Rumble link Bitchute link FFWN post with links and information on E. Michael Jones’ “Dangers of Beauty” conference
The world stands aghast as the genocidal Zionist entity lashes out in its death throes, inflicting pointless mayhem on the civilians of Palestine and the leadership of Iran. And a collective global reaction is setting in. The International Criminal Court is seeking an arrest warrant for Netanyahu, the International Court of Justice has ordered Israel to withdraw from Rafah, and European countries are lining up to join the rest of the world in recognizing the state of Palestine.
Could the rebirth of the nation of Palestine coincide with, and signify, a re-emergence of morality in world affairs? That would be no small change. As False Flag Weekly News co-host and Culture Wars editor Dr. E. Michael Jones notes, the rulers of the Anglo-Zionist Empire believe that “truth is the opinion of the powerful”—and hold the same view of morality. That view is not entirely unfounded, since those rulers have long enjoyed sufficient power to impose their versions of truth and morality on the world. If the Jewish-Protestant American empire is “a preacher with a gun,” as Dr. Jones says, it has been preaching lies at gunpoint at least since it sanctified and immortalized war propaganda in the form of the sacred Holocaust narrative after World War II.
With the demise of the Soviet Union in 1989, the empire’s capacity to enshrine lies with force became virtually limitless. Truth and morality became, for all practical purposes, whatever the lying, immoral managers of empire said they were. Karl Rove famously mocked those who failed to notice this transition as “the reality-based community” and boasted (no doubt with a nod and a wink to the absurdity of the official story of 9/11) that “we create our own reality now.” (And our own morality with it, no doubt.)
The Zionists have gone the furthest in calling lies truth, and morality whatever they can get away with. While planning and perpetrating genocide for more than a century, and inflicting the most sadistic, unspeakable, often strategically superfluous tortures on anyone who gets in their way, the Zionists have cast themselves as quintessential victims. That long-running ruse, however, has reached its expiration date. With the genocide of Gaza, the mask has come off. The psychopathic serial killer has been unveiled.
Though the neocon Zionists still control the US empire, that empire no longer dominates the world the way it did just a decade ago. The Zionists have run it into the ground. By staging 9/11 as the PR launch for $7 trillion worth of criminal wars for Israel, the neocons hollowed out the US, rendering it morally as well as fiscally bankrupt, and diverting its attention from the economic rise of China, Russia, and other independent powers.
So why will the emerging multipolar world coincide with a return to morality? Because human beings are moral creatures. Like many other animals only more so, humans have an innate moral sense and experience shock, outrage, and the need to take action when moral norms are violated. Those natural reactions can be temporarily suppressed under certain conditions, notably pathocratic tyranny. And that is what we have been living under: the “absolute power corrupts absolutely” regime of the self-styled unipolar hegemon. As it comes apart, global power will become a complex process of negotiation involving many stakeholders, who will regularly appeal to the moral sense of their negotiating partners and adversaries.
Revenge for the Gaza Genocide: What Would Zionist-Style “Proportionality” Look Like?
The need for negotiations based on shared commitment to win-win outcomes, informed by universal morality rather than tribal egotism, may be illustrated by considering the alternative: an endless cycle of vengeance featuring ever-more-lethal technologies. Specifically, how might this play out in the Zionism-versus-Palestine conflict?
Prior to the October 7 al-Aqsa Storm raid, Israel had been steadily killing Palestinians, by the thousands, for decades. Palestinian retaliation had been relatively minor by comparison, inflicting less than 10% of the deaths and casualties on Israelis that the Zionists had inflicted on them.
The Al-Aqsa Storm concentration camp breakout killed about 1100 Israelis, roughly half of whom were active military, police, or security. Israel responded by indiscriminately flattening most of Gaza. As I write, the official Gaza death toll is over 36,000, meaning bodies extracted from rubble and identified, while unofficial estimates of the total dead exceed 200,000. Virtually all the Gaza victims are civilians, two thirds being women and children.
As a conservative estimate, Israel’s genocidal “retaliation” has killed 60 times as many civilians as died on October 7th (the majority of whom were probably killed by Israeli forces, not by Hamas). So if Palestine were to “retaliate” against Israel in the same way that Israel “retaliated” against Palestine, by raising the kill ratio by another 6000%, it would have to kill at least 2,160,000 Israelis.
And while the October 7 al-Aqsa Storm attack damaged or destroyed a few dozen Israeli buildings, Israel has completely destroyed the majority of Gaza’s buildings—well over 150,000 in total. That yields a ratio of somewhere between 100,000 to 1 and 10,000 to 1. So for the Palestinians to “retaliate” in the same way the Israelis supposedly did, they would have to destroy at least 1.5 billion Israeli buildings, far more than exist. The only way to come close to inflicting that scale of retaliatory damage would be to raze Israel to the ground and then nuke every major Western city where Jews live. (Western Jews and their cities might be considered legitimate targets because the West props up Israel, the state of all Jews no matter where they were born.)
(Traditional) Morality vs. the Revenge Cycle
The global anti-genocide pro-Palestine protests raise the prospect of invoking morality to stop the endlessly escalating revenge cycle. The students behind the biggest campus protests since the Vietnam era have nothing to gain, and much to lose, by taking a stand against the psychopathic genocidal killers who rule their declining civilization. Yet despite brutal repression by billionaire-incited police and thugs, and threats that they “will never work in this town again,” the students keep protesting.
Modern communications technology has allowed people to see things their rulers would prefer they didn’t, including war crimes happening on the other side of the world. Young people are beginning to care about what happens to far-away folks their grandparents wouldn’t have noticed. The 1948 Nakba (Palestinian holocaust) was little remarked at the time. Today’s Nakba 2, the genocide of Gaza, has galvanized the world’s attention, and national policies and international institutions are slowly—too slowly—swinging into action.
What most of the students probably don’t realize is that universal morality arguably depends on particular spiritual and religious traditions. It is the decline of those traditions that has brought us a world of “anything goes,” a world in which the strong can limitlessly prey on the weak and veil their crimes with lies. The neocon-run Anglo-Zionist empire’s attempt to use “creative destruction” of religions, nations, and families to clear the way for one-world global tyranny has run up against the emerging multipolar world, each pole of which demands the right to its own historical and religious identity. Iran and Russia are the two leaders in regard, but it may not be long before Confucian China and the non-Axis-of-Resistance Muslim countries likewise rediscover their spiritual roots. (Western Christianity strikes me as too far gone, but E. Michael Jones would no doubt insist that with God’s permission anything is possible.)
Will anti-genocide students follow the path blazed by people like E. Michael Jones, recognize that morality needs metaphysical grounding, and return to traditional religion? And if so, are all traditional religions equally viable?
Perennialism and the Middle Eastern Monotheisms
Perennialist traditionalism holds that all of the major revealed religions, and perhaps even some of the minor ones, provide different expressions of the same underlying universal truth. Islam says much the same thing, with the proviso that earlier religions were imperfectly preserved and transmitted, so the only extant religion that is well-preserved is…you guessed it…Islam.
As for Christianity, it has an even higher opinion of itself than Islam does. Traditional Christian doctrine, as opposed to some of its watered-down modern variants, does not see itself as just one expression of an underlying truth, but as THE truth without which salvation is well-nigh impossible.
One thing Muslims and Christians can agree on is that Jews—followers of the Hebrew scriptures who have rejected the universal messages of Jesus and Mohammed—are problematic. The Qur’an repeatedly references Jews obstinately persisting in sin, rejecting the universal message of the prophets (presumably preferring tribal and personal self-interest): “O Jews! If you claim to be God’s chosen people out of all humanity, then wish for death, if what you say is true. But they will never wish for that because of what their hands have done.” (62:6-7) The Jews are reluctant to meet their Maker, even though they claim to be “chosen,” because they know, consciously or unconsciously, that they have lived bad, selfish lives and will face a harsh judgment. So they turn away from eternity and focus instead on the goods of this world: “You shall surely find them more avid for (the) life (of this world) than all other men…” (2:96)
The Quran generally views Christians positively and Jews negatively: “You will surely find the most hostile towards the believers to be the Jews and polytheists and the nearest to them in friendship those who call themselves Christian. That is because there are priests and monks among them and because they are not arrogant.” (5:82) Even more strikingly, the Surah of Mary provides a harsh rebuke to the Jews’ calumnies against Jesus and his holy mother.
But what about the oft-cited (by Jewish media) Sura 5:51: “O you who believe! do not take the Jews and Christians for friends/allies; they are friends/allies of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend/ally, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.” Since this verse might seem to contradict 5:82 among others, and since the Qur’an states that it is free of contradictions (4:82), the conflict between 5:51 and other verses requires us to agree with Sheikh Imran Hosein’s interpretation that “Jews and Christians” should be bracketed together. In other words, "do not take the [Jews and Christians] for friends/allies” means that when [Jews and Christians] band together, as the Christian Zionists and self-styled Judeo-Christians do today, they are the “unjust people,” as are those who ally with them.
Is It Still Legal to Say That?
Is it still legal to accurately summarize the Qur’an’s largely negative view of Jews? Probably. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s Working Definition of Antisemitism, which governments are increasingly using to delegitimize and criminalize speech, does not address the Qur’an’s critiques of Jews and Judaism. But it does sanction “claims of Jews killing Jesus.” That gives Muslims, who believe along with Christians that Jews plotted to kill Jesus, but are not sure they succeeded, a plausible defense strategy.
The Qur’an says the Jews
“were condemned˺ for breaking their covenant, rejecting God’s signs, killing the prophets unjustly, and for saying, ‘Our hearts are unreceptive!’—it is God Who has sealed their hearts for their disbelief, so they do not believe except for a few—and for boasting, ‘We killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of God.’ But they neither killed nor crucified him—it was only made to appear so. Even those who argue for this (crucifixion) are in doubt. They have no knowledge whatsoever—only making assumptions. They certainly did not kill him.”
Though Qur’anic discourse on the crucifixion admits of various interpretations, including “the crucifixion like all evil was in some sense illusory, true reality being the Resurrection,” it doesn’t straightforwardly accuse Jews of killing Jesus the way Christian doctrine does. As Dr. Jones explained during this week’s False Flag Weekly News:
E. Michael Jones: Let's be perfectly clear here. Cut to the chase.
St. Paul in Thessalonians says the Jews are the people who killed Christ and they are enemies of the entire human race. There's no theologian in the world that can erase that from the Bible. It's the fundamental pillar of the Catholic faith, of the Christian faith, and it's there and it's not going to change. When St. Peter, in the Acts of the Apostles, walks into Jerusalem after Pentecost, he confronts the Jews and he says, “you killed Christ.”
What are these (IHRA-compliant) theologians thinking? That somehow we're going to forget that? That we can erase it? Well, actually, that is what's happening.
Kevin Barrett: There are a lot of Bibles out there. How are they going to get rid of all the Bibles? Go from motel room to motel room to get rid of all the Gideon Bibles?
E. Michael Jones: The point here is now you've got these anti-Semitism awareness acts that are going to be pushed to basically prosecute you if you quote the Bible. Now, that's a step too far.
Our Protestant brothers always are quoting the Bible. There's no jail big enough to incarcerate all these people. And so they're pushing the envelope to the point where it's going to backfire on them.
Something similar happened with a Washington Post story on Rabbi Solomon Friedman, who owns Pornhub. And the point of the article is, oh, well, then pornography must be OK.
No, what we derive from that is this. Your religion is not worthy of the term religion if one of its fundamental sacraments is abortion and the other one is pornography.
So you're losing credibility. You think you're winning the war. You win the battle and you're losing the war. They don't understand this.
Palestine: Holy Land of 2.5 Billion Christians, 2 Billion Muslims, and .015 Billion Jews
Of the world’s almost 8 billion people, more than half—roughly 4.5 billion—are universal monotheists. They view morality as equally applicable to everyone.
By contrast, one of every 333 adherents of Middle Eastern monotheism is a tribal monotheist. This vanishingly small fraction imagines itself to be “chosen by God” to lord it over the rest. Their unspoken slogan is “Our God Is Your God Too But He Has Chosen Us.” They hold themselves to very different moral standards—vastly lower ones. They shamelessly lie, cheat, steal, exploit, degrade, kill, and torture. But let one of their victims so much as raise a finger to defend himself, and they scream bloody murder. They proverbially cry out as they strike you.
This arrogant, psychopathic tribe has arrogated the whole Holy Land to itself. In the process, it has never stopped planning and committing genocide.
But now the world’s 4.5 billion universal monotheists, who have exactly the same rights to the Holy Land as the world’s 15 million Jews, are poised to reclaim those rights—supported by the world’s other 3.5 million people, who are becoming increasingly universalist in their moral outlook. Every time Israel threatens the war crimes prosecutor’s family, murders dozens of refugees in a tent city in a “safe space,” deliberately murders aid workers, journalists, and medical personnel, tortures children, and wildly celebrates its own deliberate murders of tens of thousands of children, the world increasingly realizes that the Jewish state is indeed “the enemy of all humanity.”
The rise of universalist Palestine in place of genocidal-tribalist Israel symbolizes the emergence of a universal moral order in which truth and morality are real, not just opinions of the powerful…a world in which all of the nations and tribes get to know one another and compete in doing good on an equal footing, resolving their differences in win-win negotiations rather than arrogant hegemonic dictates based on bogus claims of innate superiority.
Palestine Rising!