KERRY, GAZA AND THE NEW SABBATEAN HOLOCAUST

by Barry Chamish

In the first week of February 2004, two related incidents occurred in Israel and America. Prime Minister Sharon announced his decision to evacuate the Jewish residents of Gaza and John Kerry won enough primaries to just about settle the issue of who will be the Democratic Party candidate in the upcoming American elections.

Here are a few less than publicized facts about Kerry:

http://www.june24.net/images/john-kerry.jpeg - He is a graduate, like both President Bushes, of the occultic Yale University cabal, the Skull And Bones Society. So whoever Americans vote for, they get the same secret society determining their lives.

http://images.google.com/images?q=t...oads/kerry4.jpg - Kerry, like Howard Dean, Wesley Clark and Joe Leiberman are all members of the Council On Foreign Relations (CFR). So whoever Americans choose to be the Democratic candidate, they will get the same CFR agenda.

http://images.google.com/images?q=t...s/marikerry.jpg - The well publicized CFR agenda insists on Israel withdrawing from Gaza, Judea and Samaria and half of Jerusalem, making Israel unviable as a state. To that end, like Dean before him, Kerry has promised to appoint Jimmy Carter (CFR) or Bill Clinton (CFR) as his administration's Middle East advisor.

http://images.google.com/images?q=t...kerrytears.jpeg - Not that Kerry will receive any new advice from either of them, since his campaign manager is Alan Solomant, an executive of Peace Now - America.

http://images.google.com/images?q=t...com/kerry98.jpg - Kerry is being protected from exposure of the ugly crime of participating in a massacre in Viet Nam.

- But as his prominence grew, so did the investigation of his past. And what did we recently discover; why Kerry is Jewish on his father's side. Somehow, he forgot the fact that his grandparents were prominent Jewish business people in Prague and that his father is 100% Jewish. Ask yourself, do you know anyone who doesn't know his father's religious background?

http://images.google.com/images?q=t..._as_karloff.jpg As rare as it must be, that affliction runs rampant in CFR circles. Former CFR Secretary-of-State Madeleine Albright also forget that both her parents were Jews, even though she was raised in the Jewish home of her relatives in London.

If you don't feel like voting Kerry, there is Wesley Clark waiting in the wings. Uncannily, he is also a CFR member who only discovered his father was Jewish while he was burning Bosnia to ashes. Now how come, no matter which Democrat you choose, you get a CFR half-Jew who forgot all about it? The answer is found in the Sabbatean (also Shabbataian and similar spellings) policy of having their Jewish apostate followers converting and hiding their roots and beliefs. Allow me to quickly summarize Sabbateanism/Frankism:

In my previous article, The Deutsch Devils, I revealed the findings of Rabbi Antelman in his books To Eliminate The Opiate Volumes I and II. His focus is the false messiah Shabtai Zvi, and the continuation of his evil ministry through the Turkish sect called the Donmeh. In the eighteenth century, Jacob Frank brought the Donmeh ideology to Europe and joined a fateful alliance. This was described in the article as:

Frankfurt at the time was the headquarters of the Jesuit, Adam Weishaupt, founder of the Illuminati, as well as Rothschild Brothers' financial empire. This is worth repeating: Frankfurt was the birthplace of both the Illuminati and the Rothschild empire. When Jacob Frank entered the city, the alliance between the two had already begun. Weishaupt provided the conspiratorial resources of the Jesuit Order, while the Rothschilds contributed the money. What was missing was a means to spread the agenda of the Illuminati and that the Frankists added with their network of agents throughout the Christian and Islamic worlds.

Jacob Frank became instantly wealthy because he was given a nice handout by the Rothschilds of Frankfurt. There is no other explanation.

And from this starting point, Rabbi Antelman gave us a blueprint for the war against Judaism and all its good, and indeed against humanity and all its moral treasures. A movement of complete evil now took hold. The Jesuits' goal was the destruction of the Protestant Reformation leading to a return of one pope sitting in judgement on all mankind. The Rothschilds goal was to control the wealth of the planet. And the Frankist vision was the destruction of Jewish ethics to be replaced by a religion based on the exact opposite of God's intentions. When these factions blended, a bloody war against humanity, with the Jews on the front lines, erupted and it is reaching its very pinnacle at this moment.

Rabbi Antelman traces the means of the worldwide reach of this ugliness. By the 1770s, the Illuminati was exposed and banned in Germany and then throughout Europe. Weishaupt made a strategic change that worked miracles for the international spread of his goals. He infiltrated agents into the Freemasonic lodges of England and Scotland, changing their highest tenets to his own, until every lodge in every nation accepted them. Thus, the Illuminati now had two centers of activity, Germany and Britain.

** A Visit To A Publisher

Before diving into the proofs that Israel is being set up for another Sabbatean Holocaust, permit me the liberty of explaining the inspiration for this piece. On February 1/04 I visited Gefen Books in Jerusalem to pick up some copies of my Hebrew book, Who Murdered Yitzhak Rabin and David Morrison's book, Lies - The Rabin Assassination And Israel's Secret Service.

Dr. Morrison's book has made a powerful case for a conspiracy behind the Rabin assassination. One of the favors he did for me was, as a psychiatric doctor, confirming that my analysis of Rabin's medical records was the correct one. Though I had met him just once, he has aided my cause enormously.

That time I met him was in my home when he and Gefen publisher, Ilan Greenfield arrived to hear me out and decide whether to publish a Hebrew edition of my Rabin book, or not. Ilan told me something I didn't know. "If it wasn't for David, I would never have published your book. I left your place and told him you were coocoo. He answered that if I didn't publish your book, he'd never talk to me again. As a psychiatrist he watched you carefully and concluded you were totally sane. He told me, "He thinks differently than us, that's why he can see how the truth works. That's not called crazy, it's called gifted."

I told Ilan that without knowing how much I owed him, I had repaid David many times over by reviewing Lies in my book, The Last Days Of Israel, and by selling lots of copies of the book in Hebrew and English at my lectures.

Ilan's eyes lit up and he said, "Do you know we published two other books by him? Maybe you could promote them as well." He then showed me the books. He chose to display the newest book first. It is called, The Gush, and it is very relevant to today's impending withdrawal from Gush Katif. This book tells the human story of the Jewish residents of Gush Etzion, also secretly on the chopping block no matter what Sharon says. It was a nice book, I told Ilan, but my readers expect deep information from me. Then he showed me the other Morrison book, Heroes, Antiheroes And The Holocaust. I struck gold.

David Morrison's book on the secrets of the Holocaust stands with Perfidy, The Transfer Agreement and The Scared And The Doomed as one of the great studies of how Labor Zionism prevented the rescue of European Jewry. Morrison doesn't see this as policy but you will with the knowledge we have gained together.

Morrison doesn't realize that he is reporting a Sabbatean massacre, yet he instinctively writes about the Young Turks. We begin and end our overview with that subject. I will add my comments beginning and ending with two stars **.

** The First Sabbatean Holocaust - The Dry Run **

pp 48 - The Young Turks who led the 1908 revolution were Turkish nationalists and established secular institutions, overthrowing the religious Moslem order. They viewed Armenians as a direct threat to their revolutionary plans. The evidence is overwhelming that the massacre of the Armenians was a deliberate, planned genocide. The Young Turks allied themselves with Germany and used world War I as a cover for their slaughter of Armenians... As did the Nazis in World War II, the Turks used their intended victims as slave laborers building a trans-Turkish railway for German business interests.

** And who were these Young Turks who organized The Armenian genocide? We turn to Sabbatean Messianism as Proto-Secularism: M. Avrum Ehrlich for the answer. **

http://www.nakazdytemat.com/

Brought to you via Shortwave. Wow!

In the United States, the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 retroactively extended the duration of copyright from the life of author plus fifty years to the life of the author plus seventy years, in the case of individual works, and from seventy-five years to ninety-five years in the case of works of corporate authorship and works first published before January 1, 1978.

Under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works states are required to provide copyright protection for a term of the life of the author plus fifty years. However, the convention permitted parties to provide for a longer term of protection, and between 1993 and 1996, the European Union provided protection for a term of the author's life plus seventy years (see Directive on harmonising the term of copyright protection). The United States, however, only provided for the minimum required by the convention.

As a result, many literary works, movies and fictional characters, which were quite profitable for the copyright owners, were threatened with soon passing into the public domain. This included several characters owned by the Walt Disney Company; without the act, Mickey Mouse would have entered the public domain between 2000 and 2004 when early short films such as Steamboat Willie and Plane Crazy were due to reach the end of the 75-year copyright term.

Copyright owners successfully lobbied Congress for an extension of copyright, to provide for the same term of protection as exists in Europe. Hence both houses of the United States Congress passed the act as Public Law 105-298 with a voice vote, making it impossible to determine who voted for the act and who voted against it, and passed it during both the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal and the Kosovo War, ensuring that the act would get little coverage from the mainstream media.

As a consequence of the act, no copyrighted works will enter into public domain due to term expiration in the United States until January 1, 2019, when all works created in 1923 will enter into public domain.

In addition to Disney, Sonny Bono's widow and Congressional successor Mary Bono and the estate of George Gershwin supported the act. Mary Bono, speaking on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, noted that "Sonny wanted the term of copyright protection to last forever", but that since she was "informed by staff that such a change would violate the Constitution", Congress might consider Jack Valenti's proposal of a copyright term of "forever less one day".

Proponents of the Bono Act argue that it is necessary given that life expectancy has risen dramatically since Congress passed the original Copyright Act of 1790, that a difference in copyright terms between the United States and Europe would negatively affect the international operations of the entertainment industry, and that some works would be created under perpetual copyright that would never be created under time-limited copyright. They also claim that Congress has the power to pass whatever copyright term it wants because the language "To promote the progress of science and useful arts" in the United States Constitution is not a substantive limitation on the powers of Congress, leaving only the restriction that copyrights may only be for a "limited time". Given this interpretation, a million years would still be a valid "limited time" under the letter of the Constitution.

Opponents of the Bono Act consider the legislation to be little more than corporate welfare and have tried (and failed) to challenge its constitutionality, claiming that such an act is not "necessary and proper" to achieve the purpose of "promot[ing] the progress of science and useful arts". They point out that the Tenth Amendment limits the powers that a treaty can grant to Congress. More directly, they see two successive extensions of approximately 20 years each (the Copyright Act of 1976 and the Bono Act) as the beginning of a "slippery slope" toward a perpetual copyright term that violates the spirit of the "for limited times" language of the United States Constitution, Article I, section 8, clause 8. They question the proponents' life expectancy argument, pointing out that the copyright term under the 1790 act lasted only twenty-eight years, that life expectancies have not risen threefold since 1790 (ignoring infant mortality, they have increased barely ten years), and that even though terms of patents have not been extended in parallel, patents adequately reward investment in the field with only a twenty-year term. They also question the proponents' "works would not be created" argument by pointing out proponents' hidden assumption that the goal is to create all works, whereas the authors of the United States Constitution considered the goal "to promote the progress of science and useful arts." In fact, some works created under time-limited copyright would not be created under perpetual copyright because the creator of a distantly derivative work does not have the money to purchase a license from the owner of copyright in the original work, or the individual or privately held owner of copyright in the original work might refuse to license a use at any price (though a refusal to license may trigger a fair use safety valve). One can thus argue that a rich public domain is necessary for artistic creation.

For example, the works of Shakespeare and the Greek myths have been the basis for much of Neil Gaiman's writing, which might well not have been created if they were still under copyright. Recent works that have entered the popular culture, and for which copyright is arguably not appropriate, include the novels that created Frankenstein and Dracula, both originating in the 19th century. Most of the holy writings of major religions are also in the public domain, which allows them to be adapted. If the Roman Catholic Church had a perpetual copyright on the letters of Paul of Tarsus, it could have refused to license them for translation or for use by other churches. [...]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonny_Bono_Copyright_Term_Extension_Act

Now.

Imagine for yourself, a world in the future, where a decendent of Bill Gates has managed to buy up all the stock libraries and collections of photographs created since the first photograph in the 1800's, all of which are copyrighted forever thanks to another, final amendment to the copyright laws.

One man, one company will have total control over every photo ever taken, when in fact, many millions of photographs would have fallen into the public domain had corporate bought legislation not been allowed to be put into the law.

The benefit to the citezenry of works falling into the public domain is well understood. The choice presented to us is do we want to live in a world where all of the collected works of every artist belongs to one company, like a modern version of the Soviet era Melodia, or do we want to live in a world where after having plenty of time to exploit her work, an artist then serves humanity after she is dead.

Patents last 20 years. If they did not, everythying you buy would cost more because a patent gobbling monster corporation would be imposing a fee for every object that is manufactured; imagine the case for a walkman in a world where patents never expire, you would have to pay a small amount of money for each innovation in your walkman. For example:

Magnetic heads
hinges,
pulley,
capstans,
pinch rollers,
rubber grommets,
casette spokes,
anodizing metal,
integrated circuits,
volume slider,
lcd display,

and anything else that is an original patented idea that was incorporated into the walkman. The price would at least double.

As it says above, imagine if writers had to pay a royalty ever time they borrowed or enhanced an idea from an out of copyright book. It would mean that many works simply would not be made, and of course, this is completely separate from the horrible situation of a single company controlling all of western culture for its own profit.

There is nothing wrong with profit. There is nothing wrong with owning property. What is wrong however is the relinquishing of your responsibility to future generations, and the accumulation of the control of culture in one persons hands. The founding fathers understood this responsibility and wrote the copyright laws accordingly.

I say that you should not be made to forfeit your property because the word forfeit means something very specific, which is different to allowing your work to fall into the public domain.

Forfeiture means :

# Something surrendered or subject to surrender as punishment for a crime, an offense, an error, or a breach of contract.

# To surrender, be deprived of, or give up the right to on account of a crime, an offense, an error, or a breach of contract.

Which means that the state is forcibly taking something away from you. When a person creates a work it is immediately protected by copyright, and furthermore the person knows in advance that this copyright is subject to a fixed term that will end when the author is dead, plud 75 years. If they do not accept this, then they have the option of not releasing the work (keeping it secret). Most civilized people accept these terms, this contract with humanity, however, there are people wo do not, and these are the people who want to extend copyright to a term not less than eternity. They are a small number of "corporate scum" who cannot stomach that some of their works will fall out of control. Think about it; Disney is a company old enough for this to actually matter. They have mead billions off of the work of Walt Disney, and now, it (should have been) time to let Mickey Mouse go, and concentrate on making the new characters for the new generation of animation lovers.

Nintendo's Mario is more recognisable than Mickey Mouse. This proves that it is possible for a company to develop characters that can superceed the popularity of a brand as powerful as "the mouse". The question is for Disney, "why should we bother making new characters when we can sell Mickey Mouse for eternity?". And then the quesion is, is the world better off with companies making new characters, finding Nemo, Legend of Zelda, Masters of the Universe, Dragonball, or would we prefer one giant entertainment company controlling all characters art and creativitiy, selling it back to us again and again until the end of time without ever making a single new thing?

The answer is obvious; its better for everyone if copyright expires after a fixed term, so that people can benefit from expired works, companies dont get lazy, and creativity remains a dynamic, cross fertilizing, self iterating engine, working for the benefit of the people who create and the public.

COPE

"COPE brought genuine competitive politics to Vancouver for the first time: a different vision of the city and policies that promoted the interests of the people who live in the city and not those of the developers who look at the city as a giant mechano set to be torn down and rebuilt whenever the profit incentives were large enough."

COPE

KERRY, GAZA AND THE NEW SABBATEAN HOLOCAUST

Pundit O'Reilly Now Skeptical About Bush

Avoid Friendster and its clones, warns security expert

COPE

I make decisions here in the Oval Office in foreign policy matters with war on my mind

Play it loud, play it proud.