What is the capital of Israyhell?

h  ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lou0pod9Was

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

The Wondering Who

I feel I shall enjoy every single page of Gilads new book… The following is a copy of Gilads site (in case it gets attacked) by You Know Who.

The Wandering Who is Out This Week

Monday, October 3, 2011 at 2:12PM Gilad Atzmon

In the last weeks my new book The Wandering Who has received incredible  support from some of the most inspiring people around (see below). It is no secret that some very forceful elements have been investing a lot of effort trying to stop the book and its message. So far, they have failed.

You can now order Gilad Atzmon’s New Book on Amazon.com  or Amazon.co.uk

A new short video about the book:

http://youtu.be/BFjejrGxFY4

Your support is much appreciated..

Endorsements:

“Gilad Atzmon decided to open Pandora’s Box, and ignite a debate that has been frustratingly dormant for too long. His experiences are most authentic, views are hard-hitting, and, at times, provocative. It must be read and discussed.”  Ramzy Baroud,  Palestine Chronicle

“A transformative story told with unflinching integrity that all (especially Jews) who care about real peace, as well as their own identity, should not only read, but reflect upon and discuss widely.” Professor Richard Falk

‘Essential to an understanding of Jewish identity politics and the role they play on the world stage.’ Professor John J. Mearsheimer 

“Atzmon’s insight into the organism created by the Zionist movement is explosive.” Professor William A. Cook

“A pioneering work that deserves to be read and Gilad Atzmon is brave to write this book!” Dr. Samir Abed-Rabbo

“Gilad’s escape from spiritual claustrophobia towards a free and open humanitarianism is fearless” Robert Wyatt

“In his inimitable deadpan style, Atzmon identifies the abscess in the Jewish wisdom tooth – exilic tribalism – and pulls it out. Ouch!” Eric Walberg, Al Aharam Weekly

“It is more than an academic exercise. It is a revelation!” Lauren Booth, Press TV

“A brilliant analysis that makes what appear to be contradictions in Jewish identity based political behavior not only comprehensible but predictable.” Jeff Blankfort

“Atzmon has the courage – so profoundly lacking among Western intellectuals” Professor James Petras

“Having known Gilad for 25 years, I read the book in English, I heard it in Hebrew and reflected on it in Arabic. Gilad Atzmon is astonishingly courageous” Dr. Makram Khoury-Machool

“Gilad Atzmon is someone who encompasses what it means to be an intellectual.” Kim Petersen, Dissident Voice

“Gilad Atzmon is the Moses of our time, calling all of us out of the Egypt of our boneheaded nationalisms and racialisms and exceptionalisms and chosen-people-isms toward some form of humanistic universalism.”  Dr. Kevin Barrett

“Perhaps only a musician could have written this sensitive, perceptive lament over how so many Jews, believing themselves to be doing ‘what is good for the Jews,’ have managed to carve the heart out of the Palestinian nation and make this tragedy look like the natural order of things.” Kathleen  Christison

“Gilad’s The Wandering Who? would have been a welcome delight to Albert Einstein just as it will be the irritating nemesis for Abe Foxman ideologues.” Dr. Paul Balles 

“A book that will shake up a few people….” Gordon Duff

“Engaging, provocative and persuasive.’ Jeff Gates

“When you finish reading this book, you may likely as well see a different face in the mirror.” Professor Garrison Fewell

“The Wandering Who deconstructs the unique political identity that shapes the reality of the Jewish Nation and the crimes committed in its name. As a non-Jew, I found it illuminating!” Sameh Habeeb, Palestine Telegraph

“The Last Jewish Prophet”  Professor William T. Hathaway

“Atzmon is an iconoclast.” Dr.  Paul Larudee

“A brilliant, courageous study as well as critical reflection on Jewish ethnocentrism” Rainlore’s World of Music

“Like all truth tellers of any merit Atzmon can expect the wrath of the powers that be and their minions as a reward for what he is exposing.   People like Atzmon will have played a vital role in saving us from ourselves if indeed we do manage to survive.  Love and respect to my brother Gilad Atzmon.” Ken O’Keefe

“The magical and yet extremely subtle gift that Gilad Atzmon offers through his personal journeys in The Wandering Who? is the wisdom of disillusionment.” Shahram Vahdany, MWC News

“Atzmon’s writing respects no sacred cows. His wit is biting, his insight and logic compelling.” Richard A. Siegel

“Sometimes a brash, abrasive provocateur is what is required as a catalyst for genuine debate.” Sunny Singh

“This is a very perceptive and instructive book” Roy Ratcliffe

Book Launch: A Panel Discussion on ‘Jewish Identity Politics’

Monday, 10^th October, 2011, 7:30 pm

Resource for London, 356 Holloway Road, London N7 6PA

http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=116757888430540

Zero Books invites you to a panel discussion on “Jewish Identity Politics” to launch Gilad Atzmon’s important new book The Wandering Who.

For more info click here.

For more information about Gilad’s tour (concerts & talks) click here.

 

Source:

7-7 Researcher Tom Secker – On the Edge

I’ve had some free time to catch up on some videos downloaded some time ago, and I’ve just finished watching a program called On the Edge with guest Tom Secker.

http://www.   youtube   .com/watch?v=ql59RPRL4v0

Tom, creator of the claimed 7/7: Seeds of Deconstruction, was recommended to the program by J7T, i.e. the July 7 truth campaign. J7T are a small group of people – and they can get extremely agitated when shitty Israyhell gets a mention, they have poo-pooed “Zionist” connections not so long after 7/7 despite today J7T claiming We don’t have a clue what happened that day – but if you’ll excuse the liberty: We are pretty sure Zionist Israyhell is not involved . It’s not that surprising that Tom was recommended by them because Tom pushes the same ambiguity that J7T do, but in a reasoned and respectable way devoid of non-sequiturs, diversions and/or false accusations.

Tom is asked about the report of the supposed shootings at Canary Wharf (CW).  He avoids discussion on that. Well, actually, he does and he doesn’t avoid discussion of that issue. He ‘discusses’ it in so far as he mentions it in terms of other non-CW events.

In the interview, (28:48 start) Tom is asked about “the question of who was shot at Canary Wharf ” Note: The host “alex:g” should have added “media reports of…”.

Tom says

28:59

“One of the various things that came out in the reporting on the day of 7/7, was this notion that there had been some kind of police operation at CW, and there was even this rumour that suicide bombers had been shot there by police marksman.” Now that may or may not have happened.”

29:19

“I’m dubious [about the reports] to be honest…”

“…there’s a lot of different rumours going around on 7/7…”

“..Again, it’s a possibility [the shootings], but it’s something we have to have more solid evidence to go on than simply a few media reports saying this way or that”.

Was that a discussion of the possible shootings?

It didn’t look like it to me. It appeared that Tom was trying to ascribe the ‘CW shootings’ to rumour. Fine, but there is no way he can say for certain the reports were actually a rumour. And immediately after this, the discussion moves onto the return tickets. Tom himself says there’s a contradiction here mentioning the governments narrative binging up ONE report in The Mirror about the ‘return tickets’. He then goes on to elaborate on the ‘problem’ talking about the tickets as factual. Now as far as I remember, I’ve read people claiming the CW ‘shootings’ were mentioned on TV and they appeared in one or more newspapers. Tom discusses this one lone report as if it is factual giving credence to The Mirror’s return tickets, but unevenly didn’t apply this to the more reported CW shootings.

You know what?

It doesn’t really matter. Tom’s an individual. He is free to make his own judgements on what he thinks is strong evidence and what he thinks is something to be avoided. He exercises this liberty here regarding the CW ‘shootings, and makes the personal call that it’s something he finds not productive to discuss. OK. That’s a reasonable position to adopt. People shouldn’t throw horrible slander and lies against him if he says something others don’t happen to agree with.

34:44

“Obviously I have a suspicion that 7/7 was some kind of black-op. Otherwise I wouldn’t have made that film”

Here we see J7T being uneven. They recommended Tom who openly admits he has suspicions (see also 2:31 later) , but J7T fiercely attack and repeatedly libel other who have suspicions, one summised because they are suspicions+Israyhell.

Tom goes on to warn (in an advisory capacity) that independently formulated alternative narratives ‘need to know what covert-op looks like’. This is curious. Who has proposed an alternative conspiratorial narrative and doesn’t know the history of black-ops? It seems likely to me that anyone concluding 7/7 is a black-op/false-flag, then they would almost certainly have read up on other things like the Reichstag fire, Gulf of Tonkin incident, Nero’s Rome etc. I have extreme doubts someone would compose a narrative of 7/7 with only knowledge of 7/7. Perhaps Tom was alluding to something else, because what he said here isn’t particularly logical.

Tom mentions ‘people have pushed the connection between 9/11 and 7/7 for  various reasons’ (???)… ” I wonder what reasons Tom knows of ?, anyway…

36:02

“…Particularly with the 7/7 story, what’s so obvious to me, is the number of red herrings there are {I’ve seen that line almost verbatim elsewhere}..Number of things that just been taken down a particular path and it’s then turned out to be untrue.

Well Tom, I seriously doubt you know of any ‘red-herrings in progress’ but it would be nice of you would share them. A other ‘truthers’ have asserted this red herring thing but of course don’t know of any red herrings in progress or have zero proof (other than a reasonable sense of suspicion). But it makes them look smart by pretending they do KNOW these red herrings. What’s more, by asserting red-herrings are part of the 7/7 narrative, Tom is really strengthening his own suspicions that 7/7 was a black-op’ as red-herrings are deliberate acts. And that’s ok. As a thinking human being, he has the perfect right to have those feelings. It would be wise to wonder who, why and how all ‘those’ red herrings are put in place.

Tom continues:

“and the CCTV is a great example of that. You mentioned the conspiracy files and what you there is they got Nick Kollerstrom (NK) who is one of the people who thinks 7/7 was an inside job, was a covert op, and he’d spent three years basically going around saying there is no CCTV from London…”

Excuse me Tom. While I’m not that up to speed with what exactly NK did in those three years, I suspect it was a lot more than ‘just going around saying’ words which perhaps conjure up some homeless man making wild suggestions. Perhaps this would be a bit more accurate(?): “He’d spent three years personally researching, interviewing, gathering evidence and wirting on the subject in the belief there was no CCTV from London – which given none was released for years, wasn’t such an unreasonable thing to do.”  – or “going around saying there is no CCTV from London” If you want to stick to Toms description.

“…those four guys weren’t even in london that day, and claiming that one frame we’d seen from Lution was a fake. So what did they do? They roll out CCTV from Luton showing a nice long stretch of action so, kind of proving that it’s authentic, I mean I suppose the whole thing could be faked, but taking it at face value, and then they show him CCTV of these four guys walking through Kings Cross and he’s flabbergasted, ‘cos he’s been rolled down a cerain path only for them to cut him off.”

Kind of proving it’s authentic? huh? Is it authentic or not? Tom himself later allows for the possiblity that it wasn’t authentic. So Tom, you should really have said perhaps “suggesting the the audience that it was authentic”. Tom again is taking something at face value, which is what NK did before the footage was released – i.e. at face value there wasn’t going to be any footage. And Tom does say various people had requested that exact footage. Tom is impaling himself on his own sword somewhat. To the best of my recollection, the Luton video DOES NOT show the alleged ‘4 bombers’. If you can make them out to me and prove the tape is genuine, then ok, your words make sense.

As for the single frame, MANY people inc some in J7 made statements suggesting the single still frame outside Luton train station was fake, what with bars going through bodies and strange leg dirextions and no distinguishable faces, or if you prefer Toms description again “[NK] claimed the photos were fake” – which by the way there isn’t any proof that they are not fakes!

Maybe Nick did make a boob on the CCTV in London thing. Like any serious investigation, the leading model can then under improvement to fit the known evidence. But of course to those ‘loving liberal’ truthers who hate NK and wouldn’t hesitate to fling muck at him [Nick suspects Israyhelli connections] would use that to dismiss everything NK has ever done or said re 7/7.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing isn’t it Tom. It’s not beyond the realm of possibility that what you find ‘strange’ will eventually be given a palusible explaination. Don’t worry, I’m sure J7T won’t hate you, after all, you don’t mention the “I” word. So readers will have to excuse me for thinking that it wasn’t unreasonable to think there was going to be no CCTV footage. I’d hazard a guess that this crossed almost everyone’s mind at some stage. (c.f. 9/11, pentagon, hotel camera)

The ambiguous approach does have it’s merits, but as I’ve pointed out a couple of times before, it itself is limiting. An alternative narrative based on the facts is inherently closer to the real truth than some amorphous ‘blurr all’ ambiguity. Of course, alternative narratives (subject to human prejudice and biases) can fall foul of information in the hands of people(government) who themselves have an interest in trying to de-rail truth seekers, should the govt be involved with the deliberate killing of civilians. That said, it is mightily peculiar that those in possession of such material (which independent researchers can only scratch and scrape for) can only deliver a narrative that is less plausible than those independent researchers.

It tirns out that Nick probably made a mistake going on a BBC program intent to scorn independent narratives (while glossing over the govt’s Swiss cheese narrative) and J7 didn’t do this to their credit (one wonders why the BBC didn’t take the liberty of picking up on J7’s alternative narratives anyhow). My guess is Nick though he could publicise the problems with the govt’s narrative and show people there was an alternate explanation. But still, we all make mistakes.

Note: If someone proposing a ‘shitty Israyhell’ connection of 7/7 had a name like “alex:g” I can imagine the stinking ridicule that would flow their way from some quarters. Such an “Israyhell’s involved” researcher would also have suspicions flung at him for appearing on the mainstream media.

This interview shows clearly the rank hypocrisy amongst some who call for the truth, oops, I mean the truth(which doesn’t involve Israyhell).

2:31

“When 7/7 happened I instantly felt that this was something that didn’t really didn’t add up, that what what we were being told probably wasn’t true.”

Well done Tom for being honest and humanly flawed like the rest of us and acting on feelings.  It matters not what points I make here. Your effort to advance the truth emerging from that day is applauded.

Tom based his documentary on what he said was:

“the reported facts, at least what it is we’ve been told what reports say the media has said”

{Don’t forget the CW shootings folks}

–

Finally, that Jaguar, surely that’s a deliberate plant. Surely! I can’t believe the police(?) pouring over that CCTV and scruitinising it for month upon month, would not have ‘seen’ the issue of the Jag.

And what do you know, A car which appreas to be a Jag AMAZINGLY appears what also amazingly looks like a blue micra parked in Luton train station, in a helpful “visual aid” for readers see: J7T picture contained in the post A Nissan Micra Tardis?

Here’s some more of Tom’s words:

“When 7/7 happened I instantly [my emphasis] felt that this was something that didn’t really didn’t add up, that what what we were being told probably wwasn’t true.”

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

États-Unis et Israyhell, zero point.

Here’s something to make the usual Israyhell apologists happy, not watch and then criticise.

Here’s a juicy conspiracy theory for you.

Updated

Statement: Unless we experience personal involvement, unfortunately we are hostage to what information others decide to reveal. End statement.

–

The official version of 9-11 is something only a moron would believe. Yes, there are many people who believe it, but there are many who don’t.

The number of people who didn’t buy 911 was deemed unacceptable, they posed a real danger to maintaining the belief the bulk morons held.

‘Unfortunately’, it’s quite difficult to pull off a false flag (FF), because to hood-wink an increasingly aware, discontent, sceptical and WWW empowered population, you simply must make (or synthesise) credible strings-of-involvement/culpability to those you wish to blame, i.e. people who really, had nothing to do with it.

Use of patsies/stooges is perhaps the most powerful and basic way to create these strings – be the patsies aware [via Radicalisation manipulation; =difficult] of what’s going to go down or not [engage them in a oover story; =much easier] of what they were really being asked to do.

And so an ‘effect multiplier’ idea was born to try and maximise success at pulling off a FF.

As part of your FF, you deliberately incorporate questionable issues into the initial event.
This has a number of advantages, only some of which are mentioned here.

1a) It muddies the waters disguising the real event of that day.

1b) People spend large amounts of time chasing these deliberate inconsistencies – some ending stranded in a field of ambiguity.

2) It allows you to create a ‘truther’ group to gain ‘trust’ amongst other would-be dangerous ‘truthers’, people who may actually uncover your can of worms.

Through your group, you can dribble information – via official channels – according to your requirements, and whether you set up your ‘truther’ group or not, you can achieve the same effect by cleverly laying the same decoy trail of crumbs that you’re pretty sure will be picked up and followed along the path you so desire.

In relation to 2), there’s probably times when you need to silence ‘truther competitors’ out of the way. This can be achieved in a number of ways, e.g. by making fake truther competition groups simply for the purpose of being knocked down – when necessary, hence raising the stature of your chosen (owned or guided) truther group.

You can also set up people whose character is questionable, get them to parrot some line (probably along with some of the truth mixed in with it) destroy their character and the truth they were actually saying {although this is dangerous, you don’t really want any truth to come out at all} is destroyed with them in the process. Kill the messenger to kill the message.

Overall, The most successful way to get away with a FF, is, after the event takes place, to continue to drip more false trails into the mix to hook even more people, ‘truthers’, into a false trail.

Also, as time rolls on, you have the option of destroying some of these false trails simultaneously with the REAL version of events of course – better still only <i>parts</i> of the REAL story!.

Few of the (already)few would notice REAL events of the FF being thrown in the bin, obscured by the adjacent other versions/elements speeding their way into the garbage bin.

So you don’t actually ‘fix’ the narrative. A narrative is necessary, and it pacifies most of the aforementioned believers, but the narrative itself is deliberately false to allow for this incredibly empowering FF management dynamic, while using the minimum number of people to keep the whole thing under wraps.

Most in the establishment will of course follow the official narrative, no matter what crap it is. the real trick lies with the non-official ‘truthers’ and is where attention is naturally focused.

Update: Oh, and on 7/7, I have to say, it seems the ‘truth’ movement is rather split along two lines: One where mention and question of Israyhells role in 7/7 gets a good venting, and the second, pro-Israyhell camp, that launches tricks, tactics and ad hominen attacks on those probing the Israyhelli line, or indeed, anyone else who has given criticism of those who genocided and stole their way into Palestine.

It’s also quite telling that these attacks are practically a one way street, and are hardly reciprocated by those putting  attention on Israyhell.

All these instances add up, and they will do so for a reason.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Seymour Hersh: Jewish Money Controls Presidential Candidates

h_ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4ZDabT6r3w

Now if certain people said “Jewish” money here, they’d get all the usual pig-muck thrown their way, but even if one was to caveat what Hersh said for him, that pig-muck would come ones way too because one simply posted Hersh saying what he did.

Mind magic.

It’s the bankers stupid!

But not those ‘those’ bankers – God forbid.

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Balls in a ballsless world

It is impossible to not comment on Ahmadinejad’s iron balls declaration that many around the world are suspicious that the 9-11 was an inside job. (I’m paraphrasing)

It was, of course.

The accumulation of all the evidence allows us to arrive at that decision. As it does regrding the crime of the war against Iraq.

It is noteable at who walked out… Largely ‘white-scum-nations’, you know, the centres of power that have brought untold misery to the good ordinary people of this planet for more centuries than I’d like to count, while having the chutzpah to calim they are the most righteous states that have ever been.

*puke*

The history of these obnoxious bastards lying, conducting black-ops/false-flags is undenyable, and the reaction of those devils who went along with these dasterdly events reveals perfectly that they have not the  slightest bit interest in the truth.

Daniel Ellsberg, David Shayler, Craig Murray, the leaker of the Collateral Damage video, etc etc etc… were all subject to to hostilities by the state when they pubically exposed the states can-of-worms. The same has (obviously) happening to Jaddie babes.

The walk-out Ahmadinejad got for pointing the spotlight on the crown jewels which these scum-states use for the lawlwss slaughter from Sept 2001 into the forseeable future, actually gives some vindication to what he said at the UN on behalf of millions across the world.He did the same thing about the other crown jewels… what some dubb the holohoax (or as Finklestein said of it: shoah business / holocaust industry).

According to the IBBC (Israyhelli British Broading Corporation), the delagates that walked out were the US, UK, all other EU states, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Costa Rica. Most of them being those scum-states which don’t give a bluebottles gonad about slaughtering millions.

In the age of lies, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

Well done President Ahmadinejad.

UPDATE:

–
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2010/09/201092417585294591.html

This is a dangerous game. Any UN ‘team’ will be studded with sabateurs, just like the original one was with that very slippery American Israyhelli Phillip Zlikow. So be careful Mahmood! You might get something that might thicken the muddy waters.

On a dad note: Marwan Bishara, an otherwise excellent journalist and intelligent man is acting like your commoner garden presstitute, saying of Ahmadinejad:

“So you can now say President Ahmadinejad is both a 9/11 denier and a Holocaust denier.” – source

Ridiculous!

Not to mention the fact Marwan is making the news here, tagging ‘value added’ properties onto the story, not reporting it or as journalists should do, challenge ahmadinejad on his claim and pick them apart. Marwan is an utter fool if he believes the 9-11 Commission Report. But hey, perhaps that’s why he’s precisely where he is.

Please note: In NONE of the Al Jazeera English reports is NO ONE including US citizens who agree with a new investigation is necessary, or wven those USans who believe their government did 9-11, or well known figures like the “(New)Jersey Girls”

In Their Own Words:

9/11 Press For Truth:

Al Jazeera English’s reportage here is certainly not to their credit. It is a very clear and display of operating firmly within the box of permitted dissent.

Shame.

–

–

–

 

–

–

–

–

Mark Dice and Invisible Empire – A New World Order Defined

I’ve finished watching Invisible Empire – A New World Order Defined by Jason Bermas. It features a guy called Mark Dice, an author and anti-NWO campaigner who I’ve never consciously come across before. I like the kinds of things Dice says so I’m adding his website to my links. You could do worse than to go to his site and check it out, or buy his books (no, I’m not on commission).

Here’s just one of a set of clips featuring Mark (I’m putting it first ‘cos I need a laugh).

Mark Dice: Boycott the Super Bowl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v€=h-xYvv6raV8

–

But here’s something a bit more serious…

Mark Dice on THE INFOWARRIOR with Jason Bermas 1/3: When Will The People Wake Up! (Boardcast 20th Feb 2010)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AG7asd9fd8Q

Mark Dice on THE INFOWARRIOR with Jason Bermas 2/3: When Will The People Wake Up! (Boardcast 20th Feb 2010)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUqWo0zkVSY

Mark Dice on THE INFOWARRIOR with Jason Bermas 3/3: When Will The People Wake Up! (Boardcast 20th Feb 2010)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HC2k5dCEaQk

As for the movie – Invisible Empire – A New World Order Defined I thought it was very good indeed, as was The Obama Deception.

Quite a few people criticise Alex Jones (and his ‘stable’) for example becasue Alex is softly-softly on Israyhell (unless the USS Liberty is under discussion), but what the Jones stable do very well, is use mainstream media, FACTUAL government documents, declassified documents, secret memos, along with government spokespersons to make their point – esxposing THAT level of the NWO.

 A couple of people get very strung up about one or two trivial errors Jones himself made, e.g. when he got the date of the 2005 UK election wrong and from that, they therefore seem to ignore a lot of what the Jones said, some people also seem to dismiss him beacuse of his tone. His detractors are by the way supposedly in oppositon to the fake-glossy-magazine world we are encouraged to believe in. The monumental egos within the anti-NWO movement aside, I’ll reiterte that I think Jones has a vital role – one that he does very well – in taking on and exposing the particular level of the shadowy elite that he deals with.

I on the other hand believe the conspiracy doesn’t just stop with the ultra rich, as to me, the NWO is grounded in satanism, religious apocylapse and the anti-Christ.

What a cheery outlook I have on life, huh!

anyway, here you go…

Invisible Empire – A New World Order Defined  2hours 14mins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO24XmP1c5E

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

 

Why I love Cynthia McKinney.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article24641.htm

–

–

–

–

–