Some poor academic, Jean-Pierre Rocher, has written a book “History of the 20th Century in Flash Cards“ published by Ellipses. Jean-Pierre Rocher, based on surveys of under 35s found that 21% of them believed the statement: “This global event – without doubt orchestrated by the CIA (secret services) to impose American influence on the Middle East? – hit the symbols of American power on its own territory.”
As under 35s is the target readership of the book it seems a reasonable sentence to include.
Ellipses, the book’s publisher, spoke on behalf of the author saying that the statement was not the opinion of the publisher and that Jean Pierre Rocher wanted to delete the sentence, though he was not interviewed himself.
There are certain things to be noted here.
1. It took a schoolteacher and a conspiracy watch-site on Facebook to contact the publisher before the publisher was aware that a certain sentence (or sentences) should not have appeared in the book. This is nonsense. All books are proofread before going to press. Now they may wish it wasn’t there. But it is.
2. The author may not hold that view (at least now) but one fifth of the populace under 35 who were surveyed did and that is significant enough for an alternative opinion to the mainstream argument to have representation – if free speech is still on the agenda. It surprises me that the figure is so small. It is presumably kept down due to the relentless efforts of the BBC and other mainstream outlets to make sure the truth is never learnt.
3. All books which have not yet been sent to bookshops are going to have an addendum slip correcting this “error”. Debate is dead. Well of course it is not. And thanks to this book and the publicity it is receiving will most likely boost that 21% figure. Similarly the number of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth has risen as more people start to question from a few hundred to thousands.
History will show that the United States was behind 9/11. At least that is what I believe. It happened with the Gulf of Tonkin incident in which a US navy ship opened fire on non-existent North Vietnam navy ships which it claimed had opened fire. This false-flag incident was used to increase US involvement in the Vietnam War. And we all know the cost of that in human lives and maimings. Another false flag incident happened when Japan blew up a railway siding at Mukden in Manchuria, blamed it on the Chinese, and used it as an excuse to invade the territory with the aim of increasing its empire. These incidents are now accepted as fact. However, anybody pointing out the truth at the time was a conspiracy theorist.
The problem with 9/11, and what makes it different, is that the targets were US civilians. No government is going to admit to mass murdering its own people while any of the perpetrators are still alive and in power. No patriotic person would want to believe their government capable of such an act. So history in the form of false-flags repeats itself. By the time people eventually realise what happened everybody, politicians, truthers and all those who believed the lies, are dead. Nobody then has any interest. It is history!
Let’s hope these evildoers are exposed before they face divine justice.
Note: I am now paying for this blog and apologise for all the adverts that previously appeared. It was only when I saw the site as others see it that I realised how irritating it must have been.
For Gladys Hotchkiss
Christmas comes splitting
post, ream or quire,
the Yule log is spitting
with sparks from the fire.
Grandma is sitting
her mind quite a mire
of washdays and knitting
of childhood desire.
Yellows, blues, pinks
a young girl again
coloured gummed links
then a paper chain
of trimmings. She blinks ―
her memories in vain.
Know what she thinks?
Then think again!
I wrote to my MP on 14 April 2018. Another instance of political abuse had allowed UK air-strikes on a country which was no threat to the UK and no threat to NATO. In my opinion our prime minister at the time, Theresa May, had sanctioned these attacks on Syria without consulting parliament and therefore I believed she should have resigned. Our country was off the rails then, and more so now.
The reason given for these attacks was that Bashir al-Assad had used chemical weapons against his own people. Why he would do that is beyond rational. It now transpires that not only was there no evidence that chemical weapons were used but that some OPCW inspectors’ reports were ignored. OPCW findings have allegedly been doctored to try to make it look like there was proof that Syria had used such weapons. The OPCW is not fit for purpose – even if some of its personnel are fit for purpose.
Today in the west, Fox News presenter Tucker Carlson, has questioned the OPCW report. For his trouble he has been called a traitor and other nasty names by thoughtless people who soak up the government narrative without inquiring if it is true. Instead of being proud of Carlson for asking the right questions a barrage of accusatory tweets have been launched at him. That is a big problem. We see it in the imprisonment of Julian Assange. Any person with the integrity to question officialdom and report the truth becomes the target of pillory.
Those, who try to row their oars against the mainstream, gain no kudos in being proved right. By the time that happens the damage has already been done. The purpose is to try to persuade others to row along with us. We need to unite honest journalists like Peter Oborne, honest journalists like Robert Fisk who went to Douma personally and reported that no chemical weapons had been used, honest reporters like John Pilger and Julian Assange. There are a quite a few more together with honest blog-writers like Craig Murray and blog-sites like The Canary. But for all these to become mainstream we need a government with honesty and integrity.
Jeremy Corbyn has real integrity. Even his opponents realise it. That is why some thinktank got together to invent the nonsense story of his “anti-Semitism”. This story enabled the BBC’s Andrew Neil to waste a quarter of an interview trying to get Corbyn to apologise for non-existent “anti-Semitism” in the Labour Party. That was instead of concentrating on the wonderful Labour policies that can bring back honesty to government and thus a fairer and more equitable society.
You want proof that Jeremy Corbyn is a fair and honest man? You want proof that he is in no way anti-Semitic? It comes from the Jewish community itself. This is Jeremy Corbyn’s own record in support of Jewish concerns. Unfortunately I am not sure of the original source so cannot credit.
1. In October 1936, Jeremy Corbyn’s mother participated in the battle of Cable Street in defence of British Jews after British fascists had staged an assault on the area. Corbyn was raised in a household passionately opposed to antisemitism in all its forms.
2. In 23rd April 1977, Corbyn organised a counter-demonstration to protect Wood Green from a neo-nazi march through the district. The area had a significant Jewish population.
3. On 7 November 1990, Corbyn signed a motion condemning the rise of antisemitism in the UK.
4. In 2002 Jeremy Corbyn led a clean-up and vigil at Finsbury Park Synagogue which had been vandalised in an anti-Semitic attack.
5. On 30 April 2002, Corbyn tabled a motion in the House of Commons condemning an anti-Semitic attack on a London Synagogue.
6. On 26 November 2003, Jeremy Corbyn signed a Parliamentary motion condemning terrorist attacks on two synagogues.
7. In February 2009, Jeremy Corbyn signed a parliamentary motion condemning a fascist for establishing a website to host antisemitic materials.
8. On 24th March 2009, Corbyn signed a Parliamentary motion praising British Jews who resisted the Holocaust by risking their lives to save potential victims.
9. Nine years ago, Corbyn signed a Parliamentary motion praising “Jewish News” for its pioneering investigation into the spread of Antisemitism on Facebook.
10. On 9 February 2010, Corbyn signed a Parliamentary motion calling for an investigation into Facebook and its failure to prevent the spread of antisemitic materials on its site.
11. On 27 October 2010, Corbyn signed a Parliamentary motion praising the late Israeli Prime Minister for pursuing a two state solution to the Israel/Palestine question.
12. On 13 June 2012, Corbyn sponsored and signed a motion condemning the BBC for cutting a Jewish Community television programme from its schedule.
13. 1 October 2013, Corbyn appeared on the BBC to defend Ralph Miliband against vile antisemitic attacks by the UK press.
14. Five years ago Corbyn signed a Parliamentary motion condemning antisemitism in sport.
15. On 1 March 2013, Corbyn signed a Parliamentary motion condemning and expressing concern at growing levels of antisemitism in European football.
16. On 9 January 2014, Jeremy Corbyn signed a Parliamentary motion praising Holocaust education programmes that had taken 20,000 British students to Auschwitz.
17. On 22 June 2015, Corbyn signed a Parliamentary motion expressing concern at the neo-nazi march being planned for an area of London with a significant Jewish population.
18. On 9 October 2016, Corbyn, close to tears, commemorated the 1936 Battle of Cable Street and recalled the role his mother played in defending London’s Jewish community.
19. On 3 December 2016, Corbyn made a visit to Terezin Concentration Camp where Jewish people were murdered by the Nazis. It was Jeremy’s third visit to such a camp, all of which were largely unreported in the most read UK papers.
20. Last year, a widely-endorsed 2018 academic report found ninety-five serious reporting failures in the reporting of the Labour Antisemitism story with the worst offenders The Sun, the Mail & the BBC.
On top of that, thanks to the slanderous accusations of chief rabbi Ephraim Mirvis, a number of Jews have spoken out in Jeremy Corbyn’s support. Paul Goldman, a former businessman, wrote to Rabbi Mirvis telling him in no uncertain terms that the Chief Rabbi did not speak for him and many other Jews in this country. This testimony is from a distinguished old gentleman, Frank Land OBE.
Outside of this country there was sterner criticism of Chief Rabbi Mirvis in a letter to Jeremy Corbyn on behalf of United European Jews and signed by one of its executive, Rabbi Mayer Weinberger. The content is worth giving in full so there can be no “out of context” claims.
“Dear Jeremy Corbyn – Leader of the Labour Party
I write to you on behalf of the Executive Board of the United European Jews Organisation regarding an unusually disturbing declaration that was totally reported in the media that the overwhelming majority of British Jews are “gripped by anxiety” at the prospect of a Labour victory in the forthcoming General Election.
Please note that we totally reject and condemn in no uncertain terms these remarks, which does not represent the views of the mainstream chareidi Jews that live in the UK.
We believe that such assertions are due to propaganda with a political and ideological agenda. An agenda, which, I might add, is diametrically opposed to fundamental Jewish values as well as the opinions of tens of thousands of Jews in our community.
At this time we also relay our gratefulness numerous acts of solidarity with the Jewish community over many years and also welcome your assurances that Labour will do everything necessary to defend the Jewish way of life and protect our rights to practise our religion.
For all this; we take the opportunity to say: Thank you! Mr Corbyn.
Yours sincerely,
Rabbi Mayer Weinberger
Director”
We need a man with the respect of all good people, from all communities and backgrounds whatever their religious beliefs, to restabilise and redirect a country that has come off the rails. That man is Jeremy Corbyn.
To my last piece debunking the claim by Ephraim Mirvis that Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party is anti-Semitic one person, Jack Mendel, included my blogpost in one of his tweets.
His accompanying comment was to the effect: “Ooh look an antisemitic article about why Jeremy Corbyn’s antisemitic Labour Party is not antisemitic.” I might be paraphrasing but not by much.
When I asked him on Twitter in what way my piece was antisemitic, rather than providing an answer he first: deleted my tweet; second: blocked me.
So much for free speech!
Before that I had no real interest in somebody sharing my post whether they agreed with it or not. Afterwards I was bemused that Jack – if he was convinced that the statement made and the ground he stood on was worth defending – would not want to discuss or explain in what way he deemed my article anti-Semitic.
I wrote in my previous piece “There is an old adage that if you say something often enough people will start to believe it.” In essence Jack Mendel appears to be following that same meme. Put another way certain people who have no argument can get away with labelling someone anti-Semitic instead of an argument.
Before it was deleted my tweet in response to Jack’s comment in sharing my piece had 15 views. Perhaps somebody wiser than Jack had pointed out to him that there was nothing anti-Semitic in the article.
Who is Jack Mendel? He is the online editor of Jewish News, a tabloid, which, according to his LinkedIn page has a distribution of 25,000 with an additional 500,000 hits online. It is aimed at the Jewish community. Most people from the Jewish community are as fed up with the memes of “anti-Semitism” and “Holocaust denial” as we non-Jewish people, who are usually the targets of these venomous comments. It seems from the few Jewish News headings I have seen (including the featured image) that it has an agenda. That agenda is to keep labelling people without argument hoping that eventually some of the muck will stick.
Jack, you have a degree in Politics and International Relations from the University of Reading, and presumably in getting that degree you had to argue from more than one point of view, yet now you have become a person with power – indeed, little more than a dictator, who can decide which voices get heard and which are discriminated against. Your alma mater will be proud of you – if it uses the same criterion for argument – but I very much doubt it does.
Never to my memory has there been an election where wealthy Jews have been so frightened. Many of them have a large influence over and ownership of the media and even it may appear over the Church of England. Just in case you had any chance of missing it when they start a story like this it hits all the media en bloc: Telegraph, BBC, Guardian, Mail, Express, Financial Times, Jewish Chronicle and many other outlets in a carpet spread.
The boringly incessant cliché used to blacken Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party is an unsubstantiated claim of anti-Semitism. There is an old adage that if you say something often enough people will start to believe it. That is what the wealthy Zionists and their Neo-Con allies are hoping for because let me tell you for all these claims of anti-Semitism in the Labour Party none of the media outpourings produces any credible evidence or examples of anti-Semitism. They just say it is there.
It is a bit like saying there are aliens among us. Aliens may be among us. How would anyone know without proof? Likewise there may be the odd incident of careless thought and thoughtless words that make it appear anti-Semitism is an issue. I have not seen aliens. I have not seen anti-Semitism in the Labour Party.
The big fear for the rich is not racism of any kind – the Labour Party has always been opposed to racism – including the persecution of Palestinians in the apartheid state of Israel. The big fear is that some of the accumulation of wealth might be more equitably distributed. That is the real fear.
Those who circulate this nonsense are not poor Jewish families trying to eke out a living in these days of austerity. They are not persecuted like Anne Frank’s family, forced to move abroad because of Nazi ideology. They are rich. They are bankers. They are owners of corporations and owners of the media – or those who can put pressure on the owners of the media.
Yes, people are leaving the Labour Party. Sometimes they blame it on anti-Semitism without citing examples. But the real reason is that they do not belong in a party that is trying to bring social justice and equal opportunities for all – including the poor. They belong in opportunist parties where they can have a more-than-comfortable lifestyle for themselves and their families perpetuated into old age. Take for example, Lady Neuberger, who is not even a Labour peer, but quoted in the Guardian article linked above.
“Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Lady Neuberger said that under Corbyn’s leadership “there has been this insidious antisemitic tone to quite a lot of what’s happened and an unwillingness to really face it.””
This is it: accusatory words. This is the total “argument”. The words are there and make it appear that anti-Semitism is an issue. However there are no examples to back this “argument” up.
We hardly ever hear of rabbis making political comments except occasionally on Radio 4’s thought for the day. This statement by the Chief Rabbi, Ephraim Mirvis, that the “overwhelming majority of British Jews are gripped by anxiety” that Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party might win the election is misguided at best but most likely untruthful. First there would have needed to have been some kind of poll on this which I have yet to see.
The tentacles of power politics stretch far and wide bringing the Archbishop of Canterbury into their clutches. Justin Welby, has issued in a tweet a statement about the “deep sense of insecurity and fear felt by many British Jews”. There is certainly anxiety. But it is not about anti-Semitism. Instead it really appears to be about the existentialist threat to a change in the social structure bringing the needs of the poor into the frame. I wish they would say that was their worry because I am sure this anti-Semitism nonsense will backfire on them. And so it should.
It is not new for Chief Priests and Rabbis to be worried about the threat of a change to their comfortable way of life. The same thing happened 2000 years ago. Hopefully today they will not be as severe in their punishment of an innocent man and his followers as they were then!
Cartoon by Bob Moran
This year I am cycling for two charities. One I have supported since its first event is The Big Ride for Palestine, which this year again is providing sports equipment for Palestinian girls. If you want to know more about this important and needy cause here is a news article about this year’s event. To support this please click on the link.
The second cause is just as worthy and locally-based. It is the Myton Hospice Challenge – a gruelling 100 miles from Warwick through the Cotswolds and back to Warwick. To support this please click this link.
If I was responsible for allocating places in heaven anyone supporting both would surely get one.
On Easter Sunday this year in Sri Lanka three Christian churches together with three hotels in Colombo were targeted by ISIS in suicide attacks which claimed the lives of more than 250 people and injured some 500 others including worshippers and foreigners. The attack was premeditated. What is more the Saudi Arabian foreign office knew it was planned five days before it happened.
The following leaked document shows that the Saudis were aware of the slaughter that was about to take place and may even have been the perpetrators. In a top secret letter from Foreign Minister, Ibrahim bin Abdul Aziz al-Assaf, to Saudi Ambassador in Sri Lanka, Abdul Nasser al-Harethi, it instructed Saudis in Sri Lanka to stay away from churches on Easter Day.
https://english.alahednews.com.lb/47824/269
Saudi Arabia has a history of funding ISIS and terror. As Julian Assange pointed out in an interview with John Pilger not only was Saudi Arabia funding ISIS it was also funding the Clinton Foundation.
Only last year a journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, was murdered in the Saudi embassy in Istanbul by a special squad flown in from Saudi Arabia to do the dirty act. The BBC was, for once, excellent in reporting this and for a few days the plight of the destitute and dying in Saudi’s war on Yemen was given coverage. Sadly, because of western love of Saudi money it was short-lived.
The love of money is the root of all evil according to a letter written by Paul to his fellow-Christian Timothy. By the time of his second letter to the same he was in chains and imprisoned for speaking the truth. People who tell things as they are – there are few in mainstream media allowed this luxury – are just as likely today to be persecuted for their honesty as they were in Paul’s day.
That is why Julian Assange is in Belmarsh prison. He told the truth about US war-crimes in Iraq. Chelsea (then Bradley) Manning provided Wikileaks with video evidence of these war crimes. For telling this truth and providing the shocking footage many of us have seen, she went to prison. Although released by the Obama administration she is back in custody now for an indefinite period for refusing to testify against Wikileaks. People who speak the truth lay themselves open to all kinds of punishment, from incarceration, torture and amputation to capital beheadings and crucifixion. It is widely held that Julian Assange is currently being subjected to mind-warping drugs.
We in the west love money so much we are prepared to forgive Saudi Arabia for its genocide against Yemeni people already struggling to survive in one of the poorest of countries in the world, people who are often indiscriminately slaughtered with western weapons, and children dying of starvation. We are prepared to forgive Saudi Arabia for the planned murder of the US and former Saudi journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, in the consulate in Istanbul. We are prepared to forgive Saudi Arabia for the mass execution of its political opponents. We are prepared to forgive Saudi Arabia for any involvement in the mass murder of Christians in Sri Lanka.
Why? We forgive them not because forgiveness is a tenet of Christian teaching – though it is. We forgive them because we love their money. This love of money is the root of all the criminal acts outlined in the previous paragraph. Yet western governments lack the moral fibre to speak the truth. Worse still, western governments seek to make those who do tell the truth, pay for their honesty and for the moral fibre they possess that governments lack. Saudi Arabia is not our friend. Neither are western governments.
Julian Assange, like Paul, and many others from history, is being persecuted for revealing the truth. We teach our children it is right to tell the truth. If journalists and human rights campaigners stop telling the truth there is no hope for the future of society. We come into the world without money. We go out of the world unable to take anything we gained with us. Paul said that too. Therefore there is an obligation on us to speak the truth and support others who do so. I urge one and all to speak up for Julian Assange. He represents us all.
