‘International Jewry’? What was that prior to 1939? And what is it now?

Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).
User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: ‘International Jewry’? What was that prior to 1939? And what is it now?

Post by been-there »

The Waldheim affair

The most sensational of all post-war, racist, anti-German/Austrian persecution campaigns.

Kurt Waldheim was United Nations Secretary-General from 1972 to 1981.
Prior to his role at the UN he had unsuccessfully sought election as President of Austria in 1971.
After the end of his tenure as UN Secretary-General he sought again to become President of Austria and in June 1986 was successful. During his campaign for the Austrian presidency, what became known internationally as the "Waldheim affair" began.

In March 1986, the World Jewish Congress has alleged that Waldheim lied about his WW2 service.
The World Jewish Congress (WJC) claimed that its organisation had discovered that the United Nations War Crimes Commission had concluded after the war that Waldheim was implicated in Nazi mass murder. The WJC argued that Waldheim should be arrested. This transformed the 'Waldheim affair' into the most sensational of all post-war Nazi accusations and persecutions.

Waldheim called the allegations, which grew in magnitude in the ensuing months, “pure lies and malicious acts”. Nevertheless, he admitted that he had known about German reprisals against partisans: "Yes, I knew. I was horrified. But what could I do? I had either to continue to serve or be executed."
He said that he had never fired a shot or even seen a partisan. His former immediate superior at the time stated that Waldheim had "remained confined to a desk".
Former Austrian chancellor Bruno Kreisky, of Jewish origin, denounced the actions of the World Jewish Congress as an "“extraordinary infamy”, adding that Austrians would “not allow the Jews abroad to ... tell us who should be our President”.

Part of the reason for the controversy was Austria's refusal to address its national role in the Holocaust. Austria refused to pay compensation to Nazi victims, and from 1970 onwards refused to investigate Austrian citizens who were senior officers in the Third Reich.

In 1994, a former Mossad officer Victor Ostrovsky stated in his book The Other Side of Deception that Jewish Mossad agents had doctored Waldheim's file while he was serving as Secretary-General to implicate him in Nazi crimes.
These false documents were then conveniently "discovered" by Benjamin Netanyahu in the UN file and this triggered the "Waldheim Affair".
Ostrovsky wrote that this was motivated by Waldheim's criticism of Israel's war in Lebanon.
Despite Jewish attempts to discredit Ostrovsky and to deny his service in Mossad, it was confirmed when the Israeli government unsuccessfully attempted to stop publication of the book.

In view of the ongoing international controversy, in 1988 the Austrian government decided to appoint an international committee of historians to examine Waldheim's life between 1938 and 1945. Their report found no evidence of any personal involvement in those crimes.

Curiously the discredited Jewish 'Nazi hunter' and liar of his own wartime record Simon Wiesenthal, defended Waldheim. For this he was sharply criticized by the World Jewish Congress and others. He gave "adamant defence of Waldheim" and made "public, personal attacks against the WJC investigators" and for that the WJC assisted in tarnishing his then prominent global reputation.
Simon Wiesenthal had publicised the fact that the investigative committee had found no evidence that Waldheim took part in any war crimes. The International Committee in February 1988 concluded that Waldheim could not have stopped what was going on in Yugoslavia and Greece even if he had known.

Despite this, under pressure from the Jews who effectively control many aspects of US policy, Waldheim was banned from entry into the USA.
Get that!! World Jewry got America to ban entry to a head of state on exaggerated charges and malicious lies that had been initiated by bogus, Mossad forgeries!!! :o :?
Thus it was that, despite the false and exaggerated nature of the accusations, on 27th April 1987 the United States Department of Justice and the United States Department of State announced that evidence amassed in an investigation conducted by the Justice Department's Office of Special Investigations (OSI) had established a prima facie case that Waldheim participated in Nazi-sponsored persecution during World War II and therefore that his entry into the United States was prohibited by federal statute. This marked the first time that a head of state had been put on an immigration watchlist.

According to the Jewish-controlled and policed wikipedia page that this account is based upon, it claims there that “throughout his term as President (1986–1992), Kurt Waldheim was officially deemed persona non grata by the United States and officially or informally, by nearly every other nation in the world outside the Arab world”.

Yet it also admits the contradicting fact that in 1994, Pope John Paul II awarded Waldheim a knighthood in the Order of Pius IX and also bestowed upon his wife a papal honour.

Kurt Waldheim died on June 14th 2007, at the age of 88 from heart failure. In a speech at the St. Stephen's Cathedral in Vienna, Federal President Heinz Fischer called Waldheim "a great Austrian" who had been wrongfully accused of having committed war crimes. Fischer also praised Waldheim for his efforts to solve international crises and for his contributions to world peace.

As a young adult at the time of the 'Waldheim affair', I didn't follow the case in any detail but was aware of it. I was made to believe that a ‘lying, unrepentant ex-Nazi’ had successfully been elected President of Austria and therefore was manipulated to erroneously conclude Austria was populated by a majority of 'Nazi sympathisers'.
Also the mass-media amplification of the World Jewish Council's persecution of Waldheim made me aware of the 'war-crimes' accusations but not that they were unsubstantiated and were proven false.
I discovered that only today.

This demonstrates how the old term International Jewry is a description of a phenomena that still exists.
It also demonstrates how it operates; how it can successfully manipulate public perceptions; and how it can persecute, discredit and defame anyone who these Jews choose to target.

"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Would you like to financially contribute to the upkeep of RODOH? Please kindly contact Scott Smith ([email protected]). Any and all contributions are welcome!

User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: ‘International Jewry’? What was that prior to 1939? And what is it now?

Post by been-there »

Matthew Berlow, perfidious, pro-Israeli, zionist Jewish lawyer.

A top lawyer has been slammed by legal watchdogs for a bizarre plot to discredit a Palestinian pressure group.
Matthew Berlow played a key part in faking a graffiti attack at his home then used the bogus incident to smear the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign.
He now faces a £500 fine for his part in the conspiracy after an initial probe by the reporter of the Law Society of Scotland.

Berlow knew his associate Ed Sutherland, a teacher at Belmont Academy, Ayr, had created a fake Facebook identity under the name Stevie Harrison to infiltrate the SPSC in January last year. Berlow and Sutherland are linked to Friends of Israel, which aims to promote the interests of the country in the UK.

The fake Palestinian supporting activist “Stevie Harrison” wrote a social media post highlighting vandalism daubed on Berlow’s home in Glasgow.
The post said: “A certain Jewish lawyer woke up this morning to find ‘Free Palestine’ spray-painted rather ­prominently – no idea who was responsible.”

Berlow fuelled the story of the fantasy attack by playing the victim and commenting on the post: “Idiocy. Typical SPSC behaviour criminal.”
He later admitted to the LSS that he knew the scenario to be faked. But he claimed he went along with it because the Harrison character was being used “to monitor various ­disruptive activities of the SPSC”.

A preliminary ruling found Berlow failed to maintain the standards of behaviour expected for a ­solicitor.

https://israelpalestinenews.org/top-pro ... ine-group/

.. .. .. .. .. ..

In 2018, Berlow was ordered to pay a fine of £1,750 and undergo diversity training after he called Palestine activists 'scummy racists' in an online argument on Facebook. The Law Society initially ordered Berlow to pay the fine and undergo training for damaging his own and the legal profession's reputation.
However, the decision was later overturned on appeal.

In a post on the SPSC website, organiser Mick Napier said the scandal was part of a wider campaign, describing Sutherland and Berlow as “foot soldiers in a legion of deception and dirty tricks”.

Scotland's Daily Record newspaper quoted Napier as saying: “We welcome the finding against Berlow but the gravity of the offense clearly merits more than a £500 rap on the knuckles.

“I believe those who have been defamed, including myself, should be awarded exemplary damages. We have been smeared as antisemitic and that is serious and quite unacceptable.
The LSS decided no damage had been done to myself or the SPSC, but I would urge it to ­reconsider this because the damage to our reputation, in accusing us of such criminal acts, is impossible to deny.”

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/scot ... -palestine
been-there wrote:
Mon Aug 17, 2020 10:34 am
A Scottish shabbat goy is being "investigated" for possibly committing a crime.
Religious studies teacher faces losing job after allegedly posting anti-semitic slurs online

A senior figure in a pro-Israel group faces losing his job as a religious studies teacher — after allegedly posting anti-Semitic slurs online. Edward Sutherland set up a fake social media page which he used to write inflammatory messages.

Now the Belmont Academy employee – head of religious and moral education at the Ayr school – is being investigated over his fitness to be in the classroom by the General Teaching Council for Scotland (GTCS).

Edward Sutherland

However, his supporters have told the standards watchdog the site was a decoy created to lure bigots into making illegal comments.

Sources also say the page was used to monitor the activities of the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign (SPSC).
Sutherland was convener of the Confederation of Friends of Israel (COFIS), a lobby group and registered charity. He has stepped down while the investigation is underway.

He called himself Steven Harrison on the Facebook page which was created in 2018. ...COFIS says on its website: “We want to challenge the lies that are spread by hateful individuals and hate groups who claim to care about ‘the Palestinians’ but really just want to attack Israel.”

Sutherland could not be contacted for comment.

Edward Sutherland at a Friends of Israel stand

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scot ... YnvquP1GqU
What a despicable, immoral, conspiratorial, devious, dishonest mindset: making admittedly "illegal comments" to supposedly "lure bigots" into “making illegal comments”.
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

User avatar
Propositions Moderator
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 8:59 am

Re: ‘International Jewry’? What was that prior to 1939? And what is it now?

Post by been-there »

Further evidence that the elite of 'International Jewry' in the 1930's had no regard for the lives of the majority of Jews whose lives were to be disrupted (and even ended) by the elite Jews' desire for war and for a Jewish state in the Middle East.

Chaim Weizmann it turns out "hated" fellow Jews. He treated them with "contempt" and "enmity" and hated having to live with them, even though he himself lived in luxury in the specially designed mansion built for him in Israel.

As a reminder, here is something Chaim wrote during the orgy of mass-murder and cultural destruction in Europe that he was hugely instrumental in unleashing:
Chaim Weizmann wrote:“We are not afraid to confess that this war is our war and that it is waged for the liberation of Jewry...
Stronger than all fronts together is our front, that of Jewry.
We are not only giving this war our financial support on which the entire war production is based, we are not only providing our full propaganda power which is the moral energy that keeps this war going.
The guarantee of victory is predominantly based on weakening the enemy forces, on destroying them in their own country, within the resistance.
And we are the Trojan horses in the enemy's fortress.
Thousands of Jews living in Europe constitute the principal factor in the destruction of our enemy. There, our front is a fact and the most valuable aid for victory.”

And yet Chaim Wiezmann who admitted WW2 was a Jewish war — promoted by Jews, funded and propagandised by and for Jews, and surreptitiously/deceitfully fought by Jews — ironically “hated” Israel and found the Eastern European Jews who invaded and occupied it, "repellant". He actually hated the vast majority of the colonialist, invader, settler Jews who he had engineered to come to occupied Palestine to create his 'Jewish' state. And he openly showed them that, treating them with “enmity” and “contempt”.

A new biography reveals these contradictions in this man who was one of the leading purveyors and pimps of world war for Jewish self-interests. He comes across as a self-centred, dishonest, manipulative, hateful person who used everyone around him and dropped them when they were of no further use to him.

And yet these Jewish authors believe “Weizmann comes out well from our book”!!! :o :?

The founding father of the Jewish state
was a serial cheater who hated Israel

New biography in Hebrew on Chaim Weizmann casts a new light on Israel’s first president

| By Ofer Aderet | Sept. 12th, 2020 |

There is a new Hebrew-language biography of Weizmann, The founding father by historians Motti Golani, from Tel Aviv University, and Jehuda Reinharz, from Brandeis. The Weizmann who emerges from their book’s 1,000 pages is light-years away from Weizmann the symbol, the person behind the famous Balfour Declaration, and the first president of the State of Israel.

Prof. Golani tells Haaretz. “We discovered a person who is capable of quarreling, who has desires, who makes mistakes, fails and doesn’t tell the truth. In short: a human being,” he says, summing up the most comprehensive study ever made of Weizmann. This was a decade-long endeavor in which the two biographers left no stone unturned anywhere in the world, when it came to their subject.

Golani: “If you want to understand who Chaim Weizmann was in broader contexts, you also have to address his relationships with women. From these contexts we learned that this man had one major passion in his life. It wasn’t for women. Or for science. It was for Zionist activity. For its sake he sacrificed his family, his health, his profession — and his women.”

He had a passion for Zionism, but not necessarily a desire to fulfill it himself.
“Weizmann did not want to live in the Land of Israel. But, ...[his] life ...the whole is rife with contradictions.”

Indeed, it’s worth dwelling on the contradictions in Weizmann’s life. It’s hard not to be taken aback by the disparity between the prodigious effort he invested in promoting the Zionist enterprise — worldwide travels, meetings with the high and mighty – with the aim of establishing a Jewish state in the Land of Israel, and the repulsion he felt at life in that land. Golani and Reinharz did not recoil from dealing with this directly and without embellishment.
“Weizmann sought to lead the realization of the Zionist vision more than to live it. One foot here, one foot there” — although mostly there, in London.

It’s hard to blame Weizmann, a British elitist who lived in surpassing comfort in London, for his intense dislike he had for Rehovot, where he established his research center (the Sieff Institute, now known as the Weizmann Institute of Science) as well as his private residence in Palestine in the 1930s. His wife wanted things in Rehovot to be as they were in London, but the meager level of culture in the former ruled that out, he himself noted.

“He’s despondent and thinks that the level of morality and aesthetics in Palestine is inferior,” his colleague in the Zionist movement’s leadership, Arthur Ruppin, observed.

Weizmann did not hesitate to commit to writing, in letters and other personal documents, his inability and lack of desire to live in the Land of Israel, where he only moved permanently after he was made the state’s first president, in 1949. He wrote that he was shocked to the depths of his soul by the conditions in the country. When he did live there, he wrote in 1935, it was not out of free will but because of his Zionist duty. He confessed that he lacked the courage, the strength and the devotion rooted in love that helps one overcome such difficulties. What did he mean, exactly?

Golani: “Weizmann found it difficult to tolerate life in this country — the blunt language, the lack of manners, the disrespect and the weather. He was ready to lay down his life for the country — but to live here was a different matter.” Archival documents led Golani and Reinharz to conclude that Weizmann literally counted the days until his return to London. (During World War II, he was on the move between London and the United States.)

The solution he found was possible at the time only for a person of means like himself: to be constantly on the go and yet, when compelled to live in Palestine, to bring Europe there with him — in the form of an estate designed for him by preeminent Jewish-German architect Erich Mendelsohn, at an exorbitant cost: an architectural masterpiece built on a hill in Rehovot, which is now part of the campus of the Weizmann Institute.

But Weizmann didn’t always succeed in sequestering himself in his Middle Eastern “Europe”. On one Purim festival, he remarked, he felt as if he was “a mourner among bridegrooms” unable even to smile. The country was going wild with joy, he noted, and wondered why. He himself was in physical and spiritual “depression”. Life in the “small village” as he termed Rehovot, was not to his liking.

As the new biography shows abundantly, the alienation Weizmann felt was not only from the country itself but — and mainly — from the [Jewish] people in it. Thus, in 1935, he wrote that the country was filled with tourists and visitors of all kinds, and that it was not possible to avoid them, despite efforts to keep them at a distance. Indeed, he noted, he was heartily fed up with the place, particularly when it was overrun with swarms of pesky, troublesome [Jewish] visitors. He’d be happy to leave, he added. “Uninvited guests” was his term for those who sought him out like pilgrims, hoping to see the man of vision and action.

Romantic hypochondriac
Weizmann was repelled even by the [Jewish] immigrants in Palestine who had come from Eastern Europe, which is especially noteworthy because they were flesh of his flesh. He himself was born in 1874 to a traditional, observant Jewish family in the town of Motol, in what is today Belarus, then part of the Russian Empire; he was the third of 15 siblings (three of whom died in childhood). His father, Oser, was a merchant and Torah scholar. At 18, Weizmann left to study chemistry in Germany and Switzerland, and from that point on he felt estranged from Eastern European Jewry, where his own origins lay.

“He turned his back on them and ignored them, even when he struggled on their behalf,” Golani explains. “He wasn’t able to hide his repulsion from those who weren’t like him, from those whom he used to resemble,” the authors write. He was offensive and condescending toward them, to the point of enmity and contempt. He also spoke with overt disdain about his rivals in the Zionist movement and the Yishuv (the pre-state Jewish community in the Land of Israel), in a way that was in stark contrast to his varied diplomatic skills.

The Weizmann portrayed by Golani and Reinharz comes across as unhealthy, both physically and mentally — if it’s possible to separate the two. Between handshakes with Winston Churchill and intense conversations with Lord Balfour, between a fiery speech at the Zionist Congress and a meeting in the White House, lurked a different Weizmann. A leader prone to gloominess, dejection and anxiety, even when he walked tall, radiated charisma and displayed an exuberant sense of humor.
“He was prone to frequent mood swings. Within an hour’s time he could be elated and then feel sorry for himself,” Reinharz says.

“Nothing would divert him from the political and diplomatic activity in which he had been caught up since the Great War [WW1], when the Zionist horizon opened to new possibilities. Not a loving woman, not his family, his wife, his sons, his mother, his brothers and his sisters, not his scientific career, not his health, not the intolerable comportment of the Jewish masses in Eastern Europe, London and New York. Not even the ongoing pestering of Zionist functionaries who made his life miserable — nothing would stand in his way.”

...He was not only aloof in terms of his relationship with his wife and children. His insensitivity extended also to his mother and his siblings. ...His emotional stinginess and/or disability regarding familial relations is reflected in his reaction to the sudden death of his younger sister Mina...

...Weizmann also behaved callously with his friends and confidants, whether personal or professional. “What was true regarding his family was all the more true regarding his social circle,” the authors write. “...he would mercilessly attack those who stood in his way, even if in the past they had been close friends. In the best case he only severed his contact with them. At worst, he would harbor lifelong resentment, harboring on intense dislike”.

Ego battles and spitting
On May 13th, 1939, two days before the White Paper was due to be published, Weizmann was invited to the residence of Malcolm MacDonald, Britain’s colonial secretary in the government of Neville Chamberlain. This time he departed from the norms of diplomacy and did not attempt to conceal his anger.
...Once they were inside, Weizmann lashed out at MacDonald, saying that the politician’s father must be turning over in his grave. Ramsay MacDonald, of the Labour Party, had been prime minister four years earlier. Summing up afterward, Weizmann noted that he had spat at MacDonald and that the latter had reacted with English restraint, as though it were raining. At the end of the meeting, he shattered etiquette by turning his back on MacDonald and leaving without saying goodbye or shaking his host’s hand.

Eight years later, Weizmann again mobilized himself, this time in a different arena. On the eve of the United Nations vote on the Palestine partition plan, on November 29, 1947, he worked day and night behind the scenes in New York to ensure that it would be passed. At the time, Weizmann held no official position in the movement. He acted alone and without any authority as a “one-person delegation,” as the biographers describe him. Two other delegations represented the state-in-the-making and the Jewish people – the former headed by Moshe Sharett, who would become Israel’s first foreign minister; the latter, of the Jewish Agency, was led by the American Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver.
Weizmann loathed them both. If we’re not careful, he wrote to Doris May, his secretary, we’re liable to get a Jewish state with Silver as president and Ben-Gurion as prime minister, God help us.

https://www.haaretz.com/misc/article-pr ... -1.9144888
"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 33 guests