Benedictus Qui Venit in Nomine Domini, Hosanna in Excelsis

There will never be peace in the Middle East—or anywhere else in the world for that matter—until everyone converts to the Catholic Faith and exclaims “Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Deus Sabaoth, Hosanna in Excelsis. Benedict, qui venit in Nomine Domini. Hosanna in Excelsis.”

Men whose souls are steeped in Original Sin are slaves to the devil even though they do not realize that is the case. Such men are prone to vicious hatred of those they deem to be their enemies, whether real or imagined, and to seek “justice” by means of wanton attacks upon innocent civilians in order to avenge past injustices done to them without realizing for a second that cycles of barbaric madness can never be ended absent a conversion of souls to the true Faith, which is the sine qua non for forgiving and rectifying injustices while seeking a true path of reconciliation after having been reconciled to the true God of Divine Revelation in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance.

The terrible, barbaric acts committed by Hamas on Saturday, October 7, 2023, the Feast of the Holy Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary are indeed execrable. Such acts are inspired by the devil to incite massive retaliations that he knows will generate new generations of Mohammedan “freedom fighters,” who, inspired by the blasphemous Koran, will be combatted by new generations of other devil worshippers, namely those who adhere to the blasphemous Talmud. Untold numbers of souls, made in the image and likeness of God and redeemed by the shedding of every drop of His Co-Equal, Co-Eternal Divine Son’s Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday, are being sent to hell to curse each other without cease for all eternity as they suffer in hellfire and are deprived of the glory of the Beatific Vision of the Most Holy Trinity of God the Father. God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity. That is the real tragedy of the Middle East since the Jews were dispersed by the Romans in 70 A.D. as Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ used the cruel pagans to chastise the once chosen people after giving them a period of mercy to respond to the preaching of the Apostles over the course of thirty-seven years.

With this in mind, therefore, it is perhaps quite useful to remember this unending conflict between two sets of unbelievers who are united in their rejection of the Most Holy Trinity and the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ was enkindled anew over one hundred years ago when the founder of international Zionism, sought to convince European Talmudists to move to the Holy Land from which their Biblical ancestors had been expelled as a just punishment for their disbelief in Catholicism and to which they were not meant to return.

Herzl’s influence was felt long after his death on May 3, 1904, a little over three months after Pope Saint Pius X told him that the Catholic Church would never sanction the return of the Jews to Palestine and that she would open up churches to baptize them all if they did return, and it was during the needless, unjust and barbaric World War I that Lord Arthur Janes Balfour was convinced of the “need” to resettled Jews in Palestine-Trans-Jordan that had fallen into British hands because of the defeat of the Ottoman Empire:

Foreign Office
November 2nd, 1917

Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you. on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet:

His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Arthur James Balfour (The Balfour Declaration.)

The England of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry was a natural ally of Zionism, which gained impetus after the tragic events of World II were exploited as a just cause for imposing a sense of “collective guilt” upon nominal “Christians” so that Jews could move into Palestine without opposition from the leaders of Western nations.

The Zionist State of Israel was entirely invented out of the fantasies of Theodore Herzl, the founder of International Zionism (with the help of the Masons in the United Kingdom such as Lord David Balfour, of course) to relocate the Talmudists in the very land from which the actual descendants of Abraham were expelled by the Romans in 70 A.D. as God used the pagan Romans as the instrument to chastise the Jews for their obstinate refusal to accept the preaching of the Gospel in their midst after He had mercifully permitted them a thirty-seven year period of reprieve following their role in calling down the Most Precious Blood of Our Divine Redeemer, Christ the King, upon them and their children. God expelled the Jews from the Holy Land in 70 A.D., and they were not meant to return, certainly not to found a nation based in a false, blasphemous religion, less yet to do so by violent means and the constant use of raw terror and the murder of countless thousands of innocent Palestinian Arabs, both Christians and Mohammedans.

The State of Israel was created by the shedding the blood of the innocent and by the stealing of the homes and land of the Palestinian Arabs who had been living there for centuries upon centuries as they, the Palestinian Arabs, were rounded up and sent to "detention centers" (concentration camps), all with the support of the government of the United States of America (which has its own interesting history of targeting civilians, including the members of various Indian tribes who simply wanted to retain custody of their own lands and, of course, the horrific fire-bombing of Dresden, Germany, on February 13-14, 1945, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, on, respectively, August 6 and 9, 1945, to say nothing of the innocent civilians killed in the moral and geopolitical disasters that were this country’s invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afin Iraq and Afghanistan).

Here, for example, is a summary of some of the brutal methods used by the late Ariel Sharon during his days in the leadership of the Israeli Defense Force:

AS ARIEL SHARON'S career comes to an end, the whitewashing is already underway. Literally overnight he was being hailed as "a man of courage and peace" who had generated "hopes for a far-reaching accord" with an electoral campaign promising "to end conflict with the Palestinians."

But even if end-of-career assessments often stretch the truth, and even if far too many people fall for the old saw about the gruff old warrior miraculously turning into a man of peace, the reality is that miracles don't happen, and only rarely have words and realities been separated by such a yawning abyss.

From the beginning to the end of his career, Sharon was a man of ruthless and often gratuitous violence. The waypoints of his career are all drenched in blood, from the massacre he directed at the village of Qibya in 1953, in which his men destroyed whole houses with their occupants — men, women and children — still inside, to the ruinous invasion of Lebanon in 1982, in which his army laid siege to Beirut, cut off water, electricity and food supplies and subjected the city's hapless residents to weeks of indiscriminate bombardment by land, sea and air.

As a purely gratuitous bonus, Sharon and his army later facilitated the massacre of hundreds of Palestinians at the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila, and in all about 20,000 people — almost all innocent civilians — were killed during his Lebanon adventure.

Sharon's approach to peacemaking in recent years wasn't very different from his approach to war. Extrajudicial assassinations, mass home demolitions, the construction of hideous barriers and walls, population transfers and illegal annexations — these were his stock in trade as "a man of courage and peace."

Some may take comfort in the myth that Sharon was transformed into a peacemaker, but in fact he never deviated from his own 1998 call to "run and grab as many hilltops" in the occupied territories as possible. His plan for peace with the Palestinians involved grabbing large portions of the West Bank, ultimately annexing them to Israel, and turning over the shattered, encircled, isolated, disconnected and barren fragments of territory left behind to what only a fool would call a Palestinian state.

SHARON'S "painful sacrifices" for peace may have involved Israel keeping less, rather than more, of the territory that it captured violently and has clung to illegally for four decades, but few seem to have noticed that it's not really a sacrifice to return something that wasn't yours to begin with.

His much-ballyhooed withdrawal from Gaza left 1.4 million Palestinians in what is essentially the world's largest prison, cut off from the rest of the world and as subject to Israeli power as before. It also terminated the possibility of a two-state solution to the conflict by condemning Palestinians to whiling away their lives in a series of disconnected Bantustans, ghettos, reservations and strategic hamlets, entirely at the mercy of Israel.

That's not peace. As Crazy Horse or Sitting Bull would have recognized at a glance, it's an attempt to pacify an entire people by bludgeoning them into a subhuman irrelevance. Nothing short of actual genocide — for which Sharon's formula was merely a kind of substitute — would persuade the Palestinian people to quietly accept such an arrangement, or negate themselves in some other way. And no matter which Israeli politician now assumes Sharon's bloody mantle, such an approach to peace will always fail. (The Whitewashing of Ariel Sharon, UCLA International Institute; see also Timeline: The Palestinian and Israeli Conflict, Explained.)

This is a very accurate summary of the brutal conditions that have plagued the Palestinians since the creation of the State of Israel on May 1, 1948. Up until now, though, most of the terrorist attacks committed by Hamas resulted in several score or more of Israeli deaths but were met with disproportionate responses by the Israeli Defense Force. Consider the following two reports from 2008 and 2014 concerning Israeli military response to Hamas terror attacks on Israeli settlements in lands that were seized by Israel at various points since 1948 and have thus put those settlers at risk of attacks solely because the hubris of Zionist imperialism and racial superiority:

The Israeli air strikes on the Gaza Strip represent severe and massive violations of international humanitarian law as defined in the Geneva Convention, both in regard to the obligations of an occupying power and in the requirements of the laws of war.

Those violations include:

Collective punishment – the entire 1.5 million people who live in the crowded Gaza Strip are being punished for the actions of a few militants.

Targeting civilians – the air strikes were aimed at civilian areas in one of the most crowded stretches of land in the world, certainly the most densely populated area of the Middle East.

Disproportionate military response – the air strikes have not only destroyed every police and security office of Gaza's elected government, but have killed and injured hundreds of civilians; at least one strike reportedly hit groups of students attempting to find transportation home from the university.

Earlier Israeli actions, specifically the complete sealing off of entry and exit to and from the Gaza Strip, have led to severe shortages of medicine and fuel (as well as food), resulting in the inability of ambulances to respond to the injured, the inability of hospitals to adequately provide medicine or necessary equipment for the injured, and the inability of Gaza's besieged doctors and other medical workers to sufficiently treat the victims.

Certainly the rocket attacks against civilian targets in Israel are unlawful. But that illegality does not give Israel any right, neither as the occupying power nor as a sovereign state, to violate international humanitarian law and commit war crimes or crimes against humanity in its response. I note that Israel's escalating military assaults have not made Israeli civilians safer; on the contrary, the one Israeli killed today after the upsurge of Israeli violence is the first in over a year.

Israel has also ignored recent Hamas' diplomatic initiatives to re-establish the truce or ceasefire since its expiry on December 26.

The Israeli air strikes today, and the catastrophic human toll that they have caused, challenge those countries that have been and remain complicit, either directly or indirectly, in Israel's violations of international law. That complicity includes those countries knowingly providing the military equipment including warplanes and missiles used in these illegal attacks, as well as those countries which have supported and participated in the siege of Gaza, which itself has caused a humanitarian catastrophe.

I remind all member states of the United Nations that the UN continues to be bound to an independent obligation to protect any civilian population facing massive violations of international humanitarian law – regardless of which country may be responsible for those violations. I call on all member states, as well as officials and every relevant organ of the United Nations system, to move on an emergency basis not only to condemn Israel's serious violations, but to develop new approaches to providing real protection for the Palestinian people.

Written by Professor Richard Falk, United Nations Special Investigator for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories (RT: News : 'Israeli air strikes represent massive violations.)

As Catholics, of course, we know that there is no such thing as "international humanitarian law." There are the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law that have been entrusted by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ exclusively to the authority of His Catholic Church for their eternal safekeeping and infallible explication. The Fifth Commandment forbids the direct, intentional targeting of innocent noncombatants in military operations and it also forbids a military response that is disproportionate to and incommensurate with the level of a threat posed by an aggressor. What does this mean to people whose souls are steeped in the ravages of Original Sin? The only thing that matters to the Mohammedans of Hamas and the Zionists of Israel is to display raw power in order to exact revenge on those whom they hate.

Indeed, the leaders of the State of Israel had sealed off the border with the Gaza Strip, imposing as a consequence a de facto embargo upon food and supplies into the Gaza Strip prior to massive air strikes that began a few days ago and are preparing, it appears, for a major ground offensive there is a French-sponsored forty-eight hour cease-fire proposal is rejected. Thus it is that the Mohammedans of Hamas, steeped in the ravages of Original Sin, and the Zionists of Israel, steeped in the ravages of Original Sin, take out their grievances by targeting the innocent, with the more powerful and better-armed Israeli forces able to exact a quite price upon the innocent human beings in the Gaza Strip who bear no responsibility for the rocket attacks by the leaders of Hamas and who suffer disproportionately as the number of civilian casualties amongst their population place demands on hospitals that have no means to of assistance to them. Obviously, the Israelis believe that such suffering will force the leaders of Hamas to back down and to "behave" themselves. It matters not to the leaders of Israel that their bombs and military assaults are destroying homes and wounding and killing innocent human beings who bear no responsibility for the Hamas-sponsored rocket attacks. (From Worthy Successors of Herod the Great.)

TEL AVIV — Even as Israel and Hamas agreed to suspend hostilities briefly on Thursday at the request of the United Nations, a senior Israeli military official said that his government was increasingly likely to order a ground invasion of the Gaza Strip that it had hoped to avoid.

Though Israel initially set limited goals of halting the rocket assaults against it and degrading Hamas, the Islamist movement that dominates Gaza, the group’s tenacity and surprisingly deep arsenal have led to widespread calls to expand the mission. The military official said only “boots on the ground” could eradicate terrorism from Gaza and indicated that Israel was even considering a long-term reoccupation of the coastal territory.

But with the Palestinian death toll reaching 214 on Wednesday, Israel and the Gaza militants agreed to end the violence for five hours on Thursday, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. For Israel, it was a move that might help mitigate international criticism of rising civilian casualties, and that carried little cost: The military warned that if Hamas or other groups “exploited” the “humanitarian window” to attack Israel, it would “respond firmly and decisively.”

Hours earlier, Israel called up 8,000 reservists in addition to the 42,000 troops already mobilized. With no progress reported from Cairo, where President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority had gone to discuss terms to end the fighting, Israel’s airstrikes intensified despite what the military official acknowledged were diminishing returns.

“Every day that passes makes the possibility more evident,” the military official said of a ground campaign. The official, who has been briefing Israeli ministers responsible for strategic decisions and spoke on the condition of anonymity under military protocol, said that his assessment was based on “the signals I get” and that the likelihood of an invasion was “very high.”

“We can hurt them very hard from the air but not get rid of them,” he told a handful of international journalists in a briefing at the military’s Tel Aviv headquarters. An Israeli takeover of Gaza would not be “a huge challenge,” he said, estimating that it would take “a matter of days or weeks.” But he added that preventing a more dangerous deterioration in the territory would require a presence “of many months.”

The stark assessment came as Israel bombed scores of targets, many of them homes in northern Gaza, after warning 100,000 residents via leaflets, text messages and automated telephone calls to evacuate by 8 a.m. Palestinian health officials said that more than 1,500 people had been injured since the Israeli operation began July 8, and that several young children, including four boys on a beach, were killed in strikes on Wednesday.

The lone Israeli casualty, a 37-year-old man killed by a mortar round as he distributed food to soldiers Tuesday night near the Erez crossing into Gaza, was eulogized by Israel’s president-elect, Reuven Rivlin, at an afternoon funeral.

In Washington, President Obama called for both sides to exercise restraint, and Secretary of State John Kerry continued making phone calls to the region. “The Israeli people and the Palestinian people don’t want to live like this,” Mr. Obama told reporters. “We will use all of our diplomatic resources and relationships to support efforts of closing a deal on a cease-fire.”

Mr. Obama reiterated his support for Israel while expressing sorrow over civilian casualties. “Israel has a right to defend itself from rocket attacks,” he said. “But over the past two weeks, we’ve all been heartbroken by the violence, especially the death and injury of so many innocent civilians in Gaza.”

Hours earlier, Israel called up 8,000 reservists in addition to the 42,000 troops already mobilized. With no progress reported from Cairo, where President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority had gone to discuss terms to end the fighting, Israel’s airstrikes intensified despite what the military official acknowledged were diminishing returns.

“Every day that passes makes the possibility more evident,” the military official said of a ground campaign. The official, who has been briefing Israeli ministers responsible for strategic decisions and spoke on the condition of anonymity under military protocol, said that his assessment was based on “the signals I get” and that the likelihood of an invasion was “very high.”

“We can hurt them very hard from the air but not get rid of them,” he told a handful of international journalists in a briefing at the military’s Tel Aviv headquarters. An Israeli takeover of Gaza would not be “a huge challenge,” he said, estimating that it would take “a matter of days or weeks.” But he added that preventing a more dangerous deterioration in the territory would require a presence “of many months.”

The stark assessment came as Israel bombed scores of targets, many of them homes in northern Gaza, after warning 100,000 residents via leaflets, text messages and automated telephone calls to evacuate by 8 a.m. Palestinian health officials said that more than 1,500 people had been injured since the Israeli operation began July 8, and that several young children, including four boys on a beach, were killed in strikes on Wednesday.

The lone Israeli casualty, a 37-year-old man killed by a mortar round as he distributed food to soldiers Tuesday night near the Erez crossing into Gaza, was eulogized by Israel’s president-elect, Reuven Rivlin, at an afternoon funeral.

In Washington, President Obama called for both sides to exercise restraint, and Secretary of State John Kerry continued making phone calls to the region. “The Israeli people and the Palestinian people don’t want to live like this,” Mr. Obama told reporters. “We will use all of our diplomatic resources and relationships to support efforts of closing a deal on a cease-fire.”

Mr. Obama reiterated his support for Israel while expressing sorrow over civilian casualties. “Israel has a right to defend itself from rocket attacks,” he said. “But over the past two weeks, we’ve all been heartbroken by the violence, especially the death and injury of so many innocent civilians in Gaza.” (Military Official Says Israel Invasion of Gaza Is Likely.)

The monstrous, murderous occupation of the Holy Land by the Zionists has been enabled by one American presidential administration after another ever since the Six Day War forty-seven years ago now. It is not without justification that Patrick Joseph Buchanan termed the Congress of the United States of America as the "occupied territory" of the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). No one within the ranks of the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist "right" ever speaks out in opposition to the amoral, disproportionate Israeli response to Hamas attacks on innocent civilians in Israel, attacks that can in no way be justified, of course, that includes the killing of over two hundred innocent Palestinians as thosands more are displaced from their homes and as the whole region of Gaza is now being invaded by the agency of the "civilization of love" known as the Israeli Defense Forces:

Netanyahu's office said he instructed the army to go ahead after Hamas rejected an Egyptian cease-fire plan earlier in the week and after Hamas militants tried to infiltrate into Israel through a tunnel from Gaza earlier Thursday.  

He added Operation "Defensive Edge" would continue" until its goal is reached - to restore sustainable quiet and calm to the Israeli citizens while severely hurting and dismantling Hamas infrastructure as well as other terrorist organization in Gaza."

Lt. Col. Peter Lerner, an Israeli military spokesman, said that the operation is open-ended.

"We will be striking the infrastructure," he said. "We will be striking the operatives in order to safeguard the civilians of the state of Israel especially issues to do with tunneling, that was exemplified earlier today."

Thousands of Israeli soldiers had massed on the border with Gaza in recent days, waiting for the order to go in.

Earlier Thursday, Hamas militants and Israel exchanged rocket fire following the expiration of a brief cease-fire that allowed Gazans to stock up on supplies. 

The U.N.-brokered five-hour lull in fighting gave residents of the Gaza Strip time to crowd into stores and vegetable markets after more than a week of being mostly holed up at home for fear of airstrikes. Gaza City, a virtual ghost town for the past 10 days, returned to apparent normalcy within minutes of the start of the truce. Streets were jammed, motorists honked horns and Hamas police directed traffic at busy intersections.

But the streets emptied out quickly after the cease-fire expired, with Palestinian militants firing more than 50 rockets at Israel, including a heavy salvo toward the Tel Aviv area that sent people running for cover, the Israeli military said. The military said a rocket fired from Gaza struck the city of Ashkelon at precisely 3 p.m. local time (8 a.m. ET) as the pause in military activity ended. No injuries were reported.

Israel responded with a wave of eight airstrikes, including one that killed two boys and a girl ages 8 to 10 from the same family in Gaza City, Gaza Health Ministry spokesman Ashraf al-Kidra said. (Israeli military launches ground operation in Gaza Strip against Hamas.)

The atheist who is the Deputy Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Nick Clegg, had more natural courage to denounce Israel's attacks on Gaza than any leader in the United States of America and than anyone associated with the conciliar Vatican, men who live in fear of offending the Jews, but not God, at all times:

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has lashed out at the Gaza military operation, urging Israel to cease its offensive.

Speaking in his weekly phone-in program on radio LBC, Clegg said that Israel had gone too far in its attacks after four Palestinian children were killed on a beach by Israeli shells.

He also accused Israel of imposing a “disproportionate form of collective punishment” on to Gaza citizens, which would lead to “truly unimaginable” and “unacceptable” humanitarian crisis.

The statements echo the guidelines set out by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to define breaches of international law.

In a paper defining international conventions during war, the ICRC classifies collective punishment as a war crime, as it constitutes ‘cruel treatment’.

"Both indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks can be likened to attacks on civilians if the perpetrator was aware that this would be the effect of the attack in the ordinary course of events" the report states.

The death toll from the Israeli military operation has now climbed past 200 Palestinians, 70 percent of whom were civilians. Thirty percent were children, according to the UN office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNCHA). Fifty-two people were killed on Saturday alone.

By contrast, One Israeli civilian died as a result of the Palestinian offensive, which included 1,200 largely ineffectual rockets.

While Clegg affirmed his belief that Israel has a right to defend itself “in the face of violence” he hoped that the five-hour humanitarian ceasefire, which began on Thursday morning, would help ease the current attacks.

"Regardless of which side you are on in this ancient bloody conflict, no one can feel indifferent to the spectacle of this overcrowded, desperate sliver of land in Gaza, where so many thousands of people are suffering” he told listeners.

The deputy PM is the first UK government official to criticize Israel’s conduct since the Gaza offensive began. It is in stark contrast with Prime Minister David Cameron, who earlier this week asserted Israel’s “right to defend itself.”

Meanwhile, Cameron signed up to a European Union statement last night, calling for both sides to "de-escalate the situation, to end the violence, to end the suffering of the civilian populations notably by allowing access to humanitarian assistance, and return to calm." (Israel attacks are collective punishment!’ Nick Clegg slams Gaza.)

The irony here is palapable. The very people who reject any idea of collective guilt for the Crucifixion of Our Lord impose colllective guilt on those they hold responsible for crimes that, although unjustifiable morally, have been committed by fellow non-Christians in response to the State of Israel's bloodthirsty, oppressive policies that have been enabled by the United States of America for so very long. (From  Monsters of Modernism, Monsters of Modernity.)

No matter the repeated injustices cruel barbarities perpetrated against Palestinian Arabs by the Zionists in the past seventy-five years as generations have been displaced from their homes and rounded up into concentration camps (excuse me, detention centers) and thousands upon thousands of their innocents killed wantonly, there can no justification for the targeting of Israeli population centers by Hamas militiamen and their rockets. While one can denounce the fact of the State of Israel’s seven decades of injustices against the Palestinians, it is never morally licit to target civilian population centers to redress legitimate grievances militarily.

As per usual, however, uniparty Zionists in the United States of America, many of whom have encouraged Israelis to settle in the West Bank and Gaza, are calling the State of Israel our greatest “ally” even though this alleged ally is selling arms and technology to  the Red Chinese tyrants themselves:

TEL AVIV, Israel—U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s message to Israelis on a recent visit was blunt: Beware China.

After years of blooming Israeli-Chinese commercial relations and the awarding of a string of port and mass transit projects to Chinese building conglomerates, Israel must tread warily or risk cooperation with its most important ally, he said in an Israeli television interview last month.

“We don’t want the Chinese Communist Party to have access to Israeli infrastructure, Israeli communication networks,” he said, “the kind of things that endanger the Israeli people and the ability of the U.S. to cooperate with Israel.”

Two weeks later, Israel’s government passed on a bid by the Hong Kong conglomerate CK Hutchison to build a $1.5 billion water desalination plant.

But despite the bow to U.S. warnings, Israel appears to be pressing ahead on other deals—highlighting a substantial gap in the positions of the two countries on whether commerce with China poses a security threat. Washington’s trade war with Beijing is making the tensions even more acute.

“Israel sees China as an opportunity,” said Michael Oren, a former Israeli ambassador to Washington. “For the United States, China is a threat—a three-pronged threat that’s strategic, commercial, and technological.”

For Israel, the opportunities abound. Chinese construction companies are expected to bid on upcoming infrastructure projects in Israel ranging from light rail to 5G telecommunications networks. And the Chinese are expected to invest billions of dollars in Israeli technology ventures in the coming years.

Already, Shanghai International Port Group is building a new container port in Haifa, which some U.S. officials believe could be used to conduct surveillance on the U.S. 6th Fleet whenever it ports at a nearby Navy base. Chinese companies are building another Israeli port in Ashdod and a light rail project through the greater Tel Aviv area, which will run a few hundred yards from the Israeli military headquarters. Meanwhile, Chinese companies invested some $400 million in Israeli start-ups in 2018 and $243 million in 2019, according to IVC Data and Insights.

So far, Israel’s concern about strategic threats has been more limited to foes in the region: namely, the so-called Shiite crescent that runs through Iran, Syria, and Lebanon. Even though China supports Iran, Beijing has never been viewed as a factor in the Middle East that could weigh against Israeli security interests.

“China has never been in Israeli threat assessments like Iran is. China’s not in the neighborhood, and Israel isn’t an Asia-specific power,” said Shira Efron, a fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University. “Israel doesn’t have the China experts here that are embedded in the system the way they are in the U.S.”

The United States and Israel first squabbled over ties to China two decades ago, when Washington pressed Israel to cancel a deal to sell Phalcon intelligence surveillance aircraft to Beijing.

Though Israel agreed to back off, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s state visit to Beijing in 2013 opened the door to more commerce. The same year, the Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing contributed $130 million to Israel’s leading technology institute, Technion, for a collaboration that includes a joint campus at Shantou, a city of more than 5 million people located 230 miles northeast of Hong Kong.

“We have been promiscuous in our attitude [toward China on intellectual property]. For a couple hundred million dollars, the Chinese gained access to the Technion,” Oren said. The former ambassador recalls Obama administration officials warning Israel against giving the Haifa contract to the Chinese.

“They said to us, if the Chinese build Haifa, they would not let the 6th Fleet come and visit.”

The port construction is part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative to establish a network of infrastructure projects internationally that will embed Beijing in the channels of global trade and economic development.

Unlike many developing nations that have partnered with Beijing for Belt and Road ventures, Israel is not taking Chinese loans to help finance the projects—sidestepping the debt trap that has ensnared other countries. But Chinese companies have a reputation for competitive pricing on infrastructure projects and finishing on time, making their bids hard to turn down (though in the case of a recent water desalination plant tender, however, Israeli officials insisted that an Israeli-led bid was cheaper).

Under pressure from the United States, Israel announced late last year that it would form an oversight panel to scrutinize foreign investment into civilian companies—akin to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, an American interagency body.

But scrutinizing foreign investment in Israeli technology start-ups was not included in the panel’s mandate. That decision reflects Israel’s overall approach to the issue: widen trade with China when possible and indulge American demands when necessary.

Yitzhak Shichor, a political scientist at Hebrew University who was in Beijing in 1992 when Israel and China established diplomatic relations, said Israel’s promise to the United States not to sell military hardware to China already constitutes a concession that harms the commercial relationship. Israel should convince the United States that China is not a strategic threat, he said.

“For Israel, China is very important economically. And it opened the door to Israeli relations with other Asian countries,” he said. “In my view, Israel can somehow provide a bridge between China and the United States.”

But with the U.S.-China trade war threatening to shift global commerce into two competing economic blocs, it will become increasingly harder for Israel to maneuver between them.

The United States remains Israel’s main strategic and trading partner. But Netanyahu has sought for years to diversify commercial ties beyond the United States and European Union—which together account for about two-thirds of the country’s foreign trade.

“It used to be you could do business with everybody,” said David Rosenberg, an economics columnist and editor at the Haaretz newspaper. “The U.S. and China didn’t care. It’s become obvious that there’s in fact a cold war on the global scene. It’s like in the old Cold War, you couldn’t be friends with Russia and friends with America. You had to choose sides.”

Though it’s the Israel-China infrastructure projects that most often grab headlines—experts say they expose Israel to remote cyberstrikes from China—many others believe that Chinese investment in Israeli technology represents an even more serious concern. The United States is increasingly trying to block China’s access to cyber-innovations, artificial intelligence, and digital health technologies.

“This is going to be a new long-term feature of the U.S.-Israel relationship,” said Daniel Shapiro, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel. “Israel adjusting to the strategic competitive relationship, while trying to sustain its close partnership and take advantage of opportunities with China.” (While the U.S. Is Waging a Trade War With China, Its Ally Israel Is Widening the Commercial Relationship. Also see Record-breaking Spike in Countries Buying Israeli Arms and Cyber - National Security & Cyber.)

America’s greatest “ally” is loyal only to itself, which is why the world’s largest arms dealer in the world, Israel, sold weapons to over 145 different nations.

However, there is a sense in which this claim is correct as a book published in 1948 asserted that none other than the Zionist “Christian” named Lyndon Baines Johnson, who wanted to change the American policy of Middle East “neutrality” in favor of Israel, ordered Israeli Defense Forces to attack the USS Liberty during the Six Day War in 1967 and then blame Egyptian President Gamel Abdul Nasser for the attack:

COLEBROOK — With a North Country native at its core, a book to be released this fall will argue that then-President Lyndon Johnson ordered the Israeli Defense Forces to attack and sink, with no survivors, the USS Liberty on June 8, 1967 in an effort to promote regime change in Egypt.

“Blood in the Water: How the US and Israel Conspired to Ambush the USS Liberty” by Joan Mellen, a professor of English and creative writing at Temple University in Philadelphia, explores this tragic episode of an attack by one of America’s allies that resulted in dozen of American deaths and nearly 200 injuries.

Deep in the midst of the Cold War, the NSA wanted to hear everything that the then-Soviet Union and its allies or proxies were saying anywhere in the world. The 456-foot Liberty — whose specialty was gathering electronic communications — was accordingly sent around the world.

On June 5, 1967, when Israel launched a strike against Egypt, Jordan and Syria — the so-called Six-Day War — she was ordered to proceed “at best speed” to the eastern Mediterranean Sea.

While Cmdr. William McGonagle, the ship’s captain, and his crew of 99 sailors directed the Liberty toward the Sinai Peninsula, inside the vessel, then-Lt. Cmdr. David Edwin Lewis, the Liberty’s chief intelligence officer and a 1949 graduate of Colebrook Academy, received a terse order for himself and the 194 other communications gatherers under his command: “Find out who’s doing what to whom.”

“But Israel,” said Lewis, during an interview last Wednesday at his Colebrook home, “didn’t want that” and on June 8, 1967, its military attacked the Liberty with the intent of sending her to the bottom with all hands.

Israel has repeatedly said the incident was a tragic error caused by the fog of war during which the Liberty was confused with an Egyptian vessel. Israel quickly apologized for the attack that killed 34 crew members, including a civilian, and injured 173 others, and it also paid financial compensation to the victims and the U.S. government.

The day of the attack was “a beautiful day,” recalled Lewis. Israeli planes had flown over the Liberty nine times prior to the strike, including once that was so close that sailors were able to see and wave to the pilots, Lewis said. It was apparent that Israel knew who the Liberty was.

In the attack, McGonagle was able to dodge four torpedoes before the fifth struck the Liberty midship, ripping a hole in her side, and covering Lewis, who had been applying a tourniquet to a sailor’s bleeding leg, in a quarter-inch of heavy, burnt naval paint. The impact of the blast destroyed both of Lewis’ eardrums while the heat seared his eyes shut.

“I was one of the very, very lucky ones,” Lewis said. “Everybody around me was killed instantly.”

Lewis said he feels personally responsible for what happened to the Liberty, explaining that the day before the attack McGonagle asked him whether moving the Liberty further out to sea would affect communications-gathering. Lewis said it would.

As he recuperated, Lewis learned that James Terry Halbardier, an electronics technician 3rd Class, saved the heavily damaged Liberty from more destruction.

Although under fire, Halbardier, who later received the Silver Star, ran a coaxial cable across the deck to the sixth Liberty antenna, which had been inactive at the time of the attack, allowing an SOS to be sent to the Sixth Fleet. The message was seemingly also heard by the Israelis, who immediately ceased their attack.

But help for the Liberty did not arrive with equal alacrity and, as Lewis later learned, there was a nefarious reason for the delay.

While recovering aboard the carrier USS America, Lewis said he had a conversation with Adm. Lawrence R. Geis, the Sixth Fleet’s carrier division commander, who “swore me to secrecy for his lifetime” and then shared that the Fleet had twice launched relief aircraft to the Liberty and that each time they had been recalled by Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara.

When Geis challenged the second recall, Johnson came on the phone himself, the admiral told Lewis, who remembered Geis quoting the President saying that “I don’t give a damn if the ship sinks and all the Americans are killed. I will not embarrass my ally.”

In 2003, an independent commission released the Moorer Report that took a hard look at the incident.

The commission wrote that on June 8, 1967, the Israelis had aerially surveilled the Liberty for eight hours before launching an attack that lasted about 25 minutes “during which time unmarked Israeli aircraft dropped napalm canisters on USS Liberty’s bridge, and fired 30mm cannons and rockets into our ship, causing 821 holes, more than 100 of which were rocket-size; survivors estimate 30 or more sorties were flown over the ship by a minimum of 12 attacking Israeli planes, which were jamming all five American emergency radio channels.

Now 87 and the oldest survivor of the Liberty, Lewis keeps trying to understand why Israel did what it did 51 years ago Friday and he comes to some of the same conclusions that others, including Mellen, have reached: that the U.S. and Johnson had decided to destabilize Egyptian President Gamal Abel Nasser by blaming his country for the attack.

Asked what he hopes will happen when “Blood in the Water” is released, Lewis replied that he’d be happy if the book educated more people about what happened to the USS Liberty and why.

“It’s frustrating that the American people know nothing about this and that the U.S. perpetrated it,” he said. (New book: '67 Israeli attack on USS Liberty ordered by LBJ.)

Additionally, Christian Zionists worked in tandem with Benjamin Netanyahu to secure the release of Jonathan Pollard, who had spied for Israel while in the employ of the United States Navy, and returned to Israel in 2020 courtesy of the man who said that “Jerusalem is the eternal capital of Israel,” Donald John Trump (see, for example, Jerusalem Belongs To Christ the King, part oneJerusalem Belongs to Christ the King and His True Church, part twoJerusalem Belongs to Christ the King and His True Church, part three, and Jerusalem Belongs to Christ the King and His True Church, part four):

Pollard, a civilian intelligence analyst for the U.S. Navy, sold military secrets to Israel while working at the Pentagon in the 1980s. He was arrested in 1985 after trying unsuccessfully to gain asylum at the Israeli Embassy in Washington and pleaded guilty. The espionage affair embarrassed Israel and tarnished its relations with the United States for years.

In a 60 Minutes interview from 1988 (in the video player above), Mike Wallace interviewed the Pollards, then behind bars, along with defense lawyer Alan Dershowitz and prosecutor Joseph diGenova.

Pollard told Wallace he knew he broke the law, but his motives were pure, rooted in his Jewish faith and allegiance to Israel.

"I can give you a number of soft reasons why I was motivated to do what I did," he said. "Soft reasons, having to do with a family that was destroyed in the Holocaust, having to do with the realization that this government in the '40s had abandoned the Jewish people to its fate in Europe." There was also a "hard reason," he said: He believed Caspar Weinberger, then secretary of defense, was neglecting his obligation to Israel. . . .

Pollard's release was the latest in a long line of diplomatic gifts given to Netanyahu by President Donald Trump. His arrival in Israel gives the embattled Netanyahu a welcome boost as he fights for reelection in March 23 parliamentary elections.

Netanyahu has been one of Mr. Trump's closest allies on the international stage. Over the past four years, Mr. Trump has recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital and moved the U.S. Embassy to the holy city. In other departures from traditional U.S. positions, Mr. Trump has also recognized Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights, said that Israeli West Bank settlements are not illegal and brokered a series of diplomatic agreements between Israel and Arab nations. (Jonathan Pollard, who spent 30 years in U.S. prison for spying, arrives in Israel.)

While none of this is any way meant to be a justification for barbaric attacks upon innocent civilians in the occupied territories that Benjamin Netanyahu and other Zionists believe belong by Biblical right to a religion that was rendered invalid when Our Lord completed His Redemptive Act on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday and made manifest publicly when He used the pagan Romans to disperse them from the Holy Land, it is to remind the readers of this site that those whose souls are steeped in the throes of the Original Sin and are thus captive to the devil himself find it very easy to target for execution anyone and everyone they blame for their problems and find it almost impossible forgive as forgiveness is a concept that is foreign to the mind of men who deny the Sacred Divinity of Christ the King and thus know nothing of the fact that He has commanded us to forgive others as He has forgiven us.

To point all this out is not meant to diminish the tragedy that took place in Israel on October 7, 2023, nor it is meant in any way to indemnify Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.’s, naïve trust in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Of course not. As noted earlier, the true tragedy of Hamas’s deadly attacks is the fact that the souls of unbaptized persons were sent to hell to be tortured for their unbelief without cease for all eternity.

Importantly, to point all this out is not to promote anti-Semitism in any way, shape, or form, something that Father Denis Fahey himself pointed out with great clarity:

The annual celebration of the Feast of Christ the King is meant to lead men “to reflect on the Last Judgement, in which Christ, who has been cast out of public life, despised, neglected and ignored, will severely avenge such insults.” Our Lord Jesus Christ came down to proclaim His Father’s programme for the restoration of ordered life in the world and died proclaiming it. After Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus had catalogued modern errors against the order of society demanded by the infinite dignity of the Life of Sanctifying Grace, restored through the foundation of the Mystical Body on Calvary, Popes Leo XIII, Pius X, Benedict XV, Pius XI and Pius XII have set forth in their Encyclicals the Positive programme for order enjoined upon us by Christ Our Head, Priest and King. In this series of books I am endeavouring to make known that positive programme to as many as possible, so that they may have a thorough knowledge of the order of the world they should stand for as members of Christ. The series is placed under the patronage of St. Joan of Arc. At the beatification of that lovely saint in 1908, Blessed Pius X sadly reminded members of Christ that: “All the strength of Satan’s reign is due to the easy-going weakness of Catholics.”

As I was not able to bring out this book when it was originally written, it has been laid aside for years. In the meantime, the need for setting forth the full doctrine of the Kingship of Christ has been forcibly brought home to me by the confusion created in minds owing to the use of the term “Anti-Semitism.” The Hitlerite naturalistic or anti-supernatural régime in Germany gave to the world the odious spectacle of a display of Anti-Semitism, that is, of hatred of the Jewish Nation. Yet all the propaganda about that display of Anti-Semitism should not have made Catholics forget the existence of age-long Jewish Naturalism or Anti-Supernaturalism. Forgetfulness of the disorder of Jewish Naturalistic opposition to Christ the King is keeping Catholics blind to the danger that is arising from the clever extension of the term “Anti-Semitism,” with all its war-connotation in the minds of the unthinking, to include any form of opposition to the Jewish Nation’s naturalistic aims. For the leaders of the Jewish Nation, to stand for the rights of Christ the King is logically to be “anti-Semitic.”

In March, 1917, Pope Benedict XV wrote to the Archbishop of Tours: “In the midst of the present upheavals, it is important to repeat to men that by her divine institution the Catholic Church is the only ark of salvation for the human race . . . . Accordingly, it is more seasonable than ever to teach . . . that the truth which liberates, not only individuals, but societies, is supernatural truth in all its fulness and in all its purity, without attenuation, diminution or compromise: in a word, exactly as Our Lord Jesus Christ delivered it to the world.” These sublime words of the Vicar of Christ have nerved me to do all in my power to set forth the opposition of every form of Naturalism, including Jewish Naturalism, to the supernatural Reign of Christ the King. In addition, for over twenty years I have been offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass every year, on the Feasts of the Resurrection, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter and Paul and the Assumption of Our Blessed Mother, for the acceptance by the Jewish Nation of the Divine Plan for order. Thus I have been striving to follow the example of our Divine Master. Blessed Pius X insists that “though Jesus was kind to those who had gone astray, and to sinners, He did not respect their erroneous convictions, however sincere they appeared to be.”the need of combining firmness in the proclamation of the integral truth with loving charity towards those in error is insisted on, even more emphatically, by Pope Pius XI: “Comprehending and merciful charity towards the erring,” he writes, “and even towards the contemptuous, does not mean and can not mean that you renounce in any way the proclaiming of, the insisting on, and the courageous defence of the truth and its free and unhindered application to the realities about you. The first and obvious duty the priest owes to the world about him is service to the truth, the whole truth, the unmasking and refutation of error in whatever form or disguise it conceals itself.”

A day will come when the Jewish Nation will cease to oppose order and will turn in sorrow and repentance to Him Whom they rejected before Pilate. That will be a glorious triumph for the Immaculate Heart of Our Blessed Mother. Until that day dawns, however, their naturalistic opposition to the True Supernatural Order of the world must be exposed and combated. (Father Denis Fahey, Foreword, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation.)

Father Fahey pointed out above that Catholics must never be intimidated by the slogan of anti-Semitism. Consider once again these telling words:

Yet all the propaganda about that display of Anti-Semitism should not have made Catholics forget the existence of age-long Jewish Naturalism or Anti-Supernaturalism. Forgetfulness of the disorder of Jewish Naturalistic opposition to Christ the King is keeping Catholics blind to the danger that is arising from the clever extension of the term “Anti-Semitism,” with all its war-connotation in the minds of the unthinking, to include any form of opposition to the Jewish Nation’s naturalistic aims. For the leaders of the Jewish Nation, to stand for the rights of Christ the King is logically to be “anti-Semitic.”

These words of wisdom apply to the cultural and political legal warfare that has been waged in this country by Judeo-Masonry and to the warfare being waged in the Middle East at present. Indeed, as Father Fahey quotes from Pope Pius XI:

“Comprehending and merciful charity towards the erring,” he writes, “and even towards the contemptuous, does not mean and can not mean that you renounce in any way the proclaiming of, the insisting on, and the courageous defence of the truth and its free and unhindered application to the realities about you. The first and obvious duty the priest owes to the world about him is service to the truth, the whole truth, the unmasking and refutation of error in whatever form or disguise it conceals itself.” (Pope Pius XII, Mitt Brennender Sorge, March 14, 1937)

Conciliarism has sought to bury the insights of Father Fahey and those of his American counterpart, Father Charles Coughlin, by terming these courageous and prophetic priests as anti-Semites whose views have been repudiated by the "enlightenment" of Nostra Aetate and by the "progress" made in Jewish-Catholic relations since the end of the “Second” Vatican Council. Conciliarism's accommodation with the enemies of Our Lord, coupled with conciliarism's refusal to seek urgently the conversion of Talmudic Jews has permitted the enemies of Our Lord to promote their agenda of evil with complete abandon.

We must always recognize that the path to peace is not to be found in the Mohammedanism of the Hamas or the Talmudism of the Jews.

The path to peace is not to be found in “religious liberty” no matter how many times the conciliar “popes” tell us that this is so.

There has been no lasting peace in the Middle East despite all of the various “peace agreements” since the Camp David Accords of 1978 and 1979.

There can never be any such peace until one and all convert to Catholicism and exclaim in unison, “Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini. Hosanna in excelsis.”

The true path to peace runs through the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of His Most Blessed Mother as fallen but redeemed creatures seek to cooperate with the graces Our King sends to them through the loving hands of that same Blessed Mother so that we will abide in a state of Sanctifying Grace. Sanctifying Grace is the precondition, although not an infallible guarantor, of peace in the souls of men and thus among men in the world.

Pope Pius XI explained that the Catholic Church alone has the means to effect this peace among men:

prominent a characteristic of false peace is the weakening of the binding force of law and lack of respect for authority, effects which logically follow upon denial of the truth that authority comes from God, the Creator and Universal Law-giver.

40. The only remedy for such state of affairs is the peace of Christ since the peace of Christ is the peace of God, which could not exist if it did not enjoin respect for law, order, and the rights of authority. In the Holy Scriptures We read: “My children, keep discipline in peace.” (Ecclesiasticus xli, 17) “Much peace have they that love the law, O Lord.” (Psalms cxviii, 165) “He that feareth the commandment, shall dwell in peace.” (Proverbs xiii, 13) Jesus Christ very expressly states: “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.” (Matt. xxii, 21) He even recognized that Pilate possessed authority from on High (John xiv, 11) as he acknowledged that the scribes and Pharisees who though unworthy sat in the chair of Moses (Matt. xxiii, 2) were not without a like authority. In Joseph and Mary, Jesus respected the natural authority of parents and was subject to them for the greater part of His life. (Luke ii, 51) He also taught, by the voice of His Apostle, the same important doctrine: “Let every soul be subject to higher powers: for there is no power but from God.” (Romans xiii, 1; cf. also 1 Peter ii, 13, 18)

41. If we stop to reflect for a moment that these ideals and doctrines of Jesus Christ, for example, his teachings on the necessity and value of the spiritual life, on the dignity and sanctity of human life, on the duty of obedience, on the divine basis of human government, on the sacramental character of matrimony and by consequence the sanctity of family life — if we stop to reflect, let Us repeat, that these ideals and doctrines of Christ (which are in fact but a portion of the treasury of truth which He left to mankind) were confided by Him to His Church and to her alone for safekeeping, and that He has promised that His aid will never fail her at any time for she is the infallible teacher of His doctrines in every century and before all nations, there is no one who cannot clearly see what a singularly important role the Catholic Church is able to play, and is even called upon to assume, in providing a remedy for the ills which afflict the world today and in leading mankind toward a universal peace.

42. Because the Church is by divine institution the sole depository and interpreter of the ideals and teachings of Christ, she alone possesses in any complete and true sense the power effectively to combat that materialistic philosophy which has already done and, still threatens, such tremendous harm to the home and to the state. The Church alone can introduce into society and maintain therein the prestige of a true, sound spiritualism, the spiritualism of Christianity which both from the point of view of truth and of its practical value is quite superior to any exclusively philosophical theory. The Church is the teacher and an example of world good-will, for she is able to inculcate and develop in mankind the “true spirit of brotherly love” (St. Augustine, De Moribus Ecclesiae Catholicae, i, 30) and by raising the public estimation of the value and dignity of the individual’s soul help thereby to lift us even unto God.

43. Finally, the Church is able to set both public and private life on the road to righteousness by demanding that everything and all men become obedient to God “Who beholdeth the heart,” to His commands, to His laws, to His sanctions. If the teachings of the Church could only penetrate in some such manner as We have described the inner recesses of the consciences of mankind, be they rulers or be they subjects, all eventually would be so apprised of their personal and civic duties and their mutual responsibilities that in a short time “Christ would be all, and in all.” (Colossians iii, 11)

44. Since the Church is the safe and sure guide to conscience, for to her safe-keeping alone there has been confided the doctrines and the promise of the assistance of Christ, she is able not only to bring about at the present hour a peace that is truly the peace of Christ, but can, better than any other agency which We know of, contribute greatly to the securing of the same peace for the future, to the making impossible of war in the future. For the Church teaches (she alone has been given by God the mandate and the right to teach with authority) that not only our acts as individuals but also as groups and as nations must conform to the eternal law of God. In fact, it is much more important that the acts of a nation follow God’s law, since on the nation rests a much greater responsibility for the consequences of its acts than on the individual.

45. When, therefore, governments and nations follow in all their activities, whether they be national or international, the dictates of conscience grounded in the teachings, precepts, and example of Jesus Christ, and which are binding on each and every individual, then only can we have faith in one another’s word and trust in the peaceful solution of the difficulties and controversies which may grow out of differences in point of view or from clash of interests. An attempt in this direction has already and is now being made; its results, however, are almost negligible and, especially so, as far as they can be said to affect those major questions which divide seriously and serve to arouse nations one against the other. No merely human institution of today can be as successful in devising a set of international laws which will be in harmony with world conditions as the Middle Ages were in the possession of that true League of Nations, Christianity. It cannot be denied that in the Middle Ages this law was often violated; still it always existed as an ideal, according to which one might judge the acts of nations, and a beacon light calling those who had lost their way back to the safe road.

No merely human institution of today can be as successful in devising a set of international laws which will be in harmony with world conditions as the Middle Ages were in the possession of that true League of Nations, Christianity. It cannot be denied that in the Middle Ages this law was often violated; still it always existed as an ideal, according to which one might judge the acts of nations, and a beacon light calling those who had lost their way back to the safe road.

There exists an institution able to safeguard the sanctity of the law of nations. This institution is a part of every nation; at the same time it is above all nations. She enjoys, too, the highest authority, the fullness of the teaching power of the Apostles. Such an institution is the Church of Christ. She alone is adapted to do this great work, for she is not only divinely commissioned to lead mankind, but moreover, because of her very make-up and the constitution which she possesses, by reason of her age-old traditions and her great prestige, which has not been lessened but has been greatly increased since the close of the War, cannot but succeed in such a venture where others assuredly will fail.

It is apparent from these considerations that true peace, the peace of Christ, is impossible unless we are willing and ready to accept the fundamental principles of Christianity, unless we are willing to observe the teachings and obey the law of Christ, both in public and private life. If this were done, then society being placed at last on a sound foundation, the Church would be able, in the exercise of its divinely given ministry and by means of the teaching authority which results therefrom, to protect all the rights of God over men and nations.

It is possible to sum up all We have said in one word, "the Kingdom of Christ." For Jesus Christ reigns over the minds of individuals by His teachings, in their hearts by His love, in each one's life by the living according to His law and the imitating of His example. Jesus reigns over the family when it, modeled after the holy ideals of the sacrament of matrimony instituted by Christ, maintains unspotted its true character of sanctuary. In such a sanctuary of love, parental authority is fashioned after the authority of God, the Father, from Whom, as a matter of fact, it originates and after which even it is named. (Ephesians iii, 15) The obedience of the children imitates that of the Divine Child of Nazareth, and the whole family life is inspired by the sacred ideals of the Holy Family. Finally, Jesus Christ reigns over society when men recognize and reverence the sovereignty of Christ, when they accept the divine origin and control over all social forces, a recognition which is the basis of the right to command for those in authority and of the duty to obey for those who are subjects, a duty which cannot but ennoble all who live up to its demands. Christ reigns where the position in society which He Himself has assigned to His Church is recognized, for He bestowed on the Church the status and the constitution of a society which, by reason of the perfect ends which it is called upon to attain, must be held to be supreme in its own sphere; He also made her the depository and interpreter of His divine teachings, and, by consequence, the teacher and guide of every other society whatsoever, not of course in the sense that she should abstract in the least from their authority, each in its own sphere supreme, but that she should really perfect their authority, just as divine grace perfects human nature, and should give to them the assistance necessary for men to attain their true final end, eternal happiness, and by that very fact make them the more deserving and certain promoters of their happiness here below.

It is, therefore, a fact which cannot be questioned that the true peace of Christ can only exist in the Kingdom of Christ -- "the peace of Christ in the Kingdom of Christ." It is no less unquestionable that, in doing all we can to bring about the re-establishment of Christ's kingdom, we will be working most effectively toward a lasting world peace. (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)

We do no lose heart in the midst of the circumstances in which we live. God will never desert the cause of His Holy Church. Pope Leo XIII was very clear on this one point:

The Church, it is certain, at no time and in no particular is deserted by God; hence, there is no reason why she should be alarmed at the wickedness of men; but in the case of nations falling away from Christian virtue there is not a like ground of assurance, "for sin maketh nations miserable." If every bygone age has experienced the force of this truth, wherefore should not our own? There are, in truth, very many signs which proclaim that just punishments are already menacing, and the condition of modern States tends to confirm this belief, since we perceive many of them in sad plight from intestine disorders, and not one entirely exempt. But, should those leagued together in wickedness hurry onward in the road they have boldly chosen, should they increase in influence and power in proportion as they make headway in their evil purposes and crafty schemes, there will be ground to fear lest the very foundations nature has laid for States to rest upon be utterly destroyed. Nor can such misgivings be removed by any mere human effort, especially as a vast number of men, having rejected the Christian faith, are on that account justly incurring the penalty of their pride, since blinded by their passions they search in vain for truth, laying hold on the false for the true, and thinking themselves wise when they call "evil good, and good evil," and "put darkness in the place of light, and light in the place of darkness." It is therefore necessary that God come to the rescue, and that, mindful of His mercy, He turn an eye of compassion on human society.  (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)

Men today, blinded and made miserable by their own sins, do indeed lay hold on the false for the true and consider themselves very wise when they call "evil good, and good evil" and "put darkness in the place of light, and light in the place of darkness.”

Total trust in the Mother of God and her Fatima Message as we pray as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits to console the good God and to make reparation for our own sins, each of which has worsened both the state of the world-at-large and the state of the Church Militant here on earth in this time of apostasy and betrayal.

This time of chastisement will pass. The Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary will be made manifest.

True, we may not be alive to witness this triumph. We can, however, plant the seeds for it by our patient endurance of the crosses of the moment as we make whatever sacrifice necessary and endure whatever calumny, humiliation and hardship that is required in order to make no concessions to falsehoods, whether of Modernity or Modernism, of any kind at any time for any reason.

Let us lift high the Cross of Christ the King, He Who is the King of men and their nations even though most men do not realize this and even though most nations seek to suppress all mention of His Holy Name and mock any possibility that He is their King, the King Who will come in glory to judge the living and dead.

Vivat Christus Rex!

Viva Cristo Rey!

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint John Leonard, pray for us.

Saints Dionysius, Rusticus, and Eleutherius pray for us.


Theodore Herzl's Efforts to Promote Zionism Failed with Pope Saint Pius X Before Succeeding After His Death with Protestant Cyrus Scofield

As we know only too well, though, the American military presence in the Middle East has done nothing to bring “peace” and “stability” to the region has been undertaken in order to make it “safe” for the only “democracy in the area, America’s “friend,” the Zionist State of Israel, whose creation was specifically rejected by Pope Saint Pius X when he met with the founder of Zionism, Theodore Herzl, on January 25 1904, the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul the Apostle, something that was noted last in part one of this commentary but will be repeated here yet again given given the passage of time since its publication:

HERZL: Yesterday I was with the Pope [Pius X]. . . . I arrived ten minutes ahead of time, and without having to wait I was conducted through a number of small reception rooms to the Pope. He received me standing and held out his hand, which I did not kiss. Lippay had told me I had to do it, but I didn’t. I believe this spoiled my chances with him, for everyone who visits him kneels and at least kisses his hand. This hand kiss had worried me a great deal and I was glad when it was out of the way.

He seated himself in an armchair, a throne for minor affairs, and invited me to sit by his side. He smiled in kindly anticipation. I began:

HERZL: I thank Your Holiness for the favor of granting me this audience. [I begged him to excuse my miserable Italian, but he said:

POPE: No, Signor Commander, you speak very well.

HERZL: [He is an honest, rough-hewn village priest, to whom Christianity has remained a living thing even in the Vatican. I briefly laid my request before him. But annoyed perhaps by my refusal to kiss his hand, he answered in a stern categorical manner.

POPE: We are unable to favor this movement [of Zionism]. We cannot prevent the Jews from going to Jerusalem—but we could never sanction it. The ground of Jerusalem, if it were not always sacred, has been sanctified by the life of Jesus Christ. As the head of the Church I cannot answer you otherwise. The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people.

HERZL: [The conflict between Rome and Jerusalem, represented by the one and the other of us, was once again under way. At the outset I tried to be conciliatory. I said my little piece. . . . It didn’t greatly impress him. Jerusalem was not to be placed in Jewish hands.] And its present status, Holy Father?

POPE: I know, it is disagreeable to see the Turks in possession of our Holy Places. We simply have to put up with it. But to sanction the Jewish wish to occupy these sites, that we cannot do.

HERZL: [I said that we based our movement solely on the sufferings of the Jews, and wished to put aside all religious issues].

POPE: Yes, but we, but I as the head of the Catholic Church, cannot do this. One of two things will likely happen. Either the Jews will retain their ancient faith and continue to await the Messiah whom we believe has already appeared—in which case they are denying the divinity of Jesus and we cannot assist them. Or else they will go there with no religion whatever, and then we can have nothing at all to do with them. The Jewish faith was the foundation of our own, but it has been superceded by the teachings of Christ, and we cannot admit that it still enjoys any validity. The Jews who should have been the first to acknowledge Jesus Christ have not done so to this day.

HERZL: [It was on the tip of my tongue to remark, “It happens in every family: no one believes in his own relative.” But, instead, I said:] Terror and persecution were not precisely the best means for converting the Jews. [His reply had an element of grandeur in its simplicity:]

POPE: Our Lord came without power. He came in peace. He persecuted no one. He was abandoned even by his apostles. It was only later that he attained stature. It took three centuries for the Church to evolve. The Jews therefore had plenty of time in which to accept his divinity without duress or pressure. But they chose not to do so, and they have not done it yet.

HERZL: But, Holy Father, the Jews are in a terrible plight. I do not know if Your Holiness is aware of the full extent of their tragedy. We need a land for these harried people.

POPE: Must it be Jerusalem?

HERZL: We are not asking for Jerusalem, but for Palestine—for only the secular land.

POPE: We cannot be in favor of it.

[Editor Lowenthal interjects here] Here unrelenting replacement theology is plainly upheld as the norm of the Roman Catholic Church. Further, this confession, along with the whole tone of the Pope in his meeting with Herzl, indicates the perpetuation of a doctrinal emphasis that has resulted in centuries of degrading behavior toward the Jews. However, this response has the “grandeur” of total avoidance of that which Herzl had intimated, namely that the abusive reputation of Roman Catholicism toward the Jews was unlikely to foster conversion. Further, if, “It took three centuries for the Church to evolve,” it was that very same period of time that it took for the Church to consolidate and launch its thrust of anti-Semitism through the following centuries.

HERZL: Does Your Holiness know the situation of the Jews?

POPE: Yes, from my days in Mantua, where there are Jews. I have always been in friendly relations with Jews. Only the other evening two Jews were here to see me. There are other bonds than those of religion: social intercourse, for example, and philanthropy. Such bonds we do not refuse to maintain with the Jews. Indeed we also pray for them, that their spirit see the light. This very day the Church is celebrating the feast of an unbeliever who became converted in a miraculous manner—on the road to Damascus. And so if you come to Palestine and settle your people there, we will be ready with churches and priests to baptize all of you.

HERZL: [At this point Conte Lippay had himself announced. The Pope bade him be admitted. The Conte kneeled, kissed his hand, and joined in the conversation by telling of our “miraculous” meeting in the Bauer beerhall at Venice. The miracle was that he had originally intended to stay overnight in Padua, and instead, it turned out that he was given to hear me express the wish to kiss the Holy Father’s foot. At this the Pope made no movement, for I hadn’t even kissed his hand. Lippay proceeded to tell how I had expiated on the noble qualities of Jesus Christ. The Pope listened, and now and then took a pinch of snuff and sneezed into a big red cotton handkerchief. It is these peasant touches which I like about him best and which most of all compel my respect. Lippay, it would appear, wanted to account for his introducing me, and perhaps ward off a word of reproach. But the Pope said:

POPE: On the contrary, I am glad you brought me the Signor Commendatore.

HERZL: [As to the real business, he repeated what he had told me, until he dismissed us:]

POPE: Not possible!

HERZL: [Lippay stayed on his knees for an unconscionable time and never seemed to tire of kissing his hand. It was apparent that this was what the Pope liked. But on taking leave, I contented myself with shaking his hand warmly and bowing deeply. The audience lasted about twenty-five minutes. While spending the last hour in the Raphael gallery, I saw a picture of an Emperor kneeling before a seated Pope and receiving the crown from his hands. That’s how Rome wants it.]   (Marvin Lowenthal, Diaries of Theodore Herzl, pp. 427- 430.)

Not exactly how the conciliar "popes" have spoken to the adherents of the Talmud whenever they have permitted themselves to have been treated as inferiors in Talmudic synagogues and as Talmudic choirs have sung about how the Talmudic Jews of today are "waiting for the Messiah," now is it?

Pope Saint Pius X sought the conversion of souls, making no accommodations to the nonexistent legitimacy of false religions. Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis was a regular visit of Talmudic synagogues in Argentina, and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI visited three of them, including one in Rome itself (see Saint Peter and Anti-Peter.)

No one can contend that Pope Saint Pius X did not understand Catholic teaching the conversion of some of the Jews in end times and that such a convesion is not premised upon their being located physically in the land from which Our Lord Himself expelled them by using the pagan Romans to disperse them as a punishment for their refusal to respond to the preaching of the Gospel by the Apostles after He had granted them a thirty-seven year period to do so. Pope Saint Pius X opposed the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine as he knew this to be opposed to the very will of God. Judaism became a false religion after Our Lord breathed his last breath on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday and the public pronouncement of this fact was made by virtue of the destructiom of Jerusalem by the Romans in fulfillment of His own prophecy. 

As noted in part one of this commentary three and one-half months ago now, the widespread belief that the establishment of a Jewish state is the fulfillment of God's will was engineered personally by Theodore Herzl and the Zionists who continued his work after his death by influencing Protestants to produce a commentary on Sacred Scripture that contained interpretations favorable to Zionism. Once again, let me provide you the words of Father Louis J. Campbell, the pastor of Saint Jude Shrine, Stafford, Texas, that demonstrate any interpretation of Sacred Scripture favorable to Zionism and to the State of Israel is Zionist-influence Protestant origin, not of authentic Catholic Scriptural exegesis or doctrine:

Since the time of the Apostles, the Holy Catholic Church has preached the Gospel by the authority granted it by Jesus Christ. The Church was preaching the Gospel years before the Four Gospels were written down, and has continued to this day to fulfill Our Lord’s command to “preach the gospel to every creature” (Mk.16:15). 

The Church collected the Scriptures that make up the Bible. But the heretic, Martin Luther (1483-1546), weeded out some of the books of the Bible he didn’t like, and the Protestant version of the Bible was born. The Bible itself was then touted as the sole authority subject to the “private interpretation” of the believer, thus denying the Church’s authority to preach the Gospel and interpret the Scriptures. However, it seems “the believers” are willing to believe much that is not to be found in the Bible.

No doubt many of us are puzzled by the strange phenomenon of Christian Zionism. Many Evangelical Christians, like the Baptists, the Pentecostals and the Charismatics, are enthusiastic supporters of Jewish Zionism, although not all Jews are Zionists, and many of them dispute the Zionist claims.

The Jewish Zionist Movement was founded by Theodor Herzl in 1897. Its chief aim was the creation of a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the “Land of Israel” in the Bible. The Temple would eventually be rebuilt, and the ancient religious rites resumed. Since they believe they have a right to the lands promised to Abraham by God, the Zionists have little sympathy for the Palestinians, who were squeezed into the West Bank and the Gaza strip after the creation of the Jewish State of Israel in 1948. Misusing Old Testament Scriptures, the Jewish Zionists believe they are destined to rule the world.

So what could have turned famous Protestant preachers like Billy Graham, Hal Lindsay, John Hagee and Pat Robertson, into Christian Zionists, enthusiastic supporters of the aims of Jewish Zionism? Could it have been – the Scofield Bible?

The Scofield Reference Bible is widely used in Protestant seminaries, especially among Evangelicals, such as Baptists, Pentecostals and Charismatics. Recently someone sent me an article by a Mr. C.E. Carlson about the Scofield Bible, which seems to get to the root of the problem. Much of what follows is from Mr. Carlson ( 

One of the schemes of the Jewish Zionists was to alter the Christian view of Zionism by creating and promoting a pro-Zionist subculture within Christianity. One Cyrus I. Scofield (1843-1921) was funded by Zionist agents to re-write the King James Version of the Bible by inserting Zionist-friendly notes in the margins, between verses and chapters, and on the bottoms of the pages. It was first published in 1909 by Oxford University Press, which still holds the copyright. 

 Scofield produced a revolutionary book that radically changed the context of the King James Version. Oxford's promoters made the Scofield Bible, with its Christian Zionist footnotes, a standard for interpreting scripture in Christian churches, seminaries, and Bible study groups. And they all followed like sheep – even Hagee, Lindsay, Robertson, Van Impe, and the revered Billy Graham. So much for private interpretation!

After Scofield’s death, the Oxford University Press turned the Scofield Bible into a manual for the Christian worship of the State of Israel. Scofields’s un-Christian anti-Arab theology has permitted the theft of Palestine and 54 years of death and destruction against the Palestinians, with hardly a complaint from the Judeo-Christian mass media evangelists or most other American church leaders, including the so-called U. S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

In his Epistle to the Galatians, St. Paul contradicts the claims of the Scofield Bible:

“The promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. He does not say, ‘And to his offsprings,’ as of many; but as of one, ‘And to his offspring,’ who is Christ… For you are all the children of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For all who have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither slave nor freeman; there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are the offspring of Abraham, heirs according to promise” (Gal.3:15b,16;26-29).

This makes it clear that to be a blood relative descended from Abraham is of no advantage to those who do not have faith in Jesus Christ. And Scofield and the Oxford University Press are liars when they try to prove that those who are known today as “Jews” are the heirs to the promises of Abraham. We read this whopper on page 1136 of the 1967 edition: “All Jews are natural descendants of Abraham…”  

This is absolutely false and absurd. The great majority of the so-called Jews who control Israel today are not descendants of Abraham at all. They are the Ashkenazi Jews, descendants of the Khazars of Eastern Europe. They are imposters, with no right to the lands of the Bible! Although known as “Jews” they are such neither by blood nor by religion, because the Jewish religion their ancestors adopted in the eighth century is not the true religion of the ancient Jews of the time of Christ, but the false Talmudic Judaism which blasphemes Jesus Christ and deifies the Jewish race.

And on page 19 we find this blatant lie: “God made an unconditional promise of blessings through Abram’s seed… to the Nation of Israel to inherit a specific territory forever.

What a deception! The televangelists and their huge following have accepted this abominable lie, and have led the whole country into vassalage to the Godless modern State of Israel. Jesus Christ is Abraham’s heir, not the State of Israel. The promises God made to Abraham are fulfilled in Jesus Christ. The Jewish Zionists have no true understanding of the Scriptures. And who would have thought that the “Bible believing Christians” would have stumbled after them into the darkness? 

“Did you never read in the Scriptures,” said Our Lord to the Pharisees: “‘The stone which the builders rejected, has become the corner stone; by the Lord this has been done, and it is wonderful in our eyes’? Therefore I say to you, that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and will be given to a people yielding its fruits” (Mt.21:42,43).

St. Paul understood it well:

“You are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets with Christ Jesus himself as the chief corner stone. In him the whole structure is closely fitted together and grows into a temple holy in the Lord, in him you too are being built together into a dwelling place for God in the Spirit” (Eph.2:20-22).  (Father Louis J. Campbell, Seventh Sunday after Pentecost.)

Father Campbell's sermon should help disabuse some of you in the readership from using any Protestant "minister" as an "authority" on anything other than how to offend the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity. The American evangelical movement is a wholly-owned enterprise of Zionism. Then again, so is the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

Obviously, it is not only Protestants who have fallen prey to the lies of the Scofield Reference Bible. Most Catholics, influenced by the religious indifferentism that has characterized social life in the United States of American since its founding and by the counterfeit church of conciliarism’s celebration of false ecumenism, accept “support for Israel” and its policies as a “duty” in order render assistance to “America’s only ally” in the Middle East.