The Daily Bell Newswire – It's Free!

News & Analysis

Is It the Fault of Zionists?

Monday, October 31, 2011 – by Staff Report

What is Zionism? ... A Zionist is one who believes in a Jewish homeland ... "Nothing in all the World is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity" – Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 1963. When Dr. King spoke those all-too phonetic [sic] words, I don't think he was thinking about the so-called problems created by Zionist Jewish bankers. I'm pretty sure he wasn't thinking Jews should be deported, thirty-eight years ago. It would appear the Occupy Wall Streeters anti-Semitic contingent is still spittin' their stuff. – Canada Free Press

Dominant Social Theme: It's not the fault of the Jews! It's the fault of Zionists!

Free-Market Analysis: When it comes to analyzing the dominant social themes of the elites, nothing is clear cut immediately – especially long-promoted belief systems. In the 21st century we have observed various brilliant debunkings of elite promotions that have long been held as fact – things we here at DB long believed were true and now see are evidently and obviously false.

Everything from gravity to vaccines to the money system itself has come under attack, and for good reason. We thought we had some "smarts" and yet our entire world and all our assumptions were part of a prepackaged system. We lived in a matrix and until the Internet came along, we were content with our obliviousness.

Having said this, we want to make a point that some elite dominant social themes take a lot more killing than others. And chief among these, it seems to us, is the meme that Jews – and Zionists – are behind all the problems of the world today. Yet this remains an (increasing) item of faith among many of even the most brilliant Internet revisionist journos and historians.

We've struggled with this meme ourselves, of course. We're well aware that one of the bona fides of "bold" alternative journalism is the fearless ability to declaim that "Jews" and "Zionists" are behind the world's troubles. But what if this is another meme? What if the great ("Jewish") central banking families WANT to propagate this understanding?

What if the State of Israel had actually been set up as a source of aggravation? What if "Jews" actually in a sense fund and control the Palestinian opposition and were even the master manipulators of people like Yasser Arafat? Could this be possible? Why would the great Jewish central banking families – and their non-Jewish religious, corporate and military enablers and associates do such a thing? And could they? Would they be so perfidious? Would they be so brutal to their own "chosen" people? Would they?

To ask such questions, of course, is to step on almost every politically correct red line of the modern Western world. This is why we are, in part, attracted to this short article (excerpted above) questioning in factual terms exactly what Zionism is and how it is to be defined. The article is written within the context of the expanding "anti-Semitism" on the 'Net, apparently shared by many denizens of Occupy Wall Street. We won't comment further on it directly but will use it as a jumping-off point for additional speculation on the matter.

Can the world's woes be laid at the feet of "Jews" or even "Zionists"? Certainly it seems to us there is a GROUP of entities that make up a power elite intent on running the world. This group includes "Jewish" families, but also religious leaders from the Vatican as well as other power elite segments: Corporate, military and economic associates and enablers. The conspiracy is generally a Western one and has been, apparently, for hundreds of years.

So who is involved specifically in the one-world conspiracy? Well ... all of these individuals come together to form what we call for lack of a better term a "Mafia." (We have also tried out the term "Pharisees.") The signature of any such "family" is its intent to hire those individuals with whom it is culturally familiar.

Now, naturally, there are those hanger-on-ers who seem to be part of the larger mafia but are not. These hanger-on-ers are evident when it comes to the Italian Mafia as well. They are not "insiders" but they wish to be – and act as if they ARE insiders. They are not.

To say, then, that all Jews or all Zionists are responsible for the evil in this world and the current exercise of the nascent one-world order is wrong. There are plenty of Jews who would be repulsed by what their own "elites" have done on their behalf if they fully understood it.

There are plenty of Jews who believe the creation of israel was a mistake, and a bloody one, as we do, and that it ought to be a secular state. But there are plenty of Jewish schoolteachers in Long Island, NY who believe in the necessity of the State of Israel. Should they be run out of America on a rail because they are "Zionist?"

In our view, they are not evil people, simply misinformed. America was founded on an Amer-Indian genocide but not every modern American is considered culpable. Is every Jew culpable for Israel? Of course, the response is that "Zionist" means something other than those who support the formation and continuance of a Jewish state. In this case, we'd recommend another word. The term isn't clarifying anything when used to delineate deeper, malevolent forces. 

Nonetheless, the "bold" segment of Internet alternative journos continually elaborate on the idea that the one-world order is a "Jewish" concept. Yet not all "Jews" (whatever the definition of a Jew is) are plotting for one-world government any more than all Italians want to spread the Mafia around the world. Not all Zionists, either.  

To use the term "Jew" or "Zionist" when describing those behind the incipient one-world order is to grossly overgeneralize in our view. To demand that all "Zionist Jews" must be brought to justice, or even run out of the US as one Occupy Wall Street-er recently suggested is most questionable as well. (And that's putting it mildly.)

We have also advanced the idea that the great central banking families are "Jewish" in name only. This is rebutted by those who believe that the great central banking families and others are motivated by secret Talmudic doctrines that resemble Satanism. And yet ... these are the same individuals in many cases who would maintain those running the great families (that must, evidently and obviously, exist) are either sociopaths or downright psychopaths, able to plan bloody wars in order to line their own pocketbooks and increase their power.

This seems to us a contradiction. Sociopaths by definition are exploiters. They believe – or claim to believe – whatever expedites their goals. One famous and impossibly wealthy family, for instance, is painted as manipulative enough to seek to rule the world but yet is stupid enough in aggregate to build a Supreme Court building in Israel replete with Illuminati symbolism – and to publicize it.

It never seems to occur to anyone that such activities resemble a promotion more than they resemble an act of religiosity. We've made the point before that these great families seem to be USING religion. They are within this context not "of religion" – certainly not the "Jewish religion." They are MANIPULATORS of it.

We are well aware that it is fashionable to blame Jews or at least Zionists for the one-world conspiracy. But what is going on today seems to us to be a criminal conspiracy not a religious one. By definition, a conspiracy must be limited to conspirators.

To claim that all Jews are involved in these one-world manipulations, or even that it is fully a "Zionist" conspiracy, is quite a "stretch." Just as it is to claim that all Italians are part of the Mafia. And here is one significant question that occurs to us: Is it possible that certain powers-that-be have a stake in creating tensions in the Middle East and would go almost any lengths to do so?

Is it possible the Zionist meme (and the "evil Jew" meme itself) are a kind of promotion? Certainly there are historical precedents, serious ones, but the modern elites are skilled at using historical trend-lines to their advantage. Everything else floated by this elite group is seemingly phony, after all. Why not this, too?

Conclusion: It would seem to us that these great central banking families might be interested in creating the very conclusions that energetic Internet journos claim to be discovering about Jews and Zionists. Are they perhaps interested in blurring the lines between their OWN actions and the larger Jewish population? If this is the case, then these intrepid souls are being manipulated by the very forces they claim to be fighting against. They are perhaps following a line of breadcrumbs to an intended destination.




Latest Daily Bell Articles

Feedback

Effective April 25, 2012, the Daily Bell will discontinue allowing feedback comments. We have left in place the large body of responses posted in the past, as we appreciate the valuable contributions made by some of our readers.
Showing 1 - 20 of 33 - Newest on top - Reorder Feedback
  Posted by LilaRajiva on 11/05/11 05:11 PM

Hi,

I notice this entire thread looks different.

I made several long posts in response to Memehunter conflating his views and mine.

I respectfully told you that I had not read nor do I endorse his view or Dr. Darkmoon's, nor yours (for other reasons).

I wrote that Zionism is an ideology deriving from British Israelism and is not "world Jewry" a term I have never used, and which I think is seen as offensive, because it is used by racists (I mean people who advocate legal sanctions against other races).

I told you to check and see if there are any references to 6000 year old banking conspiracies or Satanic bloodlines on my blog.

As for the power of the Rothschilds, there is more on this site about that than anything on mine.

I also notice that the excerpts from my blog have been deleted.

Was this thread rewritten for any reason? All my posts here have also been eliminated, which is a bit unfair since various motives and views have been imputed to me and I have been associated with people I don't know and haven't endorsed (memehunter).

I do not support Dr. Darkmoon's views or Douglas Reed's. Both seem to be writing from a cultural point of view close to Mullins, who was clearly a racist, although an admirable researcher and a brave man.

Thanks for posting this.

I'll not post again.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Sorry you feel this way.

We have no idea what you are talking about. As we have allowed Memehunter, in his sickness, to write dozens of feedbacks why on earth would we delete yours?

We will respond to a point you made in another thread, nonetheless ...

------

Additional note ...

You have MIXED UP THREADS, Lila.

You posted to "The Problem Is Money Power" not "Is it the Fault of Zionists."

11.05.2011 05.11.22 PM LilaRajiva Is It the Fault of Zionists? ...
11.05.2011 04.34.27 PM LilaRajiva A Spectre is Haunting the
11.04.2011 09.26.19 PM LilaRajiva Naomi Wolf: So Right and So
11.04.2011 03.04.51 PM LilaRajiva Naomi Wolf: So Right and So
11.04.2011 02.12.34 PM LilaRajiva Naomi Wolf: So Right and So
11.03.2011 02.31.57 PM LilaRajiva The Problem Is Money Power ...
11.03.2011 02.13.55 PM LilaRajiva The Problem Is Money Power ...
11.03.2011 01.53.06 PM LilaRajiva The Problem Is Money Power ...
11.03.2011 11.47.12 AM LilaRajiva The Problem Is Money Power ...
11.28.2010 12.21.53 PM Lila Rajiva The Insider Trading Promotion ...
11.24.2010 08.16.12 PM Lilarajiva Are Corporations People? ...

  Posted by memehunter on 11/03/11 02:02 PM

DB: "This is a nonsensical argument and not what we are proposing."

Care to explain in a bit more detail why is it nonsensical? There might be something to it. I don't know. How does DB know "for sure" that it does not make sense?

  Posted by whole2th on 11/03/11 06:56 AM

Posted by Abu Aardvark on 10/31/11 11:27 AM
DB: "We've made the point before that these great families seem to be USING religion. They are within this context not "of religion" - certainly not the "Jewish religion." They are MANIPULATORS of it."

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

Since I'm a lazy SOB and don't have elves and/or gnomes to delegate the donkeywork to, I just copied my comment from another DB-thread and shortened it a bit ... here we go:

I'm talking about the notion that there's anything "special" about Jews. One can find this strange assumption almost everywhere in the world. And when this being "special" isn't deduced from or defined by being Jewish, than one often can find it in the appraisal of the (alleged) singularity of Jewish suffering during WWII - hence the term - coined by Norman Finkelstein, I think - "Holocaust Religion".

With the help of this "religion" Jews around the world are brainwashed from early age on - in a kind of self-reproducing, self-fulfilling prophecy - to think and do things in a narrow, framed way - with the prime objective to "help" fellow Jews and to shield Israel, whatever the real story in any given case may be. The Holocaust gives Jews the right to do ANYTHING when they feel threatened ... or so the justification goes.

My abridged conclusion:

Whether todays Jews are descendants of the ancient tribe - if it ever existed - is irrelevant. There's NOTHING special about them. They are, im my view, up to 99% victims of propaganda and manipulation - just like the rest of us.

If the article is right and the REAL elite are using Jews
as stalking horses to hide the identity of the REAL elite,
I'm thinking that the Jews might be using the REAL elite
to hide the REAL power of the Jews.

Of course, the REAL elite might be cleverly using the Jews
to hide the identity of the Real elite, by writing articles like this.

But then----how much time do you have?

Sent to me by Z and posted here for obvious reasons.

Reply from The Daily Bell

If the article is right and the REAL elite are using Jews as stalking horses to hide the identity of the REAL elite, I'm thinking that the Jews might be using the REAL elite to hide the REAL power of the Jews.


This is a nonsensical argument and not what we are proposing.

  Posted by Levantine on 11/03/11 05:12 AM

Posted by tawny on 11/02/11 01:37 PM
Kind of late to be commenting on this subject, but I just wanted to say that I think the 'Jewish question' serves numerous purposes for the elites. For one thing, people get very emotional about it and are somewhat obsessed with it, spend a lot of time debating it, and it divides the resistance and removes focus from more practically important matters and doings of the globalist usurpers. The elites like for us to squabble and argue and expend our energies in wasteful pointless ways.

Israel is really the USA presence in the Middle East, sort of a US client state or sock puppet - in that crucially important area. It gives the USA a base of operations and an 'excuse'(gotta protect those poor long suffering Jews/victims of the Holocaust, etc.) to be/ meddle in that area.

Also - when anyone becomes a problem for the elites, they can often find a way to drag in the Jewish issue and call them 'anti-Semites.' Muddy the waters, confuse matters.

The Jewish issue has also served to legitimize and normalize 'political correctness'and the whole area of 'thought'crimes and 'speech'crimes.

Most nominal 'Jews' are Khazarian of course and have no 'ancestral right' to occupy territory in the Mid-East.

And of course most who are or think of themselves as Jewish are not part of the NWO attempt at achieving global empire.

I just think the Rothschilds et al find it useful to 'play the Jewish card' and get the max mileage from it, in various ways, that they can wring out of it.

I wholeheartedly agree too. The arguments you use in regard to Zionism might (might) apply to the Rothschilds, too... especially given that they apparently don't follow the old rule to marry only inside the family. (Take for example this lady Click to view link who is, by the way, four days away from her hundredth birthday. )

  Posted by FKTV on 11/02/11 07:30 PM

Thank you for this post! I wholeheartedly agree!

Reply from The Daily Bell

Thanks.

  Posted by tawny on 11/02/11 01:37 PM

Kind of late to be commenting on this subject, but I just wanted to say that I think the 'Jewish question' serves numerous purposes for the elites. For one thing, people get very emotional about it and are somewhat obsessed with it, spend a lot of time debating it, and it divides the resistance and removes focus from more practically important matters and doings of the globalist usurpers. The elites like for us to squabble and argue and expend our energies in wasteful pointless ways.

Israel is really the USA presence in the Middle East, sort of a US client state or sock puppet - in that crucially important area. It gives the USA a base of operations and an 'excuse'(gotta protect those poor long suffering Jews/victims of the Holocaust, etc.) to be/ meddle in that area.

Also - when anyone becomes a problem for the elites, they can often find a way to drag in the Jewish issue and call them 'anti-Semites.' Muddy the waters, confuse matters.

The Jewish issue has also served to legitimize and normalize 'political correctness'and the whole area of 'thought'crimes and 'speech'crimes.

Most nominal 'Jews' are Khazarian of course and have no 'ancestral right' to occupy territory in the Mid-East.

And of course most who are or think of themselves as Jewish are not part of the NWO attempt at achieving global empire.

I just think the Rothschilds et al find it useful to 'play the Jewish card' and get the max mileage from it, in various ways, that they can wring out of it.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Very good, thanks.

  Posted by rossbcan on 11/01/11 10:38 AM

Posted by memehunter on 11/01/11 10:16 AM
DB: you now say you believe neither in Jews nor Jewry

I must reply to this otherwise fairly neutral comment because of the sneaky use of the word "now" which seems to imply that I changed my mind. I have always said that my point was about an ideology, specifically Talmudism/Pharisaism/Zionism (I have also been fairly consistent with this terminology, regardless of what DB claims). We have already discussed issues related to the Khazars, Sephardim, Askhenazi at length in previous threads and, as far as I recall, we had sort of reached an agreement (despite the not-always cordial nature of the discussion... ) that the idea of a "Jewish people" was not very well supported by facts. It's DB who is always bringing up the "blame all the Jews" strawman whenever this discussion comes up. I don't feel the need to argue this point further as it can be verified by reading these threads.

As I said very clearly on the McManus thread, Zionists are Zionists regardless of their ethnicity and there are Zionists who do not self-identify as "Jews". I'm sure that DB remembers at least the gist of my position on this issue, which is why I find the use of the word "now" dishonest in this instance.

"my point was about an ideology"

... so, we should smite ALL who we believe think or interpret to speak a certain way and deny freedom of thought and speech by smiting those we allege are guilty? Thoughtcrime?

... as opposed to accept that ALL people are free to live life as they see fit and only defensively smite those who cross the line by initiating aggression.

In your faux paradigm, the fate of people is not their choice, but dependent on the opinions of others, interpreting that certain thoughts and speech must be sanctioned. This intellectual opinion is factually and morally indefensible. You ARE painted into a corner, with the brush of your own words.

In what I consider to be truth, intellectually and morally, nobody gets smited until they choose to aggress against another. Their fate is their own choice, in response to their actions.

In fact, based on your opinion, aggression must be initiated to deal with those deemed (speculated, may be) a danger. Do it and, in my books, you have initiated aggression and have chosen your own fate, at the hands of your victims and those they may contract to represent them.

  Posted by memehunter on 11/01/11 10:16 AM

DB: you now say you believe neither in Jews nor Jewry

I must reply to this otherwise fairly neutral comment because of the sneaky use of the word "now" which seems to imply that I changed my mind. I have always said that my point was about an ideology, specifically Talmudism/Pharisaism/Zionism (I have also been fairly consistent with this terminology, regardless of what DB claims). We have already discussed issues related to the Khazars, Sephardim, Askhenazi at length in previous threads and, as far as I recall, we had sort of reached an agreement (despite the not-always cordial nature of the discussion... ) that the idea of a "Jewish people" was not very well supported by facts. It's DB who is always bringing up the "blame all the Jews" strawman whenever this discussion comes up. I don't feel the need to argue this point further as it can be verified by reading these threads.

As I said very clearly on the McManus thread, Zionists are Zionists regardless of their ethnicity and there are Zionists who do not self-identify as "Jews". I'm sure that DB remembers at least the gist of my position on this issue, which is why I find the use of the word "now" dishonest in this instance.

  Posted by oneman on 11/01/11 10:05 AM

Posted by memehunter on 11/01/11 08:36 AM
Seems like Lila Rajiva also has some difficulties with the Daily Bell's complicated stance on Zionism:

Hitler Was Not A German Nazi; He Was A 'German Nazi'…

Click to view link

Interesting viewpoint, as always with Ms. Rajiva. Note that I do not claim that Ms. Rajiva would necessarily agree with my opinions, but I find myself in agreement with some of the points she mentions in this comment. In fact, this corresponds a lot to what I experienced here on DB and I believe that Ms. Rajiva may have uncovered some of the reasons for what I perceive to be a form of sophistry or casuistry which seems to pervade the DB's responses and comments on the topic of Zionism.

I, myself, have been guilty of attributing many (if not all) of the world's problems to the central banks, which manufacture money and credit out of thin air; and lend to governments, who then do their bidding.
Recognizing the crime, at the heart of central banking, leads one to investigate who is behind these banks; and that investigation leads to the discovery of certain families; which leads to the discovery that, these families have a common ethnic/religious link. No problem with the facts, so far.
The problem seems to be, that these discoveries tend to lend themselves (at least with some) to attributing the crime, itself, to certain ethnic/religious groups, to whom a the criminals, themselves, happen to belong (the Mafia comparison applies here).
The REAL problem with all of this is, that it tends to disguise, to discount, or even dismiss, the actual enemy, and the common criminal element behind it all - which is NOT "Jews," or even central banks per se, but rather those monopolies of force (governments), which establish, empower, encourage, and allow such criminals and criminal entities, such as central banks, to operate in the first place.


Short (under 5 minutes) and sweet (cuts to the root of the problem):

Click to view link

For a somewhat longer treatment, but more detailed analysis:

Click to view link

  Posted by memehunter on 11/01/11 09:33 AM

Posted by rossbcan on 11/01/11 08:55 AM
... when thoroughly trounced, step back to "argument from authority", attempt to invoke "democratic truth", preponderance of "opinions", bolstered by "expertitus"? This is no slight to Lila.

whatever labels you may care to use for those you consider "at fault" such as grouping by ideology, you still cast a wide net that tars innocents with your groupthink brush, just racism abstracted, under a different label. When confronted with truth, change the terminology. It has been amusing watching DB allow you to paint yourself into your own corner.

It is INDIVIDUALS who commit crimes by initiating aggression in our action precedes consequence reality. This is an inescapable FACT and yet, you persist with your "divide and conquer" labeling and groupthink, IMHO, attempting to incite this contrived conflict here at DB. Do you really believe anyone here is going to bite this poisoned fruit?

may be time for another identity or, a different bridge to lurk under.

"Attempting to incite this contrived conflict here at DB"

Ross, please note that it is the DB who published an article entitled "Is it the fault of Zionists?". I disagree with several statements made in this article.

I don't see any trouncing or painting in a corner, but again the score-keepers may wish to do as they want... The idea that my stance is "fashionable" does bring a smile, though. I doubt I have the right strategy to win a popularity contest here at the DB (not that I care about that, clearly... ).

"It is INDIVIDUALS who commit crimes"

So you deny the role of ideologies and systems? You favor targeting specific individuals? Curious, this seems to be in contradiction with some of your own statements, as well as with DB's earlier statements about the role of systems.

As Lila Rajiva pointed out, it is fine to mention other groups or ideologies but Zionism is sacred, apparently.


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

DB: You wish to blame a people and their voluntarily adopted ideology for the world's woes. We blame a criminal conspiracy that achieves its goals via mercantilism.

No, I blame an ideology. No, there is likely no "Jewish people" and I do not equate an ideology with a "people" anyway. No, Talmudism/Pharisaism was not voluntarily adopted, at least not by most (see Douglas Reed). Also, I disagree that a religion/ideology is voluntarily adopted when it is part of the fabric of a community and individuals are "born" in a religion/ideology (same with Christianity and Islam - this is where rossbcan gets it wrong as I've pointed out before). Finally, mercantilism is only a tool, it is not the driving principle (we've been there before, infinite patience is required when explaining these basic points over and over again... ).

DB: We don't like racism - anywhere; it is a simplistic solution for small minds; and we don't believe in damning the many for the acts of a few. You can dress up your opinion as gaudily as you want, but this is what it comes down to in our humble opinion.

The whole idea of a "Jewish race" is likely a myth. So why do we still talk about this if it is a meaningless construct? Who is talking about "race"? It's DB who keeps bringing this tired old strawman repeatedly.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Ha, nonetheless, even though you now say you believe neither in Jews nor Jewry, you will apply the nomenclature "Zionist" to the subject we are discussing. You care not for agreement, but you are apparently comforted by Ms. Rajiva's company.

  Posted by rossbcan on 11/01/11 08:55 AM

Posted by memehunter on 11/01/11 08:36 AM
Seems like Lila Rajiva also has some difficulties with the Daily Bell's complicated stance on Zionism:

Hitler Was Not A German Nazi; He Was A 'German Nazi'…

Click to view link

Interesting viewpoint, as always with Ms. Rajiva. Note that I do not claim that Ms. Rajiva would necessarily agree with my opinions, but I find myself in agreement with some of the points she mentions in this comment. In fact, this corresponds a lot to what I experienced here on DB and I believe that Ms. Rajiva may have uncovered some of the reasons for what I perceive to be a form of sophistry or casuistry which seems to pervade the DB's responses and comments on the topic of Zionism.

... when thoroughly trounced, step back to "argument from authority", attempt to invoke "democratic truth", preponderance of "opinions", bolstered by "expertitus"? This is no slight to Lila.

whatever labels you may care to use for those you consider "at fault" such as grouping by ideology, you still cast a wide net that tars innocents with your groupthink brush, just racism abstracted, under a different label. When confronted with truth, change the terminology. It has been amusing watching DB allow you to paint yourself into your own corner.

It is INDIVIDUALS who commit crimes by initiating aggression in our action precedes consequence reality. This is an inescapable FACT and yet, you persist with your "divide and conquer" labeling and groupthink, IMHO, attempting to incite this contrived conflict here at DB. Do you really believe anyone here is going to bite this poisoned fruit?

may be time for another identity or, a different bridge to lurk under.

  Posted by memehunter on 11/01/11 08:36 AM

Seems like Lila Rajiva also has some difficulties with the Daily Bell's complicated stance on Zionism:

Hitler Was Not A German Nazi; He Was A 'German Nazi'…

Click to view link

Interesting viewpoint, as always with Ms. Rajiva. Note that I do not claim that Ms. Rajiva would necessarily agree with my opinions, but I find myself in agreement with some of the points she mentions in this comment. In fact, this corresponds a lot to what I experienced here on DB and I believe that Ms. Rajiva may have uncovered some of the reasons for what I perceive to be a form of sophistry or casuistry which seems to pervade the DB's responses and comments on the topic of Zionism.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Back you come. Can't stay away.

You are welcome on this board anytime, but we would venture you are a tad obsessed on this subject. As bright as you are, that's sad - to spend so much time on negativity. But you are driven to prove that Zionism and those who espouse it are, well ... evil. Can't let it alone, eh?

Now you call our stance sophistry or casuistry, but these are very big words for a simple-enough issue! In fact, we think it is close to crystal clear. And we have now written another article to make sure it is so.

You wish to blame a people and their voluntarily adopted ideology for the world's woes. We blame a criminal conspiracy that achieves its goals via mercantilism.

Also, agreement is not our objective in advancing these arguments. Our approach is simpler than this.

We don't like racism - anywhere; it is a simplistic solution for small minds; and we don't believe in damning the many for the acts of a few. You can dress up your opinion as gaudily as you want, but this is what it comes down to in our humble opinion.

In fact ...

No, religion, has hijacked the world. (The cartel MANIPULATES the religion.)

Nor a "people, either" (It is not even clear WHO they are.)

But this mafia surely does not include all "Jews," nor even all Zionists.

It is not complicated, not at all.

As for Ms. Rajiva, ironically enough she bases her faulty analysis on the Bell's putative placement in Switzerland, a base of operations not now so much in use. We are certainly not constrained by Swiss law, or not insofar as it concerns the "Jewish problem."

She makes the point that Zion refers to the Promised Kingdom, to a “Shining City On A Hill." It is the kingdom of god on earth. It is thus a Utopian ideology, as many such ideologies are.

She would like us to believe that the controllers of central banks - and thus most of the wealth in the world - are subject to such utopian fantasies. Funny, they seem pretty hard-headed to us.

In fact she attributes 9/11 to these utopian-ists. We have referred to this contradiction before. These controllers are infinitely evil when it comes to their manipulations but entirely naive when it comes to scripture.

They are utopian sociopaths! What's THAT all about? ...

  Posted by Summer on 11/01/11 06:46 AM

"What if "Jews" actually in a sense fund and control the Palestinian opposition and were even the master manipulators of people like Yasser Arafat?"

Perhaps, but only as a means of controlling the situation (to a suitable conclusion) not to perpetuate it.

"Can the world's woes be laid at the feet of "Jews" or even "Zionists"? Certainly it seems to us there is a GROUP of entities that make up a power elite intent on running the world. This group includes "Jewish" families, but also religious leaders from the Vatican as well as other power elite segments: Corporate, military and economic associates and enablers."

Spot on, *but* a GROUP within a group are the masterminds.

"The conspiracy is generally a Western one and has been, apparently, for hundreds of years."

They are the 'muscle' - psudo-leaders and major collaborators.

"Well ... all of these individuals come together to form what we call for lack of a better term a "Mafia."

Correct.

"To say, then, that all Jews or all Zionists are responsible for the evil in this world and the current exercise of the nascent one-world order is wrong."

True.

"Is every Jew culpable for Israel? Of course, the response is that "Zionist" means something other than those who support the formation and continuance of a Jewish state."

Not every 'fundamentalist' Muslim believes in commiting terrorism but he may still be a fundamentalist - as a term it is still correct whilst not being overly generic: by using too broad term, such as 'Muslim'.

"We have also advanced the idea that the great central banking families are "Jewish" in name only."

Philosophically aren't all 'extremists' like this (using labels)? It doesn't change their lineage or their religious/cultural heritage, does it?

"One famous and impossibly wealthy family, for instance, is painted as manipulative enough to seek to rule the world but yet is stupid enough in aggregate to build a Supreme Court building in Israel replete with Illuminati symbolism - and to publicize it."

Most people are oblivious (Xfactor!). As to their boldness being 'stupid' well then there are many instances of this! And to be bold and get away with it is quite satisfying for nutters!

"It never seems to occur to anyone that such activities resemble a promotion more than they resemble an act of religiosity. We've made the point before that these great families seem to be USING religion. They are within this context not "of religion" - certainly not the "Jewish religion." They are MANIPULATORS of it."

True, but that does not change self-definition. Nor does it change historical associations.

"But what is going on today seems to us to be a criminal conspiracy not a religious one."

Definitely criminal! And certainly not a 'moral' religion - whatever its followers may 'believe'.

"Is it possible that certain powers-that-be have a stake in creating tensions in the Middle East and would go almost any lengths to do so?"

Perhaps, if it benefits Israel, why not?!

"To claim that all Jews are involved in these one-world manipulations, or even that it is fully a "Zionist" conspiracy, is quite a "stretch." Just as it is to claim that all Italians are part of the Mafia."

True.

  Posted by memehunter on 11/01/11 06:20 AM

DB: We will point out the obvious: You reacted to statements aimed at Memehunter by attacking Anthony Wile by name. How you believe these two events are congruent, we cannot fathom. But then, you are not always logical in our view.

So, attacking feedbackers personally is OK as long as they are only known by their pseudonyms, but suggesting that Mr. Wile may have affinities with JBS is not allowed (even though there were, at the time, valid reasons for at least considering that this could be the case)? And, why is it an "attack" to suggest that Mr. Wile may have affinities with JBS (especially in the context in which I made that comment)? Well, the DB elves are not always logical in my view...

Also, as some other feedbackers have commented, the discussion here might be more transparent if we could identify the elves that are replying here by name (even if that name is a pseudonym), instead of having to reply to an amorphous "we". I bring this point because of DB's insistence on the pseudonym vs real name issue - it cannot be said that we have a model of transparency in our discussions here.

  Posted by Kriss Robin on 11/01/11 05:11 AM

Posted by rossbcan on 10/31/11 03:11 PM
DSS: "It's not the fault of the Jews! It's the fault of Zionists!"

... nope, it is the fault of each and every one of us, to the extent we "go along to get along" and tolerate injustice, whose criminal "proceeds of crime" have integrated to a vast, coercive economic power that is determined to make injustice and their "mastership" an eternal truth of human servitude. And, they will manipulate social / economic collapse, war, genocide and every pestilence they can dream up until we, the people collectively cry uncle and tolerate servitude, according to their terms in their feudal civilization, in perpetuity.

Justice Defined: We are all free to profit or suffer and learn (adapt to excellence) by facing the consequences of our OWN choices. Injustice is to be forced to suffer the consequences of choices of unaccountable (irresponsible) others.

Collectively, we need to do some serious THINKING:

Click to view link

... take a risk and make them cry uncle as our far wiser ancestors once did.

"... nope, it is the fault of each and every one of us, to the extent we "go along to get along" and tolerate injustice,"


I whole heartedly agree with "your comment", but.

There was this fella in Scripture, it may have been Paul, he said something like, "the good I wish to do I do not, what I do not wish to do I find myself doing", my scripture is not always that precise. The point here is very simple, why do people "go along to get along" at the detriment of their own well being and the well being of the rest of the world.

To look, find and See the reason for this is "the escape" from bondage. This is Inner Work, that seems to dissolve the outer conflict.

p.s. I like reading your comments rossbcan.

  Posted by memehunter on 11/01/11 04:43 AM

Here we are again, clogging the thread. Well, I'm not the one who brought back the JBS stuff on this thread...

DB: We did go to the source and found nothing there as we recall. Mullin's statement was simply an assertion. Prove otherwise.

I cannot prove Mullins' statement about the Rockefeller funding, but Oliver (who was Mullins' source) claimed that JBS had received financial backing from large Jewish banking families. I don't know whether Oliver was right (although he should be in a position to know what he was talking about), but it shows that Mullins' statement was based on a verifiable statement by a source. I provided some links, with direct quotations from Oliver's letters, at the beginning of the infamous McManus thread.

DB: Customary distortion, huh? Implying that Anthony Wile was a "secret Bircher" was ... what? Part of a game of 21 questions?

What has this to do with the discussion about Zionism? We are still keeping score, I see. I'd rather not count the number of insults and ad hominem attacks that I (and other feedbackers such as peri1224) received. And that's not including lies such as the assertion that I ignored the whole Khazar question. Besides, this comment was made as a reply to a feedback suggesting that the "third party" movement in the US was manipulated and I showed that SPOiLER, which was promoted quite aggressively here on DB, seems to have benefited from strong backing by known Birchers (and possibly "closet" Birchers as well, for all I know).

The rest of the reply by DB was actually enjoyable to read for the most part (points 1 to 6).

For points 3 and 5, I have shown, on this thread, that to point fingers at Talmudism/Pharisaism/Zionism as an ideological driving force for the push toward one-world government is definitely not fashionable, although it may be fashionable in some circles to "blame Jews". Ask Douglas Reed, Roy Tov, Benjamin Freedman, Jack Bernstein and others if this viewpoint was/is fashionable.

For point 4, I may be wrong, but I don't see how the DB has convincingly shown that I was wrong. Again, it seems more convincing to think that the Baal/Moloch iconography used in the Jerusalem buildings is used as a genuine religious/ideological/spiritual iconography rather than as an elite promotion or as a "stupid" gesture.

--------------------------------------------
DB: 1. Stop wriggling. You used the name "Anthony Wile." Mr. Wile is not a concept. He is a person.

M: Who is wriggling? This has nothing to do with this particular discussion. By the way, I am also a person, not a concept, and received several personal attacks here. Besides, pointing out that Mr. Wile might have affinities with JBS is not exactly an insult (especially when compared with the treatment I received here).

DB: 2. Indeed, the answers to your other "questions" are obvious. We are against the system of central banking and the mercantilism it represents. We generally fault systems, not individuals. Bad systems give rise to bad results. The best systems are the freest from force and the most welcoming of freedom and free markets. You seem to want to fault a group of people, which gives rise to a fairly sterile discussion in our view.

M: What should I reply at this point? You deliberately misconstrue my viewpoint (saying that I want to fault a group of people), despite repeated explanations and clarifications. This is a dead end.

Reply from The Daily Bell

OK, this is extended thread and a good summary of ground covered at length in other threads. We will leave it to viewers to decide the truth of the matter. Obviously we have our opinions. As far as personal attacks go, no one has attacked you personally as you are only known here as Memehunter. This is akin to your statement in another thread that we were "slandering" you, though you should have used the word libel. We will point out the obvious: You reacted to statements aimed at Memehunter by attacking Anthony Wile by name. How you believe these two events are congruent, we cannot fathom. But then, you are not always logical in our view.

  Posted by memehunter on 11/01/11 03:37 AM

DB: "Wait a minute. You virtually accused DB of providing a false flag Birch society interview that, as we understand it, covered up the role of "Jews" in the larger scheme of things. We think we understand your point very well."

Well, do you finally understand the difference between pointing fingers at an ideology or pointing fingers at individuals? If not, then I think you do not understand my point (or rather, refuse to admit that you understand it).

Again, is DB against bankers as a group or against the idea of central banking or mercantilism? Is DB against all American and British citizens (members of the Anglosphere) or specifically pointing fingers at an elite? Should I understand that DB is suggesting that we should physically eliminate all the Rothschilds, Jesuits, and others?

I suppose that DB will say that the answers to these questions are obvious. So, it should be easy to understand my viewpoint. There is no need to pretend otherwise. But if you insist in doing so, I may as well point out that some of the viewpoints advocated by DB could be similarly misconstrued, if one is intent on doing so.

Reply from The Daily Bell

1. Stop wriggling. You used the name "Anthony Wile." Mr. Wile is not a concept. He is a person.

2. Indeed, the answers to your other "questions" are obvious. We are against the system of central banking and the mercantilism it represents. We generally fault systems, not individuals. Bad systems give rise to bad results. The best systems are the freest from force and the most welcoming of freedom and free markets. You seem to want to fault a group of people, which gives rise to a fairly sterile discussion in our view.

  Posted by memehunter on 11/01/11 03:00 AM

Rossbcan: "Assume, for arguments sake, you are correct. Does this not inevitably lead to some sort of Nazi "final solution" for the designated perps? And, when this "solution" is implemented, assuming the target was "correct", does this not lead to a criminal power vacuum which will be instantly filled by other predators, solving no problems?

The problem is not the identity of the predators. So long as crime is forcefully "decreed to pay" for officially sanctioned predators by corrupt judiciary and regulatory captured states, we will have the equivalent of those you claim are the conspirators. You tar an entire people with your racist brush when, by the historical facts there have been some very outstanding Jews both in terms of goodness and evil. You can accurately state this about members of any group you can conceive."

Ross, I will quote for you what I wrote earlier on this very thread:

Memehunter: "I cannot comment for the uneducated people who blame "all the Jews" (and I agree with DB that this does not make sense, and have said so repeatedly), but as far as I am concerned, I see Talmudism/Pharisaism as an ideological system (whether or not one wishes to call it a religion is irrelevant to my point) that promotes a one-world-government as one of its goals. As I have pointed out repeatedly, to mention that an ideology is promoting one-worldism is not the same as blaming "all the Jews". The fact that most followers of the Talmud are self-described (note that I insist on the "self-described") "Jews", regardless of their actual ethnic background (Khazar, Sephardic, or other) may be responsible for this conflation, but readers who have reached a modicum of understanding of the situation (which I expect the DB elves to have attained) should be able to make a distinction between these two elements.

[... ]

Now, I refuse to be associated with simplistic solutions such as blaming all the Jews or Zionists, so I seem to be in agreement with DB on that point. I don't even believe much in pointing fingers at specific individuals. I do, however, believe that it can be useful to point fingers at ideologies. Are we blaming all bankers when we are clamoring for the elimination of central banking or when we are identifying mercantilism as a central issue? Are we blaming the entire Anglosphere when we speak (as DB elves are prone to do) of an Anglosphere power elite? These are rhetorical questions, of course, but I would (not so) humbly advise everyone to keep them in mind. It's easy to create a strawman and accuse people of blaming an entire group, but one needs to be careful to not expose oneself to exactly the same accusations... "

This is from my first post on this thread.

Clearly, there is no basis to your idea that I am promoting racism. Anyway, I'm not sure if there is any validity to the concept of a "Jewish race", and I think that DB, and some other readers as well, would be in agreement with this judging from earlier comments and discussions. Besides, I don't see how I could endorse this viewpoint given my own personal background.

Reply from The Daily Bell

"Clearly, there is no basis to your idea that I am promoting racism."

Wait a minute. You virtually accused DB of providing a false flag Birch society interview that, as we understand it, covered up the role of "Jews" in the larger scheme of things. We think we understand your point very well.

  Posted by memehunter on 11/01/11 02:51 AM

DB: Now the point of the discussion is "to improve our understanding." OK but a while back the point seemed to be DB was 1. an apologist for John Birch Society (and a secret traveler) or 2. an apologist for predatory Zionism. This does not seem to us a rational way to go about constructing a educational enterprise. We think, then, you had something else in mind.

M: I still maintain that there was something fishy about the afterthoughts to the McManus interview. After all, I was right to point out that DB never went to the source of Mullins' comments (Revilo Oliver), thus offering readers a biased perspective that implied that Mullins was simply wrong in his assertions about JBS. Whatever else DB may say about this, this fact remains.

About the secret traveler bit, not sure what DB has in mind here. I did mention at some point that it was funny for a Swiss-based organization (at the time) to adopt a point of view (in some articles) that implied that they were US-based. I could probably find the exact verbatim quote, but I'm not particularly interested in this at the moment, although one may asks why DB felt the need to do this in some articles.

I never said that DB was an apologist for Zionism (again, the customary distortion); I did say that DB has issues with Zionism, and I pointed out again on this thread that they mentioned only one side of the issue, without pointing out that there is actually a fair amount of factual evidence showing that Zionism is part of the globalist agenda and has been for quite some time (ergo, it is not simply, or not only, a modern meme promoted by the current elites, as DB suggests).

DB: In any event, as a further addendum to your "bad day" you have taken the word "argument" out context. We have used it to mean "opinion" whereas you have consciously misconstrued to it to mean "quarrel." We are not "arguing" in fact, nor is that our intention. We are making a significant point on a significant issue. The act of misdefining words, committing logical fallacies, etc. does not obscure the significant and serious points that we have offered within the context of an important conversation.

M: I believe I have also offered significant and serious points about the historical evidence regarding Talmudism/Pharisaism/Zionism and the factual basis for the claim that Zionism still plays an important role in the push toward a one-world government. After DB pointed out that not all large-scale inter-generational criminal organizations seem to be ideologically-based, I suggested that there could be an important difference between the Mafia/Yakuza and the elite banking families. I may be wrong about this, but it is interesting that DB refused to address this topic and preferred to focus on my alleged "logical fallacies".

DB: The hell with keeping score. More and more of the 'Net intelligentsia find it appropriate and comfortable to blame "Jews" and "Zionists" for the deeds of a criminal mafia. They're submitting to an elite manipulation in our view and that's a BIG problem, whether you recognize it or not.

M: Again (and I mentioned this on this very thread), there may be the knee-jerk reflex to blame "all Jews", and I do not endorse that. I am focusing on an ideology, and I have shown that there is at least some factual basis to the idea that this ideology has historically played a fairly important role in the globalist conspiracy.

My main point (and the reason why I take the trouble to write these comments) is that to argue, as DB does, that the whole idea that pointing fingers at Zionism is simply an elite manipulation is misleading and at best a semi-truth. Apart from some concessions in the article ("Certainly there are historical precedents"), the historical and factual basis for this viewpoint was neglected and I felt the need to address this.

Reply from The Daily Bell

M: I still maintain that there was something fishy about the afterthoughts to the McManus interview. After all, I was right to point out that DB never went to the source of Mullins' comments (Revilo Oliver), thus offering readers a biased perspective that implied that Mullins was simply wrong in his assertions about JBS. Whatever else DB may say about this, this fact remains.

DB: We did go to the source and found nothing there as we recall. Mullin's statement was simply an assertion. Prove otherwise.

-----

About the secret traveler bit, not sure what DB has in mind here. I did mention at some point that it was funny for a Swiss-based organization (at the time) to adopt a point of view (in some articles) that implied that they were US-based. I could probably find the exact verbatim quote, but I'm not particularly interested in this at the moment, although one may asks why DB felt the need to do this in some articles.

DB: We have written countless times that DB is not merely Swiss based but has writers and editors in various countries, including the US. Our internal editorial makeup has varied.

-----

I never said that DB was an apologist for Zionism (again, the customary distortion); I did say that DB has issues with Zionism, and I pointed out again on this thread that they mentioned only one side of the issue, without pointing out that there is actually a fair amount of factual evidence showing that Zionism is part of the globalist agenda and has been for quite some time (ergo, it is not simply, or not only, a modern meme promoted by the current elites, as DB suggests).

DB: Customary distortion, huh? Implying that Anthony Wile was a "secret Bircher" was ... what? Part of a game of 21 questions?

-----

M: I believe I have also offered significant and serious points about the historical evidence regarding Talmudism/Pharisaism/Zionism and the factual basis for the claim that Zionism still plays an important role in the push toward a one-world government. After DB pointed out that not all large-scale inter-generational criminal organizations seem to be ideologically-based, I suggested that there could be an important difference between the Mafia/Yakuza and the elite banking families. I may be wrong about this, but it is interesting that DB refused to address this topic and preferred to focus on my alleged "logical fallacies".

DB: Why shouldn't we point out logical fallacies? They speak to your larger argument. As far your complex, evolving nomenclature for "Jews" (Talmudism/Pharisaism/Zionism) we have already suggested a simpler terminology: "Jewish Mafia," or "Criminal Mafia" - much as one might refer to the "Italian Mafia." Your logical would lead us to conclude you would refer to the Italian Mafia as "predatory Catholicism" or some such phrase.

-----

M: Again (and I mentioned this on this very thread), there may be the knee-jerk reflex to blame "all Jews", and I do not endorse that. I am focusing on an ideology, and I have shown that there is at least some factual basis to the idea that this ideology has historically played a fairly important role in the globalist conspiracy. My main point (and the reason why I take the trouble to write these comments) is that to argue, as DB does, that the whole idea that pointing fingers at Zionism is simply an elite manipulation is misleading and at best a semi-truth. Apart from some concessions in the article ("Certainly there are historical precedents"), the historical and factual basis for this viewpoint was neglected and I felt the need to address this.

DB: Again, our argument (Note, Memehunter we use this in the context of "opinion" so don't misconstrue the word again) as we are now verbalizing it (thanks to this "discussion"), is that Zionism may well be an elite dominant social theme, at least to some extent. We arrive at this opinion via the following points:

1. While one surely can find references to returning to a Jewish homeland, perhaps as part of a larger apocalyptic presentation, the modern power elite conspiracy has proven adept at using people's fundamental belief structures to promote its own agenda. We would argue that Zionism fits into this pattern/paradigm.

2. "Did this "Mafia" promote Zionism and go to the trouble of creating a Jewish state and populating it? Yes, it did, and manipulated the Jewish people to do so by frightening them into emigrating. We won't argue this point. It is well known.

3. This "Mafia" deals in dominant social themes, fear based promotions. They have built corporate engines such as Tavistock to develop these themes. But for some reason when it comes to elite Zionism and their religiosity generally, you are unwilling to grant that this pattern holds. Everything else is a promotion but when it comes to the larger agenda and the tools used to achieve it, you become credulous. You seem to take their statements and "worship" at face value.

4. At the same time, you argue that the religiosity that binds the elite together may be Satanism. Or maybe something else. And maybe the Jews are actually Kazars. Who knows? You have also argued that a spiritual ideology is necessary to support this intergenerational conspiracy. When we pointed out that various criminal mafias exist for generations without such a "glue," you fall back on old texts to support your position that Zionism is an ancient belief structure and therefore the Anglosphere power elite and its enablers and associates are acting out of belief.

5. Just because it is "fashionable" to blame the Jews or the Zionists or what have you doesn't mean it is "true." You may be participating in and upholding an elite meme. You may be manipulated. You may be following breadcrumbs, just as "they" wish.

6. It is a perfectly reasonable argument to make. The elites may well be using Israel and Zionism as a polarizing force to reinforce the chaos (and military actions) they need to help create one world government. Zionism may have been a historical agenda, but in the hands of this modern conspiracy it may well have become another tool. Thus those who are proponents of Zionism as the world's basic problem (rather than the existence of this "mafia") are helping promote the meme, facilitating elite objectives and supporting the journey toward a new world order.

  Posted by TerryWriterFromPortCredit on 10/31/11 11:10 PM

Criminal actions by psychopaths - period! Stop them so they can't kill anyone else behind whatever name or ideology or idea they conveniently use to pillage until they possess their ultimate endgame - total control - period!

In the spirit of a Mohandas Movement and a Gandhi Outcome!

Out of respect to all who suffered and to those who have died and are being killed as we speak -

Peace - T.

1 2 Next