Showing posts with label Palestine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Palestine. Show all posts

Sunday, September 21, 2025

Some Observations on Israel, Iran, Russia, Islam, and Christianity

Some Observations on Israel, Iran, Russia, Islam, and Christianity

Thomas Allen


The following are some comments on the Israel-Iran War, especially concerning Islam, Christianity, Zionism, Jews, and Russia.

1– Israel knows that it cannot defeat Iran on its own. It planned for the Jewish lobby, the Jewish-controlled media, neoconservative Zionists, and the Christian Zionists to draw the United States into its war with Iran. That plan has worked.

2– A major problem that Muslim countries have in the Middle East is that their religious disagreements prevent them from uniting against Israel. Israel has used these disagreements to its advantage.

On the other hand, Zionists have no such problem. Christian Zionists, Jewish Zionists, and atheist Zionists unite against the Muslims. They value Zionism above their religion. Indeed, for many of them, Zionism is their religion.

3– Zionists and other pro-Israel people rant endlessly about the vileness of Islam and Muslims. Other than their claim that such vileness is innate in Islam and the Koran, they never try to discover the cause of Muslim hostility toward and hatred of Jews and, particularly, Israel. To them, Muslim hostility and hatred have nothing to do with Jews terrorizing the Palestinians and stealing their land.

After the Balfour Declaration (1917), Jews began moving to Palestine and terrorizing the Palestinians, both Christians and Muslims, and taking their land. (In 1920, 500,000 Muslims, 70,000 Christians, and 60,000 Jews lived in Palestine. In 1940, the population was 948,000, 121,000, and 464,000, respectively.) Before the Balfour Declaration, Muslims, Christians, and Jews lived peacefully in Palestine. 

Moreover, Muslim hostility and hatred of Israel and Jews have nothing to do with the ongoing genocide of the Palestinians. Nor do they have anything to do with the Suez Canal Crisis of 1956 or Israel’s attacks against its neighbors in 1967 (the Six-Day War), 1973 (the Yom Kippur War), 1982 (the 1982 Lebanon War), and 2006 (the Israel–Hezbollah War), and the almost continuous offensive assaults against its neighbors since 1948.

Furthermore, Muslim hostility and hatred of Israel, Jews, and the United States have nothing to do with Israel getting its vassal, the United States, to destroy Iraq and Syria for Greater Israel. Now, Israel is trying to get the United States to destroy Iran. (As a result of its subservient support of Israel, many Muslims consider America the Great Satan and chant, “Death to America.” Without the succor of its slave, the United States, Israel would collapse.)

All these ignored issues have much more to do with Muslims’ loathing Israel and the Jews than does the Koran or anything innate in Islam.

4– Many people who believe that Islam is an innately vile religion ignore many non-Christians viewing Christianity as an innately vile religion — and for many of the same reasons. Before Muslims arrived in the Middle East and North Africa, these regions were predominantly Christian, among whom Jews lived. After the arrival of Muslims, the population of Christians and Jews significantly declined over the years. The implication is that Muslims either killed them or drove them out of the Middle East and North Africa. What is often overlooked is that many converted to Islam to avoid paying the jizya, a tax levied on non-Muslims.

Islam is criticized for using the sword to force its religion on others. Once Christianity became the state religion under Constantine, Christians not only used the sword to convert others, but they also used it to settle theological disputes. The Catholic Church became notorious for using the sword against Christian sects that did not adhere to what the Catholic Church declared to be orthodoxy. An early example was the wars between the Trinitarians, who were usually the aggressors, and the Arians. Later, the Catholic Church used the sword to oppress Christian sects, such as the Waldensians, who refused to recognize the Pope’s authority. Perhaps the bloodiest conflict of Christian intolerance was the Thirty Years' War. 

Moreover, in Christendom, Jews were often persecuted. At various times, many European countries forbade Jews from living in them.

Before Bush the Younger destroyed Iraq for Israel, Iraq had a thriving Christian population. Now, the Christians who remain are struggling to survive.

Does this mean that the Bible and Christians are vile? (The Bible does contain stories where God orders his people to kill and genocide others.) If judged by the same standard that people who consider Islam innately vile, it seems to imply that Christianity is innately vile.

Furthermore, Islam has a much higher opinion of Jesus, who is the central figure of Christianity, than does Judaism. According to Islam’s holy book, the Koran, Jesus is a great prophet, second only to Mohammad. According to the Jewish holy book, the Talmud, Jesses is a blasphemer, a bastard, and a sorcerer. 

5– Iran is as much of a threat to the United States as Iraq was in 2001 — none. Like Iraq, Iran is mostly a threat posed by the propaganda of the Jewish and Zionist-controlled media, federal bureaucrats, and politicians of both parties. 

6– If Iran falls, Russia and China are in great danger. Iran serves as a buffer to Russia because it prevents the CIA from sending jihadists into Russia’s Muslim provinces. Also, if the United States gain control of Iran’s oilfields, China could lose a major supplier of its energy. How long will Russia and China stand by and let Israel and the United States have their way in Iran?

Russia and China may have prevented this war if they had a public defense pact with Iran and had placed it under their nuclear umbrella. However, it is unlikely that this action would have stopped Israel, but it may have slowed, if not prevented, the United States’ entry into the war. Now, Russia and China may have to enter the war directly.

7– Some wonder why Putin signaled his approval of an Israeli attack on Iran by announcing that Russia’s treaty with Iran did not include military support. 

What happened to Iran’s air defense? Russia had provided Iran with antiaircraft missiles. Did Russia prevent Iran from using them? Were they faulty, or were they inadequate for the job?

Putin and Russia seem to be continuing the extinct Soviet Union’s policy of aiding Israel surreptitiously by undermining its ostensible Muslim allies when they warred against Israel. President Sadat of Egypt realized this betrayal when he expelled Soviet agents from his country in 1972, several months before the Yom Kippur War.

The Soviet Union, which Jews founded, aided Jews in Palestine before 1948 and in Israel afterward. During the Zionists’ struggle to drive the British and later the Palestinians from Palestine, the Soviet Union, through Czechoslovakia, was a major supplier of arms to the Jews in Palestine. 

Furthermore, it joined the United States in partitioning Palestine and giving a large portion of it to the Jews. With Soviet-supplied weapons and aircraft, Israel won its war for independence. Later, Ben Gurion would thank the Soviet Union for providing Israel with the arms that it needed to win independence and for its support of Zionism in the United Nations.

President Truman gave Israel de facto recognition on May 15, 1948, the day that Great Britain’s mandate in Palestine expired. However, the Soviet Union extended de jure recognition to Israel on May 17, 1948, and, thus, became the first state to recognize Israel fully and officially. 

To win favor and influence over Israel’s Arab neighbors, the Soviet government instituted a campaign to suppress some petty Jews in the Soviet bloc. Also, it openly denounced Israel and supplied weaponry to Israel’s Arab neighbors. Later, the Soviet Union would use its influence over Egypt, Syria, and other Arab countries to aid Israel.

8– Iran is one of the seven Muslim countries that Israel and the Zionists have identified for destruction. Five have been destroyed: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, and Sudan. Iran and Saudi Arabia remain. Israel’s updated list now includes Pakistan. Turkey may soon be added; a small part of it falls in Greater Israel. Destroying Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and possibly Turkey for Israel will be an extremely expensive chore for the United States. Additionally, Egypt must be included since all of Egypt east of the Nile belongs to Greater Israel. Likewise, Jordan will need to be destroyed because it is also part of Greater Israel. China will be the real winner of such an undertaking because America will be so exhausted from these wars that it will fall into China’s hands as easily as an overripe plum.

9– In “US State Department Spokeswoman Says Israel Is Greater Than America,” Caitlin Johnstone makes some interesting and informative remarks about the Israel-Iran War (https://caitlinjohnstone.com.au/2025/06/23/us-state-department-spokeswoman-says-israel-is-greater-than-america/):

Top Ten dumbest things we’re being asked to believe about Iran:

1. That the Iranians want to be bombed.

2. That the guy bombing Iran wants peace.

3. That regime change interventionism is a swell idea this time.

4. That anyone who doesn’t want war with Iran hates Jews.

5. That this time the government and the media are telling us the truth about an American war.

6. That this time the neocons are smart and correct.

7. That bombing Iran makes it LESS likely to try to obtain nukes.

8. That Iran is trying to assassinate the US president when all US presidents have the same foreign policy.

9. That Iran (a country that never starts wars) cannot be trusted with nuclear weapons, but Israel (a country that starts wars constantly) can.

10. That attacking Iran benefits Americans.

10– Paul Craig Roberts writes, “Iran has done nothing to America. It has not attacked us, sanctioned us, frozen our bank reserves, forbidden trade with us, assassinated any of our leaders. These are things that Washington has done to Iran. Why? Because Netanyahu told us to.” (https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2025/06/19/is-trumps-constituency-netanyahu-or-maga-america/)


Copyright © 2025 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles. 

Thursday, January 30, 2025

The Promised Land

The Promised Land

Thomas Allen


In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: (Genesis 15:18)

God promised to give the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites (Exodus 3:8 and 17), i.e., the land that became Palestine, to Abraham’s descendants. Zionists claim that this promise has never been fulfilled. Many Zionists claim that the promised land includes all the territory between the Euphrates and the Nile. That is, it includes not only Palestine, but also Iraq and Syria west of the Euphrates, Lebanon, Jordan, northwest Saudi Arabia, and Egypt east of the Nile. Moses describes the promised land in Numbers 34:1-12.

According to Joshua, God gave the Israelites all the land that He had promised to Abraham:

So Joshua took the whole land, according to all that the Lord said unto Moses; and Joshua gave it for an inheritance unto Israel according to their divisions by their tribes. And the land rested from war. (Joshua 11:23)

And the Lord gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein. (Joshua 21:43)

Thus, the Abrahamic land promise was fulfilled in Joshua’s lifetime.

While Joshua claims that God’s land promise to Abraham was fulfilled in his lifetime, Zionists contend that the promise remains unfulfilled. Some Zionists contend that before the Abrahamic land promise is fulfilled, modern-day Israel must occupy all of Palestine. To fulfill this promise, other Zionists assert that Israel must occupy all the land between the Euphrates and the Nile.

Who do you believe: today’s Zionists or Joshua?

Furthermore, Jews using Genesis 15:18 to justify God giving them Palestine is one of today’s greatest ironies. It is ironic because so few Jews may be descendants of Abraham.  Nearly all of today’s Jews are descendants of the people of the extinct Khazar Empire. (The Khazar Empire covered what is now southeastern Russia, southern Ukraine, Crimea, and northeast Kazakhstan.) Moreover, unlike the Jews, most Palestinians may be descendants of Abraham.

What some commentators have written about Genesis 15:18 and Joshua 11:23 and 21:43 follows:

– Halley: God promised the descendants of Abraham the land of Canaan.[1]

– Gore: The land promised to Abraham’s descendants was not achieved until the peak of Solomon’s reign.[2]

– Holmes: Joshua conquered the land described in Deuteronomy.[3]

– A. Clarke: The southwestern border was not the Nile but was the Sichor River on the border of Egypt near the Isthmus of Suez. The Abrahamic land promise was fully accomplished during the reign of David and Solomon. Whatever land in Canaan that the Israelites did not occupy paid tribute to prove their submission.[4]

– L. Clarke: The Israelites occupying all the land between the Nile and Euphrates was never more than a dream.[5]

– Mann: The extent of the promised land was idealized and was approximately achieved during the reigns of David and Solomon. Moreover, the River of Egypt refers not to the Nile but probably to the brook of Egypt.[6]

– Smith: All the land that God had promised the Israelites, Joshua took.[7]

– MacDonald: The Nile probably means the Wadi el-Arish, a small stream south of Gaza.[8] Further, Joshua’s stating that Israel occupied all the land that God had promised Abraham’s descendants from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates should not be understood literally; it means that the land that Joshua divided among the Israelites fulfilled God’s promise to give the Israelites the land on which they walked.[9]


Endnotes

1.  Henry H. Halley, Halley's Bible Handbook (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1965), p. 94.

2. Charles Gore, “Genesis,” A New Commentary on Holy Scripture, ed. Charles Gore, Henry L. Gouge, and Alfred Guillaume (New York: The Macmillian Co., 1928), p. 51.

3. Samuel Holmes, “Joshua,” A Commentary on the Bible, ed. Arthur S Peake (New York: Thomas Nelson & Sons, n.d.), p. 254.

4. Adam Clarke, Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible, Abridged by Ralph Earle (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1967) p. 38.

5. W.K. Lowther, ed., Concise Bible Commentary (New York, New York: MacMillan Publishing, 1953), p. 348.

6. John Marks, “Genesis,” The Interpreter’s One-volume Commentary on the Bible, ed. Charles M. Laymon, (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1971), p. 15. 

7. Robert Smith, “Joshua,” The Interpreter’s One-volume Commentary on the Bible, ed. Charles M. Laymon, (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1971), pp. 130, 133.

8. William  MacDonald, Believer's Bible Commentary (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, 1989), p. 50.

9. Ibid., p. 231.


Copyright © 2025 by Thomas Coley Allen.

Saturday, June 15, 2024

Christian Zionists

Christian Zionists

Thomas Allen


Christian Zionists are peculiar people. Of their theology, their most important doctrine is based on the commentary of Cyrus I. Scofield, primarily the futurist school interpretation of Revelation with the rapture. Zionist Jews financially aided Scofield in writing his Zionist commentary, which proselytizes for Zionism, and promoted his Bible.

Most Christian Zionists seem to confuse “Jew,” “Zionism,” and “Israel.” They consider them to be nearly synonymous. However, they differ significantly.

“Jew” is an ethnicity. Anyone born of a Jewish mother is a Jew, with the possible exception of a person born of a nonwhite Jewish mother. Although many Jews practice Judaism to some degree, many Jews are atheists or agnostics or are areligious. The only way that a person born a Jew ceases to be a Jew is to convert to Christianity.

“Zionism” is a political movement. Its objective is to convert Palestine into a Jewish homeland governed by Jews. Some Zionists expand the boundaries to cover all the land between the Euphrates and the Nile. What surprises many Christian Zionists is that not all Jews are Zionists and oppose establishing a country for Jews.

“Israel” is a country governed by Jews that covers most of what used to be Palestine. Only about 46 percent of the world’s Jews live in Israel.

Moreover, Christian Zionists delude themselves by believing that those who call themselves Jews but are not are God’s chosen people. Almost none of today’s Jews are descended from Judah or even Jacob, Israel. Ironically, their theology has led the Christian Zionists to support outlawing the New Treatment and to root for the slaughter of Jews.

With the support of Christian Zionists, the United States House of Representatives passed the Antisemitism Awareness Act of 2023. It codifies the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This definition leads to outlawing the New Testament, which has been a goal for Jews for centuries. One example that IHRA gives as antisemitic is “Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews. . . .” Jesus told the Jewish leaders that they were the children of the devil (John 8:44) and called them hypocrites (Matthew 15:7; 23:13-15; 23:23, 25, 27. 29). Thus, from a Jewish perspective, he made mendacious, dehumanizing, and demonizing allegations. Therefore, Jesus is antisemitic. Since the New Testament is the story of Jesus that glories him, it is antisemitic and, consequently, illegal under the Antisemitism Awareness Act.

Furthermore, Paul wrote much of the New Testament. Like Jesus, Paul is also an antisemite. According to IHRA’s definition of antisemitism, anyone who makes “claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel” is an antisemite. In 1 Thessalonians 2:14-15, Paul states that the Jews killed Jesus. Therefore, Paul is an antisemite.

Further, Christian Zionists imply, if not outright claim, that the Bible states that God blesses those who bless Israel (Jews) and curses those who curse Israel. Many insinuate that “Israel” refers to the country of Israel. On the contrary, according to the Bible, God blesses those who bless Abraham, who was not a Jew or an Israelite, and curses those who curse him (see “Commentary on Genesis 12:3" by Thomas Allen). No country has supported Zionism, Israel, and the Jews as much as the United States. This support even extends to giving Israel and Jews control of the US government. Yet, instead of being blessed, the United States have been cursed (see “The Results of Supporting Zionism and Israel” by Thomas Allen).

Also, some Christian Zionists claim that if a person does not promote Zionism and support Israel despite what it does, that person is not a Christian. Such a person needs to be shunned, disfellowshiped, and excommunicated.

Additionally, most Christian Zionists do not know that Christians, Jews, and Muslims lived together in Palestine peacefully before the Balfour Declaration of 1917. In 1920, of the population of Palestine, about 11 percent were Palestinian Christians, about 10 percent were Jews, and the remainder were Muslims. By 1940, the population of Palestine was about 8 percent Christians, 30 percent Jews, and 62 percent Muslims.

After World War I, Jews began moving to Palestine and creating strife, primarily by driving Palestinians from their land. Following World War II, Jews began pouring into Palestine in large numbers and stealing Palestinian land. Palestinian attacks against Israel and Israeli attacks against the Palestinians are just a continuation of the war that the Jews started following World War II to steal Palestinian land.

Many Christian Zionists fail to understand why Palestinians do not accept their plight and get on with their lives. They assert that today’s Palestinians should not hold today’s Jews responsible for the wrongs committed more than 7 decades ago by other Jews against other Palestinians. However, most of today’s Palestinians do not hold Jews who came to Palestine in the late 1940s and early 1950s responsible for what is happening to Palestinians today. They hold today’s Jews accountable for what they have done to Palestinians in recent years and decades. Israelis have continued to steal Palestinian land and murder Palestinians.

Furthermore, Christian Zionists show their compassionate Christian love by cheering for the extermination of Palestinians, i.e., the genocide of Palestinians. They rejoice over killing Palestinian children (future terrorists) and women (breeders of future terrorists). On top of that, many claim that Palestinians are subhumans, who do not and have never existed. That group that calls themselves Palestinians is no more than squatters who illegally occupied land that belongs to the Jews. Moreover, Palestine never existed. (Apparently, the editors of the Encyclopedia Britannica, ninth edition, 1890, were too stupid or too ignorant to know that Palestine did not exist because they wrote eight pages describing Palestine. Also, Joel must not have received the notice that Palestine does not exist; he mentions Palestine in Joel 3:4.)

If nothing else, Christian Zionists are hypocrites. Out of one side of their mouth, Christian Zionists claim to care for Israel and the Jews and want to provide them unlimited aid. Out of the other side of their mouth, they want and pray for a world war in which most Jews are killed. Moreover, since most Christian Zionists are members of the rapture cult, they believe that they will not be on earth to enjoy the slaughter of the Jews. They will enjoy the slaughter safely in heaven.

Jews and vaccines have one thing in common. Both are sacred and are innocent of causing any problems or adverse effects. They are immune to criticism because they can do no wrong.


Copyright © 2024 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More political articles.

Saturday, January 14, 2023

Resisting Oppressive Governments

Resisting Oppressive Governments

Thomas Allen


[Editor’s note: The texts of the verses cited in this article are given in the appendix that follows.]

In Glad Tidings of the Kingdom of God, issue 1658, p. 18, the Christadelphians argue that good Christians should not resist, but should obey implicitly, a despotic government no matter how tyrannical or evil it is. Other denominations also hold this same position. (When it advances the liberal or progressive agendas, many liberal churches interpret Romans 13:1-7 and Matthews 5:38-42 as the Christadelphians do. However, when governments act contrary to the liberal or progressive agendas, these liberal churches reject the Christadelphian interpretation.)

The Glad Tidings’ article uses the Nazi government of Germany as an example. Good Christians should not have opposed the Nazis rounding up Jews and other undesirables and sending them to concentration and labor camps. This included not opposing the Nazis verbally as such opposition was illegal, either implicitly or explicitly. Later, when the Nazis executed millions of Jews, good Christians should not have objected.

On the contrary, good Christians, being obedient to the government, would have aided the government. If they knew where a Jew was hiding, they would have informed the government as required by law. They certainly would not have hidden or aided a Jew as that was against the law.

That is because the Nazis were only obeying God’s will. According to the Christadelphians, God wanted the Nazis to execute large numbers of Jews so that He could use the slaughter as an excuse to drive the Palestinians from their homes and turn Palestine into the Jewish state of Israel, which has the reputation of being the pornographic capital of the world.

To support their position of implicit obedience to despotic evil governments, Christadelphians cite Romans 13:1–7, which is a despot’s favorite biblical passage. A good Christian should not resist any government no matter how evil it is because no government is a terror to good works but is always a terror to evil. Moreover, governments are ministers of God for good and only punish doers of evil. (If Paul practiced what he wrote as most people interpret this passage, he would have never been jailed. However, he was jailed several times.)

Consequently, if a despot declared that all children less than 13 years old are to be turned over to the government for sexual pleasures and tortures, good Christians will turn their children over to the government. Thus, being implicitly obedient to the government, all good Christians would turn their children over to the government for the pleasures of their pedophiliac overlords, who want the children to satisfy their sexual deviations culminating in torturing the children to death. These Christians are obeying the government as the Christadelphian interpretation of Roman 13 tells them to do. Moreover, they would insist that the government take their teenagers per Matthew 5:38-42 as the Christadelphians interpret this passage.

If the government decrees that all Christians are to be executed and that they have to appear before the local magistrate to receive a lethal injection, Christadelphians would be first in line for their shots. Other Christians who understand Romans 13:1-7 as the Christadelphians understand it would be standing with them. (Moreover, following their understanding of Matthew 5:38-42, Christadelphians would report every Christian whom they knew to the authorities.) After all, all rulers are ministers of God (Romans 13:4) and have been ordained by Him (Romans 13:1). As such, they are God’s avengers to doers of evil (Romans 13:4). Since the government has decreed that Christians must be executed, then Christians must be doers of evil. If the mass execution of Jews were part of God’s plan, then the mass execution of Christians must also be part of God’s plan. No Christian could object without going against the will of God.

However, Christadelphians are pacifists who resist the draft and serving in the armed forces. Thus, they show their inconsistency and hypocrisy. By resisting being part of the Nazi army, they were resisting God’s will of mass execution of Jews.

Nevertheless, Christadelphians do give themselves an out. They cite Acts 4:19–20. According to their understanding of this passage, a Christian has to disobey the government when it tells them to act contrary to God’s will. How does a Christian know what is God’s will? If the Nazi murder of millions of people is God’s will, what is not God’s will?


APPENDIX

The following verses are quoted from the World English Bible.

Romans 13:1-7

13 Let every soul be in subjection to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those who exist are ordained by God. 2 Therefore he who resists the authority withstands the ordinance of God; and those who withstand will receive to themselves judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to the good work, but to the evil. Do you desire to have no fear of the authority? Do that which is good, and you will have praise from the authority, 4 for he is a servant of God to you for good. But if you do that which is evil, be afraid, for he doesn’t bear the sword in vain; for he is a servant of God, an avenger for wrath to him who does evil. 5 Therefore you need to be in subjection, not only because of the wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. 6 For this reason you also pay taxes, for they are servants of God’s service, continually doing this very thing. 7 Therefore give everyone what you owe: if you owe taxes, pay taxes; if customs, then customs; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.


Matthew 5:38-42

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. But I tell you, don’t resist him who is evil; but whoever strikes you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 If anyone sues you to take away your coat, let him have your cloak also. 41 Whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. 42 Give to him who asks you, and don’t turn away him who desires to borrow from you.


Acts 4:19-20

19 But Peter and John answered them, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, judge for yourselves, 20 for we can’t help telling the things which we saw and heard.


Copyright © 2023 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More religious articles.

Friday, August 27, 2021

Zionism and the Middle East

Zionism and the Middle East
Thomas Allen

[Editor’s note: This article was submitted in 1988 to the “Southern National Newsletter” of the Southern National Party. Since this was originally written, nearly all changes in the US government’s policy in the Middle East have been for the worst.]

How long will it be before the South is sacrificed on the cross (or should that be the star) of Zionism? [The answer came soon after 9/11 when the US government declared a perpetual war against terrorism and in 2003 invaded Iraq — thus, began the US government’s war to protect Israeli imperialism.] The basic foreign policy of the US government in the Middle East has been that Israel can do no wrong. United States officials may occasionally scold Israel like a father scolding his child. On the whole, however, the US government treats Israel like a father trying to spoil his brat. Still, the US government does make a pretense of trying to create a balance of power in the Middle East by supporting some of the Arabic countries, primarily Saudi Arabia and Jordan. However, Israel has a veto over certain military aid to these countries, and Israel’s veto is seldom overridden. Israel effectively controls the foreign policy of the US government in the Middle East. With such Zionist control of the foreign policy of the United States, how long will it be before the South is crucified for Israel?

Zionist Jews (not all Jews are Zionists) have influence in the highest echelon of the US government far in excess of their number. But this is not their only source of power and influence. They are also aided by mainstream liberals and conservatives.

Liberals tend to support Israel because of Israel’s professed egalitarianism although they view Israel’s egalitarianism while wearing the typical liberal blinders. Moreover, most Jews are liberals. Also, Israel is a democratic state, if one ignores the disenfranchised Palestinians, in an area where nearly all other states are autocratic. To liberals, no form of government is superior to democracy — if the voters agree with them. No form of government is worse than an autocracy except of coarse when that autocracy is also a communist country in which instance it is a perfectly acceptable form of government. Israel is also a socialistic state, which is another virtue from the liberal point of view. In the area of social equality, liberals again view Israel favorably. The Jews express little objections to racial integration (except in Israel), which agrees with the self-destructive tendency of the liberals. Naturally, liberals generally overlook Israel’s discrimination against the Palestinians. This is partly because of the low value that liberals tend to place on religions other than secular humanism. Additionally, Jews are officially considered a minority. Palestinians are not. To the liberal mind, discrimination by an official minority against others is perfectly acceptable if not wholesome and desirable. On the other hand, discrimination by a nonofficial minority against an official minority can never be tolerated. Besides, Israel is the only country in the Middle East that personifies liberal equality. It has the unquestionable support of liberals.

That the Zionists have the support of liberals is not nearly as surprising as the Zionists having the support of conservatives. [This was written when the neoconservatives were beginning to capture American conservatism. For the neoconservatives, the most important values are Zionism, equality, and democracy. Many of their positions, especially on social issues, are almost indistinguishable from liberals.] After all, if it were not for those confounded Palestinians, Israel would come close to having the ideal egalitarian liberal society with democracy, socialism, and integration. In spite of the oxymoron “Judeo-Christian,” human secularism, the predominant religion of liberals, is closer to today’s Judaism than is Christianity, the religion of many conservatives.

There are several reasons for the conservative support of Israel. First, Israel has adopted an anticommunist foreign policy. The second reason, and this reason is the important one for the religious right, is Biblical prophecy. Israel also receives unquestionably support from both liberals and conservatives who fear being called “anti-Semitic” or who feel guilty about the Holocaust®.

Israel’s anticommunist foreign policy has more to do with the Soviet Union’s support of some of Israel’s Arabic neighbors than with any philosophical disagreement with communism or the Soviet Union. Israel’s economic and social policies have much more in common with the Soviet Union and Red China than do the economic and social policies of most of the surrounding Arabic countries and Egypt. [An anticommunist foreign policy carries little weight today. However, Israel’s economic and social policies are much closer to communism than most of the surrounding Arabic countries.]

The support that Israel has from the anticommunist element in America is primarily contingent on the fact that several of the Arabic countries in the region are allies of the Soviet Union [now Russia] in opposition to Israel. This element is also a strong supporter of the anticommunist Arabic countries, such as Saudi Arabia. If the military alliance in the Middle East were to shift, as they well could if the Soviet Union becomes serious about acquiring a port along the Persian Gulf or the Arabian Sea directly under its control, with the Soviet Union aligning itself with Israel against the Arabs, then most of the anticommunist, or at least those who are not fooled by the oxymoron “Judeo-Christian,” would become opponents of Israel. Israel’s anticommunist support in the United States is conditional. It is primarily predicated on the Soviet Union’s hostility toward Israel.

Although the religious right is anticommunist, its support of Israel is not based on communism or Israel’s relations with the Soviet Union. It comes from Biblical prophecy. A realignment of alliances in the Middle East would have little effect on their allegiance to Israel.

In spite of what Christ said about Jews and what Jewish rabbis have said about Him, the highly conservative religious right, surprisingly, is among the strongest supporters of Zionism. Much of this support arises, unfortunately, out of ignorance although the leaders should know better.

Most of the religious right believe that the oxymoron “Judeo-Christian” is not a contradiction of ideas, but are highly compatible ideas. (This misconception is also true of many other conservative and liberal supporters of Israel.) They believe that the principal difference between the two religions is that Christians look forward to the Messiah’s second coming while Jews look forward to the Messiah’s first coming. (Of course, they overlook the fact that the Christian Messiah comes to save or reward the Christians and destroy or punishing the non-Christians, which includes Jews, while the Jewish Messiah comes to save or reward the Jews and destroy or punish the non-Jews, which includes Christians.) This error apparently arises from both claiming the books of the Old Testament as part of their holy scriptures. However, this where their similarity ends. The Jewish Talmudic interpretation of the Old Testament differs more from the Christian New Testament interpretation of the Old Testament than a socialistic economy differs from a free market economy.

The religious right’s support for Israel arises out of a misinterpretation of Old Testament passages. It has adopted the interpretation that Zionists have used to justify their plunder of Palestine. In Genesis 15:18-21 and 17:8, God made a covenant with Abram (later called Abraham) and promised him that his descendants would possess the land from Egypt to the Euphrates. Some theologians believe that this promise has been fulfilled with the Empire of David and Solomon. Other theologians claim that God’s covenant with Abraham applies to his spiritual descendants, i.e., Christians, not to his physical descendants (Galatians 3:6-9 and 26-29). Zionists and the religious right interpret these passages to mean that Palestine has been promised by God to today’s Jews.

Even if the promise is intended to apply to Abraham’s descendants through Isaac, today’s Jews living in Israel do not fulfill the promise. Approximately 85 to 90 percent of today’s Jews are Ashkenazim. These Jews are descendants of the people of Khazaria, who were mostly Turanian Turks and Aryan Armenians and Alpines. They are not the descendants of the ancient Israelites, a Semitic people. The Sephardim, however, do have some claim to being Semitic. They are the descendants of the Jews of Palestine in the days of Jesus. If Jesus is to be believed, many of these Jews are not descendants of Isaac, for he told them that they were not of Abraham’s children (John 8:39-45 and Revelations 2:9 and 3:9). They were descendants of the Edomites.

Another error that the religious right and many others make is confusing Judaism as it is practiced today with Judaism described in the Old Testament. Most believe that these two religions are the same religion. They are not. Today’s Judaism differs as much from Old Testament Judaism as Christianity and Islam differ from Old Testament Judaism. Animal sacrifices offered to God in the prescribed manner in a properly built tabernacle or temple as described in the Old Testament is an essential and important part of Judaism. Today’s Jews do not offer God animal sacrifices. Therefore, today’s Jews are not practicing the same religion that the Jews practiced in the Old Testament or in the days of Jesus. God destroyed that religion in 70 A.D. when Titus destroyed the temple in Jerusalem. In summary, Judaism without animal sacrifices in a tabernacle [or temple] as described in the Old Testament is like Christianity without the crucifixion of Christ and the work that he accomplished on the cross. It is just not the same religion. This error along with the false belief that today’s Jews are of the seed of Abraham may cost many Southerners their lives.

Another tactic that the Zionists like to use is guilt. They are continuously reminding the world of the Holocaust®. (That the official government line throughout the world for the last four and a half decades [now 75 years] has been that the Holocaust® is a historical fact without question and even to the point of making statements that the Holocaust® did not occur [or even that less than six million Jews died in it] a crime, should make any person with any libertarian inclinations highly suspicious. When was the last time that a government consistently told the truth about anything for half a century? Governments can be consistent with lies for decades but not with the truth — a good reason to outlaw public education.) To the extent that Zionists can make people feel guilty about the Holocaust® and can make people, even those born after World War II, believe that the Holocaust® was somehow their fault, is the extent that the Zionists gain unquestionable support.

Another tactic enjoyed by the Zionists is name-calling. If anyone does not support Zionist extermination of the Palestinians, then he is guilty of antisemitism. (These name-callers ignore that Palestinians have a much stronger argument of being Semitic than do Jews, and, therefore, to persecute Palestinians is a true act of antisemitism.) To be called “antisemitic” is as horrible and terrifying as being called a “racist bigot.” Such a label will surely ruin a political career. With name-calling and through guilt, Zionists are able to control most political leaders and the gullible, ignorant masses.

With such support in the United States, how long is it before the Zionists are sacrificing American lives to fulfill the Zionist dream in the Middle East? Israel has nuclear weapons and missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads. Unlike the United States, it has the will and the desire to use them. How long is it before Israel uses these weapons against its Arabic neighbors in a surprise strike? Or more likely, to launch a surprise conventional attack while having nuclear weapons ready to use if the war does not go well? As it has in the past, Israel would naturally claim that it has acted defensively with a pre-emptive strike by attacking the Arabs before they attack Israel. Propaganda is already appearing in the American press about the Arabs acquiring nuclear weapons to use against Israel. [Iran has now replaced the surrounding Arabic countries as the big bugbear of nuclear weaponry.] Israel can rely on the government of the United States to support Israeli aggression with military materiel as they have in the past although the United State may publicly denounce Israel’s actions. The US government’s support of Israel in such a war would cause the Soviet Union [now Russia and maybe China] to provide more support to the Arabs. Then the US government’s support of Israel would become more open and aggressive as the US government would claim that Israel is the only anticommunist country in the region, and by fighting communism, it is defending the interest of the United States in the Middle East. If the war were to go badly for Israel, as it probably would if the Arabs were able to drag it out for several months, or if the Arabs were to retaliate with nuclear or chemical weapons, US troops may well be committed to the war in the name of democracy and freedom. If the war were fought as a war should be fought instead of the way the Vietnam War was fought, the joint Israeli-American forces would quickly defeat the Arabs. [The war in Iraq and Afghanistan are being fought more like the Vietnam War.] Then, the question would become one of Soviet [now Russian and possibly Chinese] troops entering the war. If they were to enter, the war would surely escalate into a global conflict. With the threat of Soviet troops becoming involved, presumably, Congress would press for peace [with the war hawks now controlling Congress, Congress would press for escalating war instead of peace, but without any backbone to declare war]. However, considering Zionist control of the US government, it might not. Claiming that God promised them the land from the Nile to the Euphrates, the Israelis would refuse to talk peace. Israel thus would seal its fate to perish. Then, the United States would face the choice of listening to the Zionists and going to war with the Soviet Union [Russian and possibly China] or ignoring the Zionists and abandoning Israel to the Soviet Union. If the United States were to listen to the Zionists, World War III and perhaps Armageddon would become a strong possibility. If the United States were to act rationally and abandon Israel, then the Jews in Israel would face the fate that the Jews faced when the Romans sieged and captured Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Can the likelihood of going to war with the Soviet Union to defend Israel in a war that Israel starts break the hole that Zionists have on the United States?

As long as the Southern States remain colonies of the United States, there is a high probability that the deserts of the Middle East will become soaked with Southern blood. There is also a good chance that Southern cities will be destroyed with nuclear blasts. The only way such destruction can be prevented is through a free and independent confederation of free and independent Southern States. Then the South would have a chance to adopt a sane policy of neutrality and nonintervention in the Middle East in which the rights of the Palestinians and Israelis are respected, a policy not controlled or guided by Zionism or antisemitism. Only then can the Zionist foreign policy of Israel first, which is the foreign policy of the United States, be abandon and numerous Southern lives saved.

Copyright © 1988, 2021 by Thomas C. Allen.

More political articles.

Saturday, March 14, 2020

Rebuttals to Some Unlimited Immigration Arguments

Rebuttals to Some Unlimited Immigration Arguments
Thomas Allen

Below are rebuttals to arguments that immigration helps the economy and does not destroy languages or genocide people.

Destructiveness of Uncontrolled Immigration
Ask the Tasmanians how much immigrants helped their economy. Oh, I forgot, immigrants drove the Tasmanians to extinction. One would need a seance to ask them.

Ask the Indians of Hispaniola how much immigrants helped their economy. Again, I forgot that immigrants, mostly from Africa, drove them out of existence; what was not killed off were bred out of existence.

How well are the Chinese immigrants, who are genociding the Tibetans, helping the Tibetans economically? It may help the Chinese, but it is driving the Tibetans to extinction.

Then there are the Palestinians. Jewish immigrants have taken much of the land of the Palestinians and drove most Palestinians into large-scale concentration camps into which the Israelis fire missiles. Immigration may have helped the immigrant Jews economically, but it has done little for the native Palestinians.

Immigration was a great benefit to the Roman Empire. It so utterly destroyed the Roman Empire that nearly a thousand years were needed before the economy of the area covered by the old Empire returned to where it was before immigration destroyed it.

Mexico lost Texas to Anglo-American settlers primarily because they came as colonists and not as immigrants. They were of a different culture and language than Mexico and came in such numbers that they did not have to assimilate.

Immigration and Language
Some opponents of open-borders-unrestricted immigration claim that unrestricted immigration can change, corrupt, and even obliterate the language of a country. Some supporters of unrestricted immigration claim that such a notion is nonsense.

As evidence to support their assertion that unrestricted immigration does not destroy language, they point to the French-speaking Canadians. French-speaking Canadians have preserved their language for centuries in a sea of English speakers.

The proponents overlook the North American Indians. The North American Indians drowned in a flood of unrestricted immigration from Europe. As a result, many Indian languages are now extinct. Furthermore, many tribes became extinct — having been genocided by disease, war, and miscegenation. Moreover, not only do many remaining tribes no longer speak the language of their ancestors, none know how to speak it.

The Romans offer another example that supports those who oppose unrestricted immigration. Failing to control immigration, the Romans lost their Empire. If it were not for the Catholic Church adopting Latin as its official language, Latin would have died with the Empire. It would have gone the way of Gothic, Doric, Hittite, Babylonian, Assyrian, Punic, Egyptian, Coptic, and many other dead ancient languages.

Both the opponents and proponents of unrestricted immigration can find examples to support their argument. Nevertheless, the weight of the evidence supports the opponents.

North American Indians
As discussed above, many Indian languages and even Indian tribes have perished under the weight of uncontrolled immigration. Moreover, as a result of uncontrolled immigration, some Indian tribes have deteriorated so much that they no longer use genetics to decide who is a member of the tribe. Instead, they use cultural identity: Anyone who identifies with the culture of the tribe is a member. (In this respect, they are like many Southerners, Paul Gottfried [a Northerner], and some writers of Abbeville Institute. They identify Southerners, a term that they use to cover not only Whites, but also Blacks and presumably other races, by culture instead of genetics. Thus, they err. Correctly speaking, “Southerner” is an ethnic group, i.e., a genetic and cultural group, and identifies Whites born and reared in the South and Whites who have lived in the South so long that they are indistinguishable from native Southern Whites. Moreover, Blacks in the South differ culturally from Southerners and, also, from Whites.)

Copyright © 2020 by Thomas Coley Allen.

More social issues articles.

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

JOHN BROWN’S CONNECTION TO ZIONISM

JOHN BROWN’S CONNECTION TO ZIONISM
Thomas Allen

    In 1859, John Brown, the father of modern-day terrorism, led an armed invasion of the South. His objective was to promote a slave revolt. Prominent abolitionists financed his invasion. They included Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Dr. Samuel Gridley Howe, Rev. Theodore Parker, Franklin Benjamin Sanborn, Gerrit Smith, and George Luther Stearns. This group became known as the Secret Six for their involvement with Brown. Other leading New Englanders who aided Brown were Samuel Cabot and John Murray Forbes.
    Higginson was from a leading New England banking family and a national leader of American Freemasonry. He funneled money from British radicals to abolitionists in Massachusetts who agreed with his goal of abolishing the United States Constitution and dissolving the United States.
    Howe was from a wealthy banking family and husband of Julia Howe, who wrote the anti-Southern song the “Battle Hymn of the Republic.” Howe and his wife, Julia, founded The Commonwealth, an antislavery tabloid.
    Parker was a leading Transcendentalist and Congregationalist minister and an activist in the Masonic tradition. He married into the Cabot family. He was the chief organizer of the Secret Six to finance John Brown’s raid.
    Sanborn was a disciple of Parker and Ralph Waldo Emerson. In 1857, he became Brown’s chief agent in New York.
    Smith was the first to finance Brown. He was the son of John Jacob Astor’s business partner. He was the largest land owner in New York, holding more than a million acres. Smith also gave Mazzini, the Italian revolutionary and later the most powerful man in the Western world, at least eight million dollars.
    Stearns was the leader of the Free Soilers (the Free Soilers were antislavery agitators in Kansas). He provided Brown and his terrorist gang money and a farm in Kansas from which to operate.
    Cabot paid for rifles for Brown to use in Kansas. Later his bank, Cabot Bank, lent Brown money for his terrorist operations. Brown never repaid this loan, and Cabot made no attempt to collect it.
    The Massachusetts State Disunion Convention, which Higginson called in 1857, laid plans for the Harper’s Ferry raid. Its objective was to split the United States. This convention was little more than a continuation of the Essex Junto, except instead of New England States leaving the Union, the Southern States would be driven out of the Union. The Essex Junto was behind the secession movement in New England at the time of the War of 1812.
    After Brown was executed, he became a martyr of the abolitionists. Ralph Waldo Emerson, a Young America supporter, an agent of the British imperialism, and ideological leader of the abolitionists conspiracy, eulogized him and promoted him as a saint.
    Closely associated with the Secret Six was C.I. Scofield. They used their influence to get him admitted to the bar in Kansas although he never attended law school and did not seem to have attended any college. They got him appointed U.S. District Attorney for Kansas, but scandal soon forced him to resign. After he was convicted of forgery, he became a follower of J.N. Darby, founder of the Brethren Movement.
    The Secret Six believed that the only way that America could be converted to socialism was for Christians to abandon politics and the affairs of state. (Abolitionism, socialism, and Zionism come from the same source and have the same hostility toward Christianity.) Christians had to cease being militant advocates of God’s law and the Holy Scriptures. The First Amendment needed to be subverted. Instead of meaning that government could not interfere with religion, it came to mean that the Christian Church was to be silent in the affairs of state.
    Samuel Untermyer, who was a wealthy corporate Jewish lawyer, a Zionist, and a communist sympathizer if not an outright Communist, was a major supporter of Scofield and the Scofield Reference Bible. Scofield came forth to emasculate Christianity. Through his annotated Bible, he taught a futuristic eschatology: Christ will return in the last days and rapture Christians from planet Earth thereby saving them from the evils of Satan, his anti-Christ, and his one world government and one world religion. The world must become worse and worse. An absolute autocrat must arise and rule the world. Scofield taught Zionism, the establishment of a Jewish political state to supplant the Palestinians in Palestine. This Jewish state must come into being before Christ returned. The result of his work was to convert Christians to Zionists. He demoralized and neutralized Christians.
    Untermyer later got President Wilson to appoint Louis Brandeis to the Supreme Court. Brandeis, a Zionists and a lawyer for the Jewish bank Kuhn, Loeb and Co., was the first Jew to serve on the Supreme Court.
    Wilson’s enjoyment of writing love letters to married women made him vulnerable to blackmail. Untermyer offered to give Wilson the money to buy these letters from his blackmailer if Wilson would allow him (Untermyer) to select the next Supreme Court Justice. Wilson accepted the offer, and Louis Brandies became the first Jew to serve on the Supreme Court. Brandies also became Wilson’s advisor on the Jewish Question.
    When the British government became hesitant about giving the Jews Palestine as a homeland, Wilson came forward and pressured the British government in keeping the promise that it made in the Balfour Declaration. With the Balfour Declaration, the British promised Palestine to the Jews as a Jewish homeland if the Jews brought the United States into World War I on the side of the British.
    The Secret Six had supported John Brown and his war of terrorism. They also supported Scofield, who later received the support of Untemyer. These two got the Scofield Bible published, which greatly aided Zionism. Untemyer went on to get Wilson to appoint Brandis to the Supreme Court. Brandis became Wilson’s advisor on Zionism, and Palestine became the Jewish homeland. Following World War II, Jewish terrorism gave birth to Israel. Thus, the Secret Six are to some extent responsible for the turmoil occurring in the Middle East today.

Copyright © 1995 by Thomas Coley Allen

More articles on history.