“They have no thought of building up a Jewish State in Palestine, so that they might perhaps inhabit it, but they only want a central organisation of their international world cheating, endowed with prerogatives, withdrawn from the seizure of others: a refuge for convicted rascals and a high school for future rogues.” – Mein Kampf
HITLER’S PREDICTION about the Jewish State is proving to be uncannily accurate, with the Israeli newspaper Haaretz now acknowledging that Israel has become a place of refuge for sex offenders.
Jewish rapists around the world have a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card. Its name is Israel.
One of Israel’s foundational laws is the Law of Return, which gives Jews the right to immigrate to Israel and become citizens — unless they are deemed a danger to Israeli society, security or the Jewish people. Israeli law, however, does not define what that means.
According to advocates for victims of child sex abuse, it is the exploitation of this law that has potentially made the country an unintentional haven for Jewish alleged sex offenders who flee here.
This issue of Israel becoming a haven, for those seeking citizenship or those who already have it, has taken center stage with the high-profile case of Malka Leifer. The headmistress of an ultra-Orthodox girls’ school in Melbourne fled to Israel in 2008 after allegations surfaced of her sexually abusing several of her female students. Leifer is facing possible extradition to Australia on 74 counts of suspected sexual abuse, including indecent assault of a minor and rape.
Look at this monstrous creature.
Exactly as Hitler foresaw, Israel has become a sanctuary for Jewish criminals.
“The Law of Return is basically why it’s so easy for people to come here,” says Shana Aaronson, the chief operating officer of Jewish Community Watch — an advocacy group for victims of child sexual abuse everywhere in the Jewish world, with offices in the United States and Israel.
“There is certainly more focus on whether or not the person is Jewish than there is on a possible criminal record,” she charges, alleging that criminal background checks run on individuals looking to immigrate are not as thorough as they should be.
Leifer’s case is by no means exceptional.
Jewish Community Watch says Leifer and Y.’s alleged abuser are among 65 people in the last decade, most of them either ultra-Orthodox or Orthodox Jews, who they know fled to Israel. They were either already Israeli citizens, began the immigration process here, or came and stayed here on tourist visas. Though they say it is impossible to be precise about the number of convicted or alleged child sex offenders seeking refuge in Israel, they believe about half of those 65 faced criminal charges concerning sexual abuse of children or have seen proceedings started against them in their home countries. The other half have been accused by alleged victims but not prosecuted.
A minister of the Israeli government even tried to use his personal influence to help this monster escape justice.
Leifer’s story became headline news in Israel again when it was reported in February that Israel’s deputy health minister, Yaakov Litzman — who, like Leifer, is ultra-Orthodox — had been questioned under caution by the Israel Police over suspicions that he tried to use his influence, including the use of threats, to get state psychiatrists to have Leifer declared mentally unfit for trial (in order to block her extradition). Litzman has denied any wrongdoing.
The description of the Haredi community here echoes that of traditional “antisemitic tropes,” suggesting that those tropes were grounded in reality, not fantasy. It’s certainly noteworthy that these Jews regard even the “Jewish State” as “other” and that they treat an imprisoned sex criminal as a “captive” to be “redeemed” just like a hostage.
These are the kind of warped moral judgements that inevitably arise from an ethical code rooted in an In-Group/Out-Group concept rather than universal standards.
“In closed communities like the ultra-Orthodox establishment, protecting the community has been considered [of] higher importance than protecting those harmed by a sex abuser,” says Avigayil Heilbronn-Karlinsky, founder of Lo Tishtok (Hebrew for Thou Shalt Not Be Silent), an organization that works to raise awareness in the ultra-Orthodox community about sexual abuse.
…In the ultra-Orthodox community, of which Heilbronn-Karlinsky is a member, the law of the land is regarded as secular, she explains, and deemed as “other,” even foreign and hostile. And in some communities, even reporting alleged crimes is seen as unacceptable because of the centuries-old prohibition of mesirah — which prohibits Jews from turning in other Jews to non-Jewish authorities for fear they would not be treated fairly. However, that said, Jewish tradition also maintains that protection should not be given to someone deemed dangerous to the community.
A recent fundraising effort to help Leifer, launched by a Hasidic rabbi, speaks to that sentiment of mesirah, with the Haredi public being asked to help “redeem a captive.”
The Jews were happy to give the Hollywood treatment to the sex abuse scandal within the Catholic Church. No doubt they are already hard at work on scripts exposing the sex crime that is rampant within their own community, and the place where those criminals find refuge: Israel.
* * *
Source: Diversity Macht Frei
Bilderbergers? Globalists? Let’s Call Them What They Really Are: Jews
Attacking the Bilderbergers will not cause you to be banned from Facebook or Twitter, much less cause you to lose your job.
by Hadding Scott
Christopher Cantwell attended the protest outside the annual conference of the Bilderberg Group, this year at Chantilly, Virginia, where he interviewed several protesters, all of whom avoided saying anything explicit about race or Jews. Two of them were associates of Alex Jones, from whom one obviously could not expect much. Cantwell then gave this little speech wherein he indicated that Jews were the real problem.
This needs to be said, because “the Bilderbergers,” “the Trilateral Commission,” and “the Council on Foreign Relations” have been used for decades as substitute terms by people like the John Birch Society who are paralytically frightened of saying the word Jew — even where it is the only correct word to use.
For example, the talkshow host Lionel, who makes frequent appearances on Russia Today, is clearly highly averse to saying anything negative about Jews qua Jews, or about even Jews qua Zionists. When RT’s reporter Caleb Maupin (who knows his stuff) recently said on Lionel’s YouTube show that Israel was behind the trouble in Syria, Lionel instructed Maupin that he must not say this; he must say that it is about oil or a pipeline instead. Well, unsurprisingly, on the same day that Cantwell posted his speech to the protesters, Lionel told audiences on YouTube and on Russia Today that the Bilderbergers were tier one of the globalist conspiracy, or words to that effect.
There is no social stigma or penalty incurred by criticizing the Bilderberg Group but the strongest possible discouragement against any criticism of Jews.
Little by little, however, that prohibition against criticizing Jews has been losing its power. It is an intimidation that is destroyed through overt defiance. When somebody responded to Cantwell by calling him an anti-Semite, Cantwell said, “I am, yes!” and continued unfazed.
* * *
Source: National-Socialist Worldview
Netanyahu: Hitler Never Wanted to Kill Jews Until He Spoke to the Muslim Mufti of Jerusalem
It’s easy to revise imaginary atrocities; no such “burning” ever took place, of course.
PRIME MINISTER Benjamin Netanyahu sparked public uproar when on Wednesday he claimed that the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, was the one who planted the idea of the extermination of European Jewry in Adolf Hitler’s mind. The Nazi ruler, Netanyahu said, had no intention of killing the Jews, but only to expel them.
In a speech before the World Zionist Congress in Jerusalem, Netanyahu described a meeting between Husseini and Hitler in November, 1941: “Hitler didn’t want to exterminate the Jews at the time, he wanted to expel the Jew. And Haj Amin al-Husseini went to Hitler and said, ‘If you expel them, they’ll all come here (to Palestine).’ According to Netanyahu, Hitler then asked: “What should I do with them?” and the mufti replied: “Burn them.”
Netanyahu’s remarks were quick to spark a social media storm, though Netanyahu made a similar claim during a Knesset speech in 2012, where he described the Husseini as “one of the leading architects” of the final solution.
The claim that Husseini was the one to initiate the extermination of European Jewry had been suggested by a number of historians at the fringes of Holocaust research, but was rejected by most accepted scholars.
The argument concerning Husseini’s role was recently mentioned in a book by Barry Rubin and Wolfgang G. Schwanitz, “Nazis, Islamists, and the Making of the Modern Middle East.” The authors, like Netanyahu, draw a straight line between the mufti’s support of Hitler and the policy of the Palestinian Liberation Organization under Yasser Arafat.
But even these two researchers do not claim that the dialogue described by Netanyahu ever took place. They say Hitler reached the conclusion to exterminate the Jews because of his desire to nurture Husseini, who opposed the transfer of Jews to pre-state Israel.
* * *