The Protocols Of The Old Fathers Of Zion (

THE HANDSTAND............................................................................................AUGUST 2002

GUIDE TO THE PERPLEXED

English translation by:Philip Simpson

"A Guide to the Perplexed, is a fascinating document, a revolutionary creation, a personal novel replete with anger and pain, constructed around the controversial personality of Gunther Wanker.
Wanker, a cold and unemotional man, but possessing superior intellect and a rare prophetic gift, sets before the astonished reader the story of a strange life, full of upheavals. Wanker, the father of peepology, an Israeli by birth, presents in his book a personal and harrowing account of disillusionment, with the Zionist experience and with experience in general.

"Gilad Atzmon, like the protagonist of his story, is a cold and unemotional man, but unlike his protagonist, his intellect is unimpressive and his gift for prophecy meagre. Atzmon, a jazz musician
with an international reputation, sets out before the astonished reader the life story of Gunther Wanker, the ultimate cold man of superior intelligence with a rare prophetic gift. Atzmon is unravelling a life-story utterly different from his own, in that Atzmon, unlike his protagonist, has none of these gifts. The question has to be asked: can a shallow individual like Atzmon shed light on a life of rare chievement? This, like many other questions, stays with us from the beginning of the book to our own end.", Bernadette Levin, literary editor.

Excerpt from the PREFACE

This book constitutes another chapter in the process of research into Israeli Hebrew culture, as conducted by the German Institute for the Documentation of Zion. This ongoing project is designed to bridge the chasm of spiritual silence that has been opened with the fading of the Zionist dream. It is no longer a secret that the cultural contribution of the State of Israel to the intellectual life of the globe, in the sixty years of its existence, was modest indeed. While the shelves of book-stores are laden to overflowing with sage words from the workshop of Jewish intellectuals of the Diaspora, from the temples of reason of the Jewish state, not one item of wisdom has emerged, nothing worthy of respectful consideration at the global level, consideration that finds its expression in foreign translation. The German Institute for the Documentation of Zion, under my personal supervision, has set itself the objective of deciphering this paradoxical phenomenon. What is it in Jews that paralyses their brains and turns them into imbeciles when they are gathered together? Professor Gunther Wanker, whose journal is presented here, expressed
himself on numerous occasions on this issue. In various seminars he used to say, ironically, that in Jews there is something resembling chemical fertiliser. Chemical fertiliser, if distributed evenly over a broad swathe of land has the effect of promoting growth, but if it is concentrated at a single point, it acts as a deadly toxin. Through this analogy Professor Wanker used to hint at the life-enhancing element inherent in Jews dispersed by the Diaspora, and the life-threatening element inherent in their gathering together.

Represented by:
The Susijn Agency
3rd Fl, 64 Great Titchfield Street, London W1W 7QH
tel: 00 44 20 7580 6341 fax: 00 44 20 7580 6341
email: laura@thesusijnagency.com
www.thesusijnagency.com

Gilad Atzmon - a foreigner in London -Carina Prange, Jazzdimensiones,Berli© jazzdimensions 2000

Primarily, Gilad Atzmon is known as an excellent saxophone-player, but there's more important things to tell about him as well: He is a philosopher, has left Israel because of political reasons - and he enjoys his role as a foreigner in London: because of the opportunities this position offers for one's own personality. - And what also must
be mentioned is his 'group of foreigners', which this autumn will release a new CD on
Enja Records.

Gilad Atzmon came to Berlin to talk to Carina Prange at the Jazzdimensions-Office.

Carina: In your linernotes is written: 'This is an original creation by four differentpeople who come from different backgrounds. It is about being a foreigner and enjoying it to the limit ...' - Could you explain that to me?

Gilad: For me, being a foreigner is a great advantage. The first thing, you might want to
do as a foreigner, is to assimilate - to be like the others, which is possible sometimes. - Doing it, you loose some main features of your identity! This is not a problem in itself - it is a loss for the others: It might be problem for you if I loose my identity, because you might miss some cultural feature that I can contribute to you.

Now the new western culture is very multicultural in an aspect, we can explore many
different views. Foreigners are in many cases refugees, political asylant people, people
that suffer - or just people that want a better life - that are not happy: "I can be better off
in Germany than in Istanbul or in Ankara."

In England the contribution of the foreign culture to the society is massive. Many of the artists are foreign people!

As the result of that moving population in the world we have the advantage of meeting people that are very, very radical, or interesting, or selfish, or individualists. - In England the contribution of the foreign culture to the society is massive. Many of the artists are foreign people!.

Foreign people have done a massive shift in their life - they took all the bags, they said bye-bye to their parents - maybe for twenty years. My album is about that: I am a foreigner in England. My drummer is a foreigner in England. The bassplayer and the pianist in a way are "foreigners in my music".

We came from so many different places and created something that has never been there before. Whether you like the album or not is another question - but it is definitely different music!. You understand what I mean? It's different for me - I could play Arabic music with Arab people - but this is kind of combination with jazz and I wanted everybody to come with his own kind of self-dimension.

Carina: You have studied philosophy - when did you decide to earn a living by
playing music?

Gilad: I was making a very good living in Israel as a RocknRoll producer and a session-player. But being a producer means to produce "commodities" - something that people will buy. So I had this kind of an intense commercial pressure on myself. I think, I wasn't too bad in luck - I was doing - I had a good living. And then, approaching the age of 32, I was completely bored with it - I couldn't do it any more.

And funny enough at the same time I was facing a book called "Slonimsky -Thesaurus of Scales" - have you heard about it(*)? It is a book that every jazz-musician in America knows by heart. It is like a very much "twentieth century approach" to music. Although it is a Russian book it very much explores the twelve-note-scheme.

And I just thought that I can explore "musical dimensions" through a very, very different aspect of improvisation. - Actually - for you: Slonimsky was the main book, that influenced Coltrane, Mike Stern, Scofield. It is a very important book. And - thinking about that, I began to ask too many questions about aesthetics.

Getting into aesthetics, I started to get more and more involved into German philosophy -
basically in Kant: "Third Critic". I remember that I started from a very critical position towards Kant. How comes that he says that "aesthetic" has something to do with "subjectivity"? And then I began to understand the difference between "aesthetic" and "aesthetic pleasure" and "fashion" - which is not necessarily "aesthetic" pleasure.

I don't have any problem to wake up at four o'clock in the morning, with my saxophone, on the road, no problem - but to teach philosophy?

I got more and more into philosophy. I went to England - funny enough - to study German
philosophy. Then I was supposed to start to work as a philosophy-teacher. Just an assistant in the university. And the first morning, that I had to wake up like six o'clock, going from London to Rochester - I don't have any problem to wake up at four o'clock in the morning, with my saxophone, on the road, no problem - but to teach philosophy? This is not way of living, straight away - and this was the end of my philosophical career! But I am still very interested in it, wherever I go. It's quite always a problem for my local tourmanager, because I used to ask questions all the time.

Carina: Lets get from philosophy to technology: what about the internet?

Gilad: Internet is a very good thing, a very, very good thing -all the time it is clear that this
is where we go now. The main question is - and it is very massive: we have jazz - like a million sites. Nobody chooses for you and it will be very difficult - the way I think as a philosopher - to develop a "conditional flavor" or "guide" to get around the multiplicity. And I don't see how this will happen.

What happens now: More and more and more people make companies, everyday. People that want to put my music on the internet. Only six months ago I thought: Yeah! - I'll send my music to all this internet-sites. - Now I don't want to send it to anyone, I prefer to "stay small"

So, I have my site, that I have actually to maintain. I am on the road for so long. I am going to be at home now for a week and I am going to work on it. So I want to stay small, I want people come to me - like the way I came to you. There is something about that effort, that you don't get fed: You want to be hungry. You want to get to search around, to meet people that you didn't expect.

But it is a much longer approach. Your life in this business will be determined by the quality ... - That's about the internet! - You might say: it is not ready yet, and you might say it will never be ready. It might be that it is like a "transforming" medium, that is kind of a complete evolution.

Gilad Atzmon & the Orient House Ensemble

Carina: How do you get in contact to other musicians you play with - how do you decide with whom to play or not?

Gilad: I don't play with too many musicians. It doesn't look like, but I am very shy. If my bassplayer is ill or has a problem - and I have to find another bassplayer - I will call my pianist: "Oh, we have a problem ..." - Funny enough, my friend - the drummer on my latest album - can call anyone. He could call Randy Brecker - he got this confidence!

All my life I already "walk" with the same people. It takes me some time to find people to walk with. For instance for the new album, we tried very different musicians for like seven months -. I was already about to do the album with a specific bassplayer and pianist. Then - by coincidence - we had a jam-session with that drummer and arranger. I liked this way to play, they were very natural, they didn't try to play "Arabic" or "Jewish" or "Gypsy" - they asked me: "What you want to play?" - I said: "Just play the way you understand it - this is beautiful, let's go on!"

I am not a typical person that meets musicians. What I want to do now is the "Orient House": in every country, every territory, every area, every town I want to meet the local musicians to come to play with me. That as kind of an authentic approach to music!

* Nicolas Slonimsky: Thesaurus of Scales and Melodic Patterns (1997) Music Sales Corporation;
ISBN: 082561449X
Carina Prange
CD: Gilad Atzmon & the Oriental House Ensemble
(Enja Records/Tiptoe, TIP-888839 2)

Gilad Atzmon im Internet: www.gilad.co.uk

The Protocols Of The Old Fathers Of Zion (Verse 2)

By Gilad Atzmon

In the last weeks there have been some very serious rumours, probably originating in Israel, claiming that G. Bush's latest speech concerning the need for 'Palestinian reforms' was sent to Jerusalem for final proofing and corrections not less than twenty eight times. Whether this is the case, whether it was twenty-eight times or just seven, whether it was physically
corrected in Jerusalem or just followed some guidelines that were drawn by the Jewish lobby in Washington, is not the real issue anymore. It is more
than clear that the American administration is completely biased when it comes to the Israeli- Arab conflict. This very one-sided approach should be scrutinised.

These days when American policy makers endorse far right nationalistic views, the US administration reveals itself voluntarily as the biggest enemy of world peace, and the American president is searching desperately for new allies to form a coalition to support his phony 'war against terror', it is hardly surprising to discover that the Jewish state and Zionists lobbies are fairly active behind the scenes. It all makes far more sense when you find out that America's current divorce from humanism is closely associated with Israeli interests. A brief study of the history of Israel will reveal that from its very early days Zionism specialised in tracing dark political motivations and interests in order to abuse them to the very limit. Zionism is a very singular political method aimed at perfecting the transformation of world disasters and human pain into Jewish gain.

Already in the first Zionist congress, in Basel (1897), Herzl, the first and most famous Jewish Zionist, illustrated this method. According to Herzl, Zionism could promise redemption for the Jewish people as long as it fitted into a larger colonial agenda of any of the greater colonial superpowers. Herzl himself travelled between the European political centres, promising full collaboration and support from the Jewish people in exchange for land in which to locate the Jewish state. This very basic motivation to associate with the world superpowers is an evident factor throughout the history of
Zionism. Somehow, Zionists always volunteer to serve the colonial interests of any leading power. This fundamental tendency to join forces with superpowers led to an internal debate within the Zionist movement concerning the independence of the whole Zionist adventure. Since Zionism religiously presents itself as a devoted servant of larger colonial forces, it is not clear whether Zionism can possess any sense of autonomy.

After the creation of the state of Israel this very question turned into a political debate. Since the Zionist movement insisted on presenting the world with the Idea of a Jewish sovereign state, it is clear that many of the most crucial developments in the history of Israel and Zionism were influenced by major global changes. Since Israel associates its fate with major dominating forces there is a growing concern among Zionist politicians regarding the independence and the autonomy of Israeli decision-making.
Those concerns are well justified. Throughout the history of Israel we can detect different cases of obvious conflict between Israel and its source of colonial hegemony.

From time to time, Israel fails to comply with its supporting superpower. These kinds of conflicts led to the divorce from the British Empire (1947) and from the French hegemony (before the '67 war). Moreover, more than once Israel got itself into face to face conflicts with the US. Until now it has been Israel that had to bow and eventually to accept American views. Somehow, this time it looks a bit different. For the very first time it looks as if it is America, the world supreme superpower, that should be
concerned. This time it is America that is about to lose its sovereignty. Now, it looks as if Zionist lobbies control American foreign politics. After so many years of independence, the United States of America is becoming a remote colony of an apparently far greater state, the Jewish state. Yes Israel, a very small place in the eastern corner of the Mediterranean Sea. If you try to look for it on your globe at home you will probably need a magnifying glass.

The idea that Zionists have taken over America might sound bizarre in the first instance but we must remember that this kind of strange scenario does happen. Last month I heard Israel Shamir's observation regarding this very issue. In a very open manner he said that no one would be surprised to hear that during different phases of the British Empire the world was governed by a very close group of 'Eton' graduates. "Some times" he added, "great empires are taken over by very marginal groups". We might have to acknowledge that this is the case with America. American foreign policy is
dictated by a very marginal group of Zionist activists, even by the state of Israel itself. Good news for Israel, quite an amazing achievement for amicroscopic state. But is it good news for the American people? Is it good news for the world?

The history of Zionism provides us with manifold stories of great empires that were misled in believing that coalition with the Jewish state will serve their own interests. In the long run those decisions proved to be unreasonable, irrational and even disastrous. The most famous one is probably the 'Balfour Declaration' (1917). It was in the midst of WW1 when the British foreign minister announced the empire's support for turning
Palestine into the "national home for the Jewish people". At the time there were less than 60.000 Jews in Palestine leaving peacefully among a total population of 600.000 Arabs. What led the British Empire to such a strange declaration? What led the world leading superpower at the time to commit itself to such an unreasonable affair based on support from a marginal ethnic group (less than 10% of the entire population)? If there had been some deep colonial strategic or any other rational thought behind 'Balfour's declaration' they proved to be very misleading. Soon Jews flood into
Palestine. Native Arab Palestinians start to show their severe dissatisfaction. Conflict becomes inevitable. When Britain tried to repair Balfour's damage it was too late ('The White Paper' 1939). The Jewish right wing terrorist and paramilitary resistance were about to teach the mandate forces a lesson in Yiddisher brutality. From a British point of view, the alliance with Zionism turned into a disaster. It was 2 years after the 2nd
WW when the Zionist pushed the British colonial forces out of the region.

SUEZ
A very similar pattern of unfortunate thought led both decaying empires Britain and France to join forces with Israel in the Suez operation (1956). Following Nasser's nationalisation of the 'Suez Canal Company' both France and Britain were looking for a military operation that would retrieve control over the Suez to the west. Clearly, Israel wasn't a part of this conflict but as an 'obedient servant' of Colonial-Western thought,Israel as usual offered its military assistance for as long as the aggressor promises to inflict pain over its Arab neighbours. The Suez Operation was launched with an IDF operation on 29 October. Two days later both Britain and France joined the party. The operation provoked an outraged American response to the aggressive coalition. On November 9th, less than ten days after the operation had started, Israel bowed to American pressure and announced its immediate withdraw from Sinai desert. For Britain and France this unsuccessful affair symbolised the end of their colonial era. More than anything else the Suez Operation indicated the loss of
European influence in the region. Again, from a colonial point of view, the association with Zionism was counter-productive.

The Europeans learnt their lesson; they became very suspicious of Zionist political affairs. At the same time we have to admit that the Americans have not yet learned theirs. The American people have not yet seen that a coalition with Israel puts their life at great risk. The American people fail to associate September 11th and the hopeless American support of Zionism. I assume the reason the American people fail to acknowledge such a straightforward connection can only be due to the fact that Zionist lobbies have managed to comprehensively dominate the major sources that control
American public opinion: in culture, in media and in finance. It is very apparent that Israel enjoys full protection in the American media. The question to be asked is who is going to protect the Americans from their motherland Israel?On reflection, it must be terrifying that such a small lobby from a tiny state is so eager to push the rest of the world into endless confrontation.

While the American people take their time to answer this crucial question we can stretch our intellectual faculties by contemplating the following questions. How is it that the great American nation, the world's leading superpower, has become dominated by a narrow lobby from a miniature foreign state? Do the American and the Israelis really share the same interests? And if they do can someone enlighten us as to what those interests are? Are the American people aware of the fact that their becoming a direct target of Islamic terror is of prior interest to Israel? Do we really need all this?

Gilad Atzmon©2002.......
.Study for Small Worlds: Miro,
"The system and its propaganda are circular".

Cartoon: A Krauze.