“The real reason you should be worried about these revelations of government surveillance is not that you’re likely to be tracked, prosecuted, or exposed. You should be worried because it is another step in the process of making our vibrant, contentious, and most of all free-minded citizenry into a nation of sheep.”…Professor Stephen M. Walt of Harvard University
Preface: The word “Jewification” here is used in its theological and ideological sense. I am in no way referring to our decent fellow Jews. I have also made it clear that people should be cherished for who they are, for common sense tells us that we all have committed “sins” in our lives, to use a theological language.
I have said again and again that I am a Christian and I have no interest whatsoever in promoting or espousing hatred toward another human being.
I need to put this to rest once again here: to all my Jewish friends and fellow human beings, I am on your side! What we will be dealing with throughout this article and the next is the diabolical ideology that has been dragging the West and much of the Middle East into economic, political, and cultural perdition.
I have no quarrel with my fellow human beings; I have quarrels with a wicked ideology, and everyone who wishes to engage in the ideological war has to be able to make that vital distinction and balance. It was Israel Shamir who wrote that,
“One should make a clear distinction between Jews as persons, and the Jewish paradigm as ideology. Jews are just human, and deserve to be treated and accepted as human. The Jewish paradigm should be confronted and counteracted. Two important issues were confused: the question of external relations, human and civil rights, human dignity on one side and ideological difference and variance, on the other. They can, and should be treated separately.”
It is time to confront this “Jewish paradigm.”…JEA
…by Jonas E. Alexis
In a speech delivered at the B’nai B’rith in 1902, Solomon Ehrmann, a Viennese Jewish dermatologist, envisioned a future in which “All of mankind will have been jewified and joined in union with the B’nai B’rith.” When that happens, “not only the B’nai B’rith but all of Judaism will have fulfilled its task.”
The German liberal Jews, continues Lindemann, tried to portray this form of “enlightenment” before the rise of Nazi Germany. They began to advocate that “a Jewish background engendered enlightenment, while a Germanic heritage was a burden, pulling in the direction of irrationality and barbarism.”
This Jewish enlightenment—or Jewification—did not die out in the early part of the twentieth century. It has shown itself in various forms and in different contexts.
This “Jewification” process was quite vivid in the life of literary writer Lorraine Hansberry, known for A Raisin in the Sun. Like Frederick Douglas before her, Hansberry married a Jewish revolutionary by the name of Robert Nemiroff. Soon enough, Hansberry began to portray the “Jewification” spirit and attitude in her work, including A Raisin in the Sun.
“God hasn’t got a thing to do with it,” Hansberry wrote. “God is just one idea I don’t accept…I get tired of Him getting credit for all the things the human race achieves through its own stubborn effort. There simply is no God—there is only man and it is he who makes miracles.”
If man is the measure of all things and if he decides who makes miracles, then racism, genocide, “survival of the fittest,” and other evils which are incompatible with Hansberry’s heritage can find their rationalization in a society where man is the final authority.
If man is in charge and that there is no ultimate transcendent moral virtue, who is Hansberry to say that racism is wrong? On what grounds is she saying that someone else’s view is wrong?
As we shall argue in the fall, without an ultimate transcendence, Hansberry’s argument is philosophically dead and logically indefensible.
Hansberry was already a revolutionary by the time A Raisin in the Sun got published. Hansberry, by indirection, gave thanks to the real person who helped bring her revolutionary work into being. In The Sign in Sidney Brustein’s Window, she wrote,
“I have learned a lot after five years of life with you, Sidney. When I met you I thought Kant was a stilted way of saying cannot; I thought Puccini was a kind of spaghetti…Thanks to you, I now know something that I wouldn’t have learned if it hadn’t been for you.”
As the end of her life drew near, Hansberry found herself between two poles:
We see the extension of this “moral corruption” once again with the release of The Man with the Iron Fist, co-written by RZA and “The Bear Jew” Eli Roth. Roth and RZA became “allies,” to sue the New York Times’ word, when Roth’s parents “took RZA in” for the night.
RZA and Roth, then, became “good buddies.” It was Roth who helped RZA “to think through his imaginary world as carefully as George Lucas knows Star Wars” in order to bring about the script.
But as we shall see in a future article, that imaginary world which Roth taught RZA turned out to be the worldview in which Roth has been living for the past decade: the world of pornography and brothel in film, and the world of “fu$k[ing] an entire generation.”
It was inevitable, then, that RZA would follow the footsteps of his teacher and include pornography in The Man with the Iron Fist.
The “Jewification” Process Is Worldwide
Were Ehrmann alive today, he would have certainly been amazed to see how the “Jewification” process has been a central force in Western culture and politics and even among Christian Zionists. The NSA debacle is a classic example.
More recently, Edward Snowden once again stunned the entire world by declaring that the United States’ covert operation is worldwide.
“Snowden claimed today to have evidence that the U.S. government has been hacking into Chinese computer networks since at least 2009 – an effort he said is part of the tens of thousands of hacking operations American cyber spies have launched around the world.
“The South China Morning Post said Snowden provided documents, which the paper described as ‘unverified,’ that he said showed U.S. cyber operations targeting a Hong Kong university, public officials and students in the Chinese city. The paper said the documents also indicate hacking attacks targeting mainland Chinese targets, but did not reveal information about Chinese military systems.”
Snowden declares, “We hack network backbones — like huge internet routers, basically — that give us access to the communications of hundreds of thousands of computers without having to hack every single one. Last week the American government happily operated in the shadows with no respect for the consent of the governed, but no longer.”
Michael J. Geary of Maastricht University in the Netherlands and attorney Kevin A. Lees declare that “the NSA gathered more pieces of intelligence within Germany during the month of March than any other EU country.”
Just recently, Bloomberg declares that
“Thousands of technology, finance and manufacturing companies are working closely with U.S. national security agencies, providing sensitive information and in return receiving benefits that include access to classified intelligence, four people familiar with the process said.
“These programs, whose participants are known as trusted partners, extend far beyond what was revealed by Edward Snowden…
“Many of these same Internet and telecommunications companies voluntarily provide U.S. intelligence organizations with additional data, such as equipment specifications, that don’t involve private communications of their customers.”
Snowden did not help the Zionist mafia by publically declaring that the U.S. has been monitoring literally millions upon millions of Americans. The U.S. government, as we all know by now, has already been “Jewified.” And we have shown in the previous article that it was the Israelis who were behind this recent debacle.
Edward Snowden and the Jewish Police State
Yet neoconservatives such as Arnold Ahlert and Max Boot were already on the march denouncing Snowden as a traitor. John McCormack of the Weekly Standard went on record saying that “the PRISM program is not designed to target electronic communications among American citizens.” A ridiculous assertion.
If it were true, why would Keith B. Alexander, director of the NSA, allegedly declared that “‘dozens’ of terrorism threats had been halted by the agency’s huge database of the logs of nearly every domestic phone call made by Americans”? (The claim that monitoring Americans keep America safe is without evidence. As the Associated Press declares, “Wondering what the U.S. government might know about your phone calls and online life? And whether all of this really helps find terrorists? Good luck finding solid answers.”)
Jeremy Bash, a former CIA chief of staff, said that Snowden is “dangerous” and “delusional.” Reuel Marc Gerecht of the Weekly Standard and a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies declared that “It should be clear by now that Snowden is a serious flake.”
Max Boot of Commentary wrote that Snowden “emerges as a paranoid narcissist with a messiah complex. He believes that there is a vast, overarching conspiracy within the U.S. government to abrogate the liberties of ordinary citizens, and he is the only person who has the courage and the idealism to expose this monstrous misdoing.”
Then Boot moves on to offer this pathetic argument:
“[Snowden] assumes that because surveillance capabilities exist, they will be misused—and therefore they should not exist at all. One might as well disarm the police because we know that occasionally a cop will commit misconduct.”
What in the world is he talking about? Does he not know that the police cannot come to your front door unless they have reasonable evidence to do so? Do the police monitor U.S. citizens daily in their private affairs?
Does he not know that what he was implicitly saying was in complete contradiction to the Constitution?
In the end, Boot declares that Snowden is “subverting” democracy. What he does not want to tell his readers is that Boot is implicitly talking about a “Jewified” democracy, which always promises heaven on earth but delivers chaos.
Boot and others have to “psychoanalyze” themselves and ask important questions. Why would 29-year-old Snowden leave a job that pays him more than two hundred thousand dollars a year and came out in the open declaring that he could no longer spy on Americans? Is it because he wanted to be in the hall of fame? Is it because the Chinese government would pay him better? Is it because he hates America? Or is it because he questions the powers that be?
In an investigation, all options should be placed on the table and must be explored in a rational fashion. I am willing to conceive that Snowden could be wrong. But would the neocons and others even entertain the possibility that Snowden might be telling the truth?
We know for example Snowden supported Ron Paul. And we know that Ron Paul is against spying on Americans. Snowden, like Paul, seems to have disavowed both Bush’s and Obama’s policies. He even declared that he used to believe in Obama’s policies, but Obama “continued with the same policies of his predecessor.”
Paul, in return, praised both Snowden and Glenn Greenwald for pointing these things out. In the same vein, retired CIA officer Ray McGovern declares that Snowden did the right thing and has an “uncommon courage” and an “uncommon devotion to the Constitution.”
Maybe Paul and McGovern are accomplices, too; maybe the neoconservatives should also go after the court that found the NSA’s covert activity unconstitutional and illegal; maybe the neoconservatives should penalize the Jewish Chronicle as well for saying that the Israelis were behind the programs that spied millions of Americans.
I could never get in touch with Boot to address some of these issues, despite numerous attempts. Ahlert did respond to my message but he quickly denied that the NSA was spying on Americans. He then added this clause:
“Do I think it’s possible this administration abused the law? You betcha, but as someone who lived less than four miles from the WTC, I know what the Islamists are capable of. There are rotten choices to be made here, especially considering the character of the administration. But what would you propose as a viable alternative?”
Feeling that I would not get anywhere with this sort of madness, I entered into Ahlert’s argument and granted him the premise that Snowden is a traitor. I added that if Snowden is going to be treated as a traitor, then all the NSA officials must also be treated as such for violating the Constitution.
Even more recently, when he was asked by Senator Susan Collins, “I saw an interview in which Mr. Snowden claimed that due to his position at NSA he could tap into virtually any American’s phone call or e-mails. True or False?”, Alexander responded, “False. I know of no way to do that.”
But now Alexander is saying that “‘dozens’ of terrorism threats had been halted by the agency’s huge database of the logs of nearly every domestic phone call made by Americans.”
Alexander continued, “We aren’t trying to hide it. We’re trying to protect America. So we need your help in doing that. This isn’t something that’s just N.S.A. or the administration doing it on its own. This is what our nation expects our government to do for us.”
They are not trying to hide it, but Alexander lied about it last year. Nonsense notwithstanding, “Alexander has asked for nearly $4.7 billion in additional funding in 2014 alone to further bolster the United States’ ‘cyberspace operations.’”
The Genius of Ann Coulter
I was quite surprised to find that neoconservative noisemaker Ann Coulter actually believed that monitoring millions of Americans (under the pretense of looking for terrorism) would be all right—but not under the Obama administration!
What was even so interesting was that Coulter invoked the Framers to make her last point! Why didn’t she tell her listeners that the Framers would also have repudiated Coulter’s own claims about monitoring millions of Americans?
Coulter came with this ridiculous explanation probably because she knew that the Bush administration was spying on Americans as well. It has been reported that spying on Americans became routine right after 9/11.
Mathematician and code breaker William Binney used to work for the NSA until 2001, when he began to discover that he “could not stay after the NSA began purposefully violating the Constitution.” In the summer of 2012, Business Insider blew everything out of proportion:
“In a short video called ‘The Program,’ Binney explains how the agency took part of one of the programs he built and started using it to spy on virtually every U.S. Citizen without warrants under the code-name Stellar Wind.”
In other words, Netanyahu was right after all: 9/11 was good for Israel. 9/11 has opened a chapter in American history where the Zionist regime can virtually manipulate the media and monitor just about every American.
The Jewified State of America
America, as soon as it became “Jewified,” has progressively become a police state where people like Snowden would almost certainly not get a fair trial. The only country that offered Snowden asylum was Iceland.
In a nutshell, the logic is pretty clear: NSA officials took their orders from the Israeli intelligence, and the Israeli intelligence is largely patrolling the world with their covert operation.
Remember the statement by William Binney, “I can pull your entire life together from all those domains and map it out and show your entire life over time.”
In response to Keith Alexander and other claims saying that the NSA does not collect data on Americans, Binney declared,
“Those are lies. Those are just outright lies. Obviously they are, with that court order. They’re scooping up the metadata of everything, and the PRISM program is a scoop up of actual content. Emails, video, photographs, all of that—that’s content. So they’re collecting all of it, and it’s a big vacuum. So you know, those are just outright lies.”
The Jewification process is now in session. Even in France, Twitter has to report “anti-Semitic” comments to the France’s Union of Jewish Students (UEJF). Now, Abraham Foxman and Christopher Wolf have just released a book entitled Viral Hate: Containing Its Spread on the Internet.
In an article explaining why he co-wrote the book, Foxman declares, “There is an epidemic of Internet hate… From the earliest years of the Internet era it became clear that the haters would be among the first not only to recognize the incredible potential of this technology, but successfully exploit it for their own ends.”
Anything that Jewish thought-police like Foxman and Wolf consider hate is actually hate. End of discussion. And the only way to fight this “viral hate” is to have the Israelis—almost certainly the Mossad—spy on millions of Americans.
This Jewification process must be resented by any reasonable person, and it must be done by reasoned principles, not by animosity, or even hatred toward other human beings.
May I interject and include a Christian principle here? Christ told His disciples to be “wise as serpents, and harmless as doves” (Matthew 10:16). Those two elements go together.
In other words, we should recognize who the enemy is and be aware of his cunning devices. But we should overcome him “through meekness and patience,” not through hatred, envy, bitterness, and persecution. These are some of the essences of the gospel when it comes to dealing with enemies.
Where Is the Jewification Process Going?
The Jewification process has been expanded in nearly every strata of society, and it has produced anti-Jewish reactions everywhere. A few examples.
In order to find a ridiculous pretext to support the Syrian rebels/terrorists, the Obama administration once again summoned the idea that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons. The evidence?
Well, in a Jewified administration, no serious evidence is required. So long that the idea is compatible with Israel’s plan, then all we have to do is believe what the administration has to say. (Even Jeffrey Goldberg, of all people, makes it clear that supporting the Syrian rebels is “depressing.”)
What about other reports saying that the Syrian terrorist used chemical weapons? Well, in a Jewified world, only the Zionist can tell the truth. All other reports are lies and fabrications. Paul R. Pillar recently declares that Obama has been pushed by the Israeli government to get involved in Syria and Iran. The New York Times seems to suggest the same thing.
What about Israel using white phosphorous in Gaza’s densely populated neighborhoods in 2008? Well, in the Jewified world, chemical weapons can only be used by the powers that be. And the Israeli officers who used white phosphorous then were only “reprimanded”!
And who killed all those 90,000 people in Syria? Well, in a Jewified world, the Assad government is the only entity that is responsible for this. If you don’t believe me, read Jonathan S. Tobin’s current article “Belated Action on Syria Won’t Deter Iran.”
What about the Syrian rebels/terrorists? Why is the Zionist regime supporting them? Well, once again in a Jewified world, the Syrian terrorists are not terrorists because their revolutionary plans—to completely overthrow a sovereign government by violent means—are quite compatible with what the Israeli regime envisions. The questions that need to be answered is simply this: “Is it good for the Jews?” If it is, then the Syrian rebels are not terrorists. Even more recently, it has been pointed out by the Wall Street Journal itself that Pope Francis is “good for the Jews.”
How is the United States going to get money to support the Syrian terrorists when the debt ceiling has already reached the $16- trillion dollar mark? Well, in a Jewified world, nothing is too great a risk. Americans have to suffer and reduce to abject poverty for the sake of Israel.
How are we doing at home? Well, whenever a Jewified ideology is in session, the American common man suffers. While the administration has never lacked money to support Israel and perpetual wars, “President Barack Obama’s health care law may turn out to be unaffordable for many low-wage workers, including employees at big chain restaurants, retail stores and hotels.”
“The U.S. House of Representatives Armed Service Committee tripled President Barack Obama’s request for missile defense collaboration with Israel and sought to include the United States in Iron Dome development.”
How does the history of Islam fit into this Jewified world? Listen to Bruce Bawer of FrontPage Magazine, author of the popular book While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within:
“There are two main points to be made whenever the words ‘Islam’ and ‘science’ come up. The first is that Islamic culture, like none other on earth, has proven to be a remarkably powerful impediment to the development of anything remotely deserving of the name of science.
“The second point, a corollary of the first, is that the relatively few worthy scientific discoveries and inventions for which Islamic cultures can take credit have occurred in spite of, and not because of, any identifiable ‘Islamic’ influence.”
Thank God that Bawer is not a historian but an ideologue and a propagandist. In the Jewified world, people like Bawer have to rewrite history and tell us what to think, which is a form of control. We have addressed Islam and science in a previous article, so there is no need to duplicate here.
“if you could count all the Muslim winners of Nobel Prizes in science on one hand and have enough fingers left to crochet. This simple, straightforward fact is, in and of itself, a dramatic indictment of Islam, underscoring its intrinsic intellectual backwardness, its refusal to compromise in the slightest its foundation of primitive superstition, and the extraordinary degree to which it manages to suppress the inborn human curiosity about the natural principles that undergird the real world’s workings.”
In other words, if you cannot get enough Nobel Prizes, then you are not qualified to be a competent scientist doing innovative science. I wonder if Bawer believes that Obama seriously deserves a Nobel Peace Prize.
I also would like to know what Bawer would have said to the many good scientists and mathematicians who have been ignored for their work by the Nobel Prize Committee.
For example, Indian astrophysicist Jayant Vishnu Narlikar, who worked with Sir Fred Hoyle in the conformal gravity theory, which was later named the Hoyle-Narlikar theory, wrote:
“SN Bose’s work on particle statistics, which clarified the behaviour of photons (the particles of light in an enclosure) and opened the door to new ideas on statistics of Microsystems that obey the rules of quantum theory, was one of the top ten achievements of 20th century Indian science and could be considered in the Nobel Prize class.”
Noted German particle physicist Rolf-Dieter Heuer declared that “It is ironical that Bose was not given the award despite his immense contribution to science. But it in no way undermines his stature as one of the leading physicists the world has had.”
David Brooks on the United Jewified of America
At the end of 2005, David Brooks of the New York Times published an article entitled “‘The Chosen’: Getting In,” in which he declared:
“A few years ago, I wrote a book about the rise of a new educated class, the people with 60’s values and 90’s money who go to Starbucks, shop at Whole Foods and drive Volvos. A woman came up to me after one of my book talks and said, ‘You realize what you’re talking about is the Jews taking over America.’
“My eyes bugged out, but then I realized that she was Jewish and she knew I was, too, and between us we could acknowledge there’s a lot of truth in that statement. For the Jews were the vanguard of a social movement that over the course of the 20th century transformed the American university system and the nature of the American elite.
“This is a large part of the story Jerome Karabel, a professor of sociology at the University of California, Berkeley, tells in The Chosen: The Hidden History of Admission and Exclusion at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton.”
Likewise, Jewish writer and academic James D. Bloom declares, “American Jewish funniness is a form of cultural aggression.” Bloom opens the first chapter of his book Gravity Fails by saying, “During the middle of the twentieth century a handful of Jews, who became famous by being funny, rediscovered, recovered, and remade America.”
This form of “cultural aggression” has produced a “new life” in “American culture.” James continues to say that advertising is “perhaps the most widespread manifestation of Jewish funniness…” Sarah Silverman and Larry David are classic manifestations of this “Jewish funniness.”
What are some of the detrimental ramifications of this “new life”? More importantly, has this “new life” been expanded more aggressively in Hollywood and the entertainment industry?
Blooms declares that “Jewish funniness” has impacted Hollywood, Broadway, Tin Pin Alley, Madison Avenue, television, literary fiction, political rhetoric, “and even the most earnest of all forms of popular expression, folk music and protest songs.”
This will be our focus in the next three articles.
 http://news.yahoo.com/edward-snowden-claims-nsa-documents-show-u-hacks-215625790–abc-news-topstories.html; see also Keith Bradsher, “N.S.A. Leaker Says He Will Fight Extradition in Hong Kong,” NY Times, June 12, 2013.
 Raven Clabough, “Evidence Shows Syrian Rebels Behind Chemical Attack,” The New American, March 27, 2013; Alex Thompson, “Syria Chemical Weapons: Finger Pointed at Jihadists,” The Telegraph, March 23, 2013.
 See for example “Israel: White Phosphorous Use Evidence of War Crime,” Human Rights Watch, March 25, 2009; “Israel Used White Phosphorous in Gaza Civilian Areas,” Amnesty International, January 19, 2009; Jeremy R. Hammond, “Israel’s Illegal use of White Phosphorous During ‘Operation Cast Lead,’” Foreign Policy Journal, May 3, 2013.