Axiom

1934 Film 'The House Of Rothschild'
Hollywood Propaganda That Is All Too Clear Now
By Richard Eastman
8-22-10





While this 1930ish Hollywood movie is only semi-accurate it certainly shows more then the PTB would like you to know today. I think this film was made as a response to the anti-Rothschild sentiment sweeping the world in the 1930's (thanks to people like Henry Ford Sr. and Charles Lindbergh Sr.). As usual it backfired and "they" subsequently went "underground" and began using the tactic of keeping their name out of the news and using the media to point the finger at their front men (it's the "Federal Reserve", it's "the Illuminati", it's "the corporations", it's "the NWO" ad nausea). Of course, every non-Jew is painted as "anti-semitic" and the Jews must fight back with the only tool they have...money (that's a knee slapper).





If you are even semi-awake to the Zionist threat this movie will blow your mind (I had to pick my jaw up several times).

Part 1 "The House of Rothschild"


Part 2 "The House of Rothschild"


Part 3 "The House of Rothschild"


Part 4 "The House of Rothschild"


Part 5 "The House of Rothschild"


Part 6 "The House of Rothschild"


Part 7 "The House of Rothschild"


Part 8 "The House of Rothschild"


Part 9 "The House of Rothschild"


Part 10 "The House of Rothschild"

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

Axiom

Who Owns The Federal Reserve? - Br Nathanael On Video! | Real Zionist News

__________________
"Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

antichrist

In Joseph Schectman’s biography of Vladimir Jabotinsky, Schectman alludes to provocative articles that were printed in Jabotinsky’s newspaper, Doar Hayom. There was a tangle of interests involved before one gets to the Arabs, all of whom were at odds with each the other, — the British Mandate authority, the Zionist Executive, Jabotinsky’s Revisionist Party which stood in opposition tot he Zionist executive; the Brit Trumpeldor organization; numerous individuals pressing for this or that advantage; and everybody seeking to create a photo op to motivate contributions from diaspora Jews. ( Shira Klein states in the last article, below, that the motive of the Mufti in pressing the conflict over the wailing wall was to generate contributions from Muslims in the region.)

Jabotinsky’s attitude was clear: he felt it appropriate and strategic to provoke Arabs:


[from Schechtman, pp. 120-121:] ” ‘I must say to my great regret that [the Wailing Wall demonstrations] was not organized by the <Brit Trumpeldor,' stated Jabotinsky in Doar Hayom. . . .He [Jabotinsky] deeply regretted that the Jerusalem demonstration had not been organized by Brit Trumpeldor because, as he insisted in a letter to a friend, it ‘was a psychological and prictical necessity; and if I believed for a moment that that was the cause of the outbreak, I should heartily congratulate the promoter(s) . . .It is the main thing in all strategy to force the enemy to attack before he is ready. A year later it would have been infinitely worse.’ . . .[T]he demonstration was ‘at that time a necessary, a useful and a fine thing. It was necessary because an unbearable atmosphere had been created in which it appeared that the Jews had given up everything, so that someone had to get up and say: ‘Thus far and no further!’ The argument that the Arabs should not have been stirred up, is a heritage of the ghetto [emphasis added]. In Palestine we are not just tolerated guests, and in order to show this, the demonstration was necessary. It made a great impression even abroad, in the countries of the galut.“

The Wailing Wall conflict was a pot set on hi heat with the intention of causing it to boil over.

During the nineteenth century the Western Wall came to be viewed in Jewish circles as a site of commemoration and particular sanctity. . . .[and]t was invested with national significance by the Jewish national movement. . . . The heads of the Yeshivot in the Old Yishuv also used photomontages showing the Dome of the Rock with the Star of David and flags of Zion superimposed in fundraising appeals to Diaspora Jews.[8] It thus came to be widely believed that a Jewish conspiracy was at work to replace the Muslim holy sites by a rebuilt Jewish Temple.[7] The resulting tensions were exploited by both Palestinian Arab and Jewish nationalists.
Joseph Klausner was a member of the Odessa circle of political activists which included Ze’ev Jabotinsky and Menachem Ussishkin . . .[who] contributed significantly to the Zionist education of Betar, the Revisionist youth movement, and nationalist youth in general. Klausner’s background as an . . . activist in Zionist polemics eventually brought him to the forefront of Jewish anger at the failure of the Zionist establishment in Palestine to resolve problems over access to, and arrangements for worship at, the Western Wall.
The political vacuum caused by the absence of the British High Commissioner, Sir John Chancellor, and of the Zionist leadership, who were in attendance at the 16th Zionist Congress in Zurich, allowed the Pro-Wailing Wall Committees to pursue a more radical agenda during the run up to Tisha B’Av, the day of mourning and remembrance commemorating the destruction of both the First Temple and Second Temple, which fell on 15 August in 1929.[9] Responding to criticism from the establishment, who feared that incitement of the youth would lead to “accidents” of no “practical utility”, Klausner’s Committee wrote in the pages of Doar HaYom: “We cannot trust any more the actions of existing institutions in this matter and it was decided to take separate action”.[10] In an article in the pages of The Palestine Weekly on the same day Klausner wrote: “But what about the Jews, cannot they too throw stones, have they not hands or even fists? What did Shakespeare say through his Shylock? ‘Hath not a Jew eyes … if you wrong us, shall we not revenge…’ “[10]
During The Nine Days the Committee published an appeal to the Jewish Diaspora calling on Jews to protest outside British consulates throughout the world:[10] “Come to our help by co-operating in this just struggle for the Wall and triumph is sure to come.”[11] The appeal was followed by a protest meeting organised by the World Federation of Hebrew Youth which was addressed by Revisionists and religious Zionists from Mizrachi, the movement supported by Chief Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook. The meeting was held in Tel Aviv on the eve of Tisha B’Av, and was attended by 6,000 people, according to British intelligence.[10] It adopted four resolutions and called on the Chief Rabbinate and Klausner’s Committee to continue the political struggle for the Wall.[10]
[edit] The outbreak of violence
On 15 August, Tisha B’Av, the Revisionist youth leader Jeremiah Halpern and three hundred Revisionist youths from the Battalion for the Defence of the Language and Betar marched to the Western Wall proclaiming “The Wall is ours”. The protesters raised the Zionist flag and sang the Hatikvah and were said to have insulted the Prophet, Islam, and the Muslim community at large and also to have beat up Muslim residents.[12] The demonstration took place in the Muslim Maghribi district in front of the house of the Mufti.
Two days later, in raised tensions caused by a 2000-strong Muslim counter-demonstration after Friday prayers the day before, a Jewish youth, Avraham Mizrahi, was killed and an Arab youth picked at random was stabbed in retaliation.[13] Subsequently, the violence escalated into the 1929 Palestine riots.
The demonstration by Revisionist youth of 15 August was later identified as the proximal cause of the riots by the Shaw Commission. Shaw Commission, Goldstone Report — pfff. we know that it was the Bad Guy Arabs that waged a pogrom against Jews .

The destruction of the Shepherd’s Hotel brings the tragedy full circle: Shepherd’s Hotel had been the residence of the Mufti of Jerusalem, central figure in the Wailing Wall controversy:

These attempts to secure the place as a Jewish site of worship were threatening to the Muslim Arabs, who considered this area a part of al-Haram all-Sharif (“the Noble Sanctuary”), the third holiest site in Islam. The Muslims were concerned that the Zionists would take over the whole area and rebuild the Temple. Under the leadership of Haj Amin al-Husseini, head of the Supreme Muslim Council and Mufti of Jerusalem, the Palestinian Arabs began an extensive campaign, urging the Arab rank-and-file in Palestine as well as Muslim leaders worldwide to oppose the Zionists and defend the Islamic shrines in Jerusalem.

That right there — don’t you see?? See how evil those Arabs were?

The Wall dispute flared up in the midst of prayer on Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement, September 1928. A British police officer removed the screen separating men and women, claiming that its installation by the Jews was a technical violation of the rights of worship. Following the incident, Jews and Zionists in the Yishuv and around the world were enraged, in particular due to the fact that the British appeared to favor the Supreme Muslim Council’s side of the matter. In November 1928 Muslim notables from all over the Fertile Crescent and Egypt gathered in Jerusalem under the auspices of the Mufti. Their struggle over Muslim holy places led to the British Government’s reaffirmation of the status quo at the Wall. Yet the Zionists continued to demand possession of the wall while the Muslims, spurred on by the Supreme Muslim Council, harassed Jewish worshipers.

Tension increased as Palestinian Arabs observed with growing anxiety the gradual recovery of the Zionist movement after a few years of decline. First, Jewish immigration began to pick up discernibly from the beginning of 1928. A second source of concern was the Zionists’ plan for enlarging the Jewish Agency to include powerful organizations. Still a third worry was a poor harvest in 1929, aggravating an already existing economic crisis, and affecting many Arab farmers who were then obliged to sell their lands to Jews.

These three developments were a serious setback to the Palestinian Arabs’ cause. The Mufti and his followers in the Supreme Muslim Council assumed an increasingly important role in Palestinian Arab leadership. They set out to curb the Zionist progress, and the Wailing Wall dispute proved just the opportunity to do so. Using Jerusalem’s holy status in Islam, the Mufti could mobilize the Muslim world’s material and moral support for the struggle against Zionism. His fund-raising efforts, which had begun in 1923, intensified with the campaign against the Zionists’ claim to the Wall. He established connections with political and religious leaders throughout Iraq, India, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Transjordan, trying to use their influence to coax the British into acting in favor of the Palestinian Muslims.

What began with a seemingly minor argument over rights of worship at the Wailing Wall was now a major public dispute, involving both Jewish and Muslim communities worldwide. The year-long period of escalation which started in the summer of 1928 culminated in the violent riots of August 1929. The Wailing Wall Controversy and Communal Conflict, Shira Klein, COJS - CojsWiki.

So — because Vladimir Jabotinsky felt that Jews in Europe were oppressed (Jabotinsky never identified himself as particularly Jewish, and never experienced discrimination in his hometown of Odessa and located his spiritual center in Rome, where he spent an idyllic two years as an erstwhile, if undisciplined, student), he considered it appropriate to incite Jewish youth collected from Eastern Europe and transported to Palestine, to stage provocations against Arabs, so that people like Irving Moskowitz could puff his chest.

antichrist

Those who speak out against oppression the true patriots Assa Doron
January 21, 2011

Patriotism generally surfaces in times of uncertainty and fear, when people coalesce to serve and protect their community and the public good. But what if such fear and uncertainty can no longer sustain the patriotic glue?

What if the very ideals and values that people found worth defending begin to erode, overrun by decades of conflict, violence and oppression? Troubled times demand critical self-examination, yet the very expression of such self-doubt can also appear as weakness and disloyalty.

In Israel this issue is explosive, polarising the country and generating unprecedented intervention by the right-wing government and its affiliated agents. These include the ''loyalty laws'' proposed by right-wing MPs, designed to alienate and exclude Arab Israelis and, more recently, the move to establish a parliamentary committee to investigate the funding of human rights groups accused of ''delegitimising'' Israel and its army.

Advertisement: Story continues below Against this unfavourable political context, the work of an organisation like Breaking the Silence, which has published hundreds of new testimonies by Israeli soldiers about their actions during the past decade in the occupied Palestinian territories and Gaza, becomes invaluable. Many were given by disaffected soldiers who had served in Operation Cast Lead in Gaza in 2008-09, describing how they used Palestinian civilians as human shields.

In the past the publication of the testimonies triggered a vehement response from the well-oiled army PR machinery against ''cowardly'', anonymous testimonies by soldiers. The Israel Defence Force spokesmen said Breaking the Silence was out to tarnish the IDF.

The sheer volume of testimonies made public a few weeks ago makes it much harder for the IDF to dismiss them as anomalous. Now, it is hoped that such testimonies would be taken seriously. Regrettably, the current political response is to create an atmosphere of fear by proposing a parliamentary committee to scrutinise any organisation it sees as working to ''delegitimise'' the state of Israel.

Anyone who reads these accounts is bound to be startled by the blatant disregard for human life that emerges. These accounts also shed light on the fear and confusion gripping young Israeli soldiers, who are routinely faced with tasks and operations they are ill-equipped to perform.

But if the testimonies reveal the immorality of the occupation, they also bring to our attention others whose moral compass drives them to speak out against the callousness of the machine controlling the occupation.

The current government is attempting to redefine Israel's raison d'etre as one premised on racism and prejudice towards Arabs. This finds expression at the grassroots level as well as in the Knesset. We see alarming cases of Israeli soldiers wearing T-shirts sporting racist and highly disturbing images of Palestinian women and children, pointing to deep-seated anti-Arab sentiments, stretching well beyond the soldiers' vocational concerns. It is in this context that Breaking the Silence is an important project for Israel.

Today, perhaps more than ever in its history, Israel is a country gripped by fear and paralysed by confusion. Its inhabitants feel disempowered and disillusioned with the peace process, while the country has progressively become isolated.

Unfortunately, those who criticise Israel's actions in public are subjected to witch hunts, instigated by the government and its supporters. Such people and groups claim exclusive copyright over what constitutes patriotism and Zionism.

Organisations such as Im Tirtzu (meaning ''If you will'') use the famous words of the founding father of Zionism, Theodore Herzl, whose dictum about the establishment of the Israeli state was, ''If you will it it is not a dream'', to flag their patriotic colours. This self-proclaimed patriotic vanguard has consistently targeted academia as the hotbed of anti-post-Zionist sentiments. Their ''carefully researched'' reports identify the culprits (read traitors) who dare question the Zionist grand narrative.

For Im Tirtzu, such acts of betrayal must be reprimanded. Then there are the draconian ''loyalty'' laws that received a sacred seal of approval by rabbis who declared an edict prohibiting renting or selling apartments to Arabs in major Israeli towns.

The writing is on the wall, making the formidable ''separation wall'' an icon of Israel's anti-democratic policies and increasing paranoia. But it is those ''voices within'', who dare show the cracks in the wall, who might help Israel recalibrate its social and moral compass.

Ironically, these brave soldiers, organisations and individuals are the true patriots, who despite their vilification are still trying to serve and protect Israel from its most intimate enemy - itself.

Assa Doron is an Israeli-Australian academic and fellow in the school of culture, history and language at the Australian National University.

Follow the National Times

antichrist

Case of with us or against us Assa Doron From: The Australian January 07, 2009

A FEW days ago a column appeared in the left-leaning Israeli newspaper Haaretz by a well-known journalist, Ari Shavit, about "Israelis who blame Israel".
Unleashing his armoury against those Israelis who disagree with Israel's recent assault on Gaza, he suggests that such people have no strategic understanding of the situation, which to his mind seems very clear: Palestinians in the Gaza Strip have failed to establish a successful state despite Israel's unilateral withdrawal from the territory.

Their frustrations and anger at such failings are therefore directed at Israel, led by the terrorist regime of Hamas, which seeks to perpetuate the conflict for political gain.

Shavit conveniently overlooks the fact that Israel has refused to recognise the freely elected Hamas government, imposing a longstanding and ultimately crippling blockade on one of the most densely populated places in the world.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.
.End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
But what was more alarming in this article was Shavit's accusation that Israelis who disagree with the present Gaza assault are morally inferior, in that they do not care for their homeland or the Israeli lives lost but instead sanctimoniously choose to side with "the terrorists".

The underlying assumption seems to be that, as Israelis, we must not empathise with Palestinian suffering. After all they are irrational, inhumane suicide bombers and mass murderers, fuelled by fundamentalist ideology, whereas we are of the rational stock, employing precision bombs and sophisticated intelligence to conduct targeted assassinations and surgical operations, which according to the latest figures account for more than 500 fatalities.

But Shavit's accusations also tap into a more fundamental and increasingly popular view in Israel: those who show empathy for the enemy are cowards or, as he put it, "pathetic".

As an Israeli now living and working in Australia, I am familiar with this argument.

All too often when raising my voice against the occupation, the policy of targeted assassinations or the recent war in Lebanon, I have been silenced, labelled yefe nefesh, which roughly translates as bleeding heart liberal but literally means beautiful soul.

Such classification inhibits further conversation, as one is silenced, emasculated, placed into a box that necessarily predetermines one's political and moral orientations.

No one has a monopoly on patriotism or what constitutes national loyalty. Like many others, I too feel for those Israelis whose lives are routinely affected by the barrage of bombs falling on their homes in southern Israel.

However, I become deeply suspicious when their experiences are used as an authenticating and authoritative view, to the exclusion of other equally important voices, especially when pitching Israel as the sole democracy in the region.

Of course, fraternity and masculinity constitute an important aspect of national solidarity and patriotic zeal. Indeed, Israel seems astoundingly unified behind Operation Cast Lead; according to the latest polls, an overwhelming majority support it.

Israeli elections are just around the corner and polls do matter. This was further reinforced when on opening my emails yesterday, I received an urgent email from an Israeli friend also living in Australia urging me to participate in a poll conducted by an influential German newspaper regarding the Gaza campaign.

Once again, the assumption is that as an Israeli I must (by default) pledge my unflinching support for Israel's actions: I must fall into line in such times of distress when Israel is the victim of yet another global attack, a thinly disguised case of anti-Semitism.

If such emails seek to enlist Israelis for the greater national cause, the broad consensus in Israel for the Gaza campaign must also ring alarm bells, as many have learned from the 2006 Lebanon war.

As I replied to my friend about my grave concerns regarding the suffering of the Palestinian people, I felt the need to balance my reply and stress my concern for my family, who live in the southern city of Ashdod and in a kibbutz bordering Gaza, which recently suffered casualties.

Still, the search for balance is a fallacy. There can be no balance when collective punishment is routinely meted out and when the loss of innocent lives is a given and not an unfortunate and tragic side effect.

As a Jew I cannot easily be accused of anti-Semitism. But the recent labelling of people such as me as "Israel-hating Israelis" sits comfortably alongside other degrading labels (for example, self-hating Jews, post or anti-Zionists, and so on), so that the state and the media can firmly place us on the moral and political ladder slightly above the most despicable category of all: traitors.

I recall my time living and studying in Jerusalem during Yitzhak Rabin's reign as prime minister, when there were mass demonstrations in which crowds were shouting slogans calling Rabin a traitor and holding placards depicting him in Nazi uniform. I also remember Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu leading and addressing those crowds.

Shavit's article received hundreds of responses praising him for finally seeing the light. Perhaps this is true for some but the Palestinians across the occupied territories and Gaza remain in darkness. A darkness that continues to generate hatred, violence and terror, enveloping the whole region in morbid blindness.

Assa Doron is a research fellow in the research school of Pacific and Asian studies at the Australian National University in Canberra.

antichrist

Between heaven and earth - and Israeli law
Ruth Pollard
November 21, 2011


Mihad Moor, 25, and her son Mohammed at the solar panel station set to be demolished by the Israeli government. Photo: Ruth Pollard

IMNEIZIL, West Bank: A freezing wind blows across the south Hebron hills and the people of the tiny village of Imneizil are steeling themselves for winter and the prospect they may have to face it without electricity.

Situated between two Israeli settlements - Susiya and Beit Yattir - Imneizil, like so many Palestinian towns, is off the grid, with no electricity, water or sewerage due to severe restrictions on Palestinian development.

Two years ago, the Energy Research Centre at Al-Najah University in Nablus and SEBA, a Spanish non-government organisation, installed solar panels in the village to replace its petrol generators. The venture received €292,000 ($394,000) in funding from the Spanish government.

Advertisement: Story continues below
The panels, which provide power for the 390 residents, their school and a small medical clinic, are now under a demolition order by the Israeli authorities. ''We are suspended between heaven and earth; the solar panels were a glimmer of hope for us and now they are trying to destroy them,'' the village head, Ali Mohammad Ali Hreizat, said.

More than a glimmer of hope, the solar panels and the electricity they generate attracted family members back to the village and allowed the school to run computers and a printer, the clinic to store medicines safely and provide light for night study.

''Before the solar panels, we had no electricity at night - the children could not study, if they wanted to go to the toilet they had to go in the dark, when our animals gave birth we could not see when they needed our care,'' said Mihad Moor, a 25-year-old mother of three. ''Now we are able to pump water and have access to television, which helps us stay connected with the world.''

Access to power also means Ms Moor can use an electric churn to prepare labneh - a soft cheese made from yoghurt - that takes half a day to make by hand.

But it is not just the solar panels that may be destroyed. A new classroom and toilet block at the village school are also under threat of demolition.

''They are making things as miserable as possible so people will just pack up and leave,'' said Paul Raymond, from the Ecumenical Accompaniment Program in Palestine and Israel, a non-government organisation that works with vulnerable communities and monitors human rights abuses. ''It is part of a much bigger picture where even basic infrastructure is not allowed to be built in these areas.''

The pace of Israeli-mandated demolitions has increased significantly since January, with at least 387 structures including 140 homes and 79 agricultural structures demolished by August, a report from three United Nations independent experts found. It has resulted in the forced displacement of 755 people and ruined the livelihoods of another 1500.

At least 23 Palestinian schools teaching 2250 children are under pending stopwork or demolition orders. The Israeli authorities have already demolished some medium-voltage power lines in other villages.

And while Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank - illegal under international law - continue to expand, Palestinian applications for permits to build basic infrastructure are denied, almost without fail.

''The situation is clearly escalating and resulting in increasing human rights violations,'' the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing, Raquel Rolnik, said.

''Not only are these families … forcibly evicted from their homes but they are not provided with compensation or relocation, and are even forced to pay for the demolition itself.''

The community of Imneizil - backed by the group Rabbis for Human Rights - has lodged a formal protest against the demolition order on 39 grounds, all of which were rejected without comment by the Israeli authorities. They are now preparing to take action in the Supreme Court.

But there may yet be a reprieve. Following an appeal from the Spanish government, the village has been asked to resubmit plans for the solar panel structure and a freeze has reportedly been placed on the demolition order.

For now, at least, the town's electricity supply is safe. But the future of its new classroom and the school's yet-to-be-completed toilet block remain under a cloud.

Twitter @rpollard



Read more: Between heaven and earth - and Israeli law

- V -

__________________
"Few have the stomach to pursue truth , yet most know in their gut something is wrong" V

"But everyone knows the media doesn't inform. Duhhhhhh !! "