Tuesday, 28 January 2025

 # The crimes of Winston Churchill


[Crimes of Britain](safari-reader://medium.com/@write_12958?source=post_page-----c5e3ecb229b3--------------------------------)


Churchill was a genocidal maniac. He is fawned over in Britain and held up as a hero of the nation — voted ‘Greatest Briton’ of all time. Below is the real history of Churchill. The history of a white supremacist whose hatred for Indians led to four million starving to death. The man who loathed Irish people so much he conceived different ways to terrorise them. A racist thug who waged war on black people across Africa and in Britain. This is the trial of Winston Churchill, the enemy of all humanity.


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1180/1*oS4WnfpthqOwWK48kE3zOw.jpeg)


**Afghanistan:**


Churchill found his love for war during the time he spent in Afghanistan. While there he said “all who resist will be killed without quarter” because the Pashtuns need “recognise the superiority of race”. He believed the Pashtuns needed to be dealt with, he would reminisce in his writings about how he partook in the burning villages and peoples homes.


> _“We proceeded systematically, village by village, and we destroyed the houses, filled up the wells, blew down the towers, cut down the great shady trees, burned the crops and broke the reservoirs in punitive devastation.” — Churchill on how the British carried on in Afghanistan, and he was only too happy to be part of it._


Churchill would also write of how “every tribesman caught was speared or cut down at once”. Proud of the terror he helped inflict on the people of Afghanistan Churchill was well on the road to becoming a genocidal maniac.


**Cuba:**


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1400/1*_M0QsoyZqx5F40ObZqJZGg.jpeg)


Churchill wrote that he was concerned Cuba would turn in to “another black republic” in 1896. By “another” he was referring to Haiti which was the first nation in modern times to abolish slavery. Haiti has been punished for doing so ever since.


**Egypt:**


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1280/1*CHm4o2fvc5WNqGHzs9zXOQ.jpeg)


“Tell them that if we have any more of their cheek we will set the Jews on them and drive them into the gutter, from which they should never have emerged” — Winston Churchill on how to deal with Egypt in 1951.


**Greece:**


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1240/1*gtdhbEHhOYTJPomsxjUv_w.jpeg)


The British Army under the guidance of Churchill perpetrated a massacre on the streets of Athens in the month of December 1944. 28 protesters were shot dead, a further 128 injured. Who were they? Were they supporters of Nazism? No, they were in fact anti-Nazis.


The British demanded that all guerrilla groups should disarm on the 2nd December 1944. The following day 200,000 people took to the streets, and this is when the British Army on Churchill’s orders turned their guns on the people. Churchill regarded ELAS (Greek People’s Liberation Army) and EAM (National Liberation Front) as “miserable banditti” (these were the very people who ran the Nazis out). His actions in the month of December were purely out of his hatred and paranoia for communism.


The British backed the right-wing government in Greece returned from exile after the very same partisans of the resistance that Churchill ordered the murder of had driven out the Nazi occupiers. Soviet forces were well received in Greece. This deeply worried Churchill. He planned to restore the monarchy in Greece to combat any possible communist influence. The events in December were part of that strategy.


In 1945, Churchill sent Charles Wickham to Athens where he was put in charge of training the Greek security police. Wickham learned his tricks of the trade in British occupied Ireland between 1922–1945 where he was a commander of the colonial RUC which was responsible for countless terror.


In April 1945 Churchill said “the [Nazi] collaborators in Greece in many cases did the best they could to shelter the Greek population from German oppression” and went on to say “the Communists are the main foe”.


**Guyana:**


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:930/1*kH2B3iYu_BgOLek8DWsHrg.jpeg)


Churchill ordered the overthrowing of the democratically elected leader of ‘British Guiana’. He dispatched troops and warships and suspended their constitution all to put a stop to the governments nationalisation plan.


**India:**


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1400/1*7kRsKBrOJqVbFb5UqdddVA.jpeg)


> _“I’d rather see them have a good civil war”. — Churchill wishing partition on India_


Very few in Britain know about the genocide in Bengal let alone how Churchill engineered it. Churchill’s hatred for Indians led to four million starving to death during the Bengal ‘famine’ of 1943. “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion” he would say.


Bengal had a better than normal harvest during the British enforced famine. The British Army took millions of tons of rice from starving people to ship to the Middle East — where it wasn’t even needed. When the starving people of Bengal asked for food, Churchill said the ‘famine’ was their own fault “for breeding like rabbits”. The Viceroy of India said “Churchill’s attitude towards India and the famine is negligent, hostile and contemptuous”. Even the right wing imperialist Leo Amery who was the British Secretary of State in India said he “didn’t see much difference between his [Churchill] outlook and Hitler’s”. Churchill refused all of the offers to send aid to Bengal, Canada offered 10,000 tons of rice, the U.S 100,000. Churchill was still swilling champaign while he caused four million men, women and children to starve to death in Bengal.


Throughout WW2 India was forced to ‘lend’ Britain money. Churchill moaned about “Indian money lenders” the whole time.


==The truth is Churchill never waged war against fascism. He went to war with Germany to defend the British Empire. He moaned “are we to incur hundreds of millions of debt for defending India only to be kicked out by the Indians afterwards”.==


In 1945 Churchill said “the Hindus were race protected by their mere pullulation from the doom that is due”. The Bengal famine wasn’t enough for Churchill’s blood lust, he wished his favourite war criminal Arthur Harris could have bombed them.


When India was partitioned in 1947 millions of people died and millions more were displaced. Churchill said that the creation of Pakistan, which has been an imperialist outpost for the British and Americans since its inception, was Britain’s “bit of India”.


**Iran:**


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1150/1*X7gGWzrLLfK4fuZAovqGTg.jpeg)


> _“A prize from fairyland beyond our wildest dreams” — Churchill on Iran’s oil_


When Britain seized Iran’s oil industry Churchill proclaimed it was “a prize from fairyland beyond our wildest dreams”. He meddled in Iranian affairs for decades doing his utmost to exclude Iranians from their natural resources. Encouraging the looting of the nation when most lived in severe poverty.


In June 1914 Churchill proposed a bill in the House of Commons that would see the British government become become the major shareholder of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. The company would go on to refrain from paying Iran its share of the dividends before paying tax to the British exchequer. Essentially the British were illegally taxing the Iranian government.


When the nationalist government of Mohammad Mosaddegh threatened British ‘interests’ in Iran, Churchill was there, ready to protect them at any cost. Even if that meant desecrating democracy. He helped organise a coup against Mosaddegh in August 1953. He told the CIA operations officer that helped carry out the plan “if i had been but a few years younger, I would have loved nothing better than to have served under your command in this great venture”.


Churchill arranged for the BBC to send coded messages to let the Shah of Iran know that they were overthrowing the democratically elected government. Instead of the BBC ending their Persian language news broadcast with “it is now midnight in London” they under Churchill’s orders said “it is now exactly midnight”.


Churchill went on to privately describe the coup as “the finest operation since the end of the war [WW2]”. Being a proud product of imperialism he had no issue ousting Mosaddegh so Britain could get back to sapping the riches of Iran.


**Iraq:**


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1400/1*Gv3o-IVznfqiZFGRMX1-HA.jpeg)


> _“I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against the uncivilized tribes… it would spread a lively terror.” — Churchill on the use of gas in the Middle East and India_


Churchill was appointed ‘Secretary of State for the Colonies’ in 1921. He formed the ‘Middle East Department’ which was responsible for Iraq. Determined to have his beloved empire on the cheap he decided air power could replace ground troops. A strategy of bombing any resistance to British rule was now employed.


Several times in the 1920s various groups in the region now known as Iraq rose up against the British. The air force was then put into action, indiscriminately bombing civilian areas so to subdue the population.


Churchill was also an advocate for the use of mustard and poison gases. Whilst ‘Secretary for War and Air’ he advised that “the provision of some kind of asphyxiating bombs” should be used “for use in preliminary operations against turbulent tribes” in order to take control of Iraq.


When Iraqi tribes stood up for themselves, under the direction of Churchill the British unleashed terror on mud, stone and reed villages.


Churchill’s bombing of civilians in ‘Mesopotamia’ (Kurdistan and Iraq) was summed up by war criminal ‘Bomber Harris’:


> _“The Arab and Kurd now know what real bombing means within 45 minutes a full-sized village can be practically wiped out, and a third of its inhabitants killed or injured, by four or five machines which offer them no real target, no opportunity for glory as warriors, no effective means of escape”. — Arthur ‘Bomber’ Harris._


**Ireland:**


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1200/1*YGdogVlOmnhj9h9qHxRLzQ.jpeg)


> _“We have always found the Irish a bit odd. They refuse to be English” — Churchill_


In 1904 Churchill said “I remain of the opinion that a separate parliament for Ireland would be dangerous and impractical”. Churchill’s ancestry is linked to loyalism to Britain. He is a direct descendent of the ‘Marquis of Londonderry’ who helped put down the 1798 United Irishmen rising. He would live up to his families reputation when it came to suppressing revolutionary forces in Ireland.


The Black and Tans were the brainchild of Churchill, he sent the thugs to Ireland to terrorise at will. Attacking civilians and civilian property they done Churchill proud. Rampaging across the country carrying out reprisals. He went on to describe them as “gallant and honourable officers”.


It was also Churchill who conceived the idea of forming the Auxiliaries who carried out the Croke Park massacre. They fired into the crowd at a Gaelic football match, killing 14. Of course this didn’t fulfill Churchill’s bloodlust to repress a people who he described as “odd” for their refusal “to be English”.


He went on to advocate the use of air power in Ireland against Sinn Fein members in 1920. He suggested to his war advisers that aeroplanes should be dispatched with orders to use “machine-gun fire or bombs” to “scatter and stampede them”.


Churchill was an early advocate for the partitioning of Ireland. During the treaty negotiations he insisted on retaining navy bases in Ireland. In 1938 those bases were handed back to Ireland. However in 1939 Churchill proposed capturing Berehaven base by force.


In 1941 Churchill supported a plan to introduce conscription in the North of Ireland.


Churchill went on to remark”the bloody Irish, what have they ever done for our wars”, reducing Ireland’s merit to what it might provide by way of resources (people) for their imperialist land grabs.


**Kenya:**


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1400/1*npMOgpnzoqmKPeUFYpi92g.jpeg)


Britain declared a state of emergency in Kenya in 1952 to protect its system of institutionalised racism that they established throughout their colonies so to exploit the indigenous population. Churchill being your archetypical British supremacist believed that Kenya’s fertile highlands should be only for white colonial settlers. He approved the forcible removal of the local population, which he termed “blackamoors”.


At least 150,000 men, women and children were forced into concentration camps. Children’s schools were shut by the British who branded them “training grounds for rebellion”. Rape, castration, cigarettes, electric shocks and fire all used by the British to torture the Kenyan people on Churchill’s watch.


In 1954 during a British cabinet meeting Churchill and his men discussed the forced labour of Kenyan POWs and how to circumvent the constraints of two treaties they were breaching:


> _“This course [detention without trial and forced labour] had been recommended despite the fact that it was thought to involve a technical breach of the Forced Labour Convention of 1930 and the Convention on Human Rights adopted by the Council of Europe”_


The Cowan Plan advocated the use of force and sometimes death against Kenyan POWs who refused to work. Churchill schemed to allow this to continue.


Caroline Elkins book gives a glimpse into the extent that the crimes in Kenya were known in both official and unofficial circles in Britain and how Churchill brushed off the terror the colonial British forces inflicted on the native population. He even ‘punished’ Edwina Mountbatten for mentioning it, “Edwina Mountbatten was conversing about the emergency with India’s prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, and the then colonial secretary, Oliver Lyttleton. When Lyttleton commented on the “terrible savagery” of Mau Mau… Churchill retaliated, refusing to allow Lord Mountbatten to take his wife with him on an official visit to Turkey”.


**Palestine:**


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1400/1*QypRbC0Cjh7O9UlPGP4ZVA.jpeg)


> _“I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger.”_


In 2012 Churchill was honoured with a statue in Jerusalem for his assistance to Zionism.


He regarded the Arab population Palestine to be a “lower manifestation”. And that the “dog in a manger has the final right to the manger”, by this he meant the Arabs of Palestine.


In 1920 Churchill declared “if, as may well happen, there should be created in our own lifetime by the banks of the Jordan a Jewish State under the protection of the British Crown which might comprise three or four millions of Jews, an event will have occurred in the history of the world which would from every point of view be beneficial”.


A year later in Jerusalem he told Palestinian leaders that “it is manifestly right that the Jews, who are scattered all over the world, should have a national centre and a National Home where some of them may be reunited. And where else could that be but in this land of Palestine, with which for more than 3,000 years they have been intimately and profoundly associated?”.


At the Palestine Royal Commission (Peel) of 1937, Churchill stated that he believed in intention of the Balfour Declaration was to make Palestine an “overwhelmingly Jewish state”.


He went on to also express to the Peel Commission that he does “not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place”.


Four years later he wrote of his desire for a ‘Jewish state’to be established after the second war world. The establishment of the colonial settler state however was done by the British Labour Party under Attlee, who were always there to back their Tory counterparts when it came to British foreign policy.


**Russia:**


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1268/1*XqWwcA56iQVtgVB049u2pA.jpeg)


Churchill’s hatred and paranoia about communism saw him suggest that an atomic bomb should be dropped on the Kremlin. He believed this would “handle the balance of power”.


**Saudi Arabia:**


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1200/1*ufN4jiOUtWHhMbm_eSdSVw.jpeg)


> _“My admiration for him [Ibn_ _Saud] was deep, because of his unfailing loyalty to us.” — Churchill_


Prior to 1922 the British were paying Ibn Saud a subsidy of £60,000 a year. Churchill, then Colonial Secretary, raised it to £100,000.


Churchill knew full well of the dangers of wahhabism. He gave a speech to the House of Commons in 1921 where he stated that Ibn Saud’s followers “hold it as an article of duty, as well as of faith, to kill all who do not share their opinions and to make slaves of their wives and children. Women have been put to death in Wahhabi villages for simply appearing in the streets… [they are] austere, intolerant, well-armed and bloodthirsty”. He was however content to use the House of Saud’s twisted ideology for the benefit of British imperialism.


Churchill went on to write that his “admiration for him [Ibn Saud] was deep, because of his unfailing loyalty to us”. He showered Ibn Saud with money and presents — gifting Ibn Saud a special Rolls-Royce in the mid 1940s.


**South Africa:**


![](https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1400/1*bu8VgqX0tC6HGTzuGe8m3A.jpeg)


Thousands were sent to British run concentration camps during the Boer wars. Churchill summed up his time in South Africa by saying “it was great fun galloping about”.


Churchill wrote that his only “irritation” during the Boer war was “that Kaffirs should be allowed to fire on white men”.


It was Churchill who planted the seed to strip voting rights from black people in South Africa. In June 1906, Churchill argued that Afrikaners should be allowed a self-rule which would mean black people would be excluded from voting.


He went on to state to Parliament that “we must be bound by the interpretation which the other party places on it and it is undoubted that the Boers would regard it as a breach of that treaty if the franchise were in the first instance extended to any persons who are not white”.


**In conclusion:**


There have been a number of attempts to rehabailtate the image of the British Empire in Britain in recent years. Particularly via the medium of cinema. The film _Darkest Hour_ didn’t show you anything about Churchill’s crimes. On the contrary it presented him as a hero. Gary Oldham won an Oscar for his portrayal of one of the most evil, imperialists ever.


British Nationalist groups in Britain hold Churchill up as their posterboy. And so they should. He was a racist to the core. In response to migration from the Caribbean to Britain he said England should “be kept white”. Throughout worl war two his cabinet obsessed over British people viewing American Black GI’s favourably. They were concerned that they would fraternised with white English women. A true believer in white supremacy, Churchill blamed the Native American and Aboriginal Australian people for their genocides. He said he did “not admit that a great wrong has been done to the red Indians and the black people of Australia.”


Winner of the Noble Prize in Literature, Churchill actually plagiarised his most well known speech from an Irish Republican called Robert Emmet who was hanged and then beheaded by the British in 1803. Winston’s famous “we shall fight them on beaches” line was lifted from Emmet’s _speech from the dock._


When it came to his own fellow Brits he was less than complimentary and displayed a deep hatred for the working classes. He suggested “100,000 degenerate Britons should be forcibly sterilised”. And that for “tramps and wastrels there ought to be proper labour colonies where they could be sent”.


It needs to be put once and for all that Churchill was despicable, racist, war criminal. Some will argue his “sins” are expiated for his actions during the second world war. It is nothing but nonsense to suggest Churchill went out to fight fascism. He lauded Mussolini as a “roman genius”, donated to Nazi war criminal Erich Von Manstien’s criminal defence and sought to desperatly cling on to the British Empire from which Hitler himself took inspiration for his Reich. What we have to remember is Churchill was not a uniquely villianous British Prime Minister. He was not out of ordinary but in fact a true representation of Britain.

 

Trump signals he may defy hardliners and talk to Iran (bad for Israel?)

A different approach? This is clearly not what the hawks in the US and Israel want, and even conservatives in Tehran are wary.

Become a VT Supporting Member Today

Please keep VT Radio and VT Foreign Policy alive! Donate today to make sure VT stays on the internet free and clear of Big Tech control! Donate today: 

Please Donate - Click Here

Defying speculations about a re-instated “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran, the U.S. President Donald Trump has messaged his preference for a diplomatic solution to the tensions with Tehran.

On Fox News’ “Hannity” show on January 23, Trump said that the “only thing” he insisted on was that Iran “can’t have a nuclear weapon.” Significantly, he didn’t mention anything about Iran’s regional policies or its conflict with Israel, nor did he express any inclination to bomb Iran or change the regime in that country.

Given that Iran’s leaders themselves have repeatedly emphasized that they do not seek nuclear weapons, an agreement between Washington and Tehran should look eminently possible.

Indeed, after the election of the reformist president Massoud Pezeshkian, Tehran has likewise consistently telegraphed its readiness to re-engage in diplomacy. The Vice-President for Strategic Affairs Javad Zarif, whom some in Tehran refer to as the “kingmaker” behind Pezeshkian, expounded on Iran’s new, more collaborative vision in recent essays for Foreign Affairs and The Economist, and further articulated it at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland last week.

Despite the apparent political will on both sides, however, the path to the deal is anything but straightforward. The context differs significantly from 2015 when the nuclear agreement known as JCPOA was concluded between Iran and the world powers that effectively curbed Iran’s nuclear program.

After Trump withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018 and Biden failed to restore it, Iran has steadily advanced its program. That includes, among other steps, uranium enrichment to 60%, a level creating an option of swiftly enriching to 90% (weapon-grade level), and installation of more advanced centrifuges. According to the nuclear expert Kelsey Davenport, Iran can now produce enough weapons-grade material for five to six bombs in about two weeks.

Concerns over these developments are exacerbated by the limited access the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has had to Iran since 2021, increasing the risk of unmonitored dispersion of nuclear material to covert sites.

What complicates matters further is shifts in the Iranian nuclear discourse. The official line remains that Tehran is not seeking weaponization — the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s fatwa (a religious edict) prohibiting nuclear weapons is still in force. However, a number of regional setbacks, such as Israel’s battering of Iran’s Lebanese ally, the Shiite militia Hezbollah, and the downfall of the Assad regime in Syria, another key cog in the Iran-aligned “axis of resistance,” has created powerful incentives for Iran to obtain a nuclear deterrent.

Officials and policymakers now openly hint at a possibility of rethinking Iran’s nuclear doctrine towards threshold weaponization. Israeli Prime-Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s bellicosity pushing to seize the moment of Iran’s perceived weakness to attack the Islamic Republic directly (with American help, as Israel has no such capability on its own), only further incentivizes Tehran to go down that road.

This set of considerations only underscores the magnitude of the task of dealing with Iran. The technical negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program are going to be long and protracted given the advanced state of Iran’s nuclear program. They would also need to be embedded in a broader regional strategy that addresses Iran’s security concerns — alongside other players in the Middle East — reducing the incentives to obtain a nuclear deterrent in the first place.

Khamenei decided to greenlight diplomacy with the U.S.: Iran’s ailing economy necessitates some form of sanctions relief, and that won’t be forthcoming without some sort of a deal with the U.S. The dividing line is not about whether to engage with the U.S., but how to do it.

The more forward-looking elements, mostly represented by the Pezeshkian’s reformist administration, favor reaching out to Washington pro-actively in order to shape the future negotiations. But their more conservative opponents insist that since the U.S. was the party that abandoned the JCPOA, it must take the first step to regain Tehran’s trust.

Besides, these hardliners see little strategic incentive in trading away Iran’s nuclear leverage in exchange for a highly uncertain sanctions relief. Meanwhile, the conservatives are also confident that a recently signed strategic partnership with Russia, especially its clauses related to military and security cooperation, can provide Iran a measure of deterrence against future attacks from Israel and/or U.S.

The proponents of waiting for a U.S. move seem to be having, for now, an upper hand in the internal debates in Tehran. The reformists, however, believe that simply waiting for a U.S. proposal is a mistake and a waste of time. They assess, likely correctly, that Trump is keen on a quick deal to burnish his peace-making credentials — now that a swift end to the war in Ukraine seems highly implausible, Iran could prove to be a low hanging fruit.

A limited, framework deal modeled on the one Trump signed with North Korea in his first term could serve as a blueprint, and as Iranian diplomatic sources reckon, could be prepared in a couple of weeks if a political decision is there.

There are legitimate concerns, even among those who would consider such a course of action, about the feasibility of a more substantive follow-up to such a deal. However, even a limited deal, ideally followed by a highly symbolic step, such as a handshake between Trump and Pezeshkian, would already be massively de-escalatory, discourage the spoilers from the pro-Netanyahu lobby, and gain time and political space to negotiate a sustainable, substantive deal addressing the Iranian nuclear program, sanctions relief, and even broader regional situation.

While diplomacy with the U.S. is still in an exploratory stage, Iranians have already engaged with the EU and E3 (Britain, France, Germany). Tehran doesn’t entertain any hope that the EU/E3 will be either willing or able to restore the JCPOA on their own, without the U.S. The purpose of meetings is to prevent them from playing spoilers, such as snapping back the UN Security Council sanctions against Iran before the deadline in October 2025. UK and France, as both members of the UN Security Council and signatures of the JCPOA, can invoke that snapback, and it is not subject to a veto.

These negotiations are also, however, meant to signal to Washington that Tehran is, this time, serious about a deal. The road to the original JCPOA was also paved initially by Iran’s negotiations with the European trio, which the U.S. joined at a later stage. The U.S. has a clear incentive to join the substantive talks in a multilateral format as otherwise, if it engages solely in a bilateral track with Iran, there is a risk that E3, fearful of being left out of a potential agreement between Washington and Tehran, will play a spoiler by activating the snapback — all the more so as relations between the U.S. and EU themselves are drifting into uncharted waters.

A limited bilateral deal that could de-escalate tensions between the U.S. and Iran, followed by deeper multilateral talks involving the original JCPOA signatures would seem like the most realistic way forward. With the political will seemingly present among all the players concerned, it is time to move on.

 

FREEMASONRY & ZIONISM – 3. Historical Devilish Roots of ongoing HOLOCAUST IN HOLY LAND

Become a VT Supporting Member Today

Please keep VT Radio and VT Foreign Policy alive! Donate today to make sure VT stays on the internet free and clear of Big Tech control! Donate today: 

Please Donate - Click Here

“All this happened because the Israelites sinned against the Lord their God, who had brought them out of Egypt and delivered them from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. But they worshiped other gods and adopted the customs of the peopleswhom the Lord had dispossessed of their land to make room for the Israelites, and also the customs introduced by the kings of Israel.”

Holy Bible – Second Book of KINGS (2 Kings 17:7)


Firs published on December, 6,2024

by Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio

All artilces in Italian linked below can be read in English thanks to machine translation available clincking on the flags (top left)

VERSIONE IN ITALIANO

“The United Nations Office for Human Rights (OHCHR) said Friday that nearly 70 percent of verified victims in the Gaza war are women and children and condemned what it called a systematic violation of fundamental principles of international humanitarian law.”

“The UN tally covers the first seven months of the conflict between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, which began more than a year ago. The 8,119 confirmed deaths by the UN Human Rights Office over this seven-month period are significantly lower than the Palestinian health authorities’ death toll of over 43,000 for the entire 13-month conflict.”

POPE: “GENOCIDE IN GAZA”. International Court issues NETANYAHU ARREST WARRANT! Here IMAGES of Chilling Crimes and ICC Paper

Netherlands Attack: Mossad False Flag to Raise Anti-Semitic Alarm?

This story was reported by mainstream media around the world yesterday, Friday, November 8, with considerably less coverage than a handful of Israeli hooligans (10 slightly injured) who were beaten by pro-Palestinian patrols after some Maccabi fans, in Amsterdam for the game against Ajax, tore down Palestinian flags from public buildings.

Obviously, it cannot be ruled out a priori that the violent and unjustified attack in Holland was not a shameful anti-Semitic act but may have been organized as a FALSE FLAG by Islamic terrorists recruited by the powerful Israeli counter-espionage MOSSAD which, according to a former CIA agent, played a significant role in the Hamas attacks and especially in the attack of October 7, 2023.

Update – INTEL DROP by CIA ex Agent: Hamas-Israel Fighting, likelihood “False Flag” to Wipe Gaza Off the Map. Warnings by Egypt Ignored

Also for the singular historical recurrence with the Kristallnacht of the Nazi pogroms immediately artfully evoked by the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to relaunch the anti-Semitic alarm.

The disproportion of the media analysis between the two events is such that it has transformed the genocides committed by the Israeli Army of the Zionist regime of Benjamin Netanyahu into a phenomenon of diabolical cruelty.

Genocides in the Holy Land: a Demonic Holocaust of Historical Significance

The current DEVILISH HOLOCAUST is no longer just war, geopolitical and social but of historical significance because, as when there was the legitimization of abortion contrary to every Christian principle and human dignity, it has created some distinct and polarized factions in the world:

  • the supporters of the implicit legitimacy of genocide actually support the strategy of reprisals of the SS during the Shoah that authorizes Israel to exterminate 10, 100, 1000 children in order to eliminate without trial 1 ALLEGED terrorist suspected of an attack
  • the resolute protesters of these wretched and satanic war crimes and violations of human rights
  • the diplomats who fill their mouths with formal condemnations in words but do not perform any peremptory act (like the UN)
  • and the usual indifferent people who only have to fill their bellies until the next health dictatorship that will force them to inject themselves with poisonous drugs experimental vaccines to be idiot subjects and good unpaid human guinea pigs in the transhumanist tests of Masonic scientism that inspires Big Pharma

Gaza: SATAN’S HOLOCAUST. No More Words, Images are Enough! A Minute of Silence to Pray. WARNING! Chilling Video

This is why from today, barring exceptional episodes, we will no longer report on the daily massacres carried out by Netanyahu thanks to the support and weapons of the USA, NATO and the EU, but we will analyze them periodically in this cycle “Freemasonry & Zionism” a historical, anthropological, cultural and religious key.

NATO, EU and Italy’s Military Support for Nazi-Zionist Dictatorships

The ferocious paradox that has brought political hypocrisy to its hyperbole is that the same Western impostor rulers and media who tear their clothes to denounce even the smallest episodes of anti-Semitism are the same ones who are imposing increasingly despotic oligarchic democracies, emulating Nazi culture with even evident traces of explicit military support for every form of neo-Nazism, as is happening in the Ukraine of President Volodymyr Zelesnky, the first example of a ruthless statesman inspired by a Nazi-Zionist dictatorship.

NEO-NAZIST DRIFT OF NATO’s WAR IN UKRAINE. US Bet on Arming Azov Battalion. Bojo praises the Fierce Fighters as “Heroes”

As we have illustrated in our previous investigations, it is in reality a new Zio-Nazi totalitarian dictatorship as it is based on the right to usurp national sovereignty as Freemasonry did in previous centuries with the bloody French and Bolshevik Revolutions but even more with theattack on the Papal State in Italy.

The Repudiation of Biblical Precepts by the Zionists created by Freemasonry

All this, as we have highlighted in the incipit with the biblical quote, arises from the history of Israel itself which was the CHOSEN PEOPLE as long as it observed the alliance with the God of Noah, Sem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Moses and David (…) obeying his commandments which placed among the first precepts DO NOT KILLaccording to the merciful logic of Yahweh who advised anyone to kill Cain even though he had killed his brother Abel.

In the Books of the KINGS of the Old Testament, both of the Christian Bible and of the Jewish Torah, the deportations and massacres of the Semitic Israelites are narrated because of the religious and human misdeeds committed by dozens of their Kings with the complicity of their subjects.

FREEMASONRY & ZIONISM – 1. Apocalyptic “Cataclysms” by Synagogue of Satan: Genocides in Palestine & Plotted Pandemic for Lethal Vaccines.

It is the clear proof that even a CHOSEN PEOPLE BLESSED BY GOD, then condemned to the diaspora that many Orthodox Jews accept, could and can still repeatedly and deliberately deviate towards the eternal human frailty of serious and even diabolical sins.

The clear proof of the surreptitious and vacuous evocation of forms of anti-Semitism against the current Israelis consists precisely in the fact that the first ones who cannot be identified as authentic Semites (in a historical and profound sense of religious ethnicity) are precisely them, being children of the satanic geopolitical birth between the Rothschild Freemasonry, the independent American Jewish lodge B’nai B’rith and the Zionist Political Movement.

FREEMASONRY and ZIONISM – 2. Toward Diabolical Apocalypse. Guardian Forecast Hundreds of Casualties in Israel. Then Thousands in West for Nuke Winds

If instead the term Semite is understood in a broad, simply ethnic sense, even Muslims, being Abrahamic populations, are to be considered Semites and therefore, paradoxically, today victims of anti-Semitism…

The Birth of B’nai B’rith without the Mention of the Torah

A very interesting article published last year in the Italian Zionist newspaper Bet Magazine Mosaico by Marina Gersony in a few lines summarizes the deliberately secular matrix of the B’nai B’rith lodge founded in 1943 in the Lower East Side of New York City by Henry Jones who immediately understood the importance of uniting the American Jewish community during those years.

«This community was predominantly made up of Ashkenazim from Germany, Austria and Eastern Europe, a minority of Sephardim originating from the Mediterranean (such as Spain and Portugal) and Mizrahim from the Middle East and North Africa. The constant increase in the number of emigrants required an organization that would take care of their accommodation and sustenance. While the synagogue, increasingly divided by internal disputes, could not face this challenge, Jones realized that the Lodge could intervene and reunite what religious controversies had divided».

THE ASHKENAZI ORIGINS OF HITLER. A Journalistic Scoop becomes a Fake-News if relaunched by Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs

«Thus B’nai B’rith was born, during the presidency of John Tyler, an institution intended to educate and guide American Jews. Jones was convinced that Jews should be a beacon for all humanity, an example of faith and solidarity. The organization had a dual purpose: on the one hand, it had to preserve Jewish identity, protecting it from secularization and the loss of roots; on the other, it had to prevent theological disputes from leading to divisions within the community».

This is what we can read on Bet Magazine Mosaico which certifies the totally secularist matrix of the lodge in perfect harmony with the Deist culture of the hooded British who venerate the Great Architect of the Universe in order to welcome into their temples Protestants (the founders), Catholics (despite the papal excommunications to Freemasonry), Muslims, Hindus and Zionist Jews.

FREEMASONRY & VATICAN – 2. Cardinals, Bishops kneeling before Satan at the Masonic Summit in Italy

«B’nai B’rith rose above political differences and Jewish religious currents, fostering unity among Jews. It thus became the center of all matters relating to American Jewry and the meeting place for Orthodox and liberal Jews. Although Jewish, the charter they wrote made no mention of G-d, synagogue, Torah, or Talmud. Rather, its motto was “Charity, Brotherly Love, and Harmony” (Wohltätigkeit, Bruderliebe und Eintracht), its mission was “to unite the Israelites” to promote common interests including educational and philanthropic activities»

From here they flowed the Zionist Lobbies which are in fact POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL ARCHITECTURES that have nothing authentically ethnic or religious so much so as to support the thesis of some historians according to which the Nazi Adolf Hilter was in reality an Ashkenazi(descendant of the Khazars exiled in Europe after converting to Judaism) financed by the Rockefellers precisely to cause the SHOAH and justify the birth of the State of Israel.

The Zionist Lobbies are in fact POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL ARCHITECTURES that have nothing authentically ethnic or religious so much so as to support the thesis of some historians according to which the Nazi Adolf Hilter was in reality an Ashkenazi (descendant of the Khazars exiled in Europe after converting to Judaism) financed by the Rockefellers precisely to cause the SHOAH and justify the birth of the State of Israel.

TRUMP VICTORY Thanks to ZIONIST MUSK-VANCE AXIS. Will He Be a Christian US President or a NWO Puppet in the Holy Land and Ukraine?

We reserve the right to provide evidence of this in a historical investigation in which we will prove that Nazism itself was created by Freemasonry just like Communism…

Well said the Jewish American Senator Bernies Sanders stating that contesting the ZIONIST GENOCIDES IN PALESTINE cannot be considered anti-Semitism.

Zionists’ Kids-Genocide as Never in the Wars! Jew US Senator: “Is not Antisemitism to Point out the Racist Netanyahu Govt Killings’

Given the delicate issue, I remember that I am first an honored Christian and proud of my Judeo-Semitic cultural-religious roots, but I consider any non-violent criticism of anti-Zionism a legitimate expression of contestation and opposition to an extremist political movement: comparable to anti-fascism and anti-communism.

A concept clearly reiterated by the most Orthodox Jews in recent occasions of tension in the Holy Land since far back in 2021.

WHOLE ARTICLE CONTINUES IN THE TOPICS LINKS BELOW

Israeli Suprematism Protected by Western Rulers

UN OHCHR: “Systematic Violation of Human Rights”

Thousands of Civilian Casualties in Lebanon too

Lebanese Christian Bishops: “Stop the Aggression”

More Israeli Army Attacks on Italian Peacekeeper of the UNIFIL Mission

Western Rulers Complicit with Luciferian Netanyahu Ready for Hell


VT Condemns the ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINIANS by USA/Israel

$280+ BILLION US TAXPAYER DOLLARS INVESTED since 1948 in US/Israeli Ethnic Cleansing and Occupation Operation
150B direct "aid" and $ 130B in "Offense" contracts
Source: Embassy of Israel, Washington, D.C. and US Department of State.


ATTENTION READERS

We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion. 

About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy

Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.

 

Why are there so many Palestinian children in Israeli prisons?

Israeli forces detains 7 Palestinians, 5 of which are children at the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem on February 18, 2023.  ( [Ibrahim Hamad – Anadolu Agency])

Twenty-three child prisoners were released but more than 300 minors remain in Israeli custody, many of them without charges.

by Al Jazeera and News Agencies, reposted from Al Jazeera, January 26, 2025

At least 23 Palestinian child prisoners have been released by Israel as part of the ceasefire deal, bringing into focus Israel’s systematic prosecution of Palestinian children in military courts.

At least 290 Palestinian prisoners have been released in two batches since the Hamas-Israel ceasefire came into effect on January 19, ending 15 months of nonstop Israeli bombardment of Gaza.

According to Adameer Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association, a rights group based in the occupied West Bank, 320 children were being held in Israeli prisons before the latest prisoner exchanges.

So, what do we know about Palestinian child prisoners and why are they tried in military courts?

(Al Jazeera)

What do we know about Palestinian child prisoners in Israel?

In 2016, Israel introduced a new law allowing children between the ages of 12 and 14 to be held criminally responsible, meaning they could be tried in court as adults and be given prison sentences. Previously, only those 14 or older could be sentenced to prison. Prison sentences cannot begin until the child reaches the age of 14, however [PDF].

This new law, which was passed on August 2, 2016, by the Israeli Knesset, enables Israeli authorities “to imprison a minor convicted of serious crimes such as murder, attempted murder or manslaughter even if he or she is under the age of 14”, according to a Knesset statement at the time the law was introduced.

This change was made after Ahmed Manasra was arrested in 2015 in occupied East Jerusalem at the age of 13. He was charged with attempted murder and sentenced to 12 years in prison after the new law had come into effect and, crucially, after his 14th birthday. Later, his sentence was commuted to nine years on appeal.

An estimated 10,000 Palestinian children have been held in Israeli military detention over the past 20 years, according to the NGO Save the Children.

Reasons for the arrest of children range from stone-throwing to participation in a gathering of merely 10 people without a permit, on any issue “that could be construed as political”.

Under what law are children detained by Israel?

Controversially, Palestinian prisoners are tried and sentenced in military rather than civil courts.

International law permits Israel to use military courts in the territory that it occupies.

A dual legal system exists in Palestine, under which Israeli settlers living in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem are subject to Israeli civil law while Palestinians are subject to Israeli military law in courts run by Israeli soldiers and officers.

This means that a large number of Palestinians are imprisoned without basic due process.

“Israeli authorities, however, regularly arrest Palestinian children during nighttime raids, interrogate them without a guardian present, hold them for longer periods before bringing them before a judge, and hold those as young as 12 in lengthy pretrial detention,” Omar Shakir, the Israel and Palestine Director at Human Rights Watch, wrote in November 2023.

Nearly three-quarters of Palestinian children in the occupied West Bank were kept in custody until the end of proceedings, compared with less than 20 percent for Israeli children, according to the Association for Civil Rights in Israel’s report from 2017.

HaMoked, a human rights NGO assisting Palestinians subjected to human rights violations under the Israeli occupation, said minors being held in prisons were allowed a 10-minute phone call to their families once every two weeks during 2020.

How many Palestinian prisoners released so far as part of the Israel-Hamas deal are children?

Israel released 200 Palestinian prisoners, 120 of them serving life sentences, from its jails on Saturday as part of the ceasefire deal.

Two of them were children, both 15 years old. The oldest prisoner, Muhammad al-Tous, was 69. He had spent 39 years in jail, having first been arrested in 1985 while fighting Israeli forces.

The swap on Saturday was the second exchange since a ceasefire came into effect on January 19. Three Israeli captives and 90 Palestinian prisoners (69 women and 21 children) were released in the first swap.

Only eight of the 90 prisoners were arrested before October 7, 2023, when Hamas-led Palestinian groups carried out attacks in southern Israel. The attacks killed more than 1,100 people, saw about 250 taken captive, and triggered Israel’s devastating war on Gaza.

Some Palestinian prisoners have been held in Israeli prisons for more than three decades.

Prominent Palestinian leader Marwan Barghouti – who was the co-founder of the Palestinian National Liberation Movement, also known as Fatah, the party that governs the West Bank – has been in prison for 22 years.

Tamer Qarmout, an associate professor at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, told Al Jazeera that the release of Palestinian prisoners is a “huge relief” for families, although it is happening under the “horrible realities of [the Israeli] occupation”.

“These prisoners should have been released through a bigger deal that ends the conflict, that brings peace through negotiations, through ending occupation, but the harsh reality in Palestine is that as we talk, occupation continues,” Qarmout told Al Jazeera.

How many Palestinians are in Israeli prisons? Have they faced abuse while in custody?

As of Sunday, about 10,400 Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank were in Israeli captivity, according to estimates from Addameer.

In the occupied Palestinian territory, one in every five Palestinians has been arrested and charged at some point. This rate is twice as high for Palestinian men as it is for women – two in every five men have been arrested and charged.

There are 19 prisons in Israel and one inside the occupied West Bank that hold Palestinian prisoners. Israel stopped allowing independent humanitarian organizations to visit Israeli prisons in October, so it is hard to know the numbers and conditions of people being held there.

Palestinian prisoners who have been released have reported being beaten, tortured and humiliated before and after the start of the war on Gaza on October 7.

How many Palestinian prisoners are being held without charge?

About 3,376 Palestinians being held in Israel are under administrative detention, according to Addameer. An administrative detainee is someone held in prison without charge or trial.

Neither the administrative detainees, who include women and children, nor their lawyers are allowed to see the “secret evidence” that Israeli forces say forms the basis for their arrests. This practice has been in place against Palestinian detainees since the establishment of Israel in 1948.

These people have been arrested by the military for renewable periods of time, meaning the arrest duration is indefinite and could last for many years.

The administrative detainees include 41 children and 12 women, according to Addameer.

(Al Jazeera)

  Ukrainian President Zelensky Demands the West Provide Ukraine with Nuclear Weapons (VIDEO) by  Jim Hoft   Feb. 4, 2025 3:45 pm Zelensky an...