Wednesday, January 08, 2020
Elder of Ziyon
Wednesday, January 08, 2020Elder of Ziyon
Wednesday, January 08, 2020Elder of ZiyonI do expect a response - Iran is still an honor/shame society and some action, now that the US admitted its role, is deemed necessary. But I think it will be a limited response. Perhaps cyberattacks, perhaps rockets to Israel as I mentioned, perhaps some directed attacks at US troops in Iraq or a 1983 Beirut-style attack against US military installations in Europe.Almost unbelievably, as of this hour, Iran is treating its shooting of a dozen or two rockets at US airbases in Iraq as the response from an honor/shame perspective.
More than 80 U.S. forces have reportedly been killed during Iranian missile strikes to intended U.S. targets in Iraq on Wednesday, IRIB quoted a source close to Iran's Revolutionary Guards (IRGC).80 deaths would be significant. Of course, it is fictional, but it is a number that is high enough for Iran to declare that they have avenged Soleimani.
“According to the accurate reports of our sources in the field, at least 80 American troops were killed and some 200 others were wounded, who were immediately transferred out of the airbase by helicopters,” said an informed source at the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps.”
“Despite the fact that Americans had been on high alert, their air defense was unable to respond.”Notice the symbolism of the number 104 - exactly twice the number of sites Trump said he had targeted, also for symbolic reasons (the 52 US hostages in Iran in 1979.)
“As many as 104 critical U.S.-held points in the region have been targeted, which would be attacked upon the U.S.’s first mistake,” the source added.
Chief of Staff of Iran’s Armed Forces Major General Mohammad Bagheri warned that the US will face a harsher response if it conducts any further mischief after the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps fired tens of ballistic missiles at American bases in Iraq.Here Iran is saying that it believes that its strikes did the job, and they won't perform any more as long as the US doesn't respond to the attack the airbases.
Following IRGC’s attacks to US bases in retaliation to the assassination of top Iranian commander, Lieutenant General Qasem Soleimani, Major General Bagheri said last night’s operations were only a part of Iran’s capabilities in responding the US regime’s mischief.
He stressed that any further misconduct by Washington will bring on a harsher and more severe response.
Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib are not only anti-Israel but also anti-Semetic, US President Donald Trump claimed while doing a radio interview on Monday.
Speaking to conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh, Trump said, “If you go back 10 years or eight years maybe even five years, Israel was the king of the Congress. Our Congress protected Israel and fought for Israel. You look at the way the Democrats in Congress are treating where you have AOC, and you have Tlaib, and you have Omar they are actually, you know, anti-Semitic.”
“They are totally against Israel,” he added. “The things they’ve said. You go back to the past. You look at the things that they’ve said about Israel and Jewish people. It’s incredible. Ten years ago, that would be unacceptable.”
Trump lamented that this was unfortunate because of Israel's importance to the administration. "I think they've lost their minds, to tell you the truth," he attacked.
Although Trump didn’t provide specific examples, Ocasio-Cortez, Omar and Tlaib critics slammed the two Congresswomen for recent anti-Israel comments.
Ocasio-Cortez is in favor of cutting military aid to Israel as long as it maintains its presence in disputed territories in Judea and Samaria and Israel barred both Tlaib and Omar from visiting Israel because of their pro-BDS convictions.
He continued: “I still can’t believe it. I’m a little bit old-fashioned in that sense. Because I’ve grown up and there was always great protection and reverence for Israel. Now it’s the opposite. In the Democrats, it’s almost a negative. They’re going out and what they do for Tlaib and what they do for Omar, Representative Omar of Minnesota and AOC —I think for incredible the way they talk about Israel. You know it just was unthinkable to do that ten years ago and sooner.”
Limbaugh then suggested that Trump’s pro-Israel legislation has helped drive the hypercritical Israel sentiment among progressives within the Democratic Party.
“I actually think you helped drive them even more insane than they were,” he said.
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D., Minn.) was named the 2019 anti-Semite of the year by an organization that seeks to combat the spread of anti-Jewish bias.
The organization StopAntiSemitism.org chose Omar, who has repeatedly spread anti-Israel and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, following a public nomination and voting period.
"Among Rep. Ilhan Omar's transgressions, she perpetuated anti-Semitic tropes on Twitter to nearly two million followers and introduced an anti-Semitic resolution in Congress that promoted boycotts of the State of Israel and likened them to boycotts of Nazi Germany," the group wrote in a press release Monday. "The public's vote highlights the growing concern among Americans about the Congresswomen's ability to use and abuse her position of power to propagate hatred in the U.S."
Liora Rez, a spokesperson for StopAntiSemitism.org, said in a statement that Omar's selection highlights the public's growing awareness of rising anti-Semitism in the United States.
"Anti-Semitism is plaguing our nation and it's about time we create real consequences for those spreading it," Rez said. "By exposing bigots like Rep. Ilhan Omar, we are ensuring that the public is alert and able to take action."
Congresswoman @ilhan, why would you attack @AlinejadMasih, the voice & inspiration for hundreds of thousands of oppressed women living in Iran who bravely defy the unjust Hijab law by filming themselves walking through Tehran with their hair uncovered? 🤔https://t.co/4kp0DoCb6J
— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) January 7, 2020
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) liked a tweet from a Russian-funded operative claiming that Iran, the world's most prolific state sponsor of terrorism, does not target civilians.
"A friend flying into the US says he hasn't seen so much security since 9/11," activist Rania Khalek said in a Sunday tweet liked by the Democratic congresswoman. "The US is terrified of how Iran will retaliate. Iran won't attack civilians, that's what al Qaeda does. But it shows this assassination did the opposite of making Americans safer and our leaders know it."
Khalek is a host for In the Now, a viral media company funded by the Russian government that was kicked off Facebook for its pro-Russia propaganda. She previously served as an editor for anti-Israel site The Electronic Intifada but resigned after speaking at a pro-Bashar al-Assad conference in Syria.
The extent of Khalek's pro-Iran advocacy was on full display in a recent YouTube livestream in which the activist claimed that "Iran is a country that mostly keeps to itself." She also said "it's a really brave country that's been essential to keeping the Middle East stable throughout the last several decades."
Contrary to Khalek's claims, Iran has been responsible for countless attacks on civilians carried out by Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its funding of various terror organizations. Ocasio-Cortez's office did not respond to questions about Khalek's Russian state affiliation or her claims about Iran's targeting of civilians.
AOC liking a post written by a pro-Assad war crimes denier and Russian state media employee telling the lie that “Iran won’t attack civilians”, as if it doesn’t do so repeatedly and systematically, shows how endemic ignorance and propaganda are embedded within the left. pic.twitter.com/n70086Szwk
— Oz Katerji (@OzKaterji) January 6, 2020
Tuesday, January 07, 2020Elder of Ziyon
archaeology
Tuesday, January 07, 2020Elder of Ziyon
.@StopAntisemites just named Congresswoman Ilhan Omar it's 2019 Antisemite of the Year. Here is a clear opportunity to prove that all the talk about standing up to #antisemitism is not just an empty promise, but will be followed by action. https://t.co/dxtQlnl5dQ— Ambassador Danny Danon | דני דנון (@dannydanon) January 6, 2020
Last week, an American drone strike killed Qassem Suleimani, who for over two decades led Iran’s Quds Force—which of late has been fighting wars in Syria, Iraq, and Yemen—and managed a network of proxy militias and terrorist groups throughout the Middle East. Among Suleimani’s accomplishments are the transformation of Hizballah into a military powerhouse and the creation of guerrilla forces that have killed hundreds of Americans in Iraq, and many more Iraqis. President Trump had until now refrained from responding militarily to the Quds Force’s multiple attacks on American allies and even military hardware throughout the region since he came to office. But the killing of a U.S. contractor changed the equation.
Joining a number of other Israeli experts in commenting on the significance of Suleimani’s death, Hillel Frisch explains why it is more than a merely tactical success:
Suleimani’s death is a major blow to Iran. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s designation of Esmail Ghaani, Suleimani’s second-in-command, as his successor as head of the Quds Force is an indicator of the magnitude of that blow. Ghaani is in his sixties (as was Suleimani)—not the ideal age to take over a major undercover organization with tentacles throughout much of the Middle East and beyond.
Over twenty years ago . . . a younger, more vibrant Islamic revolutionary leadership chose then-forty-year-old Suleimani over his superiors to head the elite [Quds Force]. Khamenei is older now, and less willing to take the risk of choosing a daring young commander, but that is not the only reason why he did not do so.
Even if the ayatollah were inclined to select a younger replacement, the targeting of Soleimani prevents him from making such a choice. The killing proves beyond doubt that the Iranian security system is riddled with informants. . . . The killing of Soleimani was, [moreover, a meaningful] show of American force because he was touted by Iran as invincible.
At one level the complaints are inescapably partisan; Democrats complaining about the Trump Administration is the first and only law of American politics today. Parallel complaints regarding process, wisdom, and ultimately fitness for office were leveled at Obama by Republicans and will be again, but they hardly reached the current level of antipathy directed at Trump. The questions then become not simply whether Trump's policy decision was correct, but whether critics adopting such tones of ill-disguised hatred are themselves to be trusted.Alan M. Dershowitz (WSJ Google Link): Easy Call: The Strike on Soleimani Was Lawful
But the responses to Soleimani have additional relevance not simply because of their partisanship and self-referential elevation of expertise, which illustrate if nothing else the processes of elite groupthink. They anticipate a possible future, namely the way Democratic presidential candidates uniformly disapproved of killing Soleimani.
Current frontrunner and former Obama Vice President Joe Biden likened the act to throwing "a stick of dynamite into a tinderbox." Elizabeth Warren acknowledged "Soleimani was a murderer, responsible for the deaths of thousands, including hundreds of Americans. But this reckless move escalates the situation with Iran and increases the likelihood of more deaths and new Middle East conflict." Finally, Bernie Sanderswarned "Trump's dangerous escalation brings us closer to another disastrous war in the Middle East that could cost countless lives and trillions more dollars."
The parallels between the blob/echo chamber and the Democratic candidates illustrate their interlocking nature; Obama veterans would return under Biden or Warren, while Sanders likely bring in ideologue outsiders, such as his foreign policy advisor, progressive blogger Matt Duss. But they also illustrate common intellectual foundations, the elevation of process and celebration of expertise, the search for predictability and corresponding avoidance of disruption. Readiness to be gamed by canny adversaries is thus built in.
The candidates' responses are thus a foreshadowing of a future Democratic administration. Like most members of the blob and the echo chamber, the candidates have already stated they would recommit to the JCPOA nuclear deal (which of course may not longer be possible). But they would likely return to the Obama policy of indulging Iran's 'legitimate regional aspirations,' 'security concerns,' and Islamic government, even as they offer tepid criticism, as means of restructuring American relations away from Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Still, every new administration has to deal with reality bequeathed by its predecessors. The killing of Soleimani may, or may not, upend the chessboard of Iranian imperial expansion, much less unleash World War III. As the new reality unfolds, the question remains whether experts on all sides of the equation are willing to rethink their premises and contend with the world as it is now. First indications are not promising.
There can be no serious debate about the president's constitutional authority to order a single attack on an enemy combatant who has killed and is planning to kill American citizens. Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama issued such orders.Shmuley Boteach: Killing Soleimani was a moral response
The targeting of Soleimani was more justified, as a matter of law, than the targeting of Osama bin Laden in 2011. The killing of Soleimani was in large part an act of prevention, whereas the killing of bin Laden was primarily an act of retaliation.
The killing of Soleimani was also entirely legal under international law. The Quds Force commander was a combatant in uniform who was actively engaged in continuing military and terrorist activities against Americans. The rocket that killed him and a handful of others was carefully calibrated to minimize collateral damage, and the resulting death toll was proportionate to the deaths it may have prevented.
Like Hitler, Soleimani had a knack for survival. He was reported killed in 2006, 2012 and 2015 – only to show up, time after time, alive and well with a sinister grin. Would yet another practitioner of genocide be allowed to live, into the second decade of the second millennium?
He would, but only for a mere few days. His being considered the second-most powerful man in Iran wouldn’t stop Trump from imposing the most basic law of human justice – that there’s a death sentence for those who engage in genocide.
IN KILLING Soleimani, Trump has finally managed to do what no American president has managed to do before: put Iran on notice that it’s not primarily ordinary Iranians who will suffer for the crimes of their leaders, but, rather, the leaders themselves would pay the ultimate price.
The corrupt Iranian mullahs who slaughter their own people, steal their wealth, and bring terrorism and mayhem to the world are now on notice that they are squarely in American sites for justice.
In his lifetime, Soleimani sought to prove that evil and brutality will ultimately triumph over goodness and mercy. With Soleimani’s death, Trump has proven that those tactics are no match for God’s cosmic force of justice.
Martin Luther King, the greatest American of the 20th century, put it best: “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.
Tuesday, January 07, 2020Elder of ZiyonAFP, dam lies, flood libel, gaza, HRW, Juan Cole, Middle East Monitor
Israel yesterday opened one of the gates of its rainwater stores east of Gaza, allowing rainwater to flood large swathes of Palestinian land, Ma’an reported.This absurd accusation was popular a few years ago. In 2015 AFP even published the accusations. Juan Cole and HRW's Sarah Leah Whitson doubled down. But when the truth was pointed out, AFP didn't just issue a correction, but it published a full debunking of the libel and made an accompanying video showing it was a complete lie.
The Palestinian Ministry of Agriculture said in a statement that the water drowned “hundreds of dunams of agricultural lands and damaged barley and wheat crops.”
According to the statement, the water storage area was located in the east of Shuja’iyya neighbourhood in the east of Gaza city.
Israel builds a number of reservoirs to stop rainwater from running through the Gaza valleys in winter. These prevent Palestinians in the enclave from storing rainwater to irrigate their crops and to fill underground wells.Israel builds reservoirs in the desert just to deprive Palestinians of rainwater??
Tuesday, January 07, 2020Elder of Ziyon
Tuesday, January 07, 2020Elder of Ziyon
Tuesday, January 07, 2020Elder of Ziyon
A Lebanese security source told Asharq Al-Awsat that "once the expected force arrives in Awkar and takes over its mission, the embassy will turn into a military target due to the presence of the soldiers and officers who will protect it."
Several years ago, in an article for Commentary magazine, I offered a distinction between two kinds of anti-Semitic mindsets. I named the first one "bierkeller" anti-Semitism and the second one "bistro" anti-Semitism, as a way of illustrating the cultural gulf between these two forms.Don’t confuse me with facts: It’s always about the ‘occupation’
Bierkellers, or "beer cellars," were the drinking establishments in Germany that during the 1920s and ’30s were the domain of Nazi thugs. They also provided an arena for Adolf Hitler to refine his foaming gutter rhetoric targeting communism, liberalism, and most of all, the Jews. There was no attempt to camouflage or prettify any of this rhetoric, which loudly declared that the Jews were Germany’s misfortune. The thorough dehumanization of the Jews in Nazi propaganda prepared the ground for a decade of persecution that culminated in the Holocaust.
Bierkeller anti-Semitism, then, was unmistakable and instantly recognizable. But "bistro" anti-Semitism – named a bit mischievously in honor of the cozy restaurants and bars where metropolitan intellectuals tend to gather – was, I argued, harder to identify. That is because Jews as Jews are rarely the direct targets of these writings, speeches, parliamentary resolutions and so on. Instead, the bistro mindset relies upon qualifiers, codes and euphemisms that seek to separate "Jews" and "Judaism" from "Zionism," "The State of Israel," "The Jewish Establishment" and the other bugbears of progressives who advance anti-Semitic arguments while indignantly deflecting the charge of anti-Semitism as a reputational smear without foundation.
This contrast between the full-throated anti-Semitism that denies the Jews their humanity and the camouflaged anti-Semitism that denies the Jews their nationality isn’t the only difference. Arguably more important is the observation that the "bierkeller" form of anti-Semitism explicitly aims to visit physical violence upon Jews, whereas in its "bistro" form, protestations against Jewish power and privilege manifest in the main non-violently form: for example, boycott campaigns, demonstrations against pro-Israel and Zionist speakers on university campuses, the constant opprobrium poured upon the Jewish state in the halls of the United Nations, and by leading human-rights NGOs like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.
Still, as the years have gone by, the gulf between crude anti-Semitism and its more polite expressions (between the "bierkeller" and the "bistro") has narrowed considerably. Among the examples I would cite is the British Labour Party, where the anti-Semitic rhetoric that destroyed its reputation over the last five years was, more often than not, of the "Rothschild Bankers Rule the World" variety. (Not to mention blaming Jews for the trans-Atlantic slave trade, accusing "Zionists" of having "collaborated" with the Nazi regime and a slew of other murky fantasies that had nothing to do with Israeli settlement policy.)
Like clockwork, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s recent observation that “the establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not, per se, inconsistent with international law” was immediately denounced by the Jewish left.The U.S. Should Stop Ignoring the Malaysian Prime Minister’s Anti-Semitism
The head of the Reform Movement in North America, Rabbi Rick Jacobs, said that the U.S. government’s new position on Israeli settlements will undercut the fight against BDS and the delegitimization of Israel in the United States, specifically on college campuses.
It’s not clear when Rabbi Jacobs was last on a campus, but the debate at North American colleges is not about the so-called “occupation” but about whether Israel has a right to exist, period. Pro-BDS groups, including “Jewish” ones, are talking about the illegitimacy of the 1949 armistice lines, not those of 1967.
Moreover, a recent survey conducted by Ron Hassner at the University of California, Berkeley shows that most students who care strongly about the “Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories” do not have knowledge of even basic facts on the subject.
Jacobs’s lack of understanding speaks to the divergent lexicon of the conflict, and more pointedly to the growing split between American Jews and Israelis. In many “progressive” circles there is little to no understanding of what areas are even in dispute; witness the continued claims that Gaza is “occupied” by Israel. For the BDS movement, everything Israeli, including Haifa and Tel Aviv, is a “settlement” and hence “illegal.”
Far more than American policy, it is the language of “occupation” that plays a key role in what has become the religion of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The main feature of that religion is the Palestinian claim that their (alleged) territories are “occupied” by Israel, regardless of where they are located on the map, much less in any legal sense under international law.
The mantra of “occupation,” and the demand that Israel be shunned until the “occupation” is ended—meaning the time when Israel is dissolved by the implementation of the Palestinian “right of return”—is the key demand of the Palestinians and the BDS movement.
In September of last year, Columbia University hosted Mahathir Mohamad—who served as Malaysia’s prime minister from 1981 to 2003 and returned to the office in 2018—as part of its World Leaders Forum. This year, Mahathir is expected to host the American president in Kuala Lumpur. Mahathir’s virulent anti-Semitism, notes Isaac Herzog, has never stopped democratic countries or their institutions from giving him this sort of respect—and he doesn’t even attempt to dress up his hatred of Jews as criticism of Israel:
This is a man who openly touts his anti-Semitism, repeatedly claiming Jews “are not merely hook-nosed, but understand money instinctively.” [He] has distributed copies of The International Jew—an anti-Semitic diatribe that had a key influence on the Nazis and is still banned in Germany—to his party members. Nevertheless, President Barack Obama and his wife Michelle recently visited Malaysia for the Obama Foundation’s inaugural Asia Pacific leaders gathering from December 10-14.
With over 60 percent of its population harboring negative opinions of Jews, Malaysia has the highest rate of anti-Semitic views in Asia, [excluding the Middle East]. This is despite the fact that Malaysia has no geographic proximity to Israel, has never had any conflict with Israel, and does not have many Jewish citizens—the last reported to have fled due to anti-Semitism in the early 1980s.
But the most troubling aspect of the Malaysian example is the warm welcome Mahathir receives around the world. The welcome mat has been rolled out for him time and again in global cities, top universities, and leading media outlets. Time magazine has even named him on its 2019 list of the world’s 100 most influential people for his “core values.”
While the events attended by Presidents Obama and Trump in Malaysia are important global forums, America’s leaders and their counterparts worldwide must at a minimum adhere to and reaffirm their commitment to fighting and condemning Mahathir’s anti-Semitism.
Monday, January 06, 2020Elder of Ziyon
Monday, January 06, 2020Elder of Ziyonanti-Israel left, antisemitism, David Duke, Death to Israel, iran, Mark Dankof, neo-Nazi, PEZ, Press TV, The Protocols, white supremacistGen. Soleimani’s Assassination Extra-Judicial, War Crime: Ex-US Senate CandidateTEHRAN (Tasnim) – Mark Dankof, a former US Senate candidate, called the US assassination of Lt. General Qassem Soleimani “extra-judicial” and a “war crime” under international law.Who is this guy?
Unfortunately, because of the polarization that has become more extreme under Trump, his political rivals found it impossible to praise him. Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders and fellow progressives went so far as to introduce legislation to block funding for any military action connected with Iran without congressional authorization.
Similar sentiments were expressed by other representatives of the Left, emphasizing the possible risk of war as a result of the targeted assassination.
What they ignore is the very high and escalating risk of war that existed under Soleimani, which the arch terrorist himself fostered. As British commentator Maajid Nawaz put it in part of a longer tweet, those opposed to the targeted killing will “proactively and without invitation condemn ‘America in the region’ without saying anything at all about ‘Iran in the region.’”
Care should be taken not to turn this into a partisan issue, despite the obvious temptation to do so in a presidential election year.
Similarly, this should not be seen as the US carrying out Israel’s dirty work for it. It’s true that Israel, across the broad political spectrum including some of the Arab parties, welcomed the removal of Soleimani. So, too, did Saudi Arabia. As did many people struggling against Iran’s pernicious and spreading control in the region.
Iran might want to turn Soleimani into a martyr, but he was no saint. He should not be mourned or missed by anybody with a sense of moral decency.
In response to Soleimani's killing, around the world angered protesters have taken to the streets to rage at…
— Israel Advocacy Movement (@israel_advocacy) January 5, 2020
Israel. pic.twitter.com/dh7DWdVhm0
Veteran Israeli analyst Ehud Yaari told Israel's Channel 12: Soleimani's execution "is the most important assassination from the Jewish point of view since the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich, the architect of the Final Solution, in Prague in 1942."Photos: Top 10 atrocities from the now-vaunted Soleimani
"This man was the brains and the engine of the Iranian machine that is trying to wrap the Middle East in the arms of an octopus. He was the head of the octopus in this regard."
"He is the man that conceived the idea of how to slowly tie the noose around Israel's neck, so I say - second only to Heydrich."
As a high-ranking officer in the SS, Heydrich headed the Wannsee Conference that approved plans for the genocide of the Jews. He was killed by Czech partisans.
As creeps like Rep. Ilhan Omar denounce the rubout of Iranian terrorist kingpin Qassem Soleimani as the killing of a "foreign official," the press calls him "a farm boy" or "icon," and stupid Hollywood celebrities send their condolences to "the Iranian people," (who are celebrating, actually) the ugly hard reality remains that Qassem Soleimani, leader of the terrorist Quds force, was a monster, a stone-cold killer of innocents, the driving force behind Iran as a state sponsor of terror. His funeral song should be "That Smell." He stunk of death all around him and liked the stench. According to the Washington Post:
“The warfront is mankind’s lost paradise,” Soleimani said in a 2009 interview. “One type of paradise that is portrayed for mankind is streams, beautiful nymphs and greeneries. But there is another kind of paradise. ... The warfront was the lost paradise of the human beings, indeed.”
But this isn't stopping the left from lionizing the beast. Here's a list, in no particular order, of the worst of what he did:
10. The first 9/11s. Soleimani was involved in the still-unpunished bombing of the Israeli embassy in 1992 and the even bigger AMIA Jewish Center in Buenos Aires in 1994, which killed more than 100 people. Up until then, mass casualty murder of civilians was not a terrorist 'thing.' After that, it was. AMIA was said to be the first 9/11, the model for this sick new mode of terror which culminated in 9/11. Soleimani wasn't the chief of the Quds force at the time but the Guardian reports he was thought to have been in on it. We know he got promoted not too long after.
This list is just a little list. The beast's terrorism career extended across the world, with his involvement in attacks in India, in Thailand, in France. He's the creep who gave Hugo Chavez all that protection and entrenchment in Venezuela. Remember the bizarre assassination bid against the Saudi ambassador that originated in Texas? Him again. He never stopped aiming for the big atrocities. Let him explain them now as he meets his Maker.
Buy EoZ's book, PROTOCOLS: EXPOSING MODERN ANTISEMITISM
