Feb 5Liked by Anthony James Hall

According to GOP Congressman ( Florida ) Brian Mast

Dead Palestinian babies aren't all that innocent.

He believes that Palestinian babies are not innocent civilians but "terrorists" who should be killed.

Mast made the horrifying comment when confronted by Code Pink protesters outside his office on Wednesday.

In a video Mast can be seen calmly telling the demonstrators. "It would be better if you kill all the terrorists and kill everyone who are supporters.

When asked if he has seen the babies killed in Israeli attacks, Mast says, " These are not innocent Palestinian civilians.

The babies ? " the activist asks in astonishment.

Mast then says that the "half a million people starving to death" should have elected a pro Israel government.

Hmmm... isn't that what was said about the 3million civilians bombed to death in Germany.

When one protester points out that much of Gaza's infrastructure has been destroyed, Mast says," And there's more that needs to be destroyed. Did you hear me? There's more that needs to be destroyed, he said again for emphasis.

Why do I bring this to the table. To point out that this is the thinking, belief and nature of many Israeli Jews, and above all that total lack of empathy to the suffering of others, let anything happen to Jewish sensibilities however and listen to the cries of anguish. It is a nature alien to most gentiles and it is important to make note of that distinction. It therefore is impossible and silly for a gentile to attempt to affect the thinking or behaviour of a hateful Jew by conversation, no matter how logical that might be. The true masters of all humanity have counted on this for centuries as they turned everything upside down and confounded the minds and souls of all gentiles.

Almost every great thinker throughout recorded time has lived by a code of self restraint, of truth to self and others as a foundation for living a life worth living in any so called civilization which by its nature is fraught with faults. A life worth living is only possible where the stage is set for it to flourish. That stage is one of rules and laws which go beyond the norms of civility and actively protect said life worth living.

So do we go on.. every man for himself a sure fire road to zero. Or do we unite.. small at first ( the core of formulation and principle ) then larger groups until we can no longer be ignored, until due to our strength and principles we no longer ask we simply take, because that is our right as a people. As in take away the corrupt power bloc that has ruled the country for decades.


Expand full comment

Are the rightfully God chosen owners of the planets resources including Specie Homo Sapiens really backing off, taking a deep breath and noticing what the little bought and paid for homies are doing and saying these days. Are they possibly shaking with fear... NNNAAAAHHH

The homies are at the domicile watching Tellie munching Poppies chicken and sucking pepsi through a straw or whatever when they are not doing some silly soon redundant job somewhere. Scurry on .. dance the dance... consume or die

Every day the visible front men ( the politicians ) of the real owners of all under the sky are in the hot seat, so the fool would think. In Europe those monsters in Brussels are attacked and cowed by the latest group of citizens enraged about their way of life being ruined, while trying to feed a hungry world. Call me a cynic but I have seen this play before, the game should be called the price isn't right. There will be many many more beautiful retirement villas in the Alps and along the shores of the mediterranean after things quiet down. There are a lot of no shows in this fest like all the people.

Stuff is going on however and I call it the soft shuffle. Now we have that shrieking would be this or that creature Brandon from the UK who has reinvented himself again and is getting plenty of air time on some talk shows. Speaking of air thats all this guy is.. hot Air and bullshit. Ever notice how many of the know it all mouthpieces especially in the Alt/media hail from the UK.

Tucky had a guest the other day (named Weinstein I think) an academic with a lot knowledge in human biology, virology and the human immune system. The conversation was the Darien Gap in the Jungle of Panama where most migrants have to pass through. Weinstein had visited the place and was telling Tucker about his trip. When the talk got around to the Chinese young men there and how they could be a danger to the US... I took notice. Why just the Chinese and not the more numerous others.

Didn't the US... Nixon and Kissinger force the one child only policy on the Chinese back in the seventies to obtain most valued world trade partner with the US. Being a patriarchal society boys where in, not so much little girls. What is China to do with the two males out of three who can't marry and have children. Another brilliant forethought of the chosenites.

Next up the C19 vaccines and Chinas role in the vaxx as a bio weapon came up, that too struck me as dubious finger pointing. When funding for research into weaponizing a virus transmittable into humans was stopped in the US It all transferred to China. Fauci (not Chinese) and company servants of the chosenites oversaw the funding and research. There's the plan Stan. This Kettle is full of rotten fish and not just Chinese ones either. To the western mind the terror of the yellow peril is always present seemingly brought on by the Mongolian conquests of eastern Europe in the the 12th and 13th centuries. Their cruelties much like Israel is displaying today certainly had an effect on medieval Europe. Well .. the Chinese are not Mongolian and themselves fell victim to the yellow horde and other tribes from the steppes.

Just a thought. Was there not another walking human like biped primate walking the earth at one time. Yea... it was Homo Erectus wasn't it then more recently the Neanderthals. I wonder what happened to them.

They sound great , strong virile and masculine unlike Homo Sappiens.

You don't suppose that mother Nature in her wisdom has planned for our exit as well. If so then I know by what means she plans to do it. Clever old bitch.


Expand full comment

You really nailed it like an yone else who is not corrupt. If it walk like a duck, looks like a duck behave like a duck then IT IS A DUCKE. What is in play is no more less than a GENOCIDAL EVENT perpetuated by ISRAELI STATE, period..

Expand full comment
Feb 5·edited Feb 5Liked by Anthony James Hall

Good article, apart from this

“Then on January 26 the ICJ came out with a historic ruling that acknowledged that a plausible instance of genocide was occurring in Gaza. The court did not order a cease fire. According to Michel Chossudovsky, the Court opted rather to call on the Netanyahu government to prevent and punish itself for possibly committing genocide.”

The ICJ called for the end of the killings and of all action which may result in harm for the Palestinian people.

In other words, it did called for a cease fire.

They did not use the term ceasefire, but in their written decision, using the technical terminology related to their convention, they did.

“Ceasefire” is is just the word used for the madia spin.

Advise you read this article which explains in details from a legal point of view what the ICJ decision say.


Also the court did not told the government to investigate them selfs, that is a job for the Supreme court of israel, and not by “politicians”.

Also, taking israel propaganda quotes about the court judgment, as legit should ring some bells in your head.

Professor Chossudovsky, may be a great economist but not a lawyer

Here is more from Gaza


Expand full comment

I appreciate you comment Sol Son and I can see you are following events very closely. I have been following Craig Murray including the essay you cite, prior essays, and his appearances on George Galloway's "Mother of All Talk Shows." The two men went to school tother in Dundee I believe. In fact I have been following his role in all this. Murray inspired me to push for a Genocide Convention case which I did a couple of times on Press TV. Then along came South Africa. It unfolding like poetry. I suspect, although he never said so directly, that Murray played played a role in the process of persuading the government of South Africa to develop its case.

You write, "The ICJ called for the end of the killings and of all action which may result in harm for the Palestinian people.. In other words, it did called for a cease fire." Surely the ICJ have called for much more than a cease fire by calling for an end to the genocide, plausible and actual. I have been following Prof. Chossudovsky closely on this story which he understands in depth. I published my first article in Global Research in 2008. Michel started Global Research.ca in 2001. If you look through the archives of the publication you'll find its a vast repository of activist scholarship on a huge array of topics.Michel is a an economist but to put him in that box and to belittle his grasp of legal issues because he is not a lawyer doesn't cut it for me.

In explaining his background on this case, which he does in the accompanying video, Michel emphasizes his work over a number of years in the Kuala Lumpur Commission whose work included indicting Israel for war crimes and genocide. I encourage you to go deeper than simply dismiss Michel's argument on the basis that's he's OK as an economist but should leave the jurisprudence aspect of all this to the lawyers and judges.

Michel asserts

"The option to entrust Netanyahu’s Cabinet with the “Prevent and Punish” assignment was a decision of the World Court. The 17 Judges could have demanded that the Israeli government cease all genocidal actions. They could also have recommended that the “prevent and punish” mandate be assigned to a United Nations body, including the UN Security Council."

What about it? Why is Michel wrong to have made this observation? What if Joan Donoghue really is steering the judicial ship with signals from her former colleagues now prominent in the Biden White House. I'm not saying you are wrong and that I am right. But I am asking you to address the substance of the crucial issue before us. I'm suggesting you come up with a reason for dismissing Michel that has more jam than your generalization about his academic specialty.

I'd like to see some broader discussion from those who care about this matter about whether Prof. Chossudovsky is right or wrong to smell a rat in the ICJ's assignment to the Netanyahu government of the responsibility to investigate, prevent, and punish this very obvious case of genocide.

I've seen Michel in action over the years and I'm still learning from him constantly. All and all though, thanks for dropping by and thanks for you pertinent observations. You've given me an opening to elaborate a bit and I'm grateful for that opening. This stuff is really really important. But you know that.

Expand full comment
Feb 5·edited Feb 5

As Sol points out, and as Craig Murray has written, it does look like the ICJ asked the Israeli courts not it's government to apply it's orders.

The provisional measures of the International Court of Justice by Thierry Meyssan also gives an insightful perspective.

"The Court’s order is binding not only on Israel and South Africa, but also on the 151 other States that have signed the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Depending on their situation, each of them is obliged to associate itself with the provisional measures. Some could interpret this as justifying an embargo on all armaments, or prohibiting their dual nationals from taking part in this potentially genocidal war."


As such, Prof Michel Chossudovsky's call for an international campaign based upon...

"Nuremberg Principle IV is not only a “Legal Text”, It is A Guiding Light in a Worldwide campaign against Acts of Genocide"

... seems to me to be the most insightful part of his article (which Anthony James Hall linked to for his above article).

Expand full comment

Thank you Anthony, you can call me Sol.

I use globalreach for many years now, and find it an excellent source for information, Nevertheless, when we are talking about international criminal law, I reader listen to what diplomats and lawyers have to say.

Our great professor’s interpretation, is also in my opinion wrong, as the terminology of the ruling speaks clearly.

I also agree to the extent that the court should have used stronger word and terms, and demand the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the Palestinian territories.

Nevertheless, they did orders “not the government” but the Israeli court which is the only body which can peruse civil criminal investigation for incitement to violence.

So once again, no, the court did not asked the prime minister to investigate it self.

It asked the competent israeli court to do it.


Also, some weeks ago, the Supreme Court of israel took away some police power from the defense minister which was not allowing protests against the war.

So once again, the Supreme Court have the police at its disposal, and can order the arrest of anyone it finds guilty.

Note also this, the same day the ICJ told the world it was going to open its investigation, israel killed some hamas leader by drone strike in the middle of a city in “Lebanon”.

By saying this I am not justifying the weak language of their provisional measures, but anyway, this is also a fact which may have made them think twice before formulating their provisional measures.

Anyhow, we must use what we got, because crying for what we don’t does not help.

Expand full comment

To Sol and Natasha. I agree. We have to creatively work with what we get from the judiciary, which initially surprised me for its candour. And then came Michel's criticism. Kevin Barrett was not at all pleased with my account when I brought up the new information into our recent digital exchange


Jerome Irwin goes way farther than Michel in criticizing the ICJ ruling an more in a new GR article that came out today.


Expand full comment

yes Anthony, but once again, we can go on criticising the ICJ ruling for as long as we like, and for sure there is much to criticise of the fact it did not order the withdrawal of the Israeli militias from the Palestinian territories, but than again, the provisional measures are clear just as clear is the fact that the israeli government is ignoring them and thereby braking the law.

Genocide is the most serious of all crimes, and those indicted have no way out of this one.

All they can hope is to be sentenced “like the ICJ ordered, in israel.

So once again, I think the moral of this story, is that we should try to help enforcing the existing decision, and we should not give excuses to the Genocidal maniacs to carry on pretending the decision was just bad because it did not use the term ceasefire, or “the court told the prime minister to indite him self”, that is absurd.

And by the way, looks like the prime minister of israel is about to be replaced.


Expand full comment

Here's is my comment which came up on some of these issues I discussed via radio. It came up when I was a guest with Dr. Kevin Barrett on his Substack, Kevin's Newsletter


From Hall

"That's too flippant and misleading Kevin. When we discussed the genocide party animals on your show, and I didn't go along with your easy peesy narrative. You wanted to correct me, not converse with me in a constructive fashion about the news that I was looking into concerning Prof. Chossudovsky's critique of the ICJ ruling.

I specifically explained that I had at that point read Chossudovsky but had not yet read to source documents. So I indicated I would hold back from going deeper in an analysis until I had done more homework. That's different than folding because I didn't have a good answer to your question." What was your.... oh so good question... for which I apparently didn't have a good answer? Rather than engaging in debate and then declaring yourself to be the winner, back up a bit. At least tell me the content of the good question I couldn't, or chose not to answer. After all I'm a volunteer doing a public service, not an applicant for a job or a student doing a test.

Hi John Scrivener. Welcome to the discussion. OK. Now I know how you read my psychology. It looks like a reasonable possibility. This whole subject about what to do about a genocide right in our face every day, can have a depressive effect. But now that you have come up with your diagnosis of my mental state, what about contributing to the substance of issue at hand. Any thoughts outside the ad hominem realm on the substance of the ICJ ruling and on various responses to it?

Prof. Chossudovsky is incredibly productive, far reaching, and deep digging in his activist scholarship. He deserves some respect and consideration Kevin. To me he is an exemplary illustration of a senior academic keeping up with the news as a tenacious activist scholar. How many like him are around? Maybe my bias as a Canadian is a factor here.

My first encounter with Michel was when he accepted my essay after our Edmonton presentation in 2008. "The Lies and Crimes of 9/11" is still published on my archive at GR.ca. You may not be aware John that I gave my first 9/11 paper at the Stanley E Milner Library in Edmonton, sharing the podium with Kevin. Kevin was then riding the wave of his fame as the Fox New's favourite evil Muslim... and a traitor to boot.

Its too early to shut down open debate on the ICJ ruling. It seems, however, everything that needs to be decided on the World Court's role has already been decided here on Kevin's newsletter. Or if there is to be a discussion, I've already been disqualified. Nothing to see here ladies and gentlemen. Just move along.

Once we got beyond the interrogation phase, I thought the conversational grass became somewhat greener between us.

Here's the GR version of the new essay you included in the intro to our conversation. Thanks for including in your comments."


Expand full comment

Caitlin Johnstone, However Bad You Think Israel Is, It's Worse

"The IDF has been running a Telegram channel featuring homemade snuff films in which Gazans are brutally murdered by Israeli forces, captioned with celebrations of the gore and pain therein like “Burning their mother… You won’t believe the video we got! You can hear their bones crunch.” The IDF had previously denied any association with the channel, but Haaretz now reports that it was directly run by an IDF psychological warfare unit."


Expand full comment

I've seen flashes of all kinds of music videos and such presenting satirical representations of injured and dead Palestinian children and such. Its a way bigger phenomenon, I suppose, than a single IDF Telegraph channel. The children's choir with the horrific genocidal words and images was pretty bad. But the tsunami of degrading imagery and words keeps rising. I can't think of anything remotely like it that I've ever witnessed in my 72 years.

Expand full comment

Good work. You "think" elections are rigged? "Most elections these days are rigged. There are many well-established means of doing this cheating. One of the main techniques is through the exploitation of hackable systems of digital vote counting. Another common feature is the sabotage of elections by well-orchestrated networks of large media cartels."

Fuck, Anthony. Money. $. Media is $$. You think Carnegie was just a guy with no power, no influence?

Money, booze runners, cigarette runners, the entire cartel of casino capitalism.

Capitalism is all about cheating, and 21st century hacking by the Jews of Israel or Jews of Little Tel Aviv, come on, brother.

Entire countries are the outcome of cheating, treaty making and treaty breaking. Why the hell would elections be immunde from a Sucker is Born Every Nanosecond SMoke and Mirrors Snake Oil Salesmen?


Richard is hot today. Scroll down.



Boss Tweed looks like Fred ROgers today compared to these pollitical and economic and media hitmen/women:

Tammany Hall, also known as the Society of St. Tammany, the Sons of St. Tammany, or the Columbian Order, was an American political organization founded in 1786 and incorporated on May 12, 1789, as the Tammany Society.

Expand full comment

Excellent, incisive, unbiased analysis

Expand full comment