Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

The Left Gate Getting Crowded

by Ariadna Theokopoulos
Wednesday, January 23rd, 2013

[Note: This is a slightly edited version of a post in BOLDFACE NEWS. Primarily some typos were corrected and new ones were inserted.]

 “Mirror on the Lefty Wall,

  Who’s the ‘anti’-est of them all?” 

Many writers have exposed diverse aspects of the gatekeeping of the Left, of those who call themselves “progressives” and describe their position as anti-racism, anti-bigotry, anti-imperialism and anti-zionism and, need I even add, anti-semitism.

Arguably no one has done a more comprehensive job of exposing the wide spectrum of manifestations of the progressive gatekeepers than Gilad Atzmon, with justifiable emphasis on the hypocrisy of their professed anti-zionism, for which he nicknamed them “anti-zionist zionists” (AZZs).  He has also shown how they operate in ethnically exclusive enclaves, “Jews for”… justice/freedom/apple pie, etc.” When they run in packs they are, of course,  easier to spot than individual “progressives.”

Recently Information Clearing House (ICH) reprinted an article published by Glenn Greenwald in the British bastion of left gatekeeping, The Guardian. Coincidentally, in a very recent radio interview with Rense, Atzmon identified The Guardian, along with Democracy Now!, as primary pulpits for Soros- and soroidal NGOs-supported gatekeeping propaganda.

In his article, Greenwald reprises a theme he has been developing in his writings for a while now and could be summarized as “Eyes on white Western imperialism, the mother of all evil. Look nowhere else because I certainly don’t.”

This time, however, he takes one big step further, announcing that the American imperialism is based on the American people’s “national character,” a conclusion he drew, he says, based on his readings of Martin Luther King.

According to Greenwald the root of all evil is capitalism and its even worse progeny, imperialism, specifically American imperialism. The perpetrators are American whites. It’s their “national character.”

His argument about the American national character being at the root of the wars of imperialist aggression is very much reminiscent of Goldhagen’s thesis (in his Hitler Willing Executioners) that the Holocaust™ [trademark symbol added] was caused by the German culture and the German nation’s character and inbred anti-semitism.

Nevertheless, this sincere anti-zionist, when criticizing Israel, never finds fault with its “national character.” In fact nothing much Israel does is really its fault; after all, Israel is but a pawn of American imperialism, its “outpost” in the ME, serving the interests of the white imperialists.

In some articles Greenwald is outraged by the economic ruin of the US, by the banks bailouts and the impoverishment of the masses—in his leftist generosity of spirit he does have compassion for the masses, defective in “national character” as they are. The banking industry is all about greedy white capitalists, of course.

Strange that he never seems to notice these oddities that any impartial observer can see:

– All global banking, including the all-American Federal Reserve Bank is virtually 100% Jewish owned. What singular coincidence could have caused 1.9% of the population (in fact even less—a fraction of that 1.9%) to OWN the finances of a nation?

– The Jewish Lobby is he most powerful political force in the US, a veritable king maker who vets the President of the US on the criterion of his Jewish good conduct certificate. It is also the most important decision maker in the crafting of the US foreign policy.

– All of the recent wars waged by the US (indeed its entire foreign policy) is tailored to serve Israel’s expansionist plans for domination of the ME, most often at the expense of American economic and political interests.

– Despite being mired in astronomical debt (especially to the Federal Reserve) and despite making painful budget cuts in social services (which sadden Greenwald as a compassionate progressive), the bequest of billions upon billions of dollars to the same “outpost” of white imperialism keeps growing.

Could he be so totally blind to the enslavement of the American people, both white and black, that is blatantly obvious to many others?

The American empire is the first empire ever in the history of mankind that invades and plunders other countries but does not bring even a fraction of the wars spoils home (crumbling infrastructure, not lavish stadia, nor free flour distribution and circuses, to say nothing of rewarding or even caring for the veterans).

In fact it is the first empire ever that despoils its own citizens and sends its treasure to one of its smallest colonies.  What kind of empire is that and how can its white citizens be considered slave masters when they are in fact the slaves, alongside their black co-citizens?


The mirror he places in front of the American nation is like those you could have seen in carnivals and old traveling circuses: severely distorting and ugly.  It is narrow and distorting by intent: so you don’t look anywhere else for culprits.

White European genocidal aggression against the native populations of the New World and Africa are well known. Nevertheless a professed anti-zionist who suggests an unbroken and unchanged continuum to today’s wars without ever mentioning Israel’s and Jewish power’s leading and decisive role in war mongering, without mentioning Oded Yinon, and the names of the neocons responsible for PNAC is seriously suspect.

Enormous acts of aggression and colossal massacres in the 20th century are directly attributable to Jews, not to “whites,” from the tens of millions of people who perished during the Bolshevik revolution and regime, to the Ukrainean Holomodor, and the blood bath unleashed upon Spain by the thousands of Jewish ‘volunteers,” like the Lincoln Brigade from the US and thousands of Jews who poured into Spain from all over Europe to fight in the Civil War. They massacred hundreds of priests, destroyed churches, tortured and killed nuns. Was it “fascism” those progressive Jews had come to fight in Spain or was that an avant la lettre “price tag” on Christianity? Odd little statistic: from Rumania came 500 volunteers. They were all Jews.

A subtler form of gatekeeping is Greenwald’s professed compassion for the plight of the Iranian people suffering under sanctions and his opposition to war and to war mongering against Iran by, again, white American imperialists, of course. The kosher elephant in the room is invisible to him. Note this subtle maneuver on his part:

“Questioning whether Iran is pursuing a bomb, or a negotiated settlement with its leaders, or containment if they do proliferate are not even acknowledged as alternatives,” he notes disapprovingly.

The unspoken premise he sneaks in is obviously that Iran does not have the right to develop a nuclear program, despite its being a signatory to a treaty of non-proliferation and allowing inspections, unlike the never-mentioned State for Jews that has hundreds of nuclear weapons and refuses to join any treaty or allow inspections. But in his anti-war, “reasonable” view we should “negotiate” with Iran, that’s how much he wants peace. Negotiate about what Iran is totally and legally entitled to have? Sounds like the negotiations in the “peace process.”
Note also the use of the word “containment.” Does he recommend any “containment” for Israel? No.

The war mongers are imperialist white Americans, he insists. Like Rabbi Dov Zackheim perhaps? He was the Defense Undersecretary under GW Bush who exhorted the “white Americans” to attack Iran because, in his words, “Real men go to Tehran.”(Incidentally he is the same prestidigitator who made more than 2 trillion dollars disappear from the Pentagon, an inexplicable loss announced by Rumsfeld on 9/10. After the next infamous day no one cared to mention it again–it’s only money after all.)

It is with American money (trillions of dollars) and blood and with the subversion of those “values” they claim we share (minus the national character, I presume) that Israel pursues its dominance plans through devastating wars waged by the US, UK and the rest of NATO in the ME.

Greenwald’s spirited, anti-racist indictment of white Americans and his repeatedly emphasized admiration for MLK has no footnote about the staggering role played by Jews in slave trading. No Jewish mea culpa? Is that not a guilt to be shared with the “white Americans”?

He is an AZZ par excellence and an Israeli Firster.  An able gatekeeper of the left gate. He is also a Goldhagen wannabe.

I posted a brief initial outline of this view of Greenwald on ICH and got some heckling in response—there are always hecklers and bouncers around there, as everywhere else. Another poster asked me perfectly reasonably why I called Greenwald an Israeli Firster when in his writings he is an avowed anti-zionist.

I tried to post a full reply as a comment but it was disallowed. I rewrote it and replaced throughout the words “Jew” or “Jewish” with the word “Episcopalian,” and “Israel” with “Episcopael.” I may have missed some tripwire because the automatic censored informed me again that the comment was deleted.

I can see how ICH self-censors because it wants to avoid bringing troubles upon itself. The problem with that pre-emptive trimming of free speech is that timorous behavior does not prevent but, on the contrary, emboldens aggression, an argument I made before about BDS.

The left gatekeepers, in packs or individual operators, should be exposed at every opportunity.
_______________________________________________
Jan. 24, 2013

CORRECTION: Not hundreds, but THOUSANDS of Catholic clergymen were killed and about 20,000 churches destroyed, as noted in Richard Edmondson’s recent article on this subject:

“Most people are aware that the Spanish Left received quite a show of solidarity from leftists in various countries, including the U.S., many of whom organized themselves into brigades and went to Spain to fight at their side—and in his talk with Rense, Atzmon mentions that a large percentage of these were Jews. In fact, the “vast majority,” in the case of the Russian brigade, he says. Here’s a brief excerpt from the interview:

Now the Russian brigade…burned 20,000 churches in Spain. They killed around 7,000 clergymen, 300 bishops. They slaughtered Spanish people. They introduced them to war, and frighteningly enough, frighteningly enough, this is exactly what the same ‘progressive’ elements are doing to the Palestinians or within the antiwar movement.”

Share Button
Posted by on January 23, 2013. Filed under Jewish Power (JP),Propaganda. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

26 Responses to The Left Gate Getting Crowded

  1. Deadbeat

    January 24, 2013 at 2:13 am

    Ariadna,

    THANK YOU SO MUCH for writing this article. You summed it all up in such a wonderful articulate fashion.

  2. pgg804

    January 24, 2013 at 2:18 am

    Very interesting article Ariadna. However, there is one thing that I don’t agree with. The statement:

    The American empire is the first empire ever in the history of mankind that invades and plunders other countries but does not bring even a fraction of the wars spoils home (crumbling infrastructure, not lavish stadia, nor free flour distribution and circuses, to say nothing of rewarding or even caring for the veterans).

    David Irving states that the British entry into WW II was not for the benefit of Great Britain either. Germany had not declared war on Britain, made peace overtures to her, even offered an alliance. Irving says starting in 1936 wealthy Jews starting providing the financially strapped Churchill with huge sums of money, “bought him” and starting at that time Churchill began attacking Hitler and Germany in the British national press.
    In 1940 Churchill considered making peace with Germany, but again he turned it down.

    But the British public were not told that Hitler offered peace to England – they were told Hitler wanted to destroy Britain and “take over the world.” The Americans came into the war and told Churchill England wouldn’t get Singapore, Hong Kong and other colonies back. FDR said to his people he wanted the “destruction of the British Empire.” Churchill oversaw the destruction of the biggest empire in the world and he knew it was happening. This, despite the fact that he was a racist (with his colonies in mind) that didn’t want the destruction of his empire.

    I recently saw a section of a book by Martin Gilbert (Winston Churchill’s official biographer) who is Jewish himself and Gilbert also discussed the Jewish funding of Churchill, but not suprisingly, he approved.

    • David Holden

      January 24, 2013 at 5:52 am

      i read somewhere that Churchill lost big-time in the stockmarket crash of 1929, so he was bought by the Jewish Zionist interest at that time. being shrewd they probably got him on the cheap. he was ever a maverick, albeit a very well-connected one, and possibly a ‘drug fiend’.

      his glorification is the other side of the coin on whose reverse face we see the demonisation of Hitler. two triumphs of the Jew-controlled media. deformed images of both Hitler and Churchill were crucial icons used in setting up the nascent religion of Holohoaxianity.

      • pgg804

        January 24, 2013 at 4:44 pm

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jc9ltEIwpo

        According to Irving the year Churchill lost his portfolio was early 1938. I always wondered if he maybe said the wrong year; 1929 was when the American stock market collapsed, but I just googled “1938 stock market collapse” and sure enough, in 1938 the stock market did collapse, not as severely as 1929, but it was a huge drop.

        This is important because Irving claims until 1936 when the first payment to Churchill wsa made, Churchill paid very little attention to Hitler or Germany except for actually praising Hitler saying something to the effect “if what happened to Germany had happened to us, I would hope that we had a leader like Hitler to pull us out of our problems.” That talk ended when the payments began.

        Besides Jewish lobbying FDR for war, FDR may not have had to be pushed too hard. With an ocean separating the USA from the fighting, and Europe self destructing, what could be better for the USA, who emerged as the world’s #1 superpower, untouched by even a bullet or a bomb (Hawaii did not become an American state until after WW II).

        • David Holden

          January 24, 2013 at 9:19 pm

          interesting point. here is another alternative version:

          “On a trip to America in 1932, Churchill paid a vist to Baruch in his office and decided to do some trading on his own. At the end of the day, Churchill lost so much money on his trading that he told Baruch that he was a financially ruined man and would have to leave politics to work and pay back the debt he racked up.”

          according to this tale, Baruch bailed him out. no sources are quoted, and the item is from a hasbara site, so it may be apocryphal. it does appear that Churchill knew Baruch, and was in NY with him on the day of the 1929 debacle.

          it would be interesting to see a concise assessment of the political influence of Baruch, Untermeyer, Schiff and their legal chum Brandeis.

          http://www.gefenpublishinginisrael.com/2012/05/08/the-jew-who-saved-winston-churchills-political-career/

          • pgg804

            January 24, 2013 at 10:22 pm

            OK, maybe they began helping him earlier then.

    • Ariadna Theokopoulos

      January 24, 2013 at 10:32 pm

      Whichever ‘empire’ became kosherized first –and you have a point there– the main argument stands, that the current discourse of the ‘progressives’ about the ‘white imperialists’ is attention deflection

  3. David Holden

    January 24, 2013 at 5:40 am

    great article Ariadna. this is just an aside…

    i notice Information Clearing House keeps getting mentioned in connection with petty-minded censorship-type behaviour. one should remember that people running websites have often a streak of megalomania that can lead to behaviour which others’ might term politically motivated control freakery.

    i’m not very familiar with the internet so haven’t heard of many things which are familiar features of the landscape to more experienced bloggers.

    i looked at ICH six months ago, as it seemed to promote articles by people whose views interested me.

    but the guy who runs it – is he called Feely? – just stuck in my craw (as they used to say). so many conditions on what behavior is tolerated and whatnot. so much about him, his agenda, what HE is trying to achieve. i have no time for any of these self-righteous squeaky-clean do-gooding toe-rags with ambitions. i can sniff out the tell-tale BS of a carefully manicured ego problem half a galaxy away.

    so i steer well clear of ICH. i am willing to pay the price of being less well-informed. if there is something i really need to know, i will hear of it. i don’t need to be the first in the line. they don’t call me John friggin Gilpin.

  4. Lasse Wilhelmson

    January 24, 2013 at 9:47 am

    Very well put, Ariadna. The left gateceeping is a bigger problem than the propaganda by the jewish culture elite, anyway in Sweden. Marxism has been fed with jewish ideology all along. And it makes good people antiintelecual.

  5. Ariadna Theokopoulos

    January 24, 2013 at 2:01 pm

    “Marxism has been fed with jewish ideology all along. And it makes good people antiintelecual.”

    That’s a very interesting observation, Lasse, and I don’t recall it ever being explored by anyone.

    • Lasse Wilhelmson

      January 24, 2013 at 9:16 pm

      Ariadna, I really like u take on things, especially when I am not
      sure if it some time is irony or not :)

    • Deadbeat

      January 24, 2013 at 9:48 pm

      Gilad Atzmon has a good article addressing Marxism called Tribal Marxism for Dummies

      It really stirred the Marxists like Louis Proyect who responded with the following article absurdly claiming that Atzmon was “legitimizing” anti-Semitism.

      What’s really going on is that due to the Internet age the Left, Marxism, Communism, and Liberalism are being exposed for their duplicity and the truth about their real history and agenda is coming out.

      I recall the Democracy Now! episode where Amy Goodman lauded the “Abraham Lincoln Brigade”. I recall in the mid-1970′s where Saturday Night Live mocked Francisco Franco death.

      Europe was in absolute FEAR of the Bolsheviks and Communist rose to power in both Germany and Italy. Mussolini rise was in direct reaction to Jewry’s takeover of Italy and all one had to do was to see what happened in Russia.

      Thus Franco was part of the European resistance against murderous Bolshevism. This is why the Jews lead the Left in order to control the information and to pretend to be for justice when in fact they it because their real agenda is Jewish supremacy.

  6. Lasse Wilhelmson

    January 24, 2013 at 9:55 pm

    Agree Deadbeat, but was it not primarily trotskiets in Spain?

  7. Deadbeat

    January 25, 2013 at 2:43 am

    Agree Deadbeat, but was it not primarily trotskiets in Spain?

    Can you explain why that would really matter at this point in time as well as in the historical context of the Spanish Civil War?

    • Lasse Wilhelmson

      January 25, 2013 at 6:33 pm

      Just thought u knew, as u wrote what u wrote. No, not a big thing. I think they were Jews in the first place, marxists/communists in the second, and mostly trotskists and syndicalists in the third place.

      At the moment I happen to have a discussion about the same thing with an old marxist who was very upset when I claimed it was not important if the maxist settelers before Nakba were trotts or bolsh.

      In Spain Stalin stopped them in the end, did he not, but not in Palestine.

  8. Jay Knott

    January 25, 2013 at 3:55 am

    This article is a major contribution. It helps advance the critique of Zionism out of the ghetto. It points out how Jewish-oriented lefties blame whitey for everything, which hasn’t been true for a while now, if ever, and how this provides cover for Jewish power.

    It describes the Jewish leftist trick of subsuming Jewish supremacy within white supremacy, and Israel within US imperialism, covering up the true relationship. How the ‘anti-racist’ left is as important in this cover-up as the neo-conservatives.

    But it could do with a bit more in the way of references to back up claims like:
    “From Rumania came 500 volunteers. They were all Jews.”,
    attempts to find counter-arguments, for example,
    at least acknowledging that many of the volunteers in Spain weren’t Jewish, e.g., Welsh coalminers,
    some kind of effort to explain why the author thinks the ethnicity/religion of the volunteers was significant,
    and spell-checking, eg. ‘Holomodor’.

    And, rather than simply asserting that the hatred of the Catholic church manifested during the Spanish Civil War was a Jewish thing, at least some attempt to deal with the argument that many poor Spaniards had some reason to dislike it too.

    But, like I said, great stuff. Where else can you find such a leading-edge critique of Zionist influence?

  9. Blake

    January 25, 2013 at 7:57 pm

    Brilliant article Ariadna.

  10. Israel Shamir

    January 26, 2013 at 11:56 pm

    Abs crazy quote allegedly by Gilad Atzmon “Now the Russian brigade…burned 20,000 churches in Spain. They killed around 7,000 clergymen, 300 bishops. They slaughtered Spanish people.” I was not able to verify whether Gilad actually said that; if he did, he is very wrong. There was an intervention in Spain – by German Nazis and Italian Fascists. And the numbers are quite preposterous. How many bishops are there in a country, in your view?

    • pgg804

      January 27, 2013 at 1:54 am

      This us what Gilad said regarding the Spanish Civil War in his radio interview with Jeff Rense.

      1) “Twenty five percent of the foreign divisions was made of Jews”

      2) “More than 50% of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade and the vast majority of the Russian Brigade” were Jews.

      3) “The Russian Brigade burned twenty thousand churches in Spain. They killed around seven thousand clergymen, three hundred bishops, they slaughtered Spanish people” He stated these estimates requires further verification.

      This is what Josef Goebbels said in a 1937 speech regarding the atrocities in the Soviet Union that were going on at that time:

      “The details about the murder of priests and rape of nuns that we received are totally are incredible and indescribable.”

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6vKOBWz0_4Y

      • pgg804

        January 27, 2013 at 2:58 am

        I want to emphasize something. It is the exact same time that the Spanish Civil War was going on and Gilad says the atrocities were being committed against the clergy in Spain that Goebbels made his speech about the atrocities being committed against the clergy in the Soviet Union.

    • Ariadna Theokopoulos

      January 27, 2013 at 2:18 am

      Strange stand by one who signs “Israel Shamir”:
      –denying the slaughter aimed primarily at the Church and ordinary Catholics.
      Do your own search and find out.
      –asking–as a Christian (even a late comer), how many bishops there are in a country. As many as there are towns and cities of sufficient significance. Even the US, were Catholicism is a minority religion, has the bishop of New York, of Boston, of Chicago, etc, etc.
      –claiming that he Spanish Civil war was … an intervention by Germany and Italy?!?
      You need to brush up on history. The uprising started when the republican government decreed the forced secularization of Spain, elimination of religion in all schools and confiscation of church property. It became a civil war when tens of thousands of volunteers from Europe and the US poured in and started the slaughter. Even wikipedia coyly acknowledges it while trying to downplay it and obscure it:
      “A smaller but significant number of killings took place in areas controlled by the Republicans, normally associated with a breakdown in law and order.[7] The extent to which Republican authorities connived in Republican territory killings varied.”

      The percentages of Jewish volunteers cited by ppg explain why the volunteers had a newspaper and a radio station both in Yiddish.

  11. fool me once...

    January 27, 2013 at 12:54 am

    @Israel Shamir
    Have a listen to the radio interview on the Gilad link from AT’s “Richard Edmondson’s recent article on this subject:” link above, provided below;
    http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/gilad-atzmon-on-jeff-rense-radio-show-jan-2013.html
    At 10.43mins
    Gilad says;
    “…these numbers you know have to be verified…”

  12. Jay Knott

    March 19, 2013 at 10:11 pm

    Here’s a major article by Glenn Greenwald in the Guardian criticizing “the FBI’s anticipatory prosecution of Muslims to criminalize speech”:

    http://tinyurl.com/bqxlb2x

  13. Jay Knott

    May 7, 2013 at 5:32 am

    Glenn Greenwald, as if to reinforce Ariadna’s analysis, writes about ‘tribalism’ in the ‘Guardian’. What? Has he taken on board Gilad Atzmon’s critique of Jewish tribal identity, undermining solidarity with its victims in the Middle East? -

    http://tinyurl.com/bvv2fqb

    No such luck. His definition of tribalism amounts to a restatement of the completely ineffective, politically-correct, Jewish leftist whine about US imperialism, fusing it with Israeli interests like they’re the same thing. ‘Tribalism’ for Greenwald means the idea that ‘might is right’. That’s not tribalism. It’s a completely separate issue.

    Meanwhile, real American nationalists are casting doubt on hasbara: http://tinyurl.com/cq52wrn

You must be logged in to post a comment Login