Friday, April 3, 2009

Tony Blair, the (paid) Zionist, and Sarkozy, the real thing

Tony Blair

Via the incomparable, courageous, most important blog in the world, Phillip Weiss';

The New Statesman:

Protected by the fake sinecure of Middle East envoy for the Quartet (the US, EU, UN and Russia), Blair operates largely from a small fortress in the American Colony Hotel in Jerusalem, where he is an apologist for the US in the Middle East and Israel, a difficult task following the bloodbath in Gaza. To assist his mortgages, he recently received an Israeli “peace prize” worth $1m.

You see, Tony Blair, the neocon in the disguise of a Labour party apparatchik ("New Labour - it is not new, and it s not labour"), is doing what any good servant of the power that be does - he has a second career, a very, very well paid career, paid for by the people whose bidding he did while in office (for example, for bringing British soldiers' blood to further Israeli security goals).

He is a so called "peace envoy", supposedly trying to bring peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis.

He does most of his work from a luxury hotel - in fact, he never leaves the place (Why should he? It's not like he has a real job or anything).

And just to keep himself impartial, Tony Blair, has had no qualms accepting a 1 million dollar prize from Israel - while he tries to mediate between Israel and Palestine.

No hypocrisy there, no conflict of interest present... right?

Nicolas Sarkozy

Meanwhile, the French people were manipulated in a very crude fashion to vote for a real deal, enthusiastic zionist.

You are probably not familiar with this odious creature's plan for French children, profiled in this Reuters report.

PARIS (Reuters) - French President Nicolas Sarkozy, facing a tide of criticism over his call for schoolchildren to "adopt" Jewish child victims of the Holocaust, hit back on Friday saying France had to raise children "with open eyes".

In a speech praising faith that also drew fire from secularists, Sarkozy told France's Jewish community on Wednesday that every 10-year-old schoolchild should be "entrusted with the memory of a French child victim of the Holocaust".

The proposal unleashed a storm of protest from teachers, psychologists and his political foes who said it would unfairly burden children with the guilt of previous generations and some could be traumatized by identifying with a Holocaust victim.

Did you catch that?

This openly zionist french citizen wants 10 year old kids to be taught to feel guilt about the holocaust and identify with a kid who did die in a concentration camps.

Wouldn't you think that, perhaps, 10 years old is a bit too young to be taught about such a serious subject?

The goal seems to be to traumatize French children, to make them feel guilty and by extension to grow up seeing Israel as a victim - something holocaust industry thrives on (please click the link and read it - that is one of the key articles on my blog; thank You).

"The emotional burden can have negative consequences for a child who is developing," Gilles Moindrot, general secretary of the Snuipp-FSU trade union which represents most primary school teachers, said in a statement.

"One can not place on a child of 11 the responsibility for what happened back then."

No shit?

And Sarkozy is not done yet.

Quick history lesson: France withdrew from NATO in the late 1960's, because, frankly, DeGaulle was pissed off at the American domination of the defense organization (short history lesson on the subject here).

You must realize that this was done when the Soviet Union was a superpower, bristling with nuclear weapons and thousands of tanks, all stationed closely to the Western Germany border... and it was a short hop for the Soviet tanks, if nuclear weapons were used to pave the way, to go into France and park their vehicles on the coastline of the English Channel.

Despite the threat, DeGaulle (and his successors) valued French independence from American hegemony enough to withdraw from NATO (while assuring their allies that French armed forces will fight if ever the Soviet Union invaded Western Germany, even though they withdrew from the defensive - at that time, it cannot be called that today - alliance).

Now, Sarkozy is turning the French independence on its head, the very idea of France as a global power, in his rush to use France in the furtherance of Israeli/zionist goals.

Sarkozy sets French terms for return to NATO command:
NEW YORK (Reuters) - France is ready to rejoin NATO's military command structure provided European defense integration moves forward and the U.S.-led alliance reserves top positions for the French, President Nicolas Sarkozy was quoted on Monday as saying.

In an interview with the New York Times, Sarkozy said he had no problem in principle with returning to NATO's integrated command, from which General Charles de Gaulle abruptly withdrew in 1966.
What is the threat that necessitates France returning to NATO?

Did I miss a second Russian revolution?

Are Soviet tanks again stationed in Poland, on the border of Germany?

In fact, there is no reason for France to rejoin NATO, save to allow French soldiers and materiel to be used up by America, and, by proxy, by Israeli-firsters still manipulating American policies, even though the shrilling banshees ("Bomb Iran! Syria! Iraq will be a cake walk, and we'll be welcomed with flowers!") withdrew from the public spotlight.

I understand that America is so infilitrated at the top echelon with neocons, both paid stooges and the real deal, to the point that an Israeli soldier could shoot a Palestinian woman - hell, an American citizen - live, right in front of the Congressmen, shown on C-SPAN, and the Congresspeople would stand up and applaud... with those who would not applaud with enough verve and with too little enthusiasm being pilloried as "hating our freedom" and accused of being "soft on terrorism" and, of course, "bigots" and "anti-semites".

But how did the UK end up spilling the blood of its soldiers to further the goals of Israel?

How did France end up with a neocon president?


Anonymous said...

A very parceptive analysis of Blair and Sarkozy, i agree that children of 10 years are way to young to be told of the Holocaust, it could well traumatise them. I enjoyed your article very much. politicalMIZZ

Outsider said...

Sarkozy's plan for the Holocaust memorial was dead in the water when he proposed it months ago. It's just another in the long list of things he tried to push through with his bullish determination and high ratings. There's a lesson there for Avigdor and Le Pen! It's sometimes easier to get headlines as the pushy opposition straight-talker than it is to effect change and survive politically.

Anonymous said...

Blair now even describes Jerusalem as 'home'