Neither Islam, Nor Israel:

Against Both Islamism And Zionism

 

Dr. Jim Saleam

 

This is an edited of an address given to the 2011 Sydney Forum on October 8 2011. It is published because of the ongoing attempt by certain satellites of the Liberal Party to persuade patriotic people to follow an agenda obsessed with Islamism and in favour of Zionist warmongering.

 

 

My address today is one that asks you to think to grasp ideas hidden by fog. My address is one of lateral thinking. And I aim to incite questions.

 

After the fall of communism, the western elites, those concealed rulers of our world, were sure of their ultimate triumph. There seemed no competitors – even unappetising ones. They wanted to extend the boundaries of the market empire, to destroy all cultures, to create economic man, that bio cog in a vast machine of trade and commerce. Super-profits forever, nirvana –the New World Order.

 

But there was still a number of hold out societies. India and China had joined the global economy, even if they could not be globalised politically. Russia broke free. There was also the Islamic world.

 

The globalisers had played with Islamic radicals in the 1980’s when they funded them to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Now there was blowback. These Islamists looked at the USA and they saw a state a little like the USSR in some ways – materialistic, imperial, hypocritical, in both its religion and its irreligion.

 

So against the USA they went to war and the USA went to war against them.

 

And the opportunity! The existence of this new enemy gave the free market empire, this New World Order, a chance to interfere in the Islamic world. To break it open as a market. To seize its oil. To serve Israel and protect Israel, the guilty little false-moral symbol of Western liberalism.

 

In the 1990’s, elite academic and opinion-maker forces identified a new enemy for the democratic globalisers – it was Islamism. Sometimes they called it Islamo-fascism because it was violent and it disliked Israel. One could demonise this enemy and crusade against it that way. They said Islamo-fascism had a basis in Nazism and it wanted to kill the Jews and that it associated we ‘westerners’ with the Jews and wanted to kill us all. Our ‘Judaeo-Christian’ world was the enemy of the Islamo-fascists they said, of these utter primitives. Why? We Judaeo Christians supposedly represented a type of God derived civilisation superior in both its traditionalism and its liberalism. But in secret the  elites knew they could break the Moslem world open for the market economy by going to war against Islam in the name democracy, the essential political creed of Judaeo Christianity.

 

The world was set for the war on terror. When the system decided that, it simply needed all sorts of political allies and dupes. It had to convince wide sections of society that such a war was good. It had to create a false politics to get us to fight the Islamists.

 

The people here, in part, not completely of course, belong to a type of would-be pro Australian political camp. We are not internationalists. We are like others in many countries who’d like to put their own people first. We tend to be a little suspicious of those who come to a society and then work against it (as the Islamists do). So, finally, we also became one target-market to be (hopefully) co-opted into the evolving system of the New World Order and its plans for war.

 

Is Islamism A Problem For Australia?

 

Islamism is a problem for Australia. But we must quantify the problem. I say that it is a problem chiefly of immigration. If Islamists can’t migrate and if they can’t find an implanted community to mobilize – then there’s no problem on Australian soil.

 

What is interesting and is a contradiction as big as the proverbial elephant in the room, is that our establishment – which is pro Israel and as such for the ideology that controls our Jewish community, Zionism – allows Moslem migration. And that the Jewish community is for it too. Indeed, officially for the Zionist leadership of Australian Jewry, the more mixed Australia is, the better it is. In fact, they say it is better specifically for the Jews.

 

Whatever views the Zionists might have is suspicious, but it hardly precludes the thesis that Islamism is a threat to Australians. But what sort of threat?

 

Islamism is paraded in our media as a threat to the position of Australia in world affairs. Our masters tell us it challenges our values (you know – drugs, sex, porn gay rights, feminism and our freedom of do what we want to do as long as we render to Caesar ..) Our masters say, among other things, that the Islamists hate Americans and Australians and Westerners generally because we have these wondrous things and because of that we should attack Iraq (which had nothing to do with Islamism) and invade Afghanistan and interfere in every Moslem country on earth.

 

Once again, I think that Islamism is a threat to Australia, but not for those reasons.

 

I think there is evidence of something else.

 

An official Taliban publication warns Australia that it will have to assimilate into a dominant Asia, or face the prospect of being overpowered and forced to take Asia’s population overspill. The choice is spelled out in a 2008 issue of the online Taliban monthly magazine, Al Sumud (Steadfastness), whose lead article offered a sweeping view of a post-war order in which a Taliban-ruled Afghanistan becomes a moral pivot for a pan-Asian renaissance an anti white union,  that will coincide with the decline of white Western powers.

"The end of European leadership in the world will place the white settler diaspora in Australia before two choices," writes the author, Mustafa Hamid, a former senior al-Qaeda member who in 2001 married Australian Rabiah Hutchinson, a Sydney mother with links to Islamic extremists. "It can either return to its motherland in Europe or reconcile with its Asian surroundings and assimilate into it as a wealthy and active member."

 

Otherwise, he cheerfully warns, a lengthy conflict will ensue in which Australia will necessarily be overpowered "by Asian waves that are better armed and more numerous."

 

"There is no doubt that the huge growth in the population of Asia, together with its economic and military development, will make Australia into lebensraum - to use the European term," writes Mr Hamid

 

So I can’t abide Islamism. Yet, I won’t advocate that we support those who wish to attack Moslem countries, because it should already be clear that these folks have another agenda. The question arises: how was it that anyone of a patriotic disposition could become convinced that Israel any sort of friend in all this and that attacking Moslem countries was a good idea? How was the Zionist factor played out?

 

What Is Zionism?

 

Zionism is an ideology, designed by certain Jews, that justifies the seizure of Israel and its occupation as a Jewish state. Zionism politicised Judaism and twists Judaism into a formal ideology of supremacism. The only thing modern about this type of supremacism is its methods of control and manipulation. The idea that some God allows murder and genocide to take a country and give it to a chosen group who may do as it pleases because others once persecuted it (albeit supposedly for no reason) – is perverse to the extreme. Zionism actually creates dual loyalties for Jews. I agree with Gilad Atzmon, a man of Jewish origin, who said recently that this ideology reduces all right and wrong to what is supposedly right or wrong for Jews as defined by the Zionists. They have to cling on to the possession of that which they stole in Palestine by any and all means.

 

Zionism is a part of Western elite politics. Its madness is considered normal by western liberals. These Zionists may be racist, murderous, genocidal, be just like Hitler was said to be – but are seen as liberal and humanistic and essential allies by western elites. Supporting Israel is a principle, a sustaining moral ethos for those who rule our country. And it is schizoid. It means that support things in Israel done by the Zionists that they condemn anywhere else. They have a right to do this as they are the front line against the new Nazis in white robes. Politicians like Rudd and Gillard and Abbott are pro Zionist to the bootstraps.

 

The Big Takeover

 

I said before that the nationalist groups found themselves targeted for co-ordination for the war on terror.

 

I will now speak specifically.

 

In the 1990’s a series of parties emerged in many European (I don’t just mean European continent) countries. They were in favour of national preference over immigrants, wanted more democracy, were for free enterprise but protection of old industries and the jobs of locals and the well being of pensioners and so on. In Europe they were sceptical about parts of the EEC etc. Names like the Progress Party (Denmark) (Norway) and early this century the Freedom Party (Austria) and the People’s Party (Switzerland). They also look and sound a little like One Nation too.

 

These parties offered no real ethnic definition of European-ness, nor did they seek to leave either NATO or the world economic order. They offered no real sense of political change, but were a protest against the elites. You might say they were feel-good sort of parties that offered a voting alternative to people. Under the right sort of leadership they could be taken in other and shall we say – more radical – directions. But someone else was looking too.

 

And here we see a paradox, as big as that elephant again. Most of us are not supporters of these hedonistic these I mentioned that define Western liberalism. We live better lives. So the establishment said: you look a little more conservative, so we’ll re-craft that for you with our Neo-Conservative ideology inspiring us at the heights and you can play politics down below with that as our basic ideals permeate your brain. So you serve without even being aware that you serve.

 

Neo-conservatism arose everywhere in one way or another from the early 1990’s and finally took office with George Bush and John Howard. And a swathe of groups became loyal followers of the regime without knowing it.

 

The model what was had occurred in Italy in 1993. A party called the Italian Social Movement (MSI) was taken over.

 

A man called Gianfranco Fini said that the MSI needed to become modern, the old thrown out the door. Things tailored to the public and not with esoteric messages. There’d be no more criticism of New World Order capital and there’d be support for Israel which was standing up against the Islamic terrorist nuts. Fini opted to support capitalism. A nationalist party turned into its opposite, but it soaked up a lot of nationalist minded people and held them. It joined in coalition with Berlusconi. In the end – paradox – it advocated voting rights for immigrants as long as they weren’t Moslems – whoopy doo.

 

In 1999 the British National Party was taken over. Nick Griffin said that if this party became more modern, more ‘mainstream’ in its approach, it would become a mass party. It had to get rid of jarring people and racist ideas and anti capitalist ideas and embraced Israel – the Zionists would give it good publicity and they would rise. Yes, yes, but rise as what?

 

After 2003 the Austrian Freedom Party was split. Leader Haider was pushed aside as the party joined the government of the Christian Democrats. They had to swear not to seek to reverse immigration, or the EEC They did nothing. The CD’s wore them out. And last December they went to Israel to swear the Jerusalem Declaration which said that European civilisation could only be understood through the prism of Israel, this project of civilisation.

 

In Holland, Pim Fortuyn emerged. He wasn’t conservative, with a religious twist, but someone who said that Holland should be free of Muslims ‘cos they interfered with gay rights and drugs. He left a legacy: Geert Wilders who is taking us to the wilderness. He crosses both lines. He attracts conservatives and gays, drug users and family folks.  For Wilders, he has in his own words, two countries – Holland and Israel. As a signatory to the Jerusalem Declaration, he says that Israel is not the problem in the Middle East but the solution.

 

Eventually, all these parties became horses for courses. If circumstances warranted, they were religious – on the other occasions, liberal.

 

The key point was Islamic immigration which they were critical of (but like the system they basically wanted to integrate them!! WTF?) and the reality of world politics was Israel. It was thought that Israel and the Zionists internationally were allies in he fight to stem the tide at the Gates of Vienna.

 

In Australia – It Was Dirty

 

And Australia was not immune from the process either. There were verbal and electronic attacks made upon your MC here today; there was the attempt to takeover the old Australia First Party and when that failed a pro Zionist clique tried to wreck it; there was the attempt to politically eliminate several key nationalist minded personnel from Australia First and other circles. There was the attempt to takeover One Nation (which had results)

 

It got very dirty. Friends were turned against each other and groups divided.

 

The same line appeared here. The mainstream is yours if you see Moslems under the bed and praise Israel and the media won’t say you are fascists.

 

I contributed to a booklet: The Liberal Party And Its Satellites. I commend it. The groups that adopted the anti Islamist ideology looked to the Liberal Party as some sort of source-pool for members, alliances, support, whatever. The Liberals could hold out the idea that they might become really hard men like the satellite group. There are no end to these anti Islamist groups here – from the Q Society to the Australian Protectionists.

 

Weakness of ideological position allowed the takeover. The softer the original line, the easier it was for the takeover by this alien line that would tie a whole generation of popular protest and embryonic nationalism – to the establishment with its evil plans for war. Like for the two trillion dollars worth of rare minerals in Afghanistan and the oil of Iraq and now Libya. And the war it may fight with non nuclear armed Iran for the nuclear armed Israel.

 

Storm In Tea Cup Or Major Factor?

 

An Australian historian called Mosler wrote:

 

“History . . . to Australians is something that happens to someone else in a faraway lands and cultures. The cosmology of Australians is benign; they will be able to engage in a life of endless recreation and pleasure, for wars, revolutions, violence and social conflict do not happen in or to Australia. If social unrest embraces the region, Australia will be exempt. The historical process for the Australian nation will continue to be blessed by the great benevolent (Christian) God that has always protected them, and the need for serious, adult, communitarian and collective social policy is not pressing, or indeed, not an issue that should cause any anxiety. In the twenty-first century, however, history will happen to Australians and when it does they will consequently be unprepared, bewildered but ultimately forced to respond." (Australia, the Recreational Society, Westport, CT: Praeger, 2002, p. 4.)

 

No history happens and can happen here. In a way, the neo-cons have helped to bring it here – no less than any other number of woes imposed upon our country.

 

The contention of Islamism and Zionism shows us that we can and we should take the hazard of Australian independence, the forbidden idea.

 

I am one of those who demands an independent nationalist politics to create a nation-wide nationalist party. In deciding upon foreign policy we can see that Islamism presents a certain threat and Zionism because of its internal influence, another type of threat.

 

Neutrality doesn’t mean ignoring. It means taking a position of neutrality by excluding both, curbing both and by correcting problems so neutrality can be maintained. That is why we say neither Islam and Israel, against Islamism and Zionism.

 

I will take your questions.