indicting an innocent man.

According to local news reports, the grand jury was shown images and writings demonstrating Manny’s alleged political ideology, but after seeing mounds of exculpatory evidence, they declined to indict.

This vindication did not change the minds of left-wing activists. In response to DA Schmidt’s statement that his hands are tied, various anarchist, Jewish and liberal groups have joined forces to organize a pressure campaign to have Manny charged with hate crimes, not for his actions, but for his beliefs.

November 20, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , | 1 Comment