Her the blog so hopefully she'll see the comments. And thanks.

For those of you who are familiar with the basic structures of international intelligence operations, you will recognize that the whole Arab-oriented Usama bin-Laden/al-Qayda/Saudi hijackers/Pakistani Intelligence Services financial support connection is what is known as a “back-story operation.” These types of operations are commonly set up over a period of several years and employed as smokescreens to completely divert the energies of investigators and researchers away from the actual intelligence organization(s) behind the operational details of ‘projects’ such as 9/11.

Now that the empirical and scientific details of the controlled demolitions on 9/11/01 have been conclusively proven in a variety of ways by physicists and engineers, the vital questions of who authorized and supervised the demolition wiring of those three buildings in NYC must now be honestly and bravely dealt with by the 9/11 Truth Movement, and this is when things start to get rough. Who would have the means and opportunity to wire up those buildings without being detected? This is the fairly dangerous and controversial area of research that my group has been concentrating upon, and the results are not very pretty. We will be making a careful and judicious presentation of our research at this site fairly soon (unless the brakes on our cars are ‘cut’ with plastique), but in the meantime I urge all 9/11 truthers to seriously educate themselves and their friends on the crucial demarcations and differences between secular, atheist Zionists and people of the Jewish faith who actually follow the Torah, for when the final truths about these 9/11 operations come out, I truly fear for the safety of my Jewish friends and relatives if such a program of enlightened, political education has not been launched. So, if any of you out there still wonder why people like Amy Goodman and Noam Chomsky won’t seriously discuss 9/11, it is because they in fact do know the horrible truths of 9/11 and are terribly afraid of the potentially horrific and violent backlash against innocent people of the Jewish faith by people of ignorant consciousness. The Zionists, in fact, would absolutely love such a backlash, but I beg you to not play into their vicious, duplicitous game. We will eventually win, but things are going to get pretty intense, more so than the usual intensity of this situation.

Warm regards to my comrades in truth,

Dr. Lazlo Toth

Dr. Toth,

You speak of the “...crucial demarcations and differences between secular, atheist Zionists and people of the Jewish faith who actually follow the Torah...”

Thank you for dividing one from the other so clearly, in your comments.

I have spoken of this before here. Zionists in Israel are a weird bunch. People view them as kooks. Generally they are poor and yet very adventurous zealots -- the folks who stake out illegal trailer encampment claims in Palestinian areas, demanding Israeli army protection for their rude and violent folly. Are these the Zionists you are referring to?

These folks are pitiable, at best. They will never rule the world, I can assure you. Lucky if they can successfully interact in normal society. In fact, for that achievement, most such people will need extensive therapy.

Are you afraid of ZIonists like that? Are these the folks your research will expose?

On another topic, have you noticed that disinformation works best when it can find an (imaginary) enemy for your opponent to hate? It is especially clever when it divides the very same opponent into camps.

Each camp can then suspect the other of being in the ranks of the imaginary enemy. Using your example, the question might become, "Is this a Torah following Jew, or a... God forbid... Zionist?"

If we get the imagination going, anything can happen. Why? Because the imagination is, basically, infinite. Also, it need not depend on fact, but only upon one's ability to project or imagine fears.

Divide and Conquer techniques usually make extensive use of this feature of human psychology.

The British made masterful use of this, as a means to take over the India -- dividing Hindus from Muslims in particular. Look what that later led to. They also did the same in the Palestinian lands.

How do you feel about that technique?

You are referring to a small subset of of Israeli Zionists as if Israel is not a Zionist state and as if there is not a substantial Zionist presence in this country, including individuals with dual Israeli-US citizenship who are or have been in high-level policy making positions OR have been influential in other ways, such as prominence in business and owners/ leaseholders of property directly involved in 9/11. Do you feel as though disingenuous arguments of this sort are effective persuasion?

I wonder if the people you refer to consider themselves Zionist. Often this is just a label.

Elitist and power mad people will use any cause to their advantage, including Zionism.

Disinformationists will use any label to their advantage, if it divides people into camps. Often the Zionist label comes in quite handy for that task. You might be able to think of historical examples of that. I think the 9-11 truth movement has had some experience of it too. Don't you?

In this case, I'm not particularly interested in what people label themselves, but in their actions. In this case, the action in question is support for a racist, imperialist apartheid state which has employed ethnic cleansing and terrorism. I'm against these things, and I oppose people who think they're acceptable. I refer to these people as Zionists.

To step outside the pussy-footing rhetorical conceit we've got going here, Student, I want to acknowledge that it can be hard to really look at American and Israeli Zionists as potential 9/11 perps because we want to protect the Jews we are or we love, either personally or simply as our fellow human beings. This is entirely understandable -- in fact, it has been my personal experience. Those two identities have been very effectively conflated as a means of shielding Zionists at the expense of Jews as such. This is the flipside of the disinformation technique to which you refer: conflate and mislead.

Casseia, you say, "In this case, the action in question is support for a racist, imperialist apartheid state which has employed ethnic cleansing and terrorism. I'm against these things, and I oppose people who think they're acceptable. I refer to these people as Zionists."

I feel the same way about it. If that is the right definition for Zionism, I too am very much against it.

I have noticed though that the label can be used for racist purposes. Also, it can be used, most ingeniously, to tarnish honest questioning into what happened on 9-11-01. You have seen that just as I have. I believe we are working against a foe who does make use of that technique.

From an earlier thread, a comment by Dr. Lazlo Toth:

"As Rabbi Yisrael Weiss has clearly pointed out – Zionism is completely antithetical to Judaism, hence right-wing Zionists are only masquerading as people of the Jewish faith. As a political and racial ideology, Zionism is essentially identical to Nazism and Fascism, only the arm-bands change, the genocidal features remain the same."

I will be interested to learn more of his views.

I do wonder why we need these labels. Are we not simply speaking of various powerful psychopaths who happen, in these several cases, to control aspects of various governments?

Why use any of these labels? Is George Bush a Zionist, or Dick Cheney? Rumsfeld? I think we may simply be dealing with very powerful maniacs.

That Zionism is to Judaism what Neoconservative is to Christianity. The problem with that statement is that several Neocons are Jewish. The way it has been explained to me is that a Zionist is a someone that believes in the protection of Israel no matter the cost. There are Christian Zionists as well as Jewish ones. There are Zionists living in the south (that make up a large portion of the Bush Base) that believe Israel needs to be "fruitful and multiply" in order for Jesus to return. BushCo has capitalized on that mindset to gain support for what they're doing in the Middle East.

But I still wonder about this Toth fellow's use of the term. I will be interested in how he brings out his views, in the blog he promised up there. Or here, if he wants to explain more in this thread.

If, when people are speaking of Zionists, they actually intend to include Christian Zionists, that may work OK.

But so very often the word gets used much as words like 'nigger,' 'jap,' 'wop,' 'dago,' and other such derogatory names are used. Like those, it offers a clear focus for unalloyed hatred. Surely you know what I mean. And then the 911 truth movement gets tarnished with that.

"Nazi" gets used pejoratively, too -- so does "fascist," "communist," "socialist," and even "feminist." Zionism refers to a political ideology; it does not refer to race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or any of the other attributes which comprise the identity of an individual.

Personally I am not too fond of any label for disliking someone. Sometimes it helps but often not.

Don't you agree that this term brings up hardened prejudices and so on? Don't you also agree that it is used for spreading dissention, even in the 911 truth movement?

I am not trying to legislate word usage. But I do wonder, and we all have seen a lot of this sort of thing.

Did you "dislike" the apartheid regime in South Africa prior to 1990? Did you "dislike" the regime of Pol Pot in Cambodia? This is POLITICAL and it is about IDEAS and not identities. Real political forces are at work behind the erroneous conflation of Jewish identity (as either ethnicity or religion) and a political movement. This conflation makes it much harder to oppose some very objectionable ideas -- and cui bono from that, do you suppose? OF COURSE many of the neo-cons are Jewish and many Zionists are Christians -- that's apples and oranges in all its citrus/non-citrus glory!

These are good points, in your post below this one.

Even so, I can't believe even a Wolfowitz is actually Zionist. He is, evidently, quite willing to trample anyone's life and interests if it suits him. He probably cares little for any Arab and would be glad to have Arab lands denuded of Arabs. That is ethnic cleansing, as someone used to call it in Eastern Europe.

Actually, I do not know that fellow. It does appear he acts cruelly. As do the others in that crowd. All of them, it seems, including of course Silverstein. Quite a collection, I agree. None of them is the least religious, of that I am sure. Nor do they really care about any given country, except as it benefits their pocket book. Or so it seems to me.

But they are just very ignorant people, who have somehow amassed great power -- by our own lack of attention really.

Amazingly, if a person is poor and a psychopath, he gets committed either to prison or a mental institution. If they are rich, we promote them to CEO positions and to top government roles.

I don't have any display trouble with stuff that gets pushed to the right margin but I know some people do -- please let me know if you can't read my response under the post you moved.

discussion of historical movements. The neo-cons represent a movement stemming from Leo Strauss at the University of Chicago, for instance -- it's a helpful label that identifies a group of people within a political/philosophical context that can be more fully fleshed out when appropriate (ie, it helps not to have to go into the career details of Strauss every single time you want to discuss the work of his various proteges.) The same is true of Zionism. There is no question we are dealing with powerful maniacs -- or sociopaths -- but these labels CAN be descriptive and not just pejorative. BTW, there is certainly overlap between neocons and Zionists.

See above for reply.

occupying Palestine, giving/denying citizenship based on ethnicity, and so forth? This just doesn't have anything to do with religion -- I'm starting to repeat myself here-- except that some people are promoting the ERRONEOUS idea that Zionism=Judaism. I have no idea if Wolfowitz and Silverstein are practicing Jews (and it's not any of my business, either) -- it is entirely irrelevent. I wouldn't presume to say Bush is not a Christian (although I reserve the right to think it loudly.) As political beasts, they behave according to political ideologies, not religions, and there is nothing hateful about identifying those political ideologies. That is what the "neo-con" label does, and that is what the "Zionist" label does.

You can judge for yourself whether Zionist is an appropriate label for him -- here's some background on Paul. I would say that he is, but he's more moderate than some (read: he has "compassion" for the Palestinians, but don't confuse that with wanting to give them their land back.) That website is an excellent resource.

Casseia, I am back at my desk and have just read your comments. I am again replying to an earlier post of yours so that it displays OK -- on my screen; others seem not to have this problem?

The link on Wolfowitz provided information I was unaware of. No person is one-sided including these folks. For instance, to me his girlfriend's name, Shaha Riza, looks very Iranian. The last Shah of Iran's name was Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi..., or rather, he changed it to that on assuming power. Surely she is Iranian, and (obviously, if that is true) an expat Iranian.

I guess our whole discussion of the Zionism term and issue comes down to how it gets used. You say, vis-a-vis Jews and Zionists, "Those two identities have been very effectively conflated as a means of shielding Zionists at the expense of Jews as such."

The conflation that I notice is similar. Someone shines light on the evident involvement of, say, Mossad in perpetrating or at least foreknowing the 9-11 atrocities. They speak of Zionism in that context. And then somehow or other the article quotes or links to some neo-nazi website which also says this about Mossad/Zionism and 911. Then and only then is when someone in the MSM notices this -- soley to link the whole 911 truth movement into that domain of dismal mental confusion. What a conflation.

In no way are the perpetrators unaware of this dynamic. In no way will the perpetrators not use this ugly conflation as a disinformation technique.

This is why I at least plan to make very little use of the Zionist label in promoting or discussing 911 truth.

I also will be most wary when I see some evidently erudite comments, such as those by Dr. Toth, which warn of how bad the backlash will be against Jews, once this Zionist-911 connection gets exposed. Please look carefully at his post for that, and see if you agree.

This warning of his reminds me all too much of how things got phrased back in the Middle ages, prior to a pogram. That is what I thought I saw in it -- not that he wants to start a pogram, but that he may, perhaps unconsciously, help conflate the 911 truth movement with something very ugly that it has nothing to do with.

I agree that Toth's post was very disturbing and I would like him to clarify, because it sounds like fear-mongering. On the other hand, I'm not ready to give up on the use of the word "Zionist" -- there are simply some cases where clear description seems to require it. For instance, I think Silverstein can be described as a Zionist. I'm not sure that he can be described as a neo-con, like many other prominent American Zionists who may have had a hand in 9/11.

We are on the same page.

Really it is the apparent fear-mongering that got to me. That, and the hint of a very familiar form of cultural racism. I made use of the Zionism terminology issue to bring those points out into the open.

Thanks for the useful discussion.

I would like to address ‘Student’ here, as well as the other good folks at this site, and just say that when I use the term ‘Zionist’ in my posts here or in other writings I am using it in its historical, academic sense, not as some KKK white supremacist might use it, which brings up the important issues of terms and terminology. If I say ‘Indian’ and you think that I am referring to a member of the Cherokee Nation, then the communication lines between us in our conversation about ‘Indians’ and classical ragas is going to be very confused and unproductive. There is an extreme difference between a Zionist in the proper historical usage of the term and a Jew, being defined as one who bases his conduct and life around the moral codes of the Torah and the large body of classical Rabbinical writings. Zionism, whose two principal founding fathers, Theodore Herzl and Chaim Weissman, were both confirmed atheists, began as a socio-political ideology in the 1890s as a response to the Russian Czarist pogroms of the 1870s and the Dreyfuss trials. The Rabbis of the time saw Zionism as a black heresy and you may see the Torah-based arguments for this put forward again by their theological descendents like the Naturei Karta Rabbis who burn Israeli flags in front of the U.N. in New York and in other cities like Montreal and London. In fact, I will give you here three websites, run by orthodox Jews, not Nazi KKK people, and you can let the Jewish Rabbis, themselves, explain to you in their articles the radical differences between Zionism and Judaism.

http://www.jewsnotzionists.org

http://www.nkusa.org

http://www.israelversusjudaism.org

Also regarding the problems with terms and shadings of terminology, the conflation of Zionism with Judaism is a very useful propaganda device on several levels. On one level, anytime anyone brings up the long history of war crimes committed by the government of Israel, they will immediately trot out the old “you’re anti-Semitic” dog and pony show in order to shut down any conversation about historical reality. Another highly misused term is ‘Semitic’, which refers to many ancient Near Eastern peoples and their languages. The Amorites, Akkadians, Aramaeans, Arabs and Hebrews are all Semitic peoples and all their languages are classified as Semitic languages, so if you hate Arabs, you are an anti-Semite. This is why I previously said that there are no greater anti-Semites than those who adhere to the socio-political philosophy of Zionism. I mentioned in a previous post that Zionism has a very nasty racist ingredient in it that is akin to Nazism. So as not to confuse anybody, I am not equating Jews with Nazis. Are we clear on this? I am not insane. I am only informing you of this so that these very real historical elements in the political ideology of Zionism can be seen without the usual sugar coating of false history and deception. Over the period of a century now, various pieces of Zionist literature have openly written of Arabs as an inferior race of dogs. Some of these horrifically ugly quotes, unfortunately, have shown up in the autobiographies of several Israeli prime ministers. I will not post these horrible and embarrassing quotes here, and I will simply refer you to the sampling found in the ‘Jews for Justice in the Middle East’ publication out of Berkeley, CA -- “The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict.” The racial philosophy of Zionism discussed in their writings developed into this weird mixture of Hitlerian, bogus 1930s German biology ‘master race’ stuff and the “God’s chosen people” concept taken to insane extremes. The people who accept this socio-political/racial ideology of Zionism are Not Jews, as has been explained, in great detail, not by myself, but by orthodox Rabbis going back to Maimonides. Just because your last name is Weinberg does not make you Jewish. To be Jewish means to accept a moral covenant with God. To see this difference between being Jewish and being a Zionist is also clearly illustrated below in the history of how LEHI, the Zionist military wing of Irgun, in 1941 offered its military services to The NAZIS! I am serious, I did not make this up.

My comments here and in my previous posts, with regards to Zionism and the question of Israel, are based upon a history that most people are wholly unaware of (and for good reason), a history nonetheless that is real and one that real historians, including Jewish ones such as Dr. Norman Finkelstein, are quite aware of. I do not make my comments lightly or frivolously, and I do not make them inspired by some kind of neo-Nazi nutcase hate agenda either. Also, at the outset, I would like to repeat that all of my many Jewish friends have always been Jewish, and none of them are Zionists. I would never hang out with someone like Paul Wolfowitz or heroin/weapons dealers like Richard Pearle, and neither would any of my friends.

Just as when you began researching and finding out about the hidden, yet real history surrounding 9/11, and you thought to yourself that you now know way too much, and that where the evidence is leading is somewhere you really might not want to go, so it is also quite like that with the study of what has gone on in the land of Palestine for about 100 years now. I did not want to find these things out, but when you study history, you often come across many horrible things that you wish you had not uncovered. For a frank, honest, and academically well-researched look at the history of Palestine for the last century, I highly recommend the following books:

1) “Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict”
by Dr. Norman G. Finkelstein

2) “Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History”
by Dr. Norman G. Finkelstein

3) “Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A History with Documents”
by Dr. Charles D. Smith -- This text is used at the university level in California and Arizona for courses in the history of the modern Middle East, including graduate level history courses at Stanford.

4) “The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict”
published by ‘Jews for Justice in the Middle East’ (Berkeley, CA) – This text is also used at the university level in California and Arizona for courses in the history of the modern Middle East.

5) “51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration With the Nazis”
by Lenni Brenner -- This volume is sold by Naturei Karta and gives the actual documentary history concerning the strange working relationships that various Zionist groups in Europe had with the Nazis. http://www.nkusa.org (Naturei Karta, USA)

Before we let Mahatma Gandhi, Albert Einstein, and Martin Buber weigh in on the situation, I want to be very clear, Zionism is a socio-political-militarist, racist philosophy, officially founded in 1897 in Basle, Switzerland by secular atheists. This ideology merely uses the religious cover of Judaism to both advance its secular real estate and resource control agendas, and at the same time to cover up the military and human rights crimes committed in the advancement of that agenda. It is the same religious con-game that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al. play, the “we’re all tight with Jesus” game. Thus, in reality, there were no Christians, Jews, or Muslims involved with the 9/11 operations, there were, however, many who dressed up in the garb of those faiths, and this is why we must be precise in the usage of terms and definitions. We must learn to separate the sheep from the wolf in the sheep’s clothing. Calling the wolf a wolf does not mean I am anti-sheep, no matter what the wolf told you my motive was.

One of the main criticisms that orthodox Rabbis have with the Zionist state is that the Jewish return from exile to the Holy Land was to be brought about through peace by the Messiah or Meshiah, but the secular Zionists decided to bring it about forcefully, using violence, terror, and deceit. Because of this, ‘Israel’ is cursed, and thus the Rabbis have said that there will never be peace there until there is real human justice. Along these lines, I found this quote by Mahatma Gandhi on the Palestinian situation:

“Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French...What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct...If they [the Jews] must look to the Palestine of geography as their national home, it is wrong to enter it under the shadow of the British gun. A religious act cannot be performed with the aid of the bayonet or the bomb.” – Mahatma Gandhi (quoted in “A Land of Two Peoples” edited by Mendes-Flohr)

Jewish Criticism of Zionism (these are only two of many, many quotes like this):

Albert Einstein – “I should much rather see reasonable agreement with the Arabs on the basis of living together in peace than the creation of a Jewish State. Apart from practical considerations, my awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the idea of a Jewish State, with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power, no matter how modest. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will sustain.”

Martin Buber (renowned, modern Jewish philosopher and writer) – “Only an internal revolution can have the power to heal our people of their murderous sickness of causeless hatred...It is bound to bring complete ruin upon us. Only then will the old and young in our land realize how great was our responsibility to those miserable Arab refugees in whose towns we have settled Jews who were brought here from afar; whose homes we have inherited, whose fields we now sow and harvest; the fruits of whose gardens, orchards and vineyards we gather; and in whose cities that we robbed, we put up houses of education, charity, and prayer, while we babble and rave about being the “People of the Book” and the “light of the nations.””

Both of these statements are quoted in Sami Hadawi’s “Bitter Harvest” and “The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict” published by ‘Jews for Justice in the Middle East’, (Berkeley, CA)

When I mentioned in my post that the ideology of Zionism also has a genocidal element in it, I wasn’t trying to spread hate speech or something. This is something you will clearly and unfortunately see if you study the history of this, and I was in fact actually referring to a comment made by Dr. Norman Finkelstein where he compared the century- long persecution of the Palestinian people to a long, slow genocide. I will not, in good taste, narrate for you here the absolute horrors of General Ariel Sharon’s Shaba and Shatila Refugee Camp Massacres in Lebanon in 1982, but to illustrate for you that I am not making all of this up, I will give you a single sample of another part of this history from the pen of an Israeli author describing what has become known as the ‘Deir Yassin Massacre of 1948’, and don’t turn your eyes away. I want you to read this.

“For the entire day of April 9, 1948 Irgun and LEHI soldiers (two Israeli guerilla groups) carried out the slaughter in a cold and premeditated fashion...The attackers lined men, women and children up against the walls and shot them...The ruthlessness of the attack on Deir Yassin shocked Jewish and world opinion alike, drove fear and panic into the Arab population, and led to the flight of unarmed civilians from their homes all over the country.” -- Israeli author, Simha Flapan, “The Birth of Israel”

If the Zionists were actually Jews, why would they offer their military help to the Nazis to fight against the British? Read on -- When it appeared that Britain, the power behind the Zionist movement since the early 1900s, appeared to be losing to Germany at the beginning of WWII, Future Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Shamir actually proposed an alliance with the Nazis! As Allan Brownfield wrote in “The Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs” (July/August 1998), “As late as 1941, the Zionist guerilla group LEHI, one of whose leaders, Yitzhak Shamir, was later to become a prime minister of Israel, approached the Nazis, using the name of its parent organization, the Irgun (NMO). Their proposal stated – ‘The establishment of the historical Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis and bound by a treaty with the German Reich would be in the interests of strengthening the future German position of power in the Near East...The NMO in Palestine offers to take an active part in the war on Germany’s side.’ ...The Nazis rejected this proposal for an alliance because, it is reported, they considered LEHI’s military power negligible.”

Again, if you want to see the documents on this, refer to, among several other sources, “51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration With the Nazis” by Lenni Brenner -- This volume is sold by the orthodox Naturei Karta group as well as Amazon.com and gives the actual documentary history concerning the strange working relationships and alliances that various Zionist groups in Europe had with the Nazis.

Along with Yitzhak Shamir, this same Zionist, terrorist organization – LEHI -- also counted as one of its members another future prime minister of Israel, Menachem Begin. Aside from all the village-to-village massacres of Palestinians like at Deir Yassin, this guerilla group was also responsible for the demolition of the section of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem where the entire commanding staff of the British military was headquartered. The LEHI operatives who planted the explosives actually dressed up as Arabs for that extra ‘false-flag’ effect so that the British would go after the Palestinians for the bombing, but the British didn’t take the bait, and that is how Yitzhak Shamir, Menachem Begin, and their friends became wanted terrorists by the British High Command in Palestine. This is all in the history books, people.

In conclusion, and in light of the above historical background and clarification of terminology, I want to simply explain the basic motive behind my previous post. I wasn’t trying to scare or disturb anyone here, although the information we deal with at this site is heavily disturbing enough. In the pursuit of honest research into the hidden elements of historical events such as 9/11, we are encountering and have encountered in the research process many people who are involved with sensitive operational details related to the events of 9/11. Many of these people have Jewish last names and have connections to the right-wing Likud Party in Israel and to the Israeli military and intelligence services. Other intelligence services are also certainly involved. This should not be new to any of you here. Anyone who says that 9/11 was “done by the Jews” is just completely ignorant about what is going on here, but nonetheless, because of this heavy Zionist/Neo-Con involvement, I was merely trying to point out that because there are many people out in America who think Zionist = Jew, I thought that before any more ‘inside’ 9/11 info comes out, we might want to educate ourselves and other people about the differences between Zionist and Jew so that innocent people do not unnecessarily suffer. As an analogy, because the whole war on terror is basically framed as a war against ‘crazy’ Muslims, there have been hundreds of thousands of Muslims now who have been recently and unnecessarily slaughtered because of a lie perpetrated based upon a misunderstanding of terms and terminology. My fear expressed in my post was thus not for the purpose of being a fear-monger, but is related to the very same reason why ‘Student’ brought up the subject of terms and terminology in the first place. Because the terms “Zionism,” “Semitism,” and “Judaism” are not properly understood and have been completely and commonly misused, often by people with sinister agendas (like FOX and CNN), we are unable in the Western world to have a civil, realistic political or historical discussion related to any of these things. Because of this improper usage and misunderstanding of terms, the secular, Zionist criminals who in fact did participate in 9/11 and its cover-up afterwards can use our discoveries of their crimes to label the 9/11 Truth Movement as ‘anti-Semitic’ (i.e. anti-Jewish), but if proper understanding of all three of these terms, through education, is conveyed, then people will no longer fall for these cheap tricks anymore. Are you going to call the Naturei Karta Rabbis anti-Semitic when you see them burning Israeli flags in front of the UN? They are not anti-Semitic, or anti-Jewish. Hey folks, they are Torah-reading Rabbis. You cannot get more Jewish than that. Maybe there is something going on here that you don’t understand. You have been lied to about everything else, right? Go look at their website with their protest march photos. They are protesting the crimes of the Israeli government, a government which is run by true anti-Semites, moral-free atheists, and true anti-Jews. Go look at their photos of troops from the Israeli Defense Forces beating the shit out of orthodox Rabbis in the Occupied Territories. The Zionists are the racist fanatics here. We are just historians calling a spade a spade, messengers with an uncomfortable, yet necessary message. If you still don’t believe me, check out the websites and books above. Peace to all of you. Sometimes the truth can hurt a lot.