    A Yiddishe Medina

    By Israel Shamir in the year 2001

    I

    America prepares for a long war. It is called ‘the war on terrorism’,
    but the name has no meaning but ‘a war on the enemy’. Noam Chomsky gave
    a witty definition, "terrorism is what they do to us". However, in the
    course of this war, thousands of our brothers by Adam and Eve will be
    strafed, napalmed and nuked. Boys and girls, unborn babes and old men
    will be brought to the altar of Vengeance and ritually slaughtered.

    President Bush called his enterprise, a ‘crusade’. This title invokes in
    our memory the dour knights of Aquitaine and the pious Frankish warriors
    who took the Cross, and with the name of Our Lady on their lips,
    ventured into a long and hard pilgrimage. Reality was worse. The Crusade
    was a Western Jihad and it caused a lot of bloodshed. The Crusaders were
    wild and unruly, they sacked the most beautiful Christian city on earth,
    Constantinople, and they drenched in blood the holy ground of Jerusalem.
    A Crusader chronicler, Radulf of Caen, wrote of his comrades-at-arms: in
    the Syrian city of Maarra, ‘they impaled babies on spits, grilled and
    devoured them’. They were rough folk, and still I would like to save the
    name of these killers and cannibals from being besmirched by association
    with Bush’s Crusade. They sought glory, not revenge, this most
    un-Christian, even anti-Christian feeling.

    The very essence of the Gospel is the rejection of revenge. That was the
    great difference between the Church and the Synagogue, the two sisters
    born two thousand years ago. This built-in difference is the inherent
    feature of the schism between the two faiths: while Christians are
    called to pray for their enemies, Jews are supposed to dream of
    vengeance.

    II

    The Old Biblical Judaism, Mother-faith of Jews and Christians, contained
    two different interpretations of ‘Messiah’. Both can be found in the Old
    Testament. In the schism between Christians and Jews, each new faith
    picked up and made predominant one of the interpretations. For
    Christians, Christ came to save, while for Jews, the Messiah comes to
    take revenge. This is explicated by the brilliant Israeli scholar, Prof.
    Israel Jacob Yuval of the Hebrew University in his new book, Two Nations
    In Your Womb[1]. ‘Vengeful salvation’, as Yuval called it, was derived
    by the Ashkenazi Jews from the old Pharisee sources and became the
    prevailing doctrine of the Synagogue.

    When Dr Israel Yuval published his perspicacious book on theology of
    vengeance in Judaism, it was accepted with great enthusiasm by his
    Israeli colleagues, but the American Jewish scholars hated it. Dr Ezra
    Fleischer wrote a vehement critique, concluding it with the words: ‘it
    would be better if such a book had not been published, but since it is
    published, it should be sentenced to oblivion’. [It was published in
    English translation only now, in June 2006].

    Prof. Yuval quotes many ancient Jewish texts to support this point. "In
    the End of the days (when the Messiah comes) God will destroy, kill and
    exterminate all the nations but Israelites", according to the Sefer
    Nitzahon Yashan, written by a German Jew in Thirteenth Century. A
    liturgical poet Klonimus b. Judah had a vision of "God’s hands full of
    Goyim’s corpses".

    Even more dreadful dreams of blood and destruction precede the first
    attacks on Jews in the end of Eleventh Century. A hundred years before
    the Crusaders’ onslaught on Jews, R. Simon b. Yitzhak calls on God ‘to
    take His sword and slaughter the Goyim". In order to hasten their
    destruction, the Jewish sages of Europe adopted new horrible curses
    against Christians and Christ, and introduced them into liturgy of
    Passover and Yom Kippur and even into daily prayer, in addition to the
    curses embedded there in the Second Century.

    The Messiah of Vengeance has actually a different name in Christian
    theology. He is called the Antichrist. Christian theologians have tried
    to delve in the qualities of this apocalyptic figure. St John of
    Damascus prophesied that the Antichrist will come to Jews and for Jews,
    against Christ and Christians. (John the Damascene was a friend of Islam
    and he interpreted the Muslim dogma of eternal Koran as a form of the
    Christian teaching of Logos). The Church Fathers considered the Rise of
    the Antichrist as the rise and temporary triumph of Judaism. In the
    Tenth Century, St Andrew the Byzantine prophesied that the kingdom of
    Israel will be restored and it will be the launching-pad of the
    Antichrist. Thus, Jewish and Christian theologians agree that their
    Messiahs are as opposed to each other as thesis and anti-thesis, or as
    Christ and Antichrist.

    This proximity of Israel to the Apocalypse is felt by millions of devout
    Christians in the United States. They have been taught that the rise of
    the Antichrist is the stage before the Second Coming. But, being misled
    by their pastors, they draw a paradoxical conclusion and decide to side
    with the Antichrist. They forget the words, ‘the Son of Man will go as
    it has been decreed, but woe to that man’ who sides with the Antichrist.

    Jews are not an Antichrist. But the idea of Vengeful Messiah is a very
    dangerous one, and it should be confronted and argued against. It could
    be done by the tools of the Old, or the New Testament, or with general
    humanist concepts. Otherwise, this idea will poison our discourse.

    III

    It would be mistake to attribute the vengefulness of the US to American
    Jewry. America is special for its Jews and Gentiles are discursively
    united ‘Judeo-Christians’, or more precisely, ‘Judeo-Americans’, for
    their mores have precious little of the spirit of Christ. As Karl Marx
    put it, "the practical domination of Jewish spirit over the Christian
    world has achieved in North America its unambiguous, complete
    _expression".

    Many American public figures, Jews and non-Jews alike, call for revenge:

      There is only one way to begin to deal with people like this, and that
      is you have to kill some of them even if they are not immediately
      directly involved in this thing[2],

    said the former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger, who heads the
    Jewish organisation for claims to Germany (at $300,000 per annum).

      The response to this unimaginable 21st-century Pearl Harbor should be as
      simple as it is swift - kill the bastards. A gunshot between the eyes,
      blow them to smithereens, poison them if you have to. As for cities or
      countries that host these worms, bomb them into basketball courts,

    said Steve Donleavy in the New York Post[3]. In the Washington Post,
    Rich Lowry proposed,

      If we flatten part of Damascus or Tehran or whatever it takes, that is
      part of the solution[4]

    The best quotable is Ann Coulter’s, the preferred writer of the World
    Jewish Review:

      This is no time to be precious about locating the exact individuals
      directly involved in this particular terrorist attack.... We should
      invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to
      Christianity (!?). We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing
      only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we
      killed civilians. That's war. And this is war’.

    After writing these words, she was rightly sacked by her newspaper and
    taken aboard the neo-conservative Jewish magazine Commentary.

    This vengeful spirit of the American press is an aberration in the
    Western discourse. If you sift the literature of the Christian and
    Muslim lands, you would discover that revenge appears rarely as the main
    subject of an important book. Nikolai Gogol wrote a Gothic short story
    called The Terrible Revenge, Prosper Mérimée wrote a novelette Colomba
    on Corsican vendetta. C’est tout. Brits always considered revenge a very
    un-English trend, certainly not cricket. ‘Vengeful’ is a negative word
    in every Christian and Muslim culture. The Jewish culture, au contraire,
    is saturated with the idea of vengeance, as it draws straight from the
    Old Testament, without the redeeming filter of the New Testament or the
    Koran.

    We Jews know it better than anybody. A brilliant American Jewish
    journalist, John Sack noted that in his Eye for an Eye, a chilling book
    about horrible revenge perpetrated by Jews on the German civilians after
    WWII. This book tells of tortures, ‘extra-judicial killings’, mass
    poisoning and other horrors. You are not likely to get this book, as the
    Jewish establishment succeeded to suppress it and keep it out of
    bookshops.

    Not surprisingly, Israel promoted vengeance into its daily policy. Its
    attacks on Palestinians were called peulot tagmul, the actions of
    vengeance. One of these actions was perpetrated by (later Prime
    Minister) General Ariel Sharon in 14 October 1953, when he and his
    soldiers murdered some sixty peasants, women and children, in the
    village of Qibya. The invasion of Lebanon in 1982, with its 20,000
    murdered Lebanese and Palestinians, Christians and Muslims, was an act
    of revenge for the attempted assassination of the Israeli ambassador in
    London. During the last Intifada, every act of Israeli terror was called
    ‘retribution’ or ‘retaliation’ by Israelis and by the American
    Jewish-owned media.

    This Jewish infatuation with vengeance survived the hazardous crossing
    of the Atlantic. The American Jews created Hollywood, and Hollywood made
    vengeance its main subject. In a recent American re-make of The Three
    Musketeers, d’Artagnan is moved by the spirit of vengeance, though this
    motif is hardly present in the book or in French movie. Actually, it is
    the bad guy, Mordred, son of Lady Winter, who nurses dreams of revenge.
    But for the new American movie, produced by a Jewish American, vengeance
    is a legitimate feeling. In a way, American cinema was an _expression of
    the Jewish collective subconscious, and it was the main factor in the
    creation of the American psyche. From Hollywood, vengefulness flew all
    over the earth, and certainly helped to create the world we inhabit.

    In other words, there was no need for a Jewish conspiracy. A grandson of
    Trier Rabbi, who grew up in the Church, Karl Marx noticed in the 1840s
    (!) that America (with or even without a single ethnic Jew) had become a
    state with a "Jewish" spirit, and had embraced the "Jewish" ideology of
    greed and alienation. A Marx’s disciple, Werner Sombart, came to a
    similar conclusion about America’s Jewish spirit, though in his opinion,
    America grew with Jews and was formed by Jews from its very first steps.
    The rather immature America could not withstand the impact of the Jewish
    mentality, and she became a Jewish State, the big sister of Israel.

    This explains the successes of American Jews: it is just natural that in
    the ‘Jewish’ state, real Jews are more successful. This sudden rise to
    glory and riches should not be a cause for vertigo and self adulation -
    other way around. In line with the reasoning of the great American
    philosopher, Immanuel Wallerstein, I say: material success in our days
    is a sign of moral failure. ‘Success’ and riches are not a sign of God’s
    benevolence. Anyway, not of the God who blessed the poor. A man who
    succeeds in the robbers’ gang fails in the eyes of God. Our world with
    its starving millions and over-prosperous minority is immoral and
    anti-Christian, as anti-Christian as the Judeo-American ‘crusade’.

    This explanation allows us to answer the question we posted previously:
    does America support Israel because of the Jewish lobby or because of
    the ‘true interest of American corporations’? The putative answer is:
    the Jewish lobby is a superfluous body supportive of the Israeli
    right-wing, while America as a whole is a grander ‘Jewish’ state with
    interests outside the Middle East as well.

    This presumption explains away a lot of queries. It explains the
    incredible 99% vote in support of Israel. It explains the Holocaust
    museums, Holocaust studies and Holocaust films. It explains the
    centrality of Jews in American life, as now America views world events
    from a traditional Jewish position, ‘is it good for Jews?’

    It explains the US walkout at Durban. G.W Bush did not mind a quarrel
    with Europe and Japan and reneged on the Kyoto treaty. He did not give a
    damn about annoying Russia and China in his unilateral decision to drop
    the Strategic Arms Treaty. But here he heard His Master’s Voice. The
    haughty rejection of Africa and Asia, the insulting dismissal of the
    Afro-American community, the rejection of the great struggle against
    racism were additional proofs that the US has become a sister state to
    Israel.

    Recently, President Vladimir Putin tried to justify his onslaught on the
    Chechens in an interview with Newsweek[5]. He said the Chechen leaders
    ‘publicly called for the extermination of Jews’, relegating critics of
    his war to the ranks of anti-Semites. Now, Chechnya has no Jews, and
    Chechen leaders’ opinion on Jews is irrelevant, if anti-Semitism is to
    preserve its original meaning of ‘anti-Jewish prejudice or racism’. In
    this form it does not exist anymore, as we argued elsewhere[6], but the
    word now has a new meaning. It has become the equivalent of
    ‘anti-Americanism’ of McCarthy’s days, or of ‘anti-Soviet’ in Brezhnev’s
    Soviet Union.

    Americans tense and shriek whenever they feel their loyalty to Jews
    questioned. Whoever rejects the new American paradigm, in America or
    elsewhere, is an anti-Semite by definition. That is why good persons of
    Jewish origin, - whether Noam Chomsky or Woody Allen, St Paul or Karl
    Marx - are called ‘anti-Semites’. They are usually rejected by the
    Jewish community, but their names are used to defend the structure they
    attacked.

    An offence to the Jewish community is not considered a form of racism,
    as ordinary racism is tolerated with great ease, especially if it is
    directed towards Arabs (new enemies of Jews) or Blacks (old enemies of
    Jews). It is treated as a ‘lese majesté’; in the years of Jewish
    ascendancy in the Soviet Union (1917 – 1937), people were shot for an
    anti-Jewish remark. Manfred Stricker of Strasbourg campaigned to name
    the local university after Dr Schweitzer, while the Jewish community
    preferred the name of a Jewish scholar with a loose connection to the
    city. As the result, Manfred Stricker was sentenced to six months’ jail.
    Alexander Chancellor wrote in the Guardian (under a promising title It
    is not Black and White) of the assassinated Dutch right-winger: yes, he
    was an enemy of Islam, but he was good to Jews, and therefore, not bad a
    guy.

    Speaking to students in Harvard, Emory and other Ivy League
    universities, I noticed that they do not know the name ‘Arnold Toynbee’.
    The greatest British philosopher of history of the Twentieth Century
    made an error: he spoke of the tragedy of the Palestinians. He also
    cited African slavery as a tragedy on a par with the Jewish holocaust.
    As a result, he was erased and disappeared from American consciousness.
    It is but impossible to find non-fiction by G. K. Chesterton in American
    or English bookshops. This brilliant essayist is relegated to almost
    non-existent ‘Christian sections’ of bookshops, and his rare reprints
    are sandwiched between Bad Popes and Rabbi Jesus.

    This influence in public discourse explains the obedience of American
    (and European) intellectuals. In the Judeo-American state, the Jews form
    its ‘Church’, its ideological establishment. For an intellectual, it is
    better to be called a paedophile than an anti-Semite.

    IV

    Though the US has become a Judeo-Christian state, the question of Who
    Rules Whom in the ménage a trois of Jews, Israel and the US is not a
    simple one. The three dramatis personae form a triangle as mysterious as
    that of Bermuda and certainly no less perilous. Half a year ago, some
    dubious sources reported Sharon saying at a cabinet meeting: ‘Do not
    worry about the US, it is under our control’. The words were denied, but
    as the uprising in Palestine swiftly glides into a Joshua-style
    extermination campaign, while the US ‘supports the war against
    terrorism’, the doubts grow.

    The very existence of a corporate entity known as "the Jewish People"
    (or, Jewry, or The Jews) is frequently denied. Some two hundred years
    ago Jewry existed as unambiguously as France or the Church. Our
    ancestors were members of this extra-territorial state, an authoritarian
    semi-criminal order, run by rich men and Rabbis. Its leadership, called
    Kahal (Hebrew for Community) made the important decisions, and ordinary
    Jews followed their directions. The leadership could dispose with life
    and property of Jews, just like any feudal ruler. There was no freedom
    of opinion within the walls of the ghetto. A rebellious Jew could be
    punished by death. Came Emancipation, and the power of the Kahal was
    broken from inside and outside. The Jews were set free and became
    citizens of their respective countries.

    Nowadays, a new generation of Jews has emerged that does not know of
    Joseph. Years of apologetic brainwashing made them forget why our
    grandfathers wanted to break the iron walls of the Jewish community. The
    notion of Jewry has become a moot point. Are we, the descendents of
    Jews, citizens of our countries, or are we citizens of the Jewish
    People? Does ‘Jewry’ exist, in the same way any state exists, or it is
    just a figure of speech?

    Here is a paradox: the Jewish leaders want Jewry to be a sort of Stealth
    jet, now you see it, now you don’t. It is here to strafe, it is nowhere
    for flak. They say: ‘That’s what Hitler said’ or ‘That was invented by
    the writers of the forgery, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion’, and
    they forget to say that it is written into Israel’s Declaration of
    Independence as well. Israel actually is described as ‘the State of the
    Jewish People’, and that is why it attracts disproportionate attention
    and influence as the visible (and territorially bound) part of Jewry.
    That is why an ambassadorial position in Tel Aviv is considered among
    the highest and most desirable for a career diplomat. The concept of
    ‘the Jewish People’ received a singular recognition in international
    law, when the Jewish People were declared in 1950 and in 1991 by modern
    Germany to be the residual heir of intestate Jews. The Israeli Criminal
    Law allows the state of Israel to judge and prosecute any person on the
    globe who acted against a person, health, life, property or dignity of a
    Jew, even if this Jew has no connection whatsoever with the state of
    Israel.

    We, children of emancipated Jewish parents, are as surprised as anybody.
    Nothing prepared us for the miraculous recovery of Jewry. Just recently
    it was on its way out, indeed, proclaimed dead; and we had come to
    consider ourselves free men. Within our lifetime, things have changed
    drastically, and now we are being called upon to declare allegiance to
    this body, or suffer ostracism and humiliation, probably loss of
    livelihood, or worse. Jewry (please do not confuse this term with the
    millions of descendents of medieval Jews) has regained its place in
    world politics, and taken over the mind of the only superpower, the US.

    Isaac Deutscher, a Jewish Marxist and a biographer of Trotsky, was among
    the first Jews to notice this phenomenon. He proposed in his essay Who
    is a Jew (published in the Jewish Quarterly, London 1966) to distinguish
    between ‘Jews’ and ‘Jewry’. While Jews are individuals of various
    opinions and ways of life, Jewry is a quasi-national body with its own
    leadership and agenda. In his opinion, Jewry was on its way to
    disappearance, but from the ashes of the World War Two ‘the phoenix of
    Jewry has risen’. ‘I would have preferred Jews to survive and Jewry to
    perish’, he wrote, but "the extermination of Jews gave a new lease of
    life to Jewry".

    The self-appointed leadership of revived Jewry achieved the pinnacle of
    power in close liaison with super-rich Mammon-worshippers. They are
    intoxicated by their clout and by the lack of opposition. They support
    the war criminal Sharon, but they consider him too weak. They booed Paul
    Wolfowitz, the Jewish American super-hawk. Every Israeli politician
    knows and heeds: there are powerful Jews in America and elsewhere who
    want endless war in Palestine. They understand the salvation brought by
    the armies of Russia and America in the World War Two as their personal
    victory over the Gentile world, as a sign of a new era of Jewry’s
    world-wide supremacy, promised in Talmud and Cabbala teachings.

    Isaac Deutscher ascribed the changes in Israel to their influence:

      A wealthy American Jew, a ‘worldly businessman’ among his gentile
      associates and friends in New York, Philadelphia or Detroit, is at heart
      proud to be a member of the Chosen People, and in Israel he exercises
      his influence in favour of religious obscurantism and reaction. He keeps
      alive the spirit of racial-talmudic exclusiveness and superiority. It
      feeds and inflames the antagonism towards the Arabs[7].

    It would be odd if this ‘wealthy Jew’ would influence only distant
    Israel. His influence is even stronger in his country, in the US, where
    he promotes the same idea "of racial-talmudic exclusiveness and
    superiority", in full harmony with the ‘Jewish’ spirit of America.

    These rich men do not need Palestinian land. They are not going to
    migrate to Israel and work on its vineyards. They use Israel and its
    people as their dispensable tool in the world-wide game. They
    misunderstand the Gentiles’ compassion as a sign of weakness. They
    misunderstand their friendliness as their submission. Like a cat with a
    mouse, they played with the Church of Nativity to check when Christendom
    is finally dead, if it will cease to respond. At the same time, they
    threaten the Mosques of Jerusalem and train American cruise missiles on
    Baghdad. Instead of Christianity and Judaism, they bring in a new faith:
    they supplant the Crucifixion by the Holocaust, and the Resurrection by
    the creation of the State of Israel. For them, Jewish control over the
    holy sites of Christendom and Islam is a visual proof of their
    dominance. Their destruction would be a sign of total victory. In a way,
    they are right: a society without its sacral values is doomed to
    extinction.

    Many Jews and descendents of Jews feel threatened by the concept of
    Jewry. They usually object to ‘generalities’, to ‘accusation of the
    whole people’ or ‘hate-mongering’. At first, I was taken aback by their
    response. Afterwards, I thought that their reasoning is so good that it
    could be used by others as well. Pity to waste a good thing. For
    instance,

    - How do you dare say the Americans nuked Hiroshima? I am an American,
    and I did not nuke Hiroshima.

    - You say, ‘the English ruled India’. What nonsense! I know hundreds of
    poor English workers who did not rule India.

    - You call for the liberation of Algeria. This is anti-Frenchism! The
    real difference is not between the French and native Algerians, but
    between cultured people and Muslim fanatics.

    - ‘Russian imperialist policy’? This is a racist remark designed to
    cause hatred of Russians.

    Probably you will admit that this sounds silly. Policies are devised by
    the elites, carried out by the more-or-less willing majority, and the
    outsiders suffer the consequences. Jewry is not different from any other
    state or trans-national corporation. The Jewish leadership has policies,
    and is able to change them. Naturally, ordinary Jews can submit to or
    reject them.

    VI

    This is not much like classified information, but you should not say it
    out loud. The Jewish establishment can tell Bush to say ‘uncle’ and he
    will. This is a Polichinelle secret, as the French say. The rest of the
    world, from the Far East to Northern Europe, knows it full well, and
    from time to time a reckless prime minister or a speaker of a parliament
    babbles about it. The US Congress always rises to the occasion and sends
    its strong protest to the babbling offender, like a henpecked husband
    who never would admit his fear of wife’s anger in front of beer buddies.

    You can say the US is run by Africans, Wasps, Freemasons or Grey Aliens,
    and you will get no response. You may say that the land is regulated by
    the Corporations, Standard Oil and Boeing, and nobody will object. But
    just try to say "the Jews run the US" and you will find yourself in a
    serious trouble. Now, what is actually the position of the Jews in the
    US?

    It can be described in many ways. They represent the Church (i.e.
    ideological apparatus) of the new Judeo-American faith. They are the
    Brahmin caste of America. They can be called even a very prominent, if
    not ruling ethnic minority. This turn of events is strange but not
    unique. Until recent times, England was run by a small caste of Eton
    graduates, as exclusivist as any Jew; they even married within their own
    group.

    That is why Powell and Bush can’t and won’t give orders to Sharon. They
    have some free play, so long as the Jewish People are of two minds, -
    before this unique entity has not decided what it wants. Now, apparently
    the Jews (as opposed to Jews) are united by a common will, single
    purpose and a feeling of power. Intoxication by power and unity has
    caused this cautious people to drop masks, to cease pretence. The new
    openness provides us with an unprecedented insight into the soul of the
    Jews and their Mammonite supporters.

    An authentic voice, Ron Grossman of the Chicago Tribune[8] writes, "As a
    self-proclaimed humanist, I ought to recoil in horror from the thought
    of tanks rumbling through a city, anybody's city. My head should hang in
    sorrow at televised images of street fighting (rather, massacres - ISH)
    in Bethlehem and Ramallah. But here is a hint: Don't lecture or preach
    to us. Forget about appealing to our better selves".

    Yes, forget about appealing to their better selves, for they have not
    got one. ‘The better selves’ were just a device, and now their real
    selves have emerged in all their brutal might.

    VII

    Let us turn this text into a movie script and alternate a few snapshots
    provided by the BBC from the field. In Palestine, UNRWA chief Peter
    Hansen said: "We are getting reports of pure horror. Helicopters are
    strafing civilian residential areas; systematic shelling by tanks has
    created hundreds of wounded; bulldozers are razing refugee homes and
    food and medicine will soon run out." Dozens of dead bodies are lying in
    the streets of Jenin refugee camp. The Church of Nativity is on fire, as
    in 614.

    Meanwhile, tens of thousands of Jews turn up in New York to show support
    for Israel’s massacre of Palestinians. 150,000 Jewish demonstrators take
    to the streets of Paris to express their solidarity with Israel. Waving
    Israeli flags and draped in the blue and white colours of their national
    banner (the tricolour is dropped and forgotten), protesters marched from
    the Place de la Republique to the Place de la Bastille in Paris,
    chanting in French and Hebrew and carrying signs that read "Yesterday
    New York, today Jerusalem, tomorrow Paris."

    In Israel, "no one can express the aspirations of most Israelis like the
    prime minister. This is not a war that was waged by Sharon, the
    "warmonger," this is the war of all of us", writes Gideon Levy, a man of
    heart and conscience. "It will also be very difficult to blame Sharon
    for the consequences of the war, in the light of the sweeping support he
    has been given by the majority of Israelis. Nearly 30,000 men were
    mobilized and they reported for duty as one man, making the refusal
    movement, with 21 refuseniks currently in jail, irrelevant. "We didn't
    ask why, we just came," the reservists told the Prime Minister,
    expressing the "together" syndrome that characterizes Israel at such
    times. Tens of thousands of men leave their homes, putting their normal
    life behind them, and set out to kill and be killed - and they don't
    even ask why? "That is the behaviour of the herd", concludes Levy.

    Levy is mistaken: it is the real strength of Jewry that comes through in
    this immense cohesiveness and unabashed ethnocentrism. For instance, a
    Mark Steyn (sic) writes in the National Post. "All civilized people can
    agree that killing Jews is wrong". (Not ‘killing’ is wrong, as then it
    would be wrong to kill Palestinians. Only ‘killing Jews’ is wrong. This
    approach is based on the Jewish reading of the Ten Commandments: ‘Thou
    shalt not murder a Jew’, instead of the Christian ‘Thou shalt not
    murder’.

    Professor David D. Perlmutter writes in LA Times[9]: "I daydream--if
    only! If in 1948, 1956, 1967 or 1973 Israel had acted just a bit like
    the Third Reich, then today Israelis would shop, eat pizza, marry and
    celebrate the holy days unmolested. And of course Jews, not sheiks,
    would have that Gulf oil". Such daydreamers should be carefully removed
    from the education system, for being unreconstructed Nazis. But no fear!
    Judeo-Nazism is a winning ideology in the US.

    Witty if snobbish Taki of the British weekly Spectator contributed the
    following anecdotal evidence of the new Jewish vehemence and
    single-mindedness: "On Easter Sunday, during lunch, the richest woman in
    Israel, Irit Lando[10], suddenly burst into my house and began to
    harangue my friends and family about Adam Shapiro. Despite the fact
    she's one of my wife's oldest friends and was invited to drop in after
    lunch, I was extremely annoyed. I reminded Irit that my house was not
    Israeli occupied territory; that it was Easter; and knowing how I feel
    about the plight of the Palestinians, she should change the subject.
    Which she did, turning on the press, instead, and how they gave
    publicity to that godawful traitor Adam Shapiro".

    As a few mavericks of Jewish origin like Adam Shapiro are increasingly
    marginalized, the Jews en masse rally to support Sharon and Israel. The
    US officials have no choice but to take the hint. American Gentiles
    figured it out long time ago: if you want to make a career in politics
    or the media, you have to support the Jews wholeheartedly. Otherwise you
    will find yourself thrown to dogs. If a man has found his way to the
    higher echelons of American power, then he has learned the ropes and
    knows the limits of his power.

    VIII

    Eric Alterman of the Nation published a list of American pundits
    unreservedly supportive of Israel. It is an exciting read:

      COLUMNISTS AND COMMENTATORS WHO CAN BE COUNTED UPON TO SUPPORT ISRAEL
      REFLEXIVELY AND WITHOUT QUALIFICATION:

      George Will, The Washington Post, Newsweek and ABC News William Safire,
      The New York Times A.M. Rosenthal, The New York Daily News, formerly
      Executive Editor of and later columnist for, The New York Times, Charles
      Krauthammer, The Washington Post, PBS, Time, and The Weekly Standard,
      formerly of the New Republic. Michael Kelly, The Washington Post, The
      Atlantic Monthly, National Journal, and MSNBC.com, formerly of The New
      Republic and The New Yorker. Lally Weymouth, The Washington Post and
      Newsweek Martin Peretz, The New Republic, Daniel Pipes, The New York
      Post Andrea Peyser, The New York Post Dick Morris, The New York Post
      Lawrence Kaplan, The New Republic William Bennett, CNN William Kristol,
      The Washington Post, the Weekly Standard, Fox News, formerly of ABC News
      Robert Kagan, The Washington Post and The Weekly Standard, Mortimer
      Zuckerman, US News and World Report (Zuckerman is also Chairman of
      Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations ). David
      Gelertner, The Weekly Standard John Podhoretz, The New York Post and The
      Weekly Standard Mona Charen, The Washington Times Morton Kondracke, Roll
      Call, Fox News formerly of The McLaughlin Group, The New Republic and
      PBS Fred Barnes, The Weekly Standard, Fox News, formerly of The New
      Republic, The McLaughlin Group, and The Baltimore Sun Sid Zion, The New
      York Post, The New York Daily News, Yossi Klein Halevi The New Republic,
      Sidney Zion, The New York Post, formerly of The New York Daily News
      Norman Podhoretz, Commentary, Jonah Goldberg, National Review and CNN
      Laura Ingram, CNN, formerly of MSNBC and CBS News Jeff Jacoby, The
      Boston Globe Rich Lowry, National Review Andrew Sullivan, The New
      Republic Seth Lipsky, The Wall Street Journal and The New York Sun,
      formerly of the Jewish Forward Irving Kristol, The Public Interest, The
      National Interest and The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page Chris
      Matthews, MSNBC Allan Keyes, MSNBC, WorldNetDaily.com Brit Hume, Fox
      News John Leo, US News and World Report Robert Bartley, The Wall Street
      Journal Editorial Page John Fund, The Wall Street Journal Opinion
      Journal, formerly of The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page Peggy
      Noonan, The Wall Street Journal Editorial Page, Ben Wattenberg, The
      Washington Times, PBS Tony Snow, Washington Times and Fox News Lawrence
      Kudlow, National Review and CNBC Alan Dershowitz, Boston Herald,
      Washington Times David Horowitz, Frontpage.com Jacob Heilbrun, The Los
      Angeles Times Thomas Sowell, Washington Times Frank Gaffney Jr,
      Washington Times Emmett Tyrell, American Spectator and New York Sun Cal
      Thomas, Washington Times Oliver North, Washington Times and Fox News,
      formerly of MSNBC Michael Ledeen, Jewish World Review William F.
      Buckley, National Review Bill O'Reilly, Fox News Paul Greenberg,
      Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, L. Brent Bozell, Washington Times Todd
      Lindberg, Washington Times Michael Barone, US News and World Report and
      The McLaughlin Group Ann Coulter, Human Events, Linda Chavez, Creators
      Syndicate Cathy Young, Reason Magazine Uri Dan, New York Post Dr. Laura
      Schlessinger, morality maven Rush Limbaugh, radio host.

    "What is perhaps most interesting is the long list of non-Jews who
    support Israel reflexively and without qualification", - wrote Professor
    Kevin McDonald of California State University[11]. – "Unconditional
    support for Israel is a critical litmus test of acceptability by the
    major media in the U.S. Prospective pundits "earn their stripes" by
    showing their devotion to Israel (and, presumably other Jewish issues).
    It seems difficult to explain the huge tilt toward Israel in the absence
    of some enormous selective factor as the result of individual attitudes.
    And there is the obvious suggestion that while the Jews on this list
    must be seen as ethnic actors, the non-Jews are certainly making an
    excellent career move in taking the positions they do. This litmus test
    for prospective opinion makers is further supported by the fact that Joe
    Sobran was fired from the National Review because he had the temerity to
    suppose that the U.S. foreign policy should not be dictated by what’s
    best for Israel".

    The careerists were chosen for their ability to disregard the interests
    of the American people. A good indicator of elite composition and
    behaviour can be found in the figures of student-admission figures of
    the Ivy League universities. The share of the traditional elites of the
    US, the WASPs, has shrunk from 85% to 35%, while the Jews’ share (2% of
    population) has reached 40%. In other words, a non-Jew’s chance of
    finding a place among the elite has decreased significantly.

    Thus, after many years of selection process, pro-Jewish forces have
    risen to positions of power and influence in the US. All this said,
    America was almost doomed to become a Neo-Jewish state by virtue of its
    ideology. Anthony Judge wrote, "There is an extraordinary parallel
    between the unusual exclusivist perception of America as ‘God's own
    country’, and of Israel as a gift by God to "Chosen People". Why have
    these perceptions justified encroachment on the lands of others, the
    displacement and death of the indigenous populations, their restrictions
    to ‘reservations’, and the development of a strategic framework for the
    expansion of "western civilization" into the spaces of other cultures?"

    The Fathers Pilgrims, the founders of America, called themselves a New
    Israel. However, Satan played a cruel game with their WASP descendants.
    He promised to make them new Jews, and he made his promise good.
    However, they became a minor partner in the Judeo-Mammonite alliance,
    doomed to swear their allegiance each day.

    IX

    Still, Professor McDonald is mistaken in oversimplifying the reasons of
    the Gentile support for the Jews. Apart from Bush and Ramsfield, apart
    from the careerists, there are good non-Jews who support the Jews, just
    as there are maverick Jews and ‘non-Jewish Jews’, by definition of Isaac
    Deutscher. This is due to the contradictory nature of the centrifugal
    and centripetal tendencies within the Jewish community. By their
    individual responses to encounters with the non-Jews, the Jews can be
    classified as Rim Jews or Core Jews. Rim Jews try to leave the community
    by marrying out, by adopting Christianity, Communism or other faiths, by
    seeking communion with God. Core Jews proclaim the primacy of the
    community in permanent warfare against the Goyim. In the millennia-old
    tug-of-war, Christendom tries to undo the Core, while Jewry tries to
    undo the Rim.

    That is why there are two kinds of ‘philo-Semites’. One of them, the
    good Gentiles, look to a new spiritual home. They are influenced by the
    positive parts of the Bible, by ‘love thy neighbour’. They like the
    spirit of community, of belonging, of the tradition that Jews exude.
    They like a light touch of ‘outsider’ that attracts poetic natures.
    There are many people, who want to break the tiresome strangling ties of
    their immediate surroundings. James Joyce, the Irish writer, saw the
    Jews as a way out of the bloody feud with Brits. Marina Tsvetaeva, the
    Russian poetess, felt herself an outsider in her steady middle-class
    family, and wrote, ‘in this most Christian world, all poets are Jews’.
    The charming female characters of Woody Allen’s early comedies are
    attracted to this eternal foreigner, the Jew.

    It is not a coincidence that such people usually meet with marginal Jews
    on the outer rim of the Jewish community. The Jew of Joyce was the
    Italian Jewish writer Italo Svevo, the Jew of Tsvetaeva was the Russian
    Communist spy Sergey Ephron. The Jew of Diane Keaton and Mia Farrow was
    this amusing outsider, Woody Allen. As the rim of the Jewish community
    is quite large, there always is intermingling with the better sort of
    Gentile mavericks.

    The second set of allies consists of the hard businessmen who appreciate
    the practical side of Jewish ideology. They like the idea of the Mob,
    the pursuit of money, the disregard of morals and of social consequences
    thereof, of others’ property and very life. People who see everybody as
    an enemy, and life as eternal warfare, notice that in Jewish ideology,
    no stranger is a ‘neighbour’. That is why the cruellest rulers, princes
    and kings were those who took Jewish advisers and ministers. They
    learned from them how to disregard their subjects. Such people as Nero
    and Pedro the Cruel, Conrad Black and Margaret Thatcher, the Mafia
    Godfathers and Third World dictators loved the Core (as opposed to Rim)
    Jews.

    Thus, good people have their Jews, and bad people have their Jews. There
    is a problem: the Jews of good people are the outsiders, who hardly
    qualify as Jews, while the Jews of bad people are the powerful Jewish
    leaders. And the Jewish fraternity is a structurally hierarchical body,
    strongly influenced by its authoritarian leadership. Unwillingly, the
    good Jews were used by the bad Jews. Albert Einstein rejected the Jewish
    community, disproved of Zionism, never went to a synagogue and was a
    charming man. But his achievements were used by bad Jews to promote
    their own concept.

    It happened because not too many people dare to understand: the Jews are
    neither a people, nor a religion, nor a race. They are a quasi-religious
    organisation; a likeness of the Catholic Church bundled together with
    the IMF like browser and mailer are bundled in the Windows. One can find
    all sorts of Catholics, but decisions are made in Rome. One can find all
    sorts of Jews, but the decisions are made in Wall Street.

    While fighting against the Core, it is important to support the Rim.
    That was the traditional approach of the Christian Church: fight Jewry
    for the soul of Jews. A Jewish Zealot, ‘Mad’ Goldhagen, claimed in his
    books that the Church was ‘anti-Semitic’ and its policies led to the
    Jewish holocaust. Nothing could be more wrong: the Church wished to
    correct the mind, not to kill the body. Indeed, the true interests of
    Jews and the Jews are at loggerheads.

    The Jewish elites know that people should be given a choice, and they
    try to ensure that it will be the wrong choice. That is why the
    Mammonite Jews support the Zionist Zealots. They want us, Jews, to make
    our choice between these two evils, the Zealots and Mammonites. But
    there is ‘the third philosophy’ as well. Its adepts believe in the great
    fraternity of mankind, and they reject both the Zealots’ hate and the
    Pharisees’ drive for the world domination. They can adhere to different
    political and religious schools, be on the left or on the right of the
    political map, believe in Christ or Allah, Lenin or Chomsky, the New Age
    or Buddha, Art or Love. They are the remnant of Israel, proclaimed by St
    Paul. In their merging with mankind, the words of Christ will be
    fulfilled: a corn that dies, lives. A corn that lives, dies.

    The story of the Death and the Resurrection has this mystic meaning: do
    not be afraid of death and disappearance, as it is the way to life. The
    Jews who died as Jews remained alive. After the curtain descended on the
    Jewish community in Spain; St Teresa of Avila and St John of God died as
    Jews and remained alive forever. The names of exiles who went to
    Amsterdam and Morocco are gone and forgotten: they remained alive as
    Jews, then died forever. It was repeated in 1917 in Russia: that those
    who remained Jews died forever; those who embraced the revolution live
    forever.

    XIII

    Just before 9/11, a group of US congressmen visited Palestine, and one
    of them made headlines. It was the Congresswoman Shelley Berkley (a
    Democrat from Nevada) who said to the Palestinian Minister Saeb Erakat:
    "This is our country; we won the war. If the Palestinians do not like
    living under Jewish rule, I would not prevent them from leaving".

    Who are the Hon. Shelley Berkley’s ‘we’? She certainly did not mean ‘we
    the Americans’, or ‘we the Nevadans’ who sent her to Washington. Nevada
    did not wage a war in the Middle East, to the best of my knowledge. Some
    naïve person would probably reply ‘Israel’, and even accuse her of ‘dual
    loyalty’. Strict mentors would censure her for betraying the trust of
    her electorate by switching her allegiance to a foreign country. But it
    would be a dishonest misinterpretation. Miss Berkley never switched
    allegiance. Together with many other members of Congress and the Senate,
    she has a single loyalty, which is to the Jewish cause.

    Miss Berkley makes sense. If Nevadans and other Americans do not mind
    living under heavy Jewish influence, why should the Palestinians mind
    it? Americans apparently do not mind that their wealth is managed by big
    investment bankers, under the umbrella of Mr Greenspan’s Federal
    Reserve. Jesus saves, but Moses invests. Jewish influence does not stop
    where the buck stops. The ideals of Americans are formed by Hollywood
    with its cult of greed and success. Their thoughts are supplied by the
    Jewish pundits in the universities and media. For comfort, they take the
    New York Times chicken soup. Their history has shrunk down to Holocaust
    studies. Their books are written by Bellow and Malamud. Americans do not
    mind that their politics are in the hands of people whose single
    devotion is to the Jewish cause.

    If they do not mind, why do I, an Israeli Jew, mind it, instead of
    feeling pride for this great achievement of my brethren the American
    Jews? After all, it is no mean feat to take over the only superpower
    without a single shot being fired. This is not a rhetorical question, it
    has an answer, and it is not ‘self-hatred’. I feel perfectly comfortable
    with myself, and with the majority of Jews I meet. Separately, we are
    nice and cuddly. Well, as nice as any. But together, we form a
    formidable and repulsive social machine, hell-bent on power grasping and
    greed. I like ‘the Jews’ as much as the great American Henry Thoreau
    loved the American Empire, as Voltaire loved his Catholic Church, as
    Orwell loved Stalin’s Party.

    Jewry has become the adversary of Jews in Israel: Israelis who would
    like to live in peace with their Palestinian neighbours, in peace with
    churches and mosques, can not counteract the raw muscle of the American
    Jewish leadership. Good Israelis and their Palestinian allies can’t win,
    unless this power is contained. In a Nordic story, the hero-god Thor
    came to Utgard to prove his power. The gods of Utgard challenged him to
    drink from a horn. He tried and failed: The horn was connected to a
    well. Only by severing the connection, could he meet the challenge. If
    you, my readers overseas, will block the sea of the Jewish support
    abroad, we, Israelis and Palestinians, will be able to change things on
    the ground. The supporters of the Jewish state in your midst should be
    contained, for your and our sake.

    X

    A few months ago, my travels took me to the Amazon basin, to the
    Peruvian jungle deeply cut by Rio del Madre de Dios. In this remote
    location, small rivulets meander for miles among endless forests,
    navigable just by small pirogues. After a long sailing from Puerto
    Maldonado, my native guide brought me to the Lost World of many-coloured
    parrots and of friendly monkeys that sat on my shoulder. On a narrow
    path, I noticed a huge tree. It was bigger than all other trees of the
    jungle. Its huge roots were spread across many yards. It is the
    telegraph-tree, my guide replied to my query. He tapped on the trunk of
    the monster tree and the sound boomed throughout the jungle. The giant
    was hollow.

    I looked at it closely and noticed a strange feature I had missed
    before: some seven yards above the ground, another trunk, a partly
    digested palm tree, protruded from the embracing, smooth bark. The
    telegraph-tree was a monstrous parasite, a growth on a palm tree. The
    parasite had no trunk of its own, but it enveloped the tree and grew on
    it, eventually blocking it and digesting its life juices. The tree
    rotted inside its shell, and the hollow trunk climbed to new heights,
    creating a perfect drum for the local Indians.

    It was a living image of the United States of America, this huge and
    hollow trunk, towering above the forest of nations, but dead inside. The
    American Empire has entered its period of decline. The dollar is still
    the world currency, the American army is still the formidable war
    machine, the stock market still runs to trillions, but the great state
    of the West is a spiritual nonentity. Political life in the US has
    entered the twilight reminiscent of the last days of the Meroving kings.
    For an outsider, it is hard to comprehend that this nation of 275
    million could not find better leaders than the two nincompoops Bush
    and/or Gore. Both appear to be weak of mind, lacking in basic knowledge,
    and totally devoid of political will. Probably an average city could
    field better men than these two.

    General political decline is accompanied by weakness of mind. America of
    the mass media and public life is silly. There are no important new
    books, comparable with the pre-war American output. The US TV is an
    insult to human intelligence. Museums are full of rusty junk and
    videotapes purporting to be American art. The Judeo-Mammonite takeover
    has eliminated the living forces of America, and directed them into
    consumption.

    XI

    The ‘Jewish’ spirit of America, denounced by Marx, was glorified and
    exalted by a Jewish American journalist Phillip Weiss[12]:

      No one is allowed to speak up about something we all quietly know: Jews
      changed America. The civil rights movement reflects Jewish values of
      justice. Feminism is a reflection of liberal Jewish matriarchal values.
      Ever-more-powerful Jews in the media have ushered in the information
      age. Psychologically attuned Jews and Hollywood Jews changed the
      language of popular culture—Seinfeld, Weinstein. And the new emphasis on
      educational achievement throughout our society reflects the Jewish love
      of learning. I have not even gotten to finance or the law… These trends
      have made America a fairer and more creative place. Jews have fostered
      the separation of church and state. The greatly diminished influence of
      church on public mores wouldn’t have happened without secularized Jews
      gaining cultural power. And no one ever talks about it. The most
      important change in establishment culture in the last 25 years, and it
      goes unspoken.

    This smug self-adoration of Weiss calls for some sobriety. These changes
    can be seen in a less felicitous light. Jews changed America during last
    25-30 years, says Weiss. These were golden years for American Jews, as
    their share of power and influence grew. But these years were rather bad
    for un-Chosen Americans. A British weekly, the Economist, an ardent
    supporter of the neo-liberalism, reported[13] recently:

      The gap between the poor and the rich is rising. In America, in last
      twenty years, average income of the richest fifth of population from 9
      to 15 times income of the poorest fifth. In 1999, British income
      inequality reached its widest level in 40 years.

    The growth of Jewish influence was accompanied by divergence: the rich
    became richer, the poor became poorer, and the middle class lost. It
    should have been expected, as traditionally the prosperity of the Jewish
    community runs counter to the interests of common folk. The Bible
    provided us with an archetypal story of Joseph and his brothers, who
    prospered by enslaving ordinary Egyptians to the Pharaoh. The Jewish
    community stood by the king and against the ordinary folk in Spain in
    the days of Don Pedro the Cruel, in Poland and Ukraine of 17th century.
    Not in vain Jewish neighbourhoods were located next to royal palaces
    everywhere in Europe.

    The ‘ever-more-powerful Jews in the media’ were engaged in their usual
    drivel: glorifying Israel, bemoaning the Jewish Holocaust, supporting
    every nasty case from mass murder in Iraq to the blocking of the Blacks’
    advancement in the US. Under the Jews, Hollywood made American cinema
    even more violent, moralistic, repulsive, and philistine. There is a
    good Jewish guy in the movies, Woody Allen, but he is not in Hollywood
    and he is anyway considered an anti-Semite. In the law, the advent of
    the Jew did not make America a more just society, but a more litigious
    one. ‘A Jewish lawyer’ has come to stay as the bogeyman for scaring kids
    at night. ‘Separation of church and society’ can be considered to be its
    forced de-Christianisation and de-spiritualization.

    XII

    The US has become a Jewish state in more ways than one. It has the same
    security checks, the same holocaust museums, the same poverty for many
    and riches for a few as Israel. The similarity is felt by its friend and
    foe alike. David Quinn[14] wrote in the Sunday Times, that the feel of
    Irish intellectuals’ rejection of American policies is "so strong, so
    palpable, so irrational (!?), that it reminded me of nothing so much as
    anti-Semitism". Quinn continued:

      Americans are like the Jews in having become the scapegoats of choice
      for half the planet. The Jews were accused of controlling the world's
      finances; so is the United States. The Jews were accused of promoting
      decadence through their control of culture and the arts. So is the
      United States. The Jews were accused of putting their power to a range
      of nefarious uses. So is the United States.

      Given America's power and wealth, and the strength of its Jewish lobby,
      in the Middle East it has been simplicity itself to mix anti-American
      with age-old anti-Semitism to produce a truly poisonous brew. Tens of
      millions of people have imbibed this concoction and are now filled with
      a hatred of America as strong as that of many Germans in the Weimar
      Republic.

      Osama bin Laden and his followers have followed their hatred to its
      logical conclusion, just as Hitler did: If America really is to blame
      for the world's problems, then it, and its people, must be eradicated.

    This article is important, as it displays the subconscious of an adept
    of Judeo-Americanism. Quinn appeals to Jews and Neo-Jews: support
    America as America is a Jewish state that carries out Jewish policies
    and causes normal anti-Jewish response. Quinn considers Jews and America
    to be identical, and he uses the many cliché of Neo-Jewish propaganda.

    One of the clichés is that rejection of Jewish/American policies is
    ‘irrational’ for there is a tenet of faith: "thou shall not try and
    understand why thine policies cause rejection". Elie Wiesel, the prophet
    of holocaustism, recites at every occasion: ‘totally irrational… no
    explanation… no reason, just pure hate of everybody to Jews’, and Rabbi
    Tony Bayfield repeats it with usual Jewish vehemence[15]:

      I am seething with rage at anyone who dares suggest that, in any way,
      such acts (attack on Pentagon etc) are even explicable, let alone
      justifiable.

    Without knowing Rabbi Bayfield personally, I venture a wild guess. If
    you mention Deir Yassin to him, or the genocide in Iraq, he will seethe
    with rage: How can one compare! He will find these mass murders
    justifiable, let certainly explicable. But whenever Jews suffer, it can
    not be explained and understood but by some mystic means.

    Quinn, as any Neo-Jewish apologist, denies the undeniable. For him,
    America does not control world finances, she is accused of it. Probably,
    America is only accused of occupying a large part of North America. In
    Quinn’s mind, she lives in a poor house, in a little schtetl. I have no
    idea of David Quinn’s origin, but nobody can be more Jewish than he.

    For Quinn, every enemy of Jewish supremacy/American domination is a new
    Hitler who wants to kill all Jews/Americans. Nasser was Hitler when he
    nationalized Suez, Arafat was Hitler and Beirut was his bunker. Soviet
    Russia was the same as Nazi Germany from the moment Moscow completed its
    part in vanquishing Hitler. Osama bin Laden, or ‘tens of millions of
    people in the Middle East’ became a new Hitler. The idea behind this
    comparison is that these ‘tens of millions’ of Muslims should be dealt
    with as Hitler and his ‘many Germans in the Weimar Republic’.

    Judeo-American discourse inherited this demonisation idea from its
    Jewish predecessor. Introduction of fury, hatred and vengefulness into a
    discussion of the adversary is a potent traditional Jewish ideological
    weapon. It is never turned on inside the community, but used outside of
    it. Demonisation and fury causes general nastiness and bias in discourse
    and eventually destroys society. Rabbi Shmuel Boteach, formerly the
    Chabad Rabbi at Oxford University, presented this Jewish approach in his
    aptly named piece, A Time to Hate[16].

      The proper response to the cowardly brutes who perpetrated the horrific
      attacks against America is to hate them with every fibre of our being
      and purge ourselves of any morsel of sympathy which might seek to
      understand their motives. Hatred is a valid emotion… Contrary to
      Christianity, which advocates turning the other cheek to belligerence
      and loving the wicked, Judaism obligates us to despise and resist the
      wicked at all costs. For us to extend forgiveness and compassion to
       in the name of religion is not just insidious, it is an act of
      mocking G-d, who has mercy for all, yet demands justice for the
      innocent. The only response to Hitler is utter contempt and violent
      hatred. The only way to react to incorrigible evil is to wage an
      incessant war against it until it is utterly eradicated from the earth.
      I maintain that any culture that does not hate Hitler and his ilk is a
      non-compassionate society. Indeed, to show kindness to the murderer is
      to violate the victim yet again. Thus, in the interest of justice, the
      appropriate response to the evil person is to hate him with every fibre
      of our being and to hope they find no rest, neither in this world nor in
      the next.

    XIV

    In the struggle of ideas, there is a formidable weapon of mass
    destruction: demonisation of the opponent. Theologically it is called
    the ‘Manichean’ heresy. There is no better systemic weapon if you intend
    to destroy society. One should not divide people unto Sons of Light and
    Sons of Darkness.

    Jews usually are quite tolerant of ideas produced within the community.
    The founder of Zionism Theodor Hertzl was anything but a pious Jew.
    Religious Jews greatly disliked him. Still, when a Rabbi was asked to
    say something good about him, he found good words: Theodor Hertzl never
    spoke on mundane subjects in a synagogue, never entered a toilet while
    wearing phylacteries, he never studied the Talmud on Christmas Eve. The
    truth is that Hertzl never visited a synagogue, never wore phylacteries,
    never studied the Talmud, full stop. In a similar vein, Jews were quite
    tolerant of Leon Trotsky the Communist, and of Yair Stern the Nazi
    supporter, for they knew that every idea has its positive elements.
    Nowadays, the leader of Left Opposition Yossi Sarid was a friend of the
    assassinated Judeo-Nazi minister Zeevi and touchingly eulogised him.

    But to the outside world, Jews usually offered the idea of the eternally
    blessed vs. the eternally damned, of seething rage, of anger and
    vengeance. In order to restore the balance of mind, this Jewish internal
    tolerance should be universalised, and Jewish external intolerance
    rejected.

    Judeo-American thought keeps producing intolerance for external
    consumption. Ronald Reagan called Russia, ‘the Evil Empire’. Bush called
    Saddam Hussein, ‘Hitler’. Barbara Amiel, wife and guiding light of the
    media magnate Lord Black, remarked that now, Israel and the Jews are
    presented as an Evil Empire.

    Wrong, Ms Amiel: there are no Evil Empires, only unchecked ones.

    Soviet Russia was not an Evil Empire, nor was Communism embodied in
    Stalin and the Gulag. Sholokhov, Block, Pasternak, Esenin, Mayakovsky
    and Deineka embraced the Revolution and expressed its ideas in art. It
    was a land of the great and partly successful experiment in equality and
    brotherhood of Man, of a brave attempt to defeat the spirit of Greed.
    Communists and their supporters tried to liberate labour, to bring the
    Kingdom of Heaven upon earth, to remove poverty and free the human
    spirit. Communism brought forth the social democracy of Europe.

    Germany was not an Evil Empire, nor was the spirit of organic
    traditionalism embodied in Hitler and Auschwitz. The Traditionalists
    tried to establish an alternative paradigm based on Wagner, Nietzsche
    and Hegel, to go to the roots and traditions of the folk. Not in vain,
    the best writers and thinkers of Europe from Knut Hamsun to Louis
    Ferdinand Celine to Ezra Pound to William Butler Yeats to Heidegger saw
    a positive element in the Traditionalist organic approach. If Russia and
    Germany had not been demonised, it is quite possible we would not have
    seen them coming to such extremes.

    We have to restore the balance of mind and discourse lost in the
    aftermath of the World War Two, due to the too-complete victory of the
    bourgeois ‘Judeo-American’ thought. While condemning excesses and war
    crimes, we should regain the kingdom of the spirit from Mayakovsky to
    Pound. There are no evil men, we are created in the image of God, and
    all ideas are needed to produce new thought.

    The two great protagonists of 1930s and 1940s committed many atrocities,
    but whoever is without sin, let him throw the first stone. After Dresden
    and Hiroshima, and the Deir Yassin and Jenin massacres, there are not
    many takers. They should be de-demonised, as their demonisation creates
    a dangerous imbalance of ideas.

    We should not demonise their opponents, either. America is not an Evil
    Empire. It can and should be brought to its senses. The American spirit
    of entrepreneurship, invention, self-reliance, unbridled freedom and
    democracy should be kept as all-human valuable assets.

    The Jewish People are not an Evil Empire. Good organisers and
    ambassadors, stubborn and devout, easily carried away, high-strung,
    first-class thinkers and brave soldiers, light travellers, compassionate
    and cheerful; Jews are needed for the prosperity of mankind.

    But every one of these approaches can destroy the world if left
    unchecked.

    The Soviets killed and exiled millions in their drive to demolish the
    Old Order. They ruined old churches, uprooted peasants and supported
    uniformity as much as their American antagonists. The Nazis unleashed
    the most horrible war on the world and killed millions of Slavs and
    Jews. Now, the Judeo-American forces have been unhinged by the
    completeness of their victories in 1945 and in 1991. They understand it
    as a licence to drive the world to perdition. Their programme of
    globalisation would eliminate all beauty and specific quality of the
    world, kill the spirit, undermine art, wipe out spirit, destroy nature,
    undo social achievements, divide mankind into Masters and Slaves.
    Wherever they go, old cafès and restaurants disappear and Starbucks and
    McDonalds take over. Workers lose their working places, museums are
    filled with trash, art is replaced by TV. Still, they should be
    contained, not destroyed.

    Usually we discuss war as the conflict of state interests. But the
    never-ending World War Two was the war of ideas, as well. It was wrong
    and unneeded, as various ideas should coexist in eternal struggle, as
    Yin and Yang, or feminine and masculine forces. The Judeo-American idea
    will emasculate the world if left to run unchecked. This emasculation is
    strongly felt in the US, where men do not dare to be men anymore. They
    can be sued if they look at a girl, and sued if they do not look at a
    girl. In Beowulf, the great Anglo-Saxon epic poem, a cruel queen kills
    every man who dares to look at her. Little did they know that the spirit
    of the cruel queen will rule supreme in the world.

    The Judeo-American idea has a strong attachment to biological life, but
    rejects spirit. It is not for nothing that no great pieces of art, no
    great new ideas appear under its rule. On the other hand, the purely
    masculine tendencies of its opponents were also dangerous for the
    survival of the human race.

    All three adversaries of the last Century had a common feature: they
    rejected Christ, the base of our spirituality. None of the great leaders
    of the WWII ever turned to God. Americans are and Communists were scared
    to mention Christ in order not to be ridiculed or rebuked by Jews. The
    Nazis were strongly anti-Christian, and dabbled in the occult. This is
    the fourth element missing for the restoration of the balance.

    Thus, we should look for a synthesis of the four tendencies: the organic
    native love of nature, local roots and tradition, social communal
    justice for all mankind, love of life and entrepreneurship; and
    spirituality. They would present the new meaning of Cross, and bring
    mankind to its unity in spirit, while preserving its beautiful variety.

    XV

    Many scholars of the Rise of the Jews encounter a difficulty. Their
    Darwinist instincts called them to presume some better qualities of the
    Jews which led them to succeed. McDonald came to the conclusion that
    Jews possess a higher intelligence, the result of eugenics and careful
    breeding. I felt myself proud while reading his work, until I looked
    around at real Jews, my neighbours. His concept did not survive
    encounter with reality. If it is not higher intelligence, what then?

    Darwinists’ error lays in their inability to see success as a function
    of society. In traditional Gentile societies, a model of success was
    provided by a poet, a saint, an artist, a brave warrior, a good worker
    or peasant, a man who made life better for others. For Homeric Greeks,
    good sportsmen, seafarers, poets, musicians and dancers were the models
    for success as we can learn from the wonderful utopia of the Feacians.
    These idyllic people, like the jolly Oxford student of old, despise a
    trader and a businessman, and prefer a good yachtsman.

    According to Jews, there are two different concepts of success. One,
    success within the Jewish community, was achieved by studying the
    Talmud. Another, success in the Big World of Jews and Gentiles. This
    success is measured by the ruthless amassing of money and power.

    From the Jewish point of view, Jews were always successful, as they
    always had both sorts of success. But until recently, the Jewish
    external success was not considered a success by Gentiles at all. There
    were always Gentiles who shared their view, but be they Richard III or
    Harpagon, they were considered monsters rather than models of success.
    In the Nineteenth Century, the critical mass of monsters was achieved
    and thus the Mammonite world was born. By actively participating in
    discourse (media + universities), Jewish thinkers and ideologists
    promoted the Mammonite idea of success and made it the standard one in
    Western society. Modern Harpagon and Richard, be they Iacocca or Soros,
    are generally approved of in the new society formed by the Mammonite
    discourse-masters. The Western world became Jewish, as Marx put it, and
    it adopted the Jewish idea of success. In plain words, Jews did not
    ‘become successful’, rather, their normal behaviour became a norm of
    success.

    If the discourse of the US were transferred into Afro-American hands, it
    is possible that good sportsmen and musicians would come to be
    considered successful, while lawyers and bankers would be considered
    failures. That would be better for the future of mankind than the
    present adoration of money and power.

    XVI

    Even the material success of Jews is not achieved by a miracle. A
    tentative explanation was offered by two Israeli directors and
    producers, Menachem Golan and Yoram Globus. People of meagre talents
    whose cinematographic achievements remain strictly in the B-class, they
    made a fortune in Hollywood and produced many awful films until they
    suffered a setback. Their key to success lay in vertical networking.
    Golan and Globus bought cinemas all over England and the UK, and there
    they screened the movies of their choice. They invariably (well, almost)
    chose awful movies, as they had no taste, talent or ability. They said:
    If you own a chain of cinemas, you do not have to worry about the
    quality of your movies. Globalisation and creation of networks is the
    way to avoid competition by merit. Instead of opening a better café, it
    is easier to buy every café and turn it into a Starbuck. People will
    have to come to your café.

    The second reason for Jewish success is in our mutual psychological
    compatibility. Adversaries usually describe it as Jewish ‘freemasonry’,
    almost a conspiracy. But it is quite natural for Jews to like similar
    things, like Englishmen like bacon and eggs. Still it creates a problem
    for human development. In Prague of the 1920s, there were two equally
    good but very different writers, an alienated and abstract Jew, Frantz
    Kafka and an earthly Czech Communist Jaroslaw Hasek. Both are good, both
    are necessary for the development of mankind, but the genius of Kafka is
    more palatable for Jews. As there are many more Jewish professors of
    literature and newspaper editors than the Czech ones, it is but natural
    that Kafka is universally known and recognised, while Hasek’s name
    remains in Bohemia. More writers imitate Kafka than so much as consider
    Hasek. As a result, mankind, not only America, turns more and more
    ‘Jewish’. As writers know, they must write in a way palatable to the
    Jewish editors and professors. Otherwise they can expect only a
    parochial success. Thus, without any conspiracy, normal human Jewish
    tendencies influence the spirit of mankind by eliminating its beautiful
    variety.

    Now, these problems can be solved. While some amount of private
    initiative is good, networking should be banned. One may own a bookshop
    or a cinema or a café. But an attempt to buy or establish control over a
    second one should attract criminal prosecution.

    An Inuit was hit by a steam train while visiting the continent, tells a
    Northern joke. He survived the accident, but since then, he destroys
    every kettle he sees. They should be eradicated while small, he says.
    After seeing the monopolisation, we should follow the advice of the wise
    Inuit. It is better for us to have a hundred different cafés than a
    hundred Starbucks.

    Man’s income should be capped by a double-average industrial wage, while
    above that amount, taxes should exceed one hundred percent. Managerial
    privileges should be capped severely as well. Media and discourse in
    general should be freed. In the area of human thought, the Brahmanite
    tendency of Jews should be made visible and confronted. The Brahman is
    not an enemy, but his traditional tendency to domination should be
    counteracted by better visibility and accountability.

    A joint communion of spirit proclaiming our unity should be established.
    It implies rejection of interest and racial discrimination. St Ambrose,
    in his comments on Deut. 23:19, wrote: "From him exact usury whom it
    would not be a crime to kill. Where there is a right of war, there also
    is a right of usury"[17]. People who share communion with their brothers
    and sisters in spirit do not demand usury. But, if the communion is
    gone, usury, unlimited exploitation and slavery come in. Slavery was
    introduced by Calvinists and Jews in North America, while it was unknown
    in the lands where the communion united the people in one Church.

    In his witty Catch-22, Joseph Heller has a General ask his chaplain in
    disbelief: "Do enlisted men pray to the same god as we do?" This is the
    idea of the world without a shared communion. It is not without reason
    that the Talmud forbids a Jew to drink wine with a Gentile, as sharing
    wine is a communion. As the purpose of Jewish Law was to maintain
    low-intensity warfare of Jews against Gentiles, a Jew was also forbidden
    to make an interest-free loan to a Gentile. By sharing communion,
    society will overcome this difficulty.

    With this, the Rise of the Jews will be transformed into a Rise of Man.

    The long saga of the Jewish people is headed for an unknown end. It
    began with rejection of communality, and it ends with the same question
    asked again. If Zionism and its elder brother Mammonitis were to win
    world-wide, it would remove variety, mercy and spirit. If the spirit of
    communality wins, the prophecies of old will become true. We shall say:
    We be of one blood, the Palestinian people, descendents of Abraham, of
    the Israelites, of the Apostles, the rightful dwellers of Palestine, and
    their close kin and kith, the wandering Jewish folk, who came back like
    the Prodigal Son to the land of his fathers. The exiled sons of
    Palestinian villages, of Kakun and Suba, will return and they will
    rebuild the ruined cities, never again to be uprooted (Amos 9:15). In
    the Holy Land, the two branches of one people, the Jews and the
    Palestinians will unite, intermarry and create a new folk - like the
    Normans did in East Anglia, Sicily and Normandy - never again to disturb
    the peace of the world.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    -------

    [1] Publisher: Alma/Am Oved, Tel Aviv, 2000, ISBN 965-13-1428-1,

    English translation http://www.ucpress.edu/books/pages/8335.html or
    cheaper: from Barnes and Noble
    http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&endeca=
    1&isbn=0520217667&itm=1

    [2] CNN, 9/11/01

    [3] 9/12/01

    [4] --Rich Lowry, National Review editor, to Howard Kurtz (Washington
    Post, 9/13/01)

    [5] 2.7.01

    [6] The Third Dove

    [7] The Israeli-Arab War, June 1967, New Left Review, 23.6.67

    [8]
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/perspective/chi-
    0204070422apr07.s

    [9] April 7, 2002

    [10] I normalised the spelling of her name. Taki the snob had to spell
    quite an ordinary Jewish name Landoi (var. Landau) in the French way.

    [11] in private communication to the author

    [12] Source: NY Observer of 22 January 2001 by: Philip Weiss

    [13] June 16, 2001

    [14] Blaming America, Irish edition, Sunday Times

    [15] Guardian, 15 Sept 2001

    [16] http://www.arutzsheva.org

    [17] The quote supplied by David Pidcock.