Support Klaus Vogel!

Here is a civilian sailor with one ship doing what, in a sane world, the navies of every EU country would be doing with every spare ship they have:

I began coordinating the first rescue missions in February, and I have to say that the thing that has most deeply affected me has been my experience with people who are in grave danger and live in mortal fear. One cannot begin to imagine what that is like. It changes a person. It is clear to me and those that I work with that we have an obligation to rescue these people and to help them as best we can.

I am in fact devastated by the direction that the discussion in Europe has taken over the last year. At the same time I realize that those who talk like that simply don’t understand the situation – and cannot imagine it. But I hope that our work will help people to better understand it. We invite those who are in doubt to simply come along with us and experience it for themselves.

They would meet people who have been living in mortal danger for months, even years, and have no other options. They are people that have experienced the unimaginable in Libya. In the end, they put all their money on one card and have taken the risk of setting out to sea in a tiny inflatable. To make matters worse, most of these men and women can’t swim. When you see people like that, you suddenly understand that we have to find another way to let these people come to Europe rather than making them risk their lives. We must open our borders for people that are fleeing and are in danger.

If we create legal paths for these people to come to Europe, then they will not have to risk their lives in the hands of smugglers … The more open we are, the less dangerous traffickers there will be. But we must be fundamentally prepared to accept more refugees in Europe for that to happen.

Posted in Aryan Sanctuary | 3 Comments

Third debate reviews

I’m glad the debates are over. Making myself sit through them all probably had a negative effect on my health…..

And one older article:

But I think this passage is what really sums up this entire series of debates:

it’s provided many occasions to engage in a thought experiment called “Imagine Mitt Romney. …” Imagine Mitt Romney being captured on tape bragging about grabbing women “by the pussy.” Imagine Mitt Romney staying up until 3 am frantically tweeting about a sex tape. Imagine Mitt Romney defending the time he called a woman fat.

Imagine if Romney had dodged a question about his Supreme Court philosophy with a personal attack on a justice. Imagine if Romney had threatened NATO as if it were a protection racket. Imagine if Romney had accused President Obama of being Putin’s puppet. Imagine if Romney had been unable to lay out a coherent policy on the single issue that launched his campaign.

Trump’s bizarre debate performances have so adjusted our expectations that we’ve forgotten what a normal election even looks like.

Now I need to go and heal myself with some 90s retro pop culture…..

Posted in Aryan Sanctuary | 8 Comments

This tweet deserves a post of its own

Debate quote:

“Because there is a problem, whether we like it or not — and we could be very politically correct, but whether we like it or not, there is a problem and we have to be sure that Muslims come in and report when they see something going on. When they see hatred going on, they have to report it.” – Donald Trump



More detailed reviews of the second debate:

This article is good too:

Posted in Aryan Sanctuary | 22 Comments

Support Cedric Herrou!

This is the Occitan spirit:

On a recent sunny Sunday, about a dozen young men, women and children sat around a wooden table belonging to Cédric Herrou, a 37-year-old farmer, laughing about who would cook that night. It could have been any family-like gathering in the pastoral setting high in the French Alps, just above the border with Italy. But it was not.

A local hero to some, a scofflaw to others, Mr. Herrou, who was arrested in August, had helped his guests — all migrants from Africa — to cross the border into France illegally.

people like Mr. Herrou, who has become the de facto leader of a low-key network of citizen smugglers, are countering police efforts in a quasi-clandestine resistance, angered by what they see as the French government’s inhumane response to the crisis.

“Either I close my eyes, or I don’t,” he said. “These are people with no papers at all. That means they have no protection. I don’t see how we can be inert.”

He takes the migrants to his property, where he has set up two small campers at the back so they can sleep and hide among the silvery olive trees of the Roya Valley. They wander his property with a rare sense of security.

Mr. Herrou estimates that he has helped more than 200 migrants this way. His accomplices in the loose network he informally leads have helped dozens more, sometimes picking up migrants as they straggle up the steep mountain railroad tracks from Italy to France, flattening themselves against the walls of the dark tunnels as the trains pass.

In Breil-sur-Roya, an old French-Italian village of ocher houses in the valley by a quiet lake, Mr. Herrou is something of a celebrity. At the Friday night local council meeting, townspeople clapped him on the back, greeting him warmly. That afternoon he had shared a beer with the town’s Socialist mayor in the main square.

“Yes, of course, we know,” the mayor, André Ipert, said in an interview. “Yes, of course, he is outside the law. This happens in France.”

That very day, three Sudanese migrants had straggled into Breil’s tiny town hall. The mayor did not turn them over to the police.

Others agreed with the assessment, and have done the same.

“We think we are doing what we should do, as citizens,” said Françoise Cotta, a well-known Paris lawyer who lives part time in Breil. She is part of the smugglers’ network. “Down there I am a citizen, and what I do is illegal,” she said. “And I help them.”

In the past I have stated that France is predisposed towards Islamophobia and general xenophobia due to its Carolingian literature. Occitania’s positive attitudes, in contrast, are explicable by not only the fact that Occitania followed Arthurian rather than Carolingian literature, but additionally by the fact that it had a few outright anti-Carolingian legends of its own (which portray Charlemagne as the villain). This had also been a theme of NSDAP literary research:

“The battle these children and their horse Begard waged against Charlemagne impressed me greatly, but I was especially touched by the fate of the horse itself. The noble animal would not sink even under the heaviest load. As long as his master kept on looking at it, the beast could always hold itself above water. But then Reinhold was forced to turn his tear-filled eyes away, and Begard sank. I cried when I thus first discovered how fidelity is rewarded in this world.” – Alfred Rosenberg

What I want to share this time are the Carcassone legends:

In this period, the best known legend of Carcassonne came into existence. The story of Madame Carcas, the wife of the Saraceen Balaak.

“When Charlemagne stood before the gates of Carcassonne with his troops, the castle army existed of only one person, Madame Carcas. She gave the illusion that many men were still on the walls. When Charlemagne wanted to starve the castle, and Dame Carcas heard of his plans, she threw a pig over the wall, filled with sweet corn. This made Charlemagne believe that there was still enough food left, so he packed up and left. On the site of his retrieve, she triumphantly blew her horn (Carcas sonne).”

Another story tells of the presence of sun temples or sun churches, which would have been responsible for the name Carcassonne (Karke Sonne). However, it is more likely that its name is based on the name of the Roman fortress, Carcasso. The connection with the sun temples and a possible Egyptian influence in its Celtic history is now a discussion between scholars.

I believe that people like Herrou and his associates subconsciously see a shadow of Charlemagne in France’s cruelty towards refugees: *

and intuitively feel that Occitania is meant to stand against this, hence their willingness to ignore French laws in order to follow their conscience. And, just like Lady Carcas, despite tiny numbers they are making a difference. We need more people like this. If you are out there, please contact us!

(* Note that terror attacks on refugee accomodation have by now become too frequent for us to keep up with, let alone post all the links about, anymore. Our recent lack of blog coverage on far-right terrorism across the EU reflects not absence of incidents, but the overwhelming quantity of them.)

Posted in Aryan Sanctuary | 4 Comments

Anti-Zionist harvest: US Presidential Debate version

So I watched the first Clinton vs Trump debate. The following reviews pretty much summarize how I thought it went as a whole:

But my main reason for writing this post is to point out is that, during this debate, Trump was the only candidate who mentioned his good relations with Israel. The word “Israel” was absent from Clinton’s speaking throughout the entire event. This is a superficially insignificant but profoundly seismic rhetorical shift from the standard format in past debates when both ‘opposing’ candidates were guaranteed to each try to outboast the other regarding the importance of Israel as an ally to the US (including when the debate question had nothing to do with Israel). I am guessing Clinton has become aware that a large enough fraction of the Democrat grassroots are now anti-Israel enough - as we have documented previously – that it would be better for her campaign to leave Israel unmentioned unless specifically asked.

A tiny step, admittedly, but we were the ones who made it happen. Now the Democrats need to be rewarded for this shift with election victory in November. This would facilitate us in subsequently pushing the shift even harder, and finally splitting the US two-party system into a pro-Israel (Republican) side and an anti-Israel (Democrat) side and thus a genuine bifurcation in foreign policy vision, as I have long maintained is wholly possible to achieve.

The alternative election outcome would be too disastrous to contemplate:

Republican candidate Donald Trump pledged Sunday in a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s “undivided” capital if he is elected president.

Netanyahu met privately with Trump at his residence in Trump Tower a day before the New York billionaire faces off against Democratic rival Hillary Clinton for their first presidential debate.

“Trump acknowledged that Jerusalem has been the eternal capital of the Jewish people for over 3000 years, and that the United States, under a Trump administration, will finally accept the long-standing congressional mandate to recognize Jerusalem as the undivided capital of the state of Israel,” his campaign said in a statement.

Israel captured the Arab eastern half of Jerusalem during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, and annexed it in 1980, declaring all of Jerusalem Israel’s unified capital.

The United States — and most other UN member countries — do not recognize the annexation and consider Jerusalem’s final status to be a key issue to be resolved in peace negotiations with the Palestinians.

The US Congress passed a law in October 1995 calling for an undivided Jerusalem to be recognized as Israel’s capital and to authorize funding for moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

But no US president — Democrat or Republican — has implemented the law, regarding it as an infringement on the executive branch’s authority over foreign policy.

The Trump statement said he promised Netanyahu that the United States would provide Israel with “extraordinary strategic, technological and military cooperation” if he is elected.

“Mr Trump recognized Israel as a vital partner of the United States in the global war against radical Islamic terrorism,” it said.

“They discussed at length the nuclear deal with Iran, the battle against ISIS and many other regional security concerns.”

The campaign said they also discussed Israel’s experience with the security fence” used to wall off Israel from the West Bank.

Trump has made building a wall along the US-Mexico border a signature campaign promise.

Posted in Aryan Sanctuary | 36 Comments

Recalling the anti-Zionist sowing season

A good thing to do during this anti-Zionist harvest time is to look across the fields and recollect how, not so long ago, we were diligently tilling the empty soil and planting seeds, faithful in the value of our toil.

Obsessed with spreading demonization of the Jewish state across the Western world by any means necessary and at any cost, time and again anti-Israel campaigners have fought tooth and nail to insert defamatory anti-Israel language into resolutions and bylaws of unions, NGOs, political parties and other institutions advancing unrelated progressive agendas. Time and again, this hijacking has driven more enlightened activists out of the host movement, contributing to its decline.

Yes, but the people involved in each such declined movement didn’t disappear, not did they abandon their left-leaning views. These movements declined because the people inside them realized that the ideology behind them were not radical enough, and therefore began seeking out better foundations, which necessarily meant discontinuing the old movements and building new movements from the ground up.

The phenomenon was first evident during the lead-up to the 1991 Gulf War, when many Jewish American peace activists encountered a threatening environment at antiwar rallies due to aggressive anti-Zionist campaigning. “I didn’t feel comfortable or safe outside the Jewish contingent,” said Betsy Tessler, leader of the Philadelphia chapter of the staunchly antiwar New Jewish Agenda.

By the time the next Gulf War came around, militant anti-Zionists had become far more organized and determined not merely to piggyback their issue onto the antiwar agenda, but to push out those who were unwilling to accept it. The antiwar movement was primarily led by two far-left coalitions, International ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) and United for Peace and Justice (UFPJ), an uneasy partnership strained greatly by the former’s promotion of anti-Zionist activists before the war even began. When Tikkun editor and leading UFPJ leader Michael Lerner openly criticized the anti-Israeli bent of the demonstrations in January 2003, ANSWER banned him from speaking at its rallies. This led to a splintering in UFPJ and an overall weakening of the antiwar movement.

What this article deliberately avoids mentioning is the infusion of the anti-war movement with awareness of the 9/11 false flag and that Israel was behind it. One of the first groups we approached was none other than the ANSWER Coalition, as it was obvious that nothing would implode the war narrative and negative stereotyping of Muslims faster than realization that 9/11 was a planned deception designed to promote the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and encourage Islamophobia.

Much the same thing happened to the Occupy Wall Street movement that swept through New York and other major U.S. cities in 2011. The official Twitter account of the main OWS leadership in New York briefly endorsed the so-called “Freedom Waves Flotilla” that attempted to break through the Israeli blockade of Gaza in November 2011, while Occupy Oakland had an “Intifada tent” and the official Occupy Boston web site promoted an “emergency march” on the city’s Israeli consulate. Mainstream OWS organizers refused to denounce protesters who carried anti-Israeli, and often brazenly anti-Jewish, signs and banners.

Daniel Jonathan Sieradski, a liberal Jewish writer and activist who led a well-attended Kol Nidre prayer service across the street from the protests in Zuccotti Park on Yom Kippur, warned that the growing infusion of anti-Israel messaging into official OWS activities was leading “many Jewish supporters of OWS who do not identify as anti-Zionist” to believe “that they could no longer be associated with the movement.” “Once this movement becomes explicitly anti-Israel, you’ll have effectively alienated three times more people than you’ll attract,” he predicted. Within a few months, the movement was effectively dead.

Why was it dead, though? Because OWS was essentially an anarchist movement opposed to leadership (especially autocracy) and all violence, therefore all the serious activists who understood the need for autocratic leadership and willingness to use retaliatory violence to defeat an enemy as powerful as Jewry figured out that OWS was a useless movement to stay in despite its elementary good intentions.

A related dynamic was evident in the unraveling of Britain’s Labour Party this spring, driven by the reluctance of Jeremy Corbyn and others to disavow a small minority of radical anti-Zionists within the party’s ranks. Britain’s Jewish community, which “once looked to Labour as its natural home,” wrote leftist Guardian columnist Jonathan Freedland, one of the country’s leading Jewish journalists, “is fast reaching the glum conclusion that Labour has become a cold house for Jews.”

It’s difficult to find a progressive cause that hasn’t been compromised in some way by the so-called Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, from the antiglobalization movement to the fight against sexual assault. “BDS destroys everything it touches,” observes Cornell law professor William A. Jacobson.

We destroy whatever proves unworthy of us, primarily by showing its well-meaning followers that they could be part of building something better instead of staying with something which will never give them the result they want because it was never designed to.

What accounts for this extraordinary nihilism on the part of supposedly progressive BDS activists? Holding an extreme position on Israel is one thing—that can be the result of ideology, religious beliefs, ignorance or something else. Being willing to sacrifice all other causes and concerns ordinarily convergent with one’s worldview for the sake of hurting the Jewish state is something altogether different.

This unusual grade of obsessive, self-destructive antipathy is a hallmark of classical eliminationist anti-Semitism. Unlike ordinary intergroup prejudice “found in the suspicion and resentment which are often directed against neighbors of another tribe, another race, another faith, or from another place,” explains historian Bernard Lewis, anti-Semitism is a “special and peculiar hatred” that attributes to Jews “secret and diabolical power.”

What Lewis calls “ordinary intergroup prejudice” is ethnobigotry. What Lewis calls “special and peculiar hatred” is Amalekism. So of course they are “unlike”. The question is: which of the two represents a higher moral level?

Although anti-Semites often go to great pains to avoid expressing their hatred as anti-Jewish (indeed, they coined the term “anti-Semitism” itself as a politically correct euphemism for Judenhass), this unique cognitive signature is easy enough to spot—just take a measurement of what the subjects are prepared to sacrifice to harm Jews.

This is an outright lie. “Anti-Semitism” was a term coined by Jews themselves to obfuscate Jewishness within a linguistic category called “Semite” that includes non-Jews, so as to portray hostility towards Jews as a form of racism, rather than as an anti-racist response to Jewish racism towards non-Jews.

This is not to say that there exist no actual anti-Semites (ie. those who are hostile to non-Jewish Semites as well as to Jewish Semites), but those are rightists. Leftists view non-Jewish Semites as fellow victims of Jewish racism, and therefore stand with them.

To date, however, mainstream liberals in America have been reluctant to call out the anti-Semites wreaking havoc within the ranks of the Left. If black lives—or socioeconomic justice, peace, women’s rights, etc.—really matter to them, why have they allowed the cancer to metastasize this long?

Because they are in the middle of a struggle within their own minds about whether to remain False Leftists or to become True Leftists. We have faith that they will make the correct decision, and look forward to hearing from more and more of them in the near future:

Posted in Aryan Sanctuary | 1 Comment

RoboCop 3 becoming real

Eric Zemmour (Jew) proudly announces what I worriedly predicted years ago:

In the following interview Mr. Zemmour discusses the Islamization of France, the expansion of the no-go zones, and the inevitability of a French military response to Muslim colonization. One of the most intriguing revelations in this interview is his assertion that the French military has consulted with its Israeli counterparts for advice on how to re-conquer the “sensitive urban zones” that have been lost to French control.

“The plan is already written. It is called “Operation Ronce”. It was designed with the help of the specialists for the Israeli army. … They went to see the specialists from the Israeli army and, the French that explained this to me, told me that, like they did a Gaza, they would advise them to do the same; they explained to them how to proceed, because Israelis are the specialists, of course, and so the French plan is ready.”

If this is not a wakeup call as to how serious the ZC threat is, I honestly don’t know what is. The present government is unlikely to implement this plan, but if the far-right come into power in the future, I guarantee they will have no qualms about doing so. This is what we must prevent. (If you haven’t seen Robocop 3, please do so.)

If you are a solider in the French armed forces, it is your duty to open fire on your officers if they order you to attack innocent people. People simply living in so-called “no-go zones” (which cost the state nothing and indeed saves money for the state, as they refuse the usual state-provided social services, which enables these services to focus on serving the neighbourhoods which do want them) are innocent; they are merely rejecting democracy, which is what everyone should be doing anyway, because democracy is the very system ultimately asserting that a majority of voters wanting soldiers to attack innocents is enough reason for soldiers to do as the majority wants. It is not. A true soldier’s most fundamental duty is to combat initiated violence, and thus to stand against democracy which potentially condones any initiated violence so long as it is sufficiently popular:

If you are a resident of the neighbourhoods targeted by this plan, make sure you own firearms (rifles at the very least; handguns are virtually useless) and other supplies, and get organized:

The best response to enemies who claim based on your ethnic background or religion that you are somehow “not French” (as Zemmour was insinuating above) is to simply show them this picture:

We would love to hear from you! Contact us:

(And one more thing: does anyone really believe that France is the only country which the IDF has been helping to lay this type of plan? It is likely that similar plans exist in many Zionist countries, except they merely haven’t announced them yet. So this is far from just a French problem.)

Posted in Aryan Sanctuary | 12 Comments

It’s not that difficult…..

Italy is one country where a working model for refugee resettlement has already been developed, which I first drew attention to last year using the example of Riace. Now more and more villages are participating:

The question is: why aren’t other EU countries (except Scotland, as also previously noted), Germany in particular, emulating this model? There are villages and small towns dotted all over the map, yet the governments would rather keep refugees concentrated in asylum centres that are not only increasingly overcrowded and hence increases stress among occupants and volunteers alike, but also make refugees easy targets for far-right arson and other terror attacks. Unless, of course, Merkel is – as we have suspected long ago – deliberately trying to do a spectacularly bad job of handling the refugee crisis in order to bring on the Zionist-scripted backlash right on schedule, as can now be seen in the increasing popularity of the AfD…..

(Isn’t it suspicious how little media coverage has been given to Italy’s village revival approach to the refugee influx, especially compared to the fence-building approach of Hungary etc.? It’s as if they want people to think that, because it is inefficient to keep refugees in asylum centres, therefore it is acceptable to let them starve on the border rather than try alternative resettlement schemes.)

Posted in Aryan Sanctuary | 102 Comments

Anti-Zionist harvest contd.

Last year, Rabbi Susan Talve, a longtime activist on race issues in the St. Louis area was told that her advocacy for Israel was incompatible with the objectives of Black Lives Matter: “Solidarity from Ferguson to Palestine has become a central tenet of the movement” she was informed, because “Israeli and U.S. state oppression are deeply interconnected.”

Similarly, a student who attended a Black Lives Matter rally at Northwestern University last year was told “you support Israel, so you cannot also support us.”

Recently, that seems to be the response of many of the activists who dominate so-called “progressive” social justice movements.

The self-described “progressive wing” of the Democratic Party — represented by radical and often repressive organizations such as MoveOn, CodePink, Occupy Wall Street, and Black Lives Matter — has become openly opposed to the nation state of the Jewish people.

Increasingly, these organizations demand that their members and “allies” renounce support for Israel and for Zionism in order to belong.

Earlier this year, supporters of the LGBTQ community in Israel learned this lesson the hard way, when BDS activists together with a local Black Lives Matter chapter broke up a gay pride event, because it featured a presentation by an Israeli group.

The protesters claimed that the event organizers had engaged in “pinkwashing” the Israeli occupation by showing solidarity with the Israeli LGBTQ community.

Members of the National Women’s Studies Association (“NWSA”) who also support Israel have been similarly excluded. Last year, that organization voted to endorse BDS, and as one pro-BDS activist explained: “What is significant about this particular resolution is the rationale; the fact that the resolution makes it explicit that BDS is a feminist issue … that one cannot call themselves a feminist … without taking a stand on what is happening in Palestine.”

Their hostility towards Israel does not stem from any particular Israeli actions or policies. Even if Israel were to withdraw from the West Bank, destroy the security barrier, and recognize Hamas as a legitimate political organization, it would still not be enough.

For these radicals, it is not what Israel does; it is about what Israel is: the nation state of the Jewish people, or to use hard-left terminology: an imperialistic, apartheid and genocidal, colonialist enterprise. The recently released Black Lives Matter policy platform offers a perfect example of such extreme rhetoric: It states that U.S. military and economic support for Israel makes American citizens complicit in “the genocide taking place against the Palestinian people.”

The fact that the BLM platform reads like it was lifted from a BDS screed is hardly coincidence: the two groups enjoy a longstanding relationship, and a prominent BDS activist apparently helped draft elements of the BLM declaration. But BLM is far from the only hard-left organization that has been infected by BDS vitriol. In fact, BDS has pressured a wide range of progressive organizations into assuming an anti-Israel posture.

The American Green Party, for example, which has become a haven for disaffected progressive activists this election cycle, recently came out in support of BDS and called for the U.S. to end its support for “the Israeli apartheid regime.”

This trend has been particularly pronounced on college campuses, where a host of academic groups — most absurdly the Native American Scholars Association and the Americans Studies Association — have passed resolutions in favor of BDS.

Many of these organizations have also endorsed the Palestinian Academic and Cultural Boycott (“PACBI”), which encourages participants to engage in McCarthyite blacklisting of Israeli academic institutions, as well as groups and individuals who promote “Brand Israel.” This category apparently includes artists like Matisyahu, and academics like me, as I found out last year when a prominent BDS advocate refused to debate me at the Oxford Student Union.

The PACBI also explicitly denounces “normalization projects,” programs or events aimed at Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation that do not sufficiently emphasize the colonialist nature of the state of Israel.

BDS campaigners want to force any supporters of Israel, no matter their stances on other political issues, outside of the progressive tent.

Now is the time to ride our own wave.

Posted in Aryan Sanctuary | 2 Comments

Anti-Zionist harvest

Having been sowing the anti-Zionist seeds year in and year out since the mid-2000s, and having witnessed the horror of many of our seeds hijacked by the BS camp from the late-2000s schism onwards, it is truly a reward to be able to see at least some of those seeds grow as they were meant to:

If you’re Jewish, you should probably also prepare yourself for the various forms of anti-Israel sentiment, and maybe even anti-Semitism, you’re likely to encounter on your new college campus.

In the past year alone, as a Jewish student at McGill University in Montreal, I’ve been called a “Zionist b—-.” I’ve been told several times that Jews haven’t suffered (never mind the Spanish Inquisition, Eastern European pogroms and centuries of violence and marginalization leading up to the Holocaust). I’ve seen my friends mocked for their Judaism in crude, hateful language on popular anonymous social media platforms. When I asked if a student publication would write about instances of anti-Semitism on campus in its end-of-year issue, I was told that those instances were already covered in “mainstream Zionist media.”

By no means do I defend every action of the Israeli government, but Israel as a Jewish homeland plays an integral role in my identity. I love Israel and firmly believe in its right to exist, just as I believe in a Palestinian state. I also consider myself a liberal and care deeply about a range of injustices, including gender inequality, homophobia and the racial opportunity gap.

Yet so many of my liberal peers, with whom I share so much common ground, have actively excluded Jewish students from their social-justice organizations. The activist community’s demonization of Israel is apparent again and again in my interactions on campus. These clubs propagate the idea that Zionism underpins many of the world’s problems, as well as claim that Jews have no right to feel connected to Israel and that any Jew who does feel a connection to his or her religious homeland is part of the problem. Despite many of our shared values, my Jewish peers’ and my attempts to reach out to these groups have often been dismissed.

Because they are not liberals any more. They have already started the shift towards becoming True Leftists. They have started to care about internal consistency in their positions, and have understood that identitarianism and social justice are mutually exclusive, and therefore that Jews who claim to care about social justice, while retaining support for Jewishness, Judaism and Israel, are LYING.

As you begin your journey as a Jewish college student, you may find that the students involved in the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS) against Israel, which is on the rise on campuses across North America, are the same students who are active in feminist collectives, LGBT groups, environmental organizations and anti-racism clubs. As a Zionist, this can be extremely disheartening — why should you be alienated from a cause because you believe Israel has a right to exist?

To all you pre-schism Jew-aware activists out there who many years ago told me not to waste my time trying to convert leftists to anti-Zionism, face it: you were never worried about me wasting my time, you were worried about me succeeding. You actively wanted leftists to continue siding with Jews so that leftists could be portrayed as PC cowards and hence rightists would gain credibility by being the only non-PC side in the discussion. This is now no longer possible. By leftists turning anti-Zionist while remaining staunchly leftist on other issues, rightists have lost what was their single most – perhaps even only – effective line of propaganda against leftists.

As the Millennial generation takes positions of leadership in the evangelical churches of America, we may see Christian Zionism and support for Israel vanish. It is a process that is already underway.

Today’s 20-year-olds and 30-year-olds think of themselves as well-informed about Israel’s role in the Middle East and its struggle with the Palestinian people. They are likely to feel strong empathy with the oppressed Palestinian people, and they unanimously join the rest of the world in condemning the State of Israel.

today’s young evangelical Christians are far more likely to march under the slogan, “End the Occupation,” than the slogan, “We stand with Israel.” They are following in the footsteps of mainstream denominations such as the Presbyterian Church in the USA, which sponsors boycotts on Israeli products and has published statements condemning the State of Israel for their occupation of Palestine.

And to all you pre-schism Jew-aware activists out there who told me to just give up on Christianity altogether, I’m glad I didn’t listen to you either.

In the view of anti-Zionists, Israel is unworthy of Christian support because it is home to Jews who have rejected Jesus as their Messiah. Anti-Zionist evangelicals contend that support for Israel thwarts efforts to share the Christian faith with Muslims in the Middle East. (In other words, Christianity would be more attractive to Islam if we could present it to them as anti-Jewish and anti-Israel.)

This last sentence is what I have been saying all along. This is the key to fulfilling the prophecy of the Second Christ and the Mahdi fighting side by side against the Antichrist/Dajjal/Jewish Messiah. I still believe firmly in this prophecy. How many more times must I demonstrate my prescience before all of you out there (I’m addressing the lurkers, not our team members) start taking this prophecy seriously enough to join us in working towards it? Because, just like all the other stuff above, Christian-Mohammedan solidarity will not happen unless we do the long, patient and mostly thankless work needed to make it happen. But I would not be asking you to do such work in the first place if I had any less than absolute confidence that, if done well, it will not be done in vain.

So what are you waiting for? Join us!

Posted in Aryan Sanctuary | 61 Comments