The Shadow And Zog
Israel Shamir
In Luc Besson’s delightful film, The Fifth Element (with perfect Mila Jovovich and supreme Bruce Willis), an
absolutely evil force, the Shadow, Messenger of Death, comes from Outer Space to destroy human life on our
planet. It is impervious to bombs and missiles, and regardless of what people do, it closes in, and its cover
ever thicker upon the earth. Yet in order to succeed the Shadow needs some human help. Who will, for
personal profit, assist the satanic Shadow in his quest to destroy our Mother Earth? In the best
tongue-in-cheek tradition of Swift, Besson gave the monstrous volunteer, that servant-of-profit, a scary name:
Zog.
The name of pre-war Albanian King, Zog is one of a few words that kick the fearsome Thought Police of ADL
into action, activate FBI like Anthrax, and can send IDF assassins and ARA punks in hot pursuit, for this king –
like the Jewish God - does not like his name to be mentioned. This name came back to me with the
impending instalment of General Jay Garner as Viceroy of Iraq. Garner received his credentials from the
bloody hands of Ariel Sharon: he supported the killing of the Palestinians by signing, in October 2000, a letter
that began: "We believe that the Israel Defence Forces have exercised remarkable restraint in the face of
lethal violence orchestrated by the leadership of the Palestinian Authority." The letter was launched by JINSA,
"the major link of the Israel lobby, the Washington-based and Likud-supporting Jewish Institute for National
Security Affairs", as defined by Michael Lind of the New Statesman, or "another thinly disguised Israeli
espionage and recruiting front", according to Washington observer Jeffrey Steinberg of EIR. Signing the letter
was a good move on General Garner’s part: it will give him the rule of Iraq.
However, he will not have too much money at his disposal. Despite ‘NO WAR FOR OIL’ slogans, Iraqi oil won’t
make Americans rich. Iraq has a huge national debt - $70 billion to Russia alone - and the Occupation
Regime will have to cough it up. Debt to France is over $30 billion, and it will have to be paid. On top of this,
the US Occupation Administration will have to spend considerable amounts of money on repairing the Iraqi
infrastructure, destroyed by sanctions and war, before paying one cent of commission to Dick Cheney and his
company. No, this war was not fought for the imperial interests of the US or for its mammoth oil companies.
As the head of the Occupation Administration, Jay Garner’s task is to create a new Iraq, friendly to Israel. The
Jerusalem Post, a hard-line Zionist daily published by Conrad Black, friend of Pinochet and Sharon, carried
an interview with one of his wannabe Quislings, Ahmad Chalabi's right hand man, Musawi.
"Musawi talks enthusiastically of his hopes for the closest possible ties with Israel. There will be no place for
Palestinians in the new Iraq, for the large Palestinian community is regarded by INC leaders (and presumably
by their Zionist instructors) as a loathsome fifth column. Instead, an `arc of peace’ would run from Turkey,
through Iraq and Jordan to Israel, creating a new fulcrum in the Middle East."
The Occupation Regime in Iraq was installed by the US army in the interests of Zionists, and it may be rightly
called ZOG, Zionist Occupation Government if anything. However, this ZOG is also a Zog, a servant of
Darkness and Annihilation, for its first step was the destruction of Baghdad’s libraries and museums. A
scholar of Zionism, Joachim Martillo, wrote:
"Zionism has long taken a position of stripping target populations of their cultural heritage and turning them
into clay so that they can be remoulded in conformance with Zionist ideology".
My learned friend is right. This week I took myself to a lonely hill near Mesecha, a small village in the heart of
Biblical Israel, where a few young ISM activists and villagers helplessly watched the Caterpillar machines
uprooting olive trees, smashing lupines, devouring this unique Biblical landscape, home and cradle of the
people of Palestine. They did not dare step out in front of the machines, for the American volunteer Rachel
Corrie was murdered in similar circumstances, to the deafening sound of silence from Washington. Jeffrey
Blankfort, the analyst from California, had good reason for calling Washington "the Zionists' Most Important
Occupied Territory".
Thus, the burned manuscripts of Baghdad and uprooted olive trees of Mesecha lead to Zog … and to ZOG.
This homonymy points to a telling semantic concurrence; as Kuang-Ming Wu said in The Butterfly as
Companion: "Words of a sound flock together in sense; like sound, like sense". Thus witty Luc Besson, who
borrowed the idea of the Five Elements from Socrates, gave us a lesson: "ZOG is Zog".
II
For a while, the Jewish establishment tried to deny its direct involvement in the Third World War. They furiously
rejected references to high and mighty Jews pushing for war as, (you guessed it) "antisemitism". But
eventually the denial wall was broken, and in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the culprits, a "band of 20-30
Jewish intellectuals", the Neo-Cons, admitted they did it. Afterwards, Michael Lind summarised their powerful
positions in the New Statesman, while my countryman Gabriel Ash optimistically predicted: "In a couple of
months, when the role of the Zionists in the war will become widely known, The New York Times will
publish an editorial sheepishly bemoaning the way some Pentagon officials have let their personal views
influence U.S. policy".
The problem is, the US people have no way out of the Zionist takeover. While Neo-Cons and Right-wingers
are guilty of starting World War Three, of introducing Fascist measures against the American population, of
premeditated aggression against sovereign Iraq and of unrestrained support for the racist Jewish State, it
would be mistake to leave the buck resting with them. Michael Moore’s philippics against President Bush are
convincing only up to a point, for in his bestselling book, The Stupid White Men, he regrets that Al Gore was
not allowed to enjoy the victory that was his by rights. But if Al Gore and Joseph Lieberman were the White
House incumbents now, the US Marines would be in Baghdad nevertheless, the National Library of Iraq and
Iraqi museums would still have been looted, and the olive trees of Mesecha uprooted and the flow of
American cash to Israel would be continuing unabated.
Every publicist, every internet user in America and Europe knows by now that the ‘only superpower’ was taken
over by the Likudniks, the supporters of the right-wing Likud and its bloody leader General Sharon. The team
of Bush and Sharon, or BuSharon, in internet parlance, horrifies the right-minded. But is there an alternative in
American politics? Al Gore was a ‘hand-picked and chosen disciple of Podhoretz’ the Zionist, Lieberman is a
devoted Zionist. Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean, ‘has a Jewish wife, and both his children,
17-year-old Paul and 18-year-old Anne, have chosen to identify as Jews’, we were informed by JTA, the
Jewish Telegraphic Assn called The Global News Service of the Jewish People. Kerry ‘discovered his Jewish
roots’, and Kucinich told the Jewish newspaper Forward that he "observes kashrut, has an ex-Israeli girlfriend
and knows most of the Haggadah (Passover narrative) by heart". Apparently, the forthcoming elections in the
US (as the previous ones) are the elections for the front figure of Zionist-led America. Left Zionists or Right
Zionists - that is the only choice for Americans, and, alas, for the whole world. Why did it come to pass?
We can find an answer in a short and sincere piece by Eric Alterman, a good Leftist, a journalist with the
anti-war Nation. He admits freely: "My own dual loyalties -- there, I admitted it -- were drilled into me by my
parents, my grandparents, my Hebrew school teachers and my rabbis, not to mention Israeli teen-tour
leaders and AIPAC college representatives. Whose interests come for me first, America's or Israel's? I feel
pretty lonely admitting that, every once in a while, I'm going to go with what's best for Israel".
Bear in mind: while the right-wing Jews were always shamelessly chauvinist, the left kept up a universalist
appearance. If that is a voluntary admission of a progressive left-wing journalist, you can easily guess what’s
on the mind of the average American Jew. As an Israeli, I should be happy that millions of American Jews
stand for me. However, ‘Israel’ in Alterman’s confession stands for ‘the People of Israel’, ‘the Jews’, not for
the Middle Eastern State of Israel. If Alterman does not mind robbing his fellow Americans of their hard earned
cash in order to sustain Israeli occupation (as he freely admits), he is probably ready to go much further for
the sake of his own community, American Jewry. And this community is managed and represented by – not by
the ostracised Noam Chomsky, but by an extremely unpleasant bunch of billionaires, media lords and
warmongers.
If Alterman were the only Jew in the media, one would be able to dismiss his self-admitted bias as the normal
influence of an important community. If Jews in the media constituted only 3% as their share in the general
population, Alterman’s position would be affordable. But their share in the top echelon of the media is in
double digits; according to some sources it approaches 60%.
Jeff Blankfort writes, "Ardently pro-Israel American Jews are in positions of unprecedented influence within the
United States and have assumed or been given decision making positions over virtually every segment of our
culture and body politic". And he quotes Benjamin Ginsberg’s "The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State":
"Jews played a central role in American finance during the 1980s, and they were among the chief
beneficiaries of that decade’s corporate mergers and reorganizations. Today, though barely 2 % of the
nation’s population is Jewish, close to half its billionaires are Jews. The chief executive officers of the three
major television networks and the four largest film studios are Jews, as are the owners of the nation’s largest
newspaper chain and the most influential single newspaper, the New York Times".
Is it a conspiracy of Jews to steal the Republic? No, no conspiracy is necessary. In Jules Verne’s juvenile
novel, Children of Captain Grant, a villain leads the captain’s ship astray by placing a magnet brick beneath
the compass. The magnet does not conspire: it constrains the compass. The sheer mass of self-involved
Jews in the media acts in a similar way and draws the superpower off its normal course. For the media is the
nerve system of a modern state. Modern democracy in practice in a very complicated society can be compared
to a sophisticated computer. Its machinery can function successfully on one condition: there is a free flow of
information across the system. While every input is instinctively checked and sieved on one criterion, whether
it is good for Jews, it is not odd that the machine produces such freak output as ‘revenge on Babylon for its
destruction of Jerusalem in BC 586. Indeed, in long-gone 1948 the first ruler of Israel, David Ben Gurion,
promised: "We shall mete historic vengeance to Assyria, Aram and Egypt". Now it comes to pass, as Iraq,
Syria and Egypt are targeted by Zog.
Thus, concentration of Jews in the media created the distortion. A takeover of every other part of industry or
trade would be noticed and reported in the media; but there is no remedy for media takeover. Discussion of
this unbearable situation is further stifled by the ‘political correctness’ taboo. PC has its good sides, for it
made life easier for a lone outsider. However, this very good and useful device has its limits of application.
Otherwise, it could be used to defend South African apartheid, or British colonial rule in India. Isn’t it anti-white
racism to notice that the political power in apartheid South Africa belonged to whites? Surely there are poor
and good whites? Gandhi could be condemned as ‘racist’, for he ‘noticed’ the privileged position of the British
in India. By PC logic, a good American should reply to Mahatma: yes, there are some rich and powerful Brits in
India, but there are also poor Tommy Atkinses, governesses, honest administrators, writers like Kipling and
Orwell. On the other hand, there are powerful and rich Rajas, important Brahmins. How do you dare, sir, to
demand ‘de-colonisation’! This is sheer anti-English racism!
An old Indian Air Force officer Joe Thomas actually reminded that, "while the population of the US today is
approximately the same as the population of India a century ago, the British in India never numbered more
than 50,000 and still ruled India. They did not rule India by force but by dominating Indian discourse. Indians
fought for the British and put down rebellions. During the two world wars, millions of Indians fought as
volunteers for Britain. If such a tiny group could control India, then it is not strange that 100 times that number
can influence the United States".
In no way should we embrace racism. Au contraire, the anti-racist fervour of America should be turned against
the Jewish racists - Elliott Abrams, Deborah Lipstadt and others of their ilk - who publish treatises comparing
intermarriage with a holocaust. It should be turned against the Wolfowitz Cabal who push for racist war in the
Middle East for the sake of the racist Jewish state. It should be turned against media owners who employ
disproportionate numbers of Jews and thus discriminate against non-Jewish Americans. It should be turned
against the church leaders who agreed to the racist notion that Jews are the only people in the world who do
not need to be baptised. It should be turned against the Jewish/non-Jewish discrimination; for the present
situation when a goy killer of Klinghoffer the Jew is hunted by the CIA, but the Jewish killer of Rachel Corrie
goes scot-free is perversion of natural justice. Jewish racism should be confronted; otherwise America will
forever have to choose between Likud and Meretz on its way to Armageddon.
Jewish dominance in the media should be redressed, among other measures, by separating advertising and
media. Advertising media shouldn’t carry news or articles, and non-advertising media should be forbidden to
carry advertising. Commercial advertising in the general media was (according to Werner Sombart) an 18th
century Jewish invention. Apparently that was ‘good for Jews’, but not for society in general, as it turned the
media away from readers towards advertisers. The separation could be enforced by banning all forms of
media and business interaction, like we ban all interaction of police and business. The media is more
important than police for the safety of society. It should be free from undue influences. Media is the compass
of society. It is necessary to remove the magnet from its vicinity, in order that the good ship of our society sail
smoothly. |
