Dear Readers:
I wonder if the student activists on American campuses were surprised by the violent reaction which their peaceful protests elicited. And I don’t necessarily mean the violence of the cops and the Zionist goons, but the violence of the “respectable” campus administrators. Oh boy, did these kids strike a nerve!
In the Old Testament there is this thing called the Holy of Holies. Some people say it is the Ark of the Covenant, yeah, that’s the object that Indiana Jones was trying to steal. Moses and his people basically borrowed this concept from the Egyptian Pharaohs, who were no stranger to mumbo-jumbo voodoo themselves.
I am no Hebrew scholar, but wiki says that the ancient Hebrew reads something like Kodesh HaKodashim. A very interesting linguistic/semantic note:
The construction “Holy of Holies” is a translation of the Hebrew, which is intended to express a superlative. Examples of similar constructions are “servant of servants” (Gen 9:25), “Sabbath of sabbaths” (Ex 31:15), “God of gods” (Deut 10:17), “Vanity of vanities” (Eccl 1:2), “Song of songs” (Song of Songs 1:1), “king of kings” (Ezra 7:12), etc.
In other words, “This is a really important god” or “This is a really big song” or “This is a really holy object…”
How holy is it? It is so holy that if you come too close and try to touch it, then the skin will melt off your face, like that Nazi in the movie.
Remember that post I wrote a couple of days ago about the Grand Inquisitor and his tripartite recipe for controlling the masses, as he explained his formula to Jesus Christ: Miracle, Mystery and Authority. Of which the greatest of these, the Kodesh HaKodeshim, is Authority, in the form of raw power, when it becomes absolutely necessary to reveal a glimpse of the whip. At its heart, once you get close enough, Authority starts looking less Holy, less fiery-Awesome, and more … well, Banal. The Banality of those who have the power to zip-tie your hands behind your back and crush your skull into the pavement.
“Only he who is pure of heart…”
Of course, we all understand where the actual Holy of Holies sits, and why the campus bigwigs defend it with their last breath: It’s the Countinghouse. That’s where the money is collected and counted. The students sealed their own fate when they demanded that the Universities divest their endowments from the genocidal state of Israel. Divesting from Israel is one and the same as divesting from the American Military-Industrial Complex. American universities, especially the Ivy League colleges, are a brick in the very foundation, the very heart, of the War State. They collect their exorbitant tuitions and funnel the money, by one means or another, to Raytheon and Boeing, and the rest of the Military-Industrial Complex, with every Congressman taking his cut. The state of Israel is a vital link in that chain of money-laundering. The Genocide is part of the machinery. The killing machine must continue to grind on without interruption.
Glory to the students for caring, even if they don’t fully understand how the system works. For those who dismiss these students as pampered, privileged elites (and some of them do, indeed, come from privilege; how else could they afford that tuition?), I think Max Blumenthal successfully countered that critique in one of his podcasts. Max pointed out that the student protesters of the Vietnam War era had a dog in the fight: They (the boys at least) were threatened by the draft. They didn’t want to fight, so they needed the war to end. Thus putting a question mark (or asterisk*) next to their motives. Today’s campus protesters have no dog in the fight, no skin in the game, and nothing to prove: They are threatened by nothing, they have absolutely no motive to risk their careers (or their physical bodies) for this cause, except only the purest of motives.
I can’t believe I am promoting a Democracy Now segment, but this is a very good coverage featuring student reporters from UCLA. Whose students had to come face to face with that butt-cheek of the establishment known as the Zionist mob:
When Is Doxing Okay?
Normally I am opposed to doxing. But these are not normal times. This piece from the LA Times recounts how UCLA students had to become amateur sleuths, in order to figure out the identities of those brutes who attacked them. Like I said, these kids are smart, that’s how they got into top-notch schools, they know that the police are not going to investigate; quite the contrary, the police most likely were in collusion with the Zionist gangs. Therefore, using the tools that they know best, social media, the students set about to unmask the criminals themselves.
Our era may go down in history as one in which “amateurs” had to take over the jobs that are supposed to be done by professionals. Be it bloggers instead of reporters, or students instead of detectives. It’s an unfortunate phenomenon, but very necessary, taking into account that every single blinking institution of our society has been corrupted by the Money-Counters and those who serve them.
Awful Avalanche 
Superb.
The milk of human kindness shown by hubby was abhorrent to Lady MacBeth. Compassion for others, the ability to imagine the plight of others and to be in their shoes, yes, fundamental altruism we all hope to encounter from others when we’re in dire straits — none of it matters to the exemplars of the Brass Ring cult. Their dictum: Screw ’em, we’ll show ’em who’s Boss! That is how our lords and masters view the serfs, peons and proles. The masses to whom doing a good deed comes naturally from a sense of community solidarity or even mere friendship.
For this system of the overlords to “work”, there has to be a legion of thugs and goons perfectly at ease to physically beat the tar out of rebelling proles, maybe even kill them to get the point across — do as we say, or else. Fanatical police, (national guardsmen also in the US), private companies like Pinkerton’s and assorted criminal fellow travellers. People who give not one shit about anyone else, so long as they’re all right, Jack. Mercenaries with no conscience. The dross of society harnessed when “necessary” to keep the masses down by force.
Essentially, we are ruled by socio- and psychopaths, conmen, and always have been. To them, no future exists unless they are certain they will be in charge, because the future is tomorrow and the continuous rebellion of low and occasional high intensity is now.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Most of the time (in “normal” times) the hand is gloved, and the whip is kept just out of sight. But the moment somebody approaches too close to the Holy of Holies, or dares to bend down and touch that Third Rail – BAM!
Orwell got it just right in his novel “Animal Farm” when he showed how the new pig-ruler recruited dogs to carry out whatever violence he needed to inflict upon the dissenters. These dogs are often the scum of the earth in any society and are willing (nay, eager) to inflict violence, pain, and suffering on their fellow human beings.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Max is wrong, during the Vietnam war students had automatic draft deferments. The protests weren’t spurred by fear of being killed in the war but by disgust at the carnage. In my own small university city a non-violent protest was held inside the main administration building on campus against Dow chemical company, the producer of Agent Orange and napalm, which was funding research on campus.
The protesters were shocked when the liberal bigwigs called in the police to clear the building and the cops entered swinging clubs and cracking skulls. As the cops drove the protesters out of the building other students who were on their way between classes were also beaten and then tear gassed. When the cops get their blood up everyone can be a target.
Thus thousands of middle class young people were radicalized inside the space of a hour. The campus didn’t return to peace until eight years later.
The corporate media as usual disgraces itself at every opportunity. I flash back to 1964 when I realized for the first time that things weren’t as they were portrayed in the media. A photo appeared in my local rag of a newspaper showing cops in Philadelphia swinging clubs at small gathering of elderly priests and nuns who were holding a prayer vigil for peace. The headline read “Antiwar Protest Turns Violent“. Nothing changes with these simple minded, lying pieces of excrement.
History does seem to repeat itself, as will be evident when the Democrats meet at their convention in Chicago to give their corrupt, senile war-monger of a President the stamp of approval. Think 1968. You ain’t seen nothing yet.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hah..hah..very funny satire…the key to good satire is to sound genuine and you nailed that part.
Every single male Viet Nam war protester I have known throughout the years has turned into a dogmatic war supporter now that their personal danger has passed. That includes my two older brothers who used faked medical records rather than face exile or imprisonment. I was there at the 1968 protests…I am sure there was a tiny..tiny..tiny minority that were altruistically inclined but, in conversation after conversation I met none, just guys who wanted to score weed and get laid. None of the guys I met talked about social justice, the brutality of the war, the girls did but, not the guys. If the guys were concerned about any social issue it was their low/lowish draft number.
One has only to look at Bill and Hillary Clinton to follow the arc of the “anti-war-movement”…anti-war when Bill faced the draft, virulently pro-war when in power….
—————————————
“At the outbreak of the Vietnam War, Harvard students were safe from the draft. College undergraduate and graduate students were automatically awarded draft status 2-S–deferment for postsecondary education–and could not be forced to serve. For those opposed to the war, it was a get-out-of-jail-free card.
In 1965, that changed.
The war in Vietnam was escalating, and the U.S. army found itself in need of more recruits…to meet these demands, the U.S. military began to draw from a new pool: college men. These thousands weren’t selected at random. Instead, the Selective Service System (SSS) instituted a system of academic evaluation…Undergraduates with a high class rank, or a test score above a certain cutoff, were draft-exempt. Everyone else could be sent to the front.
“At that point, things changed,” recalls Timothy K. Wright a Harvard graduate student “if you had a low number–even if you were in college–you had to show up.”
.Initially, Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) had lacked a strong anti-draft program. Its membership had been draft-exempt until 1965. This changed after the erosion of the 2-S deferment. Galvanized by this new vulnerability and seeking to consolidate its place as the leading anti-war organization in the country, SDS staged a national protest against the exam!
Other Harvard students were reluctant to protest the Vietnam exam…under a system based on a national test, they were competing with students from across the nation. For Harvard students, the Vietnam exam offered a distinct advantage in the competition for draft deferrals.”
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2016/5/23/lbj-wants-your-gpa/
———————
Self-interest was the motive for 99% of male “protesters” pure undiluted nihilism, nothing more…once the draft disappeared the “working class found itself “concern over war” evaporated…and here we are and so it goes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I hate the cut and paste on wp, the last line should have read:
Self-interest was the motive for 99% of male “protesters” pure undiluted nihilism, nothing more…once the draft disappeared “concern over war” evaporated…and here we are and so it goes.
LikeLike
I saw Norman Finkelstein in a vid last night discussing Israeli opinion polls. I was very shocked and Norman Finkelstein was also shocked at the numbers. Last I heard support for the genocidal brutality displayed by the IDF in Gaza had ~80% support among Israelis. Norman Finkelstein reports that number now is north of 98%.
Norman Finkelstein opined that in comparing those numbers with the popularity of Nazi Germany’s extermination campaign, the deduced numbers appeared very unfavorable to Israel. At most, the Nazis garnered 80% support and that was in arguably the most coercive environment known to man, the Israelis have no such excuse. We do know factually that much of the Nazi extermination campaign was secretive..unlike the Israeli campaign which is openly touted.
Never Again has become just another sarcastic remark to tossed when one means the very opposite thing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
darn it !!! this should have been it’s own comment, not a reply to a comment…ugh…..
LikeLike
At most, the Nazis garnered 80% support
Maybe that was a number just before they invaded Poland. The last election the “won” with about 42%. They used the years before the war began to actually improve the lively hood of the German population, so I guess there was likely a massive an upswing in support.
However, the years up to 1939 were also marked with suppression of unions, all critical political parties and the elimination both figuratively and actually of journalists, satirists and any newspaper not following the party line.
I therefore have some doubt that actual support would have even reached 80% support, despite all the economic improvements.
LikeLike
Wouldn’t argue the point, “deduced numbers” means we don’t know for certain..still, the point stands, Israel has a higher percentage of genocide supporters than Nazi Germany ever did which is, remarkable.
LikeLike
I haven’t seen that photo, was Finkelstein arrested?
LikeLike
I think that’s an old photo Y
LikeLike
You don’t know what you’re talking about. As long as a student stayed in school you were draft exempt, regardless of their grades as long as they didn’t flunk out. I am 74 years old. I was there. I lived it. It was a common slander to accuse college students who protested of only wanting to avoid serving. Once a myth is perpetrated it seems to live on forever.
There were plenty of other college aged non-students who protested because they didn’t want to go to war. God bless them. Fighting in imperialist wars isn’t patriotic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I applaud you for your activism, Gareth. I didn’t mean to imply that all of the anti-Vietnam protesters were self-indulgent or only cared about being drafted. It’s just become a common meme now that the pro-Palestinian protesters have no extra baggage and nothing to prove. And this is their defense against the nasties who accuse them of being privileged.
I think that both generations of protesters should be celebrated, 56 years apart!
LikeLike
You seek to ennoble your [self-serving]* behavior while you denigrate what I saw and heard with my very own eyes and ears…fine, have at it, doesn’t bother me in the least. However, the truth of my statements stand.
Even the most casual observer will note that you did nothing to refute the story cited above? And that story was self-incriminating, which was why I chose it** because, that’s hardly a normal practice amongst liars…yes? Then too, you did not attempt to refute the very public and documented lives of the Clinton’s which…engaged in exactly the behavior I described, anti-war when very convenient then, pro-war when the personal threat was removed.
What the heck…maybe you’re right? Maybe it is a vast conspiracy comprising millions of unrelated people with no establishment links? Yeah..yeah that’s it, I’m sure a court of law, against all the evidence, would buy your story…with the right attorney, the right judge, with the right jury and the right venue. You know, the stuff social privilege buys. So now that we’re in accord, let’s do a little kumbayaing…shall we?
You, like Dick Cheney, dodged the draft for the most honorable reasons. Check. That accepted, you do have to acknowledge…for every man who dodged the draft another man was sent in his place…another man was forced to do your duty, to carry your burden…yes?
*Unless you went to prison, you avoided risk, made money, career advancement…”you had better things to do” as your fellow traveler Dick Cheney said.
**Among thousands of individual postings with similar 1st hand observations
LikeLike
Oh c’mon, S, please calm down. What do the Clintons have to do with any of this? They are just one corrupt couple, you can’t pin them on other people who took a different path, that’s not fair.
LikeLike
Likewise, using Cheney as an example. You’re mixing everyone together in one pot, and that’s just not fair!
LikeLike
In my first reply to Garth’s generalized apologia* for all 1960’s draft-dodging protesters, I allowed for the rare exception when I said:
“I am sure there was a tiny..tiny..tiny minority that were altruistically inclined”
Indeed, the first time he tried to sell the “Draft-dodgers had only the purest of motives” story two months back I noted that the original protesters against the war that I observed, [circa 1964-early 1965], where indeed genuinely anti-war. They weren’t students either, they were mostly older church-folk, they were in Sunday clothes and they were protesting on Saturday so the were workers. In that group, outside of an occasional young child in tow, I never saw a young person, 9-24 years-old in their well ordered crowd.
And I note for the record, Mayor Daley’s Chicago Police showed the utmost deference to the protesters, only showing police authority when some were shuffled off the sidewalk curb and they were gently reminded. They were the true anti-war crowd and after 1965-66, I never witnessed their street presence again, as the draft-age anti-war crowd would dominate the streets and media.
As you can see with your own eyes today, instead of war protests for DC’s war in Ukrainia, we see flags of support. Granted, most of those flags have been sheepishly taken down but, not from a change of heart, rather from the embarrassment of having been wrong about the eventual outcome. So where are these ’60’s “pure-of-heart” draft-dodgers…hmmm…all dead?
*[Which contained disinformation about student deferments which I counter with a citation that refuted the deception]
LikeLike
Well, maybe there is something in between “self-serving” and “altruistic”. People could be scared of the draft, but also oppose the war on moral grounds.
Not every student protester in the 1960’s turned out to be a Clinton, not everybody turned out to be a Cheney. I have read Gareth’s comments, and it doesn’t seem to me that he turned into a Clinton or Cheney. He protested against a vicious imperialist war back in the day, and I think he should be given credit for that. Because he was on the right side of history. I read your comment to him as pretty much just attacking him, and I don’t think that’s fair. To quote yourself:
“You, like Dick Cheney, dodged the draft for the most honorable reasons. Check. That accepted, you do have to acknowledge…for every man who dodged the draft another man was sent in his place…another man was forced to do your duty, to carry your burden…yes?
*Unless you went to prison, you avoided risk, made money, career advancement…”you had better things to do” as your fellow traveler Dick Cheney said.”
Again, you sound very angry, and I don’t think you are being fair. You are basically accusing Gareth, one of my valued readers, of shirking his duty, making money, advancing his career, and being exactly like Dick Cheney!
LikeLike
Well, the proof is in the pudding, where have those protesters gone?
When Cheney started an illegal war against Iraq, the were some sizable short-lived protests that were sponsored by some in the Democratic Party but, these were tiny/short-lived compared to the protests when the draft was around. Remember, the vast majority of the Democratic party supported the Iraq invasion now that the true burden of war falls solely on the working class…it’s a “no-brainer”. Conversely, when Clinton, Obama & Biden started their illegal wars against Serbia, Libya, Syria and Russia, there were no protests to speak of, just flag waving by Democratic “left/liberals”. Indeed, anybody who opposed these wars started by Democratic Presidents was promptly labeled un-American and canceled by American “left/liberals”. BTW, to me, the American left/liberals crowd is little more than a very bad joke, a group whose leaders are/were, until they age out, the draft-dodging crowd.
Again, the proof is in the pudding…
Garth predicts that the anti-war protests against Crimean-War 2.0 at the Democratic Convention in 2024 will dwarf 1968’s when he said: “[history will repeat itself]…when the Democrats meet at their convention in Chicago…Think 1968. You ain’t seen nothing yet”. We’ll see if his contention that the anti-war movement was not overwhelmingly driven by upwardly-mobile men* wanting to dodge the draft. Even with a country almost twice the population that it was back then, I very much doubt will see anywhere near the swarm of 250,000-350,000 demonstrators that camped out in Chicago to protest the draft back in 1968.
I’ve had to correct myself on this board for being wrong about this or that; we’ll see if Garth comes back to admit he was wrong when his contention is disproved by the appearance of a tiny handful of anti-war protesters at the 2024 Democratic convention in Chicago. This a very clear test of his conjecture that, an overwhelming percentage of the male protesters in 1968 were genuinely anti-war and were not largely driven by draft concerns.
*In 1968, a much bigger portion of the population than today…thanks to the “Chicago-School” of economics.
LikeLike
S, these are all good points, and I think this is proper debating instead of just attacking Gareth and his motives. Personally, I think that Gareth is a good person who has good motives. Let us just stipulate that everybody has good motives, and everybody can sometimes be wrong about something without having to be compared to demons like Clinton or Cheney.
And, by the way, if I read Gareth correctly, the protesters at the 2024 convention will not be fired up by the Crimean War, but rather by the Gaza genocide. Well, we’ll see what happens. The police may ensure, in advance, that absolutely nothing happens. America is a lot more totalitarian now than it ever was in 1968!
LikeLike
And the end result of those anti-Vietnam, anti-draft demos?
Milton Freidman’s all volunteer army, 1973.
Nice one, M.I.C.
LikeLike
Bingo! It was a brilliant solution to a tricky problem. And set the stage for all the imperial wars to come, which nobody bothered to protest! (or, if they did, it didn’t really matter, government and MIC could just shrug it off, since they had all the cannon fodder they needed).
LikeLike
I can’t believe I am promoting a Democracy Now
That channel has its moments, not when it comes to Russia and its “unprovoked invasion™” in Ukraine.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So, why they dipshit on Russia? Another case of TDS? (Trump Derangement Syndrome)
LikeLike
Definetely anti Trump and pro Jan 6 insurgents prosecutions
Not that Trup would change anything, he is still part of the established power structure, and utterly pro Israel.
LikeLike
If these Liberals support the Jan 6 prosecutions, then they are dumber as shit. It’s the old “first they came for the Trump supporters…” shtick.
LikeLike
Outstanding post Yalenis.
I initially thought that students complaining about endowment investments was the least effective thing a student could possibly do! It certainly doesn’t help Gaza today.
I see it differently now. Thank you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, countrumford. I think the protesting students have been able to look ahead into the future and see where they can strike Israel where it hurts the most. But you’re right, sadly this will not save the Gazans from their short-term fate.
LikeLike
The endowments are provided because the institution has demonstrated that it is reliable in its ideological distinction, and will properly contribute to the approved causes. If the institution wavers, future endowments will not occur, and the institution will have to shed layers of administrative “power” like New Yorkers ditching winter gear whilst deplaning in Aruba.
In other words, the students were demanding institutional suicide and the reaction followed.
It’s a very common model for capturing institutions of all kinds.
Side note/minor correction: the “holy of holies” was not the Ark itself, but the space that was set up to contain it and a few other ceremonial objects, and was to be entered only by the High Priest, only in his specific garb, and only a few times a year to do very specific things.
Think, if you will, of the Ark and its contents as being highly radioactive and wrapped in protective layers of materials and space.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Perceptive comment about the endowments. If I am not mistaken, the Columbia Prez herself mentioned government funding and research grants, all of that would be put on the line if Divestment from Israel were to ensue. Hence, the Trustees literally cannot divest without, like you say, committing institutional suicide. And this is exactly how the system works.
Thanks for the correction about the Ark and its location. I remembered from Sunday School that passage where the Ark was actually on the move and some poor shlub named Uzzah got smited for touching it (II Samuel chapter 6):
Again, David gathered together all the chosen men of Israel, thirty thousand. And David arose, and went with all the people that were with him from Baale of Judah, to bring up from thence the ark of God, whose name is called by the name of the LORD of hosts that dwelleth between the cherubims. And they set the ark of God upon a new cart, and brought it out of the house of Abinadab that was in Gibeah: and Uzzah and Ahio, the sons of Abinadab, drave the new cart. And they brought it out of the house of Abinadab which was at Gibeah, accompanying the ark of God: and Ahio went before the ark. And David and all the house of Israel played before the LORD on all manner of instruments made of fir wood, even on harps, and on psalteries, and on timbrels, and on cornets, and on cymbals.
And when they came to Nachon’s threshingfloor, Uzzah put forth his hand to the ark of God, and took hold of it; for the oxen shook it. And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error; and there he died by the ark of God.
I mean, this is so unfair. Uzzah was just trying to help. The oxen were the ones really to blame. If Uzzah had not put out his hand to steady the Ark, it would have fallen crashing to the threshingfloor and probably broke up into pieces!
LikeLike
Yeah I felt/feel sorry for Uzzah as well–and so did David, who was so terrified of burden he left it some guy’s house (nevermind how the chap and his kids felt) for three months.
The point, as I understand it, of that particular episode was re-affirming the seriousness of the Ark after it had been trotted out as a talisman in battle, lost, and gone through an apparently well-known series of supernaturally-attributed events up to and including divine direction and protection.
So Uzzah not trusting that Yahweh would keep his Ark intact was the problem.
But I still feel for Uzzah. He probably had wicked reflexes from raising kids around fires and farming implements.
LikeLike
Very well said. We shall raise a toast to Uzzah and his super-quick but misplaced reflexes!
The other major take-away from this passage is that David and his crew had all the musical instruments available, not to mention the dancing skills, to be a travelling Broadway show!
LikeLike
I dunno about the Vietnam war, but I do remember lots of people wearing peace buttons and participating in peace marches in the 80s. Those I know who are still alive have all become pro-EU, pro-US, pro-Ukraine and pro-war. If being anti-war was a cool thing back then, it was quickly forgotten.
That said, you can do the right thing even if you have selfish motives. Just like I think the peace marches could be a good thing (Scott Ritter tries to organize new ones!) I think refusing to participate in waging war against countries half way around the globe is a good thing.
In the US it’s the Zionists who fund the universities while in Europe it’s the Wahhabis. What the UCLA students’ motives are, I don’t know, but protesting genocide is always the right thing to do.
LikeLike
People change over time. Students and intellectuals are an especially volatile group. They could be a Marxist today, and then morph into a fascist 10 years from now. When they grow up and get jobs, many of them become part of the Establishment. Rebels become conformists.
This is why real Marxists, when organizing within the student movements, always insisted that the students must only be an auxiliary force, the true vanguard would have to be actual workers, the industrial proletariat. You could never accomplish an actual social revolution with just students, they are not a proper base.
LikeLike
Perhaps a lot of people simply do what other people are doing. And, yes, a lot of people join organisations when they are young to have sex and smoke dope. But you can have sex and smoke dope without joining organisations which are trying to save the world from evil genocidal psychopaths. Plus the people you have sex with and share joints with often teach you things you didn’t know before (and not only about the kama sutra and where to score the finest ganja).
It’s fair to say that not everybody involved in politics is altruistic. But I’d say that the proportion of altruistic people involved in protests is far higher than in regular political activities. Admittedly altruism is hard to sustain unless you have some sort of hard ideology backing it. When my organisation was first banned from taking any action in mid-1986, and then banned altogether in early 1988, some people left. Others stayed despite the repression and tried to set up alternative organisations.
Very often repression is counterproductive because you weed out the people who aren’t really committed and end up with a hard core of people who are dedicated to the cause. I suspect that’s what happened in the Donbass after the Ukrainian government decided to send in the army in 2014.
LikeLike
Perceptive point, thanks.
LikeLike
yalensis, I think there’s more … or perhaps less … to the student protesters than you realize. Mind you, nothing you’ve written is specifically wrong. But the protests shouldn’t be taken at face value as ‘pro-Hamas’ (per US right-wing media) or ‘anti-Israel / pro-Palestinian’ (state-controlled corporate media).
A few posts ago you noted reports that Soros’ Tides Foundation et al were funding the protests, and urged them to ‘divest.’ This is extremely confusing, because Soros is at the very least a crypto-Zionist, a financier and agent of Washington’s notorious ‘rules-based order.’ He’s a pillar of the neolib/neocon Zionist establishment. He’s sworn enemy of Russia, of Iran, its proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah (in other words, an enemy of the Resistance Axis). Soros’ proxies, Democrat politicians and outfits like the Anti-Defamation League, routinely attack anyone who criticizes him, on any grounds, as an ‘anti-Semite.’
The real story is the paradox of Soros funding the protests. This has largely been ignored (except by Politico). Most Zionists and anti-Zionists in US media have shrugged it off, and followed their kneejerk storyline: The right-wingers mock the students for their pathetic pseudo-revolutionary cosplay. They’re having a field day with the kids’ demands for take-out food delivery and luxury items (‘Aquaphor, but not sunscreen!’ was the most memorable.) They also exaggerate the mostly imaginary ‘threat’ to the ‘safety’ of ‘Jewish students.’ To the extent there’s hostility toward Jews qua Jews, I expect it’s strictly toward loudmouthed well-known Zionists: With a name like King-Slutzky, the odds of that ‘keffiyeh Karen’ being Jewish asymptotically approach 100%. The corporate media initially covered the protesters more sympathetically but seem suddenly to have tired of them too.
The explanation, I think, is simple. Last week – right around the time Columbia U called in the NYPD and the Zionist vigilantes attacked the UCLA encampment – the US House of Reps passed a bill redefining ‘anti-semitism’ so broadly as to include any substantive criticism of the Israeli government, by deferring to definitions and examples provided by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance. At IHRA, we learn that the legislation also censors whole passsages of the Bible including the entire Passion story, because we aren’t allowed to point out that the Jews killed Jesus anymore.
So Soros, by financing ‘pro-Palestinian’ protests (led, in part, by typically insufferable progressive American Jews) created a big showy pretext for a large bipartisan majority of US lawmakers to censor the Bible and make it illegal to criticize Zionism or Zionist war crimes … indeed, probably even to use terms like ‘typically insufferable … American Jews.’ Mission accomplished. Money well spent. Now it’s the Senate’s and White House’s turn to rubber-stamp it.
It may get challenged in court, where just like everything else in America these days, you get what you pay for. Soros can buy more ‘justice’ than almost anyone.
LikeLike
Thank you for this well-researched and well-reasoned argument, John!
It sounds very plausible and offers an explanation to the rather puzzling phenomenon of Soros helping to fund the protests. The Lord knows I couldn’t figure it out. It all sounds rather devious, like somebody playing 5D chess, but it makes sense, because “Devious” is Soros’ middle name!
Meanwhile, I wouldn’t put it past the Senate to pass this ridiculous law that essentially nullifies the First Amendment.
I don’t remember if I posted this Judge Nap vid, but here it is, the Judge offers a rather good tutorial on the First Amendment, Natural Law, and why he is sure that the very first court, even a low court, will strike down this silly law the first time it is challenged. Unfortunately, the way the American system works, in order for the law to be struck down, there must first be a “martyr” who suffers persecution at the hands of this law. It’s similar to the way Civil Rights legislation was passed, and Jim Crow laws were struck down in the 1960’s: Savvy political organizers like Dr. King and Rosa Parks realized they needed to create test cases with willing guinea pigs. I wonder who will volunteer this time around to criticize Israel, be thrown in jail for it, and then challenge their detention in the courts?
LikeLiked by 1 person