Gilad Atzmon

Israelis watch the mass murder from a hilltop near Sderot, ex-
ploding with glee & joy each time a bomb hits Gaza...

Ninety-one percent (91%) of Israeli Jews support Israel's campaign against the people of Gaza, according to a survey published Monday - and just 4.2% believe the operation is a "mistake."

The survey also revealed that 85% of respondents would only support a cease-fire agreement if Israel eliminated every Hamas rocket and destroyed the full network of terror tunnels before agreeing to do so.

Seventy-seven percent (77%) of Israeli Jews polled "very strongly support" Operation Protective Edge's airstrikes on Gaza; 17% "support" the airstrikes; and 4.5% had "weak support" for the airstrikes. Just 1.5% of respondents opposed the airstrikes on Gaza.

Similarly, 50% "strongly support" the IDF's ground offensive in Gaza; 28% "support" the ground campaign and 14% have "weak support" for the campaign. By contrast, only 9% of respondents oppose sending ground troops into Gaza.

Eighty-two percent (82%) of respondents "strongly disagree" with the statement "Israel launching Operation Protective Edge was a mistake"; 11% only "slightly disagree." Just 7% of respondents "agree" or "strongly agree" with that statement.

As to the operation's success, 74% of respondents overall believe the IDF is "achieving its goals" in Gaza; of those, 23% "very strongly agree" and 51% "strongly agree." Just 22.5% of respondents were neutral on the issue and only 3% believe the operation is failing.

Ninety-five percent (95%) of respondents said the operation has "made them proud of the IDF, the State of Israel, and the Jewish people," and only 2% disagreed with that statement.

More »

Gilad Atzmon

As one of the first to predict an imminent Israeli defeat in this round of violence, I was delighted to read this morning that Zionist mouthpiece Jeffrey Goldberg admits that Israel has lost the war. “Why Is Israel Losing a War It's Winning?” asks Goldberg. The Jewish State is a regional super power, its lobbies dominate Western politics, it is technologically superior, so what could have gone wrong?

Jeffrey Goldberg, a veteran Israeli concentration camp guard produces a few uniquely amusing arguments that deserve our attention. He writes,

“In a fight between a state actor and a non-state actor, the non-state actor can win merely by surviving.”

I suspect Israel’s military leadership is aware of this argument by now. But the Palestinians have achieved far more than merely ‘surviving.’ They brought Israel to its knees. Palestinians performed heroically on the ground and displayed total unity, two things Israel did not anticipate. They have also delivered a clear message to the Israeli people, to world Jewry and even to the miniature Jewish ‘anti Zionist’ clan – this battle is not about ‘occupation,’ 1967 or the ‘two state solution.’ It is about human dignity - the right to exist. The Palestinians do not have any plans to fade away, they are the people of the land, and they will be back. The IDF may be able to destroy a few tunnels, murder elders, women and children and turn streets into piles of debris, but it can’t even scratch the Palestinians’ will. Eventually, even Goldberg may be forced to admit, that the Palestinians prevailed because their objectives and goals are far greater than mere ‘survival.’

More »

Gilad Atzmon

As the Israeli Cabinet announced earlier today that it accepted the Egyptian cease-fire offer, Palestinian freedom fighters in Gaza continued firing rockets targeting the whole of Israel.

The situation is clear. Israel is desperate for a break in the violence. In spite of its endless ‘bravado,’ and military might, Israel lacks the military capacity and the courage to encounter Palestinian resistance on the ground. The Israeli elite recognizes that the military can’t resolve the problem, if anything, its extensive use would diminish Israeli manoeuvrability on the international front.

Hamas, on the other hand, has won its biggest military, political and ideological victory to date - it has managed to deliver some elementary messages to all of Israeli society:

You are living on our Palestinian stolen land, our Right to Return is elementary and is not negotiable. You Israelis do not belong here, you never did, and you had better consider your options immediately.

More »

Alimuddin Usmani interviews Gilad Atzmon

#PalestineUnderAttack

Alimuddin Usmani: After "Cast Lead" in 2009 and "Pillar of Defense" in 2012, the Israeli army has launched operation "Protective Edge" in July, 2014 against Gaza. What is the purpose of these repeated large scale military operations?

Gilad Atzmon: It is important to note that Israel hasn't won a single military battle since 1973. True, it has killed many Arabs, but it hasn't managed to achieve any of its military objectives.

Israel’s military domination has been sustained by the power of deterrence. The strategy was to force Arabs to avoid conflict by threatening that they could lose everything. This week has shown that this trick won't work anymore. Palestinian resistance has sprung back to life.

Israel can not solve its problems by military means. The situation is desperate for the Israelis. They have started to realize that they are stuck within a political, ideological and cultural stalemate. Israel is unable to conjure an image of a resolution. There is no prospect of future for the Jewish State.

Furthermore, the Jewish left's blatant lie that the ‘occupation is the problem’ has been exposed this week as we witness Israeli Arab citizens chased by Jewish mobs. As we know, the right-wing call for mass expulsion of all Arabs from Israeli territory is becoming increasingly popular within Israel. This brutal ‘solution’ is totally consistent with Jewish supremacist culture and ideology. After all, Jews, and I mean both Zionists and anti, like to operate within a Jews only environment. But can Israel rid itself of the Palestinians? This is exactly what the Right wing parties within the coalition promise to do.

Back to your question; since the military cannot provide the answers and the politicians cannot produce an image of a solution, the military is used as a firemen's brigade. It supplies short lived victories. The IDF is buying time, it cannot deliver a victory because military objectives cannot even be articulated. The IDF pounds Gaza with missiles, it kills whatever it suspects might be dangerous (a lot of kids, elders and women). But as time goes by, the military options are shrinking and to a certain extent, are not viable any more.

The German military theorist, Carl von Clausewitz suggested in the 19th century that “war is the continuation of politics by other means.” In the case of Israel what we see instead is the reverse of Clausewitz’ idea: Israeli politics is the continuation of the Jewish need for a conflict.

More »

Gilad Atzmon

In his latest article in The Nation, Noam Chomsky cherry picks the facts that fit his preferred narrative, while ignoring and disguising relevant details that contradict his thesis. One would expect an academic of Chomsky’s stature to perform at a much higher standard of intellectual integrity.

Reviewing Chomsky’s latest criticism of the BDS reveals that the MIT linguist borders on deception. It is especially fascinating to examine Chomsky’s tactics in light of the current violent events in Israel/Palestine.

Chomsky writes, “The opening call of the BDS movement, by a group of Palestinian intellectuals in 2005, demanded that Israel fully comply with international law by “(1) Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall.”

This is simply not true. In July 2005 BDS’ first goal read rather differently – “(1). Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall.”

In 2005 the first BDS goal didn’t include any reference to 1967 as Noam Chomsky suggests. It expressed opposition to the Israeli occupation of the entire land of historic Palestine. This goal was very upsetting for Jews and especially distressful to members of the Jewish Left. For them, the meaning was obvious; it implied that the Zionist project was a pure land grab. Then, at some unknown date around 2010 and without any protocol that suggested a formal decision, the goal changed as if by ‘magic’ and the words “occupied in June 1967” were added.

Attempts to discover who, within the BDS movement, had made the change didn’t reveal any answers. We do know, however, that the change followed growing pressure from Jewish anti Zionists within the BDS movement. We also know that the change occurred when BDS formed a dependence on EU money and Wall Street financers such as George Soros. I would like to believe that Chomsky, who is a meticulous researcher who doesn’t miss details, is well aware of this change in BDS’ Goal statement. However, it may as well be possible that I am totally wrong and Chomsky was not aware of this BDS saga at the time he wrote his article.

More »

(G. Gorodetsky)
Introduction by Gilad Atzmon

Photo: Ivan Maisky (second from left), the Soviet ambassador to London between 1932 and 1943, with Winston Churchill at the Allied ambassadors’ lunch at the Soviet embassy, September 1941. General Władysław Sikorski, prime minister of the Polish government in exile, is second from right.

Forthcoming in G. Gorodetsky (ed.), "A Red Ambassador to the Court of St. James’s: The Diaries of Ivan Maisky, 1932-43". - The following is a unique historical document. It is an extract from The Diaries of Ivan Maisky, the Soviet Ambassador to Britain from 1932 to 1943. As far as I am aware this is the debut online appearance of this invaluable document.

Maisky, a former Menshevik of Jewish origin, kept a highly personal diary. He recorded conversations with five British prime ministers, as well as with many other prominent British politicians.

In this extract, written on 3 February 1941, Maisky recounts his brief meeting with the Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann, later the first president of Israel. Maisky provides crucial insights into the history of Zionism including the brutality of the Jewish plan for Palestine and the Middle East. Noticeably, the document reveals that an intention to expel the Palestinians was explored by Zionist leaders as early as 1941.

More »

Marc H. Ellis (on Gilad Atzmon)

Introduction by Gilad Atzmon: I learned this week that Professor Marc H. Ellis - regarded by many as the contemporary leading Jewish theologian, came to the conclusion that yours truly, is the new Jewish prophet.

Here are some quotes I found in the final chapter of “Future of the Prophetic”, Ellis’ new epic treatise:

“Like the ancient prophets Atzmon exposes Jews. At the same time, Atzmon believes that the Bible, from which the prophets spring, is bogus….Atzmon provides no hiding place for Jews anywhere.” (Future of the Prophetic, Marc H. Ellis, p. 332)

“Atzmon is extreme but, in his extremity, he is much like the biblical prophets.” (p. 332)

“Atzmon performs the prophetic for our time. Like the biblical prophets he does not acknowledge, Atzmon believes we are at the end of Jewish history, a history, like the prophets, he no longer believe exists or, if it does, is not worthy of being carried forward. Irony of ironies, he witnesses to the continuity of both.” (p. 334)

More »

Gilad Atzmon

It is amusing to witness the energy and effort mainstream news outlets are investing in diverting attention from the fact that the current mess in Iraq is the direct outcome of Jewish political domination of the West for the last two decades.

When America and Britain launched the criminal second Gulf War, it was the Zionist Neocons, a bunch of politically influential Jews who urged the ‘liberation’ of the Iraqi people. Members of the same breed of tribal exponents have rallied for intervention in Iran, Libya and most recently in Syria.

But Zio-cons were not the only Jewish players in this iniquitous game, they were opposed by a Jewish progressive front largely funded by George Soros and his Open Society Institute. These so called ‘good Jews’ had a different strategy for the Middle East, they planned to ruin the Muslims through the use of Identity Politics by funding Gay, Lesbian, Feminist and Queer groups in the region.

Why do these Jews intervene in Arab and Muslim life? What motivates George Soros and Paul Wolfowitz to ‘revolutionize’ or ‘liberate’ people living thousands of miles away from Manhattan or Washington? Why did Lord Goldsmith give a green light to the war? What drove Jewish Chronicle writer David Aaronovitch to campaign for a series of interventionist criminal wars? What pushed Lord ‘cash machine’ Levy to the forefront of Blair’s fundraisers?

In 2007, American political science professors James Petras, John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt reached the conclusion that American foreign policy was dominated by Israel’s lobby. Surely, Israel’s Lobby is just a polite, politically correct name for the Jewish Lobby. But what motivates the Jewish lobby to destroy Iraq, Libya and Syria? Is it their commitment to the Jewish State?

More »

Gilad Atzmon

Surely, what’s happening now in Iraq and Syria must serve as a final wakeup call that we have been led into a horrific situation in the Middle East by a powerful Lobby driven by the interests of one tribe and one tribe alone.

Back in 1982, Oded Yinon an Israeli journalist formerly attached to the Israeli Foreign Ministry, published a document titled ‘A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties’ [here and here]. This Israeli commentator suggested that for Israel to maintain its regional superiority, it must fragment its surrounding Arab states into smaller units. The document, later labelled as ‘Yinon Plan’, implied that Arabs and Muslims killing each other in endless sectarian wars was, in effect, Israel’s insurance policy.

Of course, regardless of the Yinon Plan’s prophesies, one might still argue that this has nothing to do with Jewish lobbying, politics or institutions but is just one more Israeli strategic proposal except that it is impossible to ignore that the Neocon school of thought that pushed the English-speaking Empire into Iraq was largely a Jewish Diaspora, Zionist clan. It’s also no secret that the 2nd Gulf War was fought to serve Israeli interests - breaking into sectarian units what then seemed to be the last pocket of Arab resistance to Israel.

Similarly, it is well established that when Tony Blair decided to launch that criminal war, Lord Levy was the chief fundraiser for his Government while, in the British media, Jewish Chronicle writers David Aaronovitch and Nick Cohen were busy beating the drums for war. And again, it was the exact same Jewish Lobby that was pushing for intervention in Syria, calling for the USA and NATO to fight alongside those same Jihadi forces that today threaten the last decade’s American ‘achievements’ in Iraq.

Unfortunately, Yinon’s disciples are more common than you might expect. In France, it was the infamous Jewish ‘philosopher’ Bernard Henri Levy who boasted on TV that ‘as a Jew’ campaigning for NATO intervention, he liberated Libya.

As we can see, a dedicated number of Jewish Zionist activists, commentators and intellectuals have worked relentlessly in many countries pushing for exactly the same cause – the breaking up of Arab and Muslim states into smaller, sectarian units. But is it just the Zionists who are engaging in such tactics? Not at all.

More »

Gilad Atzmon

Following the surge of right wing parties in Europe’s Parliamentary election, Forward, the once-progressive Jewish outlet asks, “Have the Jews Lost Europe?” The tone of this question implies that until just a few days ago, at least some Jews believed that Europe was, in part, a ‘Jewish property.’ Such views were not baseless; Jewish Lobbies have dominated British and French policies by means of aggressive lobbying (CFI, LFI, CRIF etc’).

Following the European poll, Dave Rich, deputy director of the ultra Right Wing Jewish para-military Community Security Trust, is concerned. He detects a growing resentment of Jewish politics in Europe. His article in the Forward’s openly examines whether Jews have lost their grip on the European continent.

Rich begins by quoting Israeli veteran concentration camp guard Jeffrey Goldberg. “At what point,” asks Goldberg, “do the Jews of America and the Jews of Israel tell the Jews of Europe that it might be time to get out?” Apparently, says Rich, “Goldberg is not the only one to have had this thought. In fact, according to a 2013 opinion poll …more than a quarter of Jews in the E.U. have considered emigrating at some point in the past five years, because in their own countries they do not feel safe as Jews.”

More »