hypocrisy of the 'highest' order ...

  .. what we see (endless bloody murder) ...

    .. what they push on TV (filthy peace-process lie)

-=*=-

It's not 'merely' mass-murder, it's not 'just' genocide - it's incontrovertible evidence of the deep, essential criminality of the race that call themselves 'Jews.' More on that statement in a moment.

My thanks to Kate Bates for the Steven Lendmen article. More on that in a moment also.

Disclaimer 1: One of the mind-games played by Jews is that if one refers to them as Jews they may instantly object (screeching 'racism!' or worse, 'anti-Semitism!'), and/or demand to be called Israelis or Zionists or some other whatever. It is this site's policy to avoid such filthy mind-games; here a spade may be called a bloody shovel, if that is closer to the truth.

Disclaimer 2: Before being dragged into the ghastly task of fighting through the fug of capital crimes that the US and Israeli regimes continually create, it never occurred to me to mention the H-word: hate. On some Lakoff-framing scale, the H-word must rank as one of the very worst, as it invokes one of the most negative aspects of humans. I found to my horror, that not only was the H-word deployed in what should be serious discussions of vital matters of fact, but it was veritably thrown willy-nilly around - mostly, almost exclusively - by Jews, their accessories and apologists (any exceptions being generally secondary, i.e. in response to being H-worded first). Forgetting the US for the moment, and paraphrasing Marilyn Shepherd, we do not hate the Jews, we simply and utterly deplore the ugly, murdering-theft-crimes of the rogue state of Israel, and we completely condemn any and all support for those crimes.

One specific thing stands out and that by a vast margin: justice-seekers are vitally interested in truth, criminals simply are not, in fact with criminals, the absolute opposite to truth often obtains. So it is no surprise, in retrospect, that the criminal Israeli regime, its supporters, accessories and apologists use emotional terms - anything to avoid the sad truth, anything to hook sympathy however confected to their vile and criminal cause.

-=*=-

They (a publicly-financed broadcaster) trotted it out again last night, something like "What are the implications of the Israeli elections for the Middle-East peace process?"

Q: Err - exactly what 'peace process' please?

A: The one that hasn't worked these past 60+ years?

-=*=-

We know - now, following the run-up to the illegal invasion of Iraq (1mio+ dead Iraqis; murder for oil) - that the commercial mainstream media (MSM) can be very truth-averse when it comes to certain topics, like the US M/I/C-plex depredations, say. See the myriad filthy lies pushed by certain 'journalists,' the names of Judith Miller (NYT) and Tony Parkinson (theAge) come quickly - infamously - to mind.

The commercial MSM deploy a flimsy two-way 'excuse:' a) that they are privately-owned and b) that they must pursue profit (in the name of shareholder-value, actually another weak cop-out); I write 'excuse' because in good faith, the mission of the news-organizations is to inform us, when they tell us lies they are betraying the trust that they implied we should have in the first place, and what one tacitly assumes when one pays for a service. Well of course, caveat emptor; but now not only do we pay for the news (voluntarily in cash, or involuntarily by being passive advertising targets), we also have to spend our time and talents separating the truth from the lying propaganda.

It is, however, an entirely different story vis-à-vis any publicly-financed broadcaster. Having grown up in Aus, having turned to the AusBC as my primary information source - and having innocently fallen for the poor little Israeli David vs. ugly Arab Goliath myth, I accuse the AusBC as having knowingly broadcast lies. Given that the lies support murder of Palestinians, and have done so for 60+ years, I accuse the AusBC of nothing short of treachery (betrayal of trust), as well as being accessory to murder. It's not an easy thing to write and that's for sure, but in here, we deal with provable facts. The truth is not ugly, but acts of treachery indubitably are. Very.

Just as the commercial MSM clings to a flimsy, feeble 'excuse,' so the AusBC: they, the AusBC, must have permission[1] from 'above,' i.e. from the politicians - bipartisan, not in the people's interest, and therefore diametrically undemocratic - and, even more deeply undemocratic one supposes, permission from the politicians' shadowy controllers. This permission-giving chain has incredibly vicious implications all of its own: IMHO, it is prima facie evidence of a conspiracy of our so-called 'leaders,' a criminal conspiracy directed against us, we the people and at the very heart of our democracy, both.

-=*end*=-

PS Just as "Some of one's best friends may be Yanks," so not every Jew must be suspected of being bad, but until enough Jews deploy an effective counter to the criminality, Zionist evil will taint them all. The 'more' on Jewish racism (I don't invent this stuff, I just distil it) can be seen in detail in the Lendmen article, the Jews are often their own worst enemy. This latter, their own worst enemy, would be a good joke if it wasn't so sad; they even have an horrendous slur for any internal dissenter: "Self-hating Jew!" Now an extract:

February 09, 2009
A Short History of the Israeli - Palestinian Conflict: Past Is Prologue
 - by Stephen Lendman

  «Understanding Zionism is fundamental:

-- its reliance on oppression, violence, and dispossession;

-- its belief in exclusivity, privilege, and Jewish exceptionalism;

-- racism at the core of its politics;

-- democracy only for Jews;

-- an ethnically pure state in which half its inhabitants aren't Jewish, are afforded few rights, and none on what matters most.»
[sjlendman.blogspot]

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] permission used instead of remit[2], for the illiterate until proven otherwise Mr. Butler. BTW, distractions about blaming others are purely that: distractions (troll warning!) As far as I can see, no-one is denying anything here, perhaps you could save us from your baseless fantasies.

[2] remit (see—n. 1) —v. (-tt-) 1 cancel or refrain from exacting or inflicting (a debt, punishment, etc.). 2 abate or slacken; cease partly or entirely. 3 send (money etc.) in payment. 4 a (foll. by to) refer (a matter for decision etc.) to some authority. b send back (a case) to a lower court. 5 postpone or defer. 6 pardon (sins etc.). —n. 1 terms of reference of a committee etc. 2 item remitted for consideration. [Latin remitto -miss-] [POD]