From the Yeast of the Pharisees (Come the Lies and Crimes of Zionism)

Part Four: Children of the Corrupted Covenant

---

Notice to my readers: My work is reader supported. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber, or a one-off financial contributor. Doesn’t have to be a lot. All donations gratefully accepted. See ⤵️ for direct payment details. Or subscribe via the Substack forum.—GM. 🙏 👍

---

‘The State of Israel will prove itself not by material wealth, not by military might or technical achievement, but by its moral character and human values.’ — David Ben-Gurion, Jewish terrorist, Zionist Icon, First Prime Minister of Israel.

‘Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.’ [Trans: ‘To ravage, to slaughter, to usurp under false titles, they call empire; and where they make a wasteland, they call it peace.’] — Publius Tacitus, Roman senator, orator, and one of antiquity’s great historians.

‘Be careful...watch out for the yeast of the Pharisees...’ — Jesus Christ, “King of the Jews”, giving his apostles a ‘heads up’ of sorts. — Mark 8:15, from the Bible, a novel by God.

‘🎵Now they call it the “good book”, well that's a shame…How could so much evil be done, in the good book’s name…🎶’ — SONG: The Good Book, by Rainer Ptacek (For Bibi Netanyouknowwho).

*Author Note: A word about the title. One doesn’t need a Ph.D in Divinity to work out where the Son of God was coming from with this indelible Biblical soundbite. For all his “love thy neighbour” and “turn the other cheek” schtick, JC was not a big fan of the Pharisees, the Chief Priests and the Scribes et. al. Amongst other less than savoury character traits, these folks held themselves in high regard; purported to speak on behalf of their Jewish brethren; and weren’t known for practicing what they preached. (It’s no accident of linguistic history that a synonym for ‘hypocritical’ is “pharisaical”.)

Now of course we don’t have the “Pharisees” as such; but we do have perhaps the next ‘best’ thing: that’s the Zionists and their unholy dogma of course, one diametrically opposed to everything JC preached. We only need ponder the unfolding events in Gaza for hard-core evidence of the Old Testament kind to appreciate that. GM

---

Introduction: As is often the case, there’s a sense of déjà vu attending debate about any and all things Israel. Such discourse is unavoidable without reflecting on its kinship with its chief patron the United States. The terminal discord in Palestine and ongoing havoc in Iraq, Syria and more broadly across the Middle East brings this into sharp relief. No matter what happens, in bi-partisan lock-step America’s political classes—and its establishment media—avoid any censure of the Tel Aviv regime for its role in the mayhem. This was exemplified by recent events with most western leaders falling over themselves to condemn Hamas’ actions on October 7th, 2023, once again barking like a pack of Pavlov’s dogs to anyone who’d listen that hoary old mantra: ‘Israel has a right to defend itself’, or some riff on the theme.

Though especially evident since 9/11—an event from which Israel seems to have been the only state that’s benefitted—this unholy geopolitical alliance is the decades-in-the-making basis for everything we’ve recently witnessed, with links to so much of what we’re witnessing in the here and now, including in Ukraine. Whilst such links remain, so do the existential dangers for America and the rest of the world.

In this fourth instalment in a series of stand-alone articles, Greg Maybury again draws upon the work of both Jewish and non-Jewish writers, journalists, researchers, scholars, activists and historians to present a critical, wide-ranging analysis of various facets of the mythos and the reality of Israel, its history, and its origins. By alternately illuminating the past with an ever watchful eye to the present, he attempts an in-depth probe into Zionism and its origins, and the inordinate power its various supporters, lobby groups, apologists, defenders and acolytes wield across time and space.

Zionism it needs be noted is the reigning political ideology which inspired the establishment of the Jewish State in 1948 and which still dictates its national interests, and fuels its larger geopolitical ambition. It’s an ideology that’s usurped in varying degrees the “national interests” of the respective nations in which so many of “God’s chosen” reside. It is one moreover whose precepts are arguably the most enduring, portentous, globally consequential, yet least understood—by Jews and non-Jews alike—of any of the major political currents in the ‘river of our history’. Time then for another ‘pilgrimage’ to the Wailing Wall, albeit one of a different kind, sans yarmulke!

See here for links to Part One, Part Two, and Part Three.

---

— Of Zionists & Terrorists (The Best Laid Plans)

As folks with only a passing interest in such matters would know, since the last instalment of this series, events in the Middle East have taken a serious turn for the worse. Unsurprisingly, the region’s resident hegemon Israel as per is at the eye of the storm. Perhaps it’s more correct to say, is the very storm itself!

We’re speaking here of the Hamas attacks of October 7 upon Israel, the so-named Operation Al-Aqsa Flood. Although these events might’ve taken the world by storm, a big question remains as to whether Israel was taken—a la 9/11, a la Pearl Harbor—by surprise. Or whether in fact the Israelis (or others who might’ve had skin in the game) had some inkling of what was coming, and allowed the events to play out as Hamas alone—allegedly—had planned.

(Readers can 👀👉 here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here for additional reporting on the specifics of the events).

If these conjectural musings have a ring of familiarity about them, that is not simply déjà vu. And in such situations, they should be the first port of call for any investigator seeking a deeper truth about these events. Or simply for anyone wanting to know how and on what basis Israel might justify (whilst most of its citizens at least tacitly condone if not actually support unconditionally with few questions asked), the wholesale slaughter of tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children. We’ll return to these points throughout.

But first to say this: The extraordinary polarisation of opinion we’ve witnessed in recent times appears to have reached a whole new level since the Hamas attack, particularly in the manner of Israel’s immediate and ongoing response. This is especially insofar as the pro-Israel sentiment goes. Absent from much of it is an informed understanding of the history behind the events, not least being in the very nature of Israel’s creation in 1948 and the justification for it.

Any commentary on recent events without considering the context of Israel’s creation and the deeper perspective it provides is meaningless. Sadly, this does not deter innumerable fools who like rushing in to areas where angels and the more circumspect amongst us fear to set foot.

Herein, the following reality check is worth noting. As Jewish historian Ilan Pappe notes in his excellent 2017 primer Ten Myths about Israel, the Zionist account of how [Palestine] became the state of Israel is based on ‘a cluster of myths…’, one that has persistently sought to question if not outright deny the Palestinians’ moral right to the land. For Pappe, Western media and political elites—and we should add ill-informed armchair analysts—unremittingly accept this set of myths as ‘a given truth’, as well as the justification for Israeli actions.

‘More often than not, the tacit acceptance of these myths serves as an explanation for Western governments’ disinclination to interfere…in a conflict that has been going on since the nation’s foundation.’

At the same time, the Zionist ‘myth-meisters’ and assorted hasbara hacks have themselves insisted on the Jews’ own inalienable right—Biblically contrived though it be—to that very same real estate. Yet as Keith Whitelam, in his 1996 book The Invention of Ancient Israel: The Silencing of Palestinian History notes, this is deeply troublesome. ‘The problem’ he says, ‘of Palestinian history [and by direct implication, Israel’s claim on this ancient land per the Old Testament “myth-narratives”], has remained unspoken within biblical studies’, he says.

Notes Whitelam:

‘[It’s] been silenced by the invention of ancient Israel in the image of the European nation state. Only after we’ve exposed the implications of this “invention” will Palestinian history be freed from the constraints of biblical studies and the discourse that has shaped it.’ [Emphasis added.]

For those with a more nuanced understanding of the role played by our Hebrew brethren throughout history and their place in the current geopolitical firmament in general—along with the less partisan observers of Israel’s history and the destabilising role it has assiduously played the Middle East before and since its formation in 1948 in particular—none of this should comes as a surprise. Nor should it be overly controversial. More to the point, the overarching significance of all this for these same folks is unlikely to go unnoticed.

To be sure though, there’ll be no dearth of Israel’s staunch defenders taking serious umbrage (and it needs be noted, taking it to the streets) at the preceding. The raging controversy surrounding unfolding events in Gaza is palpable evidence of this. This, even as thousands of innocent people are slaughtered en masse in what can only be described as a fiery maelstrom (“a holocaust?”) of Old Testament inspired, ‘vengeance is mine’ fury.

These righteous defenders include it needs be stressed, many folks who consider themselves devout Christians. These are the ones who subscribe to the view of the Jews as being “God’s Chosen”—and that of their “rightful” claim on the “Promised Land”—and whose sacred covenant ‘inked’ with the Almighty back in the day they accept as having been proffered to the Jews sans any strings or ‘key performance indicators’ attached.

---

— Poisoning the Wells of Palestine

One of the more reliable indicators of the intense division and rancour in such a climate is the all too predictable warnings of ‘increased anti-Semitism’ that come with the territory. Yet, as Joachim Hagopian pointed out recently, there’s a ‘huge difference’ between being genuinely critical of the Israeli genocide on the one hand, and—on the other—antipathy directed at Jews just because they happen to be Jews, the latter being the only valid basis for using such heavily loaded language. This is a trope we’ve all heard before.

Whilst first being careful to rightly decry such behaviour and attitudes, ‘Antisemitic hate speech and hate crimes’, Hagopian opined, ‘…are likely rising in the wake of [the] genocide [of] Palestinians.’ He went further,

‘…Fearing of being called [an “antisemitic bigot”], many have repressed their opinions for decades of built up resentment. A mounting, seething reservoir of repressed anger is now “safely” expressed in numbers in the face of blood-soaked Palestinian children’s lives being snuffed out by the thousands released daily on social media.’ [Emphasis added.]

Especially insofar as the pro-Israel sentiment goes—irrespective of whether it emanates from Jews themselves or non-Jews sympathetic to their cause (however said “cause” might be defined by either group)—what’s absent from much of it is again, that all-important “informed understanding” of the history that has brought the situation to this point.

Placing to one side the predisposition of the garden variety “anti-semitic bigot” (whose numbers are in any event routinely inflated in these situations), to leverage Israel’s scorched earth response in order to bait, bash, n’ berate Jews for the sheer hell of it, the more valid concerns here are the views of those who genuinely oppose the Israelis’ actions, and why they might be justified in so doing. We’re talking a ‘cause and effect’ thing here, one that frequently gets lost in translation, if not is deliberately hijacked so as to further muddy the already murky waters of this interminable myth-narrative.

Put another way, this is one time where the tired and tiresome, albeit tried and true, “anti-semitic” rebuke (no matter how or by whom it’s framed or to whom it’s aimed) no longer cuts the mustard as an all-purpose bulwark against criticism of Israel for its criminal behaviour past and present. Israel and its apostles and apologists have been dining out on this one-size-fits-all riposte for far too long, and it’s now well and truly reached its use by date.

That being a reality though, these folks appear not to have received the memo. For them, ‘missing in action’ is any apparent inkling upon their part of the heinous—and, hitherto unspeakable—crimes and atrocities perpetrated by the Jewish state against the Palestinians since its inception. Put another way, the Israelis have been (literally and figuratively) poisoning the wells of Palestine for a very long time.

Though hardly common knowledge (there’s a reason for that), such well-documented crimes were planned and carried out by Zionist uber-terrorists, the ‘spiritual’ forbears of Israel’s leaders today. So many of these people went on to become the state’s founding “fathers”, their campaign of terror, assassination, sabotage, dispossession, ethnic cleansing, genocide, wanton violence, and mass murder already a work in progress a full decade or more before 1948, and well before the events enshrined in the sacrosanct “Holocaust” narrative.

---

SIDEBAR: A WORD ABOUT ‘HASBARA’ and THE FABLED ‘EXODUS’.

“Exodus” was the title of Jewish author Leon Uris’s massive bestseller of 1958 that purported to provide for the world an account (albeit thinly fictionalised) of the ‘heroic’ story of Israel’s ‘small, poorly-equipped, inexperienced, rag-tag army’ of “freedom fighters” courageously battling overwhelming odds in their epic fight to establish the Jewish state after their mass “exodus” from Europe so as to finally escape the trauma, horror and tragedy of the war years and thereafter fulfil their Biblically ordained destiny. Something akin to this would’ve undoubtedly been the pitch to the book’s publisher anyway.

Yet the book has not aged well by any stretch. Famed, though now sadly deceased British Middle East correspondent Robert Fisk opined in 2014 that it was ‘a racist, fictional account of the birth of Israel in which Arabs are rarely mentioned without the adjectives “dirty” and “stinking” [and] was one of the best pieces of Socialist-Zionist propaganda that Israel could have sought’. Others diverse voices such as Norman Finkelstein, Edward Said, and Rashid Khalidi were left also equally underwhelmed.

As for the title of Uris’s pseudo-historical exercise in ‘hasbara’ inspired hackery, to say little of the plot/narrative itself, it’s perhaps far more correct to describe “Exodus” as “thickly fantasised”; the author laying it on so thick he used a brickie’s trowel in lieu of a pen, thereafter renewing his creative licence with each successive chapter. Apart from the “exodus” from historical reality, the only genuine “Exodus” that took place was the one enforced upon the tens of thousands of shit-scared indigenous Palestinians who were lucky enough to escape the genocidal onslaught of the aforesaid “freedom fighters” in their determined rush to overrun the Holy Land during their bloody, relentless campaign of ethnic cleansing.

Nevertheless, it would be difficult to underestimate the impact of the book, which was later made into a Hollywood blockbuster (natch) starring Paul Newman. It powerfully solidified the Israeli creation myth-narrative in the global collective consciousness of Jews and non-Jews alike for generations to come, with this writer even getting sucked into the fantasy (via both book and film) as an impressionable teenager. It’s unknown how much ‘blood shekel’ passed hands between the Zionists and the author for his dubious literary ‘legwork’. But with Uris no doubt profiting handsomely from book sales and film rights alone and Israel profiting immeasurably in the propaganda ROI forever and a day, both parties cleaned up.

It’s often said one ‘can’t make shit like this up’, but someone did on this occasion to be sure, not least Uris. And Israel itself it must be said, have been ‘making shit up’ since then in order to sustain the fairy-tale fiction of its invention. It’s only in recent years that I’ve personally managed to shake off this fairy-tale bollocks by reading some real history. What you’re imbibing now dear reader might be seen as part of, well, let’s just call it my “self-prescribed and administered rehab”, belated though it may be. And if much of what you’ve read thus far is news to you, it can be part of your rehabilitation too, only if you want it of course. Bottom line: Let there be no longer any illusions about Israel and the nature of its birth. 😉👍

---

That the crimes of Israel’s founders have all but been whitewashed from the historical record is another of the realities that propels our narrative herein. Indeed, in the words of writer Nur Masalah, the Israelis weren’t just satisfied with an ethnic cleansing exercise—or for that matter a straightforward genocide—upon the Palestinians; their intention was perpetrating a complete memoricide: the destruction of all trace and memory of these peoples and their past. (As in fact Jewish philosopher Adi Ophir once remarked, they ‘never stopped denying the atrocities [they] could not justify, and justifying those [they] could not deny’.)

The infamous Deir Yassin massacre of 1948 is perhaps the best known. Yet Deir Yassin is but one of countless small and large atrocities committed by the “Jewish terrorists” (as one writer aptly calls them) in the months before the state of Israel came into being, with reportedly more than 500 Palestinian towns and villages having been wiped off the map since 1948.

However, the studied ignorance of such historical realities seems not to inhibit many folks (even those who should know better) from letting their opinions run ‘free-range’ across the open prairie of public discourse. This is particularly the case with our political leaders and the establishment media. As their pearl-clutching posturing over the “horror” of the Hamas attacks attests—with so many of the reports now authoritatively debunked as “atrocity propaganda” or since shown to have been grossly exaggerated—these folks just can’t bring themselves to nod the savage, ugly realities of Israel’s past. Such timidity and recalcitrance we can safely assume is mustered in no small part because they’re well aware upon which side their bagel is buttered best.

---

SIDEBAR: ‘...the Jews are the last people in the world to build their home on the back of [others]. The Jews have suffered so much from injustice that they’ve learned their lesson and I can assure you that the Arabs will not suffer at our hands.’ — Chaim Weismann, responding to (former British PM) David Lloyd George’s caution in 1925 that his Zionist project may be jeopardised if Palestinians were ill-treated by Jewish settlers. — Cited in: The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine—A History of Settler Colonial Conquest & Resistance, Rashid Khalidi, 2020

---

— The Ever Widening Gulf (Between Reality and Fantasy)

The primary aim of this series even before October 7 then was always intended to provide at least an entree into a more objective insight and informed perception than might be provided by say, the anti-Defamation League (ADL) for example. The latter to be sure being one of the more notorious guardians of the ever-so-carefully curated Zionist Mythos, whose ‘eye-for-an-eye’ inspired mission statement might best be summed up as ‘fighting hate and discrimination with more hate and discrimination’. The imperatives at this point remain the same, but are now imbued with a far greater sense of urgency. An event like that of October 7 will do that.

Author Note: Worth mentioning here are the words of Moshe Sharett, Israel's second PM, incidentally one of its more moderate, perhaps more reflective leaders. In a 1957 talk, he candidly spoke to Israel’s ‘brutal and murderous’ military campaigns and why they’re ‘always doomed to fail’. Sharett mused rhetorically: ‘Do people consider that when military reactions outstrip in their severity the events that caused them, grave processes are set in motion which widen the gulf and thrust our neighbors into the extremist camp? How can this deterioration be halted?’

“How?” indeed, well might we again ask!

The only quibble one might have with his observation here is his use of the word “fail”. Most I expect would argue that on the face of it, Israel’s numerous “brutal and murderous military campaigns” over the decades have been marked by far more success than failure. Although it’s something to contemplate in future outings, suffice to ponder at this point: At what cost have these successes been achieved? In this respect it would appear, Sharett was on to something. Given all that has happened since that time and even more recent events, it seems clear few of his Tribal brethren—then or since—heard or understood what he was getting at. More’s the pity.

---

David Ben-Gurion: First PM of Israel, Jewish Icon, Zionist Terrorist.

---

With the preceding in mind, what transpired on October 7 is undoubtedly the sort of scenario that would’ve been the stuff of the worst nightmares of those who were—well before Israel was established—adamantly opposed to the creation of a settler-colonialist Jewish entity in the already inhabited area of Palestine. Such folks not only included high profile, respected members of America’s political, military, diplomatic, foreign policy, and national security establishment.

It also numbered many prominent, and decidedly wiser, Jewish heads across the diaspora, who for a variety of reasons all viewed any such development as a very, very bad idea. We’ve touched on this opposition in earlier episodes. And if for no other reason than it needs to get more airplay than either the official historical record or that aforesaid general public discourse allows for (there are many other reasons to be sure), we’ll do so again in later instalments.

But harking back to those days, it’s enough to say a couple of things at this point:

a) the Zionists’ grip on the imagination of world Jewry and their broader geopolitical influence was still a ‘work in progress’ and had yet to take hold; and

b) those of America’s key foreign and national security policy decision makers more concerned with US national interest were by and large more prevalent and outspoken.

Yet although far too many people are quick to declare Israel as the innocent victim of an horrendous, unprovoked, “surprise” terrorist attack by its notional mortal enemy Hamas, as always with this country—and it needs be said with our ‘Hebrew’ brethren in general, especially those who subscribe to the ideology of Zionism—such concerns are never quite that clear cut. (N.B.: As I write, new revelations about the events of October 7 are coming thick and fast, few if any of them lending any ballast to the official story.)

Ever since the Zionist zealots overran Palestine and ‘Nakba-ed’ the indigenous population, it has sought with remarkable sleight-of-hand effectiveness (spec. via ‘pilpulism’, a bespoke, Talmudic-derived variant of circular reasoning aimed at muddying the waters of an otherwise logical argument*) to occupy the moral high ground. This, notwithstanding them having about as much right to the ‘real estate’ therein as that of the land ‘between the river and the sea’. (Truth be told, the only “real estate” Israel might legitimately lay claim to occupy is that which is located inside the Memory Hole.) (*See here for more on this.)

The response moreover to the Hamas attacks is itself testament to another irrefutable reality: when it comes to Israel, the compulsion to engage in moral relativism upon the part of the Zionists and their apologists is at its most righteous whenever it deems itself the victim of the ruthless, implacable determination of its enemies to inflict harm, if not indeed, complete annihilation, upon it. To underscore once again, it is this Grand Canyon-sized gulf between perception and reality attending all things Israel and the cult-like ideology of Zionism that forms the basic premise herein.

With that in mind, it may or may not be happenstance that the Hamas attacks provide us another glaring example upon which to draw in order to further explore this gulf, and what doing so means for understanding the broader issues attending the “Arab-Israeli” conflict; but it hardly matters either way. The fact that it clearly does is enough. And so we proceed on that basis.

---

SIDEBAR: ‘History and collective memory are often a tapestry of stories woven by social elites, with disregard for the voices of ordinary people and self-representation of the oppressed, colonised, indigenous and marginalised. Much of the histories of Palestine are written by powerful elites and those in the service of conquerors and colonisers.’ — Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History, Nur Masalah, 2018

---

— The Real Enemy of the Jews

As noted, we’ll return to recent events again soon. But another short detour down memory lane is necessary in providing essential context and perspective, this being one issue of historical and political import which is rarely burdened with too much of either.

In an article from 2013, acclaimed British journalist, and author of the excellent trilogy Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, Alan Hart, related details of a little known plot concocted by the founding fathers of Israel to further their aims and ambitions. Amongst other things, this bloody ‘blueprint’—known as Plan Dalet (aka “Plan D”)—holds significant import for our understanding of the events that took place on October 7, and in particular, that of Israel’s response. Plan D is framed by one scribe Stuart Littlewood as “one of the sickest documents in history and shows why so many people question Israel’s legitimacy”. By any measure that’s a shocking indictment, yet one that’s difficult to refute.

What is/was Plan D then? The short answer? Seventy-five years ago, on March 10 1948, two months before Israel’s unilateral declaration of independence in defiance of the will of the international community as it was then represented at the United Nations (UN)—Zionism’s then political and military leaders (most of whom were unreconstructed terrorists), met in Tel Aviv to formally adopt PLAN DALET.

As we’ll continue to see, that that “independence” had already come directly at the expense of the independence, security, safety, property, livelihoods, and the very lives—and what should have amounted to the inviolable heritage—of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians is a matter of historical record. As Hart noted, Plan D was the ‘blueprint with operational military orders for the ethnic cleansing of Palestine’. [Emphasis added].

According to him however, neither the soon to be freshly minted Israelis (nor their political heirs) ever referred to the crime they nodded and committed with ruthless efficiency, then or since, as “ethnic cleansing”. And ever since that time, few could reasonably argue this has not always been the intention of the Zionists and their heirs from the off.

Their euphemism of choice was “transfer”, a prototypical example of the Zionists’ penchant (then and now) for disguising the nature of their crimes to a) inoculate themselves from criticism at the time; and b) ensure they come up smelling like roses in the historical record and in the hearts and minds of the general public. Along with those portrayed in previous instalments, the response by certain individuals and groups to recent events indicate that this MO is alive and well, and working a real treat.

Worth adding here is this: A year after Plan D was blueprinted, Zionist terror-meister David Ben-Gurion (who by then had ‘rehabbed’ himself into Israel’s first PM on the way to establishing a legacy as the country’s most revered elder statesman), told his fellow terrorists and agents provocateurs he supported compulsory transfer. Attacking outside the boundaries allocated to a Jewish state [by the UN partition] as well as inside them,

‘…the Zionists had cleared about 300,000 Palestinians from their homeland by the time the state of Israel was declared in May 1948. Their militias were attacking everywhere, murdering, massacring and ethnically cleansing…’ .

Such then was “compulsory transfer”! Ben-Gurion unashamedly laid out his stall regarding these criminal actions with this: ‘I don’t see anything immoral in it.’ For Hart, the preceding exposed the Zionist entity’s principal founding father as a man with ‘no sense of what was morally right and wrong’. Well might we say, that insofar as the Israeli leadership has revealed itself throughout that 75 years, Ben-Gurion presents as an exemplar (the “poster-boy” perhaps, to use the vernacular du jour), for most if not all of his successors.

(With that, we can say the current PM, the estimable Benjamin Netanyahu, to whom we’ll soon return, is seeking now—packing his own bag of magnificent obsessions, delusions, pathologies, and compulsions—to show even DBG a clean pair of heels, if he hasn’t already done so long ago. But I digress.)

---

SIDEBAR: ‘Having demonstrated the…documentary record as uncontroversial, I devoted the remainder of [the book] to scrutinizing the controversies manufactured by Israel’s apologists. I focused on three: mystification of the [Arab-Israeli] conflict; an alleged “new anti-Semitism”; and proliferation of fraud posing as scholarship.’ — Jewish-American scholar and serial Zionist remonstrant, Norman Finkelstein, Beyond Chutzpah: On the the Misuse of Anti-Semitism, and the Abuse of History. 2005

---

The Massacre at Deir Yassin — David Ben-Gurion’s “compulsory transfer” in action. ‘Without Deir Yassin there’d be no Israel’.

---

— The Nightmare of the Never-ending Nakba

In the context of what’s unfolding now in the wake of October 7, an important point to understand about Plan D is the following—it being taken verbatim from the original document—which declared in part how the operation would play out (for the record, it did to a “T”): ‘Mounting operations against enemy population centres located inside or near our defensive system in order to prevent them from being used as bases by an active armed force.’

These operations were divided into the following categories, with the plan’s ‘fine print’ spelling it out in no uncertain terms. Here’s a sampler:

a) destruction of villages—setting fire to, blowing up, and planting mines in the debris—especially of those population centres which are difficult to control continuously;

b) mounting search and control operations [by] encirclement of the village and conducting a search inside it; and, in the event of resistance,

c) any armed force must be destroyed and the population must be expelled outside the borders of the state.

Now the preceding alone should give all those folks whose righteous umbrage at the “horror” and the “evil” of the Hamas attacks seems to know few bounds, much pause for thought. If not, then the following should do the trick. Although a reality Zionism’s sundry apologists would prefer passes unremarked upon in polite company, it is (again) a matter of historical record that in the relentless, decade spanning crusade to establish Israel, its ignoble knights in not so shining armour committed the most ruthless, premeditated, and horrendous atrocities upon innocent Palestinians in order to achieve their goals. (Indeed, one writer was unabashed in calling them out for what they were: “Jewish terrorists”.)

In this endeavour no bullet or bomb was spared, no crime perpetrated delayed by hesitation, no bloody massacre or bog-standard terrorist tactic off the table, no injustice too extreme, and no mercy or compassion wasted. The profound irony that such acts were perpetrated a full couple of decades or more before anyone thought it a good idea to redefine, capitalise—then ‘trademark’—the word “holocaust”, should not be lost on anyone.

Author Note: If that in and of itself does not demonstrate the characteristic “chutzpah” of the Tribe, the subsequent morphing of these “freedom fighters” into the foundation after 1948 of Israel’s regular military forces (the IDF) and later on into The World’s Most Moral Army™️—the latter designation largely one of the self-anointed, albeit delusional kind—should surely do the trick.)

---

---

Indeed, though Zionism’s more ardent apologists might take considerable umbrage at the suggestion, many folks could rightly argue that there’s been as much effort invested in keeping the holocaust narrative alive (“never again” anyone?), and milking it for everything that’s on offer, as has been spent in keeping Israel’s own crimes and atrocities out of the historical record and far removed from public consciousness. (Herein, the fabled “Promised Land” of the Good Book—aka the “Land of Milk n’ Honey”—might be up for a rebrand: the “Land of Bilk n’ Money” perhaps captures the Zeitgeist best. But again, I digress).

And in order to somehow justify their actions to the world (at least to the extent said “world” was looking or for that matter even cared), Israel concocted and repeatedly circulated throughout this time the most outlandish lies and delusional fantasies. Then, via the twin evils of propaganda and censorship, they’ve employed the vast resources of the world’s media (at which point they already commanded considerable control over, if not indeed wholesale ownership thereof) to pull this all off. This is a reality which cannot be overstated. Nor should doing so be called in to question, or rebuked by expedient accusations of "anti-Semitism" or “stereotyping”.

(Such is their mastery of the modern myth-narrative undertaking, as noted earlier they even have their own bespoke variant, called “hasbara”.)

That their victims moreover included countless fellow Jews, so many of whom were refugees or displaced persons from war torn Europe desperately seeking a salvation of sorts anywhere it could be found (though it should be noted Palestine was the last place the majority had on their ‘shopping list’), and many others besides the Palestinians—including Muslims, Christians, and Jews already co-existing peacefully in the Holy Land—who got in their way or who became collateral damage, is a story for another time. It does though underscore the aforesaid “reality” in spades.

That the preceding should render recent events in a decidedly different light than they've thus far been portrayed or viewed by so many who should know better, is of course another matter entirely. Suffice to say, so much then for ‘the insulted innocents, the victims of intolerance, the martyrs of world history’, as one writer has portrayed—ironically it would appear—our ‘Hebrew’ brethren.

---

— A Lunatic State of Affairs (Israel’s Moment of Truth)

In taking to task the state of Israel and its policies and actions, the “self-loathing” Jewish-American historian Norman Finkelstein, per his ‘schtick’ is not usually one to mince the King’s lingo. In a 2012 interview with BBC journalist Sarah Montague on the notoriously Zionist-biased broadcaster’s program “HARDTalk”, Finkelstein nonetheless demonstrated no small measure of forbearance with his ‘Bolshie’ interlocutor, who seemed determined from the off to deny the controversial author an opportunity to get a word in edgewise.

Norman Finkelstein, Author, Historian, ‘Self-Loathing Jew’.

Placing to one side the fact that this exchange presented a masterclass in ‘hasbara-inspired hatchet hackery’, her guest at one point was attempting to respond to her belligerent line of questioning about his frequent critique of Israel’s foreign policies. In particular it was Israel’s ‘repeat offender’ role in fomenting instability, conflict and endless war within and across the Middle East that was at the core of her questioning, with her seeking, indeed provocatively so, Finkelstein’s responses on that matter.

For the none too savvy author and anti-Zionist activist, who must’ve seen her coming from a mile off, there was nothing to debate much less argue about: this was a point which the righteous Montague—who having bitten off more than she could chew and was clearly out of her depth—was unable to grasp or accept. ‘We’re talking about a country that every 2-3 years goes to war’, he calmly persisted. Insofar as Finkelstein was concerned, Israel’s track record spoke for itself:

‘If you follow the press as I do, every day they talk about “let’s attack this country, let’s attack that country”. That's not normal, and I call it a “lunatic state".’ [Emphasis added.]

Now admittedly Finkelstein could’ve been talking about Israel’s benefactor, meal ticket and its de facto bodyguard the United States, this point itself being a recurring theme in this series. It’s perhaps enough to say that for the US to insist upon better (i.e. less “lunatic”) behaviour from Israel, it would morally require America to clean up its own act, thereby setting something of an example for the Chosen Ones. Given the stranglehold that Israel maintains over US policy itself (herein one only has to point to the neoconservatives’—Israel’s resident stateside “fifth column”—role in shaping that policy and the fawning commitment to Israel’s interests by America’s political classes and its media), this is unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Indeed, with most objective commentators conceding that Washington (not unlike that “moral high ground” referred to earlier) is also presumed “Israeli Occupied Territory”, with its denizens no less constrained and controlled than those of the West Bank and Gaza—this metaphorical ‘confinement’ to be sure being of a more volitional and self-serving kind—this is to be expected. And with the fallout and blowback from the events of October 7th still exploding in our ears and sending seismic tremors across the Greater Middle East and the broader geopolitical landscape, Finkelstein’s observations resonate with ever greater portent and gravitas.

If that doesn’t underscore the double barrelled hypocrisy that characterises the Zionist myth-narrative which the media dutifully regurgitates, in a recent article (aptly titled for our purposes herein “The Demise of the Last Jewish Kingdom”), E Michael Jones from Culture Wars reported the following. For Jones, the war on Gaza ‘provides cover for the Jews who are determined to take total control of discourse according to their ethnocentric irrational views’, he began. Jones went further: ‘The war on Gaza’ [he said],

‘…coincided with the tail end of the ADL’s campaign against Elon Musk, which was followed by the EU’s attempt to force Musk to adopt European censorship regulations and impose them on the United States in a clear violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution, and exposed the colossal double standard behind that attempt.’

He further noted that whilst YouTube is zealous in policing its platform and banning anyone guilty of what they see as “hate speech”, it is somewhat selective in bringing down the hammer on transgressors. Jones added that Jewish demonstrators can shout ‘Kill all Palestinians. Kill all of them’ and argue in favor of genocide with impunity. This and other threats to ‘wipe them [the Palestinians] off the fucking map’ appeared on YouTube without evident sanction, the latter verbatim remonstrances about as ‘hateful’ as anyone might imagine. ‘What happened to YouTube’s hate speech guidelines?’, Jones righteously enquires.

“What happened” indeed? They’ve clearly gone MIA. A reality that’s been apparent for some time, and one unlikely to change anytime soon. Why is that so? Who owns YouTube? Or as it’s ‘affectionately’ dubbed, “JewTube”.

---

SIDEBAR: ‘[Actually] there is no such thing as ancient Jews. [Furthermore Jews] are not the same thing as Judahites, who are not the same as Israelites, who must be distinguished from Hebrews—and Israelis are something else altogether. The confusion of these terms works greatly to the advantage of the [Zionist movement]…and is understood by all open-minded scholars.’ — John Tiffany, Fables of Ancient Israel Dissected.

---

— The Grass-mower of Gaza (His Final Solution?)

Although a more expansive analysis is beyond the scope of this instalment (the deeper dive perhaps best left to another time), in examining the recent events in the overarching context of Israel’s history, one cannot do so without some mention of its estimable prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

By virtue of his longevity alone, to say nothing of the man’s clear determination—which many, perhaps too simplistically, see as psychopathically driven—to continue pursuing at all costs and by whatever means the legacy of his forbears (i.e. finishing the job as outlined in “Plan D”, which put simply is eradicating the Palestinians from the river to the sea), it is important to have some insight into his mindset.

Benjamin ‘Netanyouknowwho’ — The Grass Mower of Gaza

In two recent articles in which he ruminated on Israel’s response to the Hamas attacks, French writer Laurent Guyenot drew our attention to a number of factors which serve us well here. Guyenot’s analysis included on the one hand his own perceptions of the Israeli PM and his peculiar psychopathy; on the other he examined the Biblically derived nature of his worldview and that of Israel’s role and place in the global firmament, a theme to which we alluded earlier.

Both articles also present us an ideal segue from Finkelstein’s preceding observations about the “lunatic” character of the Jewish state, and both articles present an intriguing, yet nonetheless thoroughly disturbing insight into the man who could still—whether by accident or by design—instigate World War Three.

In the first article “Israel’s Biblical Psychopathy”, though he concedes that Netanyahu ticks many of the requisite boxes, Guyenot refutes the notion of the Israeli PM as “psychopathic” in the more readily accepted sense. Instead he offers him up as an ‘apostle’ of sorts, a “worshipper” of a “psychopathic god” (Yahweh), one who happens to be the leader of a “psychopathic state”. For Guyenot, calling Israel’s leaders “psychopaths” is not helpful:

‘What we need is [to] recognize Israel as a collective psychopath, and study the origin of this unique national character. It’s a matter of survival for the world, just as it’s a matter of survival for any group to recognize the psychopath among them and understand his patterns of thinking and of behavior.’ [Emphasis added.]

For some this might sound like splitting hairs. But in a very real sense, Guyenot is still making I believe an important point. As noted earlier, Netanyahu views his mission through a Biblical prism; like the aforementioned Ben-Gurion he is “not crazy” per se, he is simply “thinking biblically”, as delusional and deranged as his actions might appear. ‘Almost every Israeli leader of Ben-Gurion’s generation and the next’ he says, ‘shared the same biblical mindset.’

The “Grass-mower of Gaza” likely sees himself then as a modern day Zealot of sorts—albeit one armed with the nuclear powered ideology of Zionism and with it, the Biblically bequeathed licence to exterminate all of Israel’s enemies once and for all—igniting and unleashing “Yahweh’s devouring fire” upon the Gazans in particular, but with no doubt with an eye to doing same to the rest of what is left of the Palestinians once this present operation is done and dusted.

In the second article, “The Gospel of Gaza: What we must learn from Netanyahu’s Bible lessons”, Guyenot underscores his refrain from earlier: Netanyahu is simply ‘possessed by the Bible, because Israel and the Bible are one’ with his ‘insanity’ such as it is, being ‘rooted in the Bible’. Guyenot: ‘The spirit of Yahweh is in all Israel, now, stronger than ever before, fed by a century of bloodbaths orchestrated by Zionists.’

---

In rounding out on our themes regarding this “lunatic state of affairs”—itself begging the inevitable question: How long can this situation continue?—the words of Yehoshafat Harkabi are worth noting. Harkabi was chief of Israeli (IDF) military intelligence from 1955 until 1959. He then became a professor of International Relations and Middle East Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Until his death in 1994, he was a highly respected strategist, political scientist, and one of the world's acknowledged authorities on the Arab-Israeli conflict.

In the wake of the Hamas attacks upon Israel (and for the moment placing to one side the specifics behind these attacks and the events which have occurred since, further revelations of which we might reasonably expect to surface in due course), what Harkabi said around 35 years ago I believe holds singularly profound implications in the here and now for:

a) all Jews inside or outside of Israel;

b) anyone (Jew or non-Jew) attempting to understand this “conflict”, the directions in which it might be heading from here, and the implications of all that; and

c) those who are genuinely seeking to bring about a lasting, equitable, peaceful, and just solution.

In addition to the prescient subtext of his musings, they also have considerable relevance to the broad themes this writer is attempting to highlight in the series. ‘Jews in the West, particularly in the United States’, Harkabi opined, ‘should participate in this debate [about peace]. They should not be squeamish and discouraged by the fear that the arguments they air may help their enemies and those of Israel.’

He continued:

‘The choice facing them, as well as Israel, is not between good and bad, but between bad and worse. Criticizing Israeli policies may be harmfully divisive, but refraining from criticism and allowing Israel to maintain its wrong policy is incomparably worse. If the state of Israel comes to grief…it will not be because of a lack of weaponry or money, but because of skewed political thinking and because Jews who understood the situation did not exert themselves to convince Israelis to change that thinking…’ [Emphasis added.]

Now even if enough right-thinking, pragmatic, and genuinely peace-seeking Jewish folk imbibed the significance of Harkabi’s conclusions and responded in kind, some might conclude that it all may be ‘too little too late’. But as deluded as it may be seen by some people, I’m opting for a measure of optimism here: Meaning? Better late than never I say. This time though I believe will be Israel’s last chance to act on Harkabi’s insights, and the rest of us—Jews and non-Jews alike— inclined to think likewise.

To use Harkabi’s own words, perhaps we’re now truly witnessing Israel’s—and by extension we might add, world Jewry’s—“moment of truth”. The only thing that remains to be seen is whether any such “moment of truth” comes sooner rather than later. And whether or not it comes complete with the apocalyptic outcome vividly chronicled in the Book of Revelations. We’re talking here the one embraced by so-called Christian Zionists, whose peculiar worldview we will examine in future instalments.

With regard to the aspirations of the “Armageddonites” who comprise the Christian Zionist end-timer cult [and] who envision such scenarios with fervent, rapturous glints in their collective eye—this writer’s preferred “outcome” needs to be noted for the record: This is the collective realisation upon the part of world Jewry—along with all the world’s leaders and their fellow citizens who’ve thus far seen fit to forgive and forget the “crimes and lies” that have sustained this nation counter to all the precepts of international, moral and natural law for 75 years—that the “Israel experiment” has been an utter failure for them as much as it has been for everyone else.

This to be followed by:

a) the peaceful dismantling of the state of Israel, and with it the relinquishment of their presumed status as “God’s Chosen”;

b) the unconditional return of the “Promised Land” to its original owners with appropriate compensations and apologies;

c) their unequivocal rejection of the criminal, racist, supremacist ideology that has tragically determined their path and place in the modern world; and finally,

d) the readmission of those same Jews back into the community of nations and the fold of humanity at large.

Oh, and perhaps a complete rewrite of the Ts & Cs of that original “covenant” with the Almighty (with or without his/her infinite wisdom to guide the process), would not go astray. Even with the Almighty’s input, I feel quietly confident he/she could be convinced that choosing one group of folks over the rest of humanity as his perennial faves, may not have been the best idea he/she ever came up with.

Now wouldn’t all that be a most welcome early Christmas present? One that I feel sure many folks from right-thinking Hassidic Jews to hard-core atheists and all those in between who are most definitely ‘over’ this interminable turmoil and tumult would receive for the deliverance thereof, avec ample good grace from their preferred deity.

---

© Greg Maybury, 18 December, 2023.

#Israel #ZionistLies #Censorship #EthnicCleansing #IsraeliCrimes #Zionism #JewishState #Antisemitism #Disinformation #Propaganda #Hasbara #FakeNews #Genocide #JewishTerrorism #Hamas #IlanPappe #NormanFinkelstein #WarCrimes #CrimesAgainstHumanity #Gaza #WestBank #RashidKhalidi #Palestine #DavidBenGurion #Netanyahu

---