Michael Jackson Anti-Semitic? (MFCS)

[brianpi]

I did not mean anyone on this forum....this forum is better than that....and that is why we are here....I agree with what you say, even tho I'am not a christian...Here is what I hope will be some history that the forum will find worth hearing....The jewish people have many unusual "break-offs"...One of them that is very much looked down-on, is the "Frankists". This cult is the equivalent of "Left-Hand Tantra, Buddhism". The primary concept is: "evil is an aspect of the unspeakable name of God, as much as goodness"...and a lot of other things that was taught, just to get money and or get someone in bed....The "Frankists" had a lot of influence on the formation of the Rothchild/Meyer/Goldman, illuminate family group.....This cocept that was at the core of this cult, is not unlike,,"thesis--anti-thesis--synthesis" or "first build--then destroy--then rebuild" or "order out of chaos".....I wonder what kind of "anti-Jew" ? Michael may have been.

[Salvador Astucia]

I did not mean anyone on this forum....this forum is better than that....and that is why we are here....I agree with what you say, even tho I'am not a christian...Here is what I hope will be some history that the forum will find worth hearing....The jewish people have many unusual "break-offs"...One of them that is very much looked down-on, is the "Frankists". This cult is the equivalent of "Left-Hand Tantra, Buddhism". The primary concept is: "evil is an aspect of the unspeakable name of God, as much as goodness"...and a lot of other things that was taught, just to get money and or get someone in bed....The "Frankists" had a lot of influence on the formation of the Rothchild/Meyer/Goldman, illuminate family group.....This cocept that was at the core of this cult, is not unlike,,"thesis--anti-thesis--synthesis" or "first build--then destroy--then rebuild" or "order out of chaos".....I wonder what kind of "anti-Jew" ? Michael may have been.

Interesting, but I don't know anything about Frankists. Regarding Michael Jackson being anti-Jewish, his beliefs were probably similar to mine, in that he did not blame every single Jewish person on the planet for the actions of a few. He probably understood the threat to humanity by this small group of fanatic psychopaths who pretend to be religious leaders and defenders against bigotry. The late Douglas Reed described that threat as follows:

"In our time, I judge, a barbaric superstition born in antiquity and nurtured through the ages by a semi-secret priesthood, has returned to plague us in the form of a political movement supported by great wealth and power in all great capitals of the world."

I have little doubt that Michael generally thought in those terms, although he was forced to befriend people he knew wanted to kill him as a means of appeasing his ignorant mother. Most people bash his dad, but his mom must be a real pill with that Jehovah's Witness nonsense.

Salvador

[Steve]

I get the feeling that the different movements within the Jewish community often know what is going on at the top, and they don't always agree. There are so many people involved, jewish and non-jewish, everyone with their own mind and their own little agenda. The only way to keep this movement going into the very direction it is heading now, is to have the whole bloody planet remain on this low vibration. I can't say it often enough, all of us choose this life, this reality. Evil people can only be evil if they find victims. And we make ourselves into victims every day. Often on a small scale, but still the same concept. Going to the doctor, getting insurance, sending our kids to (propaganda)-school because we are too busy working to teach them ourselves. I'd call this victim mentality, with very little faith in our own power.

By the way, i created a new "Religion & Spiritality" section here: viewforum.php?f=29

[brianpi]

Ah' yes the Mom...I wonder about both the Mom and Dad......They both knew Melvin Belli....Melvin was in contact with someone close to Michael...I'am not saying that the Mom or Dad turned against their own Son...but did Dad and Dad introduce LaToya to her mobster husband ? Melvin Belli was very much a NWO and Mafia connection, and was friends of some other people in the Jackson circle....I looked at Melvin with the same kind of admiration that I have of a Lion. The man had no time for the innocent masses, [unless they had a lot of money] this is exactly what Dad acts like on interviews. These pragmatic Mom and Dad teams, show up throughout history....but it is hard to point the finger of guilt at this pragmatism, and say it was ill intentioned.....an element of this is part of many Jewish and American Black families. This grows out of struggling with the larger prejudice group. [just my opinion]...and home schooling is the best way to start pulling us out of the dive.

[Salvador Astucia]

I get the feeling that the different movements within the Jewish community often know what is going on at the top, and they don't always agree. There are so many people involved, jewish and non-jewish, everyone with their own mind and their own little agenda. The only way to keep this movement going into the very direction it is heading now, is to have the whole bloody planet remain on this low vibration. I can't say it often enough, all of us choose this life, this reality. Evil people can only be evil if they find victims. And we make ourselves into victims every day. Often on a small scale, but still the same concept. Going to the doctor, getting insurance, sending our kids to (propaganda)-school because we are too busy working to teach them ourselves. I'd call this victim mentality, with very little faith in our own power.

By the way, i created a new "Religion & Spiritality" section here: viewforum.php?f=29

Nice sentiment, Steve, particularly the comment about making "ourselves into victims every day." This particularly applies to African Americans who attend churches that give Old Testament teachings equal treatment as the divine guidance of Jesus in the Gospels. Such people are setting their people up to be victims -- manipulated by the "barbaric superstition born in antiquity and nurtured through the ages by a semi-secret priesthood" that "has returned to plague us in the form of a political movement supported by great wealth and power in all great capitals of the world." By worshipping the same god as the stated barbarians, African Americans continue to live in bondage, controlled by the true oppressors of all people who are not members of their cult. When one encourages an entire community to worship *their* god, one contributes to mass manipulation of his/her own people by these barbarians, the ones who worship Jehovah/Satan.

Salvador

[Salvador Astucia]

That is very persceptive....The old testament, is the basis of many occult concepts, and the entertaiment industry has many adherentsts to the occultic realms of darkness and light. The blood thirsty, and the greedy, run together, and all they need is some ancient validation, to make it right....."DO what thou wilt"....Aleister Crowley

A perfect example of the Old Testament's influence on Hollywood is the movie, "Inglourious Basterds," which came out last summer. Inglourious Basterds is a sick sadistic movie that encourages torture, disfigurement, sadism, cold blooded murder and every form of gratuitous grotesque violence imaginable. But its creators and backers get away with it for several reasons, all related to Israel, Zionism and naked propaganda. The primary reason for its success is the victims in the movie are German soldiers, and thus considered not human. A more subtle reason for the movie’s success is it adheres to the ancient teachings of Deuteronomy and other Old Testament writings that encourage utter destruction of people or nations considered the enemy of God’s chosen. Lastly, Basterds is a last-ditch effort to promote much of the now-defunct folklore about the Holocaust, which portrays Hitler and all Nazis soldiers as the devil in human form, unworthy of human treatment or scholarly discussion by historians and other intellectuals. In reality, scholars around the globe have shown many critical points regarding that period of history to be untrue. Unable to respond to scholars’ critiques in an adult and serious forum, propagandists responded with a fantacy movie that does not even qualify as historical fiction. (Hitler is gunned down at the end.) The creation of the movie itself is similar to two men debating a political topic, and one presents overwhelming evidence to support his point of view. The other reacts by talking complete nonsense and cursing. That is essentially what the movie is about. A definite point of view is being pushed, but in the most juvenile manner humanly possible. Zionist leadership lost the intellectual debate on the stated topic years ago, so now they’re angry and reacting like spoiled children. There was a time when movies about the Holocaust were treated with total seriousness and reverence. Basterds now treats this previously sacred topic with all the reverence of teenage boys comparing genitalia in a locker room.

For promotional purposes, Mongoloid-looking Hollywood director Quentin Tarantino is presented to the world as the Gentile cinematic genius who created this ghoulish psychopathic treasure, but the sadistic flick’s true backers are one-hundred percent Jehova worshippers. The movie’s producer Lawrence Bender declared it was a “Jewish wet dream.” (For what’s it worth, I do not for a minute believe that intellectual Jews like Noam Chomsky or Roman Polanski, for example, consider such trash to be a wet dream. Only leadership like ADL president Abe Foxman, for example, would consider it comparable to sexual self-gratification.) The movie was released by brothers Harvey and Bob Weinstein, owners of the Weinstein Company, the independent American film studio. Tarantino may not be Jewish, but the mainstream media’s collective insinuation that Basterds was not the brainchild of Jewish bosses in Hollywood is a brazen lie. The stated Hollywood moguls had the audacity to nominate this warped piece of garbage for eight academy awards. Ninety percent of mainstream media’s movie critics say the movie is great.

If one looks at Tarantino’s physical appearance (nervous ticks, constant smirks at inappropriate times) and general narcissistic attitude, it is clear that the guy is yet another puppet, propped by the powers that be, with little imagination, but seemingly excels in making movies that encourage the most vulgar forms of violence. In fact, if Mr. Tarantino were not a so-called successful movie director, he would likely be a patient at a state mental hospital, which is clearly where he belongs. It is ironic that a wonderful human being like Michael Jackson was hounded by the media for years, then killed, while a semi-psychopath like Tarantino is considered the toast of Hollywood. The media’s collective reaction to such total garbage gives us a window into where our culture is going.

Salvador Astucia

[Steve]

[..]
If one looks at Tarantino’s physical appearance (nervous ticks, constant smirks at inappropriate times) and general narcissistic attitude, it is clear that the guy is yet another puppet, propped by the powers that be, with little imagination, but seemingly excels in making movies that encourage the most vulgar forms of violence. In fact, if Mr. Tarantino were not a so-called successful movie director, he would likely be a patient at a state mental hospital, which is clearly where he belongs. It is ironic that a wonderful human being like Michael Jackson was hounded by the media for years, then killed, while a semi-psychopath like Tarantino is considered the toast of Hollywood. The media’s collective reaction to such total garbage gives us a window into where our culture is going.

Salvador Astucia

Tarantino used to be one of my favorite filmmakers when i was a teenager. I loved pulp fiction and reservoir dogs. But since Kill Bill i found it more and more difficult to enjoy his movies. I first thought maybe i was getting too old for this stuff, or the special effects are just too realistic nowadays.
When watching Hostel and Saw (not Tarantino movies) i got really worried about the path our society is going down. Both movies have an interesting plot (in my opinion), but the level of violence on the screen shocked me. This violence in combination with our predilection for reality shows like Big Brother and Survivor will eventually bring us back into the acceptance of gladiator fights over life and death. I think it will not be long before we see the first "Running Man" on tv, with an aged Arnold Schwarzenegger as the show's host. Violence, just like sex, not only sells very well, but also controls the masses.

I found this very nice post here with the title: Quentin Tarantino You Suck!
http://celticrebel.wordpress.com/2008/0 ... ino-sucks/

[Salvador Astucia]

...Tarantino used to be one of my favorite filmmakers when i was a teenager. I loved pulp fiction and reservoir dogs. But since Kill Bill i found it more and more difficult to enjoy his movies. I first thought maybe i was getting too old for this stuff, or the special effects are just too realistic nowadays...

Inglourious Basterds seems like a propaganda piece. A lot of its message may actually be directed at Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, someone I admire a great deal for his charisma, intelligence, not to mention opposition to Israel on strictly moral grounds. Ahmadinejad keeps scoring debating points over Obama and his Jehovah worshipping backers by asking common sense questions about the Holocaust. Ahmadinejad often poses the following rhetorical question: “If the Holocaust happened as you claim, why were the Palestinians blamed instead of the Germans?”

That is an outstanding question, but I’ve got a better one: “After the British helped defeat Hitler and the Nazis, why did Jewish commandos in Palestine terrorize the British in the late 40s?”

For example, why did future Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin order his terrorist organization, Irgun, to blow up the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on July 22, 1946? The blast killed nearly 100 people – British, Arabs, even some Jews. It is a matter of historical record that Begin’s objective in bombing the King David Hotel was to target British military personnel who were housed in the stated hotel during the British Mandate. The objective was to drive out the so-called British tyrants from Palestine so Israel could emerge as an independent state. And it worked. The King David Hotel bombing completely demoralized the British, and they left Palestine shortly thereafter. Problem is the timing was a bit off, particularly when trying to understand the Holocaust from today's perspective. Why terrorize friends and liberators like the British? If the Holocaust was as bad as everybody claims, why would Jewish terrorists like Begin target the British after they helped liberate German Jews from their German oppressors? That simply makes no sense at all, if we accept the standard Holocaust story. (But people who form a religion around books like Deuteronomy are clearly not logical thinkers.)

By the way, one of Irgun’s terrorists was named Benjamin Emanuel, who had a son named Rahm, who is currently the White House Chief of Staff for Obama. (Talk about a brood of Jehovah worshippers.)

That stated, Basterds appears to be an attempt to respond to Ahmadinejad’s insinuation that Jehovah worshippers are blaming Palestinians for the actions of Germans. Tarantino and his Jehovah worshipping backers are essentially saying to Ahmadinejad: “We don’t just hate Palestinians! We hate Germans too!”

Actually the movie would be more realistic if Tarantino et al had modified the script and re-direct its hate from Germans to Palestinians. Problem is the Jewish dirty dozen didn’t kill any women and children in the movie. If they only slaughter men, they’re not true Jehovah worshippers. (That stated, in the Lebanon-Israeli war, in the summer of 2006, Hezbollah showed the Israeli soldiers what happens when they try to fight men instead of raping, torturing and murdering women, children and babies.)

Here’s an article I wrote about Obama’s attempts to discredit Ahmadinejad in June 2009, around the time of Michael Jackson’s death.

Obama vs. Ahmadinejad
Cairo Speech Kicks off the Great Holocaust War!

http://www.jfkmontreal.com/Obama_Cairo/ ... ticism.htm

Salvador

PS. It may seem like I dislike Obama, but he’s an improvement over Bush, in my humble opinion. But the Rahm Emanuel situation is a real problem that makes him a joke in the Arab/Muslim world. Still, he’s less of a joke than his predecessor.

[Steve]

[...]
By the way, one of Irgun’s terrorists was named Benjamin Emanuel, who had a son named Rahm, who is currently the White House Chief of Staff for Obama. (Talk about a brood of Jehovah worshippers.)

It's all connected behind the curtain, isn't it. Hitler had support from british businessmen. The buddhists in Nepal had financial support from the CIA to discredit the Chinese. I'm not sure if Ahmadinejad is a exception here. To be honest, i don't know much about him, but what is he doing on this image?



Is this just a coincidence? The whole scenario reminds me very much of Nazi-Germany before the second world war. See the similarities: There was a war that demoralized the country a few years earlier. Then, a new fanatic president comes in and points at the jews as the reason for all the problems. Financiers from behind the enemies' border help to build a strong military structure in the country (nuclear weapons). Unemployment rates go down.
Regardless how strongly Ahmadinejad really believes he is independent from the NWO, his fanatic attitude will turn him into another one of their victims. He is being used to prevent a good and healthy fight, pushed in to distract his followers from a chance at real growth. And we will only end up with another war. That's just my opinion, but as i said before, i don't really know much more about Ahmadinejad. . .

[Salvador Astucia]

To be honest, i don't know much about [Ahmadinejad], but what is he doing on this image?



Is this just a coincidence?

Have you checked the authenticity of that photograph? The hands look suspicious. Are you sure it has not been doctored? The CIA has a history of using dishonest photograph techniques to push propaganda/disinformation. Also, it’s pure hypocrisy for the Obama administration to criticize Iran or any nation for human rights violations, terrorism, and so on, while the president employs the son of a bona fide terrorist as White House chief of staff. No Arab nation will take Obama seriously until he dumps Rahm Emanuel and publicly apologizes for giving him the job in the first place.

Your comments about Hitler and WWII are interesting, which brings us back to the point previously discussed. 65 years have passed since the end of WWII, yet Hollywood still feels compelled to release WWII propaganda movies like Inglourious Basterds. Quentin Tarantino is a sick sadistic racist bigot who encourages torture, disfigurement, sadism, cold blooded murder and every form of gratuitous grotesque violence imaginable. Why do sexual perverts like Tarantino get a pass in the media while Michael Jackson was harassed to death?

Salvador

[Steve]

I already knew that the current Obama administration is made up only of banksters. I didn't know much about Rahm, so i took the opportunity to read a bit into his biography. Rahm Emanuel is currently the White House Chief of Staff; he is the highest ranking member of the Executive Office of the US President as well as his senior aide. This position has been dubbed "The Second-Most Powerful Man or Woman in Washington" due to the nature of the job.
Here a few quotes from wikipeadia:

[..]
"The most controversial moment of the primary election came when Edward Moskal, president of the Polish American Congress, a political action committee endorsing Kaszak, called Emanuel a "millionaire carpetbagger who knows nothing" about "our heritage". Moskal also charged that Emanuel had dual citizenship with Israel and had served in the Israeli Army. Moskal's comments were denounced as anti-Semitic by Kaszak.
[..]
In his 2006 book, co-authored with Bruce Reed, The Plan: Big Ideas for America,[49] Emanuel advocated a three-month compulsory universal service program for Americans between the ages of 18 and 25.[50] An expanded version of this idea was later proposed by U.S. Presidential candidate Barack Obama (who was later to choose Emanuel as his White House Chief of Staff), during his 2008 campaign, in a speech on July 2, 2008 at the University of Colorado, in which Obama proposed a "civilian national security force" (this term being used in the spoken version of his speech, not in the original written version), which included expanded voluntary national service programs in many areas, such as infrastructure rebuilding, service to the elderly, and environmental cleanup. For some of these services, tax credits and direct pay, primarily for college tuition, was proposed. Obama's original proposal was for participation by all ages, but with required participation by all middle school and high school students for 50 hours of community service a year. That proposed requirement was later modified to being "a goal"."
[..]
In June 2007, Emanuel condemned an outbreak of Palestinian violence in the Gaza Strip and criticized Arab countries for not applying the same kind of pressure on the Palestinians as they have on Israel. At a 2003 pro-Israel rally in Chicago, Emanuel told the marchers Israel was ready for peace but would not get there until Palestinians "turn away from the path of terror".
[..]
In an article in The New York Times Emanuel was characterized as being "perhaps the most influential chief of staff of a generation".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahm_Emanu ... in_finance

This is quite amazing! He openly sympathises with Israel (of course he would as son of an Israeli) and obviosly uses his position to help the home country of his parents. It's amazing that the masses of Americans can't see that he doesn't act in their interest in the first place. It doesn't matter if he is Jewish or any other nationality. If you work for the government, you should leave all your personal interests at front door. Of course that's very idealistic, but nowadays you don't even have to pretend anymore. He is the second most powerful man in the white house (officially), and openly promotes his personal agenda and the one of his fellow countrymen in Israel. That's just not right.
And i was not aware that Rahm Emanuel was the one that came up with the idea of a "civilian national security force". That is just so wrong. He copies the same faschist methods that were once used in Nazi Germany. Everything bad that the ADL apparently fights comes out of its own ranks now! Apparently the Israelian army often used Nazi methods in their war with Palestine (Ghettos for Palestinians). If this is true, it makes me even more distrustful of the whole Anti-Semite hype.

To bring this back to the entertainment industry, Ari Emanuel, Rahm Emanuel's brother is a Hollywood talent agent. His entertainment agency WME is one of the biggest in the world and represents Martin Scorsese, Larry David, Michael Moore, Matt Damon, Sacha Baron Cohen, Conan O'Brien, and Mark Wahlberg, Quentin Tarantino, Condoleezza Rice among others. Here is a list of clients on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Mo ... oliticians

This agencfy is also responsible for the new wave of reality tv that's flooded our livingrooms over the last years: "Big Brother", "Fear Factor", "Hell's Kitchen", "Biggest Loser", "American Idol", "Dancing with the Stars", and "Project Runway".

[Salvador Astucia]

I already knew that the current Obama administration is made up only of banksters. I didn't know much about Rahm, so i took the opportunity to read a bit into his biography. Rahm Emanuel is currently the White House Chief of Staff; he is the highest ranking member of the Executive Office of the US President as well as his senior aide. This position has been dubbed "The Second-Most Powerful Man or Woman in Washington" due to the nature of the job.

Here a few quotes from wikipeadia: ...

Interesting info, Steve, but you left out the following statements under Rahm Emanuel’s bio in Wikipedia:

"Emanuel was born in Chicago, Illinois to Jewish parents. His father, Benjamin M. Emanuel, a Jerusalem-born pediatrician, was a member of the Irgun."

STOP right there! This is a critical point! Irgun was a *terrorist* organization from the 40s. Keep in mind, however, that Wikipedia tends to soften controversial topics like Jewish terrorism. But with Irgun, it is only controversial because of the shocking nature, not because there is any question as to whether Irgun was a terrorist organization or not. Here are excerpts from Wikipedia’s write-up on Irgun:

“Irgun (Hebrew: ארגון‎; shorthand for Ha'Irgun HaTzva'i HaLe'umi BeEretz Yisra'el, הארגון הצבאי הלאומי בארץ ישראל, "National Military Organization in the Land of Israel") was a militant Zionist group that operated in the British mandate of Palestine between 1931 and 1948.”

STOP right there! Notice that Wikipedia describes Irgun as a “militant Zionist group.” Let’s get real. Militant, in Wikipedia speak, means *terrorist* anywhere else. Remember, Rahm Emanuel’s father was a member of this militant/terrorist Zionist group.

Let’s see what else Wikipedia has to say about the nice things that Rahm’s dad’s organization did shortly after WWII:

“Some of the better-known attacks by the Irgun were the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on 22 July 1946 and the Deir Yassin massacre (carried out together with Lehi) on 9 April 1948.”

STOP right there! Even wimpy Wikipedia cannot deny that Irgun committed the stated two acts, which were clearly acts of terrorism. (Blowing up a building? slaughtering a village of Arab people? Isn't that terrorism?) Irgun blew up a hotel, thus killing innocents during a time of peace. But with the King David Hotel bombing, Irgun did not target Arabs, who most people consider the collective enemy of Jewish settlers in Palestine. They targeted the British of all people. Remember, in 1946, the British had just helped defeat Hitler, the so-called persecutor of Jews. I stated before that this makes no sense, given all the modern hoopla about the Holocaust. But that is another discussion, and it's really a moot point because the fact is Irgun stabbed their British allies in the back by committing the stated bloody assault against them in the wake of WWII, after the defeat of Hitler's Germany. Again, Irgun’s Jewish terrorists targeted the British more than the Arabs when they blew up the King David Hotel. Wikipedia does not describe it very well, but the terrorist Jews disguised themselves as Arabs when they snuck into the hotel and planted explosives. I can provide sources to validate that specific claim, but it is absolutely true. (Some say similar activities were observed during the attacks on the World Trade Center.)

The second example of Irgun’s terrorism provided by Wikipedia was the Deir Yassin massacre. The Deir Yassin massacre was similar to the My Lai Massacre, in Vietnam, where women and children in a village were murdered in a savage manner. The only difference is My Lai was a terrorist act committed by the US military, which is not overtly a terrorist organization. (I realize many will debate that point, but most reasonable people would agree that the US military is not generally considered a terrorist organization. This is not the case with Irgun. Virtually all western historians would label Irgun a terrorist organization. None would say that about the US military.)

I could go on, but at some point, people must use their own brains and accept reality. Rahm Emanuel’s father definitely belonged to a terrorist organization called Irgun. Rahm Emanuel has never apologized or even attempted to explain his father’s participation with Irgun, or his feelings about past terrorism committed by Jews against the British and Arabs in Palestine in the wake of Hitler’s defeat.

The mere fact that Rahm Emanuel was appointed White House chief of staff is alarming in its own right, but here is a larger more upsetting question that many Obama supporters are afraid to ask. What does the Emanuel factor say about President Obama’s basic character? Now we’re in the realm of speculation because no one but Obama himself can say with certainty why he would tolerate allowing the son of a known terrorist to be employed as White House chief of staff. Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-Obama. For example, I support the recent passage of health care legislation over the weekend. My gut feeling about Obama is he is a decent person, an intelligent person, and is generally making some progress over the mess left behind by his predecessor George W. Bush. So why would a smart guy like Obama do something so unwise as to appoint the son of a known terrorist as White House chief of staff? Again, this is speculation, but there appears to be only one answer. BLACKMAIL!! It is highly likely that Obama has a dark secret in his past that Emanuel and his criminal friends are holding over the president’s head. Is he a womanizer, a drunk, a former drug addict, a registered Communist, a murderer, a rapist, a traitor? Nobody knows for sure. But it is my experience that when a smart person makes an overtly bad decision, it is usually because an unscrupulous person is applying enormous pressure.

Salvador

[Steve]

I found some more information about the IRGUN:
This is another quote from the book: Jan van Helsing - Secret Societies and Their Power in the 20th Century
(You might be not allowed to read this, as the book is banned in certain countries in the world).

Page 118:
CHAPTER 41
THE FOUNDATION OF ISRAEL
As it was planned since 1871, the war opened also the doors to the foundation of Israel. As
the wounds in Europe slowly healed, the attention of the public went to the Near East, where
the Zionists were establishing the state of Israel in Palestine. England was shaken by the
murder of Lord Moyne by two Zionists. At the 1946 Zionist congress in Geneva terrorism
was approved as a means to establish the Zionist state. Thus many terrorist organizations
sprang up in Palestine to force the foundation of Israel.
The two most important ones were the IRGUN ZVAI LEUMI of Menachim Begin and the
STERN GROUP of Yitzhak Shamir. Since the bloodshed between the Arabs and the
English was getting worse the matter was put before the UN. On November 29, 1947 the
UN decided to split up Palestine into two independent states, and Arab one and a Jewish
one. We know the principle of dividing a state for domination from ancient Rome. The
consequence of “divide et impera”, divide and rule, is always a never-ending dispute. And
that is what occurred. The division caused even bloodier unrest which caused the UN to
draw back. The Zionists then proceeded to divide Palestine on their own authority. The
Stern Group and the Irgun Zvai Leumi (led by Begin) stormed the village Deir Yasin and
slaughtered all the people, as a warning against further resistance by the Arabs. They threw
the people into the fountain in the middle of the village and threw had grenades after then to
silence the screams of the dying. Most of the Arabs flew to the neighboring countries,
except for a few who under Yasir Ararfat formed the PLO.
The declaration of independence by Israel on May 14, 1948 spurred further unrest. Ever
since that time the Near East has been a festering hotbed of hatred and murder.
But that corresponded exactly to the aims of the Illuminati (Albert Pike’s Plan No. 3).
What happened in this particular village sounds pretty much like what occurred hundreds of
times in the Old Testament, all by the same group of people, and nobody has ever been
punished for it. Isn’t it interesting that you don’t read about stuff like that in your
schoolbooks, but about the “bad Germans”? May I be the case that somebody who has the
power uses the news agencies and the mass media for holding back information of “some”
kind and for giving out “other” information in a rather unbalanced way? To say it more
clearly, they use the mass media in a very clever way to hand the bucket to somebody else?
Who owns TV networks? Who owns Hollywood? Who is always the “bad guy” in the
Hollywood productions? Of course the Germans. And who has never been called the “bad
guy”? Could it again be the case that these particular persons may be the ones who own
Hollywood and the TV networks? Think about it! We will see more a little later.

in his book "Inside Terrorism", Security analyst Bruce Hoffman wrote about the King David Hotel bombing:

"Unlike many terrorist groups today, the Irgun's strategy was not deliberately to target or wantonly harm civilians. At the same time, though, the claim of Begin and other apologists that warnings were issued cannot absolve either the group or its commander... Indeed, whatever nonlethal intentions the Irgun might or might not have had, the fact remains that a tragedy of almost unparalleled magnitude was inflicted... so that to this day the bombing remains one of the world's single most lethal terrorist incidents of the twentieth century."

And in Wikipedia we read that Benjamin Netanyahu attended the 60th year anniversary celebration of the bombing. That says something about the mentality of the people who run both Israel and the US i would say...

60th anniversary controversy
In July 2006, Israelis, including the past and future Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former members of Irgun, attended a 60th anniversary celebration of the bombing, which was organized by the Menachem Begin Centre. The British Ambassador in Tel Aviv and the Consul-General in Jerusalem protested, saying "We do not think that it is right for an act of terrorism, which led to the loss of many lives, to be commemorated." They also protested against a plaque that claims that people died because the British ignored warning calls, saying it was untrue and "did not absolve those who planted the bomb." The plaque read "For reasons known only to the British, the hotel was not evacuated.”[29] To prevent a diplomatic incident, and over the objections of Reuven Rivlin of the Likud Party, who raised the matter in the Knesset, changes were made in the text, though to a greater degree in the English than the Hebrew version. The final English version says, "Warning phone calls has [sic] been made to the hotel, The Palestine Post and the French Consulate, urging the hotel's occupants to leave immediately. The hotel was not evacuated and after 25 minutes the bombs exploded. To the Irgun's regret, 92 persons were killed." The death toll given includes Avraham Abramovitz, the Irgun member who was shot during the attack and died later from his wounds, but only the Hebrew version of the sign makes that clear.

But i still don't quite get why the bombing was carried out in the first place. Officially it says that it was a response to a British operation called "Operation Agatha". British troops had searched the Jewish Agency (the pre-state Jewish government, active from 1921 to 1948) on June 29 and confiscated large quantities of documents about the group's operations and links with violent groups. The intelligence information was than taken to the King David Hotel building in Jerusalem. . .

Did the British find something during this raid that was of too much value to the Zionists to simply give it into the hands of the goys? It's interesting how the guys from the Jewish Agency present the Star of David in their logo anyway. Looks more like a pyramid to me:


I don't know how to get this topic back to Michael Jackson, but it's very interesting anyway

[Salvador Astucia]

... But i still don't quite get why the bombing was carried out in the first place. Officially it says that it was a response to a British operation called "Operation Agatha". British troops had searched the Jewish Agency (the pre-state Jewish government, active from 1921 to 1948) on June 29 and confiscated large quantities of documents about the group's operations and links with violent groups. The intelligence information was than taken to the King David Hotel building in Jerusalem. . .

I've got a good book about the bombing which I have studied and will review shortly if you want more detailed information. To be blunt, Wikipedia sucks when dealing with sensitive topics like the KDH bombing. From my memory of the book, your description seems generally correct, but there's more to it. Yes, there was a crackdown on Jewish terrorists and perceived troublemakers by British forces. But Jewish leadership had long resented the British because they were in charge of Palestine since -- I believe -- the 1920s. The irony is Jewish leadership and Adolf Hitler had a common enemy: THE BRITISH! Hitler claimed to hate the British because he opposed colonialism. He also hated the French for the same reason, but he particularly hated the British. This is not merely speculation; he said it repeatedly in many speeches. It was Hitler's hatred of the British and French that made him so popular among Arab and Muslim nations. On the other hand, Jewish leadership hated the British because England ruled Palestine under the British mandate. Even worse, the British tried to be somewhat fair to the Arabs who lived in Palestine, something that upset fanatic Jehovah worshipping leadership. Just prior to WWII, the British limited Jewish migration to Palestine which caused the Jehovah worshippers to scream bloody murder.

Back to why Irgun blew up the KDH -- yes, the British cracked down on perceived Jewish troublemakers in Palestine. But the British were hated by Jewish leadership long before that event.

Let me re-state your concern:

"But i still don't quite get why the bombing was carried out in the first place."

That is a good question. The answer is fairly straightforward, but somewhat difficult for westerners to understand because we are brainwashed with Holocaust propaganda 24-7. But if we can set that aside for a minute (don't deny it, necessarily, just ignore it for a few minutes, if that is possible), then enlightenment may be easier to attain.

Jewish leadership hated the British for years because the latter ruled Palestine, and Jewish leadership wanted independence, which is what they got within two years after the bombing. The objective of the bombing was to demoralize the British and drive them out. Also, the British used the hotel as a military facility, to an extent, but it was also a real hotel that rented rooms, provided food, and so on. Because of the hotel’s usage by British military during the latter days of the British Mandate, many Jews claim the bombing was not truly an act of terrorism because it was a military target. This is totally false and improper thinking. Palestine was not at war with England. In fact, England was an ally with Jewish leadership in their common fight against Nazi Germany during WWII. So the notion that the hotel was a military target is hogwash. The bombing was clearly an act of terrorism with one reason and one reason only: to gain independence for the Jewish homeland by driving the British out of Palestine, thereby ending the British Mandate. After the British left, the country was renamed Israel, in keeping with Old Testament teachings that preached racial superiority of the chosen, which were a race of sort thousands of years ago, but have since intermingled with other ethnicities and are no longer discernable as a race -- superior or otherwise.

It isn't that complicated, really, but the truth about the KDH bombing exposes many aspects of the Holocaust for what they are. I won't say what they are because some people might think the description is harsh or rude, or denying a sacred historical/religious truth. But facts are facts, regardless of what Jehovah worshippers mandate we Americans believe. Thank God for the land of the free

Salvador Astucia

[Salvador Astucia]

...I don't know how to get this topic back to Michael Jackson, but it's very interesting anyway

This is a follow-up comment, but it seems appropriate now because we're covering some complex issues that may seem off-topic, but are not really that far astray. The topic is not merely Michael Jackson, it also deals with anti-Semitism, which is often a cowardly attempt to divert serious discussions about the history of Israel. As we discussed the history of Zionism, in this thread, the topic of the bombing of the King David Hotel naturally came up. We drifted onto that particular topic after I made comments about Katherine Jackson creating confusion for Michael Jackson because she is a Jehovah’s Witness, and Michael was hated by people who also worship Jehovah, which is a polite way of referring to fanatic Jewish individuals. In case you haven’t noticed, so-called free Americans are really not allowed to say the word “Jew” without raising eyebrows or being labeled a troublemaker. So it is wise to use euphemisms.

When I criticized Old Testament teachings, this was still on topic because it dealt with Michael’s mother and her belief in similar teachings as Jews, which was on topic from the anti-Semitic view. “Brianpi” replied that Hollywood incorporates many occult concepts in movies, which are based on OT teachings. Then I agreed by citing “Inglourious Basterds" as a perfect example of the Old Testament's influence on Hollywood. I stated that the movie pushed sadistic concepts that encourage torture, disfigurement, sadism, cold blooded murder and every form of gratuitous grotesque violence imaginable. In passing, I mentioned that the movie seemed to be directed at Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad because he often questioned why Jews punish Palestinians for the actions of Germans during WWII. I also commented that it is pure hypocrisy for the Obama administration to criticize Iran or any nation for human rights violations, terrorism, and so on, while the president employs the son of a bona fide terrorist as White House chief of staff. I was referring, of course, to Rahm Emanuel’s father, Benjamin, who was a member of the terrorist Zionist organization, Irgun. One of Irgun’s biggest terrorist acts was the bombing of the King David Hotel. That’s how we got here. We’re really not far off topic, in my opinion. In many forums, we would all be labeled anti-Semitic outright for even mentioning the KDH bombing, let alone saying Jews falsely charge critics of Israel with anti-Semitism, something that is absolutely true and happens all the time. My overall point is the anti-Semitic charge is generally a cowardly charge and has no place in a free society. Americans of all ethnicities and races are free to express our views as we wish. If certain thugs like Abe Foxman, for example, don’t like it, they can move to Israel or Eastern Europe where most of them were spawned in the first place, along with the original Communists. There’s really not much difference in the chosen and the Communists. It’s all about oppression and control. That’s the basis of this particlar so-called religion and the Marxist ideology.

Salvador

[Steve]

[..] It was Hitler's hatred of the British and French that made him so popular among Arab and Muslim nations.

[..] The irony is Jewish leadership and Adolf Hitler had a common enemy: THE BRITISH! Hitler claimed to hate the British because he opposed colonialism.

[..] This is not merely speculation; he said it repeatedly in many speeches.

[..] On the other hand, Jewish leadership hated the British because England ruled Palestine under the British mandate. Even worse, the British tried to be somewhat fair to the Arabs who lived in Palestine, something that upset fanatic Jehovah worshipping leadership. Just prior to WWII, the British limited Jewish migration to Palestine which caused the Jehovah worshippers to scream bloody murder.

[With "Operation Agatha"] the British cracked down on perceived Jewish troublemakers in Palestine. But the British were hated by Jewish leadership long before that event.

Thanks Salvador, This answers my question about why the bombing was carried out.

After the British left, the country was renamed Israel, in keeping with Old Testament teachings that preached racial superiority of the chosen, which were a race of sort thousands of years ago, but have since intermingled with other ethnicities and are no longer discernable as a race -- superior or otherwise.

That's an interesting statement! I'm German, and the way i perceived history when i grew up was very much determined by what i learned at school and saw on tv. Which, of course, was all a black and white view of the events written by the victorious powers of WWII. But the more time goes past and the more i see from the world, the less sense it makes to me. The Germans were labelled as racists and regarded as seeing themselves as a superior race. The Arians. This world view is still strongly supported by the ADL and the whole NWO-Hollywood propaganda machine. And at the same time you learn that Israel, the very country that should represent the very opposite of Nazi Germany, acts just like its previous enemy, repeatingly, since the beginning of its existence. The Zionists, the rulers of Israel, see themselves as a superior race. And they treat the Palestinians, who claim back the soil they used to live on before the foundation of Israel, the same way the Germans did the Jews. They put them in ghettos and so on. Is this just the irony of life, or do we recognise a pattern here that could lead us to the same people in the background of both events?

"Divide and rule". Isn't it funny that the "A"rians and the "Z"ionists are even divided by 24 letters in the alphabet. Irony or purpose?

The same teachers that tough us "black and white" history at school, were telling us on other occasions (for example when there was a fight between two classmates, and both were blaming each other for taking the first step) "It always needs two for a fight". And then they would punish both of them. . .

[Steve]

[..] I made comments about Katherine Jackson creating confusion for Michael Jackson because she is a Jehovah’s Witness, and Michael was hated by people who also worship Jehovah, which is a polite way of referring to fanatic Jewish individuals.

I have started a conversation on the topic of the Jehova's Witnesses here:
The Jehova's Witnesses and Michael Jackson