-33 votes

Is Cointel Pro responsible for this "Zionist" term that is popping up everywhere?

I hesitate to post this because I don't want to invite the ugliness that will ensue. At the same time, I’d like to hear from my DP brethren.
Ready to pull this thread...

The liberty movement is not good at self policing by definition....but if we keep allowing ourselves to be labeled racists an anti-Semites then we will not be able to spread our message.

This is my plea:

If you are honestly not racist, but are concerned about the Zionist conspiracy, could you just keep it to yourself.

Here is why:

It does not matter if we are losing our country and our liberties to a cabal of Zionists or lizard aliens.


If we live in a society with liberty and limited government then no conspiracy would be successful. ***

Anyone find this as disturbing as me?

Every time you find a liberty video on youtube these days the comments are filled with vitriol against these so called “Zionists.”

This is a traditional codeword for old fashioned jew hating. But, I don’t think there are that many jew haters around. I’m calling BS. I think with the exception of a perhaps a few unemployed neonazi wannabes, the only people that have enough time on their hands to fill comments sections on liberty articles and liberty issue treatments with ravings about “Zionists” must be on the payroll of people who want to discredit the liberty movement. Perhaps the pentagon, perhaps cointel pro, maybe the ADL…but I’m sorry, I don’t believe there are that many true anti-semites around these days to be making all of these comments.

I especially find them troubling on the DP.

(for the true believers, please don’t split hairs with the, “not all jews are Zionist” routine…if
you are a racist then you get off on using the word Zionist. It gives you a little rush…be honest)

**OK, let's say I buy into your collectivist notion that there is an extremely large group of people up to these nefarious deeds, what is your Final Solution?**

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

That's not a knife. That's a knife.

According to the official website of the Australian Parliament:

"There is a small number of matters (probably only four) in relation to which the Governor-General is not required to act in accordance with Ministerial advice. The powers which the Governor-General has in this respect are known as ‘reserve powers’. The two most important reserve powers are the powers to appoint and to dismiss a Prime Minister."


If this link does not work, then use the link below and click on "View the Constitution as a single document (PDF 92KB)".

The bottom line is the Queen rules Australia:

1. The legislative power of the Commonwealth shall be vested in a Federal Parliament, which shall consist of the Queen ...

59. The Queen may disallow any law ...

61. The executive power of the Commonwealth is vested in the Queen ...

68. The command in chief of the naval and military forces of the Commonwealth is vested in the Governor-General as the Queen's representative.

72. The Justices of the High Court and of the other courts created by the Parliament--

(i.) Shall be appointed by the Governor-General in Council;

(ii.) Shall not be removed except by the Governor-General in Council, on an address from both Houses of the Parliament in the same session, praying for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity;


Democracy is an illusion in Australia, as it is in Canada and the UK. You are allowed to vote for representatives who then are allowed to pass only the laws the Queen wants them to pass. The Queen is not so gauche as to admit the laws come down from her. She has the class to play this little game to keep the wee people from catching on and beheading her.

Please do not take what I say as an insult to Australians. Democracy is just as much an illusion in America as well, but for different reasons.

Very interesting post!

I think that it is a good thing that many people both Jews and gentiles use the term Zionist instead of just looking at the fact that all of the institutions that are destroying America are controlled by Jews and condeming the whole race. You are correct, If we lived in a truly free society no conspiracy could survive. The problem with that is the MSM, the Federal Reserve, The CIA, AIPAC and many other organizations that do there best to keep us all in slavery are controlled by Zionist Jews. On the other hand some of the most liberty loving people in the world are also Jews. Quite a conundrum. Zionisim does exist. It exists with the help of Zionist christians. Hell, Joe Biden claimed on camera that he is a Zionist and we know he is not smart enough to be Jewish.

Non-Zionist Jews should be joining with Gentiles in condeming Zionisim or they risk being lumped together as they were in Nazi Germany.

As for my Final Solution, Thats easy. I would pass a law simillar to the one Isreal just passed requiring all Jews sign a loyalty oath to Isreal except change it to America. No dual citizenship. Period. No more aid to Isreal or any other country. Hang any politician that excepts money from a foriegn nation (AIPAC).

If by putting the needs of America ahead of Isreal and Zionist internationalist you consider me a biggot,I am guilty.

reedr3v's picture

You certainly sound like a collectivist, judging

people by groups rather than as individuals. I guess that accounts for your simplistic, collectivist solutions and admiration for Statist loyalty oaths and top down government controls that would eliminate the freedom to NOT support a government that is clearly running amok, bombing innocents all over the globe and enslaving its own people etc.
You offer no solution, only more tyranny; it's the oldest State solution of all.

I would prefer anarchy to

I would prefer anarchy to loyalty oaths. I happen to believe that a lot of the tyranny you speak of originates outside of Americas borders. I did not speak of a loyalty oath to any GOVERMENT but to our country. How do you make the jump to collectivist from that? Do the individuals you speak of include dual citizens that have sworn an oath to another nation? I guess you believe in the new world order,No borders or sovereignty? Yes, our goverment is running amok bombing innocents all over the world. But for who's intrest? Since the Iraq invasion rhetoric started 6 hours after the 9-11 attack by Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Pearl and the rest of the Isreali citizen group that influences our nation I say it is for Isreal. Whether our nation keeps marching toward tyranny or decides to enbrace Liberty should be Americas decision not another foreign nation's. I am a simple man but calling me a Statist offends me.


Just to let you know I have a problem with the anti collectivism that we are using,it IS defeating our goals in the long run.I have been leaning libertarian for a couple of years now and I have noted a lack in productivity because of this.I am working on another term that may be acceptable to everyone to hopefully cure the problem.To think this way is not helping our cause at all.

Unconstitutional War - "The story you are about to hear is true; the names and places are being changed to protect the guilty."

Final Solution: Lessons Of History

We need the ability to discern … to recognize the patterns of fallacy, if we are to avoid the mistakes of the past. Don’t kid yourself, the efforts to sanitize the record are overt and covert and often aided by many handmaidens well meaning. Those who would control access, and presume to assemble the details to better serve up their self-serving bottom line for you always start with the premise that the masses ( that means you) cannot handle the truth. For reasons expedient to such interests of power, you should not be able to draw your own conclusions.

I shudder when I see the statement, probably added as an update to the original post, -- ‘Ready to pull this thread...The liberty movement is not good at self policing by definition.... then we will not be able to spread our message.”
The threat is real when we ourselves prove to be the greatest censor of our own message … and through so called self policing, supinely submit to sacred cowing in stanchions of our own construction. In this instance, the original poster who has invited our candid input, would presumptively claim the prerrogative to take ALL the worthwhile content of an intelligent discussion on important, though sensitive, topics down the drain with the bath water.
That form of cleansing of ideas used to happen more frequently here on DP when Jack’s pretensions of parlor room political decorum carried more credibility during the election season. Provocateurs of his ilk were more successful then in exploiting our vulnerability to such manipulation. Look at the consequence when the lessons of history must be relearned with no reference to a true account of what transpired in the past: Newcomers here might think that BigT or I were unwarranted in calling out of Jack in his new incarnation as F-Buzz. Without reference to his past indiscretions where he was flushed out to show his true colors, readers of this forum unfamiliar with his trail of tactics might be taken in when he pretends to the equanimity of a social worker preparing a case report to the judge. Make no mistake; the charlatans of history are usually only recognizable through the lens of retrospection … which is why we need to remove the tinting, rose colored, blue blocked, reflective, or dark so-only-they-can-see-out-ain't-nobody-can-see-in.

In regards to such questions, by way of illustration, I’m going to post an article that someone else first put up on DP several weeks ago, but it received virtually no circulation at the time ( perhaps out of timidity). I don’t post it as any final word of authority on the topics addressed, because to my view, that’s not how solutions are best arrived at. Experience has taught me that ideas are best confronted by the crucible of adversarial debate were no side is hobbled in the due process of deliberate scrutiny.

My solution, finally – you be the judge:


very interesting link; I didn't know this--

but I learn something new from these people all the time--

what courage they have!

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

If you liked that one,

you should DEFINITELY read this link.


This fills in SO many blanks that people don't know.
Anybody who really wants to learn what's going on, absolutely MUST read this entire speech by Freedman, or they will never really know what's going on behind everything.
This is probably one of the most important speeches that you will ever read.

Jews Against Zionism





the OP is resorting to name calling! lol

I think with the exception of a perhaps a few unemployed neonazi wannabes, the only people that have enough time on their hands to fill comments sections on liberty articles and liberty issue treatments with ravings about “Zionists” must be on the payroll of people who want to discredit the liberty movement. Perhaps the pentagon, perhaps cointel pro, maybe the ADL…

we are the Remnant

Bill Cooper - on Zionism

why is zion so important to these people? is it more than just a symbol of status..?


Iinteresting Wiki article

Interesting etymology theories.

OK, Zionist is out and Kike

OK, Zionist is out and Kike is back in.


“It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds”
-Sam Adams

wtf? mods please

This post and user should be removed

I think you may want to actually READ the supplied link, first.

IF you actually READ the link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kike) to the etymology of the derogatory term "kike," as supplied by "netzorro" you'd find that it WERE THE JEWS themselves whom coined it to ridicule the Jews of Russian/E.European Origin:

"According to Our Crowd, by Stephen Birmingham, the term "kike" was coined as a derogatory putdown by the assimilated American German Jews to identify Eastern-European Jews: "Because many Russian [Jewish] names ended in 'ki', they were called 'kikes'- a German Jewish contribution to the American vernacular. The name then proceeded to be co-opted by non-Jews as it gained prominence in its usage in society, and was later used as a demeaning Anti-Semitic slur."

THIS is WHY it is PRUDENT to actually hear the "opposition's" argument, even if on the surface you don't like it, especially IF you actually want to "win" the argument via an apropos rebuttal.

you know, it's actually no different than an American from New York RIDICULING a Southerner as "ignorant-redneck, whitetrash, trailer-trash, a hick," blah, blah, blah, etc. what makes you think any of those terms are any less offensive than a Jew calling another Jew as a "kike"?? precisely because NO ONE in the MSM "tells you" to equate calling Southerners as "Neo-Confederates," "rednecks, trailer-trash, whitetrash," as a BAD THING. But you do hear ALL the time, NOT to call Jews, ___, whatever that maybe.

THAT's all the poster wanted you to know.

apparently, you had the same knee-jerk reaction typical of what any neocon zionist propagandists would have, ie. mainly their go-to toolbox of calling the rest of FREE THINKERS as "ENEMIES of Israel" this, and ENEMIES of Israel that.

what other "people" do you know that gets called that? Do the French have a need to call the rest of us "ENEMIES of France" when someone says something that they find offensive, or a constructive criticism of their foreign policy, or a policy of occupation? Oh wait, the French kinda stopped the whole colonial thing, at least visibly. never mind.

the mere fact that "grown adults" would need to fall back to kindergarten-playground level name calling is pretty telling that it's done so, to AVOID any nuanced discussion of Israel's murderous occupation and apartheidist POLICE STATE policies against their OWN SEMITIC Palestinian brethren, as well as their OWN Citizenry, not to mention PROPAGANDIZING here in OUR REPUBLIC, via the likes of their own MSM, AIPAC, SPLC, and ADL fearmongering.

aren't you glad, now that you can count yourself among such fine upstanding organization as the IOF, Mossad, AIPAC, SPLC, PNAC, and ADL, whether by intent or inadvertence, for falling into the same knee-jerk reaction, of all things, to simple words that prompt a Pavlovian canine response?

whuff, whuff

P.S. the mere fact that you'd call on the poster to be "removed" because you personally felt offended by it, is PRECISELY what the still False L vs.R Paradigm-stuck liberals AND FAKE,RINO-"conservatives" resort to. It's no different than a child who cannot stand up on his own so he calls on his daddy to beat up the kid that made fun of you, for it. pretty revealing actually. I know you're better than that.

IF you're on DP forum, you should be able to rebut other's positions, without asking Mike or the Mods for him/her to be "REMOVED" for your personal pleasure.

THIS is precisely how people STOP talking to each other, and fall into the partisan trap of painting an individual with a label one wants to vilify, and communicate to the rest, as if to say "if I call him/her with this term, ie. 'anti-semite' that's a code word for ya'll to avoid him/her like the plague."

I'd highly recommend that you internalize and look deeply into the origin of your own subconscious autonomic response; WHY do you feel the need to BAN someone from speaking or thinking in such apparent factual reality? again, the derogatory term, as it IS coined as a derogatory term, BY the JEWS THEMSELVES, is netzorro's whole point.

what is SO WRONG about simply pointing out this fact?

freedom of speech means you

freedom of speech means you have to hear somethings you don't want to from time to time..

quit being so thin skinned, its people like you that get books burned.

“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” Plato

Nope. This has nothing to do

Nope. This has nothing to do with free speech. This is a private website, what the owner says goes. As far as you enjoying that Ron Paul's name and followers are associated with hate speech, eat it. Under your argument, it's ok to label groups and use derogatory attacks against people you don't like just because of freedom of speech. Sorry that I wasn't raised like an animal. I treat everyone equally; jews, hispanics, gays, blacks and everyone else because we're all part of the HUMAN RACE.
I don't treat hate mongers, bigots, and idiots the same though. Defend them all you like

hate speech... theres that

hate speech... theres that liberal phrase again..

I think you just made the point for the rest of "us,"

"As far as you enjoying that Ron Paul's name and followers are associated with hate speech, eat it. Under your argument, it's ok to label groups and use derogatory attacks against people you don't like just because of freedom of speech."

and you just labeled the rest of "us" as bigots, as IF, for using "Ron Paul's name" as some type of cover, to merely discuss the ACTUAL ORIGIN of the term, which apparently you've still NOT READ. as IF you ACTUALLY clicked on the Wiki link, you'd understand that it was a term coined by the Jews themselves to ridicule OTHER JEWS of ethnic origin they themselves feel superior to.

POINTING OUT THIS HISTORICAL FACT does NOT impugn Ron Paul's good name, nor does it automatically make any grown adult who can talk about controversial issues, into a bigot.

this is no different than you calling ACLU neoNAZIS, for DEFENDING their 1st Amendment right. again, after all these yrs, how is it that people always FORGET the logic behind that, whenever if feels convenient to do so?

what is APPALLING is that you'd relegate to the same lazy propagandists' tactic of namecalling, without actually examining the underlying intent of the origin of the discussion.

LEARN to DISCERN the difference.

F-Buzz, You can't have it both ways.

"This is a private website, what the owner says goes."
Restaurants are private property yet there are Federal laws forcing the owner of that property to serve people he may not wish to serve for his own personal reasons. I suspect you support that law even though on it's face it is discrimitory. You are all for dicrimination as long as its against what you consider the right people. I consider that hate mongering!

I'm thinking of taking up a collection,

and printing you up an official Jack Parkman memorial DP HALL MONITOR badge, so you don't feel under-appreciated for all the fine work you do here.

You would defend that word.

You would defend that word. Why don't you just add an O after the G in your name.

Buzz Off


Sticks And Stones ...

... But really, Jack, what's in a name?

As your almost clever post shows, a niggardly attention to hipersensitive rules of political correctness can chill worthwhile intercourse of ideas at times.

You wouldn't want to just intercourse with yourself, now would you?

Can we agree it would be rude to even suggest such a thing ( in subtle words or their components ) unless in response to a personal attack lodged by a distractor who is here just to cause trouble.

You and I might agree it would not be politic. But I think it would be correct in such instance to appreciate the context in which words are used.

For words to have meaning, and not just affect, one must be effective at discerning. In that regard, shouldn't we pay more attentionn to what someone is saying, and why ... and less how they say it ?

You can disguise hate speech

You can disguise hate speech under cover of context very easily. If you enjoy defending it, congratulations. Why allow Ron to be sullied via the bigots hiding their jew hate through double-speak? Unless of course, you are against him or care not of the implications. Remember; this is politics, the public is your audience, not pseudo-intellectuals mentally drooling over the proper context of hate speech. If you think the dipsh*ts defending the use of the word here are enough to vote Ron into the presidency, by all means, carry on. If you really think you can help someone run for president and simultaneously re-educate the public on the proper use of language, you have been taking some amazing drugs and I want some.

"hate speech"???

what the hell is a "hate speech"??

no such thing.

you just feel hatED by someone thinking and talking. that does not justify calling someone names or label it with 'avoid that kind of thought' dictate.

Ways And Meaning …

The Hate Song Of Jack The Ripped --

Call me anything you like, Jack, just don’t call me any synonym of mean or hateful (not because I’m crushed by the tactic, but because it’s a dead give away, and that kind of slip ends up in your performance review. I’d hate to see you become an unemployment statistic. There is entertainment value in your antics; and it’s good exercise for our free speech liberty advocates.)

Speaking of ‘hate speech’, did I ever tell you I hate it when you speechify all righteous and all... correct and politic. One minute you are pretending to be the voice of all creed tolerance in an effort to suck up to superficial political constituencies, then you are looking to share drugs. The many faces you put forward reminds me of the narc that Fishy described on the reunion thread. You know – the guy who insinuated himself where he didn’t belong just to make trouble among those who were busy relating with each other. Hey ! Jack … you rascal you … was that you talking shame over on that ‘Legalize Pot’ thread … the video with that hot chick … It was – wasn’t it! It’s your scolding division politics MO … Oh you scoundrel …you’ve been stirring up trouble in a couple of places haven’t you … Was that you, or just a colleague, with the non sequitur –‘Anti-Semitism on Daily Paul?’, posted earlier today? … What’s that line about protesting too much ( … and methinks you doth protest an awful lot … especially when one takes count of the many, many facets of the disorder your multiple personalities attempt to foment. ).

As you know, Jack, since we've gone around on these issues of sanitized communication before, I am not in favor of gratuitously insulting vituperative remarks; but there is a specter more menacing to constructive dialogue – And that is -- censored … even self censored, open inquiry cowed into orthodoxy by political correctness demanding flinching conformity to oppressive dogma.

You are a bit of a distraction; but since loaded words and disinfo gimmicks is sort of the theme of this thread, your semantics are not ‘OFF TOPIC’. Carry on. Thanks for the illustrations.

Are you having a stroke right

Are you having a stroke right now? I see many intelligent words all mixed up into a frenzy of nothingness. If you really believe I am someone else or acting on behalf of some clandestine government agency, then I really want your drugs. I have no problem with weed, I just think yours is much stronger than mine. Also, if I was working against Ron Paul and his success, why would I be calling out the maniacs that are sure to railroad his 2012 candidacy? Essentially, I'm sick of the fringe elements becoming the media focus and have taken matters into my own hands , kind of a public relations out of sheer desperation. Consider my hand forced.

Please go see a doctor as soon as possible, strokes are very serious. Good luck

Circular Jerks …

… might take the bait …

Masters of da’ bait come to recognize that indulging every urge becomes self-abusive, and is ultimately unsightly – ‘An eye for an eye’ leads to mutual blindness.

So, hearing that you have taken yourself in hand, I will leave you to yourself. But again thanks, ... Jack, ( hmm) … for this clinical series on the ways and means of contending with molesting provocateur techniques. And I do wish you good luck resisting the ravaging reach of that forcible hand.

“ Master thyself, then others shall thee beare.”

-- Ezra Pound