The US Dollar is the tenth strongest currency in the world … despite having the largest economy by GDP in the world. The top three currencies are Kuwait, Bahrain and Oman. Eight African Colonies of France were required to trade in the French Franc creating an artificial strength in currency valuation. In 2021, the Euro was valued at 1.234, today the value has dropped to 1.083 a drop of 12.25%. Good for exports, bad for imports. When imports drop, cost of goods rises as demand is forcibly squeezed higher. Higher demand = inflation. In 2023, the EU’s international imports dropped from 40% to -20%…simultaneously exports dropped from 20% to zero. A double-Dip Inflation.
Nothing to do with employment – and everything to do with the antagonized ritual of ‘interest rate manipulations’. A communist tactic to destroy economies. If the EU goes full Communist in the fashion of Bolshevism, their next move would be to follow in the footsteps of Stalin and force a campaign of starvation. Exterminating livestock and crops. A famine to eradicate opposition.
When western agencies across the EU and US exterminate cows, chickens, and pigs – they do so under the same Bolshevik playbook. When they set fire to crops and industrial plants – they do so under the doctrine of Kabbalah superiority – those not born Jew and who later convert are still ‘gentiles’ and unworthy of the Chosen Protocol because they are not of the ‘seed’. ~ Rabbi Lieberman.
Alvin Goldstein is considered the man who normalized hard core porn. Israel wants to legalize pedophilia: The age of consent in Israel is 16 for all genders but can be as low as 14 provided both parties consent and have a 3-year age gap or less. In the US, Alan Dershowitz is vying to reduce the age of legal consent to 14 years old. Why? The most obvious answer would be that he has partaken of those age 14 and needs a law to justify and legalize his pedophilia before it becomes a criminal charge.
It has been researched that this slide into depravity has been linked to the Fall of Rome. Pompeii – in profusion. In psychology, victimhood is a cognitive distortion of the real world. But Zions use collective victimhood as a tool. Instead of working through it – they use it as a justification for committing evil actions. And within that victimhood they create a state of depravity. Of course, the fact that the Zionists refuse to acknowledge their mass genocide of over 60 million Russians during the reign of Jewish Bolsheviks, rather refutes the entire hypnosis.
While the parlay is that immorality, aka porn and pedophilia, are a lucrative business industry, and Israel is promoting itself as the global capital of this activity, Israel wants a bigger piece of this ‘lucrative pie’. Building a playground on the Gaza Strip, or in Ukraine, could enhance their monopoly over this ‘industry’. As we are continually reminded – follow the money.
Israel’s economy slumped nearly 20% by the end of 2023. Private consumption dropped 27%, fixed investments fell nearly 70%, – yet their stock market is relatively stable. How is that possible? Short answer – it isn’t. According to CNN, their market collapsed and is now higher than before the October 7th attack. Why? Buying on the lows? Or are they buying into Israel’s new land grabs?
Bill Ackman and his wife Neri Oxman have been buying up TASE – Tel Aviv’s stock market. He now owns 5% of the exchange. Bill Ackman is a hedge fund manager who is worth roughly $10 billion. He has a history of market manipulation in the US and an acrimonious relationship with Carl Icahn. He has worked diligently to fire and demonize anyone who is anti-war/pro-Palestine and been called out as the new McCarthy. Like most in the billionaire Club, Ackman donates to various philanthropies, including his own Foundation. He has endorsed Trump.
The Ackman investment would also indicate that the war against Palestine is coming to its grand finale – and warring against Lebanon or Iran is NOT likely. The war has already cost Israel in the neighborhood of $70 billion and rebuilding is going to cost roughly $500 billion. I imagine Blackrock, Vanguard, and State Street will lead the rebuild project while our DoD siphons social security funds to Israel as well.
“Until all objectives have been achieved”, is Israel’s version of a peace deal. And the UN is silent.
NATO is meeting in New York and Zelenskyy is asking for submarines. Powell has declared inflation is flat, despite my food prices rising 20% this last month, and the job market is soft – as in people will start losing their homes to bankruptcy. Despite this flattened economy, Powell says he wants inflation at 2% before he’ll make any move, which is where it was during Trump’s term – coincidence? Manipulation?
The US economy is slowing rapidly and risks a recession again as corrupt monetary policy and false statistics present a better economy than reality. The trade deficit has increased reflecting less exports. Of course, given it is an election year we can expect some rather rattled version of our economy being promoted by in sync media puppetry. utilizing the stock market as emphasis to define Biden’s greatness.
But the stock market is a three tiered Ponzi scam within the vectors of BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street, all holding the same stocks and trading within each other. The middle class peons who don’t have the resources to be a part of The Club, and clearly see the reality. But we no longer have any say in the matter. While a Biden/Cackle White House would truly push the US into a spiraling depression – a Trump presidency will likely see a Corporate Takeover… with Israel front and center.
Israel should not be an associated state of the EU. Israel as a state of the Middle East should have the legal right to chair UN committees as a State of the Middle East and not an associated state of the EU?
Many Arab countries historically viewed Israel as a “Zionist entity,” a term often laden with political and ideological connotations. This refusal stems from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and broader regional tensions. The refusal to recognize Israel as a legitimate state is tied to issues of sovereignty, rights, and historical grievances, particularly concerning the Palestinian population.
The metaphors of “Zionist Entity” as a “Crusader State” and the comparison to apartheid represent different historical and ideological perspectives. The term “Crusader State” refers to the Christian states established during the Crusades in the medieval period. This metaphor evokes a historical narrative of foreign invasion and occupation, linking modern Israel to a legacy of colonialism.
This framing suggests that Israel is an alien presence in the Middle East, imposed by external powers (primarily Western nations) and disconnected from the region’s historical and cultural identity. It emphasizes a narrative of resistance against perceived Western imperialism.
The metaphor resonates with historical grievances and collective memory among Arab populations, fostering a sense of unity in opposition to what is seen as a repeat of past invasions.
The “Crusader State” metaphor is rooted in historical narratives of invasion, while the apartheid analogy is focused on contemporary human rights issues. This metaphor frames Israel as an outsider, akin to the foreign Crusader states established during the medieval Crusades. It emphasizes the perception of Israel as a colonial or imperial force in the Middle East.
The term suggests that Israel lacks legitimate ties to the region and is seen as an imposition by Western powers, reinforcing a narrative of resistance against perceived foreign dominance. When the apartheid metaphor is used to describe the UN’s refusal to validate Israel as a legitimate state within the Middle Eastern community, it highlights perceived systemic discrimination against Israel by international bodies.
This metaphor suggests that Israel faces unique scrutiny and exclusion that other nations do not, implying a form of institutional bias akin to apartheid in that it reflects discriminatory practices in international recognition and relations. The use of the apartheid metaphor critiques how Israel is positioned and recognized (or not recognized) within the global community, particularly in the context of regional membership.
The “Crusader State” metaphor critiques Israel’s presence and legitimacy in the region, while the apartheid metaphor critiques the UN’s treatment of Israel as a member of the international community. The “Crusader State” metaphor is rooted in historical narratives, while the apartheid metaphor addresses contemporary political dynamics and institutional biases.
Both metaphors reflect deep-seated historical and political grievances but address different aspects of Israel’s identity and recognition on the international stage. The apartheid metaphor, in this context, emphasizes the perceived inequities in how Israel is treated by the UN and the broader international community.
The UN’s refusal to recognize Israel as a legitimate member of the Middle Eastern community, this perspective emphasizes a critique of international institutions and their role in perpetuating inequalities. The metaphor highlights the perceived systemic discrimination against Israel, framing the UN’s stance as a form of exclusion akin to apartheid policies.
This view critiques the selective recognition and treatment of states based on political alignments, arguing that it undermines Israel’s status as a sovereign nation. By comparing the situation to apartheid, one could argue that the refusal to validate Israel as part of the Middle Eastern community reflects broader geopolitical biases, inhibiting genuine dialogue and cooperation.
The Apartheid metaphor can also be applied to the UN’s historical refusal to validate Israel as a State within the Middle Eastern community of nations. This metaphor can be used to highlight the perceived systemic inequality and discrimination that Israel has faced in its international relations, particularly in the context of the UN. The focus is on the political and diplomatic exclusion of Israel, rather than the treatment of Palestinians within Israel or the occupied territories. This interpretation emphasizes the long-standing conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbors, which some argue has led to Israel’s marginalization in the region.
The UN’s discriminatory treatment of Israel by refusing to acknowledge its rightful place within the Middle Eastern community of nations. This refusal, akin to apartheid’s systematic exclusion and marginalization of South African black majority populations.
Israel’s relationships with many neighboring Arab states have historically been contentious. This has led to a perception of exclusion from regional organizations and discussions. Israel is a full member of the UN, but its participation in regional forums and committees is often complicated by political dynamics, particularly the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Many Arab countries do not recognize Israel, which affects its ability to engage fully in regional diplomacy and cooperation. This exclusion can limit Israel’s influence in Middle Eastern affairs and hinder collaborative efforts on regional issues, such as security and economic development.
UNSCR 2334 builds on the principles established in earlier resolutions, particularly UNSCR 242 and 338, emphasizing the illegality of settlement activities. Borders and sovereignty of a nation should primarily be determined by its own people, reflecting historical and cultural ties to the land.
Israel’s viewpoint, its claims to certain territories are rooted in historical, security, and legal arguments, asserting that foreign resolutions should not dictate its borders. Israel is a sovereign state and not a protectorate or mandate territory.
As a sovereign nation, Israel governs its own affairs, including its security, economy, and borders. Israel is a member of the United Nations and participates in international diplomacy, but its sovereignty means it does not consider itself subject to external determination of its borders.
Israel emphasizes the importance of self-determination and national sovereignty in discussions about its borders and security. Israel’s status as a sovereign state means that it does not operate as a protectorate subject to foreign dictates regarding its borders. This perspective is central to its national identity and ongoing diplomatic efforts.
Many argue that these resolutions, 242, 338, 446, 2334 undermine Israel’s sovereignty and right to self-determination by attempting to dictate its territorial claims. Critics contend that these resolutions reflect a political bias against Israel, framing them as tools of international pressure rather than neutral legal frameworks.
Since UN political rhetoric classifies these resolutions as under Chapter VI of the UN Charter, which is advisory in nature, opponents argue they lack the binding authority to dictate state behavior. Yet ICC rulings treat these UN infallible dogma as if they existed as Chapter VII dictates.
The perceived inconsistency between the advisory nature of Chapter VI resolutions and their treatment by international bodies like the ICC can create tensions for Israel, which sees these interpretations as undermining its sovereignty.
As a sovereign state, Israel asserts its right to determine its own borders and governance without external dictation, including from international bodies like the ICC. The argument that the ICC treats these advisory resolutions as binding reflects a perceived inconsistency in its legal reasoning, which some see as undermining Israel’s sovereignty.
The ICC’s reliance on these resolutions indicates a political bias against Israel, framing it as a misuse of legal principles. This perspective highlights how international legal interpretations can influence diplomatic relations and the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The ICC’s position represents a legal fraud stems from concerns about sovereignty and the interpretation of international law. This ongoing debate reflects the complexities of international relations and the challenges of achieving a fair resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Israel’s sovereignty means that it does not operate under external dictates regarding its borders and security. The inconsistency between the ICC’s treatment of UN resolutions and Israel’s status as a sovereign state supports Israel breaking off all diplomatic relations with the UN-nations.
The Middle East Conflict directly compares to the post Napoleonic Wars “Concert of Europe”. States relied heavily on diplomacy and alliances to manage their interests and prevent conflict. A conflict between Russia and the Ottoman Empire, involving Britain, France, and Sardinia, highlighting the fragility of the balance of power. Specifically that war compares to the American Civil War which pitted the Industrial revolution Northern economy against the agricultural based economy of the South. After Russia’s defeat in the Crimean War, Tsar Alexander terminated the institution of feudalism much like Linconln freed the slaves.
The Abraham Accords as a key element of Israel’s strategic foreign policy in the Middle East. The goal of creating a regional economic alliance, similar to the EU, is a significant ambition.
The UN 242, 338, 446, 2334 imperialism challenges Israeli strategic interests by prioritizing a divide and conquer EU imperialism which fracturizes Israel like post WWII defeated Nazi Germany – the Two State Solution and a forced population transfer of all Samaria Jews like the expulsion of Germans from Prussia.
UN resolutions 242, 338, 446, and 2334 are “imperialist” and challenge Israeli strategic interests. UN General Assembly Resolution 77/1, which, among other things, calls for Israel to withdraw from all occupied territories within a year. This hardly qualifies as a Chapter VI suggestion!
The severity and tone of the UN Resolutions raise in intensity and severity as the Resolutions evolve from 242 to 2334 and 77/1. The international community has prioritized a Palestinian State two-State solution over the broader alliance between actual nation states in the Middle East as opposed to imaginary dhimmi Arab refugee populations. This shift in consensus is reflected in the stronger language and demands of later resolutions.
This phrase is highly problematic and carries significant historical and political baggage. It implies that Palestinian claims to statehood are invalid or based on a fabricated narrative. Arabs lost the 1948 & 1967 Wars. Jews lost their 66 and 135 Revolts against Rome. Jews endured 2000+ years of political exile as stateless refugee populations. Why should the Palestinian refugees be any different?
Arab leaders rejected the 1947 UN Partition Plan (UN Resolution 181), which proposed dividing Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab. This rejection is a significant historical event with lasting consequences.
The reasons for the Arab rejection of 181 – not relevant any more its 2024 nor 1947. Israel repatriated their 800,000 displaced Jewish refugee populations expelled from Arab countries. Arab states refused to repatriate their Arab refugee populations. The Palestinian refugee crisis remains because Arab countries refuse to repatriate their own refugee populations as Israel did on day ONE of its Independence as a nation.
The Palestinian refugee crisis remains because Arab countries refuse to repatriate their own refugee populations as Israel did on day ONE of its Independence as a nation. Arabs fought the Wars of both 1948 and 1967 with the intent to throw the Jews into the Sea. Israel has absolutely no obligation to repatriate these Arab enemies.
The Palestinian refugee crisis is primarily the responsibility of Arab countries, who refused to repatriate their own refugee populations. Arab League in Khartoum 3-NOS serves as proof. NO negotiate with Israel, NO recognition of Israel, and NO peace with Israel.
Israel has a special partnership with the EU through the European Neighbourhood Policy, which aims to foster cooperation and dialogue with neighboring countries. This means that the EU promoted 2 State solution dictates the UN prioritizes over the Abraham Accords.
The notion of a 2 State solution treats Israel as a divide and conquer Germany, Berlin, and Prussia! Absurd to prioritize a Nation state vs. dhimmi Arab refugees who have no country of their own; with establishment of an economic alliance among the Middle East and North African nation states. The Two-State solution promotes European great power domination of the Middle East. Just as did the ’56 British and French failed attempt to seize control over the Suez Canal!
Post WWII European Shoah, Jews would sooner pee against a Tidal Wave than trust Europeans to dictate a two-state solutions between Israel as a nation and dhimmi Arabs as stateless refugees who have no country of their own.
The Shoah culminated 2000+ years of European oppression of the Jewish people. The Shoah murdered 75% of all European Jewry in less than 3 years! Only an absolute fool would ever trust Europeans to place a rope around Jewish necks again.
The Dryfuss Affair, the Russian pogroms of the 1880s Christian nurses stealing Jewish babies and baptizing them! 2000+ years of taxation without representation, forced mass expulsions, three Centuries of Ghetto prison war crimes, the 1648 Kossack pogroms that killed some 1.5 million Jews.
UN 242 France who attempted to dominate the Middle East by stealing the Suez Canal attempts to return Israel to its 1948 Auschwitz-Birkenau borders! The unequal power dynamics between Israel and the European powers involved in the Suez Crisis. Israel was a young and vulnerable state, while Britain and France were established colonial powers with significant military and economic resources.
The Suez Crisis of 1956 ended with the withdrawal of British and French forces from Egypt, largely due to pressure from the United States under President Dwight D. Eisenhower. The pressure from the US, coupled with international condemnation and a growing sense of isolation, led to the resignation of British Prime Minister Anthony Eden. Eden had been a strong supporter of the Suez operation, but he was ultimately forced to back down in the face of US pressure.
France did not change 11 years later when it wrote the legal fraud UN Resolution 242. The basis of all post 1967 UN Condemnations of Israel! The significance of UN Resolution 242 and its impact on the legal and political landscape of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The phrase “occupied territories” has become a cornerstone of international law and diplomacy, shaping how the conflict is understood and addressed.
This fraud bogus resolution, passed in 1967, introduced the phrase “occupied territories” and called for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from territories occupied in the Six-Day War. France’s historical involvement in the Middle East and its motivations in the Suez Crisis of 1956 and the Six-Day War of 1967. While France’s desire to promote a peaceful solution to the conflict is a common narrative, it’s important to acknowledge the complexities of its actions and motivations.
The 1916 Sykes-Picot imperialism proves the evil hostility of France & British narrow strategic imperialist interests to dominate the Middle East. No different in ’56, or ’67! The Sykes-Picot Agreement, along with other colonial interventions, has left a deep and lasting legacy of instability, conflict, and mistrust in the region. Just has likewise done the Shoah European warcrimes where Britain and France refused to bomb the raillines to the death camps and closed the borders of British mandate to Jews seeking to flee the Nazi barbarians.
The historical context of UN Resolution 242 and its relationship to the broader history of European colonialism, anti-Semitism, and violence against Jewish refugee populations. Post WWII Europeans Israel simply excludes their diplomacy as vile and utterly detested.
The historical context of UN Resolution 242 and its relationship to the broader history of European colonialism, anti-Semitism, and the treatment of Jewish refugees after World War II. It’s true that many Israelis view European diplomacy, particularly in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with a deep sense of mistrust and resentment.
The history of European colonialism and anti-Semitism has deeply impacted the Middle East and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Sykes-Picot Agreement, which divided the Ottoman Empire’s territories, is a prime example of European imperialism, and its legacy continues to shape the region today. Anti-Semitism, which has been a recurring problem in Europe for centuries, also played a role in the persecution of Jews and the creation of Israel.
The treatment of Jewish refugees after World War II, including the refusal of many European countries to accept them, further fueled Israeli resentment towards Europe. Many Israelis view this treatment as a betrayal, particularly given the suffering that Jews had endured during the Holocaust.
Many Israelis view European diplomacy in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with a deep sense of mistrust and resentment. They see European powers as biased against Israel and as failing to understand the complexities of the conflict and Israel’s security concerns.
The Israeli perspective on European diplomacy is a powerful reminder of the complex and interconnected nature of history. The legacy of European colonialism, anti-Semitism, and the treatment of Jewish refugees after World War II has shaped the perceptions and actions of both Israelis and Europeans, and it has contributed to the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
This history of anti-Semitism and violence against Jewish refugee populations has contributed to the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Israel’s perception of European diplomacy, including that of France, may be influenced by this historical context, leading to a sense of exclusion and mistrust.
Lots of interesting information.
I listened today to Jerome Powell answer questions about inflation from various senators. I wanted to vomit.
In fact, trump’s son in law was seen peddling beach front properties futures in Gaza withing a week of 10/7…
I can believe it – Egypt has been developing resorts on the Sea – and Saudi Arabia is apparently buying them for debt…
I don’t know which is worse, Kushner in the White House inner circle, or a demented Biden in the White House. A lose/lose scenario.
You have a basic cognitive problem. Tell us, what policies did Trump’s son in law create? And tell me, what things has your son in law forced you to do?
We now have 15+ million invaders, 40% increase in cost of living, a threat of a world war, and so on. Since you do not know the difference, you are clueless.
And, Kushner, is already out of the next administration, do you try to follow matters?