Surreptitious Ways of Striking at Jews -- An Old Story

http://ziontruth.blogspot.com/

Many roads go to Rome and to Jerusalem for that matter.

One way to get to Jerusalem is to go through "non-governmental organizations" --NGOs-- ostensibly popular, independent grass roots orgs. Maybe like the Free Gaza Movement. But Free Gaza is actually astroturf, fake grass roots. It was created by Fenton Communications with Qatari money. Qatar is one of those super-rich per capita Arab emirates on the Persian Gulf. Funny thing is though that the so-called "Left" which poses as anti-capitalist, doesn't mind super-rich capitalists as long as they're Arabs. And if super-rich Arabs put up money for their pet anti-Israel projects [which both rich Arabs and Judeophobic Westerners are fond of], then that's OK.

Don't forget that "Free Gaza" [they don't want to free the folks of Gaza from Hamas to be sure] teamed up with the present authoritarian regime of Erdogan. They don't mind Erdogan's war against the Kurdish insurgents in southeastern Turkey [involving incursions into northern Iraq], nor his continued denial of Ottoman Turkey's genocide of Armenians, nor Turkey's occupation of northern Cyprus which led to ethnic cleansing of Greeks from the occupation zone [later paralleled by ethnic cleansing of ethnic Turks from the southern part of the island, the still independent Republic of Cyprus]. We may point out here parenthetically that some occupations are viewed more favorably than others. Just as "Free Gaza" couldn't care less about
northern Cyprus being occupied, few in the West cared that Germany, Austria and Japan were occupied after WW 2 --and American troops are still in Germany and Japan, while Russia annexed huge areas of Japan and part of Germany and part of Finland. On the other hand, Israel is falsely accused of "occupying" parts of the ancient Jewish homeland, assigned by the League of Nations in 1922 to the Jewish National Home. But why go on with Western hypocrisy?

A semi-official branch of the US Govt, the Woodrow Wilson Center in DC, just last week gave an award to Turkey's foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu, who recently called the Israeli boarding and seizure of the blockade-running Turkish ship, the Mavi Marmara, "Our 9/11." That hyperbole was worthy of an Arab, whom Turks often look down on. It is significant that the Wilson Center is headed by Lee Hamilton, a stuffed shirt white guy who is one of Obama's mentors [see previous post at bottom]. Hamilton praised Davutoglu. He "personifies the attributes we seek to honor at the Woodrow Wilson Center," Hamilton claimed. Just incidentally, Hamilton thereby contradicted the silly words of his spokeswoman who claimed that the award was not an "endorsement" of the Turkish FM. Now we have to wonder if the Wilson Center award to the Turkish FM was the White House's way of encouraging Turkey's anti-Israel policy, including the thugs on the Mavi Marmara ship. This is because, as said, Hamilton is one of Obama's mentors and John Brennan, Obama's so-called "counterterrorism czar" [pro-terrorism czar?], has a soft spot in his heart for both Hamas and Hizbullah.

This use of surreptitious methods, of subterfuges, against Jews is an unfortunate part of Jewish history. It was common in the Russian tsarist empire more than 100 years ago. These methods
went so far as organizing pogrom mobs to attack Jews, including a nasty group of thugs called the Tshernotentsy, the Black Hundreds. Here is the historian Solomon Grayzel:

For the six million Jews in the Russian empire, the decade and a half before World War I was a period of oppression and heroism. Russia was in the midst of its long overdue struggle for general emancipation . . . the Jews naturally aligned themselves with the forces of liberalism. The tottering czarist system and its reactionary supporters resorted to the old game of identifying the revolutionaries with the Jews and attempting to turn attention away from the existing abuses by stirring up anti-Jewish feeling. A wave of pogroms swept over Russia. The massacre in Kishineff [now Chisinau in Moldova] at Easter 1903 saw dozens killed, hundreds wounded, and thousands of homes sacked. The cry of horror which went up all over the civilized world and among the liberal elements in Russia itself did not stop the government from instigating similar pogroms in the city of Homel and elsewhere. The only police interference was with the efforts of the Jews to defend themselves. [Solomon Grayzel, A History of the Jews (Philadelphia: JPS 1959), pp 708-709]

Does that last sentence sound familiar? The Russian police interfered "with the efforts of the Jews to defend themselves." How about the policy of the EU, UK, UN, OIC [Organization of the Islamic Conference], Turkey and others to prevent Israel from defending the Jews of Sderot and the rest of the south of Israel? How about all that sympathy for the trials and travails of a territory ruled by Nazi-like Muslim terrorists, the Hamas? The Hamas Charter calls for murdering all the Jews at Judgment Day. The noble Western states want the Hamas to have all the concrete and steel that it needs to build bigger and better underground bunkers so the Hamas leaders will have somewhere to hide the next time that they provoke Israel with hundreds of missiles.

Now are there any other parallels between then and now? Yes, Virginia, there are other parallels. Then there was the Mendel Beilis case. Beilis was a Jew accused in Kiev of murdering a non-Jewish boy [a prefiguration of Muhammad al-Durah]. The case became a blood libel with the Tsarist govt pressing for conviction of Beilis, hoping to arouse a pogrom atmosphere [see Grayzel, pp 709-710]. Fortunately, Beilis was defended by some of the best, most respected Russian attorneys. He was acquitted in a jury trial by the jury. The real murderer's of the boy who had disappeared were found.

What today is comparable to the Beilis case? First, the murdered boy has a parallel in young Muhammad al-Durah. But whereas the boy in Kiev had in fact been murdered by known criminals, al-Durah was not killed at the time and place alleged by France2's Charles Enderlin at the end of September 2000, in a notorious, very short film clip released by France2 free of charge to TV broadcasters throughout the world at that time. As we can see in the parts of the film taken by the same cameraman on that same day of al-Durah but not released to TV, little al-Durah was not killed and his death does not appear in the very short film clip meant to indict and convict Israel in a new blood libel, updated for the new century. A French court in Paris ordered Enderlin to produce the full, uncut film in court. He did not bring the full film but what he did bring was enough to overrule his accusation of libel against a media critic who had argued that the al-Durah affair was a hoax [an argument partly based on the reports of senior French journalists who had seen the full film or most of what was not shown on TV back in 2000]. Hence, today we don't know whether al-Durah is dead or alive , although in the parts of the film shown in court little Muhammad is shown holding a red cloth that might seem to be blood if you see it only for a few seconds.

Any other parallels? At least one, a host of false accusations are made against Israel. Some focus on alleged Israeli crimes against the Turkish jihadist thugs on the Mavi Marmara [one of them being an American citizen whose parents brought him to Turkey when he was 2 years old and never visited America afterwards] who are described as "peace activists" by the trained minions of Fenton Communications. The active Judeophobes in the United States show much more "sympathy" for that Turk of American birth than for the three thousand Americans murdered by jihadist fanatics not much different from the goons on the Mavi Marmara.

Then too we have the Goldstone "Fact Finding Mission" report prepared by the staff of the UN"human rights council" which is subject to the OIC, the most powerful bloc in the UN. The "goldstone report" was meant to be a trial and conviction in the court of public opinion worldwide of Israel and the Jews. Something like the Beilis trial. Another set of false charges as in the Beilis case.

We note that historian Solomon Grayzel was somewhat naive. He didn't know the "liberals" of today. Most of the most outspoken "liberals" around today are fascist rabble rousers and demagogures.