A Leauki's Writings
Published on August 4, 2010 By Leauki In War on Terror

Irish national hero Daniel O’Connell said in 1846:

Ireland has claims on your ancient race, it is the only country that I know of unsullied by any one act of persecution of the Jews.

What is left of Daniel O’Connell?

During the Great Potato Famine in the mid-19th century, the Rothschild family were among the biggest contributors to food and other aid. It certainly seemed prudent of the Rothschild bankers to support a country and a nation that was so friendly towards Jews.

The same Rothschild family also bought land in what was then the Ottoman Empire for Jewish settlement in Israel.

Jewish-owned land continued to grow bigger as the Jewish National Fund and individual Jews bought more and more land and finally, when the British won World War I and the Ottoman Empire shrank, none of the peoples formerly ruled by the Turks except the Arabs and the Jews were granted independence.

At that point the Jewish settlers, the native Jewish population of Israel, and allied Bedouin clans and the Druze owned almost the entire coast line of Israel as well as most of the Galil and Jerusalem (under Ottoman rule a Jewish city) and the Negev desert.

That land became the state of Israel in 1948.

The Arab states immediately attacked the newly founded state.

The Irish Times, in a move that is certainly not antisemitic in nature, has decided that Jews can only live on land they bought if Europeans grant permissions but only if it remains clear that the land is still the property of the non-Jewish seller. Jewish neighbours are then an "expense".

Europe, as a whole, decided to assuage its guilt in the cheapest possible way – by meeting the Jewish need for a sanctuary at someone else’s expense.

It piously hoped that Israel would be nice to those whose land it had been granted, but it was tacitly grateful that the historic consequences of the Shoah would essentially be played out elsewhere.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2010/0608/1224272053591.html?via=rel?via=rel

Apparently Jews cannot own land.

Here is a picture of a JNF Blue Box showing how much land the JNF alone had bought in the area of what was then the British territory of "Palestine" in the 1940s.


Those are JNF holdings alone. The Rothschild holdings were merged into the JNF holdings after independence and individual Jews also owned and lived on land in Israel, some of them for over 3000 years.

That land plus the Negev desert became the independent Jewish state of Israel in 1948. Most land owned by Jews outside Israel’s borders was taken away from the Jewish owners and given to, presumably, the "rightful" (aka non-Jewish) owners.

And when Jordan invaded the new country Jews were expelled from Jerusalem. Reclaiming lost property in Jerusalem remains a controversial issue in the sense that Jews reclaiming property the Jordanians took in 1948 are considered thieves by the “international community”. There is no such controversy about abandoned Arab-owned land in Israel, which in contrast to Jewish-owned land remains Arab-owned.

The point with the Irish Times article is that it openly, in a major Irish newspaper, defends the thesis that land bought by Jews remains the property of the non-Jewish seller and that Jews can only live on their land because Europeans grant them permission. It hasn't been like that since the middle ages in Europe. In Ireland it's becoming normal opinion now.

For the longest time I was wondering why the world accepts that lands bought or owned by Jews in the middle-east outside Israel are apparently not Jewish property for some reason. But I thought that at least where Jews are owners and sovereign our property would be safe.

During the potato famine the Irish didn't have a problem with accepting help from the Rothschilds, the same family that bought so much land in what was then the Ottoman Empire. Apparently what Jews buy is the Jews' to give away, if the Irish can eat it. But if the Jews want to consume what they buy themselves, they can only do so with permission by the Europeans and have to accept the "fact" that what they bought remains the seller's property.

The land the JNF and others bought is now the place where almost all middle-eastern Jews live. They were expelled from Iraq, from Syria, from Egypt and other Arab countries. It’s good to know that they were welcome in Israel, a land "granted" to the Jews because of the Holocaust, not because Jews bought the land decades before the Holocaust or because middle-eastern Jews have a right to live somewhere, but because Europe was so nice to Jews.

Just imagine, if we (Zionists) had not spent money to safe the Irish during the famine we could have bought more land for Jewish settlers in Israel. And the Irish could happily claim that the land we bought remains the seller's property and I wouldn't have to be upset at them for accepting our help but refusing to acknowledge our right to buy and own land.

It just goes to show that many (or perhaps most) people do not feel gratitude for those who help them in need but rather despise them, maybe for making them feel like they owe something.

There won't be another potato famine in Ireland, thank G-d. But if it happened again, I would still support sending aid again, just like in the 19th century. But I will know that there won't be gratitude, or even respect for our equal rights. We will still be the people who are only allowed to live on land we buy because the Europeans grant us permission. And we will have to accept that what we buy remains somebody else's property. We still have to help.

Isn’t it great that Great Britain "allowed" us to live on land we bought? And how nice of Britain to train, equip and lead the Transjordanian army when it annexed Jerusalem and expelled the Jewish population in 1948. And don’t forget the Great Britain also made Hitler’s friend Muhammed Al-Hussainy the “Grand Mufti” of Jerusalem, whose nephew later founded the PLO terrorist group.

Considering that Britain gave all the other land to Arab rulers without regard to non-Arab inhabitants, it was indeed "great".

And isn’t it great that some of the same people we helped when they were in need now officially denounce our right to own land we bought, ironically bought with money from the same source used to buy food for Ireland?

Go to hell, Irish "peace activists" and bloodthirsty media.

We buy land. We own land.

Get fucking used to it.

What the British did to Ireland ultimately bought them undying support for their border drawing games in the middle-east. And what the Rothschilds did to help Ireland ultimately bought us contempt for our rights.

And yes, we have a right not to be attacked from Gaza and impose a weapons embargo on the territory.

Get fucking used to that too.

The land Jews were "granted" was the land the Jews bought. And the Jews were nice to "those whose land they had been granted", i.e. the Jews.

To many Irish the term "never again" doesn't mean "never again support antisemitism and genocide against the Jews. It means never again making the mistake of failing to finish the job.

Dublin’s main street is named after Daniel O’Connell.


Comments
on Aug 04, 2010

Anyway, if I really need that kind of news I can read "Der Stuermer". Perhaps the Irish media don't understand German and never knew that most of their discoveries about Jews have already been made 80 years ago by the Germans.

However, the old German articles are sometimes written more politely and allow for a Jewish ability to cheat and steal rather than reducing all Jewish achievements to being gifts from Britain and Europe.

 

on Aug 04, 2010

From Wikipedia:

With pleasure I say that the Stürmer, more than any other daily or weekly newspaper, has made clear to the people in simple ways the danger of Jewry. Without Julius Streicher and his Stürmer, the importance of a solution to the Jewish question would not be seen to be as critical as it actually is by many citizens. It is therefore to be hoped that those who want to learn unvarnished truth about the Jewish question will read the Stürmer.

Today  the Irish Times will do.

 

on Aug 04, 2010

I wonder why it took you this long to realize that newspapers are written by the liberal dregs of society.  It matters not whether it is the Dublin Times or the LA Times.  But their views do not reflect the views of the majority they purportedly serve.

20 years ago, you had no choice.  Today, we have many choices.  That is why the Grey Lady is hemorrhaging red ink faster than a hemophiliac.  And Newsweek just got sold for a buck.  NO ONE IS READING THEIR PROPAGANDA.  They do not need to read Der Stuermer to know when the paper is not worth bird cage liners.

on Aug 04, 2010

Dr Guy
I wonder why it took you this long to realize that newspapers are written by the liberal dregs of society.  It matters not whether it is the Dublin Times or the LA Times.  But their views do not reflect the views of the majority they purportedly serve.

It didn't take me long.

I just hadn't realised the extent of the problem. That article was not just an example of a left-wing bias or plain normal antisemitism. MOST left-wingers are too politically correct to spell out in detail that they believe that Jews shouldn't be allowed to own land.

I find the LA Times quite OK.

 


20 years ago, you had no choice.  Today, we have many choices.  That is why the Grey Lady is hemorrhaging red ink faster than a hemophiliac.  And Newsweek just got sold for a buck.  NO ONE IS READING THEIR PROPAGANDA.  They do not need to read Der Stuermer to know when the paper is not worth bird cage liners.

In Ireland the older people see through the media propaganda. The younger ones become "activists".

 

on Aug 04, 2010

You confuse "liberal" (small el) with Liberal.  The former are your rank and file folks.  The ones you meet on the street, who bleed with compassion and love everyone and sing kumbay-yah before bed every night.  The latter is the ruling class that KNOWS what is best and KNOWS how things just HAVE to be done in order for humanity to survive.  They are the Napoleons and Snowballs.  And they are part of the media.  The ruling class.

You have just noticed that the papers have become more honest (less deceitful) in expressing THEIR world views.  That it was happening long ago probably went un-noticed as most young people do not care to spend much time on such matters - too much else to do.

liberals are fine in moderation.  Liberals are the source of every dictators power - the people who KNOW everything, so to question them is instant death.

on Aug 04, 2010

liberals are fine in moderation.  Liberals are the source of every dictators power - the people who KNOW everything, so to question them is instant death.

I like eating sandwiches.

Hence I eat sandwiches where ever that is possible.

Liberals like questioning authority.

Hence liberals criticise whomever allows them to question their authority.

 

on Aug 05, 2010

Hence liberals criticise whomever allows them to question their authority.

Emphasized for effect.

on Aug 05, 2010

Emphasized for effect.

You got it.

That's why the left works so well with the Islamic fundamentalists.

Islamic fundamentalists do not differentiate between themselves and G-d. They believe they are just as infallible. And they obviously don't allow criticism of their authority. On the other hand you have the left-wing activists, who want to question authority, an easy target, and powerful allies. It's a match made in heaven.

 

Meta
Views
» 619
Comments
» 8
Category
Sponsored Links