Empire of False Faith, Silicon Valley, and War: The New Threesome Driving Global Destruction
Mairead Maguire nominated Edward Snowden and Julian Assange for a joint Nobel some years ago for exposing US Empire's crimes. Now enter Israel, High Priests of Silicon Valley, Christian Zionists.
Source: Matthew Hughes, Britain’s Pacification of Palestine, The British Army, the Colonial State, and the Arab Revolt, 1936-39, Cambridge U. Press, 2019.
A brief commentary from me, before sharing a small collection of relevant perspectives on things and events that will have worldwide impact, negatively.
Mairead was spot on when she nominated these two men - an American and an Australian - who really risked their lives to confront the only existing Evil Empire, post-USSR, armed only with Truths.
Empires are typically built on and sustained through systems of lies, deceits and deceptions, beyond sword and conquest.
So Truth is like a shining spotlight on a giant racoon, sneaking near your tent in the forest in order to scavenge from the lid-less dumpster, under the cover of the night.
No evil imperialists - for that matter any POWER - like to be caught with pants down. Truth-tellers are dangerous. Criminals in power KNOW.
In the past imperialists who operated under the banner of Christian God persecuted the adherents of Judaism, one of the three Abrahamic faiths.
For the last 100 years Anglo-American powers of UK and USA - in that order - have mixed their imperialist equations with the fervor of Christian Zionism, which has led death and destruction of the indigenous populations of Palestine, including Palestinian Christians.
Today as a human community, we are at a crossroads of corporate-sponsored species destruction, a process that is jointly overseen by the combination of mass-murderous Zionists, collaborationist Christian Zionists and profiteering high priests of the Silicon Valley.
There is an emerging threesome of Zionists - which the late Professor Leibowitz prophetically called Judeo-Nazis, millions of fanatical and sinister Chritsian Zionists, who are largely Americans, who want all the Jews to “return” to Palestine, and either convert en masse or burn to death, in order that the Christian Messiah will come again, and the American oligarchs from the Silicon Valley.
Arthur Balfour of the Balfour Declaration was Chancellor of Cambridge University where iconic Christian Zionists of the 17th century such as Sir Isaac Newton was based. (A plaque at Emmanuel College, Cambridge, photo by Zarni, 24 Feb. 2026)
Christian Zionism predates secular nationalist Jews and their Zionism for land - they don’t believe that God exists, but they believe the non-existent God gave them the Land. Except, as a Hungarian Jewish neighbor of mine told me, it is “the wrong piece of land.”
From the Church to Church-blessed political states to Godless states and racial capitalist entities frown on, ostracise, or otherwise make you pay for speaking Truth, without fear or favour.
Zarni
Ambassador Huckabee, Do Not Invoke God for War: Special Feature by Jeffrey Sachs and Sybil Fares.
Huckabee’s remarks are despicable. They come at a time when true diplomacy calls for peace, restraint, and dialogue. If the US were truly a government of peace, it would have immediately repudiated Huckabee’s remarks, because they are widely condemned as inconsistent with international law and the UN Charter, and as a threat to regional stability and peace.
Europe learned, at terrible and prolonged cost, what happens when Scripture is wielded as a weapon during the Catholic and Protestant wars. Each side read the Bible in its own irreconcilable way and declared God to be on its side. The result was devastation and bloodshed that scarred the continent in the 16th and 17th centuries. Out of that catastrophe emerged a hard-won political wisdom, that sacred texts are not to be invoked as title deeds for conquest.
That lesson alone should be enough to rebuke Huckabee. For him to claim that Israel possesses a divine right to conquer the Middle East because of promises recorded in Genesis is to revive the most dangerous habits of religious warfare.
But there is something more. Huckabee’s Christian Zionist theology, and the hyper-militant Jewish nationalism advanced by Bezalel Smotrich, Itamar Ben-Gvir, and Benjamin Netanyahu, fail even on theological terms. Ambassador Huckabee’s remarks highlight two deep and basic theological misunderstandings on the part of the militant Zionists.
Read the full text here.
What is Christian Zionism, the pro-Israel ideology invoked by US ambassador
Mike Huckabee’s suggestion that Israel has God-given right to much of Middle East is rooted in Christian Zionist theology, experts say.
Read the AJE Explainer here.
February 19, 2026 15:47
Updated: February 24, 2026 17:21
For Sagiv Asulin, former senior Mossad official, senior researcher at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs (JCFA), and an expert on Iran and cognitive warfare, the key date that changed his conception of Israel’s position in the world was not October 7, but October 8 – when anti-Israel protests began on US campuses, and Israel was no longer viewed as the victim of a vicious terror attack but rather as the culprit.
“I concluded this was something much deeper than coincidence,” reflects Asulin. “It was a consciousness and influence campaign being conducted by hostile actors – enemies of Israel – together with progressive woke movements.
Read the chilling news story of how Mossad, American Zionist oligarchs, and US politicians in their pockets are teaming up with Christian Zionists for what they see through their deranged minds as “enemies” of their Judeo-Christian Civilization here.
Church Times, 23 Jan. 2026
The statement, issued on Saturday, warns: “Recent activities undertaken by local individuals who advance damaging ideologies, such as Christian Zionism, mislead the public, sow confusion, and harm the unity of our flock. These undertakings have found favor among certain political actors in Israel and beyond who seek to push a political agenda which may harm the Christian presence in the Holy Land and the wider Middle East.”
The leaders go on to say that “these individuals have been welcomed at official levels both locally and internationally. Such actions constitute interference in the internal life of the churches and disregard the pastoral responsibility vested in the Patriarchs and Heads of Churches in Jerusalem.”
The statement asserts the authority of the signatories: “They alone represent the Churches and their flock in matters pertaining to Christian religious, communal, and pastoral life in the Holy Land.”
It is not the first time that the Patriarchs have condemned Christian Zionism. Twenty years ago, “The Jerusalem declaration on Christian Zionism” was issued by the Latin Patriarch, alongside the leaders of the Syrian Orthodox, Anglican, and Lutheran Churches (News, 25 August 2006).
This defined Christian Zionism as “a modern theological and political movement that embraces the most extreme ideological positions of Zionism, thereby becoming detrimental to a just peace within Palestine and Israel. The Christian Zionist programme provides a worldview where the Gospel is identified with the ideology of empire, colonialism and militarism. In its extreme form, it places an emphasis on apocalyptic events leading to the end of history rather than living Christ’s love and justice today. We categorically reject Christian Zionist doctrines as false teaching that corrupts the biblical message of love, justice and reconciliation.”
The definition of Christian Zionism, which supports the return of the Jewish diaspora to the Holy Land, has been subject to dispute. The International Christian Embassy Jerusalem, which warns that the term is “under attack and often misrepresented in the media”, defines a Christian Zionist as “a Christian who supports the Jewish people’s right to return to their homeland”. There are scriptural grounds for this, it says. “God chose Abraham to birth a nation through which He could redeem the world. To accomplish this He bequeathed them a land in which they could exist as this chosen nation.”
Christian Zionism is “not based on prophecy or end-time events”, it says. “Most Christian Zionists would agree, however, that Israel’s reemergence on the world’s scene, in fulfillment of God’s promises to her, indicates that other events prophesied in the Bible will follow.”
Christian Zionism has been traced to the “philo-Semitism” of the Reformation, partly through a focus on scripture (“Protestants rediscovered the Bible, read the Hebrew scriptures, and recognised that Jesus was a Jew” — Books, 29 June 2007), and partly through the resurgence of Millennialism. Many Christian Zionists believe that the Jews’ return to the Holy Land is a precursor to the Second Coming of Jesus. The movement grew in the early 19th century, alongside Dispensationalism, and gained strength in the United States in the 20th century, among Evangelical supporters including Billy Graham. Proponents emphasise that it represents a departure from “replacement theology”, whereby Christianity is understood as having replaced Judaism, with Christians the new Chosen People.
Although the Church’s Ministry Among Jewish People (CMJ) and other organisations have emphasised that they do not adopt a position on any particular millennial view, Christian Zionism is widely understood in its dispensationalist form: seeking to bring about the restoration of the Jewish people to their ancestral homeland in expectation of the Second Coming.
Rabbi Dan Cohn-Sherbok, Professor of Judaism at the University of Wales, Lampeter, has drawn attention to a “paradox” in the alliance of Jewish leaders and Christian Zionists, given that “Christian Zionist theology envisages the ultimate disappearance of Judaism as a living religion” (Comment, 19 May 2006).
The study — and criticism — of Christian Zionism has often focused on the United States. In a letter sent to Tony Blair in 2004, highlighting the mistreatment of Iraqi detainees, the Archbishops criticised the US government’s support for Israel as “uncritical and one-sided”, and, in an allusion to Christian Zionism, connected this to “interpretations of Scriptures from outside the mainstream of the tradition” (News, 2 July 2004).
The 2006 Patriarchs’ statement condemned “the contemporary alliance of Christian Zionist leaders and organizations with elements in the governments of Israel and the United States that are presently imposing their unilateral pre-emptive borders and domination over Palestine”.
In 2024, a resolution condemning Christian Zionism was passed by the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church (News, 28 June 2024). Having initially rejected the resolution, the Bishops brought it back for reconsideration, after the Anglican Archbishop in Jerusalem, Dr Hosam Naoum, expressed his disappointment.
Read the full text of the Church Times article here.
Read the Guardian’s piece here.
Statement from Dario Amodei on our discussions with the Department of War
26 Feb 2026
Excerpts:
Anthropic has therefore worked proactively to deploy our models to the Department of War and the intelligence community. We were the first frontier AI company to deploy our models in the US government’s classified networks, the first to deploy them at the National Laboratories, and the first to provide custom models for national security customers. Claude is extensively deployed across the Department of War and other national security agencies for mission-critical applications, such as intelligence analysis, modeling and simulation, operational planning, cyber operations, and more.
Anthropic has also acted to defend America’s lead in AI, even when it is against the company’s short-term interest. We chose to forgo several hundred million dollars in revenue to cut off the use of Claude by firms linked to the Chinese Communist Party (some of whom have been designated by the Department of War as Chinese Military Companies), shut down CCP-sponsored cyber attacks that attempted to abuse Claude, and have advocated for strong export controls on chips to ensure a democratic advantage.
However, in a narrow set of cases, we believe AI can undermine, rather than defend, democratic values. Some uses are also simply outside the bounds of what today’s technology can safely and reliably do. Two such use cases have never been included in our contracts with the Department of War, and we believe they should not be included now:
Mass domestic surveillance.
Fully autonomous weapons. Partially autonomous weapons, like those used today in Ukraine, are vital to the defense of democracy. Even fully autonomous weapons (those that take humans out of the loop entirely and automate selecting and engaging targets) may prove critical for our national defense. But today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons.
To our knowledge, these two exceptions have not been a barrier to accelerating the adoption and use of our models within our armed forces to date.
The Department of War has stated they will only contract with AI companies who accede to “any lawful use” and remove safeguards in the cases mentioned above. They have threatened to remove us from their systems if we maintain these safeguards; they have also threatened to designate us a “supply chain risk”—a label reserved for US adversaries, never before applied to an American company—and to invoke the Defense Production Act to force the safeguards’ removal. These latter two threats are inherently contradictory: one labels us a security risk; the other labels Claude as essential to national security.
Regardless, these threats do not change our position:
we cannot in good conscience accede to their request.
The full text is here.
Manufacturing Dissent exists because of you. We are a fiercely independent citizen outlet, powered only by our readers and listeners—not corporations, not advertisers. Every story we tell, every truth we uncover, depends on your support. For less than the price of a coffee, you can become a member and help us grow stronger, louder, and more fearless. Right now, annual memberships are 30% off. Stand with us. Fuel citizen journalism. Be the reason dissent thrives.
 | A guest post by
|