13-glenn-no-beauty-in-the-beast-israel-without-her-mascara-zionism-exposed

HISTORY’S FOGOTTEN BRAVEHEART 139then have to return to the rock under which it has been hiding now for 2,000 years.The detractors of such an argument will maintain with kindergarten-level rebuttal that this assertionholds no weight in that Zionism began in the mid 19th century, nearly 1800 years after the events of 33AD. However, making such arguments is in truth nothing more than intellectual slight-of-hand, the nowcommon practice of shaping and molding history for the purposes of mass consumption of propagandaby an uncritical public mind. Zionism in name may have begun with the writings and dissertations ofmen like Hess and Herzl in the 19th century, and may have incorporated into its agenda the return of theJews to Palestine, but Zionism as an ideology was already well in operation in 1st century Israel, andfound in the ambitiousness of Sanhedrinistas hell-bent on achieving power for themselves.It becomes clear then, why the disciples of modern day Zionism fear more than anything else an honestexamination of its basic tenets and tendencies, (and particularly in the Christian West) for in thisexamination, the comparison between these tenets and the principles governing the Pharisaical mindsetthat Christ opposed becomes all too apparent.In considering what were the characteristics of the embryonic Zionist movement fostered by the Phariseeswhich Christ condemned, (namely hypocrisy, duplicity, racism and the willingness to corrupt societyand employ violence to further its own interests) and then viewing this against what are the definingcharacteristics of modern day Zionism, the similarities become undeniable. The only thing separating thetwo is scale, as it was that in Christ’s time it was limited to a small geographical location, whereas todayit has permeated the world with its poison and has ensured a future of never-ending violence. It is in thislight then that it becomes more clear why all the fury over Mel Gibson’s movie The Passion took place bythe various Zionist organizations, since this movie showed in plain terms what was the philosophicallifeblood of ancient Israel’s leadership, and how this modus operandi has re-emerged in the modernworld today. In Mel Gibson’s depiction of a Sanhedrin that employs the mechanisms of political corruption,fear mongering, threats, bribery, and character assassination of its enemies, it becomes clear to the viewerthat it is mirror reflection of modern day Zionist tactics as well. With such a discussion taking place, allthe clever masks which the apologists for Zionism have crafted in hiding its true image are ripped away,revealing it for the beast that in reality it is, as well as the danger that it portends not only for those in theMiddle East, but indeed for the whole of humanity.As much as the apologists for Zionism will attempt to hide the true nature of this ideology behind thelanguage of noble aspirations mixed with the obligatory evocations of pity for the sufferings of the Jewishpeople, at its heart it is racism, chauvinism, hatred for outsiders, and more importantly, the vehicle whichemploys these characteristics for the purpose of bringing to positions of power the more ambitiousindividuals in Jewish society. Just as in the time of Christ, it featured a privileged class who occupied thepositions of power in that society, and who used those under them as stepping-stones for attaining thatpower. Just like today, it insulates its leadership and protects the power that this leadership enjoys bykeeping the lesser beings of the group locked as prisoners in a mindset which pits them against all otherpeoples of the world, in effect bringing into existence a state of war (if only in sociological terms) betweenJew and Gentile. In such a state of war, those under the sway of this leadership are kept malleable by theundercurrent of paranoia that such conditions produce, a tactic that is clearly exploited today whengroups are organized against someone or something that threatens the interests of the leadership. In sucha way, a side by side comparison of the principles that governed the agenda of the Sanhedrin in 33 ADand that which governs the agenda of the New Sanhedrin, modern day Zionist Israel and its Pharisaicalmindset, will reveal them as twin sisters separated by 2,000 years of history.