"Democracy" promotion

 USAID backed Internews in Ukraine in 2001 was proping up 203 TV stations and 126 radio stations and training 1900 "journalists."

https://x.com/ricwe123/status/2105243331340943661

Staged Antisemitic Attacks

 Here is a list of alleged antisemitic attacks staged by Jewish Zionists themselves since 2004:

https://x.com/_ZachFoster/status/2105305474006409408

In one of the most recent incidents, a Jewish lady and her daughter were caught on security cameras vandalizing their own apartment building with swastikas which they had been complaining about for months.  In one of the more destructive ones, a Jewish man in Toronto Canada set his own synagogue on fire.  In one of the more amusing ones, a Jewish student group plastered campus with antisemitic stickers claiming to be from Palestinian supporters but actually commissioned by the Jewish student group themselves.

Many incidents like these go back to the Baghdad temple bombings in 1950-51 if not earlier.

Staged attacks are clearly illegal, immoral, and forbidden by the basic laws of Judaism including the one against bearing false witness.

Zionism is a perversion and negation of Judaism.  If there were the jealous God envisioned by Judaism, I would have thought He would have stopped it by now, as was said to have happened many times to Hebrews in the Torah.  Of course, Zionist idolatry of statehood, coveting the lands and homes of Palestinians, and murderous violence to get it, in clear violation of many of the laws of Judaism, had even preceded the Holocaust, so there is that.  But it didn't really get rolling like today until after the Holocaust, and God seems to have been relatively reserved after that, so reserved that Zionists have felt compelled to stage attacks on themselves.

Judaism is Plagiarism

Antoun Ananias makes the case for Judaism almost entirely being copied from other religions, with the exception of Isaiah, which was a supernatural revenge fantasy against the many conquerors and overlords of Judea,  and that Isaiah itself was written by several authors about 100 BCE.  The Hebrews were a minor tribal sect that emerged in Judea circa 1000 BCE and lasted about 200 years having Chieftains, not Kings, and about whose religion we have no evidence at all.  He concludes that Judaism and Christianity are competing irrationalist cults both following the narrative from Isaiah, [one saying the Messiah has come once and will come again later, and the other saying the Messiah hasn't come at all yet] and the world would and will eventually be better off without either.  If it hadn't been for Christianity's success is becoming a world religion, Judaism and all of its fantastical claims about what happened during the First Temple period--which lack any evidence in archeology--would have been long ago forgotten.  [Even at the start of the Hasmonean Kingdom, whose midpoint was when Isaiah was written according to Antoun Ananias, Judea proper was a rather small region surrounding Jerusalem and the original much smaller Second Temple which was later greatly expanded by the Roman vassal Herod the Great, whose father was an Idumean--a descendant of the Edomites to the southeast of Judea and whose land was one of many territories conquered by the Hasmonians.  The Hasmonean Kingdom lasted 103 years until it was conquered, this time by the Romans]. Commenters state that this was all common knowledge 50 years ago and seems to have been forgotten because of Zionism which attempts to revive the image of a mythical ancient world of Hebrews sprawling across the Levant which never existed.  In fact, I myself first heard these things about 50 years ago, from some guy I met in college (a White history major btw) and I couldn't believe it.

https://medium.com/@antounananias/why-judaism-is-plagiarism-cba5efb0c825

I see that others claim that Isaiah was written starting in the 8th century (by the actual "Prophet Isaiah") and ending in the 5th century.  I have not seen and I doubt there is any physical evidence for this.  In fact, the earliest known copy of the Book of Isaiah is from the Dead Sea Scrolls.  The Dead Sea Scrolls date from 250 to 125 BCE, and it seems like they also have the earliest known copies of the other books in the Torah or Old Testament, except for small fragments of blessings found in earlier writings.  According to legend, the rest of the Torah et all had been passed down verbally before that.

Recently I have been fond of the idea that the Torah was conceived and composed (if not written down) during or immediately after Babylonian captivity and the Persian release, written to create the myths that the Jews being "returned" to Judea would live by as a religious sect (explicitly not a country or nation) occupying the land near the country Egypt which Persia sought to conquer.  They were written so as to be compatible with monotheistic Persian Zoroastrianism, to indicate that the Jews had a glorious civilization long before, but it all had come to a bad end before, and that they must now wait for a Messiah from God to have another such kingdom again.  It also included a myth of Egyptian captivity to make the Jews hate the Egyptians.  It all fits so perfectly with the Persian intent to conquer Egypt, which they did not long after, I figured the Persians inspired or paid for these compositions to provide a faux history for the "returning" Jews to live by.  Though it is also said they were composed in Babylonian captivity to help preserve a nationalist sentiment.

But there is no evidence the books were written even that soon after the events they supposedly describe from 1400-800 BCE including the Egyptian captivity, for which there is no widely accepted evidence, though some claim there is (I found this link in a comment and am discouraged that it is just a video interview of dubious value rather than serious writing):  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeI2-YPDTXk

If indeed the books of the Torah were actually composed and written from 300-125 BCE which was before, during or immediately before the Hasmonean Kingdom, it seems more like they were intended to glorify the new Judean priestly and warrior class, instill nationalism, and to motivate and justify the forthcoming Hasmonean* conquests, effectively claiming that the ancestors of the Jews had previously ruled over some of these same lands beyond Judea proper in a glorious ancient kingdom promised to them by God (ie, conquered and stolen by them way back then) that they were only seeking to "restore."  But there is no physical evidence at all of any of the conquests as described in the Torah.

*The Hasmonean dynasty was begun by military leaders within the Judean priestly class, the Maccabees, when Judea was a province of the Seleucid Empire--which itself was a spinoff of the earlier Greek empire.  Eventually the Hasmonians secured their sovereign independence, but for only 47 years before the Romans finished defeating and annexing them and other remaining Seleucid fragments.  The Hasmonean empire was hated by many of the peoples it conquered and ruled and was in the midst of a civil war between rival Hasmonean brothers when the Romans defeated them.  The Romans formally replaced the Hasmonean rulers with King Herod, an Idumean, in 37 BCE, though at first they gave the new Roman province which included Hasmonean conquests the name Judeah, now effectively the "greater Judea" that the Hasmoneans had conquered and were barely holding on to.

Antoun gives his better sourced and recounted version of the history of the Pentateuch, Tanakh, and Torah and related events here:

https://medium.com/@antounananias/the-aramaic-gospels-vs-the-fake-gospels-2ac1e9073067

The fact that the previous attempted restoration of the Torah's mythological past under the Hasmonean Kingdom lasted only 103 years (and only 47 years as a sovereign nation) gives some hope regarding the shortness of the continued existence of the current one, which is widely and justifiably hated except by most Ashkenazi "Jews" (who Antoun and others such as Shlomo Sand) claim have no descent from the original Judeans.  

I would characterize Ashkenazi descent from ancient Judeans not as nonexistant but rather as minimal and little more than other Europeans, noting that DNA doesn't actually provide a total record of descent because the original DNA can be almost entirely lost by genetic segregation after a few generations of mixing, and after 2000 years even slight mixing over time results in everyone being related somehow despite a lack of distinctive markers which may have been lost.  My maternal family of Jacobson (Christians) claims descent from Jerusalem through James the Just who was definitely a real historical figure, himself a Judean high priest in Jerusalem assassinated on orders of the highest priest Ananus ben Ananus, which was a critical historical event ultimately leading to the sacking of Jerusalem by the Romans.  As the descendants of James the Just were Jewish Christians, they were likely spared by Rome, as well as allowed a free ticket to the empire, so this bloodline has a higher probability of having been preserved than others from Jerusalem at the time which may have been extinguished through war or slavery.  Since pretty much all Europeans are related going back 2000 years, I've decided there is most likely some truth in our descent from James the Just, but not exclusive to me and my immediate ancestral family but shared by nearly all Europeans now.  That is the way human descent actually works over a large number of generations, and it is on that basis that Ashkenazis are not excluded from Judean descent either even if their descent originated from only a handful of Judean founders mixed with Germans which would not be demonstrable with genetics at this point.

While all Europeans must have some Judean descent, the people with the most ancient Judean descent are the Palestinians and Samaritans of today.  They are close enough related to ancient Judeans that you can indeed usually find many of the distinctive genetic markers in them, despite two millennia of mixing and genetic segregation. 

So Jews have no exclusive claim to Judean ancestry, possibly minimal anyway, and "Jewishness" is a religious ethnicity not so much uniquely connected to Judean ancestry as connected to Judaism, a levantine cult whose foundations were written down between 300 and 100 BCE to create nationalistic fervor and to fuel regional conquests, but maintained and spread ever since by its sometimes antagonistic and sometimes synergistic relationship with the more popular levantine cult of Christianity.

In my youth, I found Judaism much more attractive than Christianity because it did not require me to believe in the Jesus divinity and resurrection story, which I detested having to memorize and recite.  I also often found Jewish people I knew to be more like minded and wanted to be part of their club instead of mine.  Judaism seemed based on largely reasonable behavioral rules, which I had largely imbibed anyway through Christianity, and enjoyable rituals, rather than professed beliefs which seemed fake to me.  I only became disenchanted about converting to Judaism when I learned about the Nakba when I was 13 and none of my Jewish friends could give me an adequate explanation of it.  (Though I didn't dump my Jewish friends because of that, and I continued having mostly Jewish or partly Jewish friends, and having fascinations and sometimes dates with Jewish or partly Jewish girls for the rest of my life.). Now I would not tie Judaism unequivocally to Israeli Apartheid and Genocide, I fully respect Jewish Antizionism and see that as the truest and best form of Judaism (Zionism just skips the Messiah requirement and turns state* worship into an idolatry above and negating all the other rules) but there just doesn't seem to be a good reason for me to be immersed in Judaism anyway anymore as opposed to religions or philosophies simply emphasizing care, love. and respect for others, like humanism, Freethinking, and Unitarian Universalism.  Such religions and philosophies can be quite clear about what religious traditions they are quoting from, and can freely pick and choose the best from all of them, and avoid the inhuman and inhumane parts, like Samuel's call for genociding the Amalek and their animals too, the very model of what Israeli Zionists are doing today.  (BTW, the genocide of Amalek never actually happened, but the genocide of Palestinians and the killing of their animals and trees today is very real and disgusting.)

*Orthodox anti-Zionist Jews say that even when the Messiah comes, even that doesn't mean all the Jews flock to and establish another state in Judea.  It simply means that God re-establishes His presence in Jerusalem, then ruling the entire world with goodness which is available to everyone.  I would add that Judaism is supposed to be a proselytizing religion (and once was far more so than today), just like Christianity (which has the same roots), so that by the time the Messiah comes most of the world is supposed to be Jewish anyway making a safe haven for Jews in Judea both unnecessary and an impossibility.  Meanwhile, Jews are supposed to be "healing" the entire world as well as converting everyone who can be converted to Judaism in preparation, and with the added belief that the coming of the Messiah will lead even more to adopt Judaism, so ultimately including almost everyone.  Zionism is the attempt to escape from the rest of the world, a negation of the basic concept in this and other ways.

What Actually Happened on October 7

Quoting Tony Hanania about October 7

https://x.com/AntounAnanias/status/2104272468345000105

 I was there on Oct 7th and could see clear as day what actually happened. I have posted extensively in the Arabic media on this. 

1. The initial response was entirely unprecedented. There was no resistance to 1000s of Gazans breaching what is normally a dangerous security perimeter just to approach 30 yards away.

2. The response that there was focused not on the breaches but on attacking Nova and that soon petered out.

3. The mass slaughter did not take place until after 2pm, 8 hours after the breakout. Two passes of 14 Apaches destroyed virtually everything on the ground indiscriminately. Any cars backed up were missiled. Anything moving was a target. At the same time the Kibbutzim came under attack from tanks 

There is nothing controversial about my account of what I witnessed as the leaked Apache cockpit footage is absolutely explicit. Oct 7th was an indiscriminate and savage war crime perpetrated principally by Israeli forces.

As for the accusations against Hamas, of which I am not a member, 27 of 27 have been proved false or have absolutely no evidence to back them up !!

Trita Parsi adds that while it appeared that Netanyahu didn't tell Israeli intelligence about his input, nevertheless an intelligence chief removed his daughter from the Nova gathering at 4:45 am, leaving the rest to die.

(My own belief is Netanyahu and key Israeli intelligence knew about the Hamas attack the whole time, in fact they were encouraging it.  They had spies in Hamas, they track Palestinian smart phones, and the border if not far beyond is full of Israeli cameras.  They wanted a big event to justify the following genocide.  It was why Netanyahu was behind some funding for Hamas in the first place, he wanted them to do things to justify harsh responses.  It's possible Netanyahu didn't realize how bad this would get, but I wouldn't count on that.) 

 

Zelenskyy's Former Press Secretary Begs Europe to Consider Peace

 She was banned by Zelenskyy, then by the European Parliament, but was able to give her speech anyway.

https://substack.com/home/post/p-216109300

The Origins of the War in Ukraine

 Ivan Katchanovski's latest masterpiece book on how the War in Ukraine began is available for free downloads from Springer:

https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-98724-3

The hardcover version is $59.99 on Amazon.

Katchanovski has impeccable academic credentials also indicated by his publication by Springer.  He identifies as Ukrainian and is anti-Putin (unlike me).  He was born in Ukraine, was an active supporter of Ukrainian separation from the Soviet Union, and believes in liberal democracy.*  He was prevented from graduate study in the Soviet Union because his undergraduate thesis concerned Max Weber and western economists.  So instead he got his PhD at George Mason University and held jobs at prestigious locations in US, including Harvard and the Library of Congress, before joining the University of Ottawa where he has become quite famous, most recently for questioning western narratives about the beginning of the War in Ukraine.  His book is the most serious scholarship on the topic.

 *I think it's always been fake, now it's a thin cover for hegemonic fascist imperialism. 

Theory and Revolution

 https://liberationschool.org/theory-and-revolution-addressing-the-break-of-ideological-continuity/

The Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) released a very insightful essay in 2016 on the importance of defining Socialism in terms of working class power.  Nothing permanent can be achieved until that is done, but rather than using the historical Marxist phrase "smash the bourgeois state," they propose this definition of socialism:

”Socialism is a society where political and economic power is in the hands of the working class and the oppressed. Socialism is a society where the basic needs of the population and the planet are planned for and guaranteed.”

 The key word here is power.  And PSL contrasts this with the proposals of Social Democrats like Bernie Sanders.

PSL recognizes the successful revolution of 1917 that created the Soviet Union, the first of its kind where the working class seized power, and that there is much to learn from the Marxism and Leninism that inspired it.  (PSL uses the phrase "Marxism and Leninism" instead of the typical "Marxism Leninism" that Communist Parties use, but they would also consider themselves communists in essentially that same tradition, which was active in the US from 1919 through the liberation movements of the 1960's, but subsequently snuffed out in the minds of activists and replaced with bourgeois Identity Politics.)

Limits to Growth vs Paul Ehrlich

Whenever I bring up Limits To Growth, the groundbreaking study based on Systems Dynamics modeling, critics respond about Paul Ehrlich, who made many predictions in his book Population Bomb and in many interviews which were incredibly wrong.  Noah Smith (an economist who I basically despise btw) has a good synopsis:

https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/why-paul-ehrlich-got-everything-wrong

But Paul Ehrlich was not an author of Limits to Growth, and he was not ever a member of the Club of Rome which commissioned it.  

The Club of Rome is still around today making annual report books.  They still say we need to transition to a sustainable society or it will be forced on us at some point in the future, still likely around 2050 (but the exact date is less important than the principle) with Buisness as Usual, with drastic consequences like a large die off of humans, not just demographic shifts.  A sustainable society will not have a growing population and resource use, because the earth is finite.  Our current society can't work like that, resource use growth is forced at every level, especially through the demand for higher profits.  All that seems incontrovertible to me, and it seems we are indeed continuing down the easy road to a catastrophic collapse of several kinds all at once.

Paul Ehrlich's predictions were based on what looks little better than extrapolating current trends.  He predicted catastrophes based on limited resources in the 1970's and 1980's.  These catastrophes never happened, largely because technological changes which at least kicked the can down the road if not solving them completely.

Meanwhile, Limits to Growth made arguments (they denied they were predictions) based on a Systems Dynamics Computer Model of the world called World3.  World3 was run with different scenarios, the Standard scenario represented Business as Usual and showed Growth (of population and material production) peaking in the Middle of the 21st Century.   The authors repeatedly reiterated in interviews that they did not predict catastrophes in the 20th Century, but somehow the confusion with Ehrlich persists.  Another scenario based on wider ecological consciousness, conservation, and reduced materialism showed peaking in the early 22nd Century (but a steeper decline thereafter).

There were several official updates to Limits to Growth, in 1992, 2004, and 2015.  In every update, the authors concluded our actual trajectory still seems closest to the original Standard scenario, which did not even include Global Warming, Endless Wars, and unforced declining Fertility.

Paul Ehrlich was a co-founder of Zero Population Growth (ZPG), which has always advocated for free birth control and abortion on demand, in the US and elsewhere.  I think there are no good arguments against these things, but I know some who make them.  Anyway, ZPG has rebranded itself as Population Connection.  And they are not to be confused with another organization, Negative Population Growth, which has several ideas including severely restricting immigration to USA because immigrants have more children than non-immigrants.  I oppose ideas like that in principle, I believe in as open borders as possible both for economic and fairness reasons.  So awhile after discovering that POV I stopped supporting NPG, but I have been a long time supporter of Population Connection.

How Many Gazans Killed by Israel

 Tony Hanania (@AntounHananias on X, Antoun Hananias on Medium) says a conservative estimate of the Gazans killed by Israel since 10/7 is 1.2 million, including those buried in rubble.  He points out that Francesca Albanese had estimated 680,000 in 2025.  He is a D.Phil (PhD) and says he is a member of the oldest Palestinian family dating to 1st Century CE, St. Ananias.*

https://medium.com/@antounananias/gaza-genocide-toll-exceeds-aushwitz-91e6405c961c

@MosabAbuToha gives the current count "slaughtered" (by direct gunfire) of 73,787 and estimates the total deaths now exceeds 200,000 (September 12, 2026).

https://x.com/MosabAbuToha/status/2098903369167385017

(*I would think the families of Canaanites and others in the region would go back millenia farther than that, if you accept the name Palestine for the region then, though that name was first applied to the region by Herodotus around 500 BCE, possibly because he was most impressed by the Philistines who had migrated there in the Second Millenium BCE.  But if you want to start when Romans renamed the province which they had previously called Judaea as Syria Palaestina, that was in the 135 CE--the Second Century CE.)

Truth vs antisemitism

 I've been investigating the claims that Israel was behind the assassination of JFK.  I myself firmly believe these claims, for many reasons, including that Israeli whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu confirmed them when he was released from Israeli prison in 2004.  He had been imprisoned for revealing the Israeli nuclear program, how it had been hidden from inspectors in 1964, and revealing that Israel did indeed have nukes--which has been denied both by Israel and the US government ever since--which is pretty amazing, since outside of those two government's denials, everyone else believes it completely, and veteran journalist Seymour Hirsch even wrote a book, The Sampson Option, spelling out the mad way Israel intends to use nukes not merely against threatening Arab nations but against its Western backers, the US and Europe, if they fail to come to Israel's defense when Israel needs it.  That whole book is based on the knowledge, which everyone has, that Israel has nukes.  Epstein friend, liberal Zionist, and highly regarded writer and lecturer Noam Chomsky has also many times presumed the existence of Israeli nukes in exclamations such as "and they have nukes!"  Still, I personally know a Zionist who settled in Israel in the past decade, now lives near Dimona, and continues to deny that Israel has nukes.  These denials are a pretty good indication of who cannot be believed in probably just about anything having to do with geopolitics anyway.

Anyway, the participation of Israel in the JFK assassination has a clear motive because it is very well known now that JFK and the Prime Minister of Israel, David Ben-Gurion, sparred over the US investigating Israel's nuclear program.  The letters they exchanged were long ago declassified and have been published in many places, including most recently by Palestinian American journalist (and now Congressional candidate) Sam Husseini based in Washington DC.  Ben-Gurion insisted that Israeli intentions were peaceful, but because the Israeli nuclear program was assisted by the French, he would not allow for US inspections.  But Kennedy was not backing down.  Kennedy was assassinated a short time later.  Just before that, Ben-Gurion resigned and was replaced with an even more hardline Prime Minister in Israel.  Finally, the US was allowed inspections in 1964 but the US investigators under LBJ were not very thorough, and Mordechi Vanunu later revealed how a fake nuclear control center was constructed to fool the US investigators.  BTW, De Gaulle had also wanted inspections that were being refused by Israel, so Ben-Gurion's claim that he would not allow US inspections because it was a French assisted operation were bogus.  Evidence has subsequently arisen that China was a partner with Israel in nuclear bomb development too.

Now it is curious that one of the first JFK Assassination conspiracy theorists to write a whole book about Israel being involved was Michael Collins Piper, whose first book Final Judgement: The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy was first released in 1994.  It was sometimes banned, but today you can buy the last commemorative edition, from 2015, on Amazon.  It is Piper's most popular book and it went through 5 revisions.  He died unexpectedly of a heart attack in 2015 at the age of 55.  His last and previous editions can be also be obtained online at such places as Wikispooks and the Internet Archive.  Piper renounced copyright to his works.

https://www.amazon.com/Final-Judgment-Missing-Assassination-Conspiracy/dp/1937787370/

https://www.amazon.com/stores/Michael-Collins-Piper/author/B001KCGXU8?ref=ap_rdr&shoppingPortalEnabled=true&ccs_id=278859b5-4a12-4b95-b375-0bd6fb806bf1

https://archive.org/search?query=creator%3A%22Michael+Collins+Piper%22

Piper wrote a review of his own book, which gives a very illuminating summary of the key Mossad connections to many of the key players we have heard about in other theories.  This is like a very brief version of the very long book.

http://jfk-mossad.htmlplanet.com/piper.html

Now it is not at all surprising that Piper is called anti-Semitic and a Holocaust Denier by the likes of ADL and SPLC.  Piper himself said he was not a Holocaust Denier, and more often than not he praises jews such as Seymour Hirsch he says he relied on mostly for his work Final Judgement.  In his more careful writings such as that he clearly distinguishes Jews from Zionists, Israelis, Israeli-supporters, and Neocons.  But he was a prolific writer and and media personality and he was not always that careful.

And while he claimed not to be a Holocaust Denier, he could be categorized as a Holocaust Revisionist.  He wrote a book about the lawsuit of Mel Mermelstein against the Institute of Historical Review, a well known Holocaust revisionist organization that had offered a $50,000 reward to anyone that could prove that gas chambers were used at Auschwitz as part of an industrial scale killing program.  Piper tries to make the case that Mermelstein did not win his case on the merits of the arguments presented but instead on high powered legal tactics.  (That's not entirely implausible, not that I have the least doubt that Auschwitz had an industrial scale killing program that relied on gas chambers.  But the Nazis were pretty good at hiding their secrets.  You may need to combine multiple lines of evidence, including receipts and letters and engineering diagrams, as historians do, to prove the gas chambers.  In contrast, the Zionists boast and broadcast about their crimes.). Ultimately the judge ruled simply that the Holocaust was a fact which could not be denied, and IHR settled with Mermelstein for $90,000.

That book is out of print but is widely available used at mostly inflated prices.  Piper also wrote a book Confessions of an Anti-Semite, another book about the Rothchild banking and global influence operations, and a few others which could be dodgy.  And his books and media were generally printed by a well known self-described "Nationalist" organization (often labeled as White Supremacist) whose backer was one of his best friends.  Though Piper declared himself to be a "Progressive in the La Follette tradition" and he also wrote a book entitled Share the Wealth so he was not at all a traditional conservative.  He died before the rise of MAGA so we can't judge him on MAGA-ness.

In my brief reading of Piper so far I can sense that he is very intelligent and intellectual.  He is not your garden variety dumbass anti-semite.  His error, if there is one, which may be shared with many of the conspiracy writing set, is that he may be blind to items that don't fit the thesis.  This may be intentional or unintentional.  But from what I've read in Piper's JFK work so far, he seems like he may be the best of all in connecting all the dots, as well as critiquing earlier and later theories.  It's not surprising that Final Judgement is highly praised and often touted as the best exposition of a JFK assassination conspiracy theory ever.  And you may also learn quite a bit about the other conspiracy theories and their deniers by reading it.

So, should we discount the theory that Israel was a key player in the JFK assassination because the best known book about it was written by a Holocaust Revisionist and who was at least somewhat anti-semitic?

I don't think so, and I've made the general case in this blog that we can and should judge any ideas and/or writings based on their internal validity and not on the character of the persons who wrote about them.  I've critiqued Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein on this basis, even going so far as to call them Limited Hangouts, but nevertheless saying that we can still learn a great deal from their writings, which are essential reading, while always being aware of their biases (liberal Zionist and anti-China).

In fact, it's hard to find anyone at all that I agree with 100%, so I've quit trying.  The one person I trust the most about Zionism is Tony Greenstein, a jewish socialist anti-Zionist who critiques both Chomsky and Finkelstein as liberal Zionists.  But he can't possibly answer every question we can think of and agrees with me that people must read Finkelstein anyway.

In a similar vein, a more recent proponent of the Israel was a key player in the JFK assassination conspiracy theory is Ryan Dawson.  Not surprisingly, he has also been accused of being both antisemitic and a holocaust denier by the likes of ADL and SPLC. (Unlike with Piper, however, Google AI doesn't offer me a definitive opinion on it.  Dawson has not written books about Holocaust Revisionism or the Rothchilds.) Born in North Carolina and educated at the College of William and Mary, Dawson now lives in Japan as a prolific writer, media personality, and movie producer.  His recent hour and a half documentary NUMEC How Israel Stole the Atomic Bomb and killed JFK looks to be the best of its kind (we could still use better IMO).

https://rumble.com/v1a6xdr-numec-how-israel-stole-the-atomic-bomb.html?e9s=src_v1_upp_pl%2Csrc_v1_pl&playlist_id=QtQvO_cZvSw

Dawson's website is specifically aimed against Neocons, not Jews.  Dawson has appeared on mainstream TV programs and has featured many well known guests on his program, including Finkelstein, it's a quite an impressive list.

https://www.ancreport.com/ 

https://www.ancreport.com/ryan-dawson/

However, one clever Reddit poster clipped a 30 second segment which does make Dawson sound anti-semitic.

https://www.reddit.com/r/VaushV/comments/fxp4hv/everything_you_need_to_know_about_ryan_dawson_in/

Others in that chat repeatedly ask the poster to show the rest of the monologue (which has since been deleted) and claim that Dawson is being taken out of context.  They claim that in the opening Dawson clearly distinguishes between Jews and Zionists, even though that distinction is not being made in these particular 30 seconds.  The original poster refused to show any more of the monologue.

I believe the critics of the poster, that Dawson is being taken out of context in these 30 seconds.  I think he must be starting this section with an additional prelude like this, "It's easy to see how people can become antisemitic when they see so many things, and come to think like this ..."  So he is describing how other people come to think like they do, not that he does.  His inflections seem to reinforce that interpretation, it seems like he is making little of some of the ideas.

I note that the original poster also reveals his biases in statements such as this:

Not like that other quote makes sense. Zionism does not mean Jewish supremacism. Zionism is the belief in the right to self determination for Jews in their homeland. Most countries in the world are based on the same idea, for their respective nations. Something like 90% of Jews are Zionist. It doesn't inherently involve "shooting children". In a parallel universe where the 1947 partition plan is accepted by the arab side Zionism is achieved without any conflict.

He is wrong, Zionism does mean Jewish Supremacism, as it exists today in genocidal apartheid Israel.  Wise jews like Albert Einstein and Hannah Arendt and many others opposed the creation of the State of Israel from the beginning.  The 1947 Partition Plan was neither fair nor agreed to by the inhabitants of Palestine--who ought to have had the last word--nor implemented as written by Israel; Zionists chose to achieve facts on the ground through violence and terror rather than international agreement.  They grabbed all they could and are still doing so.  It was clear from 1898 onwards that Zionists intended to ethnically cleanse all of Palestine by whatever means necessary; they did not intend to stare the land with a rump Palestinian state or with any non-Jews.  Palestine was not ever the one or exclusive homeland of Jews, that would be like calling Germany the homeland of Lutherans.  There were always many other peoples living there, and many if not most Palestinians themselves have descent from First Century BCE Jews who simply changed religions over time.  (Tony Hanania is one example.). 90% of Jews being Zionist (which is wrong on the high side) means little when 90% of US citizens believe in US Exceptionalism.  That Zionists speak like the poster shows that they have become the genocide deniers of our time, and we should take great care in parsing the truth of their statements and agreeing to their claims of antisemitism.  And that even when antisemitism is true, it's only one of many dimensions in which nobody is right about everything.  Zionism can be just as bad, or worse, as antisemitism, and more than 90% of the political and media class in the US is Zionist.  We should denounce, but not necessarily ignore, all of them too even if not antisemitic.  Speaking with an antisemite is not uniquely evil.  

Most people of all ethnicities (not just Jews) are swept away by the political currents and propaganda of their times as well as self interest and approximate thinking.  Jews are not above all the others in these human weaknesses simply because they are Jews.  It just so happened that Zionists got their plan, to the disaster of all, because it aligned with western imperial interests and Zionists still have it, and vast support from Western governments, for the same reason.   

Zionism may even be, as believed by some Jews, among the worst antisemitism of all, since it presumes that all good jews are inherently Zionist (ie, supremacist and genocidal) and regards the others as scum, fake, or self-hating.  The truth is that anti-Zionist Jews are the minority (as it would be among any ethnicity) to buck the currents, propaganda, self-interest, and approximate thinking and see the truth past it.  And our job as anti-Zionists generally is to change those currents and debunk the propaganda.

The Reddit poster also points out how Dawson also blames Israelis for 9/11, on the basis of the widely debunked allegations that Building 7 was blown up with internal bombs.  I don't necessarily accept the bombing allegation, I can accept the official story that fire spread through the elevators.  However, these allegations are not required for the story of Israeli involvement to be possible, or even true.  CIA appears to have been involved in protecting the hijackers from FBI interference, if not actually guiding them.  And it also appears that over and over Al Qaeda has served CIA and Mossad interests, as has ISIS.  Somebodies had to be behind 9/11, and the way the US government failed to stop 9/11 despite many warnings it was going to happen.  Mossad has been at other times shown to work for CIA for deniability purposes, and that would have been useful here.  So while I don't accept that the case has been proven, there are some tantalizing bits of evidence and it's not at all implausible that Mossad was involved.  And thinking about these things does not necessarily embody antisemitism.  After all, the CIA, Bush Administration, and Saudi government are implicated too.  Are we supposed to think that Israel, who had the most to gain, would be above the fray and not involved because they are Jews?

https://thegrayzone.com/2023/04/18/9-11-hijackers-cia-recruits/

Hong Kong "Democracy" Movement

 Long read on the history and really existing democracy in Hong Kong and it's western backed discontents.

https://theescalatorhk.com/people-of-hong-kong-fight-for-hong-kong-democracy/

A much shorter version is possible and I've given it before, echoing MoonOfAlabama and other sources.  The supposed pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong was a western backed rioting hyper violent Color Revolution, much as has been seen in Afghanistan, Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, Iran, Xinjiang, Ukraine, and many other places.  It was very violent in Hong Kong, with so-called "protestors" using flame throwers to torch police and innocent bystanders alike.  In Iran recently, hundreds of mosques and other buildings were burned by "protestors" before the Iranian government got control of the situation.  In some places, Color Revolutions succeeded in installing western backed tyranny, in others not.  China has been exceptionally good at repulsing it relatively peaceably.  When you add up all the ways countries are actually controlled, the West is no better than others in implementing the will of the people within resource and other limits, and China probably does it best of all these days.

Ms CIA, the story of Gloria Steinem

 I've made many posts about Gloria Steinem before, from her early (well documented, even admitted) career as CIA funded asset infiltrating spying on and subverting communist youth gatherings, to her middle career as undercover bunny defaming Hugh Hefner at the time Playboy was publishing Seymour Hersh on Mai Lai (Hefner moved to LA and Playboy became non-political after that), founding Ms Magazine to replace class based radical analysis with liberal identity politics--thereby coopting and subverting earlier feminist movements,  demonizing sex workers by promoting very punitive laws against their clients (now the law in Sweden and other places) for which she earned to acronym SWERF, pushing for anti-pornography laws that could hold publishers responsible for any violent crime regardless of whether a connection could be shown (which became law in Sweden, but was resisted in USA, notably by Larry Flynt), defaming Bernie Sanders supporters (as Bernie Bros...despite the fact many were women) in favor of Hillary Clinton in 2016, and promoting an misandric anti-porn and anti-sex ideology which suppressed sexual relations in leftist and liberal movements--thereby tilting reproductive success to the conservative side which ignored her (easily seen in surveys...liberals out-reproduced conservatives up to the 1960's, afterwards and ever since it has been the reverse).  

She may have said a few good things along the way, but such is always the case with controlled opposition and limited hangouts.  

Steinem's version of equality generally didn't mean flattening obscene income and power for everyone, it meant making a place for women at the top of it (this was Ellen Willis analysis of her).  She was pro-Capitalism and pro-Zionism and pro-Imperialism.  While being a claimed Democratic Socialist, and highly revered honorary member of the DSA board in 2009 when I attended the DSA National Convention in 2009, she was later chastised and dethroned from DSA after demonizing Bernie supporters in 2016.

I've felt like I was shouting into a closet until today, when the wraps are off and people with views similar to mine are contributing.  So now you do not need to try to find references to Steinem in the obscure works of radical Pro Sex Feminist Ellen Willis, who started deconstructing Steinem in the 1970's and passed away in the 2006), I can link directly to a pretty good synopsis direct from Redstockings, a radical feminist movement.

https://archive.org/details/001-radical-feminists-wont-be-msled

Steinem admitting her work for CIA and calling CIA liberal and non-violent:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HRUEqyZ7p8&t=10s

An excellent thread on X, with both and many sides represented:

https://x.com/ProudSocialist/status/2095473040779796908

(Some think her work as anti-communism was noble, and that there's no proof she was boosted or connected with CIA later, however the initial funding of Ms Magazine looks interesting as described by Redstockings above.)

Jacobin Magazine weighs in:

https://jacobin.com/2026/09/steinem-feminism-ms-cia-socialism?fbclid=IwY2xjawUIg11wZG9mAWV4dG4DYWVtAjEwAGJyaWQRMTd5TnBkQmIwd2NjeW5hV3ZzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEeP1kHpVpkLV4yvvv3UAuzyo0t-LVmBPYdRXX-JCfs0EY2kpnFQw5pGzayCZI_aem_5R2s65BbUyfaFR428bBodg

Michael Tracey remembers Steinem's vast contribution to the highly destructive allegations regarding ritual satanic abuse of children, which were never proven and now seem to be completely forgotten in the New York Times long and laudatory obituary of Steinem:

https://www.mtracey.net/p/gloria-steinem-leader-of-the-womens