Chris,
You are a very brave man, I sincerely hope you don't go to the shop for a bottle of milk one day, and never make it home, you will have upset some powerful forces here, I hope fortune favors the brave mate.
Regards, Shaun.

Dozer indulges in the same tired refuge of invoking the spectre of anti-Semitism as if it some type of trump card.

If you criticise the US, you’re called “Anti-American”.
If you criticise Australia, you’re “Un-Australian”.
If you criticise Brazil, I guess you would be called “anti-Brazilian”.

Criticise Israel however, and all hell seems to break loose.

You’re not just “anti-Israeli”, you’re somehow mysteriously elevated (or lowered) to the ranks of “Anti-Semite”, as though any political criticism of a nation equates to an attack on an entire religion and all it’s followers around the world – past and present.
It’s as if they are using the collective blood of the millions of Jews killed over the centuries to cleanse themselves of any responsibility for their own actions and to keep themselves beyond reproach.

In any case, I didn’t see any evidence of anti-Semitism or direct attacks on Judaism in these posts. If any inference was felt it’s more likely to be paranoia rather than guilt.

If the main protagonist’s names behind the global Oil and Finance empires weren’t Rockefeller or Rothschild but Smith and Jones, the arguments would be identical.

I’ve also seen where the crazy conclusions that some of these so-called “theories” lead to, but most of the points raised are not theories but hard historical facts.

If there’s been any historical revisionism taking place it’s because many of these items are never mentioned and are deliberately avoided because they don’t fit the neat and tidy model of the world we have been taught.

They can't simply be be dismissed on that basis alone.

If there’s one thing I’ve learned over the decades it’s that you can’t tell the good guys from the bad guys by the colour of the hats they wear.

Liam,

As I said on the mining thread, I make a point of reading every single post before I even think about making a comment. As for my lack of evidence and sweeping generalisations, I was so overwhelmed by the sheer number of factual and logical errors, I didn’t know where to begin.

So, to respond to but a few:

Carl,

Yes, conspiracies do occur. The US’ involvement in numerous coups during the Cold War is well documented, as was the USSR’s support for numerous Communist insurgencies. The context of the Cold War is vital in understanding how a democratic government could behave in such a manner. The mistake many people make is to draw connections where none exist between everything that happens on the planet, between every war, every company, every coup.

Regarding anti-Semitism,

Criticism of Israeli foreign policy is an entirely different matter. The Jewish people, as a nation, are still “traumatised by the Holocaust,” and exhibit a tendency to “use their suffering as a weapon.” The anti-Semitism label is used a little too frequently in debates over Israel and the Palestinian territories. On the other hand, when faced with States and terrorist organisations which do not recognise your right to exist, belligerence is understandable, however inexcusable. In contrast, Shaw’s article exhibits many ideas and prejudices which can be traced back to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (http://ddickerson.igc.org/The_Protocols_of_the_Learned_Elders_of_Zion.pdf)

For example, claims about “the noise foisted upon us” by the media and the “smoke and mirrors,” using our political leaders and everyday events as diversions from the main game, bare a remarkable resemblance to extracts from Protocol 12:

“We shall saddle and bridle it (the press) with a tight curb.” (p53)

“among those making attacks upon us will also be organs established by us, but they will attack exclusively points that we have pre-determined to alter. Not a single announcement will reach the public without our control.” (p54)

“If already now we have contrived to possess ourselves of the minds of the goy communities to such an extent that they all come near looking upon

cont..

the events of the world through the coloured glasses of those spectacles we are setting astride their noses… what will our position be then, when we shall be acknowledged supreme lords of the world.” (p54)

Shaw’s reference to the troglodytes whose immense wealth and power is entrenched in every aspect of “governments, intelligence, industry, defence- because economic and budgetary matters penetrate and subvert every seen and unseen aspect of public and private life,” echo a passage from Protocol 8:

“We shall surround our government with a whole world of economists. That is the reason why economic sciences form the principal subject of the teaching given to the Jews. Around us again will be a whole constellation of bankers, industrialists, capitalists and- the main thing millionaires, because in substance everything will be settled by the question of figures.” (p42)

The suggestion that this powerful elite are behind all wars, world/ civil/ peacekeeping etc, reflects the subjects and headings for Protocol 7:

“Object of the intensification of armaments. Ferments, discords and hostility all over the world. Checking the opposition of the goyim by wars and by a universal war.” (p40)

I could go on, but 700 words isn’t much.

Shaw’s article, and much of the posts in this thread, reads like an embellished, 21st Century copy of the Protocols, with the notable omission of any reference to the Jews. The Protocols hold a special place in the history of anti-Semitism. They informed the views of Hitler, and despite being proven to be a forgery, they are commonly believed to be genuine throughout the Middle East. Furthermore, they inform the basis, either consciously or unconsciously, of much of the conspiracy literature throughout the West.

The nature of world politics in incredibly complex, with a myriad of competing and overlapping interests between and across states, regions, cultures, ethnicities, religions, corporations, NGO’s, and individuals. The belief that there is some malevolent cabal of individuals who control the mechanisms of world politics is itself an attempt to create a “neat and tidy model of the world.”

Oh, and Shaw, I haven’t heard of you either.

Mr, er - dozer.

Well mate, you certainly managed to squeeze a couple of jokers in there. Ye olde race and religion cards slipped under the door, as it were.

I have never read P of EZ, believe it or not - but there it is. Do you recommend it? I read Chariots of the Gods once, but tended to grow out of that sort of thing as I got older and (hopefully) wiser.

The formula that I suggested is equally applicable anywhere on the planet. The fact that you put such strong emphasis on Israel is your bag. It could, and does apply to any place where there are strategic resources and huge fortunes to be made. Small wonder the Middle East is deafeningly "noisy".

Be assured that I am only interested in the nuts and bolts of it all. Means , method and motive. Know people by the things that they do, not what they say.

As for race and religion, I don't get obsessed by something which for nearly all of us is merely an accident of birth. The planet is far too small for that now.

Chris,

Sorry, to say that it's the "financiers" who make a profit from the war is just bunk. Why not go all the way and say it is the "merchants of death" like people claimed about World War I? Or the Jews like Hitler thought? Or maybe the Illuminati? Freemasons?

I mean, in the absence of any evidence, all names belong in the pot.

Mind you, I'd agree that plenty of people are making a profit out of this war in one way or another. Suppliers of military needs like weapons, engineering firms, the AWB(!) - all of them are in it for the money after all. So? You still have to show how some or all of them somehow manipulated the US to start the war just to make a few measly millions.

All I can say is if these unidentified "financiers" are so powerful and clever as to make the US go to war and spend half a trillion dollars doing so, it would have been a lot less effort and danger to extract this from the US taxpayer by other means.

As to your claim that profit doesn't exist, that's wrong too. Economics is not a zero sum game: my comfy lifestyle does not depend on others living in poverty.