Skip to main content


No, Jews do not like Israel it's time for their voices to be heard

Isreal has long been known for a country that is mainly Jewish but that isn't true Israel has Jewish people just as it also has Muslims, Christians etc but the people who run the country is a totally different story. 

This week, the State of Israel observes the mournful holiday of Yom Hashoah, the Israeli Holocaust Remembrance day. And it is not just mourning; it is a day that is spent on revisiting Israel's status as the alleged safe haven of the international Jewish community. Of course, the axiom “Never again!” serves as the holy mantra, the sacred pledge for Jewish security.

But we say: indeed, never again will world Jewry be duped by the Zionists.
Would the contemporary Zionists dare admit that their forebears forsook the Jews in their worst hour? That the Zionist never perceived the safety of the Jews as part of their goal?
Yes, it was the Zionists who supported Nazism, collaborated with the Nazis, identified with Nazism - all due to the ideology of Zionism, which was in effect anti-Semitic.
A Shared Platform
Both Zionism and Nazism believe in the inherent deficiency of the Jew. The only difference between them is how the question should be answered. According to Nazism, the answer was first emigration and subsequently extermination. The Zionists preached the emigration of the Jews and the preservation of their blood in Palestine.
Chaim Weizmann, who served as leader of the World Zionist Organization and later as Israel’s first President, could not have been more effusive about his support for racial anti-Semitism.
“We too are in agreement with the cultural anti-Semites, insofar as we believe that Germans of the Mosaic faith are an undesirable, demoralising phenomenon.” (The letters and papers of Chaim Weizmann v. VII)
In support of the Nazis’ discrimination against Jewish citizens, Weizmann declared that “each country can absorb only a limited number of Jews if she doesn’t want disorders in her stomach. Germany already has too many Jews.” (Benyamin Mauve, ‘The Zionist wish and the Nazi Deed’)
For Zionism, the Nuremberg Laws were merely a restatement of their national character. The Judische Rundschau, the Zionist official organ in Germany, brazenly published a statement by A.J. Brandt, the head of the Nazis Press Association, that the enactment of the laws was for the Jews’ benefit. “Germany is helping Judaism to strengthen its national character and is making strides towards improving relations between the two peoples.” (Magaret Edelheim-Muehsam, Reaction of the Jewish press to the Nazi Challenge, Leo Baeck Insitute yearbook, bol. V (1960), p 324)
For Zionists. extending overtures to their fellow nationalists was not a brazen move, but a coordinated political tactic. In an article, Joachim Prinz, a prominent Zionist, offered the full implication of Zionist intentions: “Everybody in Germany knew that only the Zionists could responsibly represent the Jews in dealing with the Nazi Government. A solution of the Jewish question? It was our Zionist dream! We never denied the existence of the Jewish question! Dissimilation? It was our own appeal!“ (Young Zionist/London, November 1937, page 18)

The Zionists: The Nazis’ Preference
Through Zionism, the Nazis gained legitimate support to strip the Jews of their rights. Their shared ideology and Zionist assistance resulted in favouritism displayed by the Nazi leaders.
Reinhard Heydrich, Chief of the Reich Main Security Office and the innovator of the Final Solution, knew enough to differentiate the Zionist from the Jew, a separate identity indeed. “We must separate Jewry into two categories… the Zionists and those who favour being assimilated.” He was overwhelmed with emotions when wishing the Zionists farewell: ‘The time cannot be far distant when Palestine will again be able to accept its sons who have been lost to it for over a thousand years. Our good wishes together with our official good will go with them.” (Hohne, Orders of the Death’s Head, P 333 and Karl Schleunes, The twisted Road to Auschwitz pp 1934)
Adolf Eichmann did not hide his wholehearted support for Zionism: “I often said to Jews with whom I had dealings that, had I been a Jew, I would have been a fanatical Zionist. I could not imagine being anything else. In fact, I would be the most ardent Zionist imaginable… As a matter of fact, there was a very strong similarity between our attitudes in the SS and the viewpoint of these immensely idealistic Zionist leaders.” (Life Magazine, November 28, 1960)
After the implementation of the Nuremberg Laws, the Nazi prejudice in favour of Zionism could not have been more decisive. The only two flags allowed to be flown in Germany were the Nazi swastika and the Zionist Star of David. While all Jewish newspapers were banned, the only notable exception was the Zionist Judische Rundschau.
The Gestapo treated the Zionists with the deference Nazi sympathisers deserved. The Bavarian Gestapo ordered that “members of the Zionist organisation are, in view of their activities directed towards emigration to Palestine, not to be treated with the same strictness which is necessary towards the members of the German Jewish organisations.” (Kurt Grossmann, ‘Zionist and non-Zionists under Nazi Rule in the 1930s’, Herzl Yearbook vol. VI, p. 340)
Who is the Anti-Semite?
In March 1942, Chaim Greenberg, the editor of the Zionist Jewish Frontier, admitted that there was “a time when it used to be fashionable for Zionist speakers to declare from the platform that to be a good Zionist one must be somewhat of an Anti-Semite." (Chaim Greenberg, ‘The myth of Jewish parasitism Jewish Frontiers (March 1942), p. 20)
This assessment cannot be more fitting. And the converse is true as well: to be pro-Jewish, one must be somewhat of an anti-Zionist.
The question we face today is not what Nazism was, but rather, what Zionism and its supporters continue to be.

"All Israel Offers is a False Sense of Security"

noun ali•yah \ä-ˈlē-(ˌ)yä, ˌä-lē-ˈyä\
Definition of aliyah
1. : the immigration of Jews to Israel
In a recent investigation, Vice News looked into the increased aliyah of French Jewry, and the Israeli government's efforts to make sure that this wave continues well into the future. Of particular interest was the answer Natan Sharansky, the chairman of the Jewish Agency and the man largely responsible for overseeing aliyah, gave when challenged as to the preposterous notion that Israel is somehow safer than Paris. Sharansky conceded that Israel is not safer than Paris in a physical sense, but said rather, that aliyah is about feeling secure and feeling at home.
There have been times, too many times, throughout history that we Jews were expelled from or killed in our home countries. In these situations, we always had faith that G-d would provide us with refuge somewhere. And this was, in fact, the case. When one door closed, another door, thank G-d, opened. The Jewish people have always been able to find safe haven in the many kind and generous countries throughout the world. Nowadays especially, the Jewish people have experienced unprecedented acceptance and safety throughout the world, and for this, we are so grateful. That is why it is so odd that Jews would feel the need to leave France, especially when President Francois Hollande has made statements such as, “You, French people of the Jewish faith, your place is here, in your home. France is your country.” And Prime Minister Manuel Valls, in response to Benjamin Netanyahu’s urging of French Jews to make aliyah, said, “The place for French Jews is France.” It’s not just that we assume Jews to be welcome in France, but rather, French leaders are explicitly stating they want Jews in France! This should be a cause for celebration and appreciation, not fear and emigration.
What is the supposed rationale behind the Zionist effort encouraging French aliyah? In the Vice story, Sharansky and other Israeli officials made reference to a “new anti-Semitism,” the immigration to Europe of millions of Muslims, and in particular, the significant number of radicalised Muslim immigrants. If the presence of Muslims is really the cause for concern and impetus for aliyah, Israel sure is a strange choice of destination. The population of Israel is over 20% Muslim, and well, there are a few Muslims in the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem, and the rest of the Middle East as well. Furthermore, Netanyahu has spoken numerous times of the Iranian threat. Taking Bibi at his word, he is genuinely concerned that Iran, whether on its own or via proxy, will attempt to wipe Israel off the map. It’s hard to understand how French immigrants could have a feeling of security in such a hostile environment. While there have been tragic terrorist attacks in France, no one is claiming that France is under the threat of annihilation! Israel, on the other hand, as its leaders have so frequently stated, resides in a very dangerous neighbourhood.
It’s time for French Jews to give up the fantasy and face the reality. France is a well respected global power, both militarily and economically, and its leaders are committed to the safety and wellbeing of its Jewish citizens. Israel on the other hand, is a global pariah. Even in the United States, Israel’s strongest ally, support is waning. At college campuses around the USA, the voices of frustration can be heard. Support of Israel is no longer a sure thing among American Jewish youth. Israel desires French aliyah, not to offer protection, but to try and continue to change the demographics, particularly in the West Bank. This is a most unpopular initiative, and the world is becoming ever more frustrated with Israel’s game of cat and mouse. An increase in aliyah, especially to the West Bank, will only help to fuel anti-Semitism. French Jews would be wise not to allow themselves to be Israel’s pawns, and instead, embrace their country that loves them. As the prophet Jeremiah (29:7) instructed us, be loyal citizens of your country and pray for its welfare, for through its welfare will you have welfare.

Please comment below.

Disqus for Ste Matthew Murray


Popular posts from this blog

UK Lord Justice wanted age of consent lowered to the age of 4

Lord Justice Fulford was named last year as an adviser to the QueenHe was a key backer of the notorious Paedophile Information Exchange Police suspect the group of abusing children on an ‘industrial scale’He is revealed as a founder member of campaign to defend PIEAt the time it was calling for the age of consent to be lowered to just fourI clashed with Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) global leaders at the Wales conference in Swansea in 1977. Tom O’Carroll is still accepted and active on a sexnet chat group of experts in “sexology” although he writes openly as a pedophile. And the scholarly organizers of the Swansea conference at the University were part of his efforts. Below a summary of my intro to him in my book, Stolen Honor, Stolen Innocence, 2013. This academic pedophile lobby has continued and grown, training second generation and third generation supporters as “scholars” for pedophile equality and “rights.” In 1981 I realized they were global. See the B4UAct conference wi…

Tory MP's Private Company in Charge of Election votes and counts

Tory MP Peter Lilley’s company IDOX was given contracts across Scotland by SNP and Labour councils to quietly privatise the entire electoral process and control of postal votes and election counts across Scotland.

The contracts were awarded to ensure private control of all Scottish elections for the three-year period covering the EU election, the general election, the EU referendum and the Scottish Elections which allow IDOX to control, open, count and put forward "postal" ballot papers to be put into ballot boxes right up to the 10 pm deadline.

By May 2013 IDOX boasted they already had control of elections and voter registration and votes for 13 million people across the UK in the privatisation of all elections that most voters in the UK are completely unaware of.

Does this mean it is possible for postal votes to be binned (if private operators don't agree with the vote provided) and replaced using signatures they store electronically and can ballot papers be made up in pe…

Jill Dando tried to expose BBC paedophile ring but 'nobody wanted to know (including exclusive first look at the new documentary)

MURDERED BBC TV presenter Jill Dando raised the issue of a possible paedophile ring in the corporation - but no action was taken.

A former colleague and friend told us that Miss Dando, from Weston-super-Mare, tried to get bosses to investigate what was going on. The source said that the Crimewatch presenter was told that 'big name stars' and BBC staff were involved in abuse. A file was eventually handed to senior management in the mid-1990s, but no action was taken on the matter.
The source, who remains anonymous, said: “She compiled a file of complaints but she was not really an investigative journalist, just a presenter. “She passed the information to someone else and they gave it back. No one wanted to know.” Miss Dando was shot outside her London home in 1999 at the age of 37.

Justice For Jill