All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
In a compelling piece of live television, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was recently confronted by a COVID-19 vaccine injury victim during an unscripted question and answer session. Describing the pain and trauma he suffered, audience member John Watt told the Prime Minister how he had been left with no help at all after the vaccine caused him to develop a heart condition. Already under pressure over his links to a hedge fund that has seen massive returns from an investment in COVID-19 vaccine maker Moderna, Sunak was like a rabbit caught in the headlights.
Broadcast on the GB News channel during what had been billed as a ‘People’s Forum’, the incident occurred while Sunak was being posed a mostly innocuous series of questions by members of a studio audience. But the atmosphere quickly changed when Watt stood up and demanded that the Prime Minister look him in the eyes. Stating that he knows people who have had limbs amputated as a result of COVID-19 vaccines, Watt asked why he had had to set up a support group to look after those affected.
Visibly furious, Watt also asked Sunak why tens of thousands of British COVID-19 vaccine victims had been left to rot. Telling the Prime Minister that the country’s so-called ‘Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme’ was not fit for purpose, he said that in Scotland alone more than 30 thousand people have had adverse reactions to the shots. Tellingly, Watt’s contribution was given an enthusiastic round of applause by the assembled audience.
Predictably, Sunak’s response largely avoided Watt’s concerns. Despite claiming that he was very sorry to hear about Watt’s circumstances, it was quickly clear that straight answers to his questions would not be forthcoming. As Sunak’s evasiveness became apparent, Watt interrupted saying that he and other victims had been silenced on social media. “We are the most silenced people in this country,” he said.
The event then briefly descended into chaos with another vaccine-injured audience member speaking up and the television program’s presenter desperately trying to regain control over the situation. Despite being told that the Prime Minister would look at his concerns, Watts will have heard little to reassure him.
Sunak’s Alleged Links to Moderna
The reasons behind Sunak’s failure to address this issue properly are not simply down to politics, as he has recently been facing scrutiny over his connections to a hedge fund, Theleme Partners, which has seen substantial gains from an investment in COVID-19 vaccine maker Moderna. A co-founder of Theleme Partners before entering politics in 2013, Sunak says his involvement with the fund is managed through a blind trust, meaning he supposedly has no knowledge or control over its investments. Nevertheless, questions persist regarding whether he personally benefited from the dramatic rise in Moderna’s share price during the pandemic.
Despite repeated criticism, however, Sunak maintains he is unaware of any financial gains. But with publicly available evidence indicating that the Theleme Partners investment in Moderna is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, concerns over potential conflicts of interest have continued.
Only rarely are senior politicians confronted by the victims of COVID-19 vaccines. The fact that this latest incident occurred on live television makes it all the more remarkable. Realizing that the handling of the pandemic is coming under increased worldwide scrutiny, Prime Minister Sunak may be less keen on taking live unscripted questions in future.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Ach ja, unsere Grünen: Sie sind so empfindsam, wenn es um und gegen sie selbst geht. Da haben doch irgendwelche Menschen (wahrscheinlich gesichert rechtsextrem) das so schön geplante Aschermittwochsspektakel im baden-württembergischen Städtchen Biberach verhindert.
Von Wolfgang HübnerWelch ein Verstoß gegen die demokratische Etikette! Wie kann man das nur der Partei antun, die Tag für Tag daran schuftet, nicht nur das Weltklima, sondern auch Buntland vor der Machtergreifung durch die AfD-Faschisten zu retten! Wie können es diese Unmenschen (bestimmt gesichert rechtsextrem) nur wagen, die Grünen genau mit den linksgrünen Methoden zu attackieren, die bei jeden größeren und künftig auch privaten Zusammenkünften von rechten Demokraten und AfD-Tagungen längst als völlig normal gelten?Da sich die Grünen überhaupt nicht vorstellen können, dass es in deutschen Landen zunehmenden biodeutschen Volkszorn über den künftigen Lieblingskoalitionspartner von Friedrich Merz geben könnte, lassen sie einen der ihren den Verdacht in die Welt setzen: „Wir können nicht ausschließen, dass an solchen Aktionen russische Trolle beteiligt sind, dass es auch Teil einer hybriden Kriegsführung ist“. Da müssen nun der Systemschutz von Herrn Haldenwang und die Polizei aber ganz schnell dafür sorgen, dass diese Trolle aufgespürt und schleunigst in ihre finstere östliche Heimat remigriert werden!Tröstlich, dass die Grünen mutige Führer wie Herrn Nouripour haben, der trotzig verkündet: „Angst ist keine Option!“ Denn es reicht doch vollkommen aus, wenn das Machtkartell jedem Angst macht, der noch der merkwürdigen Ansicht anhängt, Opposition gegen dessen Machenschaften sei ein verbrieftes Bürgerrecht!
Ist bald Schluss mit lustig? Foto: (Symbolfoto: Durch pathdoc/Shutterstock)
Eins muss man den Grünen ja lassen: Sie sind konsequent. Und von daher muss sich auch keiner wundern, dass sie jetzt die Bezahlkarte für Flüchtling ablehnen, weil es ja so diskriminierend ist, wenn diese nicht mehr das Geld anderer Leute in die Heimat schicken dürfen.
Die “Bild” vermeldet, dass die “Partei des deutschen Untergangs” die dafür notwendige Anpassung eines Gesetzes torpedieren wollen, wenn nicht gleichzeitig sichergestellt wird, das die Meldepflicht von Flüchtlingen ohne Pass überarbeitet wird. Und zwar so, dass diese Flüchtlinge zum Arzt gehen können – ohne Angst vor Abschiebung haben zu müssen.
“Hintergrund: In Deutschland leben Hunderttausende ohne Papiere. Für diese „vollziehbar Ausreisepflichtigen“ gibt es eine medizinische Basis-Versorgung. Geht jemand von ihnen zum Arzt, muss er aber damit rechnen, gemeldet und abgeschoben zu werden.”
Zurecht, doch genau das wollen die Grünen verhindern und versuchen nun, die Koalitionspartner zu erpressen. Wobei das Ding mit der Bezahlkarte eh Ländersache ist.
Aber man kann es ma mal probieren. Es sind ja immer noch nicht genügend Rheinländer in Deutschland und noch ist auch noch etwas Geld von denjenigen, die noch arbeiten, übrig, dass man in der Welt verteilen kann.
Wenn sich die FDP nicht endlich mal zusammenreißt und hinschmeißt und nicht erst wartet, bis sie bei der nächsten Bundestagswahl aus dem Parlament fliegt, ist dieses Land verloren. Mit Material von dts)
Foto: Alexander Dobrindt (Archiv) (via dts Nachrichtenagentur)
Alleine die Stellenbeschreibung zeigt uns deutlich, wohin die Reise in Westeuropa gehen soll:
Der CSU-Landesgruppenvorsitzende Alexander Dobrindt hat auf der Münchener Sicherheitskonferenz einen neuen EU-Kommissar für Aufrüstung gefordert. “Die EU braucht keinen Verteidigungskommissar”, sagte Dobrindt der “Bild” (Samstagausgabe). “Die EU braucht einen Kommissar für Aufrüstung.”
Es sei die Aufgabe der Nationalstaaten, die Verteidigung untereinander zu organisieren und gemeinsam mit der Nato zu strukturieren. “Was aber Aufgabe der EU sein kann, ist die Koordinierung von Rüstungsproduktion, die Synchronisierung von Waffensystemen und der Aufbau von Kapazitäten zur Munitionsproduktion”, sagte der CSU-Politiker. “Dazu könnte ein Kommissar für Aufrüstung die notwendigen Initiativen koordinieren.”
Dobrindt Äußerung ist ein Gegenvorschlag zum Vorstoß des SPD-Bundesvorsitzenden Lars Klingbeil, der dem “Spiegel” gesagt hatte, es brauche einen europäischen Binnenmarkt der Verteidigung und “einen Kommissar für Verteidigung”. Ähnlich wie Klingbeil hatte sich danach die Verteidigungspolitikerin Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (FDP) geäußert.
Aber so sind sie nun mal die Bürokraten. Hauptsache, es wird eine neue Stelle geschaffen, ein neuer Kommissar geboren, dann geht es auch irgendwie weiter.Werbung
Dass es ein Kommissar für AUFRÜSTUNG werden soll, belegt, dass es nur darum geht, der Rüstungsindustrie unter die Arme zu greifen, nachdem man ja so erfolgreich die Pharmaindustrie füttern konnte.
Die EU ist nicht nur eine Gefahr für Leib und Seele, sondern auch für den Frieden. Denn wir benötigen wohl eher – wenn überhaupt – einen Kommissar für ABRÜSTUNG.
Aber stattdessen wird es hier bald von Atombomben wimmeln. Nur gut, dass wenigstens die Atomkraftwerke abgeschaltet sind.
Diese Welt ist nur noch verrückt geworden. (Mit Material von dts)
Wegen eines Plakats mit der Aufschrift „Grüne & Grün-Wähler werden bei uns nicht mehr bedient – Die deutschen Bauern!“ prüft die Staatsanwaltschaft im brandenburgischen Neuruppin den Anfangsverdacht der Volksverhetzung. Wurde jemals das selbe kranke linke Theater aufgeführt, wenn Gratismutige selbiges gegen “Ungeimpfte” oder die AfD initiierten?
Zu was für einem kranken, totalitären Gebilde dieses Land durch links-grüne Ideologen gemacht wurde, das kann man sich einmal mehr im brandenburgischen Neuruppin betrachten.
Dort waren mehrere Schilder mit der Aufschrift „Grüne & Grün-Wähler werden bei uns nicht mehr bedient – Die deutschen Bauern! an mehreren Orten aufgetaucht. Nun bestätigte der zuständige Oberstaatsanwalt am Freitag gegenüber der Deutschen Presse-Agentur, dass nach einer Strafanzeige der Anfangsverdacht der Volksverhetzung geprüft werde.
Grundlage sei hier Paragraf 130 des Strafgesetzbuchs, der jene bestraft, die die „Menschenwürde anderer dadurch angreift, dass er eine vorbezeichnete Gruppe, Teile der Bevölkerung oder einen Einzelnen wegen dessen Zugehörigkeit zu einer vorbezeichneten Gruppe oder zu einem Teil der Bevölkerung beschimpft, böswillig verächtlich macht oder verleumdet“.
Wer die nun polizeilich ins Visier genommenen Täter sind, “ist noch unklar”. Gesichert ist demgegenüber die Wahrnehmung der komplett unbekannten, lokalen Grünen-Politikerin Bärbel Treutler, die offenbar ihre mediale Stunde gekommen sieht. Die vermeldet gegenüber dem Staatsfunker rbb: “Wer sowas plakatiert, da ist blindwütiger Hass im Spiel. Man kann ja diskutieren, Dialog ist immer wichtig, aber auf einer sachlichen Ebene.”
Screenshot
Und der Bauernverband Prignitz konnte sich gar nicht schnell genug von dem Plakat distanzierten,
Werbung
An dieser Stelle erinnert man sich an die unerträgliche Hetze, an den unerträglichen Hasse, der während des Corona-Terrors über Ungeimpfte ausgeschüttet wurde. Wurde hier jemals der Staatsschutz aktiv? Oder “Wir bedienen keine AfDler”-Gratismutaktionen?
In den sozialen Medien scheint es so, als ob immer mehr Bürger erkennen, wohin dieses Land von links-grünen Ideologen gesteuert wurde:
“An Scheinheiligkeit ist das ganze schon nicht mehr zu überbieten ob bei Corona oder bei der AFD da darf nahezu alles gesagt und geschrieben werden aber wehe es geht gegen die Ampel da ist man dann sehr empfindlich. Und mit Ideologen kann man nicht diskutieren die werden immer auf ihrem Standpunkt beharren.“
“Ungeimpfte dürfen nicht rein – Wer hat’s erfunden – Wer hat ermittelt –Auf jeden Fall nicht die Staatsanwaltschaft”
Die WHO-Puppenspieler werden zu neuen Herren der Welt nach eigenem Ermessen (Symbolbild:Shutterstock)
Die Weltgesundheitsorganisation WHO ist entschlossen, ihren diktatorischen Pandemievertrag und die Änderung der Internationalen Gesundheitsvorschriften (IGH) mit allen Mitteln durchzusetzen. Am Montag beginnt in Genf eine Konferenz, auf der die Änderungen vorangetrieben werden sollen, damit sie dann im Mai planmäßig auf der Generalversammlung verabschiedet werden können. Sollte es tatsächlich so kommen, dann bedeutet dies nicht nur das Ende der nationalen Souveränität der WHO-Mitgliedsstaaten, sondern auch des Rechts auf körperliche Selbstbestimmung. Künftig könnte dann der WHO-Generalsekretär nach freiem Belieben und freihändig bestimmen, wann irgendwo auf der Welt ein “gesundheitlicher Notstand” besteht. Die WHO schaltet sich dann ein und übernimmt faktisch die Gesundheitspolitik des betreffenden Landes.
Sie kann dann, über die Köpfe der Regierungen und Bürger hinweg, die medikamentöse Behandlung vorschreiben, Lockdowns und Ausgangssperren verhängen, Impfpflichten mit eilig zugelassenen Vakzinen einführen, die gesamte Informationspolitik an sich reißen, um vermeintliche „Desinformationen“ zu unterdrücken, und Sanktionen verhängen. Es handelt sich de facto um ein totalitäres “Gesundheitsregime”, das weit über die Gesundheitspolitik hinausgeht – inklusive Zensur und Bespitzelung. Auch „Klimanotstände“ könnten beliebig ausgerufen werden, die bereits im Vertragsentwurf unter sogenannten “PHEIC”-Fällen als gesundheitspolitische Krisenfälle angepasst wurden, um mit einem Ausnahmezustand auch gleich dieses Thema diktatorisch miterfassen zu können.
Nicht einmal der Bundestag muss mehr zustimmen
Der Willkür wären Tür und Tor geöffnet, es gäbe keine Möglichkeit, gegen dieses Diktat vorzugehen. Das Corona-Regime war der Testlauf für diesen beispiellosen Generalangriff auf Freiheit und Souveränität. Der Vertrag zu den internationalen Gesundheitsvorschriften würde zehn Monate nach der Unterzeichnung automatisch zu geltendem Völkerrecht (!). Der Bundestag müsste nicht einmal mehr zustimmen.
Werbung
Klar ist schon jetzt, dass Gesundheitsminister Karl Lauterbach und der Rest der Ampel-Regierung natürlich nichts gegen diese totalitäre Ausweitung der WHO-Machtanmaßung tun werden – im Gegenteil: Sie werben dafür und legen auch hier eifrig Axt an die nationale Selbstbestimmung Deutschlands. Der Pandemievertrag ist eine Blaupause für weitere supranationale Vollmachten, die letzten Staaten und Völker zu entmachteten Befehlsempfängern machen, deren Einwohner keinerlei demokratische Mitsprache- oder Kontrollmöglichkeiten mehr haben. Genau dies entspricht den alptraumhaften Zukunftsvisionen ökosozialistischer Globalisten. Der Prozess ist bereits im Gange – im Zuge der Machtausweitung undemokratischer, nicht legitimierter und intransparenter NGOs, die von den Bürgern nicht zur Verantwortung gezogen werden können. Die Bürgerrechtsorganisation CitizenGO hat eine Petition gegen diesen bislang extremsten Ausdruck globalistischen Machtstrebens gestartet, die bis jetzt von über 300.000 Menschen unterzeichnet wurde. Es bleibt zu hoffen, dass sich bei Regierungen, denen noch an der Freiheit ihres Landes liegt und Bürgern, die sich nicht noch einmal für medizinische Großversuche missbrauchen lassen wollen, genug Widerstand aufkommt, um dieses Verhängnis aufzuhalten.
Perceived anti-semitism is cited as evidence for why Israel needs to be even more violent, militaristic and tyrannical than it already was, and why its brutal treatment of Palestinians is justified and correct.
Pro-Israel rally in Los Angeles. (Israeli American Council/Wikimedia Commons.)
There’s a certain particularly toxic personality type which thrives on being hated. They behave in wildly odious and destructive ways, and then when people react to this with hostility they plunge into poor-me victimhood, which they then use to justify more odious and destructive behavior.
You may have been unfortunate enough to have encountered such personalities in your own life. They behave atrociously, and then when people react to it they say “See?? I really AM being persecuted!”
Hillary Clinton is a perfect example of this personality type taken to the extreme. People hate her because she’s a phony, egomaniacal sadist who has spent her entire political career pushing for mass military bloodshed at every opportunity, but she then frames this hatred as evidence of widespread misogyny and far-right extremism, which is why the world desperately needs Hillary Clinton to help fight those things.
Any remotely normal person who was both as wealthy and as despised as Hillary Clinton would have simply retired from public life to enjoy their hundreds of millions of dollars, blissfully sheltered from the vitriol and condemnation of the common riff raff.
But Clinton keeps showing up, adamantly refusing to go away, because the hatred she receives is actually what fuels her entire personal dynamic.
We see a large-scale version of this same dynamic with the state of Israel. A Jewish anti-Zionist Israeli named Alon Mizrahi posted an interesting piece on Twitter a few days ago that’s been rattling around in my head ever since, wherein he argues that Israel is actually intentionally generating hatred towards itself in order to shore up political power.
Claiming that “Israel and American Jewish organizations took it upon themselves to keep Jews afraid and isolated” in a “strategy of intentional paranoia,” Mizrahi opines that when Oct. 7 hit, “the right wing, nationalistic, paranoid section of the Jewish political spectrum, realized it could be translated into political gold.”
“It doesn’t seem like Israel is trying to be hated globally. It is actually what it’s doing,” Mizrahi writes. “It is intentionally airing its cruelty and barbarity so that it will remain closed up to the world, thus guaranteeing the continued rule of the paranoia camp.”
“Palestinians are just crash test dummies in this scenario,” he adds. “Their deaths are used to get people angry and Israel hated, so it becomes even more paranoid.”
Whether you accept or reject Mizrahi’s perspective, you can’t deny that Israel’s apologists have been seizing on the outrage its actions in Gaza have caused as evidence of anti-semitic persecution.
Common pro-Palestine chants like, “From the river to the sea Palestine will be free” have been deceitfully labeled calls for the genocide of Jews, and any criticism of Israel’s actions is met with a deluge of accusations of anti-semitism.
Once Israel and its western supporters succeeded in framing any opposition to the Israeli government as evidence of anti-semitism, it was guaranteed that any time Israel does something evil it will cause a new wave of “anti-semitism” per those standards.
This perceived hatred and persecution could then be cited as evidence for why Israel needs to be even more violent, militaristic and tyrannical than it already was, and why its brutal treatment of Palestinians is justified and correct.
This in turn could be used by western governments to justify pouring more weapons into Israel and providing military support against its neighbors.
In this dynamic, anything Israel does causes more people to hate Israel both in the middle east and around the world, to which Israel responds by tearfully proclaiming “See?? They hate us! We must defend ourselves against their hostilities!”
This is not the sort of behavior you would accept from someone in your life, and it shouldn’t be the sort of behavior we accept from nuclear-armed ethno-states.
As with any other widespread dysfunction, the key to dismantling this one is to spread awareness of what it is that Israel is doing.
And what Israel is doing, ultimately, is weaponizing sympathy and victimhood. When somebody is using a weapon to hurt others, you take their weapon away.
The world needs to stop giving Israel sympathy and stop buying into its victimhood narratives, because those narratives are only ever used to justify more and more western-backed atrocities.
This won’t happen until enough awareness has spread of what’s really going on here. For there to be a movement toward health, a lot of eyes need to open to the unwholesomeness of this manipulative dynamic?—?both inside and outside of Israel.
Luckily that does appear to be the case. More and more people are recognizing the unwholesomeness of the pro-Israel victimhood narrative, just as you’d eventually recognize the unwholesomeness of someone in our own life who keeps behaving terribly and then playing the victim.
It’s going to be a messy, two-steps-forward-one-step-back slog, but I think we’ll find our way out of this mess eventually.
Caitlin Johnstone’s work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following her on Facebook, Twitter, Soundcloud, YouTube, or throwing some money into her tip jar on Ko-fi, Patreon or Paypal. If you want to read more you can buy her books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff she publishes is to subscribe to the mailing list at her website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything she publishes. For more info on who she is, where she stands and what she’s trying to do with her platform, click here. All works are co-authored with her American husband Tim Foley.
Israel took advantage of 123 million TV viewers — the most since the 1969 Moon landing — to ply its propaganda during Sunday’s U.S. football championship match, writes Alan MacLeod.
Robert Kraft at the launch of Combined Jewish Philanthropies’ “Face Jewish Hate” campaign in Boston on May 15, 2023. (Office of Governor Maura Healey, Flickr, Joshua Qualls, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
Amid the fast-paced action that saw the Kansas City Chiefs win their third championship in five years, Americans tuning in to watch the Super Bowl were met with a barrage of unusual propaganda.
Nestled between the typical ads for cars and beer were two bizarre messages: one from the Foundation to Combat anti-Semitism (FCAS) and the other from the State of Israel itself. Both were intimately related to the ongoing slaughter in Gaza and trying to draw attention away from Israeli war crimes.
The FCAS commercial features Clarence B. Jones, the former advisor to Martin Luther King, Jr., who drafted his famous “I Have a Dream” speech. The message is that there is a growing tidal wave of racist intolerance in America and that we must all come together to oppose anti-Semitism — the commercial ends by telling people to visit the website StandUpToJewishHate.com.
Super Bowl ads do not come cheap, and its $7 million for 30-second air time price tag was footed by the billionaire owner of the New England Patriots N.F.L. franchise, Robert Kraft. Kraft (net worth: $11 billion) made his fortune in the paper and packaging business and has deep ties to the state of Israel, including donating hundreds of millions of dollars to pro-Israel groups and funding pro-Israel candidates in U.S. elections. He even enjoys a close relationship with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
We are asking all Americans to stand up to hate and not be silent. Millions of people saw our ad during the Super Bowl and we have one question: how will you stand up? #StandUpToJewishHate #? pic.twitter.com/uA6cRi5aaL
Kraft married his wife in Israel in 1962 and has reportedly made over 100 visits to the country, including leading dozens of PR missions there, bringing celebrities and sports stars with him. He also maintains a network of charities across Israel.
In December, he pledged a gigantic $100 million to the FCAS. This was, Forbesreported, to “educate the public about the rise in antisemitic incidents and further develop the relationship between the Black and Jewish communities.” Considering its content and invocation of Dr. King, it seems clear that the Super Bowl ad was part of Kraft’s plan to target the Black community.
Black Americans are far more progressive on Palestine than the rest of the population. Many Black leaders, as well as movements such as Black Lives Matter, have allied themselves with the Palestinian cause, seeing parallels and connections between the oppression of Palestinians abroad and the treatment of Black Americans at home.
Black-Palestinian solidarity mural depicting George Floyd, murdered by a U.S. police officer, Gaza City, 2020. (Kalboz, Wikimedia Commons, PDM-owner)
A December poll by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace found that 28 percent of the Black population favored an immediate ceasefire, as opposed to 20 percent of white Americans. Only 5 percent of African Americans wanted the U.S. government to show “unwavering support” to Israel, versus 23 percent of the white population.
Funding Anti-Anti-Semitism
In Kraft’s view, therefore, the Black population’s outlook is a problem. The billionaire sports owner founded the FCAS in 2019 amid growing domestic and international opposition to the state of Israel’s apartheid policies in Palestine. He announced the move at a lavish ceremony in Jerusalem, where he was presented with the Genesis Prize – an Israeli government-backed award given to individuals who most aid the Jewish state.
After the ceremony, he had lunch with his friend, Netanyahu. Kraft had previously supported Netanyahu by attending his speech to Congress in 2015. “Israel does not have a more loyal friend than Robert Kraft,” Netanyahu said.
Kraft was awarded the $1 million Genesis Prize for his efforts in philanthropy and “combating anti-Semitism.” Yet his views on what does and does not constitute anti-Semitism are contentious, to say the least.
In the wake of the historic wave of protests across the U.S. calling for a ceasefire in the Middle East, he appeared on MSNBC to denounce those taking part as supporters of terrorism. “It’s horrible to me that a group like Hamas can be respected and people in the United States of America can be carrying flags or supporting them,” he said, clearly equating supporting Palestinian rights with terrorism. “Hamas is preaching the eradication of all Jewish people from the Earth,” he added.
Thus, while the FCAS claims to be standing against lies and racism, its founder continues to spread his own disinformation in service of the Israeli project.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, he also opposes the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement — a grassroots campaign to peacefully bring economic pressure on the state of Israel to stop its oppression and occupation of its neighbors. Kraft sees BDS as a form of anti-Jewish racism, lumping it in with attacks on synagogues or the growing threat from the far-right.
Pro-Palestine demonstration in Oakland, California, August 2014. (Alex Chis, Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0 )
“My vision is to work to end the violence against Jewish communities. To counter the normalization of anti-Semitic narratives that question Israel’s right to exist, disguised as part of legitimate debate on campuses and in the media,” he said, thereby hinting that the FCAS will attempt to insert themselves into college campuses nationwide and pressure the media to take (even) more pro-Israel stances.
The Israel Lobby’s Financier
Kraft is one of the Israel lobby’s chief benefactors, donating millions of dollars to various groups throughout his life. In 2022, for example, he gave $1 million to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s (AIPAC) super PAC. AIPAC works to push pro-Israel policies across the U.S. and insert pro-Israel language into as many pieces of legislation as possible.
He also funds the Friends of the Israeli Defense Forces – a group that raises money to help Israeli soldiers, even as they carry out war crimes in Palestine, Syria and beyond. Other pro-Israel groups, he has given sizeable donations to include:
American Friends of the Israel Museum
American Friends of the Yitzhak Rabin Center
The Anti-Defamation League
The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis
The Jewish Agency for Israel
The Jewish National Fund
StandWithUs
The Israel Project
Through his organization, Touchdown in Israel, Kraft regularly organizes propaganda trips to Israel for former N.F.L. players, no doubt hoping they will become advocates of the Jewish state.
Arguably the most influential way in which Kraft influences American public life, however, is his consistent funding of right-wing Democrats standing against progressives and advocates for justice in Palestine.
In 2021, for example, he donated $5,800 to Congresswoman Shontel Brown in her contentious face-off against progressive Nina Turner and another $2,900 to her reelection. Brown was a little-known but strongly pro-Israel candidate standing against a democratic socialist, national co-chair of Bernie Sanders’ 2020 election campaign, and an outspoken critic of Israel’s policies.
Brown greeting President Joe Biden at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport July 6, 2022. (White House, Adam Schultz)
Vast amounts of pro-Israel money flowed into Brown’s campaign, helping her to defeat Turner. In her acceptance speech, Brown praised Israel and later thanked the Jewish community for “help[ing] me get over the finish line.”
Kraft has also given money to pro-Israel Democrats, including David Cicilline; Juan Vargas; Ted Deutch; Jake Auchincloss and Ritchie Torres.
His actions, donations and public pronouncements have drawn condemnation from some who have followed them. Sports journalist Dave Zirin, for example, recently wrote that:
“He appears to think that any criticism of Israel is inherently antisemitic. For Kraft, it is Jews like myself, rabbis, and Holocaust survivors calling for a ceasefire and a free Palestine that are part of the problem. And Kraft seems to think that opposition to Israel, the IDF, and the AIPAC agenda is antisemitism.”
Israel on TV
Super Bowl viewers were subjected to another pro-Israel ad in between the action, this one directly funded by and representing the Israeli government.
“To all the dads,” the voiceover says, as images of wholesome fatherhood activities play on the screen,
“The funny ones, the silly ones, the strong ones, the adventurous ones. To all the dads held in captivity by Hamas for over 120 days, we vow to bring you home.”
On the surface of the ad, the Israeli government was sending a message to Israeli fathers still in Hamas custody. That message was that they were working to bring them home (by spending millions of dollars to air the message on American TV during the Super Bowl.)
The reality, however, is that this was an attempt to sway the American public into identifying with Israel, suggesting that this could happen to any of their fathers’ too.
Israel ran an ad during the Super Bowl vowing to «bring all their dads home» in reference to the Israeli captives being held in Gaza.
But what about the dads in Gaza who have suffered the worst grief imaginable at the hands of Israel’s genocidal campaign? pic.twitter.com/JerxiRHkKy
Many viewers felt that what they saw amounted to little more than expensive disinformation. “I’m sorry, is Israel seriously airing a SOB STORY PROPAGANDA AD during the SUPER BOWL while SIMULTANEOUSLY BOMBING THE REFUGEES AT RAFAH???????” wrote one viewer on Twitter.
Nevertheless, the Super Bowl was the most-watched American telecast ever, reaching over 123 million viewers. Some say you cannot put a price on that sort of publicity, but apparently, you can, and that price is $7 million. Propaganda it might be, but in America, money talks. And both Robert Kraft and the government of Israel certainly have a lot of it to spend.
There are three basic problems with the C.I.A.: its objectives, methods and unaccountability.
Its operational objectives are whatever the C.I.A. or the president of the United States defines to be in the U.S. interest at a given time, irrespective of international law or U.S. law.
Its methods are secretive and duplicitous.
Its unaccountability means that the C.I.A. and president run foreign policy without any public scrutiny. Congress is a doormat, a sideshow.
“I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole. We had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment.”
The C.I.A. was established in 1947 as the successor to the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). The OSS had performed two distinct roles in World War II, intelligence and subversion. The C.I.A. took over both roles.
On the one hand, the C.I.A. was to provide intelligence to the U.S. government. On the other, the C.I.A. was to subvert the “enemy,” that is, whomever the president or C.I.A. defined as the enemy, using a wide range of measures: assassinations, coups, staged unrest, arming of insurgents, and other means.
It is the latter role that has proved devastating to global stability and the U.S. rule of law. It is a role that the C.I.A. continues to pursue today. In effect, the C.I.A. is a secret army of the U.S., capable of creating mayhem across the world with no accountability whatsoever.
When President Dwight Eisenhower decided that Africa’s rising political star, democratically-elected Patrice Lumumba of Congo was the “enemy,” the C.I.A. conspired in his 1961 assassination, thus undermining the democratic hopes for Africa. He would hardly be the last African president brought down by the C.I.A.
Lumumba in Brussels for a conference in 1960 with other members of the Congolese National Movement delegation. (Harry Pot, Anefo, CC0, Wikimedia Commons)
In its 77-year history, the C.I.A. has been held to serious public account just once, in 1975. In that year, Idaho Sen. Frank Church led a Senate investigation that exposed the C.I.A.’s rampage of assassinations, coups, destabilization, surveillance and Mengele-style torture and medical “experiments.”
The exposé by the Church Committee of the C.I.A.’s shocking malfeasance has recently been chronicled in a superb book by the investigative reporter James Risen, The Last Honest Man: The C.I.A., the FBI, the Mafia, and the Kennedys ? and One Senator’s Fight to Save Democracy.
That single episode of oversight occurred because of a rare confluence of events.
In the year before the Church Committee, the Watergate scandal had toppled Richard Nixon and weakened the White House. As successor to Nixon, Gerald Ford was unelected, a former congressman and reluctant to oppose the oversight prerogatives of the Congress.
The Watergate scandal, investigated by the Senate Ervin Committee, had also empowered the Senate and demonstrated the value of Senate oversight of executive branch abuses of power. Crucially, the C.I.A. was newly led by Director William Colby, who wanted to clean up the C.I.A. operations. Also, F.B.I. Director J. Edgar Hoover, author of pervasive illegalities also exposed by the Church committee, had died in 1972.
Hersh Exposes CIA Ops Against Antiwar Movement
In December 1974, investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, then as now a great reporter with sources inside the C.I.A., published an account of illegal C.I.A. intelligence operations against the U.S. anti-war movement.
The Senate Majority Leader at the time, Mike Mansfield, a leader of character, then appointed Church to investigate the C.I.A. Church himself was a brave, honest, intelligent, independent-minded, and intrepid senator, characteristics chronically in short supply in U.S. politics.
If only the C.I.A.’s rogue operations had been consigned to history as a result of the crimes exposed by the Church Committee, or at the least had brought the C.I.A. under the rule of law and public accountability. But that was not to be.
The C.I.A. has had the last laugh — or better said, has brought the world to tears —by maintaining its preeminent role in U.S. foreign policy, including overseas subversion.
Since 1975, the C.I.A. has run secretive operations backing Islamic jihadists in Afghanistan that utterly wrecked Afghanistan while giving rise to Al-Qaeda.
The C.I.A. has likely run secretive operations in the Balkans against Serbia, in the Caucuses against Russia and in Central Asia targeting China, all deploying C.I.A.-backed jihadists.
In the 2010s, the C.I.A. ran deadly operations to topple Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, again with Islamist jihadists.
For at least 20 years, the C.I.A. has been deeply involved in fomenting the growing catastrophe in Ukraine, including the violent overthrow of Ukraine’s President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014 that triggered the devastating war now engulfing Ukraine.
What do we know of these operations? Only the parts that whistleblowers, a few intrepid investigative reporters, a handful of brave scholars and some foreign governments have been willing or able to tell us, with all of these potential witnesses knowing that they might face severe retribution from the U.S. government.
No Restraint
There has been little-to-no accountability by the U.S. government itself, or meaningful oversight or restraint imposed by Congress. On the contrary, the government has become ever-more obsessively secretive, pursuing aggressive legal actions against disclosures of classified information, even when, or especially when, that information describes the illegal actions by the government itself.
Once in a while, a former U.S. official spills the beans, such as when Zbigniew Brzezinski revealed that he had induced Jimmy Carter to assign the C.I.A. to train Islamic jihadists to destabilize the government of Afghanistan, with the aim of inducing the Soviet Union to invade that country.
National Security Advisor Brzezinski, on left of those standing, with Carter during a tour of Strategic Air Command’s headquarters in Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska, October 1977. (U.S. Air Force, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0)
In the case of Syria, we learned from a few stories in TheNew York Times in 2016 and 2017 of the C.I.A.’s subversive operations to destabilize Syria and overthrow Assad, as ordered by President Barack Obama.
Here is the case of a dreadfully misguided C.I.A. operation, blatantly in violation of international law, that has led to a decade of mayhem, an escalating regional war, hundreds of thousands of deaths, and millions of displaced people, and yet there has not been a single honest acknowledgment of this C.I.A.-led disaster by the White House or Congress.
Major Covert Role in Ukraine
In the case of Ukraine, we know that the U.S. played a major covert role in the violent coup that brought down Yanukovych and that swept Ukraine into a decade of bloodshed but to this day, we don’t know the details.
Russia offered the world a window into the coup by intercepting and then posting a call between Victoria Nuland, then U.S. assistant secretary of state (now under-secretary of state) and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt (now assistant secretary of state), in which they plot the post-coup government.
Following the coup, the C.I.A. covertly trained special operations forces of the post-coup regime the U.S. had helped bring to power. The U.S. government has been mum about the C.I.A.’s covert operations in Ukraine.
June 2014: Ukraine’s post-coup President Petro Poroshenko, Pyatt and Nuland meeting in Warsaw. Then Secretary of State John Kerry, in background on right. (State Department)
We have good reason to believe that C.I.A. operatives carried out the destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline, as per Seymour Hersh, who is now an independent reporter. Unlike in 1975, when Hersh was with The New York Times at a time when the paper still tried to hold the government to account, the Times does not even deign to look into Hersh’s account.
Holding the C.I.A. to public account is of course a steep uphill struggle. Presidents and the Congress don’t even try. The mainstream media don’t investigate the C.I.A., preferring instead to quote “senior unnamed officials” and the official cover-up. Are the mainstream media outlets lazy, suborned, afraid of advertising revenues from the military-industrial complex, threatened, ignorant, or all of the above? Who knows.
There is a tiny glimmer of hope. Back in 1975, the C.I.A. was led by a reformer. Today, the C.I.A. is led by William Burns, one of America’s long-standing leading diplomats. Burns knows the truth about Ukraine, since he served as ambassador to Russia in 2008 and cabled Washington about the grave error of pushing NATO enlargement to Ukraine. Given Burns’ stature and diplomatic accomplishments, perhaps he would support the urgently needed accountability.
The extent of the continuing mayhem resulting from C.I.A. operations gone awry is astounding. In Afghanistan, Haiti, Syria, Venezuela, Kosovo, Ukraine, and far beyond, the needless deaths, instability, and destruction unleashed by C.I.A. subversion continues to this day. The mainstream media, academic institutions, and Congress should be investigating these operations to the best of their ability and demanding the release of documents to enable democratic accountability.
Next year is the 50th anniversary of the Church Committee hearings. Fifty years on, with the precedent, inspiration, and guidance of the Church Committee itself, it’s urgently time to open the blinds, expose the truth about the U.S.-led mayhem and begin a new era in which U.S. foreign policy becomes transparent, accountable, subject to the rule of law both domestic and international, and directed towards global peace rather than subversion of supposed enemies.
Jeffrey D. Sachs is a university professor and director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, where he directed The Earth Institute from 2002 until 2016. He is also president of the U.N. Sustainable Development Solutions Network and a commissioner of the UN Broadband Commission for Development.
Chronology of the expulsion of one entire people from different countries of the world. For nearly 2,500 years in exile
First, let’s look at the known official expulsions of Jews and analyze them, then we’ll look at the unofficial expulsions, and then we’ll try to draw conclusions based on an analysis of all the facts.
Official expulsions (by order of official authorities):
~1200 BC — Exodus from Egypt.
474 BC — Unsuccessful attempt to expel the Jews from the Achaemenid Empire (Persia) by the courtier Haman. It ended with his execution and the coming to power of the Jews, while Artaxerxes I formally retained power. Formally, the reason was Haman’s personal hostility.
19 — Roman Emperor Tiberius, on the advice of the Praetorian prefect Sejanus, ordered the closure of synagogues and the sending of four thousand young Jews to military service on the island of Sardinia; in 30 or 31, after the execution of Sejanus, they were allowed to return, and the synagogues were reopened.
50 — expulsion from Rome by Emperor Claudius.
414 — under Patriarch Kirill, Jews were expelled from Alexandria
7th century — from Arabia by Mohammed (Muhammad). Modern Islam is still eliminating Jews wherever it has sufficient influence.
613 — all Spanish Jews who refused to be baptized were forced to leave the country by order of King Sisebut. They were returned in the 620s, expelled again in 638.
1113 — from Rus’ by Vladimir Monomakh, who declared: “Now send the Jews out of the Russian land with all their property and do not accept them in the future, and if they enter secretly, then you are free to kill and rob them”; This happened after a major Jewish pogrom because… the population rebelled against Jewish oppression.
1171 — partial expulsion of Jews from Bologna and Rome, which is confirmed by both Christian and Jewish sources.
1182 — King Philip II Augustus of France issued a decree expelling all Jews from France and confiscating their property. Most of the exiles found refuge in the county of Champagne, the kingdom of Provence, the county of Venessen and other places neighboring France.
1287 — pogrom in Bern (Switzerland), 1290 — expulsion.
1290 from England by the English King Edward I. The official reason is usury, but such a reason cannot be the real reason for the expulsion of an entire people, which means there must have been something else. The complete expulsion was preceded by the forcing of Jews to wear a distinctive badge in 1218. That. we can say that the population of England began to feel discomfort from the Jews, but the Jews disguised themselves as English and it was difficult to distinguish them. Only Jews were required to wear the distinctive sign; other foreigners were not required to do so, i.e. Jews stood out among the ordinary foreigners moving to England. The exile lasted 365 years and ended with the destruction of royal power. The Jews were returned by Cromwell in 1657. That. we see that the Jews benefited from the fall of the monarchical regime.
1306 — King Philip IV the Fair issued a decree expelling Jews from France and confiscating all their property. Lorraine, Savoy, Dauphiné, and Franche-Comté also expelled Jews. Most of the Jews moved to the southern provinces, not subject to the king. On July 28, 1315, Louis X allowed the Jews to return to France, subject to the payment of a large ransom
1320 — A decree was issued expelling all Jews from Rome. A delegation of Roman Jews led by a member of the famous Roman-Jewish family Kalonymus managed to get the decree revoked, but by the time the new order was received, some of the Jews had already been expelled.
1348 — Repeated expulsion from Switzerland. In 1397, Jews were prohibited from living in Basel, in 1427 — in Bern, in 1428 — in Friborg, in 1436 — in Zurich, in 1475 — in Schaffhausen, in 1490 — in Geneva (where Jews lived from 1428 in a separate quarter, which was attacked in 1460), in 1494 — in Thurgau, at the end of the 15th century. — in Lausanne (in some cases, an exception was made for doctors). In 1622, a meeting of representatives of 13 Swiss cantons (half of the territory of modern Switzerland was under their control) decided to “permanently” expel the Jews. In the 16th–18th centuries. Jewish communities existed only in three small towns in the county of Baden, which was not a full member of the Swiss Confederation — Aargau, Klingnau and Oberendingen (now part of the canton of Aargau).
1349 — First expulsion of Jews from Hungary. 1360 — Jews were expelled again, but in 1364 they were allowed (albeit with some restrictions) to return.
1394 — King Charles VI again banned Jews from living in France. The Jews fled again to the southern provinces. At the end of the 15th century, these lands became part of the royal domain and the Jews were expelled from there too. After this, there were no Jews in France for three centuries.
The end of the XIII-XIV centuries — numerous local expulsions of Jews from various principalities of Germany.
1421 — by order of Albrecht V, all the Jews of Austria were arrested. 270 people were burned at the stake on charges of desecrating the host at Ens. All others, with the exception of those who agreed to be baptized, were expelled from the country, their property was confiscated
1477 — Duke of Lorraine René II expelled Jews from the province.
1487 — municipal councils of Lisbon and a number of other cities adopted resolutions on the expulsion of Jews. However, these decrees were repealed by King João II
1492 from Spain by Isabella I and Ferdinand II («Decree of the Alhambra»).
1492 from the island of Sicily by Ferdinand II.
1495 from Florence.
1495 — Prince Alexander announced the expulsion of Jews from Lithuania. The real estate of the exiles was declared the property of the prince and partially distributed to Christians. In 1501, Jews were allowed to return and even had their property returned.
December 1496 — King Manuel I decreed the expulsion of Jews from Portugal and the compulsory baptism of all children. 20,000 Jews left the country. Those who remained were subjected to forced baptism in accordance with the decree of March 19, 1497. However, even baptism and the king’s special “protective” decree adopted in May 1497 did not save Jews from persecution and pogroms.
1525 — expulsion of Jews from Warsaw.
1530 — 1584 — Under Ivan the Terrible, any presence of Jews in the country was prohibited. After this, the ban was no longer strictly observed. The entry of Jews into Muscovite Rus’ took on a significant scale during the Time of Troubles, especially during the reign of False Dmitry I (1605–1606), who came to power with the help of Polish troops. The Jews were part of the impostor’s retinue and suffered during his deposition. According to some reports, False Dmitry II, who claimed the Moscow throne, was a cross from the Jews and served in the retinue of False Dmitry I. That is. Jews actively participated in organizing the Time of Troubles and tried to come to power.
1549 — a decree was signed on the expulsion of Jews from Austria. But this decree was not fully implemented and part of the Jewish population remained. Under Maximilian II (1546–76), a decree was issued on the expulsion of the Jews of Lower Austria (1572), but it was also not carried out despite petitions from the estates. Jews were forced to wear a distinctive badge introduced in Austria in 1550.
1555 — Pope Paul IV issued a bull deporting Jews to a special quarter and prohibiting Jews from owning land, trading in grain, and prohibiting Christians from being treated by Jewish doctors.
1569 — The bull of Pius V was published on the expulsion of Jews from the papal dominions in Italy (except Rome and Ancona) and France.
1570 — expulsion from Germany (Margraviate of Brandenburg)
April 23, 1615 — Louis XIII issued a decree expelling Jews from France within a month on pain of death. Jews were forbidden to live not only in France, but also in its colonies
1622 — from Switzerland.
1647 — English Revolution. 1657 — lifting of the ban on Jewish residence by Cromwell.
1669 — an imperial decree was signed on the expulsion of Jews from Vienna, Lower and Upper
Austria. In the fall of 1669, 1,600 Jews were evicted. In 1670 the rest were expelled, including the richest Viennese Jews.
1727 — from Russia by Empress Catherine I
1742 — from Russia by Empress Elizaveta Petrovna
1789 — French Revolution. The rise of Jews to power in France, the ban on anti-Semitism.
April 13, 1835 — a decree was published to the Senate, according to which Jews were allowed to settle in 6 western provinces and two regions freely, in 10 provinces with significant restrictions (for example, with a ban on living in provincial cities), in other places settlement was prohibited — «Dash settled life»
In the 1870s, approximately 30,000 Russian Jews fled to the United States to escape persecution. Subsequently, the pace of emigration quickly increased: from 1881 to 1900, another 600 thousand Jews entered the United States. Jews who left Russia were forbidden to return. The migration of Jews to Britain was stopped by the Aliens Immigration Act in 1905
May 3, 1882 — the so-called “May Laws” were introduced. They abolished some regulations previously adopted under Alexander II, which allowed certain categories of Jews to live outside the Pale of Settlement. After this, another expulsion of Jews from large cities took place. In the Pale of Settlement itself, Jews were forbidden to settle, rent or purchase real estate outside cities and towns
1917 — Revolution in Russia. Complete seizure of power by Jews, ban on anti-Semitism.
1930s — from Germany by Adolf Hitler.
1948 — 2000 — expulsion of Jews from Muslim countries (Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Tunisia, Yemen and Aden).
The list above includes only official expulsions carried out by official authorities. Ordinary pogroms, often unofficially supported by the authorities, are simply impossible to count — there are a huge number of them. This list does not pretend to be complete and absolutely accurate, but this is not required — it is already clear that the Jewish nation carries with it something that inevitably causes a reaction of their rejection from themselves among other peoples, as a foreign irritant that must be removed for recovery. All that remains is to determine what exactly the Jews are doing to the peoples whose societies they penetrate?
Turning to history, you can find that the Jews could never stay in one place and were always persecuted. What is the reason for this? Or as the proverb says: “Feed a crow, and she will peck your eye out”…
Der Friedensstifter 
