Saddened by Savagery of Zionism
August 9, 2006 –
For the first time since the Six Day War (1967), Israel is prohibiting U.S. citizens of Palestinian descent from entering
into the West Bank. These Palestinian Americans, many of them professors, researchers,
and business professionals, are being kept from their families, homes, jobs, and businesses.
How did the U.S. Embassy respond to this Israeli human rights violation? The
U.S. told an Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, “The United States cannot intervene in sovereign decisions of another
country.” Imagine how much peace, prosperity,
and security the people of the United States of America would enjoy if that really was the U.S. foreign policy – particularly
in the Middle East. Unfortunately for the American people, the U.S. Congress
does not design its foreign policy towards the Middle East. Instead, the U.S.
Congress allows the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) to dictate U.S. foreign policy to the U.S. Congress,
particularly its policy towards the Middle East. See The Nation. AIPAC’s Hold.
to The Nation writer, Ari Berman, on July 18, 2006 the Senate unanimously approved a non-binding resolution ‘condemning
Hamas and Hezbollah and their state sponsors and supporting Israel’s exercise of its right to self-defense.’ After House majority leader John Boehner removed language from the bill urging ‘all
sides to protect innocent civilian life and infrastructure,’ the House version passed by a landslide, 410-8. The fact that Senate and House members voted in favor of a resolution that had such a fundamentally fair
and sound concept - that both sides should protect innocent civilian life and infrastructure -removed from it, should
sufficiently outrage Americans enough to remove those members from office as quickly as possible.
And why did the
AIPAC loyalist, House majority leader John Boehner, remove such simple, logical language from the House propaganda resolution? According to the Berman piece, AIPAC not only lobbied for the resolution; it had written
it. “They [Congress] were given a resolution by AIPAC”, said former
Carter Administration National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski. “They didn’t prepare one.”
Boehner can easily
be defined as a key member of the neo con, pro-Zionist mafia, so whatever his reasons were for sending his kill
the Lebanese and destroy Lebanon like there’s no tomorrow message to Israel, rest assured, the motives were selfish,
corrupt, and immoral. Ohio voters, particularly real Christian voters,
need to once and for all rid themselves of John Boehner, Congressman for the 8th District of Ohio.
Something is inherently
evil about any lobby, committee, syndicate, or cabal writing congressional resolutions, particularly when it is a pro-Zionism
cartel that had two of its top officials indicted recently. Steven J. Rosen
and Keith Weissman, the former top AIPAC officials, are charged with conspiring to disclose national defense information to
people not authorized to receive it, including their AIPAC colleagues, officials of the Israeli government, and a reporter
for the Washington Post. Now why would AIPAC officials want
U.S. national defense intelligence to pass onto their colleagues, the Israeli government, and the U.S. media?
Not only should
AIPAC be fully exposed, it must also be disarmed of its influential powers. Only
then will the United States be able to assume its appropriate role as an evenhanded broker in the Middle East. But rather than expelling AIPAC and the Israel Lobby from its midst, the majority
of the U.S. Congress remains in bed with the treasonous beast. It is atrocious,
and un-American, anti-Christian, anti-Muslim, anti-Arab…basically anti-everything except Ashkenazi Communistic Jew. Can I get a witness?
the latest Israeli destruction and occupation of Lebanon in perspective
greatest missed or ignored point in the latest Israeli war of aggression against the Lebanese people is the location in which
the two Israeli soldiers were captured. Reports on July 12, 2006, the reported
date in which this latest offensive began when it actually began on May 15, 1948, suggested that the Israeli soldiers
were captured in southern Lebanon. See Muckraker Report article, South Lebanon: Lost in Translation. It is interesting to note that the Reuters article referenced in the Lost
in Translation piece; the news service article that clearly stated, The Israeli army confirmed
that two Israeli soldiers had been captured on the Lebanese frontier, is no longer available
on the Internet. Where the Israeli soldiers were captured is a key piece of information to identify
which side actually instigated this current battle, but for identifying who started the war, that’s a no brainer
for anybody who has not been overtaken by the insane and blasphemous propaganda packaged under the unity banner titled
Judeo-Christianity – a concept created by Zionists and meant to deceive the less than informed, sentimental
Christian. What a joke – Judeo Christian. Why not just claim to be Hot / Cold, Black / White, or that you believe in No Messiah / Messiah, or No
Savior / Savior? Can I get a witness?
Israel started the war in the Middle East decades ago by its displacement and murder of hundreds of
thousands of non-Zionist people that stood in the way of the vile Zionist agenda. It
entrenched itself in Lebanon in 1967, and has never fully withdraw from Lebanon. Hezbollah
wants Israel out of all Lebanese territory to include Shebaa Farms, a Lebanese territory seized by the Zionists during its
war of aggression in 1967, now referred to as the Six-Day War. After U.N. Security
Resolution 425 was passed in 1978 calling for the complete withdraw of Israeli troops from Lebanese territories, Israel took
23 years to partially comply with the international community’s mandate that it stop violating the property and territory
of others. Israel never withdrew from Shebaa Farms because the United States,
through U.N. manipulations and negotiations, was able to remove the Shebaa Farms territory from the requirements of Security
Resolution 425. Please note that the majority of Lebanese people were not in
agreement with Shebaa Farms being stolen by Zionist occupiers. But who the hell cares what the Lebanese people wanted, right? Sounds familiar, does it not? A special
exemption for the Zionists at the expense of non-Zionists - Can I get a witness?
If the initial reports of where the Israeli soldiers were captured are accurate, if they were captured
on the Lebanese frontier, then Hezbollah was justified to capture them. They
had no business being in Lebanese territory – never did, never will. But
what if Hezbollah captured the Israeli soldiers on the border, or on the Israeli side of the border – which is how
the Zionist-stamped kosher U.S. media is now describing the origin of the latest battle for Lebanese territory? Would that make Hezbollah as culpable as Israel? How could
it with Israel occupying Shebaa Farms? As long as a single Israeli soldier is
permitted by the international community to occupy any Palestinian, Syrian, or Lebanese territory, the right of the occupied
and oppressed people to defend themselves against the occupiers – by any and all means available to them, is
as absolute as the right of any other to defend themselves.
So what does Zionism want? What it always wanted –
to steal land, property, and wealth from other people. It also wants to ensure
that no neighboring nation ever emerges that has a formable military that could in fact hold Israeli aggression in check. When frustrated by the few occasions that the international community has scorned
its grotesque human rights violations, the Israelis build apartheid walls and create wasteland buffer zones in the name of
self-defense. If it had its way, there would be a fifty-mile buffer zone beyond
its borders. Maybe the international community needs to tell Israel that if it
feels so vulnerable, then maybe it should create its buffer zone within its own borders instead of invading the territories
of others. If Israel wants a buffer zone – then it should create
it on its side of the border.
Think about it. If you feel threatened by your neighbor’s
dog, does that entitle you to build a fence twenty feet into your neighbor’s property?
What about if the neighbor’s dog bit you? Now do you have the right
to invade your neighbor’s property lines? You might have the right to shoot
the dog as it is attacking you on your property, or have the government seize the dog after the attack, but that does
not translate into a right to build a buffer zone fence that encroaches twenty feet into your neighbor’s yard.
What if your neighbor’s dog, unbeknownst to you, had five puppies before the government put the
mother dog down? What if your neighbor harbored the puppies until they were grown? What
if one day, the dogs dug a hole underneath your illegal fence, crawled through, and mauled you? Would you then have the right to blow up your neighbor’s house and the houses of all suspected friends
of your neighbors? How about all the roads and bridges leading into your neighborhood. What about the animal hospital and the dogcatcher’s office at the police station? Would you have the right to unleash this type of response? Would the court of public opinion and the court of law accept this sort of response from you? What if you got bit yet again, but this time you’re uncertain exactly what dog bit you because it
was nighttime and you could not see well in the darkness? Would that give you
the right to begin killing all the dogs in your neighborhood?
What if you jumped your illegal fence and got bit by the dog in your neighbor’s yard? Would that give you the right to displace one-fifth of your town’s population? What if many of the residents in your municipality decided that because of your insanely disproportional
response to your neighbor’s dog attacking you, they had enough of your behavior, and were going to now side with
your neighbor despite the fact that they don’t necessarily care much for him or her?
What if other people began to unleash their dogs onto you also? Would
that give you a right to start bombing your entire county? Now do you have the
right to move your fence to the perimeter of your sub-division? Do you now have
the right to violate human rights in the sub-division? Can you imprison all residents
of your sub-division that refuse to be occupied and oppressed by your savagery?
And what if the original breeder of the first dog that attacked you, was you?
Understand that what the Zionist state is doing in Lebanon today is so atrocious, so anti-God, that
there will be a day of reckoning for each and all people that have turned a blind eye, or wildly supported this latest Zionist
crime. If your neighbor breeds pit pulls and trains them to be aggressive, attack,
and fight, then the leash that contains the dogs is his or her responsibility. But
if the dogs break the leash and inflict wounds upon your family and friends, that doesn’t give you a right to exterminate
all pit bulls, and dogs friendly with pit bulls, or people that harbor dogs in their houses and neighborhoods. It doesn’t give you a right to go door to door in your neighborhood, gathering
up all dogs, and imprison them for years under deplorable conditions.
And what if you were the original breeder that is responsible for the aggressive, fighting, bloodletting
breed of pit pull in the first place? What if you were the one that abused and
oppressed the breed to the point that its bloodline became savage? What if it
was your abuse and horror that made the dog strike back? Well then, you might
have wrought exactly what you deserved. Life will have come full circle.
When will life come full circle for the victims of Zionism? How
much longer must the world pay for the past sufferings of the self-chosen with the blood of those who do not claim
to be Jews? When will the United States break the shackles of Communist Zionism
cleverly disguised as a democracy so that the U.S. can become a truly independent, fair, even-handed broker of peacefully
achieved, peace in the Middle East?
Maybe non-Zionists will stop paying the price for Zionism once pro-Zionists are taught that the people
they continue to put down are not dogs.
The pit bull analogy was for instructional purposes only. Pit
bulls are as friendly a breed of dog as any other - if raised and nurtured properly.