Blog

Controversy over Jack Straw’s Comments on Jewish Influence

16 Comments

British MP decries ‘unlimited’ Jewish funds as destroying Mideast peace, JPost, 27 Oct 2013:

Former Israeli Knesset Member Einat Wilf was in attendance at the debate and posted Straw’s comments on her Facebook page.

Straw said, according to Wilf, that the greatest obstacles to peace between Israel and the Palestinians and her Arab neighbors are the “unlimited” funds available to Jewish organizations and AIPAC in the US, as well as Germany’s “obsession” with defending Israel.

“I guess he neglected to mention Jewish control of the media…,” Wilf added on her Facebook status.

Indeed. The controversy has to do with the publicly stated belief of a major figure in British politics regarding jewish influence over US foreign policy. It is being widely reported and commented on in the portion of the jewsmedia aimed at jews, and hardly at all in the jewsmedia for non-jews. Non-jewish interests are neither informed nor served by this discrepancy. Wilf implies that non-jews control the media and are responsible for this.

Straw has confirmed and expanded on his statement, explaining that he’s trying to help the jews. I’m not remotely anti-Semitic, says ex-British FM Straw, The Times of Israel, 28 Oct 2013:

“I am not remotely anti-Semitic. Quite the reverse. I have all my life strongly supported the state of Israel, and its right to live in peace and security,” Straw wrote in an email.

Lastly, the former foreign secretary said he had addressed “the problems which faced President [Barack] Obama from AIPAC and the ‘Israeli lobby’ more generally.” He said he had “pointed out that Prime Minister Netanyahu was a player in domestic US politics, on the Republican side, and that under US political funding rules (or their absence) huge sums were spent by AIPAC in support of some elected politicians (or candidates), and against others. This is in sharp contrast to the rules in the UK, where spending is tightly controlled,” he wrote.

“None of this is ‘anti-Semitic,’” Straw concluded. “There are plenty of people in Israel who take a similar view to me — not least (as I do) because they believe that the current approach of the Government of Israel will weaken the position of the state of Israel in the medium and long-term.”

This is what passes for criticism of jewish influence in the mainstream political discourse, with controversies like this becoming a regular ritual. However it starts, it quickly boils down to a debate about what’s best for the jews. It is a sign not just of jewish influence, but of jewish power. The mere implication that jewish influence is not necessarily what’s best for anyone else is immediately drowned out by cries and hand-wringing about “anti-semitism”. It is an affirmation of jewish power – the preeminence of jewish interests over all others.

For jews like Jonathan Tobin at Commentary Magazine these sick rituals serve as a pretext to get on his jewsmedia soapbox and explain, to jews and their allies, that jews are really the victims here. In Nothing Legitimate About Anti-Semitic Slur he notes “traditional anti-Semitic stereotypes about Jewish money and insidious attempts to control the policy discussion” and implies they are “conspiracy theories that are thinly veiled new versions of traditional myths about Jews”.

Of course, these regular rituals reinforce these stereotypes about jews. Tobin’s screed only adds to the insidious jewish attempts to control the policy discussion. He sees “jew-hatred” and “nasty stuff” in Jack Straw’s words, and thinks it “tells you all you need to know about the rising tide of anti-Semitism in Europe”. And it does. Jewish power harms others, creating hatred all around. Tobin, like most jews, simply hates and blames anyone but jews for it.

Tobin claims that “Straw’s charges” “are easily dismissed”, asserting that “the vast, wall-to-wall bipartisan coalition that supports the Jewish state is a function of American public opinion, not Jewish money”. If that were true there would be more reporting and discussion of Straw’s statements in places where American public opinion is shaped. Instead it is restricted almost entirely to jews talking to jews about it. To the extent non-jews are even made aware, it’s only to be put on notice that their concerns will not only be ignored, but will be regarded as offensive:

Making such accusations is offensive rather than just wrong because, as Straw knows very well, talking about Jewish money buying government policy is straight out of the anti-Semitic playbook of the The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The purpose of such claims is not to argue that Israel’s supporters are misguided so much as that they are illegitimate.

Jewish money and lobbying has an obvious effect on government policy. Somebody must be accountable for this, but in the fevered minds of jews like Tobin, it cannot be jews. According to him jewish power is not illegitimate or wrong, recognition and opposition is. He defends jewish power by attacking, crying out in pain as he strikes.

This is perfectly stereotypical behavior for jews. The best hope for change is that others come to see it for what it is and come to the realization that a gang of unscrupulously and unapologetically jew-obsessed jews having such influence over their governments, their media, their finance, cannot be good for them.

16 thoughts on “Controversy over Jack Straw’s Comments on Jewish Influence”

  1. The best hope for change is that others come to see it for what it is and come to the realization that a gang of unscrupulously and unapologetically jew-obsessed jews having such influence over their governments, their media, their finance, cannot be good for them.

    Remarkably, there is the first component of that change: to convince whites that what is good for them is good.

  2. As has been said many times before “The Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you”?

    Jews pour money into the political machine and boast about it but if any non-Jew mentions it they scream anti-Semitism

  3. Jewish control of the major media in the media age makes the enforced silence both paradoxical and paralyzing. Survival in public life requires that you know all about it, but never refer to it. A hypocritical etiquette forces us to pretend that the Jews are powerless victims; and if you don’t respect their victimhood, they’ll destroy you. – Joe Sobran

  4. My reaction to the article is that its hard for me to blame the jew-obsessed Jews for working to control Gentile nations, use them for their purposes and hammer down those that occaisonaly rebel against that effort. All groups have the natural right and God-sanctioned mandate to pursue their interests at the expense of others, particularly in the case of races. Deception, manipulation and all manner of dirty deeds are legitimate tools to achieve the goal of racial survival. Jack Straw claims that he does what he does for the benefit of Israel, but I think this is dishonest, his priorities are elsewhere. Only the Jews truly care about the fate of their race, and they are probably well-advised to be on hyper-alert for the rise of opposition.

    By the same token, the author’s point is well-taken, that Gentile nations harvest only sorrow from ceding control to aliens, whose purposes are very different from the best interests of the peoples they control.

  5. Using deception to further one’s interests is, well deceitful, and will backfire. Always does, eventually. It’s time for honest whites to stand up for our race, the white race. Anti-racist really is a code word for anti-white. The program pushed is GENOCIDE. There is NO justification for genocide.

  6. Deception, manipulation and all manner of dirty deeds are legitimate tools

    Tobin’s argument also hinges on legitimacy. It is the crux of the issue. Whites must see ourselves and our interests as legitimate. Beyond that, no action against the best interests of Whites is legitimate, most especially not acts perpetrated by deception or manipulation – such as jews playing the victim while they defile and exploit Whites.

  9. Michael Kimmel says White men are afflicted with “aggrieved entitlement” and is clearly antipathetic rather than sympathetic. Why?

    I’m going to go out on a limb and say it’s because he’s a jew, or crypto-jew. Like his hero Louis CK, and like Tim Wise and David Sirota, whose anti-White animus he echoes. They all clearly see Whites as the enemy rather than as fellow “whites”.

    Jews provide the best example of “aggrieved entitlement”. Jews (and crypto-jews) love to psychoanalyze Whites, as Kimmel does, faulting Whites for things like “privilege” and “aggrieved entitlement” that better describe themselves.

  10. Jews aren’t Semites. Therefore, one cannot be ‘anti-semitic’ when discussing the Khazarian Kosher Krowd.

    End of story. Nothing to see/hear here. Move along.- Fr. John+

  13. I’m glad someone pointed this out. Apparently, he’s only an eighth jewish but from his appearance it was a very strong “eighth”. And I’m sure this “eighth” was very important when he was groomed for politics.
    How does someone like Milliband the first generation son of an immigrant father get to be leader of the Labour Party if not picked out and groomed for the rôle?
    As usual it’s smoke and mirrors, Jews playing both sides and sowing confusion.
    You’d be amazed how many “British” politicians with anglicised names are really jews. There was a reason for the Inquisition.

  14. There is an article about the ethnicity of “British ” Leaders on alternative right. http://alternativeright.com/blog/category/mass-immigration-public-opinion-and-the-racism-of-johnson-cameron-clegg-and-miliband
    I notice that Boris Johnson who admits to one jewish great grandfather only mentions that he has “Turkish” ancestry never Muslim. I bet the “Turkish” ancestry is also jewish. The same goes for Cleg’s “Dutch ” and “Russian” ancestry. If we ever get the opportunity to isolate and expel jews it is going to be one heck of a problem.

  15. Jack Straw is certainly of partly jewish extraction, its hardly a secret over here. Of course he is very much of the secular, lefty jewish variety.

  16. Michael Kimmel says White men are afflicted with “aggrieved entitlement” and is clearly antipathetic rather than sympathetic. Why?

    I’m going to go out on a limb and say it’s because he’s a jew, or crypto-jew.

    As Il Ragno would say, the map of Jerusalem is stamped on his face. He’s as Jewish as they come.

Comments are closed.