21a July 2000

First of all, I don't believe as 99% of the blight-wing that there's a millennial cabal of old mummies with long beards plotting to destroy me, and that to be the exclusive source for all my ailments. I recently read that 40,000 people control 50% of the world's riches. That, to me, is a much more compelling information than a secret tract from a supposedly clandestine meeting which, if it had had that quality, and acknowledging the Jew's supposed effectivity in achieving their plans, would have remained CONFIDENTIAL.

That doesn't refute the fact that Jews inevitably align themselves with decadent movements and forces, be it the kitschy crap that passes for "art" today, the multicultural zoos modelled on the Star Wars bar room scene or parasitic forms of capitalism such as Israel's current system of exploitation and excluding their cousin Arabs, not one iota different from what those "evil" Afrikaners did to the blacks until 1994. Regardless, I don't expect international commerce sanctions or the coming of a democratic messiah such as the terrorist Mandela, as a solution for the problem. This, because the Jewish lobby in the world's only powerful nation is in control of the situation.

As for Mr. Mathis claims, I would like to talk about the specially outlandish one about how:

"... the whole "Palestinian problem" could have been avoided had the Mufti of Jerusalem, speaking for all Palestinians (whether Muslim or not) had accepted the U.N. partition of Palestine in 1947 and not rejected it. Smart Arabs, like Morocco's then-crown prince Hassan II knew this and begged his fellow Arab League members to accept and recognize Israel. Intransigence was instead the reaction of the Arab world, and it was met with the same by Israel. Can you honestly blame them?"

If that's not a typically Jewish cop out of justifying misbehavior, I don't know what is. So because the Arabs didn't accept an arbitrary partition and the fact that Great Britain, the US and the UN chose to solve a historical problem at their expense is a reason to charge THEM with responsibility for the atrocities that the Israeli government sustainedly commits against the Palestines? Let me refresh your memory a bit with some real history and not Mathis' revisionism.

The existence of the Hebrew tribe in Palestine, the covenant between their tribal god, Yahweh, and Abraham, and the periods of Hebrew kingdoms form the Biblical and historical foundation for the Jewish claim to Palestine.

Chief among the advocates of Jewish nationalism, or Zionism, was Theodor Herzl, who sought the backing of major European powers for his cause. This was achieved by the Zionists in 1917 when the British government called for the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Britain had its own strategic interests in mind in setting up a friendly presence in the region, but after the First World War, when the British gained a mandate to administer Palestine, they found themselves increasingly hard-pressed to control the forces they had set in motion. For one thing, they also had made written promises regarding independence for the Arabs. For another, increasing Jewish immigration, facilitated by Zionist groups, was being opposed by and reinforcing the nationalist sentiments of Palestinian Arabs, who had lived in the land for generations.

Zionist purchases of land from absentee landowners (the same they charge against the German state because of the Nazis), displacement of Palestinian peasants, and policies hiring against Palestinian labor were among the reasons for the increased tension and violence that culminated in the Arab revolt of 1936-39, which the British crushed. Do you expect a leader of its people, such as the Mufti, to accept this abuses sheepishly?

After WWII, unable to control the situation, Britain gave the problem to the newly formed United Nations, which voted to create two states in Palestine. The partition plan, which gave 57% of the territory to the Jews (who owned only 7% of the land and made up just 35% of the population), was rejected by the Palestinians accordingly, and cheered by the Zionists (please bear in mind that I don't call anyone I don't happen to like a "Zionist" but only the extremist Jews, unlike some "patriot" Conan the Barbarian wannabes).

In May 1948 Israel proclaimed its spurious birth and, in defeating the invading Arab armies, extended its control to 78% of Palestine. In the 1967 Six Day War, Israel captured what remained: East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. UN resolutions 242 and 338 called for Israel to withdraw. This spineless UN "recommendations" were supported by the US until the beginning of the 70s and Nixon's more pro-kosher policy towards Israel, mainly to have an ally in the region against the Soviets. Instead, Israel promoted settlements on them and annexed "Greater Jerusalem".

The current charade called "peace talks" are just negotiations between the incompetent Arafat (all the other PLO leaders have been vetoed), Israel and the US, which is to say Israel squared. They just intend to recover the 22% stolen in 1967, so it's not a measure of greatness from anyone.

To disregard all the looting and political backstabbing that has fueled the eternal Middle East problems (whose only value to the West lies in oil and not any Biblical fables) as the Arab's fault is a way too cheap form of avoiding responsibility. There's a book by non-Nazi, revisionist or disinformer and yes-Jew, Noam Chomsky, called "Fateful Triangle" that dissects the whole US-Israel vs Palestinians problem for what it is. It can be the political complement to Shahak's book on Jewish religion and a good work to demonstrate irrefutably their messianic delusions of grandeur.