The Jewish Question (JQ) thread

The Penitent Man

Kingfisher
Look, another demon revealing herself. What a shocker. Was married to Ron Perelman, another miserable dirtbag.

If you're fond of cancer, feel free to read some of the comments under her referenced tweet.
Twitter is kind of a blessing in disguise as it attracts the sort of people who feel compelled to post these things and broadcast the state of their soul to the world, not that we probably couldn’t discern that just from looking at her.

1631105379011.jpeg
 
It really was a shocker for me at first to see all these "actors" and "actresses" that were on the big screen in the 80s and 90s come around and basically jew themselves out to oblivion spitting venom at everything American (and by extension, European, Christian, and White). Now I'm having a hard time naming one who isn't part of this. James Woods gets a pass even though he still memes boomer stuff. Mel Gibson, Michael Beck (lead from The Warriors who left Hollywood to become a Christian), and Mr. T (a confirmed born-again Christian) are the only ones I have any modicum of respect for now. Even Arnie has been photographed with Jacob Rothschild at multiple times, and was on a recent video saying "screw your freedoms" because of (((the virus))). I expect endless vomiting from these types until they're all dead and gone and forgotten.
 
No I'm well aware of the Jewish domination of Hollywood. But I just figured most of it was behind the scenes, not the stars themselves. Up until recently I learned the hard way and It's a bit upsetting.
Further to this..

Was Big Schnozzed, Big Eared goy-impersonating (((Harry Connick Jr))) any good as an actor..?

I hear conflicting reports.
 
ISRAEL COHEN (1912)

"We must realize that our party's most powerful weapon is racial tensions. By propounding into the consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have been oppressed by whites, we can mold them to the program of the Communist Party. In America we will aim for subtle victory. While inflaming the Negro minority against the whites, we will endeavor to instill in the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the Negros. We will aid the Negroes to rise in prominence in every walk of life, in the professions and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the Negro will be able to intermarry with the whites and begin a process which will deliver America to our cause."

Israel Cohen, A Racial Program for the Twentieth Century,

Something psycho-sexual about that scheme. I probably linked this before but I believe their innovations in circumcision beyond what is historically and biblically mandated contributed to this:

Although uncomfortable, this original biblical circumcision, as demanded by God, was really a minor procedure where only the very tip of the foreskin was removed. This was that small portion which extended past the bulbous structure (the glans) at the end of the flaccid human penis. The penis bled and needed time to heal, but would still contain a considerable portion of the foreskin, so that the glans was still protected. In its flaccid condition, the penis would appear as uncircumcised.4

For thousands of years the procedure never changed, from Abraham until around the year 140 A.D., when a second and more radical step to the ritual was introduced. It was dictated by man — not God. The Jewish religious governing body “sought to put an end to the practice of youths desiring to appear uncircumcised by stretching the remaining foreskin for social [and] economic benefits and for sports competitions.” This stretching would obliterate the Jewish cut, so as to disguise ‘the seal of the covenant’.6
The change in procedure around 140 A.D., to stop the extension process, was to completely excise the remaining foreskin completely exposing the glans. Needless to say, a godly requirement then became a very painful and complicated man-made procedure. This last type of circumcision is basically what was introduced as a popular and routine infant circumcision for Christians during the late eighteenth century and well into the 1900’s. The idea being, if Jesus was circumcised, than Christians should be, too. Most people don’t know that today’s circumcision is vastly different from the one God required and Jesus received.

https://outlawbiblestudent.org/circ...t-was-it-really-all-about-why-on-the-8th-day/


Now as to the negative impacts of circumcision since this detrimental innovation:
1. Circumcision Causes Immediate Harm


Circumcision is often performed on infants without anesthetic or with a local anesthetic that is ineffective at substantially reducing pain (Lander et al., 1997). In a study by Lander and colleagues (1997), a control group of infants who received no anesthesia was used as a baseline to measure the effectiveness of different types of anesthesia during circumcision. The control group babies were in so much pain—some began choking and one even had a seizure—they decided it was unethical to continue. It is important to also consider the effects of post-operative pain in circumcised infants (regardless of whether anesthesia is used), which is described as “severe” and “persistent” (Howard et al., 1994). In addition to pain, there are other negative physical outcomes including possible infection and death (Van Howe, 1997, 2004).


2. Pain from Circumcision in Infancy Alters the Brain


Research has demonstrated the hormone cortisol, which is associated with stress and pain, spikes during circumcision (Talbert et al., 1976; Gunnar et al., 1981). Although some believe that babies “won’t remember” the pain, we now know that the body “remembers” as evidenced by studies which demonstrate that circumcised infants are more sensitive to pain later in life (Taddio et al., 1997). Research carried out using neonatal animals as a proxy to study the effects of pain on infants’ psychological development have found distinct behavioral patterns characterized by increased anxiety, altered pain sensitivity, hyperactivity, and attention problems (Anand & Scalzo, 2000). In another similar study, it was found that painful procedures in the neonatal period were associated with site-specific changes in the brain that have been found to be associated with mood disorders (Victoria et al., 2013).


3. Infant Circumcision has Psychological Consequences for Men


Over the last decade there has been a movement of men who were circumcised as infants and have articulated their anger and sadness over having their genitals modified without their consent. Goldman (1999) notes that shame and denial is one major factor that limits the number of men who publicly express this belief. Studies of men who were circumcised in infancy have found that some men experienced symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder, depression, anger, and intimacy problems that were directly associated with feelings about their circumcision (Boyle, 2002; Goldman, 1999; Hammond, 1999).


1. Medical Procedures in Childhood are Often Experienced as Traumatic


The CDC fails to consider that many medical procedures, even those that are described as routine, are often experienced as traumatic by children and adolescents (Levine & Kline, 2007). Circumcision, for example, clearly meets the clinical definition of trauma because it involves a violation of physical integrity. In fact, research has demonstrated that medical traumas in childhood and adolescence share many of the same psychological elements of childhood abuse, such as physical pain, fear, loss of control, and the perception that the event is a form of punishment (Nir, 1985; Shalev, 1993, Shopper, 1995).


2. Procedures Involving Children’s Genitals Produce Negative Psychological Effects


The psychological consequences of medical procedures are even greater when they involve a child’s genitals. Studies have examined the psychological effects of medical photography of the genitals (Money, 1987), repeated genital examinations (Money, 1987), colposcopy (Shopper, 1995), cystscopy and catheterization (Shopper, 1995), voiding cystourethrogram (Goodman et al., 1990), and hypospadias repair (INSA, 1994). The studies found that these procedures often produce symptoms which are very similar to those of childhood sexual abuse, including dissociation and the development of a negative body image. The effects often persist into adulthood as evidenced by a study that examined the effects of childhood penile surgery for hypospadias. Men who had this surgery in childhood experienced more depressive symptoms, anxiety, and interpersonal difficulties than men who did not have the surgery (Berg & Berg, 1983).


3. Circumcision Causes Significant Psychological Harm in Children and Adolescents


Circumcision in childhood and adolescence has significant negative psychological consequences. Following a traumatic event, many children experience anxiety, depression, and anger; and many others try to avoid and suppress these painful feelings (Gil, 2006). In addition, children often experience a debilitating loss of control that negatively affects their ability to regulate emotions and make sense of the traumatic experience (Van der Kolk, 2005). In a study of adults circumcised in childhood, Hammond (1999) found that many men conceptualized their circumcision experience as an act of violence, mutilation, or sexual assault. Kennedy (1986) detailed the psychological effects of circumcision in a case study describing the psychotherapy of a boy who was circumcised at three years of age. The sense of inadequacy, feelings of victimization, and violent sexual fantasies experienced during this boy’s adolescence were found to be both consciously and unconsciously linked to his experience with losing part of his penis (Kennedy, 1986). In a study examining the psychological effects of circumcision on boys between four and seven years of age, Cansever (1965) used psychological testing to measure boys’ level of distress. The results of the study indicated that circumcision was perceived as an aggressive attack on the body that left children feeling damaged and mutilated (Cansever, 1968). Cansever (1968) also noted that these boys experienced changes in body image (with many feeling smaller and incomplete), feelings of inadequacy and helplessness, as well as a tendency to withdraw psychologically.


4. The Majority of Boys Circumcised as Children and Adolescents Meet Diagnostic Criteria for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)


The most comprehensive study available that assesses the psychological impact of circumcision on children after infancy was conducted by Ramos and Boyle (2000) and involved 1072 pre-adolescent and adolescent boys who were circumcised in a hospital setting. Using an adapted version of a clinically established PTSD interview rating scale, the study’s authors determined that 51 percent of these boys met the full diagnostic criteria for PTSD and noted that other variables such as age at circumcision (pre-adolescence versus adolescence) and time elapsed since the procedure (months versus years) were not predictive of a PTSD diagnosis (Ramos & Boyle, 2000). As a point of comparison, the rate of PTSD among veterans of the Iraq war is approximately 20 percent (NIH, 2009).

 
ISRAEL COHEN (1912)

"We must realize that our party's most powerful weapon is racial tensions. By propounding into the consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have been oppressed by whites, we can mold them to the program of the Communist Party. In America we will aim for subtle victory. While inflaming the Negro minority against the whites, we will endeavor to instill in the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the Negros. We will aid the Negroes to rise in prominence in every walk of life, in the professions and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the Negro will be able to intermarry with the whites and begin a process which will deliver America to our cause."

Israel Cohen, A Racial Program for the Twentieth Century,

That is not to mention the nerve damage and the loss of sexual function:

2. Glans Externalized and Keratinized​


The normal glans is an internal structure, only exposed briefly during urination, washing, and sexual arousal. Its surface is moist, and is not keratinized. However, circumcision converts the glans into an external organ. Immediately after the operation, it retains its exquisite sensitivity, and contact with clothing causes considerable discomfort, but it soon becomes desensitized, probably as a result of the laying down of a layer of keratin on the epithelium. A few circumcised men report persistent discomfort from contact with clothing throughout their lives. The epithelium takes on the character of skin rather than mucous membrane.


Not only is the appearance of the glans altered, but also there is a dramatic loss of sensitivity. Sorrells et al. (2007) mapped fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis in circumcised and uncircumcised men, comparing the two populations. With regard to the sensitivity of the glans, they showed that the glans in the circumcised male is less sensitive to fine-touch pressure than that of the uncircumcised (intact) male. Bleustein et al. (2005) tested vibration, pressure, spatial perception, and temperature on the glans in the dorsal midline in circumcised and non-circumcised men, and failed to show any significant difference in sensation on the glans between the two groups after correcting for age, hypertension, and diabetes. What is clear is that the glans is the least sensitive region of the penis, in any case, and is only supplied with simple nerve endings, which sense deep pressure and pain (Sorrells et al., 2007; Bleustein et al., 2005; Halata and Munger, 1986).


3. Tissue Loss from Circumcision​


It is the tissue loss that causes the most important functional effects of circumcision. What is lost? Thirty to fifty percent of the penile skin, the area in an adult being about 15 square inches (96 cm2), comprising nearly all of the inner and outer foreskin, is removed. The frenulum is sometimes (and in USA-style “high and tight” operations, nearly always) removed. The inner foreskin includes the ridged band, a zone of specialized mucosa encircling the distal end of the inner foreskin, first described by Taylor and colleagues (1996). They described the ridged band in this way:


When retracted, the inner surface of the prepuce displays two zones, ‘ridged’ and ‘smooth’. The first, a transversely-ridged band of mucosa 10–15 mm wide, lies against the true skin edge, forming the outer surface of the tip of the prepuce. In the dorsal midline, the ‘ridged band’ lies above the level of the adjacent ‘smooth’ mucosa and merges smoothly, on either side, with the frenulum of the prepuce. When magnified, the ridged mucosa has a pebbled or coral-like appearance. Unretracted, the adult ‘ridged band’ usually lies flat against the glans; retracted, the ‘ridged band’ is everted on the shaft of the penis. The remainder of the preputial lining between the ‘ridged band’ and the glans is smooth and lax. There is considerable variation in the degree of ridging: older subjects showed less and younger subjects more marked ridging. Some ridging was seen in all the prepuces examined.


Taylor and colleagues further noted that the ridged band is intensely vascularized, which is typical of components of the nervous system. The tightly pleated concentric bands of the ridged band have been likened to the elastic bands at the top of a sock. These expandable pleats arise from the frenulum and encircle the inner lining of the foreskin. They allow the lips of the foreskin to open and roll back, exposing the glans. The ridged mucosa also gives the foreskin its characteristic taper (Fleiss and Hodges, 2002: 7).


The importance of the ridged band lies in its innervation. When he described it, Taylor, a pathologist working on histology, reported that it showed focal, spiky, or more rounded and flatter ridges interspersed with sulci. Meissner’s corpuscles were more plentiful in some subjects than others but, perhaps significantly, they were only seen in the crests of the ridges, occasionally in small clumps that expanded the tips of corial papillae. End-organs were not seen in sulci between ridges. Special stains for nerve tissue showed the additional end-organs and myelinated nerve fibers in the ridges. In contrast, histological examination of the smooth zone of the mucosa showed no ridging and few Meissner’s corpuscles. Meissner’s corpuscles are mechanoreceptors for detection of light touch. They are distributed throughout the skin, but concentrated in areas that are particularly sensitive, such as the fingertips, palms and soles, lips, tongue, face, and genitals. It has been calculated that circumcision results in the loss of at least 10,000–20,000 specialized erotogenic nerve endings (Winkelmann, 1959, 1956).


Also lost in circumcision is about half the smooth muscle sheath that invests the penis, which is known as the dartos fascia and is temperature sensitive. The frenulum, a highly erogenous V-shaped structure that tethers the underside of the glans to the shaft, is frequently destroyed or damaged during circumcision. Circumcision removes several feet of blood vessels, including the frenular artery. This loss of the rich vascularity interrupts the normal flow to the shaft and glans, damaging the natural blood flow of the penis (Netter, 1997: plates 238, 239).


The mucosal surface of the foreskin produces plasma cells, part of the body’s defense system. They secrete antibodies and antibacterial and antiviral proteins, including lysozyme. The list of structures lost includes lymphatic vessels, apocrine glands (producing pheromones, scent signals), sebaceous glands, and Langerhans cells (another part of the defense system).


4. Loss of Sensory Nerve Endings​


As already described, circumcision removes the part of the penis most richly supplied with sensory nerve endings, the ridged band. In general, the inner mucosal foreskin is more sensitive than the outer foreskin, which differs little from the shaft skin. This loss is borne out by the results shown by Sorrells et al. If we look at the figure showing fine-touch pressure thresholds, we notice that the lowest threshold is found at position 3, which is the dorsal preputial orifice rim, while the next lowest thresholds are found at 13 and 14, parts of the frenulum, and 4 and 5, which are the mucocutaneous junction and ridged band, respectively. In the circumcised penis, the lowest threshold is found at position 19, the ventral surface of the circumcision scar.


5. Loss of Reciprocal Stimulation of Foreskin and Glans​


The mobile sheath of the intact penis allows the foreskin to glide back and forth over the glans. As it does so, it repeatedly folds and unfolds itself. Inevitably, the tactile nerve endings in the glans and, more especially, in the foreskin are strongly stimulated by this action, whether the result of masturbation, foreplay, or penetrative intercourse. During intercourse, the ridged band is alternately stimulated by the glans, when it is turned inwards, and by the vaginal wall, when it is turned outwards. The smooth muscle in the foreskin ensures that it encloses the glans snugly.


6. Loss of the Gliding Mechanism​


Bigelow drew attention to the mechanical function of the foreskin during intercourse (Bigelow, 2002: 17). This function provides more enjoyable intercourse for both partners. During sexual arousal, the vagina secretes lubricant fluid allowing penetration to occur comfortably. Then, during intercourse, the intact penis glides in and out of its own skin sheath with each thrust, reducing friction between the penile skin and the vaginal wall, and allowing the vaginal secretions to remain on its surface, rather than being drawn out as they tend to be by the thrusting of the circumcised penis, which during erection may have no slack skin at all.


Masturbation is similarly affected. An intact man masturbates by manipulating his foreskin back and forth over his glans. In a circumcised man, this is not possible, and often a lubricant is needed to permit comfortable stimulation. Circumcision was originally brought into medical fashion in the nineteenth century because it was thought to prevent or at least discourage masturbation. Masturbation was then considered to be both immoral and dangerous to health, though this has long since been disproved. In fact, circumcision does not prevent masturbation in the least, but it probably makes it less enjoyable, though this is hard to prove.


Conclusion​


In considering the physical effects of circumcision, we have seen how there is a permanent and irreversible change in the appearance of the penis and the exposure of the glans, resulting in its keratinization and altered appearance. From the point of view of sensation and function, the most important effect is caused by the tissue loss itself. The most sensitive part of the penis is removed, and the normal mechanisms of intercourse and masturbation are disturbed. At the same time, we have learned about the function of the male foreskin, a subject that has been neglected by medical scientists in the past. We have not considered complications of the operation, but merely what ensues when everything goes according to plan.

 
Now this explains the greater incidents among Jews of traits of anxiety, neuroticism, persecution complex and sexual perversion.

Now if this is applied to America. And this same procedure is applied to many boys in America. Wonder if this explains clownworld in America too?
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
So 20 years ago, there was this awesome dance party.


"...And a third element, building on the above and adding its own dimension, is the presence of a number of (mostly white) vans owned – as far as can be determined, given the extent to which information on them and the people with them has disappeared from the public record – by an Israeli company (or rather a company owned by an Israeli, to be precise) in New Jersey. Some of these vans were regularly around the World Trade Center itself. But two stand out, and need to be examined in some detail for their significance to be appreciated.


First, Bergen, NJ residents saw five people on a white van filming the attacks and visibly celebrating. They had set up their cameras before the first plane hit. Police arrested them. All were Israelis (now referred to as the “dancing Israelis”). Bomb-sniffing dogs reacted as if they had detected explosives, although officers were unable to find anything. The FBI seized the van for further testing. All five were later released at the instigation of Israeli & American Jewish leaders, some in the US Government. Details are still classified. This incident quickly disappeared from the mainstream media, following a brief mention in the New York Times three days after the attacks, that was not followed up.


A second van was stopped on the approaches to the George Washington Bridge. As CBS’s Dan Rather said in his live report: “Two suspects are in FBI custody after a truckload of explosives were discovered around the George Washington Bridge. That bridge links New York to New Jersey over the Hudson River. Whether the discovery of those explosives had anything to do with other events today is unclear, but the FBI, has two suspects in hand, said the truckload of explosives, enough explosives were in the truck to do great damage to the George Washington Bridge…“ Those suspects –also Israelis — and the incident then seem to have disappeared from the public record and mainstream media “examinations” of 9/11, just like discussions of the first van, the secondary explosions at ground level within WTC-1 and WTC-2, and the precipitous collapse into its own footprint of WTC-7.


The combined impact of these and many other factors is both chilling and compelling. Think of it: Secondary explosions at ground level where there should be no secondary explosions. The catastrophic collapse of the 47-story WTC-7 into its own footprint in seconds, without any significant external trauma, where by rights there should have been no collapse. Vans with targeting maps, explosives or traces thereof, cameras pre-positioned to film the World Trade Center, and especially Israelis with those vans where there should have been no Israelis present with any of those things in those places at that time."


(Excerpt from Alan Sabrowsky;s recent article in the Unz Review below)



Note that Alan Sabrosky is himself Jewish, a patriotic Jewish American, Ph.D, retired Marine officer and former Director of Studies at the United States Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute where he held the position of the Douglas MacArthur Chair of Research.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
Further reading from the Unz, by Laurent Guyenot:


Inside Job or Mossad Job?


Among the growing number of Americans who disbelieve the official version of the 9/11 attacks, two basic theories are in competition: I called them “inside job” and “Mossad job”. The first one is the dominant thesis within the so-called 9/11 Truth movement, and blames the American government, or a faction within the American Deep State. The second one claims that the masterminds were members of a powerful Israeli network deeply infiltrated in all spheres of power within the US, including media, government, military and secret services.

This “Mossad job” thesis has been gaining ground since Alan Sabrosky, a professor at the U.S. Army War College and the U.S. Military Academy, published in July 2012 an article entitled “Demystifying 9/11: Israel and the Tactics of Mistake”, where he voiced his conviction that September 11th was “a classic Mossad-orchestrated operation.”

We can notice from the outset that incriminating Israelis or Arabs are both “outside job” theories (in fact, they are mirror images of each other, which is understandable in light of what Gilad Atzmon explains about Jewish “projected guilt”).[2] Before even looking at the evidence, “outside job” sounds more credible that “inside job”. There is something monstrous in the idea that a government can deceive and terrorize its own citizens by killing thousands of them, just for starting a series of wars that are not even in the nation’s interest. By comparison, a foreign power attacking the U.S. under the false flag of a third power almost seems like fair play. Indeed suspicion of Israel’s role should be natural to anyone aware of the reputation of the Mossad as: “Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act,” in the words of a report of the U.S. Army School for Advanced Military Studies quoted by the Washington Times, September 10th, 2001 — the day before the attacks.

This is an important point, because it raises the question of how and why the 9/11 Truth movement has been led to endorse massively the outrageous “inside job” thesis without even considering the more likely thesis of an attack by a foreign power acting under an Islamic false flag—and what foreign power but Israel would do that?

Of course, the two dissenting theses do not necessarily exclude each other; at least, no one incriminating Israel denies that corrupted elements from the American administration or deep state were involved. The “passionate attachment” between Israel and the U.S. has been going on for decades, and 9/11 is one of its monstruous offsprings.

9/11 was made possible by an alliance between secret worshipers of Israel and corrupted American elements.
The question is: who, of the two, were the masterminds of this incredibly daring and complex operation, and for what “higher purpose”?

The Israeli spy network


The five “dancing Israelis,” the only suspects arrested on the very day of the 9/11 attacks, were just the tip of an iceberg. In September 2001, the federal police were busy dismantling the largest Israeli spy network ever uncovered on American soil. In the summer preceding the attack, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) compiled a report which would be revealed to the public by the Washington Post on November 23rd, 2001, followed by a Carl Cameron’s four-part documentary broadcast on Fox News from December 11th, 2001. On March 14th, 2002, an article in French newspaper Le Monde signed by Sylvain Cypel also referred to the report, shortly before the French magazine Intelligence Online made it fully accessible on the Internet.[5]It said that 140 Israeli spies, aged between 20 and 30, had been arrested since March 2001, while 60 more were arrested after September 11. Generally posing as art students, they visited at least “36 sensitive sites of the Department of Defense.” “A majority of those questioned have stated they served in military intelligence, electronic signal intercept, or explosive ordnance units. Some have been linked to high-ranking officials in the Israeli military. One was the son of a two-star general, one served as the bodyguard to the head of the Israeli Army, one served in a Patriot mission unit.” Another, Peer Segalovitz, officer in the 605 Battalion of the Golan Heights, “acknowledged he could blow up buildings, bridges, cars, and anything else that he needed to.”[6]


Of special interest is the mention that “the Hollywood, Florida, area seems to be a central point for these individuals.”[7] More than 30 out of the 140 fake Israeli students identified before 9/11 lived in that city of 140,000 inhabitants. And this city also happens to be the place where fifteen of the nineteen alleged 9/11 Islamist hijackers had regrouped (nine in Hollywood, six in the vicinity), including four of the five supposed to have hijacked Flight AA11. What was the relationship between the Israeli spies and the Islamist terrorists? We were told by mainstream news that the former were monitoring the latter, but failed to report suspicious activities of these terrorists to American authorities. From such a presentation, Israel comes out clean, since a spy agency cannot be blamed for not sharing information with the country it is spying in. At worst, the Israeli Intelligence can be accused of “letting it happen”—a guarantee of impunity. In reality, the Israeli agents were certainly not just monitoring the future “hijackers,” but financing and manipulating them, before disposing of them. We know that Israeli Hanan Serfaty, who rented two flats near Mohamed Atta, had handled at least $100,000 in three months. And we also learned from the New York Times on February 19, 2009, that Ali al-Jarrah, cousin of the alleged hijacker of Flight UA93 Ziad al-Jarrah, had spent twenty-five years spying for the Mossad as an undercover agent infiltrating the Palestinian resistance and Hezbollah.

Machiavellian meta-Zionists


If we move up to the very highest level of the conspiracy, we find ourselves in Tel Aviv. The preparation for 9/11 coincided with the coming to power of Benjamin Netanyahu in 1996, followed by Ehud Barak in July 1999, and Ariel Sharon in March 2001, who brought back Netanyahu as minister of Foreign Affairs in 2002 (with Netanyahu again becoming prime minister in 2009). It must be noted that both Netanyahu and Ehud Barak were temporarily out of the Israeli government in September 2001, just like Ben-Gurion at the time of Kennedy’s assassination (read my article on JFK). A few months before 9/11, Barak, a former head of Israeli military intelligence, was “recruited” as a consultant to a Mossad front company, SCP Partner, specializing in security and located less than seven miles from Urban Moving Systems.[8] One hour after the explosion of the North Tower, Barak was on BBC World to point the finger at bin Laden (the first to do so), and concluded: “It’s a time to launch an operational, complete war against terror.”


The founding fathers of neoconservatism (Norman Podhoretz, Irving Kristol, Donald Kagan, Paul Wolfowitz, Adam Shulsky) were self-proclaimed disciples of Leo Strauss, a German Jewish immigrant teaching at the University of Chicago. Strauss can be characterized as a meta-Zionist in the sense that, while an ardent supporter of the State of Israel, he rejected the idea that Israel as a nation should be contained within borders; Israel must retain her specificity, which is to be everywhere, he said in essence in his 1962 lecture “Why We Remain Jews.” Strauss would also approve of being called a Machiavellian, for in his Thoughts on Machiavelli, he praised the “the intrepidity of his thought, the grandeur of his vision, and the graceful subtlety of his speech” (p. 13). Machiavelli’s model of a prince was Cesar Borgia, the tyrant who after having appointed the cruel Ramiro d’Orco to subdue the province of Romania, had him executed with utter cruelty, thus reaping the people’s gratitude after having diverted their hatred onto another. Machiavelli, writes Strauss, “is a patriot of a particular kind: He is more concerned with the salvation of his fatherland than with the salvation of his soul” (p. 10). And that happens to be exactly what Jewishness is all about, according to Jewish thinkers such as Harry Waton: “The Jews that have a deeper understanding of Judaism know that the only immortality there is for the Jew is the immortality in the Jewish people” (read more here). As a matter of fact, in the Jewish World Review of June 7, 1999, Michael Ledeen, a neocon and founding member of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), assumed that Machiavelli must have been a “secret Jew,” since “if you listen to his political philosophy you will hear Jewish music.”

The Hanukkah miracle to start WWIV


After eight months in the presidency, Bush was confronted with the “catastrophic event,” the “new Pearl Harbor” that PNAC had wished for a year earlier. 9/11 was a real “Hanukkah miracle” for Israel, commented Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy and Israeli National Security Council chairman Uzi Dayan. Netanyahu rejoiced: “It’s very good […] it will generate immediate sympathy […]
 

budoslavic

Eagle
Orthodox
Gold Member


12be7e1a95b2b009.jpg
 

Pointy Elbows

Woodpecker
Orthodox
I've read and re-read these Unz articles several times over recent years. I always try to control for tin-foil tendencies but when you read what they say in their own forums/publications, when you read docs from credible, even ethnic Jewish people, who flat out call this a mossad plot, then the weight of this is heavy. It is sure hard to discount.

I am dismayed at the absolute lack of normie-awareness of any of this, even though so much is open source info now.

America is an open air sandbox for Israeli intelligence.
 
Further reading from the Unz, by Laurent Guyenot:


Inside Job or Mossad Job?


Among the growing number of Americans who disbelieve the official version of the 9/11 attacks, two basic theories are in competition: I called them “inside job” and “Mossad job”. The first one is the dominant thesis within the so-called 9/11 Truth movement, and blames the American government, or a faction within the American Deep State. The second one claims that the masterminds were members of a powerful Israeli network deeply infiltrated in all spheres of power within the US, including media, government, military and secret services.

This “Mossad job” thesis has been gaining ground since Alan Sabrosky, a professor at the U.S. Army War College and the U.S. Military Academy, published in July 2012 an article entitled “Demystifying 9/11: Israel and the Tactics of Mistake”, where he voiced his conviction that September 11th was “a classic Mossad-orchestrated operation.”

We can notice from the outset that incriminating Israelis or Arabs are both “outside job” theories (in fact, they are mirror images of each other, which is understandable in light of what Gilad Atzmon explains about Jewish “projected guilt”).[2] Before even looking at the evidence, “outside job” sounds more credible that “inside job”. There is something monstrous in the idea that a government can deceive and terrorize its own citizens by killing thousands of them, just for starting a series of wars that are not even in the nation’s interest. By comparison, a foreign power attacking the U.S. under the false flag of a third power almost seems like fair play. Indeed suspicion of Israel’s role should be natural to anyone aware of the reputation of the Mossad as: “Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act,” in the words of a report of the U.S. Army School for Advanced Military Studies quoted by the Washington Times, September 10th, 2001 — the day before the attacks.

This is an important point, because it raises the question of how and why the 9/11 Truth movement has been led to endorse massively the outrageous “inside job” thesis without even considering the more likely thesis of an attack by a foreign power acting under an Islamic false flag—and what foreign power but Israel would do that?

Of course, the two dissenting theses do not necessarily exclude each other; at least, no one incriminating Israel denies that corrupted elements from the American administration or deep state were involved. The “passionate attachment” between Israel and the U.S. has been going on for decades, and 9/11 is one of its monstruous offsprings.

9/11 was made possible by an alliance between secret worshipers of Israel and corrupted American elements. The question is: who, of the two, were the masterminds of this incredibly daring and complex operation, and for what “higher purpose”?

The Israeli spy network


The five “dancing Israelis,” the only suspects arrested on the very day of the 9/11 attacks, were just the tip of an iceberg. In September 2001, the federal police were busy dismantling the largest Israeli spy network ever uncovered on American soil. In the summer preceding the attack, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) compiled a report which would be revealed to the public by the Washington Post on November 23rd, 2001, followed by a Carl Cameron’s four-part documentary broadcast on Fox News from December 11th, 2001. On March 14th, 2002, an article in French newspaper Le Monde signed by Sylvain Cypel also referred to the report, shortly before the French magazine Intelligence Online made it fully accessible on the Internet.[5]It said that 140 Israeli spies, aged between 20 and 30, had been arrested since March 2001, while 60 more were arrested after September 11. Generally posing as art students, they visited at least “36 sensitive sites of the Department of Defense.” “A majority of those questioned have stated they served in military intelligence, electronic signal intercept, or explosive ordnance units. Some have been linked to high-ranking officials in the Israeli military. One was the son of a two-star general, one served as the bodyguard to the head of the Israeli Army, one served in a Patriot mission unit.” Another, Peer Segalovitz, officer in the 605 Battalion of the Golan Heights, “acknowledged he could blow up buildings, bridges, cars, and anything else that he needed to.”[6]


Of special interest is the mention that “the Hollywood, Florida, area seems to be a central point for these individuals.”[7] More than 30 out of the 140 fake Israeli students identified before 9/11 lived in that city of 140,000 inhabitants. And this city also happens to be the place where fifteen of the nineteen alleged 9/11 Islamist hijackers had regrouped (nine in Hollywood, six in the vicinity), including four of the five supposed to have hijacked Flight AA11. What was the relationship between the Israeli spies and the Islamist terrorists? We were told by mainstream news that the former were monitoring the latter, but failed to report suspicious activities of these terrorists to American authorities. From such a presentation, Israel comes out clean, since a spy agency cannot be blamed for not sharing information with the country it is spying in. At worst, the Israeli Intelligence can be accused of “letting it happen”—a guarantee of impunity. In reality, the Israeli agents were certainly not just monitoring the future “hijackers,” but financing and manipulating them, before disposing of them. We know that Israeli Hanan Serfaty, who rented two flats near Mohamed Atta, had handled at least $100,000 in three months. And we also learned from the New York Times on February 19, 2009, that Ali al-Jarrah, cousin of the alleged hijacker of Flight UA93 Ziad al-Jarrah, had spent twenty-five years spying for the Mossad as an undercover agent infiltrating the Palestinian resistance and Hezbollah.

Machiavellian meta-Zionists


If we move up to the very highest level of the conspiracy, we find ourselves in Tel Aviv. The preparation for 9/11 coincided with the coming to power of Benjamin Netanyahu in 1996, followed by Ehud Barak in July 1999, and Ariel Sharon in March 2001, who brought back Netanyahu as minister of Foreign Affairs in 2002 (with Netanyahu again becoming prime minister in 2009). It must be noted that both Netanyahu and Ehud Barak were temporarily out of the Israeli government in September 2001, just like Ben-Gurion at the time of Kennedy’s assassination (read my article on JFK). A few months before 9/11, Barak, a former head of Israeli military intelligence, was “recruited” as a consultant to a Mossad front company, SCP Partner, specializing in security and located less than seven miles from Urban Moving Systems.[8] One hour after the explosion of the North Tower, Barak was on BBC World to point the finger at bin Laden (the first to do so), and concluded: “It’s a time to launch an operational, complete war against terror.”


The founding fathers of neoconservatism (Norman Podhoretz, Irving Kristol, Donald Kagan, Paul Wolfowitz, Adam Shulsky) were self-proclaimed disciples of Leo Strauss, a German Jewish immigrant teaching at the University of Chicago. Strauss can be characterized as a meta-Zionist in the sense that, while an ardent supporter of the State of Israel, he rejected the idea that Israel as a nation should be contained within borders; Israel must retain her specificity, which is to be everywhere, he said in essence in his 1962 lecture “Why We Remain Jews.” Strauss would also approve of being called a Machiavellian, for in his Thoughts on Machiavelli, he praised the “the intrepidity of his thought, the grandeur of his vision, and the graceful subtlety of his speech” (p. 13). Machiavelli’s model of a prince was Cesar Borgia, the tyrant who after having appointed the cruel Ramiro d’Orco to subdue the province of Romania, had him executed with utter cruelty, thus reaping the people’s gratitude after having diverted their hatred onto another. Machiavelli, writes Strauss, “is a patriot of a particular kind: He is more concerned with the salvation of his fatherland than with the salvation of his soul” (p. 10). And that happens to be exactly what Jewishness is all about, according to Jewish thinkers such as Harry Waton: “The Jews that have a deeper understanding of Judaism know that the only immortality there is for the Jew is the immortality in the Jewish people” (read more here). As a matter of fact, in the Jewish World Review of June 7, 1999, Michael Ledeen, a neocon and founding member of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), assumed that Machiavelli must have been a “secret Jew,” since “if you listen to his political philosophy you will hear Jewish music.”

The Hanukkah miracle to start WWIV


After eight months in the presidency, Bush was confronted with the “catastrophic event,” the “new Pearl Harbor” that PNAC had wished for a year earlier. 9/11 was a real “Hanukkah miracle” for Israel, commented Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy and Israeli National Security Council chairman Uzi Dayan. Netanyahu rejoiced: “It’s very good […] it will generate immediate sympathy […]
Schopenhauer said, that the jews are great masters in lying (große Meister im Lügen). Pestalozzi, who was a super nice guy, asked if jews ever stopped hating and stealing from non-jews. Fichte said, that jews are a powerful, hostile state in European countries and for Voltaire, jews were the worst thing ever walking on earth. I could go on. Isn't it interesting, that people who are considered liberal and enlightened sound like Martin Luther, who was of a staunch medieval mindset, when talking about the jews? Kant said, that the euthanasia of judaism is the moral religion.
 

Max Roscoe

Pelican
Orthodox Inquirer
Here's an interesting interview with Joe Sobran, editor for the National Review, who was fired by Conservative giant William Buckley for making "anti-Semetic statements".


What's fascinating is that in this CSPAN interview, which is very fair and unbiased, is how free people were to question Jews then. Jews were really seen as the inventors or at least the masters of terrorism. When the host takes calls, they are 100% in favor of Mr. Sobran, with even an anti-Zionist Jewish caller supporting him!

They have really done a number on the Republican Party. I never cared for the GOP (though in hindsight this 1986 version looks pretty good), but today the GOP is at least as Judaized as the Democrats are.

For those who don't wish to watch the full video, here are a couple of choice quotes from an article Sobran penned about his firing:


Bill wrote a weird public disavowal of my columns on Israel, saying in effect that I wasn't anti-Semitic, but deserved to be called anti-Semitic. What made it so bad was that I knew he didn't even believe what he was saying. It was a failure of nerve.

I couldn't understand what the fuss was about. I'd merely applied conservative principles -- the things National Review stood for -- to Israel: it was a socialist country with no conception of limited, constitutional government, which discriminated against Christians, while betraying its benefactor, the United States, and turning the Muslim world against us. It seemed pretty clear-cut to me, and none of the reasons conservatives gave for supporting Israel made much sense.

Nobody really disagreed with me. That, in fact, was the problem.

With Bill's statement, National Review became, by default, a neoconservative magazine.

The most telling issue, in a way, was the Pollard case. Conceived in preoccupation with the Hiss-Chambers case, the magazine couldn't bring itself to condemn Israel for Jonathan Pollard's espionage.

This summer he wrote an especially contemptible essay on Muslims, arguing crudely that terrorism is encouraged by the Koran itself. I knew where he got that stuff. It was right out of the Zionist agitprop manual. I was reading the same sort of thing in the New York Post, The New Republic, and suchlike rags. The clear purpose of that column was to suck up to his buddies. Nothing else. Bill doesn't even hate Muslims enough to wish to offend them. He was doing it only to curry favor with the neocon crowd.

Bill is always on stage: always acting, posing, making empty gestures. He isn't concerned about their truth or coherence. That's why he can talk facilely about prayer while he's writing for Playboy and Penthouse.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
^
Francesco Maurizio Cossiga, OMRI , 26 July 1928 – 17 August 2010[1][2] was an Italian politician. A member of the Christian Democratic Party of Italy, he was the prime minister of Italy from 1979 to 1980 and the eighth president of Italy from 1985 to 1992.[3]

Cossiga is widely considered one of the most prominent and influential politicians of the First Republic. Cossiga also served as minister on several occasions, most notably as Minister of the Interior. In that position he re-structured the Italian police, civil protection and secret services. Due to his repressive approach to public protests, he has been described as a strongman and labeled "Iron Minister".[4] He was in office at the time of the kidnapping and murder of Aldo Moro by the Red Brigades, and resigned as Minister of the Interior when Moro was found dead in 1978.[5] Cossiga was Prime Minister during the Bologna station bombing in 1980.

He knew about false flag bombings, which happened under his watch, under the Gladio deep state regime. Italy was hit by a series of bombings culminating in the Bologna train station bombing which killed over 80 people.
 
Top