1.4 million desperate women and children living in tents as refugees in Rafah are being indiscriminately killed by the Jewish army as this is being written. The IDF has failed against Hamas in Gaza and the Netanyahu government has rejected the Palestinian proposal for a ceasefire. Their final gambit appears to be to eliminate the existence of the Palestinian people from Israeli occupied territory.
It does indeed look like Egypt has quietly accepted the bribes to accommodate a Palestinian exodus, and is currently building a containment zone to take them:
1. It accommodates the Palestinian exodus but prevents them from spilling over into Egyptian society and causing future political instability.
2. In turn, it allows for the easy collection and shipping of said exodus to Europe and elsewhere.
We are witnessing a Jewish-orchestrated ethnic cleansing campaign of unbelievable scale, one that strips naked the murderous nature of the “rules based international order.” What is even more astonishing is the inability or unwillingness of both the Arab/Muslim governments and the emerging BRICS bloc to do anything to stop it.
I am surprised that this article was republished at unz.com without the author’s name appearing anywhere. There is a link at the bottom of the article to this Substack, which says that it was republished with permission, but no author credit.
"How a desperate genocidal proposal travels from the Israeli parliament to become the consensus in all of the major capitals of the West in less than a month remains a mystery."
I dont see any sort of a mystery. IF you believe in brutal and evil things, you will do brutal and evil things. What is culturally repugnant to us today - in most cases - was once viewed as religious duty.
Untold numbers of humans have had their hearts ripped out alive, on top of a step pyramid, been strangled ritually and tossed into a bog, societies have devoted communal efforts to march a select group of virgins off the edge of a Volcano, or slaughtered a retinue servants to supposedly accompany their masters' corpse into the underworld. All of this made total sense to their people accepting this dogma as ordained by their religious doctrine.
After the Battle of Arausio in 105BC, the coalition of central and (former) north Euro Celtic tribes had captured the Roman commander, Marcus Scaurus. Very few Romans survived this series of battles, with total losses over 100k men, and according to the Romans themselves, only a few hundred Roman soldiers ever returned. It was the worst defeat in total manpower any Roman force was ever subjected in their entire history.
The account that the Romans received from one of the surviving witnesses described Scaurus being burned alive inside of a wicker cage, which, to the Romans, was viewed as maniacal, sadistic torture.
The facts of this campaign actually eventually led to the Roman policy of total extermination of Continental Celtic civilization, because had the Celts pushed forward instead of dividing into winter quarters, they would have been able to entirely destroy Roman civilization, had they chosen to do so.
This account probably comes from a camp follower, not a soldier in my view, and it wrongly names the Cimbric commander as 'Boirix', when that would have been the title of the King of a Celtic tribe allied to the Cimbri, the Boii, however the ritual murder of the Roman commander inside of a wicker cage by immolation is an accurate account of Central-Euro Celtic religion at the time. It was a textbook act of battlefield sacrifice that dictated the drowning, strangling, or burning (for the God Taranis) of the highest ranking captured opponent. While this is an inhumane and sadistic way to kill someone, it was not actually being done for some revenge gratification, it was a religious precept to reward the God for the victory that the Cimbri/Teutones(Teutates)/Boii and allied tribes believed they had been granted by this God.
Remove all currently understood ethnic or tribal labels from the discussion for a moment.
Now, consider that I come to you as a member of 'group X' and introduce myself with, "my people believe fervently that we were given a command from our tribal God to mass murder every single man, woman and child, along with any domestic animals we might encounter, so that we alone would possess a region this God told us to take." This same God also said "everywhere you set your foot shall be yours". He further approved of attacking neighboring tribes that had provided us with assistance, shelter and food, (we will name this group the 'midianites') and after we defeated them militarily,
he had us execute in cold blood all the non-combatant young males, toddlers, old people and women that we had no desire for, while allowing us to retain for rape all the females that we found desirable. We then gleefully recorded every single type of supply or provision that we had stolen from this population that we exterminated.
Aside from a familiar context (the collection of writings later edited into the HBRW Bible), this would sound criminally insane to us, (because it is) and a doctrine that would be extremely dangerous to anyone interacting with this population, however in fact it is no more insane to someone acculturated to believe this than it was to the Cimbric confederation forces celebrating the ritual burning of the captured Roman commander that (mistakenly) surrendered to them. The difference between Yahwi-El and all the other pagan gods that were given 'burnt offerings' or human sacrifices is that in the case of the HBRW god he allegedly orders total extermination of anyone who cannot resist, while in the other cultures, the sacrifice is limited to combatants or a select group of unfortunate individuals.
None of us today from any religion had any role in writing or editing any of these pagan doctrines encouraging murder or sacrifice, and notably there are a lot more Christian adherents who have no issue with celebrating this story than there are Jews. If you listen to the common Christian apologetic defending this 'promised land' story, it is fairly nonsensical. In my own personal experience, it involved an explanation that a Mosaic law once existed that is no longer in force, usually based on the examples of Jesus.
The problem with this justification is, there would not be any examples of Jesus, to compare to if Jesus had begun a ministry in Judea circa 30 a.d. by telling the crowd anything that in any way clearly contradicted the religious laws of either Moses or the books of HBRW Bible. This is because (not unlike the unfortunate Roman Cavalry commander above) he would have been immediately ritually stoned to death in compliance with the same HBRW Bible, had he done so. The way that Jesus survived long enough to even have a ministry was by using parable stories that demonstrated his meaning without directly saying something that would allow him to be stoned to death by zealots.
So, for Christians, when Jesus refuses to obey the sabbath 'law' or how or what he eats, who he associates with (Sick/Poor/Samaritans), in defiance of HBRW Bible ritual law, he was not a 'fork' of Talmudic Judaism, he was refuting its very basis, which begins with mass murder and what are by any definition of the term "war crimes".
The concept of 'anti-semitism' is often applied to merely observing that this is an insane, murderous tribal ideology, if applied in modern times to fellow humans, just as we (should) be appalled at burning opponents alive in battlefield sacrifices. You have every right to personally believe that you should be considered a select group and entitled to special land access or rights, however once that crosses over into actively harming others or violating their rights, you are now no different than those murderers marching the defenseless Midianite boys off to be executed, and there is no way to pretty this up or make it 'the word of god'.
I remember as a kid having to go talk with our pastor, who had a divinity degree, and within 30 minutes he was actually agreeing with me, while my own position refuting this promised land claim was unchanged. It takes very little actual effort to determine what the HBRW actually were. They are NOT a people, and they state as much in their own 'bible'.
"Nay; but we will have a king over us; that we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.”
The HBRW were merely the collective transient poor, and not a race or tribe, which is why they aspire to be an actual people with a 'King'. The promise of a place to settle and live was directed not at a specific people, but at a class that lived a region with a lack of arable lands. This promise has been turned into a psychopathic denial of others basic human rights, in no way differing from the victim waiting to have his heart torn out while it was still beating, in honor of 'Chac' and his alleged promise of rainfall in exchange.
It does indeed look like Egypt has quietly accepted the bribes to accommodate a Palestinian exodus, and is currently building a containment zone to take them:
https://t.me/thecradlemedia/12526
This accomplishes two things:
1. It accommodates the Palestinian exodus but prevents them from spilling over into Egyptian society and causing future political instability.
2. In turn, it allows for the easy collection and shipping of said exodus to Europe and elsewhere.
We are witnessing a Jewish-orchestrated ethnic cleansing campaign of unbelievable scale, one that strips naked the murderous nature of the “rules based international order.” What is even more astonishing is the inability or unwillingness of both the Arab/Muslim governments and the emerging BRICS bloc to do anything to stop it.
Perhaps the Devil's bargain for 'multipolarity' is turning a blind eye to Israel in exchange for Iran.
I am surprised that this article was republished at unz.com without the author’s name appearing anywhere. There is a link at the bottom of the article to this Substack, which says that it was republished with permission, but no author credit.
"How a desperate genocidal proposal travels from the Israeli parliament to become the consensus in all of the major capitals of the West in less than a month remains a mystery."
I dont see any sort of a mystery. IF you believe in brutal and evil things, you will do brutal and evil things. What is culturally repugnant to us today - in most cases - was once viewed as religious duty.
Untold numbers of humans have had their hearts ripped out alive, on top of a step pyramid, been strangled ritually and tossed into a bog, societies have devoted communal efforts to march a select group of virgins off the edge of a Volcano, or slaughtered a retinue servants to supposedly accompany their masters' corpse into the underworld. All of this made total sense to their people accepting this dogma as ordained by their religious doctrine.
After the Battle of Arausio in 105BC, the coalition of central and (former) north Euro Celtic tribes had captured the Roman commander, Marcus Scaurus. Very few Romans survived this series of battles, with total losses over 100k men, and according to the Romans themselves, only a few hundred Roman soldiers ever returned. It was the worst defeat in total manpower any Roman force was ever subjected in their entire history.
The account that the Romans received from one of the surviving witnesses described Scaurus being burned alive inside of a wicker cage, which, to the Romans, was viewed as maniacal, sadistic torture.
The facts of this campaign actually eventually led to the Roman policy of total extermination of Continental Celtic civilization, because had the Celts pushed forward instead of dividing into winter quarters, they would have been able to entirely destroy Roman civilization, had they chosen to do so.
This account probably comes from a camp follower, not a soldier in my view, and it wrongly names the Cimbric commander as 'Boirix', when that would have been the title of the King of a Celtic tribe allied to the Cimbri, the Boii, however the ritual murder of the Roman commander inside of a wicker cage by immolation is an accurate account of Central-Euro Celtic religion at the time. It was a textbook act of battlefield sacrifice that dictated the drowning, strangling, or burning (for the God Taranis) of the highest ranking captured opponent. While this is an inhumane and sadistic way to kill someone, it was not actually being done for some revenge gratification, it was a religious precept to reward the God for the victory that the Cimbri/Teutones(Teutates)/Boii and allied tribes believed they had been granted by this God.
Remove all currently understood ethnic or tribal labels from the discussion for a moment.
Now, consider that I come to you as a member of 'group X' and introduce myself with, "my people believe fervently that we were given a command from our tribal God to mass murder every single man, woman and child, along with any domestic animals we might encounter, so that we alone would possess a region this God told us to take." This same God also said "everywhere you set your foot shall be yours". He further approved of attacking neighboring tribes that had provided us with assistance, shelter and food, (we will name this group the 'midianites') and after we defeated them militarily,
he had us execute in cold blood all the non-combatant young males, toddlers, old people and women that we had no desire for, while allowing us to retain for rape all the females that we found desirable. We then gleefully recorded every single type of supply or provision that we had stolen from this population that we exterminated.
Aside from a familiar context (the collection of writings later edited into the HBRW Bible), this would sound criminally insane to us, (because it is) and a doctrine that would be extremely dangerous to anyone interacting with this population, however in fact it is no more insane to someone acculturated to believe this than it was to the Cimbric confederation forces celebrating the ritual burning of the captured Roman commander that (mistakenly) surrendered to them. The difference between Yahwi-El and all the other pagan gods that were given 'burnt offerings' or human sacrifices is that in the case of the HBRW god he allegedly orders total extermination of anyone who cannot resist, while in the other cultures, the sacrifice is limited to combatants or a select group of unfortunate individuals.
None of us today from any religion had any role in writing or editing any of these pagan doctrines encouraging murder or sacrifice, and notably there are a lot more Christian adherents who have no issue with celebrating this story than there are Jews. If you listen to the common Christian apologetic defending this 'promised land' story, it is fairly nonsensical. In my own personal experience, it involved an explanation that a Mosaic law once existed that is no longer in force, usually based on the examples of Jesus.
The problem with this justification is, there would not be any examples of Jesus, to compare to if Jesus had begun a ministry in Judea circa 30 a.d. by telling the crowd anything that in any way clearly contradicted the religious laws of either Moses or the books of HBRW Bible. This is because (not unlike the unfortunate Roman Cavalry commander above) he would have been immediately ritually stoned to death in compliance with the same HBRW Bible, had he done so. The way that Jesus survived long enough to even have a ministry was by using parable stories that demonstrated his meaning without directly saying something that would allow him to be stoned to death by zealots.
So, for Christians, when Jesus refuses to obey the sabbath 'law' or how or what he eats, who he associates with (Sick/Poor/Samaritans), in defiance of HBRW Bible ritual law, he was not a 'fork' of Talmudic Judaism, he was refuting its very basis, which begins with mass murder and what are by any definition of the term "war crimes".
The concept of 'anti-semitism' is often applied to merely observing that this is an insane, murderous tribal ideology, if applied in modern times to fellow humans, just as we (should) be appalled at burning opponents alive in battlefield sacrifices. You have every right to personally believe that you should be considered a select group and entitled to special land access or rights, however once that crosses over into actively harming others or violating their rights, you are now no different than those murderers marching the defenseless Midianite boys off to be executed, and there is no way to pretty this up or make it 'the word of god'.
I remember as a kid having to go talk with our pastor, who had a divinity degree, and within 30 minutes he was actually agreeing with me, while my own position refuting this promised land claim was unchanged. It takes very little actual effort to determine what the HBRW actually were. They are NOT a people, and they state as much in their own 'bible'.
"Nay; but we will have a king over us; that we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.”
The HBRW were merely the collective transient poor, and not a race or tribe, which is why they aspire to be an actual people with a 'King'. The promise of a place to settle and live was directed not at a specific people, but at a class that lived a region with a lack of arable lands. This promise has been turned into a psychopathic denial of others basic human rights, in no way differing from the victim waiting to have his heart torn out while it was still beating, in honor of 'Chac' and his alleged promise of rainfall in exchange.