jump to navigation

The USS Liberty Incident as a Basis for anti-Israel US Policy November 8, 2019

Posted by Tantumblogo in fightback, General Catholic, pr stunts, secularism, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church.

This post both got too long and is some deep-inside baseball stuff on small aspects of the conservative movement.  But, I’m a Youtube addict and this is a matter that is attracting much attention, there.  It has to do with fringe elements of the conservative movement among younger millenials and Zoomers and their criticisms of more mainstream conservatism. I agree with much of what they have to say but disagree on one particular element.  That’s not even true, I don’t mind changing US policy towards Israel, but I just don’t see how it’s germane to the other topics, or why it needs to be such a huge focus of their attention, and I think it is a very dangerous game that could lead to severe damage not just to these youngsters but the entire conservative agenda and even the re-election chances of Donald Trump. At any rate, the part on the Liberty is in italics, you can read just that if you want.  The whole thing is probably TL;DR.

I have seen a growing movement online among primarily young men – many of them under the influence of E. Michael Jones and also the  Youtube personality Nick Fuentes (who presents as an orthodox if not traditional Catholic) – who are vociferously criticizing slightly more mainstream conservatives such as Matt Walsh, Ben Shapiro, Charlie Kirk, and others at various public events.  They call themselves “groypers” and they advocate an “America First” vision of conservatism which is very similar to certain strains of pre-WWII conservatism in the US.  That is, they advocate for a much more isolationist foreign policy, they are extremely concerned over the threat posed to this nation’s culture (such as it is) and government by unconstrained immigration, legal and illegal, and they have very strong criticisms towards Israel that, at times, seem to tip into anti-semitism, though the “groypers” deny the charge.  While there is much to admire in this movement, I believe this anti-Israel stand is ultimately going to prove counterproductive and even destructive of their aims.

Tactically speaking, there is no way to get labeled an “alt-right” fascist quicker than to start throwing rhetorical bombs at Israel.  There is certainly room for criticism of US policy towards Israel, but given the bias in the media, the historical past, and the, how shall I say, extreme friendliness of the political/cultural elite in the current culture towards Israel and Zionism generally, making loud and very brash and broad criticisms of Israel is a very short path towards getting your movement labeled extremist, fascist, Nazi-like, etc.  That may not be fair, but it’s the reality.

As I said, there is much to admire in these “groypers.”  They are well organized, dedicated, and largely coherent.  I have no problems with, and indeed strongly concur on a number of the policy positions they advocate, especially those related to immigration.  I believe at this time and place in American history, we need to not only control illegal immigration but put in place a practical moratorium on legal immigration for a period of 20 or 30 years, to allow for assimilation of those teeming millions who have flooded our country over the past 50 years.  I also have no problem with a more coherent and thoughtful foreign policy that gets away from the “troops first, ask questions later” mentality of the past 18 years.  That has gotten us nowhere in terms of advancing American interests and has indeed led to the needless expenditure of trillions of dollars and thousands of lives.  It has left the Mideast much worse off, from a geopolitical standpoint, than it was 20 years ago.

But many Americans, myself included, are probably more than a little confused what Israel has to do with any of this.  The “groypers” claim that the US involvement in the Mideast has been done at Israel’s behest, but this is a case they are far from proving, and in fact they tend to resort to hand-waving very quickly when questioned.  When asked why the US should stop supporting Israel with – frankly speaking, relative to the federal budget – paltry sums of a few billions dollars a year (about $4 billion).  Most of that money winds up coming back to the US in the form of the purchase of defense hardware.

The ”groypers” frequently insist that Israel is not the US’ friend and that we have no business supporting them.  While this is a highly debated question and one I don’t need to go into now, one of their primary justifications for this claim is the USS Liberty incident.  In this, I’m afraid they err, and quite possibly, tip their hand more than they intend to.

The attack on the USS Liberty on June 8, 1967, is one of those incidents in history that has attracted far more attention and controversy than it has any right to.  A US surveillance ship in international waters was attacked by Isreali fighter aircraft on the 4th day of the Six Day War.  Israeli aircraft were constantly traversing this region of the Mediterranean going to and from targets in Egypt, whose military they obliterated in the course of a few days.  The USS Liberty was in the area under NSA orders to gather intelligence on both sides, but particularly the Egyptians, who used mostly Soviet hardware.  The ship was strafed and torpedoed repeatedly, with 34 men killed, 171 wounded, and the ship almost sunk.

Israel quickly apologized for the attack and paid some degree of compensation, but ever since, many people, including a number of the Liberty’s survivors, have claimed that the vessel was deliberately attacked by Israel, for what reason is never quite made clear, or makes much sense.  The US was at that time Israel’s largest and just about only ally.  How Israel would benefit from this attack is also far from clear. 

But, some survivors and those who feel the attack was deliberately made claim, Israel had to know it was a US ship!  It was flying an American flag!  Israel had been notified of the ship’s presence!  Unfortunately, the notification of the ship’s presence never made it to the Israeli Air Force and the squadron involved in the attack.  False reports of Egyptian ships shelling Israeli units in Sinai caused alarm in Israel’s chain of command.  Aircraft were dispatched to investigate.  They found the Liberty, and attacked.

But still, the flag!  They should have known it was a US ship!  Also, the Liberty was a converted freighter, which looks nothing like a warship.  They should have, they must have known. 

This is where a little knowledge of military history enters in.  In fact, misidentification of ships by aircraft is a constant, severe, and ongoing problem.  Air force pilots are rarely well trained in ship identification.  Even naval aviation pilots often make severe mistakes.  How severe? A few examples:

  1. British pilots attacked US ships in several of the Malta convoys during WWII in the same region – the Mediterranean.
  2. US pilots at Coral Sea, the Eastern Solomons, Santa Cruz, and the Philippine Sea constantly misreported attacks. The Japanese did the same in all these battles, and more.  The Japs sank USS Neosho, an 8000 ton oiler, at the Coral Sea, and thought they had sunk the USS Lexington, a 40,000 ton, 900 foot long aircraft carrier (they did, later).  US pilots reported sinking battleships and aircraft carriers when they had actually slightly damaged a freighter or a destroyer.  US pilots attacked US ships.  German pilots attacked Italian ships.  This kind of thing happened all the time.  There were literally dozens of such incidents. 
  3. At the invasion of Sicily, Allied warplanes attacked allied ships of the invasion fleet right off the coast, in spite being briefed that is exactly where they would be!

And these were largely aircraft piloted by very experienced men who were experts in identifying ships!  It goes to show how incredibly difficult it is to ID a ship from a fast moving aircraft.  And fast moving is very relative.  Those mistakes in WWII were made by men flying aircraft at perhaps 250 kts.  A jet fighter will be going twice that speed, making identification all the more difficult. During the infamous Gulf of Tonkin incident, Vice Admiral and later Vice Presidential candidate James Stockdale came within an ace of unloading his ordinance on a US destroyer, mistaking it for a North Vietnamese PT boat, which is about 1/6th the size of a destroyer. 

The same applies to the torpedo boats which attacked the Liberty.  While not as common as aircraft friendly fire attacks on ships, in the fog of war instances of “blue on blue” or accidental attacks by surface ships are still quite frequent.  During WWII, the motor torpedo boats – PT boats in US parlance – were a frequent source of accidental, US-on-US attacks.  One particularly famous incident was during the 2nd Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, when the US’ best battleship admiral in history, Willis Augustus Lee, had to make an emergency, plain-language, unencrypted call to the nearby PT boat squadron base to keep them from attacking his ships.  And that, too, was a close run thing.  Now, most of these same side surface ship attacks occurred at night, when visibility is of course much worse, but they have been known to happen at day.  So, what happened with the Liberty is not all that surprising.

And I think that’s one of the reasons this has become such a persistent conspiracy theory, one maintained, to a large degree, by some of the Liberty’s survivors.  If I’m right, their suffering and the deaths of their friends were the result of an accident, and thus devoid of meaning.  That’s a hard thing to take.  It’s too much for some people.  So, instead of accepting this likelihood, they have created a mythos that the attack was deliberate.

The “groypers”, almost every time they bring up Israel, have referenced this attack as a reason why the US should have a neutral, if not hostile, attitude towards that nation.  The Liberty incident seems to play a major role in their ideology regarding Israel.  But I think the evidence overwhelmingly indicates this an entirely false premise.

And, as I said, I think it’s a serious mistake tactically, and I think it points to some unfortunate biases that have crept into their thinking.  It is not an understatement to note that E. Michael Jones has laid much, if not almost all, of the blame for the current collapse of Christendom at the feet of the perfidious Jews.  Much of his analysis is based on conspiratorial reads of historical and cultural developments and points towards a deliberate destruction of that culture perpetrated by one group of people.  As I indicated above, many of these “groypers,” including two of their leaders, are very open about the degree to which they are influenced by Jones, which is far more than slightly.  Thus, it is perhaps not entirely surprising that some of those they are attacking react by calling them anti-semites. At least some of the “groypers” were previously involved in the increasingly marginalized “alt-right” of extreme racist and anti-Semite Richard Spencer.  The “groypers” purported outrage, then, at being called anti-semitic is perhaps at least somewhat disingenuous.

Again, this is not to say that all criticism of Israel is out of bounds, nor that it is unacceptable to suggest completely changing US policy with regard to that nation.  It’s more  how they’ve done it, and the degree to which they have made it such a focus of their rhetoric, exclaiming that those who support Israel are guilty of “dual loyalty” (a very old anti-semitic trope), etc.

I also have a problem with another aspect of their tactics, which is the zero-sum game mentality, which holds that in order for them to rise, they must tear others down.  Number 1 “groyper” Fuentes goes on for hours almost nightly about how they must essentially destroy the reputations and influence of the likes of Charlie Kirk, Ben Shapiro, Steven Crowder, Matt Walsh, Dan Crenshaw, etc., in order to “get a seat at the table” and advance this supposed “America-first” agenda.  Now, I can understand on some level this desire, as conservatism has been cursed for decades with leadership that is full of lying, self-serving fools who disdain the base and their views and only play at being conservative for long enough to get elected or their cushy, “Conservative, Inc”  jobs. Indeed, Fuentes does make some distinctions, and seems to recognize that some people are much more honest and convicted conservatives than others.  He seems to have particular ire for Charlie Kirk/Turning Point USA and Dan Crenshaw, who he thinks are RINO shills with no real conservative principles.  So, some of these people may need to be exposed.

But……….the “groypers” have laid traps for other, much more stalwart conservatives like Shapiro, Walsh, and Crowder.  I think this kind of internecine, destructive warfare is not helpful in the long run.

Which is why the thought has crossed my mind that some or much of this “groyper” movement might be plants – just as the leftists loved the “alt-right” and Richard Spencer and gave him a platform every chance they could, in order to try to discredit conservatives generally as hateful, fascist bigots.  I would not say I’m convinced of their being plants, not even close, really, but it is something I will continue to ponder as I observe the actions of the “groypers.”


1. skeinster - November 8, 2019

Jones’s “Fidelity” magazine was a quite good publication for years. He had a roster of excellent contributors and I read it with a lot of profit from the mid-80’s until about 1993, when he seemingly overnight fell into a fever swamp of conspiracy.

I finally gave up on it when he wrote an article about how the Jews invented the suburbs to break up the ethnic Catholic neighborhoods of the big cities.Attributing something that can easily be accounted for by human nature- that many ordinary people liked owning their own homes and having backyards and garages and schools with grass playgrounds and the post-war prosperity made that possible- to a plot was just not reasonable.

Observer - November 8, 2019

Jones’ detailed analysis of the composition of the ‘liberal elites’ who undermined the ethnic and largely Catholic communities of Philadelphia is pretty convincing!

Chapin - November 8, 2019

Yes, Observer, on this I would agree with you. In my view, Jones’ forte is sociology from a Catholic perspective. One is free to see it otherwise, but I do agree with you here.

He and I disagree completely on the status of the SSPX. Again, folks are free to disagree.

I used to get his magazine. Then once he wrote that Communism was dead. I was so surprised, that I called him on the telephone and asked him if he really believed that or if there was some nuance I was missing. He replied that he believed it. I just decided at that time that I couldn’t invest more time on his magazine. But I still think that he is worth reading if someone is so inclined.

H-town - November 9, 2019

Communism has been replaced by cultural Marxism. Perhaps that’s what he meant?

Matthew R. Schwartz - November 9, 2019

Communism never died. Read New Lies for Old by Anatoliy Golitsyn. It was published in 1984 as a warning to the West. To read his predictions for the near future if the West did not change its understanding of Communism was vital. I literally laughed aloud at the author’s conclusion then. Fast forward several years, I was respecting the author’s thesis for his impossible predictions were unfolding as he described. I was also cognizant this high level KGB officer and defector to the West warnings were dismissed by Western Intelligence years before. China is our current proof we did not learn.

Mark - November 9, 2019

skeinster, EMJ does wade in the fever swamp, but the book you refer to actually blames the WASP establishment with the help of the Jeeewwws, EMJ has some very insightful things to say but after while a lot of it is predictable and is the same old same old.

Arthur McGowan - November 10, 2019

Except that in THE SLAUGHTER OF CITIES, Jones quotes page after page of the plotters’ own writings on how they were going to bust up Catholic neighborhoods and, thus, Catholic political power. Like virtually all “debunkers” of “conspiracy theories,” your case consists entirely of suppressing facts.

2. Murray - November 8, 2019

…other, much more stalwart conservatives like Shapiro, Walsh, and Crowder.

Well, this is the unbridgeable gap, right here. There’s nothing remotely “conservative” about Shapiro et al, let alone stalwartly so. Mainstream conservatives in America are merely right-liberals who accept the same basic premises as left-liberals (that the purpose of politics is to achieve “maximum equal preference satisfaction” as Jim Kalb defines it), but just disagree on the best means to get there. So it’s not surprising that they have an almost unbroken 50-year record of failure in countering the leftist juggernaut; they really don’t have any basic philosophical differences with them.

Political conservatives are a close analog to “conservative Catholics”, who try to conserve orthodoxy while accepting all the changes that came in the wake of Vatican II. Like political conservatism, it’s a completely doomed project, but at least Catholics have had the clarifying experience of the current pontificate, and each day the ranks of “conservative Catholics” are dwindling as people finally choose one side or the other.

The groypers won’t deal the death blow to the intellectually bankrupt “conservative” project, at least not immediately, but they are doing invaluable work in exposing these worthless mouthpieces for the liberals they are. Illiberalism is the future, one way or the other, and I’m on the side of the groypers.

Dismas - November 8, 2019

Count me as someone who sees this in the same way you do, Murray. Of those named I have only paid a little attention to Shapiro. I rank him among those like Levin and Hannity. To apply the term “conservative” to these bozos is to demean the term. And, just as you say, they are analogues to “conservative” Catholics.

This is my introduction to the concept of “groypers” but from what I read from Tantum’s post – they interest me. I need to go back and read that post more thoroughly.

This topic is a “third-rail” and I doubt that I have much desire to enter into disputes about it. I have found that the topic of the modern state of Israel is a lot like Tradcatholicism. One walks around blind for a long time until their eyes are opened, and then things are seen in a different light. The evidence is everywhere and yet many who have seen it have not recognized it as such.

I need to read the post again.

Htown - November 9, 2019

It’s E. Michael Jones that is red-pilling so many of these groypers on Israel and the JQ. God bless and protect him! I urge Tantumblogo to read his books and watch his videos to understand what’s happening. He’s doing the work the Catholic Church has failed us since the ecumenical madness of the Judas Council.

Mark - November 9, 2019

EMJ’s problem is that he’s critical of Jewish influence in society and the interest groups that promote & protect that influence respond by calling him an anti-semite. If you listen to what he actually says, it’s really nothing more than what people in their group or people who support them say. Of course now, any “protected class” or identity group has a conniption fit if you even mention their name.

Htown - November 9, 2019

Today anti-Semite means any criticism ofthe Jews that they don’t like. So of course they’re going to call him an anti-Semite, even though he’s said repeatedly this issue has nothing to do with race but is theological (1 Thessalonians 2:14-16). He’s no more an anti-Semite than St. Paul or St. John. Jones brings a Catholic perspective to the JQ, and I think he’s the only one doing that. And he’s converted many “pepe’s” to the faith. We certainly can’t count on the Church to protect as anymore, since the Judas Council and Nostra Aetate.

3. Camper - November 8, 2019

Jews can be powerful folks. Apparently, Franco, who had some Catholic sentiment, either never recognized Israel, never sent diplomats, or was at least cold to the Jewish state. The most true article on Israel and anti-Semitism, and my personal favorite, is the following:


“They turned down my application [to the Masons],” he said, sighing deeply, “when they found out I was Jewish.”

4. Roland - November 8, 2019

make sure you watch this – and remember the only goal is the truth, wether you like it or not is not the issue!! the issue is to ferret out the TRUTH. Needless to say the truth can be elusive. The only truth is Jesus Christ,
putting that aside….be sure and watch…unless they (sic) have taken it down

Benjamin H Freedman speech UNEDITED VERSION! 1961

Zionist Jew converts to Catholicism and exposes Zionist Conspiracy

mattsixteen24 - November 10, 2019

Here’s the bitchute link. They will eventually censor your yt link.

5. c matt - November 8, 2019

You conflate “isolationist” with “non-interventionist”. The USS Liberty incident has little relevance, other than to serve as an example why the US should not be meddling in Middle East affairs. Buy their oil, sell them military equipment, or engage in whatever other private relationships you want with any country, but we should not be sending them taxpayer $$$. The fact they buy back military equipment from us with that money does not absolve it – a tax subsidy to the MIC. why not just have US citizens pay McDonnell Douglas/Boeing directly and cut out the middle men graft?

6. Roland - November 8, 2019

regarding the USS Liberty

<Make sure you get the truth

this is – was – the best description about the attack on the USS Liberty

The True Story of the USS Liberty – Important Documentary on Israel

take note that this link has been REMOVED by the powers to be
so YOU do not have access to the truth

you make up your own mind
just try and open it!!

7. Camper - November 9, 2019

I see why Tantum says the importance of the attack was limited. It makes sense, particularly considering how often ships have been attacked in modern times by friendly forces.

8. Camper - November 9, 2019

Apparently, Sister Sasagawa had another vision, this time with no mention of a possibility of avoiding a chastisement:

Has there been any other word of this?

Camper - November 10, 2019

Any word on this? Supposedly, Our Lady appeared and asked for everyone to “cover” themselves with ashes.

9. Pat should've been Pres - November 9, 2019

So what do these “groypers” think of Pat Buchanan ?

Murray - November 9, 2019

Broadly speaking, the groypers see themselves as the heirs to the Buchananite/paleocon movement. Like Buchanan, they are isolationist, or at least non-interventionist, they hold to a strict America-first standard, and they are critical of free trade and of unrestricted capitalism.

They go beyond Buchanan in their realism about race, and their willingness to speak openly about Jewish power.

Tantumblogo - November 11, 2019

Which, in and of itself, I have no problem with. The concern is that those who do so invariably get painted as anti-semites and white supremicists, which may be unfair, but may not make the painting any less damaging or harmful to the broader conservative movement. My concern is that forcing this issue right now – for no real reason other than to split some ideological hairs (this issue could be just as easily addressed 5 years from now, with a secured border and laws and enforcement mechanisms in place making hiring illegal immigrants impossible or extremely high risk) and ferret out further RINOs in the movement – will wind up handing a very powerful weapon to Trump’s (and this nation’s) enemies.

Furthermore they paint with too broad a bunch, and have far too much a zero sum game mentality. The groypers spend literally dozens of hours working out exactly how to frame an issue for maximum discomfort for the person on the spot. I have no problem blowing up obvious con artists like Charlie Kirk but most of the other targets are generally on the right side.

10. Binky - November 9, 2019

Normally I just love your stuff, but this one is off base.

“Conspiracy”? That’d all be very nice, except– Israel itself now openly admits the attack was deliberate, and that the boats & planes involved knew very well exactly what the USS Liberty was. The optics of the 1967 war were more important.

This is just ONE link of many out there.


11. vermontcrank1 - November 9, 2019

Much of his analysis is based on conspiratorial reads of historical and cultural developments and points towards a deliberate destruction of that culture perpetrated by one group of people.

Yes, it is a conspiracy and it began after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 when Rabbinical Judaism formed in opposition to Jesus and His Catholic Church.

The official paper of the Vatican, Civilta Cattolica, carried an excellent series about the Jewish Question in Europe but because the Catholic Church wrongly entered on the path of Ecumenism that treats the One True Religion on the same basis of false religions, none of these truths are spoken about anymore.

The sad reality is the fastest race in the west is a contest between Christians who can be the first to label another Christian anti semitic and Tantumblogo is the winner today.

Of course, the accuser never defines antisemitism because that would render it far less toxic because its undefined elasticity is stretched to include those whose legitimate opposition to rule by Messias-Deniers is always castigated and condemned.

Define anti semitism and it loses its usefulness.

In is absurd that putative Holocaust Deniers are imprisoned in Europe whereas in America the Messias-Deniers control the Media and The Federal Reserve and, as Patrick Buchanan noted, Congress is enemy occupied territory.

Conservatism Inc is bankrupt because it did not conserve one damn thing and, thankfully, younger men are washing their hands of that defeatist and demented ideology

12. vermontcrank1 - November 9, 2019

Late 19th century Papal Paper on The Jewish Question


Htown - November 9, 2019

Well said, Vermontcrank! I urge Tantumblogo and everyone to read the La Civilta Cattolica article from 1890 that you just posted a link to. It’s an eye opener.

13. Anonymous - November 9, 2019
14. Del - November 9, 2019

I agree with history, not because Jones said it. If you don’t like the conclusions of books like ‘ Jewish Revolutionary Spirit’ or ‘ Slaughter of Cities’ then try and refute them with historical references. Good luck. Jones has meticulously done his research. Don’t shoot the messenger.

15. Johnno - November 9, 2019

I believe the attack on the USS Liberty was a joint US/Israeli false flag operation. The argument made in this article falls apart once the fact that the Liberty was properly identified is admitted to. But the attack was ordered to continue anyway by Israel. Meanwhile other US ships were ordered to stand down and not to intervene while one of their own was constantly under attack by Washington. Thankfully, honest US soldiers decided to disobey that ridiculous order and the false flag failed. These are the details I recall. The point being that to blame this attack solely on Israel is wrong because the US was hand in glove with it. The US has its own selfish interests in the ME with whom Israel is a partner and both mutually benefit. But when these ‘conservatives’ play the same politically correct game by only singling out Israel without also pointing out American complicity, this is dishonest, but naturally one understands why this wouldn’t fly at any ‘America-First’ rallies.

Dismas - November 10, 2019

Well, Johnno, you and I understand the attack on the Liberty in the same way. I think this was more than “mistaken identity”. Israeli jets were doing fly-bys that morning and were close enough to wave at men on deck, those men being able to see the pilot’s faces.

In my mind the case is closed on the Liberty. It was a false flag that failed. It was intended to be sacrificed and sunk and blame placed elsewhere in order to ignite a larger war against the enemies of Israel. If it is acceptable to cite examples of similar historical events to defend a point-of-view, then there are plenty of historical “false flags” that would serve to defend this point of view.

This topic is quite extensive and complicated and not likely to be ironed out in this forum. Many good people regard Israel as “our best friend in the Middle East”. I don’t see it that way at all even though I held that viewpoint twenty-five years ago. So I understand why people see it that way and I am pleased to allow someone that viewpoint.

Tantumblogo - November 11, 2019

“Israeli jets” were flying 1000 sorties a day. So the odds that the wavers were the same people, or even from the same squadron, is pretty low.

For everyone of these purported giveaways that the attack was deliberate there are generally multiple explanations and past precedents. I find that generally one’s attitude towards Israel and Jews in general has quite a bit of bearing on this particular case. I’m slightly sympathetic to Israel on several grounds but wouldn’t be upset if they were defunded of US gov’t funds, but I think BDS goes much too far and would destroy the country.

My point with regard to the groypers is that this is not the battle to fight right now, and attempting to discredit allies of Trump for not being sufficiently ideologically pure could cost him the election. But these are fraught and difficult issues upon which, hopefully, people of good will can disagree in a friendly manner.

And, I actually think the groypers are doing really good work on many fronts. I was really tickled to hear them ask how support for sodomy advances the conservative agenda. Of course, “conservativism” conserves nothing, it just enshrines yesterday’s revolution, the real goal should be traditionalism in the classic European sense.

And, I’ve seen your e-mail and will get back. As if we didn’t have enough going on my son broke his arm this week. Generally though I’m happy to help the nuns. This week will hopefully be easier. Are you still in out of the country?

c matt - November 11, 2019

I think BDS goes much too far and would destroy the country.

You and the US government are free to not join in BDS (although the US seems to have no problem BDSing Israel’s enemies). But the US government has NO BUSINESS demanding that private citizens or anyone else refrain from BDSing Israel.

16. Percy - November 9, 2019

Avoid Jones on all topics Jewish. One can be hypercritical of US relationships with Israel and Saudi Arabia (a pair) with relying an iota on poisoned pens.

Htown - November 9, 2019

Why? Jones is the only Catholic scholar today willing to speak openly and accurately about the Jewish Question. He is doing the job of the Catholic Church, which has woefully failed us since the Judas Council and Nostra Aetate….and because of that, the West is now on fire.

Del Gue - November 9, 2019

Disagree Israel is not beyond criticism.

Roland - November 9, 2019

Percy, unfortunately your comments indicate that you’re woefully uninformed and misinformed. And also consider the ignorant on the whole JQ

Have you read Jones’s book the Jewish revolutionary spirit?

Have you read his book Barron metal?
First read them and having Denso point out any if any inconsistencies are present. The books are well researched with impeccable documentation

17. mattsixteen24 - November 10, 2019

Very common ignorance and denial about the talmudic mafia. That or this blogger is too afraid to speak the truth or knows the truth and is a zionist downplaying the antichrist cult who call themselves jews. He even acknowledges they have much power over the media and criticism of them will result in being labeled. So scary!

Yet, somehow the very people whose ancestors killed Christ, who beliefs are based off rejecting Christ, who are behind open borders policies (Soros), who are behind cultural marxism (Frankfurt School), behind communism (Marx) that has killed way more than the mythical 6 million, who openly admit they were responsible for sodomite psuedo marriage being passed, who are behind the neverending push for child murder, feminism, pornography, and every other perversion, and who have powerful influence on society (media/press, big tech) is not a cause for concern.

E Michael Jones always bring this article up in about every interview he does.

18. dad29 - November 10, 2019

One consistency: when P J Buchanan dared criticize Israel, he was smeared as an “anti-Semite.” Nothing new here, eh? Benny Shapiro picks up the same club and puts Buchanan into the same group as Spenser, Joe Sobran, and Ann Coulter (??!!).

Gee. What would John F Kennedy and ‘Lindy’ Lindbergh think? After all, both of them were also “America First” members.

The “anti-Semite” smear still works, although it’s getting VERY threadbare in flyover country.

(By the way, Crenshaw was perfectly willing to toss out ‘due process’ for gun confiscations. That’s “conservative”??)

Tantumblogo - November 11, 2019

I’m not a big fan of Crenshaw, but I find the process destructive and too broad based. I disagree this is a zero sum game.

19. dthy - November 11, 2019

If we really care about the Jews, we’ll pray for their conversion. A good prayer is this one to St. Paul, as follows:
Prayer to St. Paul for the Conversion of the Jews:
O holy Apostle Paul of Tarsus, from your glorious place in heaven, look down upon the race you loved so well. True it is that many of them remained deaf to your ringing words of truth, and that some of them even stirred up persecution against you and your fellow believers, but you were so devoted to your people that you willed to become a castaway for the sake of their conversion. Now that you are glorious in heaven, obtain for your brethren the grace of repentance and conversion, so that they may finally take their rightful place in the great family of the Catholic Church. AMEN.

Tim - November 11, 2019


20. jamesthe1st - November 11, 2019

Ben Shapiro is not one a Catholic should support. He’s said on record that he hold Christ to be nothing more than a common criminal.

Camper - November 11, 2019

Do you have a reference for that?

Htown - November 11, 2019

He called Christ just some Jewish rebel the Romans imprisoned and killed, on the Joe Rogan show.

Camper - November 12, 2019

Thank you. 🙂

Camper - November 12, 2019

He does good work for the Republican Party, but if his career died as a result, well… I’m sure the party could find a replacement.

I once criticized the tone of one of his articles on his website. It seemed to be that if one did not support Israel… mindlessly, then one was apparently equivalent to a neo-nazi. I was offended by the tone of the article and mentioned in the comments’ section that it was Orwellian. A Jewish woman there called me “Achmed”. Non-trad com boxes are such slug-fests.

mattsixteen24 - November 11, 2019
21. jamesthe1st - November 11, 2019

I’m not getting into the Israel support debate, but it is manifestly false when the notion is pushed that they are the only democracy/religious tolerance state in the region. Lebanon is also a democratic state with religious tolerance.

22. How Much Responsibility do the NeverTrump Rinos of the 2016-18 Congress Bear for this Impeachment Farce We are Enduring? | A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics - November 14, 2019

[…] I get very much what the “groypers” are doing.  I agree with much of it.  I just think their attacks are a bit broad and some parts of their […]

23. Antonia - November 20, 2019

For the sake of Jesus and avoiding rash judgment, please do not blame a whole group of people (“the Jews”) for the actions of some members or for actions in the past. While many Jews are leftists who are trying to drag our society into the abyss (probably unknowingly for most of them), it is their leftism that is the problem, not the ethnicity they inherited (or even, for religious Jews, the religion they inherited from their parents). Remember that being “Jewish” is an ethnicity, so Jews today should no more be blamed for things corporately than whites or blacks or Asians. People are sensitive to anti-semitism for very good reason, since Jews were severely persecuted over centuries, even by Christians.

I don’t like hearing trad Catholics bringing up the idea of some “Jewish question,” as if they were to be specially blamed. Remember St. Edith Stein (aka St. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross) and Mother Miriam of the Lamb of God!

Of course Israel as a country/government can be criticised for its policies. I don’t see hanging so much on one incident (the USS Liberty issue), however.

If secular Jews would take their religion seriously, they would be our allies in the culture war (like Dennis Prager & Ben Shapiro) and at least one more step closer to hearing the Gospel. I pray for secular & leftist Jews to come back to God the Father of us all, and for all our Jewish brothers & sisters to hear the good news of God’s Son and the Holy Spirit. St. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross and St. Paul, pray for us!

Steve D. - November 22, 2019

It’s not an issue of race or ethnicity, it’s a theological one. The Jews deny their own Savior, which makes them corrupt and revolutionaries. Read the Talmud.

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: