You are here

The language of zionism

The inspiration for this post comes from a series of astute comments made by Rhiannon, Cherifa, Made Brani, QRS, and others over time...

Zionists and warmongers apply euphemisms that have become part of our national discourse, and which saturate everyday conversation. Euphemisms mask evil, and allow Zionists and warmongers to define all terms and control all debates.

Here's a partial guide.

Maybe WUFYS readers can list more in the comments section below…

Incorrect termcolor = red> Correct term color = red>
Peace Permanent pre-hostility
Unprovoked attack by USA or Israel Pre-emptive strike
Aggressive war Conflict or dispute
Permanent aggressive war Protracted conflict
Global aggressive war Spreading democracy
Individual resistance to aggressive war Terrorism
Group resistance to aggressive war Insurgency
National resistance to aggressive war Terrorist state / rogue state
Multi-national resistance to aggressive war Axis of evil
Political leader of resistance to aggressive war Dictator / Tyrant
Military leader of resistance to aggressive war Warlord
Any Muslim person who questions aggressive war al-Qaeda
Any other person who questions aggressive war Militant
Department that promotes aggressive war Department of defense
Invasion to promote aggressive war Incursion
Israeli agents of aggressive war Israeli defense force
Victim of aggressive war Illegal combatant
Multiple victims of aggressive war (e.g., the people of Gaza) Enemy entity
Weapons of aggressive war Policy instruments
Massive funding for aggressive war Enhanced force protection
Popular support for aggressive war Democracy
Massive funding for rich weapons makers Supporting the troops
Genocide Degrading the enemy
Dead U.S. soldiers Non-operative personnel
Murder (as a verb) Neutralize
Attack Defend
Facts / evidence / objective reality Enemy propaganda
Theft of natural resources Liberation
Violent measures that allow rich thieves to go on stealing National security
Military censorship Embedded reporters
Destroying civilian infrastructure Asymmetric warfare
Destroying civilians themselves Collateral damage
When bombs miss their targets and wipe out an orphanage Incontinent ordnance
Psychopathic mercenaries / U.S.-employed death squads Security forces
Imprisonment Detention
Prisoner Detainee
Torture Interrogation
Illegal spying on Americans Terrorist surveillance
Questioning war Anti-Americanism
Questioning murder Cut and run
Questioning the government Lack of patriotism
Mass questioning of the government Home-grown terrorism
Mass ignorance Consumer confidence
Debt Finances
U.S. Constitution / Geneva Conventions Quaint and obsolete documents
We will nuke anyone anytime we like All options are on the table
Human bodies Soft targets
Who cares if rag-heads get wasted? There is no moral equivalence between terrorists and security forces
Israelis that violently evict Palestinians from Palestine Settlers
Distraction while we prepare to strike again Peace process (which never ends, since it’s an ongoing “process”)
A child who got blinded / maimed / blown to bits when she accidentally got in the way of our aggression Human shield
Apartheid wall Security fence
Muslim Islamist or Islamofascist
Islam Anti-American radicalism
Questioning zionist atrocities Anti-semitism
Questioning Jewish supremacism Anti-semitism
Questioning U.S. funding for israel Anti-semitism
Questioning AIPAC espionage against the USA Anti-semitism
Reverence for love, innocence, compassion, and all things holy Anti-semitism
Questioning the “holocaust” Anti-semitism
Neglect to capitalize “holocaust” Anti-semitism
Sheer existence of non-Jews Anti-semitism
“Huh?” Anti-semitism
Good morning! Anti-Semtism

In order to promote “peace,” we must use the correct terms in the right-hand column above. :)

Notice how euphemisms have grown worse over time, making the nightmare of war seem more and more tame. In the wake of World War I, traumatized veterans suffered from "shell shock." After World War II it was “combat fatigue.” After the Vietnam “conflict,” it was "post-traumatic stress disorder.” Today it might be called “hypo-patriotic cognitive dissonance.”

Euphemisms vary between situations. For example, U.S. soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan don't refer to “insurgents"; they say “resistance.” The U.S. media forbids the word “resistance,” since it connotes resistance to U.S. aggression. Was the anti-Nazi movement in France (World War II) an “insurgency”? U.S. soldiers in Iraq make fun of euphemisms. They refer to their bases as “Camp Texaco,” “Camp Exxon,” “Camp Shell,” and so on, because they know they are only abroad to help steal oil.

Also, notice how euphemisms become increasingly absurd as an empire dies. Consider how the Bush regime labels its wars of aggression…

Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Operation Noble Cause.
Operation Just Cause
Operation Noble Eagle

Israelis called their 1982 invasion of Lebanon “Operation Peace In Galilee.” The 2006 invasion was “Operation Summer Rain.” What did the Israelis call their 6 Sep 07 air raid into Syria? “Operation Blossoms from Heaven for our Arab Brethren”?

Euphemisms are like fog, or white noise. They drown out the emotion and details of war. They prevent us from discussing American or Israeli aggression, since everyone around us has a head full of empty buzz words. Euphemisms spread confusion and discord even when everyone knows they’re euphemisms. They let us roll over and go back to sleep. They justify the natural human impulse to say, “It’s not my problem.”

Euphemisms are seductive. In-your-face homosexuality becomes “gay rights.” An aborted child becomes a “fetus.” Our financial system regards debt as “money.”

In his novel 1984, and in his famous essay “Politics and the English Language,” George Orwell discusses how words are used to defend the indefensible. Sloppy language causes sloppy thoughts. The power to subjugate comes from the power to define. Sometimes it comes from the power NOT to define, just as Israel refuses to formally declare its borders. The lack of borders and definitions allows any type of aggression. For example, Jane Harman’s “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007” is full of terms that are so vague they can be twisted in any direction. Indeed the entire U.S. legal system no longer places much emphasis on defining terms such as “murder.” This allows people like Bill Clinton to quibble over the definition of the word “is.” (Fortunately this same factor can open windows for defense attorneys.)

By contrast, look closely at U.N. conventions against racism, genocide, and so on. You will see that great care was taken to be very specific with regard to definitions of terms. This is one reason why the Geneva Conventions have been discarded as “quaint” and “obsolete.” What is “quaint” is the desire to be clear and specific.

Most of our disagreements with other people stem from a difference in our respective definitions of terms. How can we debate a Zionist who defines the slaughter of Palestinians as a “defensive maneuver”? If we can’t agree on terms, we can’t agree on anything. If I define the moon as an object made of cheese, and you define it as a rock, then we cannot discuss the moon.

Now look again. Notice that our disagreement with Zionists goes deeper. It stems not from difference in definitions, but from the Zionist’s refusal to even discuss the fundamental process of definition itself. The Zionist knows that if he agrees on the definition of “murder,” for example, he will have no chance. He won’t even discuss “definitions” in the abstract, separately from the “conflict” in Palestine. Thus, communication with Zionists is impossible. There can only be war.

This also applies to American warmongers. When you say, “Let’s first agree on what ‘murder’ is,” the warmonger’s face will contort in disgust. He will accuse you of sophistry, and will call you a “liberal,” when in fact you are merely trying to reach a common basis for any discussion in the first place.

Regarding that word “liberal,” notice how right-wing radio talk show hosts in the USA characterize everything as a war between “liberals” and “conservatives.” Everyone assumes he knows what these terms mean, but no one agrees on the definitions, which makes "liberals-vs-conservative" rhetoric an effective distraction. We think we're communicating, when in fact we are jabbering at each other, while the world crumbles around us.

Of course, none of us can ever fully agree on the definition of any terms, even here at WUFYS, since we all have different personal experiences. (What is “love” for example?) In the early 1900s a group of Anglo-American philosophers (e.g., A.N. Whitehead, Bertrand Russell, Wittgenstein, etc.) felt that all philosophical debates come down to disagreements in the definition of terms. They formed a field of philosophy known an “analytic philosophy,” which sought to reduce philosophical ideas to mathematical formulae. They failed. Nonetheless, what matters in debate is our attitude or spirit or intention. No one can define these terms either, but we all instinctively know what “murder” means. The Zionist does too, but his spirit is evil. There can be no discussion with him.

Sometimes instead of euphemisms we use acronyms in order to make unpleasant or embarrassing things appear “technical,” and therefore tolerable. Permanent U.S. military emplacements become “FOBs” (forward operating bases”). Nuclear weapons are ABMs, ICBMs, MIRVs, SLBMs, and other letters of the alphabet. Under the Reagan Administration, the MX-Missile was renamed "The Peacekeeper." There are no deaths; only "ECs" (enemy casualties). And so on.

Finally, even though debate with warmongers and Zionists is impossible, you can still have fun if you’re clever. Here’s a game…first you appear to agree completely with a warmonger, while you innocently ask for his or her definitions of terms. Do not disagree with those definitions. Instead, pay careful attention, and remember what was said. At the end of your exchange you can nail him with “such-and-such is wrong by your own admission.” At that point the Zionist / warmonger will have nothing left except mindless name-calling, or threats of physical violence against you.

All great debaters in history used this trick (e.g. Socrates, Cicero, Cato, etc.) They started by asking innocent questions, noting how other people defined terms, and carefully remembering what was said. Then they demolished their opponents by using their opponents’ definitions and terms. They did not use those terms “against” their opponents. They let their opponents hang themselves.



and valuable observations and insights.

Language - if you can't agree on the rules, you can't communicate.

From their perpetual twisting of meanings and words I can only conclude that zionists don't WANT to communicate - they want to distract and deceive.

"Money" has no value - people do.


"Money" has no value - people do.

very thorough...this is a post I could have used this 6 months to a year ago - to gain more confidence. But subconsiously...I do believe I did apply some of these amazing tactics - this use of the language of zionists against them.....

I believe I was talking to Leftfield about this back in the spring.

""Euphemisms are seductive. For example, many people compare Zionists with Nazis. This is meant to expose Zionist hypocrisy, but it helps Zionists. If people would educate themselves as to what really happened in World War II, they wouldn’t use this comparison.

Yes, this does indeed help zionists. Even in TV shows like seinfeld, and many others....they love to use the "Nazi" and Hilter for comic relief.


I never find it funny. It turns me off. Why is this funny? I know what they are doing and the average American is too unaware/in the dark to realize this.

And besides...why are jews using the Nazis in their comedy shows and used as comic fodder in movies?

If the "sacred 6 million" is so sacred why make fun of such a horrible time in history?

To me this is very telling.

If Muslims dominated the Film and TV world would they be making jokes about Sharon, Begin and their terrorist gangs of yesterday and today?

I hardly think so. I don't think so at all. The last thing people want is to use a rapist who tore their lives apart as comic relief later on.

Oh no, sweet darling Americans, oh no.

Something surely does smell horrid in the zionist House of Horrors.


The post above was triggered by Made Brani, who bristled when an article referred to the “dispute” in Palestine – but I really wrote it with YOU in mind.

Specifically, disagreements you’ve had with a certain WUFYS reader. My position (and yours) is that Zionists cannot be reasoned with. The above post was meant to give further reasons why.

Regarding your other comments, yes Jews are obsessed with Nazis. They revel in Nazi “holocaust porn.” They call anyone who disagrees with them a “Nazi.” When they perpetrate false-flag operations in local neighborhoods, they paint swastikas on synagogue walls. The whole Nazi thing is in their dreams, in their pornographic fantasies – in everything. It's as though Jewish infants have Nazi flags for diapers.

To compare Zionists to Nazis is to get sucked into this illness, and to legitimize the holocaust hoax. It conceals the real reason why Germany was forced to invade Poland (Poles and Jews were butchering Germans, while the USA and England denied Hitler’s request for help). Germany invaded Russia because Russia was preparing to invade Germany. Jews originated the idea of wearing yellow stars, as I once explained at WUFYS.

All these facts, and a thousand more, are concealed when people compare Zionists to Nazis. People may think they’re exposing Zionist hypocrisy, but they are adopting the Zionist obsession, and thus playing by Zionists’ rules.

Ahmadinejad does not play this game. He simply asks, “Whether or not the holocaust actually happened, why must Palestinians pay for it today?”

This is a very useful tool to decipher BS. The interesting thing is that I hear these terms ALL THE TIME when I turn on the radio. It's all lies.

Great post AA. I hope WRH or some other blog directs others to WUFYS to see it.
"Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly."


"Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly."

Do you fear a "lier" or a "BSer" more?

According to a Princeton University professor, a lier is someone who knows the truth. A BSer doesn't and doesn't care. I fear a lier far more. A BSer normally can't get too far before getting busted big time.

There is a good reason for our beloved criminals to be so inimitably interested in psychology and language and perception intensive professions. Because these are applied instrumentation sciences for control. Conversely they run from pure sciences, arts, literature, because these are tools for creation and it is against their religion to create anything that can be used by outsiders to their community.

So using language and perception as lever of confusion and control is the first purpose. But it is short term and limited in scale. I think there is a long term and far more sinister purpose here too. And that is destroying goy cultures in general.

Words and language are means of communications, but they didn't fall off the blue sky or created a hundred years ago by some smart guy. Every single word represents a chunk of cultural history of nations. Even names have deep meanings. Take Diana. It comes from Daena, the angel escorting a forgiven to heaven. Daena becomes Deen or Din in islamic names like Salaheddin or Jalaleddin.

Almost all cross pollinating concepts in the world is nonjudaic. The number of hebrew words in any language is easily negligible. I believe the reason that the judaics incessantly soil concepts, perceptions, and what the words are supposed to mean is not just for short term gains, but because these are all from nonjudaic civilizations and they just do not agree with them. I wonder if this is not the real source for 'clash of civilizations' garbage.

(I can think of a bunch of correct=/=incorrect ones, but maybe later. Just a few now:

Judaization = Ethnic cleansing
Multiculturism = No cultural identity
Prochoice = Donate to $4b kosher abortion industry.
Feminism = Defeminization )


The way you think....

very cool.

I like the take on the name Diana - I didnt know that.



courtesy of News from the west blogspot

Hope you don't mind.

"Money" has no value - people do.


"Money" has no value - people do.


Thank you Abdul for an important contribution. Your word list is very helpful and it can indeed be extended and elaborated upon.

Concepts are the building blocks of intelligent life. If you ruin these building blocks the whole structure of society will crumble.

The MSM is playing an important role to destroy society and to that end we have seen a disturbing concentration of media power over recent years. Lying is not an issue in the category of "bad manners", it has the purpose of enslaving us in "their reality". This morning I read an article about new atrocities on the West Bank along with some readers' comments. It was a shocking how successful the MSM are in mentally enslaving the public.

To safeguard your own sanity and to help others you may try to describe completely unrelated events using the same terminology and the same kind of "logics" used by MSM in describing current events in ways which you realize are clearly manipulative.

I tried my hand on the term "conflict", which upset me as it was used in an article about murder. You can probably do better, so please share your experiences with us.


“In the troubled state of Texas violence flared up again yesterday when well trained Activists made a successful incursion in the biggest WalMart in Austin. An Activist spokesperson who prefers to stay anonymous assures us that the Activists retreated safely leaving behind 28 dead shoppers, all of them militants.

This is one of the biggest losses of life to violence in Texas for a week. The President who is particularly compassionate when it comes to Texans felt compelled to make this statement during our interview with him: “This is a terrible loss of life, and it is very important for me to urge both parties to act with restraint to avoid escalating this conflict any further!”.

When reminded that more than half of the 28 dead were women and children, some of them just infants he added: “This is really what worries me….that militancy has penetrated even these groups of society, and it just underscores the need to teach conflict resolution from kindergarten”.

Asked whether the Activists are to blame for this latest upsurge of violence the President declined to “take sides” as this would be unhelpful in the peace process which is ongoing between the two conflicting parties. He just said: “I am very hopeful!”

However, the President felt compelled to add this: “The Activists feel under serious threat, and therefore, my personal feeling is that we shall not succeed in our good peace making efforts without a clear and unequivocal undertaking by the shoppers that the Activists have the right to exist and that they respect the Activists’ precious cultural and religious tradition and fully support all good efforts to give the Activists living space big enough to make them feel safe!”

The president had also this to say: “In a strange way, we are all shoppers, so we all share responsibility not to entice violence by our behaviour, even if we may not consider ourselves to be militant shoppers. That we should never forget! We are up against the sensitivities of the Activists, and I feel confident that nobody would dare to call themselves anti-Activists! We must remember that the people of the Activists have suffered persecution for one million years, and they have lost 6 trillion of their best men and women, most of them murdered when they were just babies! That must never be forgotten! I am sure that if you were in a similar situation you would also be pissed and maybe lose your temper in a shopping mall now and again! Who can blame them?”

Diana = Daena actually breaks down to Dae + Na :

Dae- relates to nurturing, protecting, and mothering. English Deity and Diva, and French Prie Dieu (literally pray god) are relative concepts.

Na- relates to container, place of birth, as in Nation.

So Deen/Din comes down to a pretty good place to be in : a protected refuge for life.


this is very interesting.

Anything to do with the Roman Goddess Diana [her Greek counterpart, Artemis]?

She also represents those keywords: birth, protection, nurturing.

All in all, Kats, I like it...glad you brought this up.

Stunning how these pieces of info may tie in together. Of course I am not calling any of this fact.

When I was in middle school I enjoyed reading about Artemis and Diana. All the other Goddesses fell by the wayside.


Judaization = Ethnic cleansing
Multiculturism = No cultural identity
Prochoice = Donate to $4b kosher abortion industry.
Feminism = Defeminization )



I am not into music, but a friend of mine who is once said, if you break down a new song into say 20 segments, only 2-3 segments might be new and the rest are pieces that the artist might have heard in an elevator, a dentist waiting room, but the new arrangement doesn't allow anyone to notice that, and hears a 'new' song.

I think a lot of tangible and intangible cultural norms of nations are also like the songs. They are new arrangements of pieces already in place plus some fundamental new ones.

But Daena, before becoming an angel or goddess Diana was a belief that was supposed to stay in somebody's heart.

" ... I am not calling any of this fact. "

Even if you do, we should take the 'period' off. We are not at the end of the world. We are still digging into the past and future. Every thing should be kept 'updatable'.

When I was in middle school, they told us there were five main races in the world. By college they said its three now!

[The linked article above failed to mention that mesopotamians revered moon and that's why islam is more comfortable with crescent than sun as a symbol.]


Awesome!! My thanks and deep gratitude for what you've all done here.

AKA: B'rithishaurus

We're all anti-semites, for even KNOWiNG TRUTH!!


Victim = Any Jew in trouble. The term should not be applied to others as that would nurture moral relativism.

Survivor = Short for Holocaust Survivor. A religious concept which must be carefully protected against misuse, that removes focus from the Holocaust. Example of contexts to be avoided: Cancer survivor.

A comment to the concept of peace: It is correctly defined in the present situation, but in the not too distant future peace will mean total submission by the Goyim. The US is advancing towards peace: Total peace already exists in Congress!

zionite mafia terrorist who commits pre-meditated hate*crimes for the don =

a promising star with an academic future; a good kid who plays the occasional prank 5x.

Of all the highly insightful reality masks peeled away by AA the central one is the fact that we exist at all as the problem to the jew. The others are all subsets of it because when we are all disposed of the subsets no longer apply.

The solution to the jewish central problem of our continuing existence is always a work-in-progess, with `final solution` being the objective.

So, think Armenian Genocide 1915, WW1, Ukrainian Genocide 1931, WW2, German Genocide 1945-50, Russian Genocide 1918-53, Iraq Genocide 1991-?, Iranian Genocide 2008, followed by real holocausting by Israeli nukes of American and Russian survivors of an iternecine nuclear exchange.

That way they shall be rid of us useless eaters most threatening to them, and the remaining peoples of the world will cower before the jew.

But that will avail them no respite as they too become trespassers on their own lands, and there will be nowhere to go as the jew is by then sole inheritor of Planet Israel.


Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer