Tuesday, November 1, 2016

Israel’s Apologists and the Martin Luther King Jr. Hoax

For more of the history of the so-called Jews role in the slave trade, please see here, for more articles about the ideology of Judaism and it's connection to racism and ethnocentrism, please see here.

By Fadi Kiblawi and Will Youmans

In formal logic, Argumentum Ad Verecundiam refers to arguing a point with an appeal to authority. This type is categorized as a logical fallacy. Citing one seemingly authoritative source is simply not conclusive evidence, even if the authority is seen as an expert on the given subject.

For the sake of clarity, there are three degradations of this maxim enumerated in this essay. First, it is especially fallacious as proof when the quoted authority demonstrates no special knowledge on the subject. Second, when the authority who is not an expert on the given subject is also quoted out of context, the argument is even weaker. Third, the lowest violation of this formal logic principle is when an advocate uses a false rendition, or a fabricated quote, by the same authority who can claim no expertise.
This is the best framework for understanding how various exponents of Israel have used Martin Luther King Jr. to promote their cause.
Dr. King’s expertise as a non-violent civil rights leader and visionary are unparalleled in U.S. history. However, that does not make him an informed commentator on Middle Eastern affairs or on the ideological facets of Zionism. As impressive as the references to his views on Israel may seem, this is a textbook example of Argumentum Ad Verecundiam.
Finding direct and published utterances by Dr. King about the modern Middle East and Zionism is extremely rare. A cursory review of dozens of books on and by the civil rights leader turned up nothing.
Nonetheless, defenders of Israel often refer to a letter by Dr. King. This letter is reprinted in full on many web pages and in print. One example of a quotation derived from this letter is:
“… You declare, my friend; that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely ‘anti-Zionist’ … And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God’s green earth: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews… Anti-Semitism, the hatred of the Jewish people, has been and remains a blot on the soul of mankind. In this we are in full agreement. So know also this: anti-Zionist is inherently anti-Semitic, and ever will be so.”
Antiracism writer Tim Wise checked the citation, which claimed that it originated from a “Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend” in an August, 1967 edition of Saturday Review. In an article on January, 2003, essay he declared that he found no letters from Dr. King in any of the four August, 1967 editions. The authors of this essay verified Wise’s discovery. The letter was commonly cited to also have been published in a book by Dr. King entitled, “This I Believe: Selections from the Writings of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.” No such book was listed in the bibliography provided by the King Center in Atlanta, nor in the catalogs of several large public and university libraries.
Soon afterwards, CAMERA, a rabidly pro-Israeli organization, published a statement declaring that the letter was “apparently” a hoax. CAMERA explained how it gained so much currency. The “letter” came from a “reputable” book, Shared Dreams, by Rabbi Marc Shneier. Martin Luther King III authored the preface for the book, giving the impression of familial approval. Also, the Anti-Defamation League’s Michael Salberg used the same quotes in his July 31st, 2001 testimony before the U.S. House of Representative’s International Relations Committee’s Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights.
The bogus letter was further quoted by writers in prominent publications one would imagine armed with fact-checkers capable of spending the short amount of time needed to verify the primary source. Mort Zuckerman, the editor-in-chief of U.S. News & World Report quoted the letter in a column (17 September 2001). Warren Kinsella followed suit in an article for Maclean’s (20 January 2003). Commentary, which is known more for its ideological zeal than any appreciation for factual scruples, ran a piece by Natan Sharansky. He quoted the false passage as a block–some ten months after CAMERA declared it a hoax.
More recently, the Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME) featured excerpts from the letter prominently on its website. Despite its name, SPME is an advocacy group seeking to bolster Israel’s image on campus–a mission it claims promotes peace in the region. Ironically, right under the false Dr. King quotation is an announcement of the formation of a task force “dealing with academic integrity with respect to fabricating and falsifying data when discussing the Middle East.”
After one of the authors of this article informed SPME’s director of the quotation’s discredited status, he replied with hostility despite the simple verifiability of the claim that the citation is incorrect. After several exchanges he replaced it with another seemingly far-fetched quote:
Martin Luther King addressed the issue in 1968, in a speech at Harvard when he said: “.. You declare, my friend, that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely ‘anti-Zionist.’ …When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews… And what is anti-Zionist? It is the denial to the Jewish people of a fundamental right that we justly claim for the people of Africa and freely accord all other nations of the Globe…When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews–make no mistake about it.”
When a citation for this new quote was requested, he refused to provide one, leaving visitors only with its claim that Dr. King delivered it in a 1968 Harvard “speech.” However, the language of SPME’s new posting strongly resembles their original one – on account of the fact that it too comes from the same discredited “Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend.”
The first time the fake letter was quoted, it could have been a mistake, but to draw on different lines from the same fictitious letter is strikingly unscholarly – as is the false citation of it to a 1968 “speech” at Harvard. Either this citation was invented or taken from another unspecified source–classic plagiarism, whether intentional or out of gross negligence.
SPME’s reference to a 1968 “speech” at Harvard mirrors the details from a published account that appeared in two sources: First, it was in right-wing and ardently pro-Israeli sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset’s 1969 article in Encounter. Second, it was in a January, 2002 San Francisco Chronicle op-ed by Congressman John Lewis, who knew Dr. King personally.
Lipset wrote in his essay “The Socialism of Fools: The Left, the Jews & Israel” about a “dinner” for Dr. King he attended. When one black student made “some remark against the Zionists,” Dr. King “snapped” back, “ ‘When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You are talking anti-Semitism’.” The piece by Congressman Lewis also quotes this same remark though it is not clear if it is gathered from Lipset’s essay.
Congressman Lewis claims Dr. King made this comment “shortly before his death” during “an appearance at Harvard.” Lipset states it was “shortly before he was assassinated” at a “dinner given for him in Cambridge.” This quotation seems on its face much more credible. Yet, SPME presents snippets from the fake letter while apparently citing this statement (a 1968 “speech” at Harvard).
There are still, however, a few reasons for casting doubt on the authenticity of this statement. According to the Harvard Crimson, “The Rev. Martin Luther King was last in Cambridge almost exactly a year ago–April 23, 1967” (“While You Were Away” 4/8/68). If this is true, Dr. King could not have been in Cambridge in 1968. Lipset stated he was in the area for a “fund-raising mission,” which would seem to imply a high profile visit. Also, an intensive inventory of publications by Stanford University’s Martin Luther King Jr. Papers Project accounts for numerous speeches in 1968. None of them are for talks in Cambridge or Boston.
While these points raise some doubt, let us assume that the quote is accurate.
This is where context comes in. One of the principal arguments of Lipset’s 1969 article is that the split between blacks and Jews “stems much more from the American situation than from the Middle East Conflict.” He identifies Jews as a dominating force within the civil rights movement. Black nationalist leadership wanted to distance themselves from Whites in the movement, Lipset argues. In Lipset’s own words, he summarized what Black nationalists were saying: “We don’t want whites, but we particularly don’t want Jews, and we are expressing antagonism to Jews in the form of opposition to Israel.”
Few of the articles that cite Lipset’s essay mention this crucial context. One individual who did explore this, albeit crudely, still managed to contrive another Dr. King quote unimaginatively. Dr. Andrew Bostom, a medical professor at Brown University, wrote an article for Front Page Magazine (20 January 2003) that was reprinted on former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s website. In it, he claimed that Dr. King had the “moral courage” to confront the anti-Jewish rhetoric of black left-wing and Muslim organizations. This is not to say that Dr. Bostom is a reliable source. Central to his article is a 347-word passage which he attributes to Dr. King. He fails to cite a source for the outlandish tirade. A quick google search determined it was lifted entirely from original material on the homepage of www.yahoodi.com (which has a copyright date of 2002), plus healthy portions of the fake “Letter to an Anti-Zionist Friend.” Dr. Bostom’s article featured the least creative and perhaps most fraudulent doctored script yet: a patchwork of plagiarism.
Taking the context described by Lipset and Dr. Bostom to be generally correct for the sake of argument would shed light on the credible Dr. King quotes. If the movement he figured so prominently in was facing such a rift, his response was only natural. To borrow Lipset’s analysis then, Dr. King’s statement also “stems much more from the American situation than from the Middle East Conflict.” Given his local political anxieties, Dr. King was hardly the kind of disinterested authority worth quoting on the subject.
As a note: the actual validity of Lipset and Dr. Bostom’s views of that context is beyond the scope of this essay. While it is true that black nationalists, such as SNCC’s leadership, became increasingly critical of Israel after 1967, it is not convincing that the motive was to alienate American Jews even if that was the foreseeable effect. An ardent internationalist for example would care more about linking oppressed people’s struggles across the globe than they would about the relatively mainstream political movement for equality in the American polity.
Back to the main point: if the forged quotes reflecting Dr. King’s views on Israel were accurate, citing him would still be classic Argumentum Ad Verecundiam. Where is the proof that Dr. King studied the region or its modern history? The dearth of then-publicized comments and writings on the region by Dr. King shows that it was probably not a subject he was well-versed on, nor did it appear to be a priority of his throughout his career.
Even the statements Congressman Lewis attributes to him are low in substance and high on flourishing rhetoric. For example, Dr. King stated that Israel is a “marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy.” Referring to it as “marvelous” and an “oasis” sounds rather uninformed given the realities of military occupation and the forced exile the Palestinians have witnessed since Israel’s foundation. They surely do not sound like the words of someone familiar with both sides of the story.
More significantly, as Tim Wise pointed out, Dr. King’s supposed statements on Zionism came before the more than three decades of crippling Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, and the 1987 intifada that grabbed the world’s attention. The Palestinian narrative was sparsely conveyed in the United States up to that point. There were few Arabs or Palestinians in the U.S. and fewer Arab academics, policymakers, and activists working with Dr. King. Wise also suggests that application of Dr. King’s principles logically give way to more sympathy to the Palestinian side given the systematic inequality it faces.
That advocates of Israel have relied on fabricated and out-of-context quotations from a leading moral figure of yesteryear only underscores the absurdity of the general point that all opposition to a Jewish state in a diverse land is anti-Semitic. There are obviously many legitimate ways to critique Zionism. One quite reasonable observation is that after more than a half-century of conflict, the Zionist project has failed to bring the Jews of Israel peace and security–its raison d’etre. One might counter that this is due to Arab intransigence; the Palestinians should accept their dispossession. However, Palestinian opposition to this fate is an indisputable fact, and security was and is Zionism’s key goal. This necessarily was an analytical failure on the part of the Zionists who assumed the Palestinians would blend in to other Arab countries while the later generations forget their past. To dismiss this argument–one that evaluates Zionism by its own goals–and every other critique of Zionism as anti-Semitism is not only dishonest but a cowardly evasion of meaningful debate.
The main reason why critique of Zionism persists is that whether Israeli officials like it or not, history as it is written and the actual land are still disputed by the millions of Palestinians who are refugees as a result of Israel’s birth, the 3.5 million Palestinians living under Israel’s direct military rule, and the Palestinians who compose twenty percent of Israel’s citizens in second class status. If Israel was founded and developed on uncontested terrain then arguments against its existence would more likely be out of hatred against the Jewish people. For supporters of Israel to wipe away all critics of the methods and outcomes of Israel’s foundation with the “anti-Semitic” label denies completely the legitimacy of the Palestinian narrative–the experiences and perspectives that never show up in Dr. King’s imagined “oasis.”
Dr. King, though long-passed, is still monumental in the continuing movement for civil rights in the United States. His legacy should be celebrated, and also critiqued constructively; it should not be falsified or stretched to accommodate a different agenda today. The context behind Dr. King’s authentic statements on Zionism was unique to a particular domestic political moment in order to sustain a fragile political coalition. Beyond that, Dr. King never claimed any expertise on the subject, nor made it a frequent topic of his speeches or writings. Claiming that all critiques of Zionism are anti-Semitic based on the force Martin Luther King Jr.’s words on the matter fails as an argument on many different levels.
Fadi Kiblawi is a law student at George Washington University. Will Youmans is a contributor to The Politics of Anti-Semitism (AK Press, 2003).

Monday, October 31, 2016

Collection of Tweets About Glenn Greenwald & Edward Snowden Being Zionist Phonies

1. Glenn Greenwald is connected to the "Revelations" of Edward Snowden: Greenwald is a liar by omission for intelligence: http://glenngreenwald.net/

2. Below is his Twitter account picture: many of these "journalists" and writers work for intelligence, they are at war with the population because they are not telling you how bad the situation really is. Remember, the appearance of truth is more dangerous than lies.


3. THEY ARE NOT TELLING YOU THE TRUTH of how bad the world is or how much you are under surveillance.

4. Edward Snowden is a phony, Glenn Greenwald is Jewish and a Zionist. If Edward Snowden was real he would tell you how bad it really is. Here is Edward Snowden's Twitter account picture:



5. Why doesn't he tell you the real truth? He has a Twitter account. Follow him here. Edward Snowden could tweet out the info that the newspapers fail to publish, just like I am doing.

6. Here is a joking post I did a while back about why Edward Snowden is a phony:  https://exposeintelligence.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/edward-snowden-i-tell-you-this-go-here.html

7. Here is a non-joking real post about why he's a phony: Is Edward Snowden a Fake? Also, see this other post about classified technology.

8. Hey, Glenn- you know about space-based weaponry and everything I am talking about- right? So why shut up about it?

Collection of Tweets About When Insanity Becomes Mainstream

1. Look at this absurd sentence written in Richard Dawkins book- this tells you the crazy world you live in:

2. this is from The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution

3. "The evidence for evolution is at least as strong as the evidence for the Holocaust" (See here for a whole collection of interesting posts about the Holocaust, be sure to scroll down and see them all.)

4. Why would you make a comparison like this to back up your claim for evolution? I am not doubting evolution, but this is stupid.

5. The problem with the evolution/creation debate is that it's a false dichotomy where each will not acknowledge any truth from the other position. Why do they insist on doing this?

6. Creationism does not even have to be about the Bible. Look what we can do now in our day with science. On the other hand, anyone who denies any form of evolution is being foolish.

7. In the story of Prometheus, he goes from the Titans to the Olympians, then he defies the Olympians and takes his fire to man- it is a dialectic

8.  As far as the quote in Dawkin's book, it would not surprise me if his publisher made him put it in.

9. Just look this: https://exposeintelligence.blogspot.ca/2016/01/numerous-accounts-of-six-million-jews.html and this statement from Oliver Stone about how Jewish control of the media is preventing free debate about the Holocaust: https://exposeintelligence.blogspot.ca/2016/04/oliver-stone-jewish-control-of-media-is.html

10. For whatever reason, the push to make Israel and the Jews so important has become a religion. The new religion is the Holocaust. It is the new secular God that you cannot question. This is extremely sad. This means they have to hold the same narrative together or potentially the Jews will cease to exist as a united people.


12. See here for an example of the problems of defending someone who questions the new secular God --- just amazing, the defendant's lawyer gets thrown in jail!

Collection of Tweets About Truth Seekers and Supposed "Conspiracy" Theorists Being Labeled As Potential Terrorists

Yes, it really is this crazy after September 11th and the advent of the new Homeland Security Laws in the United States and Bill C-51 or the "Anti-Terrorism Act" in Canada

1. 72 Types Of Americans That Are Considered “Potential Terrorists” In Official Government Documents

2. FBI Memo Labels Patriots, Truth-Seekers as Potential 'Terrorists

3. Look at what Cass Sunstein is saying about Conspiracies: or let us put this another way, freedom of thought

4. 
Look who Cass Sunstein's wife is: Samantha Power see her Twitter accounts here and here --- I promise you, these people know who I am. She is no Human Rights Defender. 
I am, not her.

5. Is this a joke to Americans and Canadians? Is everything just one big joke? How pathetic are our countries to allow this?

6. You have no rights anymore under the new laws in Canada and the United States- when they declare you a "terrorist," they can do this to anyone they want.


7. People should do research on Homeland Security and Bill C-51

8. Read here for Dennis Kucinich Attempted Ban of Space-Based Weapons. This new class of weapons is being used on unaware, not informed humans, who of course did not consent to such experimentation. The Nuremberg Code of Conduct for experimentation with human subjects, is part of the Customary Law and the UDHR. The Code lists ten points, which universally have been adopted after the Nuremberg trials of war criminals by the Nuremberg Military Tribunals. The secret technologies in question are covered by military/agency secrecy orders. The victims are not openly confronted as that would remove any feigned excuses and leave the perpetrators open to all manner of accusation. Instead, the methods used are covert; employing high-tech methods to remotely torture, torment and deceive victims without leaving evidence. 

9. Incidentally, Samantha Power is one of the names mentioned in this article about fighting "global anti-Semitism"

10. Go here to learn more about Homeland Security

11. You can see the articles I put up about James Altucher here and here. Isn't it interesting that Cass Sunstein was on his podcast show?





Sunday, October 30, 2016

Connecting Brains and Reading Minds - Brain Synchronization

For more information on this topic, go here.

How Many Americans Knew That This Was a Policy Of The United States Government? How Sad Can The United States Get?

SEE BELOW!
VERY IMPORTANT...

Yes, this is how pathetic the United States government has become. 


Essentially it is enforcing Israel's campaign against global free speech, see here to read about it. Also see here for how Israel would like world internet censorship. See here for the origins of Homeland Security. See here for a collection of tweets about Homeland Security and its connections to Zionism. See here for the strong connections between Israel, Canada, and the United States. See here for the Canada-Israel “Public Security” Agreement for Counter-Terrorism & Homeland security. See here for how the Canadian government is cracking down on criticism of Israel.

See here for the corruption of the RCMP and how they work with organized crime, see here for a video of the head of Homeland Security at the ADL "Leadership" Conference, see here and here for how Jewish groups get most of the Homeland Security grants, see here for how the ADL works with the RCMP and the FBI and its ties to organized crime.

=============================================================================

Monitoring and Combating Anti-Semitism


The Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, Ira Forman, advances U.S. Foreign Policy on anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism is discrimination against or hatred toward Jews. The Special Envoy develops and implements policies and projects to support efforts to combat anti-Semitism.
The Special Envoy was established by the Global Anti-Semitism Review Act of 2004. The Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) produces the State Department's annual reports on Human Rights Practices and International Religious Freedom, and the Special Envoy provides input on anti-Semitism for these reports.
The Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism welcomes information on anti-Semitic incidents, including personal and property attacks; government policies, including judicial/prosecutorial decisions and educational programs on the issue; and press and mass media reports. The office can be contacted at: SEASinfo@state.gov.

Combating Global Anti-Semitism in 2016

Remarks

Ira N. Forman
Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism 
Berlin, Germany
March 16, 2016


On January 27, 2016, President Barack Obama made a powerful statement on fighting anti-Semitism at the Embassy of Israel. “Anti-Semitism is a distillation,” he said, “[it is] an expression of an evil that runs through so much of human history, and if we do not answer that, we do not answer any other form of evil.” So how do governments effectively “answer” and strongly combat rising anti-Semitism?

The office of the Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism at the U.S. Department of State has been tracking the rise of anti-Semitism around the world and witnessing its alarming presence and growth in Europe and beyond. We know Jewish communities in Europe have faced an upsurge of anti-Semitic incidents, including violence in Western Europe over the past few years. Jewish communities are anxious about their safety and future. 

Sadly, if present trends continue, the viability of some of the smaller European Jewish communities will come into question due to anticipated emigration and/or assimilation. To best protect Jewish communities and combat anti-Semitism, the U.S. Department of State has encouraged European states to appoint Special Envoys or other senior officials to focus on anti-Semitism.

In Berlin, in November 2014, at the 10th Anniversary of the OSCE's Conference on Anti-Semitism, Ambassador Samantha Power stated, “One way to ensure sustained attention to anti-Semitism is to appoint a high-level envoy… Governments who appoint high-level officials to coordinate whole-of-nation efforts to combat anti-Semitism, and give them the political backing and resources they need, will see the difference it makes.”

We all welcomed the appointment of an EU Coordinator on Combating Antisemitism, Katharina von Schnurbein, and we look forward to future collaboration. This position is an important first step. Ideally, individual European governments will establish a point person to combat anti-Semitism.

Anti-Semitism is evolving into new, contemporary forms of hatred, racism, and political, social, and cultural discrimination against Jews. One virulent aspect is the relation of conflating Jewish communities with Israel, using criticism of Israel as a pretext for anti-Semitism. As government leaders we cannot ignore this phenomenon.

Being in Berlin, I am reminded of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s recent statement urging the need to specifically address anti-Semitism among youth from countries where hatred of Israel and Jews is widespread.

We have witnessed instances where anti-Israel demonstrations have taken on anti-Semitic tones such as in Malmö, Sweden, when protestors shouted, “Slaughter the Jews!” And we have seen in Toulouse and Marseilles how Jews have been targeted by terrorists who reportedly said they were protesting the situation in Palestine.

In our work, we engage with Jewish community leaders in Europe. We have heard from the Dutch Jewish community that “any criticism toward Israel is considered ‘anti-Zionism’ [in the Netherlands], but people know this and they shout ‘Zionist!’ when they mean ‘Jew’ so they won't get in trouble.”

Jewish leaders from Sweden also noted how anti-Semitism can be covered by anti-Zionism. Recent graffiti with swastikas was not classified as 'anti-Semitism' by police in Stockholm, but as actions against Israel. And I quote, “If you are hurt wearing a kippa [in Sweden], it is classified as anti-Zionism, which is legal.”

And then there is an ongoing case in Germany, which many of us know of, when in the early morning hours of July 29, 2014, anti-Israel protestors in Wuppertal threw Molotov cocktails at the main synagogue. Last year, the judge determined these actions “anti-Israel” and not “anti-Semitic.” Although this decision has recently been challenged, we have to be aware of the correlation.

This is why it is especially important to define anti-Semitism clearly to more effectively combat it. My predecessor Special Envoy Hannah Rosenthal said it best, “Opposition to a policy by the State of Israel [can morph] into anti-Semitism …This form of anti-Semitism is more difficult for many to identify – but if all Jews are held responsible for the decisions of the sovereign State of Israel [or if] governments call upon and intimidate their Jewish communities to condemn Israeli actions…this is not objecting to a policy–this is anti-Semitism. Our State Department uses Natan Sharansky’s framework for identifying when someone or a government [can] cross the line – when Israel is demonized, when Israel is held to different standards than the rest of the countries, and when Israel is delegitimized.”

While we understand the complexities of this issue and the importance of context, we are concerned about those instances where the line is crossed between legitimate opposition of Israeli government policies into rhetoric that questions Israel’s right to exist and targets Jewish communities outside of Israel.
Thus we encourage European governments to adopt a working definition of anti-Semitism, ideally, one which would include a section on how anti-Semitism relates to Israel, to improve the safety and well-being of Jewish communities in Europe.

We should also note that we are very careful to use this definition appropriately and object to its misuse as part of efforts to silence the legitimate criticism of Israeli policies. It is important to be as accurate as possible and not overstate or understate the problem. Unfounded accusations of anti-Semitism motivated by ideological or political aims distract from and are counterproductive to good-faith efforts to combat anti-Semitism.

For example, when one of the strongest opponents of anti-Semitism today—Pope Francis— is accused of taking an anti-Semitic stance, those unsubstantiated accusations make it more difficult to identify and address actual incidents of anti-Semitism. The Catholic Church has made impressive strides in speaking out against anti-Semitism and condemning intolerance.

The United States government deeply appreciates the Church’s critical voice. In October 2015, our office had the opportunity to meet Pope Francis and Vatican officials and thank them for the Church’s continuing efforts to combat anti-Semitism, and encourage them to continue. Indeed, in 2015 Pope Francis told the media “anyone who does not recognize the Jewish people and the State of Israel — and their right to exist — is guilty of anti-Semitism.”

All of us are here because we believe that democratic governments should proactively combat anti-Semitism. But governments cannot combat anti-Semitism alone. If we are to beat back the tide of anti-Semitism, we need to strengthen and enable civil society, in Europe and wherever anti-Semitism arises, to raise its voice and speak out.

Everyone needs to understand that anti-Semitism is not just a “Jewish problem.” Anti-Semitism and religious intolerance are fundamental threats to democratic societies; religious intolerance leads to the loss of rights for other minority groups, threatening social cohesion and fundamental freedoms. Civil society, governments, and religious leaders all have a responsibility to act against all forms of intolerance, including against religious or ethnic minorities.

As many of you know, at the end of 2015, the U.S. State Department led an international effort that helped prevent a statue from being erected in Hungary to honor a notorious World War II-era anti-Semite, Balint Homan. We worked with members of Congress, U.S. and international NGOs, Hungarian groups, Jewish community leaders, and European government leaders—including several of you here –to send the message that anti-Semitic acts will be strenuously opposed.

We believe there is a significant role for legislators and parliamentarians to play in speaking out against anti-Semitism. The U.S. Congress, for instance, played an important role in our efforts in Hungary, and we are appreciative of their leadership in combating anti-Semitism.

We also believe governments should make it easier for civil society and religious leaders—who are often closer to the dynamics and issues on the ground and within their communities—to access their governmental leaders, meet with them, share information, and continue to receive funding for projects and programs that combat anti-Semitism and intolerance of any kind.

In Hungary, because Hungarian civil society—Jews and others—felt empowered after the success in December, plans to unveil another statue honoring another anti-Semite last month were foiled. Because we expect these issues to persist, civil society and governments must remain vigilant and continue to coordinate efforts to confront these anti-Semitic actions.

As parliamentarians we need to encourage civil society to speak out, to build coalitions and bridges with diverse communities, and to educate in terms of citizenship and democratic values.

With a robust civil society in Europe that is both encouraged and aided by governments, hopefully, together, we can turn down the faucet of anti-Semitism. I often use this metaphor of a faucet. We may not be able to turn it totally off, but we can certainly turn it down.

Thank you.

Police State Canada: Communications Security Establishment Runs Massive Stasi-Like Domestic Spying Program


For previous articles about the CSE, please see here, here and here.

The CSE is a part of the 5-Eyes with the NSAThe big secret that they are not talking about with the CSE is the advanced technology of Echelon and Signals Intelligence along with the true nature of what the PRISM data mining program really is. The eventual plan is to have everyone hooked up to a computer to monitor their thoughts and be able to "data-mine" them. It is a form of thought policing that extends far beyond telecommunications and the internet. To learn more about this, see herehere and here.

If you are a targeted person, they are recording your whole life Eventually, the plan is to record everyone's life. That is why they are building giant data centers like the one in Utah, they are using big data with sophisticated artificial intelligence and data mining software so they can predict the future just like in the movie Minority Report. The massive data centers in Utah are for data mining purposes so they can look for statistically significant patterns in the data. They want to have everyone "hooked up" so they can monitor all human thought patterns and hunt for what they deem as "irregular" thoughts or what they believe falls out of their categories of normality. In other words, they have set up a bell curve, and anyone who falls outside of this will be seen as suspicious. Right now, they are able to set alerts on your thoughts the same way they can on phone calls, emails, search terms etc.  See here for more about the inevitable problems of technology. See here for more about the DARPA A.I Control Grid.

As far as Echelon and Signals Intelligence, it's important to realize that Signals Intelligence covers everything from intercepting signals to surveillance and electronic warfare. Please see earth-penetrating tomographyInterferometry, also Earth's Field NMRNuclear Magnetic Resonance, and Electron Paramagnetic Resonance. One part of the secret of Echelon is leaking electrical emanations which is a part of the TEMPEST program and is categorized under RADIATION intelligence. It is classified. All natural things give out radio waves, that includes you.

See this video and this video for an example using a computer. (See here, where the physicist Dr. John Morgan says 2 minutes and 10 seconds into the video, that all natural things emit radio waves. Watch this video with Michael Persinger where he talks about how light and photons can be measured. Also, take notice in this video when the physicist mentions that the brain "radiates" radio.)


What You Are:


The imagers they use are multi-purpose, the imaging transmitters target locations, areas and living animals with directed energy. There are passive and active modes, the active mode requires the transmission of signals into the target where passive mode allows imaging with illumination occurring by other means like spying through leaking electrical emanations, including unintentional radio or electrical signals, sounds, and vibrations. 

Essentially, this technology can be used with nanotechnology for holography and nanoparticle imaging. (See here and here for examples of holography,  here for more about nanoparticle imaging and here for more about molecular imaging.) 

But that's not all, it can also be used for synthetic telepathy. Light can be measured, (photons,) minds can be read, thoughts can be sent. If you can think a thought, you can send it. Just like writing an email with your mind. Zuckerberg is saying it here,  he's just not telling you the whole story.  See here for another article with Mark Zuckerberg referring to synthetic telepathy. See here for a Cisco ad that talks about this technology. Also, see this TedTalk video for another example. This technology can be used between humans that are hooked up to computers, (human to human) or by a computer to a human.

When used in conjunction with nanotechnology they have access to your vital signs, the ability to read your EEG and your brain states, look out of your eyes and hear out of your ears. (See this old clip of a scientist looking out of a cat's eyes. What they have now is even more advanced.) They can hack into your brain the same way they do with your computer. They can also alter and affect your behavior. (See here and here.) They can track you anywhere on the planet and hurt or maim you in a plausibly deniable way from a remote location. They can shoot you and your family with space-based weapons. See here for more about electronic warfare. See here for more about microwave weaponry.

Remember, YOU PAY FOR ALL OF THIS! That is so important to remember, these losers work for you! Don't ever forget that, they are using your money to enslave you. Demand transparency, do not settle for anything less. Demand that your government starts being honest with you. Honesty and the democratizing of this technology scares the absolute crap out of these people. Do you know why? Because they know they will be lynched. The foundation of Canada will be called into question and they know this. Why are you so scared of them? They are your employees. 

============================================================================

By Keith Jones

On the basis of secret government directives, Canada’s national security apparatus is conducting mass surveillance of Canadians parallel to, if not directly patterned after, the domestic spying operations of the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA).
Communications Security Establishment (CSE), the NSA’s Canadian counterpart and longstanding partner, has been scrutinizing the metadata of Canadians’ electronic communications since at least 2005.
Moreover, the NSA routinely provides Canada’s security agencies with intelligence on Canadians and CSE reciprocates by providing U.S. intelligence officials with information about people living in the U.S. This arrangement allows both agencies to circumvent legal bans on warrantless surveillance of their own citizenry’s communications.
It was “common” for NSA “to pass on information about Canadians,” Wayne Easter, Canada’s Solicitor-General in 2002-3, told the Toronto Star this week. As Solicitor-General, Easter was responsible for overseeing the operations of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).
The extent and scope of CSE’s spying and who is being targeted and why are all zealously guarded state secrets. The CSE functions under secret directives issued by the Minister of Defence—directives whose very existence is unknown to parliamentarians, let alone the public at large.
The Canadian government has responded to any slight or partial lifting of the veil on CSE activities with a campaign of disinformation, dissembling and lies. This campaign has even been facilitated by the supposed opposition parties, like the left-wing New Democratic Party, and of course, the corporate media; they have made no more than tepid calls for greater transparency about the CSC’s spying.
The Globe and Mail reported that in November 2011, former Defence Minister Peter MacKay signed a secret directive authorizing the CSE to continue its “mining” of the metadata of Canadians’ telephone and internet communications. (As I point out above, it is much worse than phone calls and internet communications.) The Globe said the program had been first authorized by Bill Graham, Defence Minister in Paul Martin’s Liberal government, in 2005, that is six years earlier.
MacKay, like U.S. President Barack Obama, responded to this revelation of massive state spying by flatly denying that CSE is “targeting” Canadians or violating constitutional prohibitions on warrantless surveillance of their communications. This lie is predicated on the drawing of a spurious distinction between the metadata created by any electronic communication and the rest of the communication and on the transparently false claim that such information is innocuous.
According to the Globe, a briefing prepared for MacKay in 2011, presumably by CSE or lawyers within his department, declared, “Metadata is information associated with a telecommunication … And not a communication.”
In fact metadata—which includes such information as the source, destination, and duration of a telephone call—is intrinsic to any electronic communication. By systematically gathering and analyzing such metadata, the U.S. and Canadian national-security apparatuses can rapidly build up detailed profiles of targeted individuals and groups, including identifying everything from their associates, to where they work, bank, and shop, and what websites they visit.
In the course of his efforts to cover-up the scope and purpose of CSE’s metadata mining, MacKay did make one revealing admission. In response to a question about the mass surveillance of Canadians’ communications, MacKay told Parliament, “I have a heads-up for the member … This is something that has been happening for years.”
Government sources, many of them unnamed, sought, meanwhile, to refute the Globe ’s claim that there had been serious questions within the state apparatus about the constitutionality of the CSE’s “metadata” mining of Canadians’ communications. In its report, the Globe said that in 2008 the then CSE Commissioner—that is the head of the government-appointed “watchdog” charged with ensuring the agency does not go beyond its legal mandate—had cautioned that the program could be violating Canadians constitutional rights and, because of his concerns, the metadata mining program was suspended for more than a year.
Sources from within the government and CSE dispute this. They say that the questions raised by Charles Gonthier—a former, now deceased former Supreme Court Justice—concerned only a small part of a much larger program, that only this part of the metadata mining program was ever suspended, and then only very briefly.
The current CSE Commissioner has publicly defended the mass surveillance and claimed that his predecessor likewise believed that the CSE has every right to spy on Canadian’s electronic communications. In an e-mailed statement to the Toronto Star, Ryan Foreman, a spokesman for CSE Commissioner Robert Decary, said, “The commissioner never questioned the legality of CSE’s metadata activities.”
MacKay and the government have also sought to shield CSE’s actions from public scrutiny by insisting that it is solely devoted to gathering foreign intelligence and, as MacKay told Parliament, “is specifically prohibited from looking at the information of Canadians.” This is an obvious falsehood and not just because warrantless metadata mining is a form of spying.
CSE’s government mandate stipulates—as MacKay well knows since he has been the minister responsible for overseeing its work for the past seven years—that it “provide technical and operational assistance” to CSIS, the RCMP and other domestic security-intelligence and law enforcement agencies “in the performance of their lawful duties.” Furthermore, CSE can seek authorization from the Defence Minister to capture and read the communications of Canadians who are in some way connected to its foreign intelligence targets. As the Toronto Star ’s Thomas Walkom has observed, “In 2011-12, the last year for which figures are available, eight such ministerial authorizations—all of unknown size and scope—were in play.”
While vigorously defending CSE’s metadata spying, the government has been anxious to put on a record that CSE does not have access to the NSA’s PRISM Program and has not been using it as a means of monitoring Canadians’ communications. Under PRISM, NSA agents are able to directly access the servers of the most important U.S. based internet companies, including Microsoft, Apple, Google, and Facebook.
The government’s claims concerning the CSE and PRISM are not credible. The CSE has been a close partner of the NSA, sharing intelligence information with it on a daily basis, for more than six decades.
Britain, which like Canada, is part of the “Five Eyes”—a consortium formed in the late 1940s by the NSA, CSE, and the signals communications agencies of Great Britain, Australia, and New Zealand to jointly monitor global communications—has already said that it obtained intelligence about Britons through PRISM.
The NSA and CSE, as the spurious distinction they have made between electronic communications’ metadata and rest of the communications illustrates, can and do create pretexts and mechanisms to illegally circumvent constitutional prohibitions.
Last but not least, whatever the validity of MacKay’s denial about spying on Canadians through PRISM, it only concerned CSE. As Easter’s comments cited above demonstrate, Canada’s security agencies have long been the recipients of intelligence on Canadians from the NSA as part of longstanding Canada-U.S. intelligence-sharing agreements and partnerships.
The CSE is part of a growing state within the state whose operations are hidden from the public. Most Canadians had never heard of the CSE and even now they know very little about its activities. When former Defence Minister MacKay renewed by secret ministerial order CSE’s authorization to spy on Canadians’ electronic communications in November 2011 he issued six other secret ministerial directives to CSE—none of whose subject let alone contents has been publicly revealed.
As in the United States, Canada’s elite has used the so-called war on terror to justify Canada’s participation in a series of imperialist wars, massively expand the national-security apparatus, and adopt laws that attack core democratic rights.


Tuesday, October 25, 2016

Counter Intelligence 101 - The Sabotage Of Legitimate Dissent

Besides the videos below, please see herehere, here, here and here. Also, see this post and this post about Judas goats and phony alternative media websites.

A Letter Sent To The Maple Ridge News About Something That is Happening in the Town I Live In

Important must read letter below
my introduction - the letter is from
a local newspaper in my town that
was sent in f
rom a resident in
 Maple Ridge, British Columbia, Canada

Introduction: Below my introduction is a letter that was sent to the local paper in my town. It describes the exact behavior I have seen from some people in Maple Ridge, British Columbia.

An interesting bit of information for you to know is the paper that this letter was written to knows that this is happening to me. My situation is different than the one described in the letter below, but similar and much more important because as I have said here, Edward Snowden is a phony and I am releasing information that everyone needs to know. (I contacted the newspaper on many occasions and received no reply even though the information I'm exposing is crucial. Absolutely no one will talk about it.) They won't say anything because of who they collect their paychecks from and who runs the papers and the media in Canada. The truth is, my situation is not "bullying" like is described in the letter below, it is 100% torture by any standards.

The individuals that are doing this to me are extremely aware of what they are doing and the importance of discrediting me. They have to do this because the information they are covering up is so horrible it would astound people. Honestly, it would literally affect the foundation of our country. All I can say is these people are demonic human beings that are hell bent on enforcing their ideology. The tactics they are using is similar to the Stasi in East Germany and comes from the Bolsheviks in Russia

Essentially, they are involved in political assassinations and counter-intelligence just like Noam Chomsky is talking abut here. (Also, see here and here for more about COINTELPRO.) This is what counter- intelligence really is and what intelligence agencies and the counter-intelligence departments inside the FBI and the RCMP really do and have been doing since at least the 60's. See here for the technology and here for the techniques they use to destroy a target's life. Be sure to check out the links on the techniques that refer to Zersetzung. See here for more about slander and here on how they discredit a targeted person with hi-technology.

Many of the people that are doing this to me are Jews, others are Christians and all of them care about Israel, (there is a reason why intelligence agencies have religious signs on them.) Besides Jews and Christians, the other people that are involved with this are community watch, vigilante groups connected to Zionism, intelligence agents or informants involved with drugs. Legal and non-legal. Intelligence agencies have always worked with individuals that are involved with drugs, some of these individuals that are involved with drugs get contracts from intelligence agencies, (for example, the intelligence agencies find people that are involved in drugs that they can use for spying, then they hook them up with deals that are involved with medical marijuana markets in the United States.) This way they can hit two birds with one stone, they can make money with drugs and be some sort of pseudo-spy for intelligence agencies.

This gives them maximum security clearance and makes them above the law.  All of this technology is financed by and used against the hapless taxpayers. They are literally subsidizing or socializing their costs and privatizing their profits. They allow YOU the taxpayer to pay for the research and development of the technology. The reality is if they want to make money with drugs and they are doing it in a legal way, that is one thing, but, for them to be using the United States or the Canadian government and taxpayer money to help themselves to accomplish this, that is another thing altogether. Especially when the technology that they have access to is extremely dangerous and massively invasive. 

As I said previously, many of the methodologies and tactics that these intelligence agencies are implementing on the population of their respective countries are right out of the playbooks of the former Stasi in East Germany, see here for more about the Stasi and how they were connected to the Cheka in Russia and how they were started by the Bolsheviks. The Stasi used to called themselves proud "Chekists." It is also important for people to know that many of the Bolsheviks were Jews, and this information comes from extremely reliable sources. This is relevant because of the connections between these tactics and the origins of the Homeland Security laws. (Public Safety Canada are the Homeland Security of Canada.) 

See here for what Zbigniew Brzezinski said about a future run an "elite" unrestrained by "traditional values" enforcing their ideology on our countries with dangerous and invasive hi-technology, see here for more about former U.S. Representative from Ohio Dennis Kucinich's attempted ban on
space- based weaponry.

The truth of the matter is, there might as well be no laws in Canada anymore. This country is pretty much gone. Your rights have been taken away and there is a very, very good chance that you will never get them back. Most Canadians don't know they can actually be waterboarded under the Bill
C-51 laws
. Though there's a slim chance they would do this because they don't need to waterboard you anymore. They will use the technology I'm exposing. They can read your mind and hurt you from a remote location outside of your house.  They can turn your house into a torture dungeon.

But, just as the RCMP officer said to me who came to my house to inform me that I had to take down information about someone working with intelligence  ---- "this is above our heads." 

Many police are afraid to even get involved with this because they will either lose their jobs or become targets themselves. If this keeps up, this is going to erupt into something very ugly in North America.

========================================================================

Original letter found can be found here.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Letters: ‘Bullying continues online’


Maple Ridge, Pitt Meadows posted Oct 12, 2016 at 12:00 PM

Editor, The News:

Recently it has come to my attention that a fair number of Maple Ridge residents are engaging in cyber bullying – creating social media pages to intimidate, manipulate, put down, falsely discredit
or humiliate people with the intent to hurt or embarrass those who have a difference of opinion.

Their main targets are the homeless and people suffering mental health or substance use disorders.

Those who at their lowest point in life, with an already unstable mental state, do not need to be
ridiculed, picked on, followed around with cameras and harassed. But the bullying doesn’t stop
there. They’ll target anyone who dares to disagree with their way of thinking.

Posting photos of people and comments in online groups and public pages, then verbally attacking the person, mocking their intelligence. You would think this sort of behaviour would be on the decline given the histories of cyber bullying and it’s outcomes.

These people are grown adults, who consider themselves hard-working, tax-paying citizens of
Maple Ridge. What kind of example are they setting for the younger generation? That it’s OK to make fun of people who don’t share your opinion?

It’s one thing to have a cause that you believe in and promote and stand up for that cause. It’s
another to post things on social media solely for the purpose of ridiculing, telling people they are wrong, unintelligent, and are just a bleeding heart with their head in the sand because they have compassion. Maple Ridge is facing an epidemic, as are many other cities.

Hate and bullying are doing nothing to help the situation. They only makes things worse.

J. Curtis

Maple Ridge