30 March, 2006

If Jews Don’t Like It, It’s Terrorism

Posted by alex in Alex Linder, jewish hate & hypocrisy, Jewish Tyranny, media control, Muslim media at 8:51 pm | Permanent Link

[Let’s face the truth. There are only two kinds of people in this world – jews and terrorists. Which are you?

If you speak against the jews, if you oppose their agenda, you become a “hater,” a “terrorist,” a “Nazi.” Doesn’t matter you’ve served them for decades, that you’re a pacifist like Zundel, you’ll be denounced in a shrieking second by the usual lineup of loxist Hebrews & baseball annies, aka the ashkenazi appeasers.

The jew is the very embodiment of hypocrisy. He leaps here and there shrieking, always shrieking, “democracy,” “tolerance,” and “rights.” But look at how the governments under his thumb act: they bomb, literally bomb, opposing media. They do all they can to outlaw media that don’t toe their line. They freeze assets, they bomb buildings, they start smear campaigns, they threaten advertisers, they murder journalists. These are not our allies, these are the people known as “us” to the rest of the world! No wonder we are hated! The rest of the world names and fights the jew; we cower before it, and allow it to perpetrate all manner of nastiness in our name.

Oh, but “we” are democrats. “They” are terrorists. Doesn’t matter what we or they do, the side of the jews is always the side of the angels, and anybody or media source saying otherwise should have its assets frozen and stolen, its reporters beat up, its propagating facilities bombed to rubble.]

CLIFFORD D. MAY: Turning off terrorist television

Scripps Howard News Service

Last Updated 9:21 am PST Wednesday, March 29, 2006

(SH) – Slowly and with difficulty, America’s military is learning to fight the armed conflicts of the 21st century. Slowly and with difficulty, we also are learning to fight a modern war of ideas.

A battle was won last week when the U.S. Treasury Department designated Hezbollah’s al Manar satellite television operation as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist organization. By prohibiting transactions between U.S. entities and al Manar, and freezing any assets al Manar may have in the U.S., this designation gives the government the tools it needs to cripple al Manar’s internationally broadcast incitements to terrorism.

The Coalition Against Terrorist Media (CATM) worked long and hard to achieve this result. An organization assembled by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, CATM includes Christian, Muslim, Jewish and secular groups and individuals – American and European.

It also is bipartisan, working closely with Sens. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., and Gordon Smith, R-Ore., as well as Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., Tom Lantos, D-Calif., Robert Wexler, D-Fla., Gary Ackerman, D-N.Y., and Mike Pence, R-Ind.

CATM has briefed more than 800 government officials and private sector executives in the U.S., Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. The result: At one time, al Manar was broadcast by nine satellite providers. Following CATM’s campaign, only Egyptian-owned NILESAT, and Saudi-owned ARABSAT continue to spread the terrorist station’s poisons in Europe, the Middle East and North Africa.

The number of multinational corporations advertising on al Manar also has decreased. CATM estimates it has denied al Manar no less than $2 million in advertising revenue to date.

Al Manar officials tried hard to convince U.S. authorities that its broadcasts are an exercise of free speech and therefore deserving of protection. But Treasury wisely concluded that al Manar is not merely the Islamist version of CNN or the Christian Broadcasting Network. Rather, al Manar is Hezbollah attempting to hide behind a corporate veil. Al Manar, said Treasury Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey, is an “entity maintained by a terrorist group” and therefore “as culpable as the terrorist group itself.”

Actually, Al Manar’s principle financial backer is the Militant Islamist regime in Iran – which also finances, arms and controls Hezbollah, the terrorist group that has killed more Americans than any other, except for al Qaida. The station serves as propagandist and surrogate for both Hezbollah and Iran’s radical mullahs.

Al Manar has been used by Hezbollah for operational surveillance, terrorist recruitment and fundraising. It calls on Muslims to volunteer to go to Iraq to suicide-bomb American soldiers. It encourages viewers to compensate the families of suicide bombers, even providing bank account numbers in which to deposit money.

If you’ve never viewed al Manar’s programs you’ve missed a singularly vile experience. In one al Manar video, the Statue of Liberty transforms into a ghoul dripping blood as a narrator menacingly intones: “America owes blood to all of humanity.” On al Manar, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah calls for “Death to America!”

Viciously anti-Semitic, al Manar ran the infamous “dramatization” of Jews slitting the throats of children and draining their blood to use in holiday baked goods.

For more than a quarter century, terrorists have attacked Americans – in Tehran, Beirut, Khobar, Nairobi, Dar es Salaam, the Red Sea and eventually in New York and Washington. Only since that last atrocity, have Americans begun to seriously fight back.

For more than a quarter century a war of ideas also has been raging. The West largely ignored the incitement emanating from Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and other extremist regimes.

But finally, and with great effort, we are learning how to fight a war of ideas. By acting to block al Manar’s salvos of terrorist incitement, Treasury has defended America and other free peoples as surely as if it had disarmed a suicide bomber.

“We have made the Reich by propaganda,” the Nazi leader Joseph Goebbels once boasted. Contemporary totalitarians intend to achieve a similar result. Last week, that goal was placed a little further from their reach.

Clifford D. May is president of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism.


  1. Similar posts:

  2. 07/26/06 The War Against Al-Manar 69% similar
  3. 08/25/06 CENSORSHIP: Jews Seek to Murder in the Dark 59% similar
  4. 07/24/06 Jews Hate Non-Jews News 42% similar
  5. 08/01/06 Mel Gibson Arrested on Terrorism Charges 35% similar
  6. 07/23/06 Jews First, Jews Last 33% similar
  7. 3 Responses to “If Jews Don’t Like It, It’s Terrorism”

    1. alex Says:

      The jew has but one answer to winning the war of ideas: preventing the other guy from speaking.

    2. Socrates Says:

      Isn’t it funny that America defends Israel, a state founded on terrorism by such Jewish groups as the Stern Gang? In fact, Jews committed many acts of terrorism in their efforts to obtain Palestine. For more information about that, see this: http://thewebfairy.com/nerdcities/Palestine/jewish-terrorism.htm

    3. apollonian Says:

      Criticism Helps, Builds Patriot Logic, Sanity
      (Apollonian, 1 Apr 06)

      Hey, thanks for first posting, this blog above, by Alex. Perhaps here I can re-post my polemic fm yesterday which got deleted fm other blog, “Dispossession”:

      “apollonian Says:
      The 31st of March, 2006 at 7:29 pm
      “Socrates� u misrepresent inasmuch as u deliberately pose something which is not mine, jumbled together, and contradictory, pretending it’s mine (�stawman� fallacy), a deliberate mis-quotation. Why resort to Jew censorship tactics?–it only discredits the entire dialectic endeavor–like “outis� calling people “faggots,� “Merovius� invoking “satanism�–yet even I wouldn’t advocate censorship of them as they seem to be so sincere in their way. I simply strive to reply to what substance they do offer.

      “Alex, u miss the point: question is why do u have to censor and take something off like u do?–what is the harm for leaving it up? U say most don’t read, but I’ve had fair results on NewNation.org with one essay u deleted. As long as I can thus claim to SOME popularity, however plausible, why not leave my stuff alone and let it speak for itself? If what u say is true, why not simply ignore it with ur usual contempt–rather than go to all the trouble of such outright censorship? I mean there seems to be some resentment attached which u won’t acknowledge. My effort is info of volk; why can’t we just disagree amicably about “relevanceâ€??–u relying upon ur own positive merit as persuader, which surely does have enough real virtue and effect of its own, which I’m always willing to acknowledge? Why go so far to deprive me even of those few “eccentricâ€? sort who may appreciate my stuff?”

      Honest elections and death to the Fed. A.