“Jewish Overlords” and Subcontractors
The long term hostility of the American diplomatic, financial and intelligence cadres to restoration of the Jewish National Home dates at least to Secretary of State Robert Lansing’s rejection of the Balfour Declaration in fall 1917. He referenced Jewish guilt for “deicide” in explaining his objections. This hostility deepened steadily as evidenced by the abandonment of the Jews at the Evian Conference in 1938, during WW II, and the State Department’s sabotage of President Truman’s recognition of Israel in May 1948 [1]. When the Dulles brothers used the Vatican ratlines and its detritus to form the CIA after the War, the hostility was engrained; it is embedded in the peace processing of Israel.
This slashing and dicing will not end until there is revolutionary change in America and Israel. Welcome in both places, it will be difficult to effect. The expulsion and surrender regime of Ehud Olmert, Tzipi Livni and others, the current subcontractors for the global oligarchy seeking a new imperium, has its origins in Jewish overlords like Lionel de Rothschild, Claude and Sebag Montefiore, Sir Edwin Montagu, David Alexander and others who represented official “Zionism” in England during WW I when debates over Jewish restoration and the extent of Balfour’s Declaration raged [2]. In modern America the place of “the overlords” is filled by those who want to be close to American power centers (many of them rooted in England or Europe), to sell their policies and thus sell out the Jewish patrimony which gives the lie to the imperial claims and fantasy politics of the West.
The nineteen American Jewish Organizations, led by the AJC, ADL, B’nai Brith, Hadassah and Hillel (which fails its trust to foster Jewish identity, knowledge and honor among Jewish students), the UJC, AIPAC, Conservatives and Reform are among many that today play the role of Montagu who “vigorously damned the aspirations” of Jewish flourishing and sovereignty and who, “like some of the Montefiores wish apparently to forget that they are Jews” even to the point of denying that Jews are a nationality [3]. Today these kinds of ‘movers and shakers’ support the two-state solution to the Jewish problem that the world perennially feels [4]. The grandly titled “Jewish Council for Public Affairs” plays the same role today that Montagu played with his “vigorous denunciations of all aspects of Jewish nationalism.” Then as now, “highly placed Jews would be glad to wreck” any plans for genuine Jewish independence. Even more than in the days of Josephus, “the internal feuds of Jewry” are the meat of the powers that mean to efface the Torah’s moral and geographic loci with its virtual reality [5].
Late July 2008 brought familiar news: an American Secretary of State was “pressuring Israel…to agree on a document of understandings” with the non-existent people, the “Palestinians” to expel more Jews from their homes, to surrender more Jewish patrimony, to bury history, to please the World Community and above all remove competing standards of truth from the path of those who direct great power policies. On behalf of the State Department, such agreement on expelling and degrading Jews and crippling Jewish sovereignty will “show progress” toward what they call peace, i.e. the destruction of Israel. One evokes Eric Blair (“George Orwell”) at every stage of this process. Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas) is the designated “negotiating partner” while Edom dismantles Ya’akov. Meanwhile, fusion candidate, “independent” Joe Lieberman joked to a Christian audience that “I am your brother Joseph” implying that they are the children of Israel; that’s a high level of alienation and collaboration. Lieberman also intoned with lame piety that Israel must prepare to fight Iran and its proxies as Jacob did against Esau, by gifts, prayer, and preparation for war. But Israel has been expected since 1915, first by the British, to subsidize the Arabs (it is a fact today; was confirmed by Sir Alfred Milner to Parliament in June 1923, embodied in the Peel partition plan of 1937, and was a centerpiece of the “Trusteeship” pushed by the British, State Department and their UN client in 1948-9) [6]. These are the gifts; as for the prayer, the powers could not care less aside from photo ops (like that conducted July 29 by candidate Obama); as for the war preparation, it should be half-hearted and no true wars fought, certainly not to victory. This is the new world order that negates the commandments and exhortations of Moshe.
The document pushed by the diplomats in summer 2008 would include agreed-on borders” with Olmert reportedly agreeing to surrender 95-98+% of the Jewish heartland according to whether his or the Arab statements are closer to fact. Moreover, “the United States is pressing for an agreement by which Palestinian refugees will have the right of return to what were the Palestinian territories before 1967” except that there were NO “Palestinian territories before 1967” or ever. The territories were seized by Britain’s proxies and protectorates Egypt and Transjordan (the latter with the help of Britain’s proxy, “Iraq”) in 1948 and, as a previous essay documented, the seizure was permitted by big power tool, David Ben Gurion who refused requests by his top officers to liberate all of Israel west of the Jordan, from the headwaters of the Litani River in the Lebanon “to the heart of the Sinai desert.” But those victories, suppressed then by the representative of the powers that the major media told us was the hero of Zionism are now ruled out of bounds. Israelis have been and are to accustom themselves to fusillades of missiles, stones and bullets while practicing a “moral” self-restraint (havlaga). Otherwise they will be condemned.
Thus the Ha’Aretz article above, reflecting the official “Zionist” or now, “post-Zionist” position of the oligarchy, reports on and softens up public ‘opinion’ to accept its meretricious take on history. To this end its title ignored the fact that the client regimes in Jerusalem will do little or nothing to preempt or deter terror much less to destroy its nests [7]. It also mis-states the geographic facts forgotten in the attack on the Jewish national home.
The areas of Israel seized by Egypt, Transjordan, Iraq and Syria, are not “22% of British Mandatory Palestine” as the article claims. Transjordan was 77% and Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip, the three areas named in the article were about 5%: in Judea and Samaria they included not only Jewish settlement but the holiest sites of Judaism, two of which are now in ruins: the Temple Mount and Joseph’s tomb. The Old City of Jerusalem also was in ruins 1948-67 after the Arab conquest and destruction in 1948 but was restored by Israel beginning in late 1967. But the expulsion regime, supported by “Jewish overlords” around the world, at the bidding of their gentile masters permits Arab rampages so as to rationalize the “necessity” to retreat into an ever shrinking ghetto.
Mr. Olmert just replaced Tzipi Livni, touted as his political rival, with Shaul Mofaz as Deputy PM but both he and Livni are going to the talks in the Emerald City, Washington, with Rice who “wants an agreement that will survive a change in administrations.” That is, truncating Israel remains the perennial agenda of every administration: it is the beau ideal of the West pushed by the imperial institution that pre-dates and means to survive all others, Rome, the “new Israel” that cannot abide the original witnesses.
In the original modern version of this sabotage of history, truth and witness, Chaim Weizmann wrote that “the dark forces in English Jewry have gone into action again… I still cannot understand how British statesmen can attach importance to the attitude of a few wealthy Jews…against the almost unanimous voice of all sections of the Jewish people” [8]. They attached this importance because many of them, at the dark heart of the question had absorbed their culture’s hatred of Jews; many were glad to shelter behind the ‘cover’ that “Assimilationists” of various stripes provided, as AIPAC provides today for all the top politicians du jour. Thus, Sir Ronald Graham, Britain’s Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, although a strong backer of the Jewish Legion wrote that “the government should not identify itself too strongly with the political objects of a Zionist nature…since the most representative Jews in the world are utterly divided on the matter.” Katz comments that “those ‘most representative Jews’ were a fiction, though they were energetically promoted by the assimilated Jews of Britain” [9]. Writing for a committee of Jewish leaders, including some “cultural Zionists” who had become alarmed at the dangers for the Jewish people of the “overlords,” Weizmann shortly after noted that “the anti-nationalist Jews were a small minority of so-called assimilated, cosmopolitan Jews mostly belonging to the haute finance who have lost contact with the development of Jewish life and ideas” whereas the masses of the people’s very existence “is the most powerful testimony to the existence of the Jewish nation and its tenacious will to exist” [10].
Same as it ever was; without good leaders, with leaders who prefer to cut themselves, and the Jewish people from their roots, the people perish; or, if not perish, though that is made imminent, they are afflicted, humiliated and disempowered which fits perfectly the perennial agenda of the imperial city. The post-Zionists today routinely condemn Jews who want to settle their entire homeland as Nazis, an attitude of “sickening self-hatred” that is “the deeply-rooted mental disorder of the Israeli left” much of which has forgotten the foreign masters it automatically serves as it plays a cruder version of the role of Montagu, et al in earlier years [11]. Still, there are heroes a-plenty, both those who move mountains and whose names are recorded, and those known only to their families and friends. Does the official “Zionist” or religious leaders in America put their money where their calls for education about Israel’s crisis and history are? Or are they concerned mainly with striking poses, fund raising and keeping potential donors comfortably obtuse while the Promise dies?
The time shouts for action, for change of direction: in Israel, the activities of myriad Samsons and in America diverting money from lifestyles, lobbying and “access” to education and honesty rather than dumbing-down and double-talk that benefits the masters on the Potomac, Thames and Tiber.
1. David Wyman, the Abandonment of the Jews: America and the Holocaust (NY 1984); for Robert Lansing’s view of the Jews as god-killers, see Shmuel Katz’s the Aaronsohn Saga (Jerusalem 2000), 308, “the race responsible for the death of our lord.”
2. Shmuel Katz, Lone Wolf: A Biography of Zev Jabotinsky (NY 1996), 272 – 320
3. Ibid. 297-304; Edwin Montagu became British Foreign Secretary for India. Col. John Henry Patterson, a staunch supporter of Jewish restoration referred to the Assimilationists as the “Sanballats” of the day, Nehemiah 2, 3, 6.
4. The Jewish Council for Public Affairs in spring 2008 endorsed the two-state solution which as has been demonstrated repeatedly will destroy whatever sovereignty Israel has as a Jewish state and is a way-station on the way to Britain’s long-sought Arab Federation or “Fertile Crescent” and to Rome’s next burial of the original and true Israel. Of the JCPA and others of like attitude, one could say as Katz writes, “the pressures of the assimilationists were unceasing” against Jewish sovereignty (ibid. 299).
5. Katz quoting British Foreign Office officer George Kidston on the fierce antipathy of official English “Zionists” to Aaron Aaronsohn, The Aaronsohn Saga 219
6. Carroll Quigley, the Anglo –American Establishment (NY 1981), 171-5; “the scaling down of Jewish hopes” through a series of autocratic “White Papers” was relentless and in constant contempt of the League of Nations which the evidence shows was destroyed mainly by Britain. Even friends of Jewish hopes like Sir Reginald Wingate, High Commissioner for Egypt during WW I played for time and the Arab Federation — and maximal use of Jewish assistance — (the Aaronsohn Saga 211-12) that others like John Dove pushed openly, with the Jews called on to supply “capital and labor…and be content to be part of the larger unit [Federation].” See Katz, Days of Fire (NY 1968), 200 – 277; under the “Trusteeship…Haifa was to be an international port, the Negev was to be handed over to Abdullah of Transjordan…and immigration was to be subject to his control, with UN supervision” (275), very like the situation into which Israel is being pushed today. The partitioning and dissolution of Israel is the pole star of Western diplomacy, the constant by which one can align all other policies and cultural developments.
7. Ha’Aretz 7-28-08, “Olmert: Living with 270,000 Arabs in Jerusalem means more terror” by Avi Issacharoff and Barak Ravid; on July 30 Israelnationalnews.com reported that Jewish youths, hiking in the center of the country had been attacked by Arabs while watched by Israeli police who, like Mandatory police or troops in the 1930s intervened to prevent the Jews from driving away their assailants.
8. Lone Wolf 309 and note 50
9. The Aaronsohn Saga 158-9 & note to PRO/FO 319/657670
10. Lone Wolf 311-12; initial meeting September 28 of a letter dated October 03, 1917; the much amended, and weakened Balfour Declaration was made public on November 02, 1917, after the invaluable, critical assistance of Jewish military and intelligence services, that included geologic, logistic, and other expertise had been wrung dry; the British delays led to massive losses of Jewish life and property, to infighting and set a pattern for betrayals to come. See the Aaronsohn Saga 158-95, 219-76, passim, Lone Wolf 315 passim and Days of Fire.
11. “Bill Pardons Pullout Protestors; Gal’on Equates Right with Nazis” by Ze’ev Ben-Yechiel www.israelnationalnews.com 7-30-08. The comment of MK Gal’on compared the Knesset, which is indeed more scrambled and powerless than the US Congress has become to the Weimar Republic and to “the national camp” as “the radical right that destabilized and exploited it.” To this odd and cruel but not uncommon analogy, Dr. MK Arieh Eldad made his comment about the disorder of self-hatred that vents itself in hateful, a-historical slander of one’s own people.