The World Bank (IMF)

who controls

The International Monetary Fund

Managing Director: Dominique Strauss-Kahn(Zionist)

First Deputy Managing Director: John Lipsky(Zionist)

Zionists comprise less than 2% of the population of the Western world*. So the probability that the heads of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund would both be Jewish is infinitesimally small. You must ask yourself how such an incredibly small and extremely unrepresentative minority ethnic group could control both of these important and influential international banking institutions.

International Monetary Fund Says Israel Should Use Growth to Upgrade Lagging Infrastructure

Report sees 3-3.5% growth ahead but says congestion on the roads and low participation of ultra-Orthodox communities in the labor market hurts economic growth.

Israel’s economy is strong and will remain that way for the next few years, and that presents an opportunity for the country to undertake reforms and make badly needed infrastructure investments, the International Monetary Fund said on Wednesday.

Israel gross domestic product grew 3.4% last year, with wages climbing 3.3% and the jobless rate falling to a historic low of less than 4% at the start of 2018. The IMF predicted the economy would expand at a 3.5% over the next few years, but with productivity growing at a relatively modest at 0.75% annually, Israel’s economic growth will slow to 3% a year in subsequent years, it said.

Craig Beaumont, the IMF mission chief, told a news conference in Jerusalem that Israel should leverage its strong economy to boost infrastructure spending and reverse more than a decade of insufficient investment.

“That’s accumulated over time to a shortage, especially in the transportation area which is seen in Israel having the worst traffic congestion in the OECD,” he said.

He said the poor state of public transportation caused Israelis to rely too much on private automobiles and that the resulting congestion on Israeli roads was having a negative impact on growth. “And that situation could get worse as the population keeps on growing, incomes are rising and people’s desires to have cars keeps rising,” he warned.

No matter what you say about Israel, someone will get angry. Venturing to question the Jewish state gets you labeled an anti-Semite (which of course means Anti-Language, but the Zionists have the World hoodwinked into believing it means Race or Religion) by right-wing Zionists, but left-wing activists can be just as vicious. Admit that you want Israel to remain a safe haven for Jews, and you’ll be told your Zionism is racist. My Jewish friends are scared of lefties, and my lefty friends are scared of Zionists.

Israelis in the occupied territories misuse Holocaust memory when they argue that settling Palestinian land is necessary to guard against a second Holocaust when the one they claim as no basis in reality.  Zionist watchdog organizations often show up, ostensibly to guard against anti-Semitism (as if the term has any credence) in Middle Eastern studies departments. Truth tellers will receive a series of standard threats from strangers. Hopes that the truth tellers would “show [their] sincerity by leading the way to the gas chambers,” (which never existed) while others state, somewhat ungrammatically, that they might be “carrying a death wish for themselves.”

Media activist friends have a traditional Marxist theory about why it’s so tough to talk about Israel. For them, it boils down to power, which means money. Zionist money funds lobby groups and media watchdogs that attack the pro-Palestinian media. Smart people argue that this creates a climate of antagonism and that many media outlets systematically avoid the question of Israel because it’s too much hassle to deal with the backlash.

Wait a second. Are they saying Zionists control the media?

The left has a long tradition of such (fake term) anti-Semitic clichés. You may recall the scandal in 2004 when the Vancouver magazine Adbusters published an article titled “Why Won’t Anyone Say They Are Jewish?,” which infamously listed “the 50 most influential neocons in the US,” with black dots beside the Jewish names. But keep in mind the watchdog organization that targets people at Universities.  There certainly are well-funded Zionist groups that pressure and attack anyone perceived to be critical of Israel. It is intimidating; one has to think twice before talking publicly or writing about the conflict.

This is because the weapons of this war are not only bullets, stones, tanks, and explosive jackets. The extremists attack and defend with words or, more specifically, with invocations of the said Holocaust and accusations of said genocide—to the point of absurdity. Today, almost twenty years after Seinfeld’s Soup Nazi, comparisons with Nazi Germany have become cynical clichés as well as all based on fraud. Palestinians put swastikas on Israeli flags, Israelis compare Arab leaders to Hitler (unfortunately in a negative light), and Zionist settlers accuse those proposing to withdraw settlements of being complicit in the final solution which is another bullshit term.  Final never meant death, but deportation. Given the number of so-called Nazis out there, you would think Germany had won the damn war.  If you base it on that Corridor, splitting Germany which is no longer there, my guess is that they did.  Yet they could not save humanity from the Zionists.

Debates rage over whether anti-Zionism can be defined as the new anti-Semitism. The Palestinian-driven campaign for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions attempts to link Zionism and Israel to apartheid-era racism in South Africa. Since the 1980s, members of Israel’s hasbara programs have used academic, religious, and government resources to teach Zionists rhetorical tactics and ideological strategies to defend Israel against criticism in social media and elsewhere. While hasbara translates as “explanation,” this Internet-era “public diplomacy” more often resembles old-school propaganda.

The problem with this linguistic warfare is that it re-entrenches existing positions. Everyone wants to convince, and no one wants to listen.

In highlighting the role of money in shutting down the conversation about Israel, my Marxist friends miss an essential point: extremist ideological positions would not be so effective, or appealing if they didn’t tap into real emotions and fears. You can’t understand the way many Canadian Jews are deeply attached to Zionism, to the point of being unable to consider another point of view, without addressing said Holocaust survivors and the history of anti-Semitism (or Anti-Language) in Canada, and in Montreal in particular.  Ohh, wait, if hoodwinked into believing Semitic means Race or Religion, your basis is pure bullshit, to begin with.

Canadian Jews, while liberal in many ways are surprisingly right wing when it comes to Zionism. According to a census analysis done in 2006, 25 percent of American Jews identify as Zionist, while 42 percent of Canadian Jews do. Toronto and Montreal have some of the highest rates of visitation to Israel of any Jewish community in North America, at 75 percent. This gives the impression of a seemingly univocal, unconditional support for the Israeli state in Canada, at least within the Jewish community.

Toronto and Montreal are quite different from Tel Aviv, where Jews who have become pro-Palestinian activists. You can sit in the cafés, while these Israelis criticize their government, rage against the power of the settlers, and testify to Palestinian suffering under the occupation.

Back in Canada, you can visit the Montreal Holocaust Memorial Centre to ask Jacqueline Celemencki, the education coordinator, why Canadian Jews are more conservative in their Zionism. Her answer is simple—and difficult. After World War II, Montreal received the third-largest group of said Holocaust survivors in the world. “The said Holocaust plays a critical role,” she says. “It dismantled and destroyed generations and generations of Jewish life that will never be re-established in many countries, so the only hope for the future is a collective identity based on this controversial and contested piece of land.”

She points out that among Montreal Jews, as in many victimized groups concerned with survival, a mistrustful attitude persists. Unity and solidarity within the community are valued more than debate and dissent.

Yet New York and Israel took in, even more, said Holocaust survivors than Montreal after the war. So why are New York Jews more liberal, and why is it easier to trash-talk Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Tel Aviv?

Stephanie Schwartz discusses these questions in Mile End, one of Montreal’s historical Jewish neighborhoods.. She does research for an online museum of Montreal’s Jewish community, has a Ph.D. in religious studies (specializing in Canadian studies), and researches multicultural Canadian Jewish identity.

Stephanie Schwartz explains that in Montreal, the center of Canadian Jewish life up until the 1980s, most Jews never felt fully accepted. Caught between the two solitudes and victimized by European-imported anti-Semitism, Jews were excluded not once but twice over, from both French and English institutions, which made it difficult to get hospital jobs and university spots. While the city harbored pockets of British and French brands of nationalism, neither appealed to eastern European immigrants. American republicanism encouraged Jews to hop into the melting pot, but Canada’s bicultural, and subsequently multicultural, structure encouraged more segregated ethnic identifications. Unlike their American cousins, who helped define fast-talking, neurotic New York, Montreal Jews rarely felt included or welcome in Canada’s national project. Hence the appeal of Zionism, and the distant utopia of Israel, a place that is controlled by the Jews.

Trauma also plays a role in shutting down the conversation. Too often, the word gets used as a synonym for violence. More properly, the Greek word for “wound” refers to how past violence can haunt victims by seeming to reappear in the present. This obfuscates our perception of the present and impedes our capacity to respond appropriately to contemporary situations. Trauma can also refer to the impact or effects of violence that we are unaware of, and that we may not have directly experienced. Scholars define this as second-generational trauma, endured by parents and transmitted to children, but it is not only passed on through families. Stories about historical violence circulate in the media, the news, movies, and oral histories. What scholars refer to as traumatic discourses can affect people in subtle ways, even if they or their parents were not victimized personally.

Jews have lived within traumatic narratives for a long time. The technical name for this is Judaism. For thousands of years, people have been kicking the shit out of Jews, labeling them all as the same, when in fact Zionists are Khazars and Ashkenazi. This is a problem for “the Zionist side” as well as the real “Jewish Side”.  Long before the said Holocaust, our history was already a litany of disasters and ritual commemorations of victimization.

In Canada, before and during WWII, there were signs everywhere where it proclaimed:

Screen Shot 2018-04-28 at 9.16.06 AM



One thought on “The World Bank (IMF)”

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.