PJ#223, BIRTHING THE PHOENIX VOL. 2

PJ 223

BIRTHING

THE

PHOENIX

VOL. 2

BY

GYEORGOS CERES HATONN

A PHOENIX JOURNAL

COPYRIGHT POSITION STATEMENT AND DISCLAIMER

The Phoenix Journals are intended as a "real time" commentary on current events, how current events relate to past events and the relationships of both to the physical and spiritual destinies of mankind.

All of history, as we now know it, has been revised, rewritten, twisted and tweaked by selfishly motivated men to achieve and maintain control over other men. When one can understand that everything is comprised of "energy" and that even physical matter is "coalesced" energy, and that all energy emanates from God's thought, one can accept the idea that the successful focusing of millions of minds on one expected happening will cause it to happen.

If the many prophecies made over thousands of years are accepted, these are the "end times" (specifically the year 2000, the second millennium, etc.). That would put us in the "sorting" period and only a few short years from the finish line. God has said that in the end-times would come the WORD--to the four corners of the world--so that each could decide his/her own course toward, or away from, divinity--based upon TRUTH.

So, God sends His Hosts--Messengers--to present that TRUTH. This is the way in which He chooses to present it, through the Phoenix Journals. Thus, these journals are Truth, which cannot be copyrighted; they are compilations of information already available on Earth, researched and compiled by others (some, no doubt, for this purpose) which should not be copyrighted. Therefore, these journals are not copyrighted (except SIPAPU ODYSSEY which is "fiction").

The first sixty or so journals were published by America West Publishing which elected to indicate that a copyright had been applied for on the theory that the ISBN number (so necessary for booksellers) was dependent upon the copyright. Commander Hatonn, the primary author and compiler, insisted that no copyrights be applied for and, to our knowledge, none were.

If the Truth is to reach the four corners of the world, it must be freely passed on. It is hoped that each reader will feel free to do that, keeping it in context, of course.

BIRTHING THE PHOENIX

Vol. 2

ISBN 1-56935-180-5

First Edition Printed by

PHOENIX SOURCE PUBLISHERS, Inc.
P.O. Box 27353
Las Vegas, Nevada 89126

February 1998

Printed in the United States of America

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

CHAPTER 1................................................................................................... .......................
THU., JAN. 15, 1998................................................................................................ ...
BIRTHING THE PHOENIX, Part 8
JEWISH IDEA OF CENTRAL BANK
FOR AMERICA, (LIX)..............................................................................................
CHAPTER 2................................................................................................... .......................
FRI., JAN. 16, 1998................................................................................................ ......
BIRTHING THE PHOENIX, Part 9
JEWISH KOL NIDRE AND ELI, ELI
EXPLAINED, (LXXI).............................................................................................. ..
CHAPTER 3................................................................................................... .......................
SAT., JAN. 17, 1998................................................................................................ ....
EXPLANATORY NOTES RELATIVE TO
THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION..................................................................................
BIRTHING THE PHOENIX, Part 10
ANTIPHONE........................................................................................... ...................
THE SOULS OF CHRISTIANS ARE EVIL AND UNCLEAN.................................
THE FATE OF DEAD CHRISTIANS.........................................................................
JUDAISM THE PHARISEES.......................................................................................
IT IS FORBIDDEN TO DISCLOSE THE SECRETS OF THE LAW.......................
ANTI-SEMITISM............................................................................................ .....................................................
CHAPTER 4................................................................................................... .......................
SAT., JAN. 17, 1998................................................................................................ ....
EXPLANATORY NOTES RELATIVE TO
THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION.....................................................................................
BIRTHING THE PHOENIX, Part 11
PART II, Chapter 1................................................................................................... ..
HOW THE PROTOCOLS CAME TO RUSSIA..........................................................
INSERT: STEPHANOV'S DEPOSITION [2 pages]..............................................................
Chapter II .................................................................................................... .............................................................
HOW AN AMERICAN EDITION WAS SUPPRESSED..........................................
CHAPTER 5................................................................................................... .......................
GEORGE WASHINGTON, UNITED STATES, 17TH SEPTEMBER 1796..........
CHAPTER 6................................................................................................... .......................
SUN., JAN. 18, 1998................................................................................................ ....
LETTER: IS GCH TELLING ANYTHING NEW TO YOU?...................................
BIRTHING THE PHOENIX, Part 12
EXPLANATORY NOTES RELATIVE
TO THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION
Chapter III, MORE ATTEMPTS
AT REFUTATION THE LONDON TIMES LENDS A HAND.................................
CHAPTER 7................................................................................................... ......................
SUN., JAN. 18, 1998................................................................................................ ....
(Continuing Part 12:)................................................................................................ ...........................................
Chapter IV, TEXT AND COMMENTARY...............................................................
WHO ARE THE ELDERS?.........................................................................................
WHAT ARE THE ELDERS ' NAMES?
THE THREE HUNDRED.........................................................................................
NOTES............................................................................................... ............................
I.--"AGENDTUR" AND "THE POLITICAL"............................................................
II.--THE SYMBOLIC SNAKE OF JUDAISM............................................................
CHAPTER 8................................................................................................... .......................
2/16/91 #1 HATONN.............................................................................................. ....
FACTS ARE FACTS, FROM ONE "JEW"
TO ANOTHER LONG BURIED TRUTH MUST BE REVEALED.....................
CHAPTER 9................................................................................................... .......................
2/16/91 #2 HATONN.............................................................................................. ....
CONTINUATION: FREEDMAN-GOLDSTEIN.....................................................................................
CHAPTER 10.................................................................................................. ......................
2/17/91 #2 HATONN.............................................................................................. ....
CONTINUATION OF THE FREEDMAN LETTER..................................................
TERM "JEW" CREATED IN 1775 A.D.....................................................................
CHAPTER 11.................................................................................................. ......................
2/17/91 #3 HATONN.............................................................................................. ....
THE VATICAN OF JUDAISM, JUDAISM/PHARISAISM........................................................
FOOTNOTES:.......................................................................................... .....................
CHAPTER 12.................................................................................................. ......................
2/17/91 #4 HATONN.............................................................................................. ....
FOOTNOTES: (continued).........................................................................................
CHAPTER 13.................................................................................................. ......................
2/18/91 #2 HATONN.............................................................................................. ....
TODAY'S WATCH............................................................................................... .......
CONTINUATION OF FREEDMAN'S LETTER TO GOLDSTEIN.........................
INSERT: KHAZAR MAP................................................................................................. ..
CHAPTER 14.................................................................................................. ......................
2/18/91 #3 HATONN.............................................................................................. ....
TODAY'S WATCH............................................................................................... .......
YIDDISH............................................................................................. ..........................

PJ 223

CHAPTER 1
REC #2 HATONN

THU., JAN. 15, 1998 2:34 P.M. YR. 11, DAY 152

THU.. JAN. 15, 1998

I am flooded with inquiries, as I have said before, on questions regarding this whole issue. If, however, I get distracted with things bearing no sequence we lose both the value of the lesson for memory recall and fail to keep continuity of flow.

The Kol Nidre oath denying all oaths taken before and after the highest Holy Day of the Jewish people, is the first oath done at the Holy Days. We have covered this many times. I will reprint the oath itself here but I have no intention of doing more at this writing. When you read Freedman's letter to Goldstein you will find that topic as well as the subject of the TALMUD covered better than I can cover it.

"ALL VOWS, OBLIGATIONS, OATHS, ANA­THEMAS, WHETHER CALLED 'KONAM', 'KONAS', OR BY ANY OTHER NAME, WHICH WE MAY VOW, OR SWEAR, OR PLEDGE, OR WHEREBY WE MAY BE BOUND, FROM THIS DAY OF ATONEMENT UNTO THE NEXT, (whose happy coming we await), WE DO REPENT. MAY THEY BE DEEMED ABSOLVED, FOR­GIVEN, ANNULLED, AND VOID AND MADE OF NO EFFECT; THEY SHALL NOT BIND US NOR HAVE POWER OVER US. THE VOWS SHALL NOT BE RECKONED VOWS; THE OBLIGATIONS SHALL NOT BE OBLIGA­TORY; NOR THE OATHS BE OATHS."
This has also become one of the ritual statements of attorneys of any Bar Association and this is why the Judge doesn't even slap their hands for lying under oath, for after all, how can you pick one oath above another "in the name of God"? Perhaps all you nice people should just go chant this oath, even if you have to read it, especially if you have a court appearance, for certainly everyone on the "court side of the barricade" will know what it means. The Bar Association is, by the way, not a licensing branch of any program--IT IS A PRIVATE CORPORATION JUST AS IS THE MEDICAL ASSOCIATION. The license by the Bar insures that those moving into the "new and obscenely Constitution-negating" thrust by the courts into case law and not justice, are TRAINED TO KNOW WHAT THE NEW REGULATIONS ARE AND HOW THEY ARE TO BE USED.

The other question coming to me is, why it appears the numbers of the various articles do not run in sequence but have portions missing. I can't answer that for I did not compile the articles used but they do need identification if anyone wishes to do a search.

Continuing with an article from DEARBORN INDEPENDENT, July 2, 1921

BIRTHING THE PHOENIX

[QUOTING, Part 8:]

JEWISH IDEA OF CENTRAL BANK
FOR AMERICA

(LIX)

According to his own statements and the facts, Paul M. War­burg set out to reform the monetary system of the United States, and did so. He had the success which comes to few men, of coming an alien to the United States, connecting himself with the principal Jewish financial firm here, and immediately float­ing certain banking ideas which have been pushed and manipu­lated and variously adapted until they have eventuated in what is known as the Federal Reserve System.

When Professor Seligman wrote in the Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science that "the Federal Reserve Act will be associated in history with the name of Paul M. Warburg", a Jewish banker from Germany, he wrote the truth. But whether that association will be such as to bring the measure of renown which Professor Seligman implies, the future will reveal.

What the people of the United States do not understand and never have understood is that while the Federal Reserve Act was governmental, THE WHOLE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM IS PRIVATE. It is an officially created private banking system.

Examine the first thousand persons you meet on the street and 999 will tell you that the Federal Reserve System is a device whereby the United States Government went into the banking business for the benefit of the people. They have an idea that, like the Post Office and Custom House, a Federal Reserve Bank is a part of the Government's official machinery.

It is natural to feel that this mistaken view has been encour­aged by most of the men who are competent to write for the public on this question. Take up the standard encyclopedias, and while you will find no misstatements of fact in them, you will find no direct statements that the Federal Reserve System is a private banking system; the impression carried away by the lay reader is that it is a part of the Government.

The Federal Reserve System is a system of private banks, the creation of a banking aristocracy within an already existing au­tocracy, whereby a great proportion of banking independence was lost, and whereby it was made possible for speculative fi­nanciers to centralize great sums of money for their own pur­poses, beneficial or not.

That this System was useful in the artificial conditions created by war--useful, that is, for a Government that cannot manage its own business and finances and, like a prodigal son, is always wanting money, and wanting it when it wants it--it has proved, either by reason of its inherent faults or by mishandling, its inadequacy to the problems of peace. It has sadly failed of its promise, and is now under serious question.

Mr. Warburg's scheme succeeded just in time to take care of war conditions; he was placed on the Federal Reserve Board in order to manage his system in practice, and though he was full of ideas then as to how banking could be assisted, he is disap­pointingly silent now as to how the people can be relieved.

However, this is not a discussion of the Federal Reserve System. General condemnation of it would be stupid. But it is bound to come up for discussion one day, and the discussion will become much freer when people understand that it is a sys­tem of privately owned banks, to which have been delegated certain extraordinary privileges, and that it has created a class system within the banking world which constitutes a new order. [H: And what do you think NOW, 85 years later?]
Mr. Warburg,it will be remembered, wanted only one cen­tral bank. But, because of political considerations, as Professor Seligman tells us, twelve were decided upon. [H: Care to guess which ones, strangers-in-Paradise?] An examination of Mr. Warburg's printed discussions of the subject shows that he at one time considered four, then eight. Eventually twelve were established. The reason was that one central bank, which natu­rally would be set up in New York, would give a suspicious country the impression that it was only a new scheme to keep the nation's money flowing to New York. As shown by Profes­sor Seligman, quoted in the last number, Mr. Warburg was not adverse to granting anything that would allay popular suspicion without vitiating the real plan.

So, while admitting to the Senators who examined him as to his fitness for membership on the Federal Reserve Board--the Board which fixed the policies of the Banks of the Federal Re­serve System and told them what to do--that he did not like the 12 district banks idea, he said that his objections to it could "be overcome in an administrative way". That is, the 12 banks could be so handled that the effect WOULD BE THE SAME AS IF THERE WERE ONLY ONE CENTRAL BANK, PRESUM­ABLY AT NEW YORK.

And that is about the way it has resulted, and that will be found to be one of the reasons for the present situation of the country.

There is no lack of money in New York today. Motion pic­ture ventures are being financed into the millions. A big grain selling pool, nursed into existence and counseled by Bernard M. Baruch, has no hesitancy whatever in planning for a $100,000,000 corporation. Loew, the Jewish theatrical man, had no difficulty in opening 20 new theaters this year. [H: How about this year with $200 million dollars to sink the poor old Titanic again--and again--and again?]
But go into the agricultural states, where the real wealth of the country is in the ground and in the granaries, and you cannot find money for the farmer. [H: NEITHER CAN YOU FIND GRAIN IN THOSE GRANARIES.]
It is a situation which none can deny and which few can ex­plain, because the explanation is not to be found along natural lines. Unnatural conditions wear an air of mystery. Here is the United States, the richest country in the world, containing at the present hour the greatest bulk of wealth to be found anywhere on Earth--real, ready, available, usable wealth; and yet it is tied up tight, and cannot move in its legitimate channels, because of manipulation which is going on as regards money.

Money is the last mystery for the popular mind to penetrate, and when it succeeds in getting "on the inside" it will discover that the mystery is not in money at all, but in its manipulation, the things which are done "in an administrative way".

The United States has never had a President who gave evi­dence of understanding this matter at all. Our Presidents have always had to take their views from financiers. Money is the most public quantity in the country; it is the most federalized and governmentalized thing in the country; and yet, in the present situation, the United States Government has hardly anything to do with it, except to use various means to get it, just as the people have to get it, from those who control it.

The Money Question, properly solved, is the end of the Jew­ish Question and every other question of a mundane nature.

Mr. Warburg is of the opinion that different rates of interest ought to obtain in different parts of the country. That they have always obtained in different parts of the same state we have al­ways known, but the reason for it has not been discovered. The city grocer can get money from his bank at a lower rate than the farmer in the next county can get from his bank. Why the agri­cultural rate of interest has been higher than any other (when money is obtainable; it is not obtainable now) is a question to which no literary nor oratorical financier has ever publicly ad­dressed himself. It is like the fact of the private business nature of the Federal Reserve System--very important, but no authority thinks it worth while to state. The agricultural rate of interest is of great importance, but to discuss it would involve first an ad­mission, and that apparently is not desirable.

In comparing the present Federal Reserve Law with the pro­posed Aldrich Bill, Mr. Warburg said:

Mr. Warburg--"... I think that this present law has the ad­vantage of dealing with the entire country and giving them dif­ferent rates of discount, whereas as Senator Aldrich's bill was drawn, it would have been very difficult to do that, as it pro­vided for one uniform rate for the whole country, which I thought was rather a mistake."

Senator Bristow--"That is, you can charge a higher rate of interest in one section of the country under the present law, than you charge in another section, while under the Aldrich plan it would have been a uniform rate."

Mr. Warburg--"That is correct."

That is a point worth clearing up. Mr. Warburg, having ed­ucated the bankers, will now turn his attention to the people, and make it clear why one class in the country can get money for business that is not productive of real wealth, while another class engaged in the production of real wealth is treated as out­side the interest of banking altogether; if he can make it clear also why money is sold to one class or one section of the country at one price, while to another class and in another section it is-sold at a different price, he will be adding to the people's grasp of these matters.
This suggestion is seriously intended. Mr. Warburg has the style, the pedagogical patience, the grasp of the subject which would make him an admirable public teacher of these matters.

What he has already done was planned from the point of view of the interest of the professional financier. It is readily granted that Mr. Warburg desired to organize American finances into a more pliable system. Doubtless in some respects he has wrought important improvements. But he had always the bank­ing house in mind, and he dealt with paper. Now, if taking up a position outside those special interests, he would address himself to the special interests, he would address himself to the wider interests of the people--not assuming that those interests always run through a banking house--he would do still more than he has yet done to justify his feeling that he really had a mission in coming to this country.

Mr. Warburg is not at all shocked by the idea that the Fed­eral Reserve System is really a new kind of private banking control, because in his European experience he saw that all the central banks were private affairs.

In his essay on "American and European Banking Method s and Bank Legislation Compared", Mr. Warburg says: (the ital­ics are ours)

"It may also be interesting to note that, contrary to awidespread idea, the central banks of Europe are, as a rule, not owned by the governments. As a matter of fact, neither the English, French, nor German Government owns any stock in the central bank of its country. The Bank of England is run entirely as a private corporation, the stockholders electing the board of directors, who rotate in holding the presidency. In France the government appoints the governor and some of the directors. In Germany the government appoints the president and a supervi­sory board of five members, while the stockholders elect the board of directors."

And again, in his discussion of the Owen-Glass Bill, Mr. Warburg says:

"The Monetary Commission's plan proceeded on the theory of the Bank of England, which leaves the management entirely in the hands of business men without giving the government any part in the management or control. The strong argument in fa­vor of this theory is that central banking, like any other banking, is based on 'sound credit', that the judging of credits is a matter of business which should be left in the hands of business men, and that the government should be kept out of business... The Owen-Glass Bill proceeds, in this respect, more on the lines of the Banque de France and the German Reichsbank, the presi­dents and boards of which are to a certain extent appointed by the government. These central banks, while legally private cor­porations, are semi-governmental organs inasmuch as they are permitted to issue the notes of the nation--particularly where there are elastic note issues, as in almost all countries except England--and inasmuch as they are the custodians of practically the entire metallic reserves of the country and the keepers of the government funds. Moreover, in questions of national policy the government must rely on the willing and loyal co-operation of these central organs. "
That is a very illuminating passage. It will be well worth the reader's time, especially the reader who has always been puz­zled by financial matters, to turn over in his mind the facts here given by a great Jewish financial expert about the central bank idea. Observe the phrases:

• (a) "without giving the government any part in the manage­ment or control."

• (b) "these central banks, while legally private corpora­tions...are permitted to issue the notes of the nation."

• (c) "they are custodians of practically the entire metallic re­serves of the nation and the keepers of the government funds."

• (d) "in questions of national policy, the government must rely on the willing and loyal co-operation of these central organs."

[H: If you don't memorize this above, readers, perhaps you deserve what you have become.]
It is not now a question whether these things are right or wrong; it is merely a question of understanding that they con­stitute the fact.

[H: Ah but it does matter for THIS FLIES DIRECTLY INTO THE FACE OF, AND IS THE NEGATION OF, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMER­ICA.]

It is specially notable that in paragraph (d) it is a fair deduc­tion that in questions of national policy, the government will simply have to depend not only on the patriotism but also to an extent on the permission and counsel of the financial organiza­tions. That is a fair interpretation: questions of national policy are, by this method, rendered dependent upon the financial cor­porations.

Let that point be clear, quite regardless of the question whether or not this is the way national policies should be deter­mined.

Mr. Warburg said that he believed in a certain amount of government control--but not too much. He said: "In strength­ening the government control, the Owen-Glass Bill therefore moved in the right direction; but it went too far and fell into the other and even more dangerous extreme."

The "more dangerous extreme" was, of course, the larger measure of government supervision provided for, and the estab­lishment of a number of Federal Reserve Banks out in the coun­try.

Mr. Warburg had referred to this before; he had agreed to the larger number only because it seemed to be an unavoidable political concession. It has already been shown, by Professor Seligman, that Mr. Warburg was alive to the necessity of veiling a little here and there, and "putting on" a little yonder, for the sake of conciliating a suspicious public. There was also the story of the bartender and the cashregister.

Mr. Warburg thinks he understands the psychology of America. In this respect he reminds one of the reports of Mr. von Bernstorff and Captain Boy-Ed of what the Americans were likely to do or not to do. In the Political Science Quarterly of December, 1920, Mr. Warburg tells how, on a then recent visit to Europe, he was asked by men of all countries what the United States was going to do. He assured them that America was a little tired just then, but that she would come 'round alright. And then, harking back to his efforts of placing his monetary system on the Americans, he said:

"I asked them to be patient with us until after the election, and I cited to them our experiences with monetary reform. I re­minded them how the Aldrich plan had failed because, at that time, a Republican President had lost control of a congress ruled by a Democratic majority; how the Democrats in theirplatform damned this plan and any central banking system; and how, once in full power, the National Reserve Association was evolved, not to say camouflaged, by them into the Federal Re­serve System."
Remembering this play before the public, and the play behind the scenes, this "camouflaging", as Mr. Warburg says, of one thing into another, he undertook to assure his friends in Europe that regardless of what the political platforms said, the United States would do substantially what Europe hoped it would. Mr. Warburg's basis for that belief was, as he said, his experience with the way the central bank idea went through in spite of the advertised objection of all parties. He believes that with Ameri­cans it is possible to get what you want if you just play the game skillfully. His experience with monetary reform seems to have fathered that belief in him.

Politicians may be necessary pawns to play in the game, but as members of the government Mr. Warburg does not want them in banking. They are not bankers, he says; they don't un­derstand;banking is nothing for a government man to meddle with. He may be good enough for the Government of the United States; he is not good enough for banking.

"In our country," says Mr. Warburg, referring to the United States, "with every untrained amateur a candidate for any office, where friendship or help in a presidential campaign, financial or political, has always given a claim for political preferment, where the bids for votes and public favor are ever present in the politician's mind... a direct government management, that is to say, a political management, would prove fatal... There can be no doubt but that, as drawn at present (1913), with two cabinet officers members of the Federal Reserve Board, and with the vast powers vested in the latter, the Owen-Glass Bill would bring about direct government management."

And that, of course, in Mr. Warburg's mind, is not only"dangerous", but "fatal".

Mr. Warburg had almost his whole will in the matter. And what is the result?

Turn to the testimony of Bernard M. Baruch, when he was examined with reference to the charge that certain men close to President Wilson had profited to the extent of $60,000,000 on stock market operations which they entered into on the strength of advance information of what the President was to say in his next war note--the famous "leak" investigation, as it was called; one of the several investigations in which Mr. Baruch was closely questioned.

In that investigation Mr. Baruch was laboring to show that he had not been in telephone communication with Washington, es­pecially with certain men who were supposed to have shared the profits of the deals. The time was December, 1916. Mr. War­burg was then safely settled on the Federal Reserve Board, which he had kept quite safe from Government intrusion.

The Chairman-- "Of course the records of the telephone company here, the slips, will show the persons with whom you talked."

Mr. Baruch-- "Do you wish me to say, sir? I will state who they are."

The Chairman-- "Yes, I think you might."

Mr. Baruch-- "I called up two persons; one, Mr. Warburg, whom I did not get, and one, Secretary McAdoo, whom I did get--both in reference to the same matter. Would you like to know the matter?"

The chairman-- "Yes, I think it is fair that you should state it."

Mr. Baruch-- "I called up the Secretary, because someone suggested to me--asked me to suggest an o_fficer for the Federal Reserve Bank, andI called him up in reference to that, and dis­cussed the matter with him, I think, two or three times, but it was suggested to me that I make the suggestion, and I did so." (pp. 570-571)

Mr. Campbell-- "Mr. Baruch, who asked you for a sugges­tion for an appointee for the Federal Reserve Bank here?"

Mr. Baruch-- "Mr. E.M. House."

Mr. Campbell-- "Did Mr. House tell you to call Mr. McAdoo up and make the recommendation?"

Mr. Baruch-- "I will tell you exactly how it occurred: Mr. House called me up and said that there was a vacancy on the Federal Reserve Board, and he said, 'I don't know anything about those fellows down there, and I would like you to make a suggestion.' And I suggested the name, which he thought was a very good one, and he said to me, 'I wish you would call up the Secretary and tell him.' I said, 'I do not see the necessity; I will tell you.' No,' he said, 'I would prefer you to call him up." (p. 575)

There we have an example of the Federal Reserve "kept out of politics", kept away from government management which would not only be "dangerous", but "fatal".

Barney Baruch, the New York stock plunger, who never owned a bank in his life, was called up by Colonel E.M. House, the arch-politician of the Wilson Administration, and thus the great Federal Reserve Board was supplied another member.

A telephone call kept within a narrow Jewish circle and set­tled by a word from one Jewish stock dealer--that, in practical operation, was Mr. Warburg's great monetary reform. Mr. Baruch calling up Mr. Warburg to give the name of the next ap­pointee of the Federal Reserve Board, and calling up Mr. McAdoo, Secretary of the United States Treasury, and set in motion to do it by Colonel E.M. House--is it any wonder the Jewish mystery in the American war government grows more and more amazing?
But, as Mr. Warburg has written--"friendship or help in a presidential campaign, financial or political, has always given a claim to political preferment." And, as Mr. Warburg urges, this is a country "with every untrained amateur a candidate for of­fice", and naturally, with such men comprising the government, they must be kept at a safe distance from monetary affairs.

As if to illustrate the ignorance thus charged, along comes Mr. Baruch, who quotes Colonel House as saying, "I don't know anything about those fellows down there and I would like you to make a suggestion." It is permissible to doubt that Mr. Baruch correctly quotes Colonel House. It is permissible to doubt that all that Colonel House confessed was his ignorance about "those fellows". There was a good understanding be­tween these two men, too good an understanding for the alleged telephone conversation to be taken strictly at its face value. It is possibly quite true that Mr. House is not a financier. Certainly, Mr. Wilson was not. In the long roll of Presidents only a hand­ful have been, and those who have been have been regarded as most drastic in their proposals.

But this whole matter of ignorance, as charged by Mr. War­burg, sounds like an echo of the Protocols:
"The administrators chosen by us from the masses will not be persons trained for government, and consequently they will eas­ily become pawns in our game, played by our learned and tal­ented counsellors, specialists educated from early childhood to administer world affairs."
In the Twentieth Protocol, wherein the great financial plan of world subversion and control is disclosed, there is another men­tion of the rulers' ignorance of financial problems.

It is a coincidence that, while he does not use the term "ignorance", Mr. Warburg is quite outspoken concerning the benighted state in which he found this country, who are candidates for every office. These, he says, are not fitted to take part in the control of monetary affairs. But Mr. Warburg is. He said so. He admits that it was his ambition from the moment he came here, an alien Jewish-German banker, to change our fi­nancial affairs more to his liking. More than that, he has suc­ceeded; he has succeeded, he himself says, more than most men do in a lifetime; he has succeeded, Professor Seligman says, to such an extent that throughout history the name of Paul M. Warburg and that of the Federal Reserve System shall be united.

DEARBORN INDEPENDENT. ISSUE OF July 2, 1921.

[END OF QUOTING]

Is anybody sick yet? Well, we are, so let's call it "a day" and get some rest.
We will, after all, be able to take up the topic of the Kol Nidre because the very next article deals with it. Thank you and good evening.

PJ 223

CHAPTER 2

REC #1 HATONN

FRI., JAN. 16, 1998 8:11 A.M. YR. 11, DAY 153

FRI.. JAN. 16. 1998

BIRTHING THE PHOENIX

[QUOTING, Part 9:]
Continuing from the DEARBORN INDEPENDENT, Nov. 5, 1921.

JEWISH KOL NIDRE AND ELI, ELI

EXPLAINED

(LXXI)

"I have looked this year and last for something in your paper about the prayer which the Jews say at their New Year. But you say nothing. Can it be you have not heard of the Kol Nidre?"
"Lately in three cities I have heard a Jewish religious hymn sung in the public theaters. This was in New York, Detroit and Chicago. Each time the program said 'by request'. Who makes the request? What is the meaning of this kind of propaganda? The name of the hymn is Eli,Eli."

The Jewish year just passed has been described by a Jewish writer in the Jewish Daily Newsas the Year of Chaos. The writer is apparently intelligent enough to ascribe this condition to something besides "anti-Semitism". He says, "the thought that there is something wrong in Jewish life will not down," and when he describes the situation in the Near East, he says, "the Jew himself is stirring the mess." He indicts the Jewish year 5681 on 12 counts, among them being, "mismanagement in Palestine", "engaging in internal warfare", "treason to the Jewish people", "selfishness", "self-delusion". "The Jewish people is a sick people," cries the writer, and when he utters a comfort­able prophecy for the year 5682, it is not in the terms of Judah but in terms of "Kol Yisroel"--All Israel--the terms of a larger and more inclusive unity which gives Judah its own place, and its own place only, in the world. The Jewish people are sick, to be sure, and the disease is the fallacy of superiority, and its con­sequent "foreign policy" against the world.

When Jewish writers describe the year 5681 as the Year of Chaos, it is an unconscious admission that the Jewish people are ripening for a change of attitude. The "chaos" is amongthe leaders; it involves the plans which are based on the old false assumptions. The Jewish people are waiting for leaders who can emancipate them from the thralldom of their self-seeking-masters in the religious and political fields. The enemies of the emancipation of Judah are those who profit by Judah's bondage, and these are the groups that follow the American Jewish Com­mittee and the political rabbis. When a true Jewish prophet arises--and he should arise in the United States--there will be a great sweeping away of the selfish, scheming, heartless Jewish leaders, a general desertion of the Jewish idea of "getting" in­stead of "making", and an emergence of the true idea sub­merged so long.

There will also be a separation among the Jews themselves. They are not all Jews who call themselves so today. There is a Tartar strain in so-called Jewry that is absolutely incompatible with the true Israelitish raciality; there are other alien strains which utterly differ from the true Jewish; but until now these strains have been held because the Jewish leaders needed vast hordes of low-type people to carry out their world designs. But the Jew himself is recognizing the presence of an alien element; and that is the first step in a movement which will place the Jewish Question on quite another basis.

What the Jews of the United States are coming to think is in­dicated by this letter--one among many (the writer is a Jew):

Gentlemen:

"Because you believe in a good cause," said Dr. John­son, "is no reason why you should feel called upon to de­fend it, for by your manner of defense you may do your cause much harm."

The above applying to me I will only say that I have re­ceived the books you sent me and read both with much interest.

You are rendering the Jews a very great service, that of saving them from themselves.
It takes courage, and nerve, and intelligence to do and pursue such a work, and I admire you for it."

The letter was accompanied by a check which ordered the DEARBORN INDEPENDENT sent to the address of another who bears a distinctively Jewish name.

It is very clear that unity is not to be won by the truth-teller soft-pedaling or suppressing his truth, nor by the truth-bearer strenuously denying that the truth is true, but by both together honoring the truth in telling and in acknowledging it. When the Jews see this, they can take over the work of truth-telling and carry it on themselves. These articles have as their only pur­pose: First, that the Jews may see the truth for themselves about themselves; second, that non-Jews may see the fallacy of the present Jewish idea and use enough common sense to cease falling victims to it. With both Jews and non-Jews seeing their error, the way is opened for cooperation instead of the kind of competition (not commercial, but moral) which has resulted so disastrously to Jewish false ambitions these long centuries.

Now, as the questions at the beginning of this article: THE DEARBORN INDEPENDENT has heretofore scrupulously avoided even the appearance of criticizing the Jew for his reli­gion. The Jew's religion, as most people think of it, is unobjec­tionable. But when he has carried on campaigns against the Christian religion, and when in every conceivable manner he thrusts his own religion upon the public from the stage of theaters and in other public places, he has himself to blame if the public asks questions.

It is quite impossible to select the largest theater in the United States, place the Star of David high in a beautiful stage heavens above all flags and other symbols, apostrophize it for a week with all sorts of wild prophecy and all sorts of silly defiance of the world, sing hymns to it and otherwise adore it, without arousing curiosity. Yet the Jewish theatrical managers, with no protest from the Anti-Defamation Committee, have done this on a greater or smaller scale in many cities. To say it is meaning­less is to use words lightly.

The Kol Nidre isa Jewish prayer, named from its opening words, "All vows", (kol nidre). It is based on the declaration of the Talmud:
"He who wishes that his vows and oaths shall have no value, stand up at the beginning of the year and say: 'All vows which I shall make during the year shall be of no value. ' "
It would be pleasant to be able to declare that this is merely one of the curiosities of the darkness which covers the Talmud, but the fact is that Kol Nidre is not only an ancient curiosity; it is also a modern practice. In the volume of revised "Festival Prayers", published in 1919 by the Hebrew Publishing Com­pany, New York, the prayer appears in its fullness:

"All vows, obligations, oaths or anathemas, pledges of all names, which we have vowed, sworn, devoted, or bound our­selves to, from this day of atonement, until the next day of atonement (whose arrival we hope for in happiness) we repent, aforehand, of them all, they shall all be deemed absolved, for­given, annulled, void and made of no effect; they shall not be binding, nor have any power; the vows shall not be reckoned vows, the obligations shall not be obligatory, nor the oaths con­sidered as oaths."
If this strange statement were something dug out of the misty past, it would scarcely merit serious attention, but as being part of a revised Jewish prayer book printed in the United States in 1919, and as being one of the high points of the Jewish religious celebration of the New Year, it cannot be lightly dismissed after attention has once been called to it.

Indeed, the Jews do not deny it. Early in the year, when a famous Jewish violinist landed in New York, after a triumphant tour abroad, he was besieged by thousands of his East Side ad­mirers, and was able to quiet their cries only when he took his violin and played the Kol Nidre. Then the people wept as exiles do at the sound of the songs of the homeland.

In that incident the reader will see that (hard as it is for the non-Jew to understand it!) there is a deep-rooted, sentimental regard for the Kol Nidre which makes it one of the most sacred of possessions to the Jew. Indefensibly immoral as the Kol Nidre is, utterly destructive of all social confidence, yet the most earnest efforts of a few really spiritual Jews have utterly failed to remove it from the prayer books, save in a few isolated in­stances. The music of the Kol Nidre is famous and ancient. One has only to refer to the article Kol Nidre in the Jewish En­cyclopedia to see the predicament of the modern Jew: he cannot deny; he cannot defend; he cannot renounce. The Kol Nidre is here, and remains.

If the prayer were a request for forgiveness for the broken vows of the past, normal human beings could quite understand it. Vows, promises, obligations and pledges are broken, some­times by weakness of will to perform them, sometimes by rea­son of forgetfulness, sometimes by sheer inability to do the thing we thought we could do. Human experience is neither Jew nor Gentile in that respect.

But the prayer is a holy advance notice, given in the secrecy of the synagogue, that no promise whatever shall be binding, and more than not being binding, is there and then violated be­fore it is ever made.

The scope of the prayer is "from this day of atonement, until the next day of atonement."

The prayer looks wholly to the future, "we repent, afore-hand, of them all."

The prayer breaks down the common ground of confidence between men--"the vows shall not be reckoned vows; the obli­gations shall not be obligatory, nor the oaths considered as oaths".

It requires no argument to show that if this prayer be really the rule of faith and conduct for the Jews who utter it, the ordi­nary social and business relations are impossible to maintain with them.

It should be observed that there is no likeness here with Christian "hypocrisy", so-called. Christian "hypocrisy" arises mostly from men holding higher ideals than they are able to at­tain to, and verbally extolling higher principles than their con­duct illustrates. That is, to use Browning's figures, the man's reach exceeds his grasp; as it always does, where the man is more than a clod.

But the Kol Nidre is in the opposite direction. It recognizes by inference that in the common world of men, in the common morality of the street and the mart, a promise passes current as a promise, a pledge as a pledge, an obligation as an obligation--that there is a certain assumption that its quality is kept good by straight moral intention. And it makes provision to drop below that level.

How did the Kol Nidre come into existence? It is the cause of the effect of that untrustworthiness with which the Jew has been charged for centuries.

Its origin is not from the Bible but from Babylon, and the mark of Babylon is more strongly impressed on the Jew than is the mark of the Bible. Kol Nidre is Talmudic and finds its place among many other dark things in that many-volumed and bur­densome invention. If the Kol Nidre ever was a backward look over the failures of the previous year, it very early became a forward look to the deliberate deceptions of the coming year.

Many explanations have been made in an attempt to account for this. Each explanation is denied and disproved by those who favor some other explanation. The commonest of all is this, and it rings in the over-worked note of "persecution": The Jews were so hounded and harried by the bloodthirsty Christians, and so brutally and viciously treated in the name of the loving Jesus (the terms are borrowed from Jewish writers) that they were compelled by wounds and starvation and the fear of death to re­nounce their religion and to vow that thereafter they would take the once despised Jesus for their Messiah. Therefore, say the Jewish apologists, knowing that during the ensuing year the ter­rible, bloodthirsty Christians would force the poor Jews to take Christian vows, the Jews in advance announced to God that all the promises they would make on that score would be lies. They would say that the Christians forced them to say, but they would not mean or intend one word of it.

That is the best explanation of all. Its weakness is that it as­sumes the Kol Nidre to have been coincident with times of "persecution", especially in Spain. Unfortunately for this ex­planation, the Kol Nidre is found centuries before that, when the Jews were under no pressure.

In a refreshingly frank article in the Cleveland Jewish World for October 11, the insufficiency of the above explanation is so clearly set forth that a quotation is made:

"Many learned men want to have it understood that the Kol Nidre dates from the Spanish Inquisition, it having become nec­essary on account of all sorts of persecution and inflictions to adopt the Christian religion for appearances' sake. Then the Jews in Spain, gathering in cellars to celebrate the Day of Atonement and pardon, composed a prayer that declared of no value all vows and oaths that they would be forced to make during the year.


"The learned men say, moreover, that in remembrance of those days when hundreds and thousands of Maranos (secret Jews) were dragged out of the cellars and were tortured with all kinds of torment, the Jews in all parts of the world have adopted the Kol Nidre as a token of faithfulness to the faith and as self-sacrifice for the faith.

"These assertions are not correct. The fact is that the for­mula of Kol Nidre was composed and said on the night of Yom Kippur quite a time earlier than the period of the Spanish Inqui­sition. We find, for instance, a formula to invalidate vows on Yom Kippur in the prayer book of the Rabbi Amram Goun who lived in the ninth century, about five hundred years before the Spanish Inquisition; although Rabbi Amram's formula is not Kol Nidre but Kol Nidrim All vows and oaths which we shall swear from Yom Kippurim to Yom Kippurim will return to us void.')."

The form of the prayer in the matter of its age may be in dis­pute; but back in the ancient and modern Talmud is the autho­rization of the practice: "He who wishes that his vows and oaths shall have no value, stand up at the beginning of the year and say: 'All vows which I shall make during the year shall be of no value."

That answers our reader's question. This article does not say that all Jews thus deliberately assassinate their pledged word. It does say that both the Talmud and the prayer book permit them to do so, and tell them how it may be accomplished.

[H: Horn, Brent, and many others we can name right here right now--are pledged liars and do so to the COURTS, to the JURY, and an oath of office as in Municipal, or other, Judgeships--the entire oath to the people and under the Con­stitution to hold up all Constitutional authority IS NULLIFIED AND VOID BEFORE THE PERSON EVEN BEGINS ON HIS REIGN OF ASSAULTS AGAINST THE POOR PEOPLE WHO COME BEFORE HIM. THIS IS WHERE THE TERM "GOD" GOT APPLIED TO A JUDGE IN ANY COURT AND WHY NO ONE DARES TO, OR IF SO, COUNTER THE AUTHORITY FOR THEY ARE NEVER ALLOWED HEARING EVEN IF THEY CAN PROVE SUCH INDISCRETIONS AND INTENTIONS.

These two Jews who have cost the Ekkers their home, their property, their savings, etc., are both avowed Jews. Brent even advertises to collect Jews to form Jewish clubs. Yet when confronted claim that the Ekkers and anyone who touches them as friends or writers are Anti-Semitic. What does your religious affiliation have to do with whether an auctioneer fails to hold a property sale or not? Oh yes, this is EXACTLY what has taken place. These people have thrust that Anti-Semitic garbage right into the first Superior Court non-hearings, in the papers, all over everywhere in their public accusations.
INTERESTING THINGS ARE QUITE STRANGE, I SUPPOSE--BUT, EKKERS ARE SEMITES AND THOSE JEWS ARE NOT! SO, HOW DO YOU LIKE THOSE APPLES?
MY PURPOSE HERE IS TO POINT OUT THAT YOU CAN ACTUALLY BRING CHARGES BASED ON "THIS" ARTICLE, AGAINST ANY RECOGNIZED JEW IN A COURT OF LAW WHO HAS LIED OR EVEN MISSPOKEN BY A SLIP OF THE LIP. DO IT! NOT UNTIL YOU UNCOVER THESE HEINOUS ACTS OF ANTICHRIST WILL YOU BE ABLE TO HAVE ANYTHING OTHER THAN CORRUPTION IN YOUR ENTIRE MANIFESTATION OF LIFE.
"But that would be so ugly," you say? IS NOT WHAT IS HAPPENING AND HAS HAPPENED TO ENSLAVE YOU THROUGH A JUDICIAL SYSTEM COMPLETELY CONTROLLED BY THESE FALSE-SEMITES AND A PRIVATE CORPORATION (THE BAR ASSOCIATION) NOT UGLY? THIS ATROCIOUS TAKEOVER OF EVERYTHING, INCLUDING YOUR SOULS, IS UPON YOU AND WHO WILL TAKE THE SWORD OF LIGHTED TRUTH AND STAND THE FIELD? I KNOW: "LET SOMEBODY ELSE DO IT!" IS ALWAYS YOUR RESPONSE SPOKEN IN THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY POSSIBLE TO JUSTIFY YOUR ACTIONS, OR LACK THEREOF. YOU WILL LOSE EVERYTHING YOU HAVE INCLUDING YOUR FREEDOM TO KEEP FROM DOING ANYTHING TO MAKE THINGS RIGHT!]

Now, as to the Jewish religious hymn which is being sung "by request" throughout the country: the story of it is soon told.

The name of the hymn is Eli, Eli; its base is the first verse of the Twenty-second Psalm, known best in Christian countries as the Cry of Christ on the Cross.

It is being used by Jewish vaudeville managers as their con­tribution to the pro-Jewish campaign which the Jew-controlled theater is flinging into the faces of the public, from stage and motion picture screens. It is an incantation designed to inflame the lower classes of Jews against the people, and intensify the racial consciousness of those hordes of Eastern Jews who have flocked here.

At the instigation of the New York Kehillah, Eli, Eli has for a long time been sung at the ordinary run of performances in vaudeville and motion picture houses, and the notice "By Re­quest" is usually a bald lie. It should be "By Order". The "request" is from Jewish headquarters which has ordered the speeding up of Jewish propaganda. The situation of the theater now is that American audiences are paying at the box office for the privilege of hearing Jews advertise the things they want non-Jews to think about them.

If even a vestige of decency, or the slightest appreciation of good taste remained, the Jews who control the theaters would see that the American public must eventually gag on such things. When two Jewish comedians who have been indulging in always vulgar and often indecent antics, appear before the drop curtain and sing the Yiddish incantation Eli, Eli, which, of course, is incomprehensible to the major part of the audience, the Jewish element always betrays a high pitch of excitement. They under­stand the game that is being played: the "Gentiles" are being flayed to their face, and they don't know it; as when a Yiddish comedian pours out shocking invectives on the name of Jesus Christ, and "gets away with it", the Jewish portion of his audience howling with delight, and the "boob Gentiles" looking serenely on and feeling it to be polite to laugh and applaud too!

This Yiddish chant is the rallying cry of race hatred which is being spread abroad by orders of the Jewish leaders. You, if you are a theatergoer, help to pay the expense of getting your­self roundly damned. The Kehillah and the American Jewish Committee which for more than ten years have been driving all mention of Christianity out of public life, under their slogan "This Is Not a Christian Country," are spreading their own type of Judaism everywhere with insolence unparalleled.

Eli, Eli is not a religious hymn! It is a racial war cry. In the low cafes of New York, where Bolshevik Jews hang out, Eli, Eli is their song. It is the Marseillaise of Jewish solidarity. It has become the fanatical chant of all Jewish Bolshevik clubs; it is constantly heard in Jewish coffee houses and cabarets where emotional Russian and Polish Jews--all enemies to all govern­ment--shout the words amid torrential excitement. When you see the hymn in point you are utterly puzzled to understand the excitement it rouses.

And this rallying cry has now been obtruded into the midst of the theatrical world.

The term "incantation" here used is used advisedly. The term is used by Kurt Schindler, who adapted the Yiddish hymn to American use. And its effect is that of an incantation.

In translation it is as follows: [H: How many of you read­ers could translate this for yourselves? It is in Yiddish, a language (NOT HEBREW) developed for the Talmudic Jew Antichrist.]
"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
With fire and flame they have burnt us,
Everywhere they have shamed and derided us,
Yet none amongst us has dared depart
From our Holy Scriptures, from our Law.

"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
By day and night I only yearn and pray,
Anxiously keeping our Holy Scriptures
And praying, 'Save us, save us once again!
For the sake of our fathers and our father's fathers!'

"Listen to my prayer and to my lamenting,
For only Thou canst help, Thou, God, alone,
For it is said, 'Hear, 0 Israel, the Lord is our God,
The Lord is One."

[H: Let us look at this as presented by Mr. Schindler, a name not easily overlooked.
I could have bet that Psalms came right before the book of Proverbs in the OLD TESTAMENT. How then could this be a reference to the "THE CRY OF CHRIST ON THE CROSS"? Ah, again the truth is given away in the face of the lies. It became recognized as the "Cry of 'Jesus' Christ on the Cross"--because nobody knew any better about any­thing. And just WHO wrote the PSALMS? I wonder if you have very much of any knowledge or understanding about your own religions?]
The words of the hymn are so much resembling a lament that they strangely contrast with the spirit which the hymn itself seems to arouse; its mournful melody inspires a very different spirit among the Jewish hearers than the same sort of melody would inspire among other people. Those who have heard its public rendition can better understand how a hymn of such ut­terly quiet and resigned tone could be the wild rage of the anar­chists of the East Side coffee houses.

The motive, of course, for the singing of the hymn is the ref­erence to non-Jewish people.

"With fire and flame THEYhave burnt us, everywhere THEYhave shamed and derided us". [H: My goodness, readers, this is prior to 1921 and they already are singing of a Holocaust to come? What is this garbage? NOW, MOREOVER, WHO DO YOU THINK MADE THE PICTURE, WHO WERE THE VAUDEVILLE ACTORS, AND WHO OWNED THE THEATER TO WHOM EVERY ONE HAD TO PAY TO GET IN? Yes, I know; it IS hard to look at Truth when you have been so blinded by the lies as to accept the lie as the Truth--YOU ARE PEOPLE OF THE LIE--AND THE JEWISH ANTICHRIST WILL BE THE FIRST TO AFFIRM THAT REALIZATION. YOU ARE, IN THEIR EYES, TOTAL FOOLS.] Who are "they"? Who but the goyim, the Christians who all unsuspectingly sit near by and who are so affected by the Jewish applause that they applaud too! Truly, in one way of looking at it, Jews have a right to despise the "gentiles".

"THEY have shamed and derided us; THEY have shamed us," but we, the poor Jews, have been harmless all the while, none among us daring to depart from the Law! That is the meaning of Eli, Eli. That is why, in spite of its words of religious resig­nation, it becomes a rallying cry. "They" are all wrong; "we" are all right.

It is possible, of course, that right-minded Jews do not ap­prove of all this. They may disapprove of Kol Nidre and they may resent the use which the Jewish leaders are making of Eli, Eli. Let us at least credit some Jews with both these attitudes. But they do nothing about it. These same Jews, however, will go to the public library of their town and put the fear of political or business reprisal in the hearts of the Library Board if they do not instantly REMOVE the DEARBORN INDEPENDENT from the library; these same Jews will form committees to coerce mayors of cities into issuing illegal orders which cannot be en­forced; these same Jews will give commands to the newspapers under their patronage or control--they are indeed mighty and active in the affairs of the non-Jews. But when it is a matter of keeping Eli, Eli out of the theater, or the Kol Nidre out of the mouths of those who thus plan a whole year of deception "aforehand", these same Jews are very inactive and apparently very powerless.

The Anti-Defamation committee would better shut up shop until it can show either the will or the ability to bring pressure to bear on its own people. Coercion of the rest of the people is rapidly growing less and less possible.

The Kol Nidre is far from being the worst counsel in the Talmud; Eli, Eli is far from being the worst anti-social misuse of apparently holy things. But it will remain the policy of the DEARBORN INDEPENDENT, for the present at least, to let all such matters alone except, as in the present case, where the number of the inquiries indicates that a knowledge of the facts has been had at other sources. In many instances, what our in­quirers heard was much worse than is stated here, so that this article is by way of being a service to the inquirer to prevent his being misled, and to the Jew to prevent misrepresentation.

DEARBORN INDEPENDENT--Issue of Nov. 5, 1921.

[END OF QUOTING]

God bless Henry Ford! And you thought all he did was make horseless carriages and your favorite pick-up truck.

Have you readers ever wondered why you can't find the Phoenix Journals or CONTACT in any library, or why you can't buy them in any establishment book store? They are banned even from the non-establishment book stores. Writings such as this series, just presenting fact from long research, the books, if caught, are disallowed passage of U.S. borders and, in the courts, the more important are BURNED.

It is YOUR life, people, and your choices are honored above all things. But your enemy, and yes the Antichrist IS YOUR ENEMY, plans to enslave you totally--and today, it is DONE. You did not see it nor could you believe it, so it slipped upon you LIKE THE THIEF IN THE NIGHT--but so too SHALL COME THE CHRIST EQUALLY SILENTLY AND TURN ON THE LIGHTS IN YOUR DARKENED HOUSES. SO BE IT FOR THE TIME IS AT HAND, NOW!

SANANDA THE CHRIST WITHIN ALL TRUTH IS AT READY. THE FALSE TEACHINGS WILL BE SET TO TRUTH AND THEN THE CLEARING WILL BECOME REALITY. THERE WILL, HOWEVER, BE NO INTERFERENCE INTO THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS OF THE MAJOR OPPONENTS OF THE ANTICHRIST FOR THEY ALSO HAVE FREEDOM OF CHOICE AND WILL. AND, UNLESS THESE DAYS BE SHORTENED BY GOD, THERE SHALL NOT BE A LIVING FORM LEFT ON YOUR GLOBE. LOOK AROUND YOU AT THE OTHER PLANETS ON WHICH DWELT THESE SAME BEINGS AND SEE IF YOU REALLY CAN LIVE THERE NOW?

IF YOU WANT A SAVIOR--THERE YOU ARE, LOOK IN THE REFLECTING GLASSES. IF YOU WANT TO BE SAVED--GET WITH TRUTH SO YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE ABOUT AND WHO HAS BROKEN YOU. THERE IS NO ARGUMENT AGAINST TRUTH, SO DON'T BOTHER YOURSELVES. FINAL? YES! GOD OF LIGHT WITHIN CHRIST PERFECTION WILL STAND WITH HIS PEOPLE ALWAYS AND NO HARM SHALL DESTROY THEM--KNOW IT!

THE MODERN SELF-STYLED FALSE JEWIS, MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT, A PART AND PARCEL OF ANTICHRIST! THE WAR IS JOINED, THE OPPONENTS OF EACH FALSE TEACHING ARE POISED FOR WAR AND THE JIHAD IS UNDER WAY--IN CASE NOBODY NOTICED. AND, IT HAS, REALLY, NOTHING TO DO WITH US OF CHRIST OR GOD CREATOR. MAN WILL DO WHAT MAN WILL DO AND HIM WHO TENDERS WAR IS A FALLEN BEING IN THE EYES OF GOD.

Will the adversary, in the form of courts, clowns and insipid as­saulters continue to work their mischief? Of course, but not very diligently for with each thrust henceforth, TRUTH will counter them and they cannot stand in the face of TRUTH or the LIGHT BEING SHINED UPON THEIR EVIL AND WICKED DEEDS. Check out self and look at what ye do in the DARKNESS of night or in secret. Are there things you prefer not be known? Wow, you don't hide from God, so I would suggest you begin to clean those closets a bit more carefully. And, shooting the truth-bringer or the messenger will merit you only worse tragedy into your experience. Join the enemy if you will, but you will soon find it futile as God marches through in TRUTH. And, oh yes, WE DO MARCH VERY, VERY WELL. Salu.

PJ 223

CHAPTER 3

REC #1 HATONN

SAT., JAN. 17, 1998 8:46 A.M. YR. 11, DAY 154

SAT., JAN. 17, 1998

EXPLANATORY NOTES RELATIVE TO
THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION

I am at aloss to understand WHY I receive objections to offer­ing this information regarding Judaism, Christians, Moslems and thus and so. I have begun this series on Antichrist by presenting relevant material on the false "Jews" and it would seem to stir the Hornet's nest. Well, we have been acclaimed by the Anti-Defamation League and various and sundry attorneys, and other publications, as Anti-Semites (when WE are the Semites in point) and, thus, it seems important to go right on with our planned format of offering INFORMATION WHICH IS WELL RESEARCHED, EASY TO PROVE TO/BY ANY READER--HISTORICAL FACT.

Because some people feel they have to read this material in the corner of their most secure closet, let me offer you, AS REGARDS THE TALMUD, FROM THE PEOPLE OF WHOM WE WRITE. This first will be a direct QUOTATION from The Talmud Unmasked, the secret rabbinical teaching concerning Christians. You can put any definition on "christian" that you might choose. Since "Jesus" was not named until almost half a century AFTER Esu Immanuel's passage from the Holy Land, by Saul of Tarsus (Paul), IN GREECE, it is hard to believe that the TRUE Christians are the ones who worshipped Jesus, for what in the world would they have called him? Nothing was written in Gospel form or compiled into that New Testament (and into a book of Old Testament) UNTIL SOME 300 YEARS AFTER THE "CHRIST" EVENT, AT ANY RATE.

SO WHY DO YOU GET SO DANGED-FOOL ANGRY AT HISTORICAL FACT IN PRESENTATION?

The book used here is by Rev. I. B. Pranaitis who was a Profes­sor of the Hebrew Language in St. Petersburg. The originals were in Latin. The printing was originally done by the Printing office of the Imperial Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, 1892.

So, let us see what the "Jews" had to say. I might add, before beginning, that just as Jesus replaced Immanuel, so to did the Jews of the chosen title replace Semite to mean themselves. No more than "Jesus" means "Immanuel" does Semite mean Jew.

BIRTHING THE PHOENIX

[QUOTING, Part 10:]

ANTIPHONE

"Let our writings be open to all the people. [H: Well, right there you have the first lie for the teachings have never been open to the people.] Let them see what our moral code is like! We need not be afraid of this test, for we have a pure heart and a clean spirit. [H: This particular writer had just, undoubt­edly, taken the Kol Nidre .] Let the nations investigate the habitations of the children of Israel, and of their own accord convince themselves of what they are really like! They will then exclaim for certain with Baalam, when he went out to curse Is­rael: 'How beautiful are thy tents, O Israel; how beautiful thy homes!"

"In its attitude towards non-Jews, the Jewish religion is the most tolerant of all the religions in the world... The precepts of the ancient Rabbis, though inimical to Gentiles, cannot be ap­plied in any way to Christians." [H: Ready to barf yet?]
"A whole series of opinions can be quoted from the writings of the highest Rabbinical authorities to prove that these teachers inculcated in their own people a great love and respect for Christians, in order that they might look upon Christians, who believe in the true God, as brothers, and pray for them."

"We hereby declare that the Talmud does not contain any­thing inimical to Christians."

[H: Ok, perhaps you might wish to re-identify "inimical".]
[QUOTING:]

THE SOULS OF CHRISTIANS
ARE EVIL AND UNCLEAN

"The teaching of the Jews is that God created two natures, one good and the other evil, or one nature with two sides, one clean and the other unclean. From the unclean side, called Ke­liphah-rind, or scabby crust--the souls of Christians are said to have come. Zohar (I,131a): "Idolatrous people, however, since they exist, befoul the world, because their souls come out of the unclean side. [H: There had been a preceding statement de­nouncing Christians as unclean, animals, idolators, etc.]
Emek Hammelech (23d) says:

"The souls of the impious come from Keliphah, which is death and the shadow of death. "
Again, from Zohar (I, 46b, 47a) goes on to show that this unclean side is the left side, from which the souls of Christians come:

"And he created every living thing, that is, the Is­raelites, because they are the children of the most High God, and their holy souls come out from Him. but where do the souls of the idolatrous gentiles come from? Rabbi Eliezer says: from the left side, which makes their souls unclean. They are therefore all unclean and they pollute all who come in contact with them. "
[H: Please do not forget: THE TALMUD book of instructions to the Jews is written BY RABBIS AND ELDERS (human MEN) and claims no Holy God input as is claimed in the Torah.]

THE FATE OF DEAD CHRISTIANS

The Elders teach that Abraham sits at the gate of Gehenna... and all the uncircumcised go down into hell. Uncircumcised means all Gentiles whether, believe it or not, they are Christians or other unclean. These Gentiles are recognized as "Heretics and Epicureans and Traitors [who] go down into hell." Rosch Haschanach (17a)
The bodies of Christians after death are called by the odious name of Pegarim, which is the word used in Holy Scripture for the dead bodies of the damned and of animals, but never for the pious dead who are called Metim. Thus the Schulchan Arukh orders that a dead Christian must be spoken of in the same way as a dead animal.

Lora Dea (377, 1) says:

"Condolences must not be offered to anyone on account of the death of his servants or handmaidens. All that may be said is 'May God restore your lost one, the same as we say to a man who has lost a cow or an ass." [H: Prior to this there was an edict that "Gentiles" could only be allowed as servants or handmaidens.]
Nor must Christians be avoided for seven days after they have buried someone, as the law of Moses commands, SINCE THEY ARE NOT MEN; for the burial of an animal does not pollute one.

Iebhammoth (61a) says:

Here, no sense is made at all, of the statement:

"The Nokhrim are not rendered unclean by a burial. For it is said: Ye are my sheep, the sheep of my pasture; ye ARE MEN. You are thus called men, but not the Nokhrim."
[END OF QUOTING]
If this is not "inimical", what, at the least, could it be?

Inimical: adverse, antagonistic, bellicose, hostile, ill, nasty, spiteful, unfriendly.

Let us drop those topics for now and if we ever find time we will offer a lot of information from the Talmud. We will, how­ever, now return to notes relative to the Protocols.
[QUOTING:]

JUDAISM
THE PHARISEES

Judaism has been described by Moses Mendelssohn, a learned Jew, in this way: "Judaism is not a religion by a Law religionized." This definition does away effectively with the er­roneous belief prevalent among the non-Jews that Judaism is a religion.

In spite of the loud and frequent assertions, made by Jews and Christian divines alike, contending that the Jews were the first monotheists, it is a well proven fact that the high initiates of the Memphis priesthood were monotheists long before the Jews ever went to Egypt.

Judaism would be best described as a rite or compendium of rites, for, if one lends belief to the existence of the Jewish Law­giver, Moses, one must bear in mind that he first studied among the high initiates of Egypt, and later, became the pupil and son-in-law of black Jethro, the Ethiopian magician whom one might call the Father of Voodooism, the name given to the magic practices and rites performed by the negroes.

The closer one studies the history of the Jews, the clearer it appears that they are neither a religious entity nor a nation. The absolute failure of Zionism which was a desperate effort on the part of certain Jewish leaders to bind all the Jews of the world into a national entity, whose territory would have been Pales­tine, proves the futility of such an effort.

Judaism is not a religion and the Jews are not a nation, but they are a sect with Judaism as a rite. [H: This does not say "right", it says: "rite".]
The obligations and rules of the rite for the Jewish masses are contained in the Talmud and Schulchan Arukh, but the esoteric teachings for the higher initiates are to found in the CABALA.
Therein are contained the mysterious rites for evocations, the indications and keys to practices for conjuration of supernatural forces, the science of numbers, astrology, etc.

The practical application of the Cabalist knowledge is mani­fested in the use made of it, through the ages, by Jews to gain influence both in the higher spheres of Gentile life and over the masses. Sovereigns and Popes, both, usually had one or more Jews as astrologers and advisers, and they frequently gave Jews control over their very life by employing them as physicians. Political power was thus gained by Jews in almost every Gentile country alongside with financial power, since Jewish court-bankers manipulated state funds and taxes.

Through the ages, also, can be followed the spreading power of the sect, and no more awful example of the devastating and destructive power of the penetration of a secret subversive soci­ety has even been witnessed.

With its B'nai B'rith Supreme Council as the directing head, the sect with its members swarming among all nations has be­come the sovereign power ruling in the councils of all nations and governing their political, economic, religious and educa­tional policies.
In his book Nicholas II et les Juifs, Netchvolodow explains that "the Chaldean science acquired by many of the Jewish priests, during the captivity of Babylon, gave birth to the sect of the Pharisees whose name only appears in the Holy Scriptures and in the writings of the Jewish historians after the captivity (606 B.C.). The works of the celebrated scientist Munk leave no doubt on the point that the sect appeared during the period of the captivity. [H: Note, please, that although you probably can no longer find references since the great libraries were destroyed and so too were the records in Babylon (Iraq), the Pharisees were called "Phareecians". By the way, the monotheistic recognizers of Aton, the ONE Light, were called at that same time, "Atonians". This concept of Aton was buried as deeply as the Phareecians could manage to wipe out historical records.]
"From then dates the Cabala or Tradition of the Pharisees. For a long time their precepts were only transmitted orally but later they formed the Talmud and received their final form in the book called the SEPHER HA ZOHAR. [H: I wonder if about now my friend Al is getting any nervous twitches regarding teachers and guides? Use of very SIMILAR names are meant to confuse, confound, and misdirect, and look how wondrous an event to have sidetracked Al.]
The Pharisees were, as it were, a class whose tendency was to form a kind of intellectual aristocracy among the Jews. At first, they formed a sort of brotherhood, a "haburah" , the mem­bers being called "haburim" or brothers. They were a subver­sive element, aiming at the overthrow of the Sadducean High-priesthood, whose members prided themselves on their aristoc­racy of blood and birth, to which the Pharisees opposed an aristocracy of learning. The war waged by the latter extends over a long period of time, and the rivalry was bitter. The Pharisees, who, although they professed as one of the their chief tenets, the utmost contempt of the "am haretz" or simple people, did not overlook the fact that they needed their mass support for the attainment of their own aim, and they enlisted it by opposing the Sadducean strictness of the Law in many instances, namely, in the observance of the Sabbath.

The power of the Sadducees fell with the destruction of the Temple by Titus and thenceforth the Pharisaic element held supremacy among the Jews.

Quoting an acknowledged authority on Judaism, Mr. Flavien Brenier, Lt. Gen. Netchvolodow further describes the policy of the sect as follows:

"Before appearing proudly as the expression of Jewish aspi­rations, The Tradition of the Pharisees had serious difficulties to surmount, the chief of which was the revival of the orthodox faith stimulated in the Jewish people by the Captivity. To the exiles, bemoaning the fall of the Temple of Jerusalem and beg­ging Jehovah to end the misfortunes of their homeland, the rev­elation that Jehovah was only a phantom, entailed not only cer­tain defeat, but also their own exposure to perils the last of which would have been the loss of all authority over Israel.

"The Pharisees then, judging it wiser to capture the confi­dence of their compatriots by taking the lead of the religious movement, affected a scrupulous observance of the slightest prescriptions of the law and instituted the practice of compli­cated rituals, simultaneously however cultivating the new doc­trine in their secret sanctuaries. These were regular secret soci­eties, composed during the captivity of a few hundred adepts. At the time of Flavius Josephus which was that of their greater prosperity they numbered only some 6,000 members.

"This group of intellectual pantheists was soon to acquire a directing influence over the Jewish nation. Nothing, moreover, likely to offend national sentiment ever appeared in their doc­trines. However saturated with pantheistic Chaldeism they might have been, the Pharisees preserved their ethnic pride in­tact. This religion of Man divinised, which they had absorbed at Babylon they conceived solely in applying to the profit of the Jew, the superior and predestined being. The promises of uni­versal dominion which the orthodox Jew found in the Law, the Pharisees did not interpret in the sense of the reign of the God of Moses over the nations, but in that of a material domination to be imposed on the universe by the Jews. The awaited Messiah was no longer the Redeemer of original Sin, a spiritual victor who would lead the world, it was a temporal king, bloody with battle, who would make Israel master of the world and "drag all peoples under the wheels of his chariot". The Pharisees did not ask this enslavement of the nations of a mystical Jehovah, which they continued worshipping in public, only as a concession to popular opinion, for they expected its eventual consummation to be achieved by the secular patience of Israel and the use of hu­man means.

"Monstrously different from the ancient law were such prin­ciples as these, but they had nothing one could see, which might have rendered unpopular those who let them filter, drop by drop, among the Jews.

"The admirably conceived organizations of the Pharisees did not fail soon to bear fruit.

"One cannot better define its action in the midst of Jewish so­ciety before Jesus Christ," said Mr. Falvien Brenier, "than in comparing it with that of the Freemasons in modern society."

"A carefully restricted membership tightly bound, imposing on their members the religion of 'the secret', the Pharisees pur­sued relentlessly their double aim which was:

• "1. The seizure of political power, by the possession of the great political offices (the influence of which was tremendous in the reconstituted Jewish nation) and the conquest of the San­hedrin (Jewish parliament).

• "2. To modify gradually the conceptions of the people in the direction of their secret doctrine."

The first of these aims was achieved when Hillel, a Pharisee of Babylon who claimed Davidic descent, was elected president of the Sanhedrin. Thus ended the bitter fight between the Phar­isees and the Sadducees. Opposed to Hillel was Shammai, a Sadduce, supporter of the Sadducean High Priest who was made Chief Judge of the assembly. The attitude of the two men to­wards each other is a matter of long record in the Talmud.
Among the most noted Pharisees, after Hillel, are: Ychanan be Zakkai, founder of the school of Yamnai, Akibah who, with Bar Cochba, fomented the revolt against the Romans under Hadrian, rebellion ending with the order for the dispersion of Jews (132 A.D.) Also Simon ben Yohai, who might be termed the great Magician and Father of the Cabala, lastly Judah the Prince who compiled the Babylonian Talmud. Under these chiefs, the Phariasaic power was definitely established in the Sanhedrin. Those among the Jews who clung to the Sadducean tradition and refused to acknowledge the domination of the Pharisees, remained as dissidents. Such were the Samaritans and the Karaites who rejected the Talmud.
[H: Are you beginning to be able to SEE the split in the ac­tual ones who might wish to call themselves Jews? If you as Gentiles think there is difficulty in clearing up these confu­sions, be compassionate toward those God-believing Judeans who followed the Judean instructions and the books they ASSUMED were from God. There is not even an assump­tion that God had anything to do with the Talmud except to have these wise elders who knew, of course, more than any­one on the face of the Earth--in ORDER TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD INTO TOTAL CONTROL BY THEMSELVES.]
The second of the aims and its method of attainment is ex­posed in the so-called Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion so loudly denounced by the descendants of those who devised The Secret Doctrine in Israel. Israel here meaning the Jews as a re­ligious community, most of whom remain quite ignorant of the intricate subversive schemes imputed to them.

The attitude of Jesus Christ to this sect [H: CULT] is definitely expressed in the New Testament (see Luke XI and John VIII).

[H: I can't let this pass, readers. Again in the assumption of whole TRUTH in the book you refer to as the Holy Bible YOU HAVE THE MISPERCEPTION THAT "JESUS" WAS THE "CHRIST" AND THAT EVERYTHING WRITTEN AS ACCLAIMED TO BE ABOUT OR FROM "HIM" WAS SO. "JESUS" COULD NOT HAVE BEEN THE ONE ACCLAIMED BORN AS THE CHRIST BECAUSE " JESUS" WAS AN ALIAS LABEL (AKA) AFFIXED BY SAUL OF TARSUS (PAUL) IN GREECE AT LEAST 35 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT OF IMMANUEL'S BIRTH! SINCE THAT IS NOT SO, WHAT DO WE HAVE AS TO ABILITY OF ANY RESEARCHER OR AUTHOR TO COME UP WITH VALID, INDISPUTABLE FACTS REGARDING THE SUBJECT? EVEN IN THE BIBLE, HOWEVER, THESE DIFFERENCES IN SECTS (CULTS) ARE DEFINED AND EXPLAINED. IF EVEN ONE THING, ONE IDEA, ONE STATED STATEMENT AS FACT, IS INCORRECT, IS IT NOT POSSIBLE YOU HAVE BEEN FOOLED IN SOME DEGREE OR ANOTHER? WHEN THE VERY BEING YOU CALL "CHRIST", "MESSIAH", EXPECTED TO COME AGAIN FOR YOU, HIS PEOPLE, IS NOT FACTUAL IN PRESENTATION, HOW CAN YOU TRUST ANY OF THE MATERIAL? I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY YOU FIRST BELIEVE A FALSE STATEMENT BUT HOW CAN YOU CONTINUE TO, CENTURY AFTER CENTURY, WHEN FACTS AND TRUTH ARE PRESENT FOR YOUR USE, CONTINUE TO BE LIKE LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER HOUSES?]
Esoteric Judaism, the Jewish religion as practised in the twentieth century, is based on the Old Testament, and on equally ancient commentaries on it, preserved for ages as oral tradi­tions, and known, as above stated, under the general name of the Talmud. All copies of this book were ordered to be burned by Philip IV, the Fair, King of France, in 1306, but the book survived the holocaust.

[H: Many so-called informed professors use this very con­cept as proving truth of the Talmud (without even an idea what is in the Talmud) as "if burned" they must hold truth. THANK YOU, READERS, for if this is the criteria for Truth, we must hold truth, for our books have been ordered BURNED, BANNED and CONFISCATED and my scribe in­carcerated in prison on contempt charges.]
We know that the Jewish god is not the father of all men and the ideal of love, justice and mercy, like the Christian God, or even like Ahura-Mazd or Brahma. On the contrary, he is the god of vengeance down to the fourth generation, just an merci­ful only to his own people, but foe to all other nations, denying them human rights and commanding their enslavement that Is­rael might appropriate their riches and rule over them.

The following quotations will serve to illustrate this point:

"And when the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy to them." Deut. VII, 2

"For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God; the Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the Earth." Deut. VII, 6.

The Talmud comments upon it: "You are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts." Baba Mecia 114, 6.

"On the house of the Goy (non-Jew) one looks as on the fold of cattle." Tosefta, Erubin VIII.

From The Talmud (a prayer said on the eve of Passover, to the present day) "We beg Thee, 0 Lord, indict Thy wrath on the nations not believing in Thee, and not calling on Thy name. Let down Thy wrath on them and inflict them with Thy wrath. Drive them away in Thy wrath and crush them into pieces. Take away, 0 Lord, all bone from them. In a moment indict all disbelievers. Destroy in a moment all foes of Thy nation. Draw out with the root, disperse and ruin unworthy nations. Destroy them! Destroy them immediately in this very moment!" (Pranajtis: Christianus in Talmudae Jeorum, quotations from:
Synagoga Judaica, p. 212. Minhagin, p. 23, Crach Chaim 480 Hagah).
[H: Wow, the universal LAW of return, according to your sowing, this is going to be some heck of a show-and-tell on delivery day! I would have thought these wise-acres would have remembered that little detail before they offered up such obscenity and atrocity upon the world.]
"When one sees inhabited houses of the 'Goy' one says, 'The Lord will destroy the house of the proud.' And when one sees them destroyed he says, 'The Lord God of Vengeance has re­vealed himself." -- (The Babylonian Talmud, Berachot 58, 6.)

Those who do not own Torah and the prophets must all be killed. Who has power to kill them, let him kill them openly with the sword, if not, let him use artifices till they are done away with." -- (Schulchan Arukh: Choszen Hamiszpat, 425, 50.)

The Jewish Sages soon understood that Christ's way of com­menting upon the old Law introduced, instead of hatred toward foreign nations, brotherly feelings and equality of all men in the face of God, thus denying the Jews their privileged position as masters of the world.

At the same time, Christ's reforming the very-primitive and rough moral ideas of the Old Testament deprived the Jews of their very convenient-in-the-battle-of-life, unscrupulous, double morality. Thence the Jewish hatred for the Christian faith is conspicuous in the following quotations from Talmudic sources:

"The estates of the Goys are like wilderness; who first settles in them has a right to them. (Baba Batra, 14b.)

"The property of the Goys is like a thing without a master." (Schulchan Arukh: Choszen Hamiszpat, 116, 5.)

"If a Jew has struck his spade into the ground of the Goy, he has become the master of the whole." (Baba Batra, 55a.)

In order to enhance the authority of the Old Testament equally recognized by the Christians, while simultaneously aug­menting that of the Talmud and the Rabbis, its commentators and authors teach: --

"In the law (the Bible) are things more or less important, but the words of the Learned in the Scripture are always important.

"It is more wicked to protest the words of the rabbis than of Torah." (Miszna, Sanhedryn XI, 3.) "Who changes the words of the rabbis ought to die." (Erubin, 21b.)

"The decisions of the Talmud are words of the living God. Jehovah himself asks the opinion of earthly rabbis when there are difficult affairs in heaven." (Rabbi Menachen, Comments for the Fifth Book.)[H: Well, oh boy, I bet that "living god" must be in full-time council since the GOD OF LIFE has ac­tively entered this "question".]
"Jehovah himself in heaven studies the Talmud[H: Want to bet?], standing; he has such respect for that book." (Tr. Mechilla).

To enhance the dignity of religious dogmas the following commandments are given:
"That the Jewish nation is the ONLY nation selected by God, while all the remaining ones are contemptible and hateful. [H: Where does this leave YOU?]
"That all property of other nations belongs to the Jewish na­tion, which consequently is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples." [H: And, where does THIS ONE leave YOU? It has already happened!]
"That an orthodox Jew is not bound to observe principles of morality towards people of other nations, and on the contrary, he even ought to act against morality, if it were profitable for himself or for the interest of Jews in general."
45
"A Jew may rob a Goy (Goy means unclean, and is the dis­paraging name for a non-Jew), he may cheat him over a bill, which should not be perceived by him, otherwise the name of god would become dishonoured." (Schulchan Arukh, Choszen Hamiszpat. 348.)

"Should a Goy to whom a Jew owned some money die with­out his heirs knowing about the debt, the Jew is not bound to pay the debt." (Schulchan Arukh, Choszen Hamiszpat 283, 1.)

"The son of Noah, who would steal a farthing, ought to be put to death, but an Israelite is allowed to do injury to thy neighbor, is not said, Thou shalt not do injury to a goy." (Miszna, Sanhedryn, 57.)

"A thing lost by a goy may not only be kept by the man who found it, but it is forbidden to give it back to him." (Schulchan Arukh, Choszen Hamiszpat, 266, 1.)

"Who took an oath in the presence of the goys, the robbers, and the custom-house officer, is not responsible." (Tosefta Szebnot, 11.)
"Inorder to annul marriages, oaths, and promises, a Jew must go to the rabbi, and if he is absent, he must call three other Jews, and say to them that he is sorry to have done it, and they say, 'Thou are allowed to.' (Schulchan Arukh, 2, 1:247.)

The Kol Nidre prayer on the Day of Judgment, that acquits beforehand from the nonfulfillment of all kinds of oaths and vows, is given here.

"All vows, oaths promises, engagements, and swearing, which, beginning this very day of reconciliation, we intend to vow, promise, swear, and bind ourselves to fulfill, we are sorry for already, and they shall be annulled, acquitted, annihilated, abolished, valueless, unimportant, our vow shall be NO VOWS, and our OATHS NO OATHS AT ALL." (SCHULCHAN ARUKH, Edit. I, 136.)

"If a goy wants a Jew to stand witness against a Jew at the Court of Law, and the Jew could give fair evidence, HE IS FORBIDDEN TO DO IT, but if a Jew wants a Jew to be a wit­ness in a similar case against a Goy, he may do it." [H: !!!!!] (Schulchan Arukh, Choszen Hamiszpat, 28 art. 3 and 4.)

"Should a Jew inform the goyish authorities that another Jew has much money, the other will suffer a loss through it, he must give him remuneration." (Schulchan Arukh. -- Ch. Ha., 338.)

"If there is no doubt that someone thrice betrayed the Jews, or caused that their money passed to the goys, a means and wise council must be found to do away with him."

"Every one must contribute to the expense of the community (Kahal) in order to do away with the traitor." Ibid. 163, 1.)

"It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere... it is permitted to kill him before he has denounced... though it is necessary to warn him and say, 'do not denounce.' But should he say, 'I will denounce,' he must be killed, and he who accom­plishes it first will have the greater merit." (Ibid, 388, 10) [H: Listen up, sleepyheads, they are NOT kidding!]

"How to interpret the word 'robbery'. A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take woman slaves, etc., from a goy or from a Jew, but he (a Jew) is not forbidden to do all this to a goy." (Tosefta, Aboda Zara, VIII, 5.)
"If a goy killed a goy or a Jew he is responsible, but if a Jew killed a goy he is not responsible." (Ibid., VDT, 5.)

The authors of the Talmud, having issued this horrible moral code, that acquits all kinds of crimes, in order to make easier the strife with foreigners to their own nation, understood the ne­cessity of keeping its contents a secret and thus legislated:

"To communicate to a goy about our religious relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if the goys knew what we teach about them, they would kill us openly." (Book of Libbre David, 37) [H: How much do you need, goyim gen­tiles? But to kill them? Oh no, there are ever so many other ways of retribution as to never need kill anyone over anything.]
"It is forbidden to disclose the secrets of the Law. He who would do it would be as guilty as if he destroyed the whole world." (Jaktu Chadasz,171, 2.) [H: That is a pretty bad judgment, don't you think? Is it any wonder, then, that the secrets are kept, just like in other Orders which require blood sanctions if secrets are revealed.] The restrictions and commandments bearing this in view were raised to the dignity of dogmas of faith. It is not astonishing that in face of such prohi­bitions the secrets of the Talmudhave been so little known to other nations, especially to the Western ones, and till the present day, even the most progressive and citizen-like Jews think the disclosure of the principles of the Talmud a proof of the most outrageous intolerance, and an attack on the Jewish religion.

In order to separate the Jewish nation from all others and thus prevent it from mixing with them, and losing their national pe­culiarities, a great many precepts of the ritual and rules for ev­ery-day life, prejudices and superstitions, the remains of the times of barbarism and obscurity have been gathered in the Tal­mud and consecrated as canons. The precepts observed by Eastern Jews till the present day deride even the most simple notions of culture and hygiene. [H: Would these not be rules for ANTICHRIST? Come on, readers, OPEN YOUR EYES.] For instance they enjoin:

"If a Jew [Eastern] be called to explain any part of the rab­binic books, he only ought to give a false explanation, that he might not, by behaving differently, become an accomplice in betraying this information. Who will violate this order shall be put to death." (Libbre David, 37)

[H: PEOPLE, THIS IS AGAINST THE JEWS; WHERE ARE THOSE JEWISH PEOPLE NOW, WITH THEIR SHOUTS AT US OF ANTI-SEMITISM AND JEW-HATER? THIS IS THE JEWISH RACE INTENDED FOR ANNIHILATION AND GENOCIDE HERE, GOOD BUDDIES.]

IT IS FORBIDDEN TO DISCLOSE
THE SECRETS OF THE LAW.

[H: But what does this do to the Antiphone where it says: "Let our writings be open to all the people. Let them see what our moral code is like!....?]

"One should and must make false oath, when the goys ask if our books contain anything against them. Then we are bound to state on oath that there is nothing like that." (Szaalot-Utszabot. The Book of Jore d'a, 17.)
"Every goy who studies the Talmud, and every Jew who helps him in it, ought to die." (Sanhedryn 59a, Aboda Zora 8-6: Szagiga 13.)

"The ears of the goys are filthy, their baths, houses, coun­tries are filthy." (Tosefta Mikwat, v. 1.)
"A boy-goy after nine years and one day old, and a girl after three years and one day old, are considered filthy." (Perferkowicz: Talmud t. v., p. 11.)

These principles afford an explanation of the action of gov­ernments in excluding Jews from judicial and military positions. [H: Well, not any more and, in fact, it is usually a require­ment that in the Judicial (Jew-dicial) system that the mem­bership in the Bar Association INSURES that even if a man is not a Jew, he becomes a Jew simply by oath of and service in the Bar Association, a private corporation overriding the laws of the Constitution in order to legislate and create LAWS as desired by this same bunch of Talmudic usurpers.] They also explain that mysterious phenomenon known as

ANTI-SEMITISM!

[END OF QUOTING]
Difficult to digest, isn't it? Well, this is why the term: PEOPLE OF THE LIE. How can you know Truth if you are given secret laws, secret rules, secret information in the form which cannot be translated, and if translated, the translator is doomed to death--under the law being utilized?

Why would Antichrist set forth such regulations as we have of­fered here, and within thousands of pages of instructions? Be­cause, if they be known, no man would allow such atrocities or lies foisted off on anyone, even himself, for gain of some Earth-perceived property or treasure.

Perhaps you can get a better view from the mountain where sit the Moslems, Buddists, Islamic and yes, "CHRIST" Sanandans. I don't care what you call your "leaders", but you err when you buy into the lies of self-established LIES AND FALSE PRE­SENTATIONS.

If the Jews (Antichrists self-proclaimed, for they denied the one accepted by Christians as their leader) are on one side and ALL OTHERS are placed, by them, on the other, how think you that there will NOT be bloody confrontations? The Sanandan Atoni­ans will do nothing save inform. But, you know and I know that the others will spread bloodshed throughout every nook and cranny of your globe as is possible and then leave the mess for the dying globalists.

If you call a rake, a shovel, just how much dirt do you suppose to lift with the tool? So, the first thing we do is to STOP call­ing, or allowing to be called, these enemies by false names. Every action is ANTI-Christ in concept, intention and action--so, get brave, gentiles and Judeans--call the rake a rake and let's get on with some TRUTH in this old weary world. The An­tichrist has ALWAYS been the SAME Antichrist from the be­ginning and will be to the ending. This is not some new concept sprung on the world for this morning's refreshment or magic show. IT HAS NEVER BEEN OTHERWISE.

You do what you want about this but the FACTS remain that this is TRUTH, PROVEN, and you get with whatever "side" you think your false teachers will allow--and sit until hell freezes--which it won't but you will be right there in the middle of it wishing you had done your homework!

I am reminded that our readers won't read the paper if there is very much information. Well, sorry about that, good friends, for it is going to be both BIG AND THICK, and it will behoove YOU TO TAKE THE TIME TO STUDY EVERY WORD OF EVERY PRESENTATION. THE FINAL CHOICE IS HERE!

If, further, you claim self to be too dense to understand these messages then you are too dense for me and, therefore, may you do well in your choices, but count me out of your plans. Salu.

PJ 223

CHAPTER 4

REC #2 HATONN

SAT., JAN. 17, 1998 2:48 P.M. YR. 11, DAY 154

SAT., JAN. 17. 1998

Continuing from: THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION (No authors or publishing information available.)

EXPLANATORY NOTES RELATIVE TO
THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION

Note that any footnotes or comments will be inserted where ap­propriate within the body of the text.

BIRTHING THE PHOENIX

[QUOTING, Part 11:]

PART II

Chapter 1

HOW THE PROTOCOLS CAME TO RUSSIA

The word "protocol" (From Greek. protos (first) + killa (glue).) was used to signify a flyleaf pasted at the top of an offi­cial document, bearing either the opening formula or a summary of the contents for convenient reference. The original draft of a treaty was usually pasted on in this way, that the signatories might check the correctness of the engrossed copy before sign­ing. The draft itself being based on the discussion at the confer­ence, the word came to mean also the minutes of the proceed­ings.

In this instance "the protocols" mean the "draft of the plan of action" of the Jewish leaders. There have been many such drafts at different periods in Jewish history since the dispersion, but few of them have come into general circulation. In all, the principles and morality are as old as the tribe. By way of illus­tration we give an instance which occurred in the fifteenth cen­tury.

In 1492, Chemor, chief Rabbi of Spain, wrote to the Grand Sanhedrin, which had its seat in Constantinople, for advice, when a Spanish law threatened expulsion. The reply is found in the sixteenth century Spanish book, La Silva Curiosa, by Julio-­Iniguez de Medrano (Paris Orry, 1608), on pages 156 and 157, shown in photostat, with the following explanation: "This letter following was found in the archives of Toledo by the hermit of Salamanca, (while) searching the ancient records of the king­doms of Spain; and, as it is expressive and remarkable, I wish to write it here." This was the reply: [SEE PAGE 57]

"Beloved brethren in Moses, we have received your letter in which you tell us of the anxieties and misfortunes which you are enduring. We are pierced by as great pain to hear it as your­selves.

The advice of the Grand Satraps and Rabbis is the following:

• 1. As for what you say that the King of Spain (Ferdinand) obliges you to become Christians: do it, since you cannot do otherwise.

• 2. As for what you say about the command to despoil you of your property: make your sons merchants that they may despoil, little by little, the Christians of theirs.

• 3. As for what you say about making attempts on your lives: make your sons doctors and apothecaries, that they may take away Christians' lives.

• 4. As for what you say of their destroying your synagogues: make your sons canons and clerics in order that they may de­stroy their churches.

• 5. As for the many other vexations you complain of: arrange that your sons become advocates and lawyers, and see that they always mix in affairs of State, that by putting Christians under your yoke you may dominate the world and be avenged on them.

• 6. Do not swerve from this order that we give you, because you will find by experience that humiliated as you are, you will reach the actuality of power.

Signed: Prince of the Jews of Constantinople."
These protocols given to the world by Nilus are only the lat­est known edition of the Jewish leaders' programme. The story of how the latter came into general circulation is an interesting one.

In 1884 the daughter of a Russian general, Mlle. Justine Glinka, was endeavoring to serve her country in Paris by ob­taining political information, which she communicated to Gen­eral Orgevskii (At that time Secretary to the Minister of the In­terior, General Cherevin.) in St. Petersburg. For this purpose she employed a Jew, Joseph Schorst (Alias Schapiro, whose fa­ther had been sentenced in London, two years previous, to ten years penal servitude for counterfeiting.), member of the Mizraim Lodge in Paris. One day Schorst offered to obtain for her a document of great importance to Russia, on payment of 2,500 francs. This sum being received from St. Petersburg was paid over and the document handed to Mlle. Glinka. (Schorst fled to Egypt where, according to French police archives, he was murdered.)

She forwarded the French original, accompanied by a Rus­sian translation to Orgevskii, who in turn handed it to his chief, General Cherevin, for transmission to the Tsar. But Cherevin, under obligation to wealthy Jews, refused to transmit it, merely filing it in the archives. (On his death in 1896, he willed a copy of his memoirs containing the Protocols to Nicholas II.)
Meantime there appeared in Paris certain books on Russian court life (Published under the pseudonym "Count Vassilii", their real author was Mme. Juliette Adam, using material fur­nished by Princess Demidov-San Donato, Princess Radzivill, and other Russians.), which displeased the Tsar, who ordered his secret police to discover their authorship. This was falsely attributed, perhaps with malicious intent (Among the Jews in the Russian secret service in Paris was Maniulov, whose odious character is drawn by M. Paleologue, Memoires.), to Mlle. Glinka, and on her return to Russia she was banished to her es­tate in Orel. To the marechal de noblesse of this district, Alexis Sukhotin, Mlle. Glinka gave a copy of the Protocols. Sukhotin showed the document to two friends, Stepanov and Nilus; the former had it printed and circulated privately in 1897; the sec­ond, Professor Sergius A. Nilus, published it for the first time in Tsarskoe-Tselo (Russia) in 1901, in a book entitled The Great Within the Small. Then, about the same time a friend of Nilus, G. Butmi, also brought it out and a copy was deposited in the British Museum on August 10, 1906.

Meantime, through Jewish members (Notably Eno Azev and Efrom. The latter, formerly a rabbi, died in 1925 in a monastery in Serbia, where he had taken refuge; he used to tell the monks that the Protocols were but a small part of the Jewish plans for ruling the world and a feeble expression of their hatred of the gentiles.), of the Russian police, minutes of the proceed­ings of the Basle Congress (Supra, Part I, 34) in 1897 had been obtained and these were found to correspond with the Protocols. (The Russian government had learned that at meetings of the B'nai B'rith in New York in 1893-94, JACOB SCHIFF (supra, 63, 65) had been named chairman of the committee on the rev­olutionary movement in Russia.)

In January 1917, Nilus had prepared a second edition, re­vised and documented, for publication. But before it could be put on the market, the revolution of March 1917 had taken place and Kerenski, who had succeeded to power, ordered the whole edition of Nilus's book to be destroyed. In 1924, Prof. Nilus was arrested by the Cheka in Kiev, imprisoned, and tor­tured; he was told by the Jewish president of the court that this treatment was meted out to him for "having done them incalculable harm in publishing the Protocols". Released for a few months, he was again led before the G.P.U. (Cheka), this time in Moscow and confined. Set at liberty in February 1926, he died in exile in the district of Valadimir on January 13, 1929.

A few copies of Nilus's second edition were saved and sent to other countries where they were published; in Germany, by Gottfried zum Beek (1919); in England, by The Briton (1920) in France, by Mgr. Jouin in La Revue International des Societes, and by The Beckwith Co. (New York 1921). Later, editions appeared in Italian, Russian, Arabic, and even in Japanese.

Such is the simple story of how these Protocols reached Russia and thence came into general circulation.

Mr. Stephanov's deposition relative to it is here given as corroboration. (The translation is the author's; a photostat of the original is appended)

Chapter II

HOW AN AMERICAN EDITION WAS SUPPRESSED

There is a saying in several languages that only the truth hurts. Recognizing the fact beneath this expression, one is little surprised at the zeal which certain parties seek to disprove documentary evidence. If the evidence were false, then it would be ignored by those concerned and pass quickly into the realm of forgotten things. But if the evidence is genuine and open to verification from many angles, then the truth will hurt and thus not be ignored.
If this reasoning is correct, the violent methods used by the Jews, particularly those affiliated with the Zionist movement, to discredit and suppress the document entitled The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, would alone constitute a proof of its authenticity.

Nilus and Butmi had published the document without comment. Its success therefore is entirely due to:

• 1. The self-evident character of the document;

• 2. The logical reasoning expressed in clear, simple terms.

• 3. The explanation it gives of international politics;

• 4. The fact that the events predicted in it have actually occurred since.

But if its publishers gave no guarantee of its genuineness, those who have attacked it have failed even more conspicuously to discredit and refute it. To quote a contemporary writer: (Cf. the works of Jouin, Lambelin and N. H. Webster.)

"The fact remains that the Protocols have never been refuted and the futility of the so-called refutations which have appeared, as well as its temporary suppression, have done more to convince the public of its authenticity than the writings of all the anti-Semites put together."

There is plenty of indisputable, documentary evidence which explains the Jewish plan of action, without recourse of the Pro­tocols. Their importance lies in the fact that, published at a definite date, they foretold historical events which have upset the world, that they explained these events by the principles set forth in the work itself: This fact makes it superfluous to enquire whether the author of the Protocols is the Zionist Congress in corpore, a member of the congress, or some Jewish (or even Christian) thinker. Their source is of small moment: the facts, the relation of cause and effect, are there; the existence of the work prior to the events foretold in it can never be brought into question, and that is enough.

The first attempt at refutation appeared in 1920, entitled, The Jewish Bogey and the Forged Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, by a Jew, Lucien Wolf; it was followed by articles in the Metropolitan (New York) signed "William Hard". The effect of these articles, contrary to the intention of their authors, was to draw wider public attention to the existence of the Protocols. At the same time in America the Jewish Anti-Defamation League (This league compelled the Beckwith Co., which subsequently published the Protocols after Putnam's withdrawal, to insert in every copy sold a copy of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League's refutation.) [H: Remember, though, that the ADL is a branch of British INTELLIGENCE.] filled the papers with denunciations of the libel from all parts of the country, thus proving how powerful is Jewish organization. One of its mem­bers was Louis Marshall, and, as an illustration of its activity, the story of the suppression of the edition of the Protocols which an American publishing house had tried to bring out, is instruc­tive. It shows not only the pressure the Jews can bring to bear on anyone who dares to lift his finger against them, but their own mental attitude of absolute intolerance towards others, while demanding of the world complete acquiescence in their schemes.

George Haven Putnam, head of the firm Putnam & Son, New York, after his annual visit to London, brought out in 1920 an American edition of The Cause of World Unrest. (The repro­duction in book form of a series of articles which had appeared in the Morning Post of London.) About the same time, he de­cided to issue The Protocols of the Elders of Zion in book form. Advance notices were released and the book set up and ready to go on the stands about October 15. On the eve of its appear­ance, Putnam received the following letter from Louis Marshall.

MY DEAR SIR:

As one who believes in those qualities that constitute the true American spirit, I have been greatly disturbed by the accounts given by the newspapers of the outrage to which you were sub­jected at the meeting held at Erasmus High School in Brooklyn the other evening. Knowing your patriotism, I can only regard the alleged cause, namely, that you had condemned the Decla­ration of Independence and were of the opinion that we owed an apology to England for severing our relations with her, as a slander, born of prejudice and ignorance.

I had scarcely finished reading this episode which had thus aroused my indignation, when I found upon my table a book, bearing the imprint of your firm, entitled The Cause of World Unrest, bound in a flaming red and purporting to be a republi­cation of articles that have recently appeared in the London Morning Post with which I had become familiar. To say that I was shocked that your honored name should be made the vehicle of disseminating among the American people these outpourings of malice, intolerance and hatred, this witches' broth of virulent poison, is merely to confess the poverty of my vocabulary. On opening the book I turned to the publishers' note, which was apologetic and disclaimed responsibility for the publication. It was followed by an introduction which made it absolutely clear that the purpose of the book was to charge the Jews with an age-long conspiracy to destroy civilization in order that they might absorb the wealth and power of the world. Thus proclaimed, at length came the stupid drivel intended to support this thesis and calculated to make the Jew repulsive in the eyes of his fellowmen and to exterminate him, not figuratively, but literally, ap­pealing, as it does, to the lowest passions and proceeding upon the same processes that were employed in the Middle Ages for the same object. Then it was the blood accusation, the charge of poisoning wells, of spreading plagues and pestilence, of the desecration of the Host. Now it is pretended conspiracy to overturn the economic system of the world by inciting warfare and revolution.

The slightest knowledge of history, the most elementary ca­pacity for analysis, or even a minute inkling as to what the Jew is and has been, would suffice to stamp this book and the forged Protocols on which it is based, as the most stupendous libels in history. These writings are the work of a bank of conspirators who are seeking to continue to make the Jew, as he has been in all the centuries, the scapegoat of autocracy. The Protocols bear the hall-mark of the secret agents of the dethroned Russian bureaucracy, and the book which you have published is a mere babbling reiteration of what the murderers of the Ukraine, of Poland, and of Hungary are urging as justification for the holo­causts of the Jews in which they have been engaged. It has been intimated, and there is much to sustain the theory, that the real purpose of these publications in the United States and in England is to arouse sufficient hostility against the Jew to subject them to mob violence and thus to give justification to those who have in­cited pogroms in Eastern Europe.

I have also observed that, upon the cover of the book to which I am now referring, you are advertising the publication of The Protocols, which I unhesitatingly denounce as on their face palpable forgeries. If you were called upon to circulate counter­feit money or forged bonds, you would shrink in horror at the suggestion. What you have done and what you propose to do is, however, in morals, incalculably worse. You are assisting in spreading falsehoods, in uttering libels, the effect of which will be felt for decades to come. You are giving them respectability, whilst the name of the author is shrouded in secrecy. Even Mr. Gwynne does not avow paternity for the book which he has her­alded. Much as you may desire to shake off responsibility, therefore, the real responsibility for hurling this bomb, for such it is, prepared though it has been by others, rests upon you. Whoever may read this book and is of such a low type of intelli­gence as to be influenced by it, will not be apt to draw the fine ethical distinctions with which you are seeking to salve your conscience. As a patriotic American, do you believe that you are contributing to the creation of that spirit of justice and fair-play, of unity and harmony, which is the very foundation of that Americanism for which every good citizen has yearned, when you stimulate hatred and passion by the publication of these dreadful falsehoods? If there should occur in this country, in consequence of these publications and those of Henry Ford, what is earnestly desired by the anti-Semites with whom you have arrayed yourself, do you suppose that, when the Almighty calls you to a reckoning and asks you whether you have ever borne false witness against your neighbor, you will be guiltless in His eyes because of your publishers' note disavowing respon­sibility? [H: Boy, this one covers it all, doesn't he?]
Iknow that you must have been pained, as I was when I read of the treatment to which you were subjected, because of lying accusations directed against you. Are you able to appreciate the pain, the grief, the agony, that you are causing to three millions of your fellow-countrymen and millions of men, women and children in other parts of the world by your participation in the disgraceful and inhuman persecution which is now being insidi­ously carried on by means of publications in the distribution of which you are now actively engaged? I look upon this as a tragedy.

Louis Marshall
Major Putnam, still feeling and sincerely believing that he was an independent American, though not a very brave one, for throughout he uses the name of Mr. Gwynne as a screen, an­swered:

New York, October 15th, 1920

Dear Mr. Marshall:

Your letter of the 13th inst., which has to do with the publi­cation of the volume entitled World Unrest and the announce­ment of the companion volume The Protocols, has been read be­fore the members of our publishing board and has received the respectful consideration to which any communication from a citizen of your standing and reputation is assuredly entitled. I am asked by my associates to make report as follows as to our own understanding of the matters in question:

• 1. We are not prepared to accept your view of the responsi­bility that attaches to a publishing imprint, or to the association of such imprint with one volume or another. We believe that our own policy in this matter is in accord with that of the lead­ing publishing houses on both sides of the Atlantic. It would be impossible to carry on the business of publishing books of opin­ion, whether the opinions have to do with the issues of today or with matters of the past, if the publisher was assumed to be in accord with the conclusions arrived at by one author or another. It is the intention to bring into print only such volumes as may present on such issues information that is understood to make an addition to the knowledge of the subject, or conclusions which appear to be entitled to consideration, to analysis, or possibly to refutation.

• 2. We have on our own catalogue, for instance, volumes ex­pressing almost every phase of theological or religious belief. The list includes some books accepted by the Christian Scientists as fairly representative of their doctrines. In publishing such books we have, of course, no intention of announcing ourselves as upholding the theories of the Christian Scientists any more than in the publication of a volume by a Presbyterian divine we have expressed our acceptance of the Westminster catechism, or in printing a book by an Episcopal friend, we have been pre­pared to approve the reasonableness of the thirty-nine articles.

• 3. The volume, World Unrest, was, as you will have noted, brought into publication in London at the instance of Mr. Gwynne, the scholarly editor of the Morning Post. You doubt­less have knowledge of the journals of England and will realize that the Post does not belong to the sensation-monger journals like Bottomley's John Bull or Hearst's American. It is a conser­vative paper which has the reputation of avoiding sensational material.

Mr. Gwynne had convinced himself that the papers brought into print in the Post, and later published under his direction in book form, were deserving of consideration. As we have stated in the publisher's-note, we are not prepared to express any opinion whatsoever in regard to the value of the so-called infor­mation presented, or as to the weight of the conclusions arrived at by the writer and endorsed by Mr. Gwynne. The recommen­dation came to us that, as the Gwynne volume used as a large part of its text the document entitled The Protocols, the readers of World Unrest would be interested in having an opportunity of examining the full text of The Protocols. You have already knowledge of this curious document. It has, it seems, been in print since 1905, and possibly earlier. An edition was published some months back by Eyre & Spottiswoode, conservative law publishers of London. The text that was brought to us in a translation freshly made from the Russian and is accompanied by a record of what is known of the original document. (This edition prepared by G. H. Putnam was subsequently published by The Beckwith Company, 299 Madison Avenue, New York.)

It is evident that the document has, as you point out, no voucher for authenticity and it is quite possible that it will be found to possess no historic importance. Attention has again been directed to it during the past year simply on the ground, according at least to the understanding of Mr. Gwynne's author and of himself, that certain of the instructions given and policies recommended in The Protocols appear to have been carried out by the Bolshevik government in Russia. Certain suggestions in The Protocols have also been connected with the policies of the Zionists, policies which, according to Mr. Gwynne and some other writers, are causing serious unrest in Palestine, Syria and Arabia.

In presenting The Protocols to American readers in a care­fully printed edition, we have not the least intention of expressing the view that the documents are authentic, or that they will in the end be considered as possessing historic authority.

Mr. Gwynne takes the ground that neither World Unrest or The Protocols themselves present charges against the Jews as a whole. They emphasize certain things that have been done, or are alleged to have been done, by certain groups of Jews. It would be as fair to say a record of lynching in Texas or Arkansas, or a record of the attempt of the Bryan group to se­cure the payment of debts fifty cents on the dollar, was to be considered as a charge against the whole American people.

Mr. Gwynne's associates take the ground that the leading Jews on both sides of the Atlantic, men whose patriotism is un­questioned, ought not to put these documents to one side as of trifling importance. The time may very properly have come at which the charges made as said, only against certain groups of Jews, should be analyzed by the Jews whose judgments would be accepted as authoritative by English and American readers. If the charge is unfounded that Bolshevism as carried on in Rus­sia has been conducted largely under Jewish direction, the statement ought to be refuted.

I received only yesterday a copy of a monthly entitled The Brooklyn Anti-Bolshevist. The magazine undertakes to make "defense of American institutions against the Jewish Bolshevist doctrines of Morris Hillquit and Leon Trotzky". It seems to me that American citizens of the Jewish race (and the group com­prises some of the best citizens that we have) might properly interest themselves in making clear to the public that there is no foundation for any charge against the World Patriotism of the Jewish race. (Our italics)

I wish very much that you preparing a volume that should subject matter and particularly, which have come into print as a against the Moscow government might yourself be interested in give consideration to the whole of course, to these publications result of the world's indignation against the Moscow government.

G. P. Putnam's Sons would be well pleased to associate the imprint of their New York and London Houses with such a vol­ume from the pen of a distinguished jurist like yourself.

One further thought occurs to me: You and I are believers in freedom of speech. We recognize that in war times certain reservations are in order for the sake of the nation, but we hold that, with the necessary reservations as to the rights of an indi­vidual, or as to a possible libel upon an individual, it is in order, and, from the point of view of the community, wise, to allow full freedom for platform utterances. If, however, this be true for the spoken word it should logically be applicable also to the word that comes into print.

In case you may be interested in considering the suggestion of a monograph from your pen to be prepared by yourself, or by some competent authority whom you might be able to inter­est, I should be ready to keep an appointment for a personal word at such time and place as you might find convenient.

Submitting the suggestion for your consideration, I am, with cordial regards,

Yours faithfully,

George Haven Putnam
The suggestion of the 'monograph' from Louis Marshall's pen was somewhat ironic. There is no doubt that on October 15, 1920, Major Putnam still felt himself an independent Ameri­can.

And the binding of The Protocols went on as usual.

But on October 29th came one more letter from the president of the American Jewish Committee:

New York City, October 29th, 1920

My Dear Sir:

Absence from the city and professional engagements have prevented me from replying earlier to yours of the 15th inst., in which you define your policy regarding the publication of the Cause of the World Unrest and your announcement of your in­tended publication of The Protocols.
I cannot accept the theories on which you seek to justify acts which, in all moderation, I sought to characterize in my letter of the 13th inst. You disregard entirely the proposition on which my criticism is based. Nobody can go farther than I do in up­holding the freedom of the press and freedom of speech. It has been my privilege to aid in the creation of important precedents in furtherance of these fundamentals of liberty. Libel and slan­der, however, have always been looked upon in American law as abuses of a free press and of free speech and as attacks upon the integrity of the constitutional guarantees that you invoke. Nor do I question the right of any publisher to issue "books of opinion" to whatever subject the opinions may relate. They may be polemical or they may attack the soundness of scientific, po­litical or theological theories or doctrines. No fair-minded man would for a moment venture to find fault because of strictures directed against his cherished doxy.

The Protocols and The Cause of World Unrest are not, how­ever, books of opinion. They assume to deal with facts. [H: Wow, it reminds of Judge Jason Brent when he came to the bench, heard Jew Horn and then turned to the Ekkers and Legal Counsel and to the MANY WITNESSES PRESENT IN THE COURTROOM and loudly announced he would "hear no facts". He then launched into a tirade of insults which were captured on audio tape, after which he dis­missed the case against Santa Barbara Savings and left the bench abruptly. The tapes, within one day, were MISSING. A hearing, without notification to the Ekkers (their case in­deed), that there would be a "clarification hearing" for "since the tapes were missing, there needed to be a record made." Ah, but the record reflected NOTHING AT ALL OF THE ACTUAL HAPPENINGS and, in addition, it was required that Ekkers' attorney falsify the record by stating there had been a hearing when there was NO HEARING ALLOWED AT ALL. THE CASE WAS IMMEDIATELY DISMISSED FOLLOWING TILE TIRADE OF JUDGE BRENT. The Ekkers only found out about the secret "restructuring or clarification" hearing WHEN THEY RECEIVED A VERY LARGE BILLING FROM THEIR ATTORNEY'S FIRM.] The Protocols purport to be the pro­nouncements of so-called "Wise Men of Zion". The Cause of World Unrest undertakes to charge that the Jews and the Freemasons are together engaged in a conspiracy for the over­throw of civilization and the arrogation by them of world domi­nation. It is these alleged facts that I denounce as falsehoods and as libels criminal in intent and criminal in their operation. The Protocols, which are made the basis of the Cause of World Unrest and which you properly describe as companion volumes, are so intrinsically false that even Mr. Gwynne concedes that he himself has a serious doubt as to their genuineness. That The Protocols are a fabrication similar to those that have appeared in every period of history, appears from every line of that docu­ment. I am credibly informed that the manuscript was offered for publication to seven different publishing houses in this country, who refused to have their names connected with it, be­fore Small, Maynard & Co., undertook to issue it to the Ameri­can public. The author of the Cause of World Unrest hides be­hind anonymity. You yourself speak of the author as being "Mr. Gwynne's author". Apparently even you do not know the pedigree of this incendiary book. Yet you have, I repeat, given it your endorsement by publishing it, even though you disavow responsibility. Your position is that of one who endorses a note to give it currency and at the same time makes a mental reser­vation against meeting his obligation.

No, Major Putnam, the principle which you seek to establish will not work. Whoever touches pitch is defiled. Whoever re­tails falsehoods and spreads them, whether it be orally or through the medium of the press, is responsible for those false­hoods. It will not do to say that you have many friends among the Jews whom you respect and that these books are not in­tended to reflect upon all Jews. The world is not so discrimi­nating. People whose passions are aroused do not differentiate. The forger of The Protocols and the mysterious author of The Cause of World Unrest make no distinctions. Neither did their prototypes of the middle ages nor the black hundred of modern Russia indulge in such refinements. Troy and Tyre were alike to them.
Do not for a moment misunderstand me, I contend that there are no Jews who are now engaged or who have ever been en­gaged in a conspiracy such as that charged by you as existing in these books which emerge smoking from your presses. The cry of Bolshevism will not suffice. Your reference to the Brooklyn Anti-Bolshevist shows what a sad pass you have reached. To shelter yourself behind the bulwarks of an infamous pasquinade of the guttersnipe variety and to insinuate that because that sheet pretends to defend American institutions "against the Jewish Bolshevist doctrines of Morris Hillquit and Leon Trotzky" you may therefore descend to the same depths, is a revelation to me. I had not believed that any real, true American would thus lend himself to the creation of and malevolence. The fact that out of the mass of Russian Jews there is an infinitesimal per­centage who are Bolshevists, affords no justification for laying the sins of Bolshevism at the door of the Jewish people. To say that Bolshevism is a Jewish movement is as ridiculous as to say that the Jews are responsible for capitalism, or because there are Jewish musicians, actors and poets, that music, the drama and poetry are Jewish movements. [H: Well???]
I am not a Zionist, and yet I regard the slurs that these books are attempting to make against Zionism to be unworthy. The very Zionists whom these books are attacking have been perse­cuted by the Bolsheviks and have been denounced as counter revolutionists, just as the mass of the Jews of Russia have been pursued as members of the bourgeoisie. I am not a member of the Masonic or of any other secret order, but the attempt in these books to charge Freemasonry with participation in such a conspiracy as is proclaimed almost argues the existence of a pathological condition on the part of the author that betokens mental aberration. When one remembers that fifteen of the presidents of the United States, including George Washington, have been Freemasons, it is unnecessary to go further in con­ demnation of these volumes which you are pleased to denomi­nate "books of opinion".

[H: Right at the end of this writing is the place I want you to put Washington's Farewell Address!]
I had not believed that a Jew in this country would ever be called upon to occupy the humiliating position of defending his people against the charges such as those which are being spread broadcast through your agency. If ever the time comes when it shall be desirable to answer such books, I am quite sure that it will be unnecessary for me to avail myself of your firm as pub­lishers.

Very truly yours,
Louis Marshall
Two days later, Putnam bowed before the will of Jewry in the following terms:

November 1st, 1920

Dear Mr. Marshall:

Mr. Gwynne, at whose instance we brought into print the American edition of his volume on World Unrest, had taken the ground that the publication of the document known as The Pro­tocols might throw light on the organization of the Bolshevists. Their operations have caused grave concern throughout the world and they are, therefore, a matter of legitimate public dis­cussion.

It was his opinion that if it had not been for the apprehension aroused by Bolshevism, the document would probably have been permitted to rest in obscurity.

An edition of The Protocols was, therefore, published in London by Eyre & Spottiswoode, law publishers of high stand­ing.

It had seemed to us that the readers of The World Unrest were entitled to have the opportunity of examining the complete document (to which frequent references are made in Mr. Gwynne's volume) and we had, therefore, undertaken the publi­cation of a carefully prepared translation by us, which is now nearly in readiness, and has involved a considerable outlay.

We now find, however, that an edition printed in Boston is being distributed as a regular publication. There is no necessity for bringing into print. another volume containing substantially the same material. We have decided, therefore, in deference to the objections raised by yourself, and by my valued friend, Os­car Strauss, not to proceed (our italics) with the publication.

I am, Yours very truly
George Haven Putnam

[H: And so another less-than-brave soul hit the ground, giving in to the actually STUPID and insipid threats and un­abashed hogwash.]
What had taken place between October 29 and November 1st? Putnam wrote to one of the parties interested that so much pressure was brought to bear on him that he had to give up pub­lishing The Protocols, and would even be obliged to withdraw unsold copies of World Unrest. It is safe to conclude that Put­nam's firm was threatened with bankruptcy if it persisted. We understand that Small Maynard & Co. of Boston and The Beck­with Co. of New York and in fact practically every firm which has published The Protocols had difficulties within a year or two. Of course it is said that is purely accidental; but it was just such an "accident" that Putnam wished to avoid!

[END OF QUOTING]
Are we pushing the river? Good grief, readers, the river is dry as the very ones you protect--stole the water. You can't even get enough for irrigation to stay alive.

My question is: What are you going to do about it? We are so stretched thin here that we can't get more done. What about, as a recent speaker stressed, there needs to be a website or some­one should put CONTACT and/or at the least, material we offer--on that internet. I welcome anyone who will do so to do so. We will even supply e-mail copy along with any relevant docu­mentation accompanying our presentations.

Reach out and touch someone!

Thank you and good night.

PJ 223

CHAPTER 5

GEORGE WASHINGTON
UNITED STATES, 17TH SEPTEMBER 1796

Editor's note: The following complete version of Washington's Farewell Address has been extracted from the Internet, as Commander Hatonn requested for inclusion with the subject material of this week's CONTACT.

This address was written primarily to eliminate himself as a candidate for a third term. It was never read by the President in public, but it was printed in Claypoole's AMERICAN DAILY ADVERTISER, Philadelphia, September 19, 1796. The address is in two parts: In the first, Washington declines a third term, gives his reasons, and acknowledges a debt of gratitude for the honors conferred upon him and for the confident support of the people. In the second, more important part, he presents, as a re­sult of his experience and as a last legacy of advice, thoughts upon the government.

George Washington gave Claypoole a manuscript which he called "his copy" and it was from this manuscript that the type was set in the newspaper, After Claypoole's death, the manuscript was ordered to be sold at auction on February 12, 1850. Senator Henry Clay on January 24 offered a joint resolu­tion for its purchase by the government, but the resolution was not signed by President Taylor until the day of the sale. The manuscript was sold to James Lenox for $2,300, and passed, with his library, to the New York Public Library. There is no evidence of any bid on behalf of the national government.

The following is an exact word-for-word text of the original. Nothing has been changed or omitted except old English spelling and punctuation.

* * *
Friends, And Fellow Citizens

The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the ex­ecutive government of the United States, being not far distant, and the time actually arrived when your thoughts must be em­ployed in designating the person who is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now apprise you of the resolution I have formed, to de­cline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made.

I beg you, at the same time, to do me the justice to be assured that this resolution has not been taken without a strict regard to all the considerations appertaining to the relation which binds a dutiful citizen to his country; and that, in withdrawing the tender of service which silence in my situation might imply, I am influ­enced by no diminution of zeal for your future interest; no defi­ciency of grateful respect for your past kindness; but am sup­ported by a full conviction that the step is compatible with both.

The acceptance of, and continuance hitherto in, the office to which your suffrages have twice called me, have been a uniform sacrifice of inclination to the opinion of duty, and to a deference for what appeared to be your desire. I constantly hoped that it would have been much earlier in my power, consistently with motives which I was not at liberty to disregard, to return to that retirement from which I had been reluctantly drawn. The strength of my inclination to do this, previous to the last elec­tion, had even led to the preparation of an address to declare it to you; but mature reflection on the then perplexed and critical posture of our affairs with foreign nations, and the unanimous advice of persons entitled to my confidence, impelled me to abandon the idea.

I rejoice, that the state of your concerns, external as well as in­ternal, no longer renders the pursuit of inclination incompatible with the sentiment of duty, or propriety; and am persuaded whatever partiality may be retained for my services, that, in the present circumstances of our country, you will not disapprove my determination to retire.

The impressions, with which, I first undertook the arduous trust, were explained on the proper occasion. In the discharge of this trust, I will only say that I have, with good intentions, con­tributed towards the organization and administration of the gov­ernment the best exertions of which a very fallible judgment was capable. Not unconscious, in the outset, of the inferiority of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, perhaps still more in the eyes of others, has strengthened the motives to diffidence of myself; and every day the increasing weight of years admon­ishes me more and more that the shade of retirement is as neces­sary to me as it will be welcome. Satisfied that, if any circum­stances have given peculiar value to my services, they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe, that while choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene, patriotism does not forbid it.

In looking forward to the moment, which is intended to ter­minate the career of my public life, my feelings do not permit me to suspend the deep acknowledgment of that debt of gratitude which I owe to my beloved country for the many honors it has conferred upon me; still more for the steadfast confidence with which it has supported me; and for the opportunities I have thence enjoyed of manifesting my inviolable attachment, by ser­vices faithful and persevering, though in usefulness unequal to my zeal. If benefits have resulted to our country from these services, let it always be remembered to your praise, and as an instructive example in our annals, that under circumstances in which the passions, agitated in every direction, were liable to mislead, amidst appearances sometimes dubious, vicissitudes of fortune often discouraging, in situations in which not unfre­quently want of success has countenanced the spirit of criticism, the constancy of your support was the essential prop of the ef­forts, and a guarantee of the plans, by which they were effected. Profoundly penetrated with this idea, I shall carry it with me to my grave, as a strong incitement to unceasing vows that Heaven may continue to you the choicest tokens of its beneficence; that your union and brotherly affection may be perpetual; that the free constitution which is the work of your hands, may be sa­credly maintained; that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue; that, in fine, the happiness of the people of these States, under the auspices of lib­erty, may be made complete, by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this blessing, as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to the applause, the affection, and adoption of every nation which is yet a stranger to it.

Here, perhaps, I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your welfare which cannot end but with my life, and the apprehension of danger natural to that solicitude, urge me, on an occasion like the present, to offer to your solemn contemplation, and to rec­ommend to your frequent review, some sentiments which are the result of much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation, and which appear to me all important to the permanency of your felicity as a people. These will be offered to you with the more freedom, as you can only see in them the disinterested warnings of a parting friend, who can possibly have no personal motive to bias his counsel. Nor can I forget, as an encouragement to it your indulgent reception of my sentiments on a former and not dissimilar occasion.

Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the attachment. The unity of government which con­stitutes you one people, is also now dear to you. It is justly so: for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the convic­tion of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and in­sidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national Union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immoveable attachment to it; accustom­ing yourself to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.

For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that coun­try has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of AMERICAN, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism, more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint councils and joint efforts, of com­mon dangers, sufferings, and successes.

But these considerations, however powerfully they address themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which apply more immediately to your interest. Here every portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding and preserving the union of the whole.

The North, in an unrestrained intercourse with the South, pro­tected by the equal Laws of a common government, finds, in the productions of the latter, great additional resources of maritime and commercial enterprise and precious materials of man­ufacturing industry. The South in the same intercourse, benefit­ting by the agency of the North, sees its agriculture grow and its commerce expand. Turning partly into its own channels the seamen of the North, it finds its particular navigation invigo­rated; and while it contributes, in different ways, to nourish and increase the general mass of the national navigation, it looks forward to the protection of a maritime strength, to which itself is unequally adapted. The East, in a like intercourse with the West, already finds, and in the progressive improvement of inte­rior communications, by lend and water, will more and more find, a valuable vent for the commodities which it brings from abroad, or manufactures athome. The West derives from the East supplies requisite to its growth and comfort, and what is perhaps of still greater consequence, it must of necessity owe the secure enjoyment of indispensable outlets for its own pro­ductions to the weight, influence, and the future maritime strength of the Atlantic side of the Union, directed by an indis­solublecommunity of interest as one Nation. Any other tenure by which the West can hold this essential advantage, whether derived from its own separate strength, or from an apostate and unnatural connection with any foreign power, must be intrinsi­cally precarious.

While, then, every part of our country thus feels an immediate and particular interest in union, all the parts combined cannot fail to find in the united mass of means and efforts greater strength, greater resource, proportionably greater security from external danger, a less frequent interruption of their peace by foreign Nations; and, what is of inestimable value, they must derive from union an exemption from those broils and wars between themselves, which so frequently afflict neighboring countries not tied together by the same government, which their own rivalships alone would be sufficient to produce, but which opposite foreign alliances, attachments, and intrigues would stimulate and imbitter. Hence, likewise, they will avoid the ne­cessity of those overgrown military establishments, which, un­der any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty. In this sense it is, that your Union ought to be consid­ered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other.

These considerations speak a persuasive language to every re­flecting and virtuous mind, and exhibit the continuance of the UNION as a primary object of patriotic desire. Is there a doubt whether a common government can embrace so large a sphere? Let experience solve it. To listen to mere speculation in such a case were criminal. We are authorized to hope that a proper organization of the whole, with the auxiliary agency of govern­ments for the respective subdivisions, will afford a happy issue to the experiment. It is well worth a fair and full experiment.With such powerful and obvious motives to union, affecting all parts of our country, while experience shall not have demonstated its impracticability, there will always be reason to dis­trust the patriotism of those who in any quarter may endeavor to weaken its bands.

In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern, that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the ex­pedients of party to acquire influence, within particular districts, is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heart burnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection. The inhabitants of our western country have lately had a useful lesson on this head; they have seen, in the negotiation by the Executive, and in the unanimous ratification by the Senate, of the treaty with Spain, and in the universal satisfaction at that event, throughout the United States, a decisive proof how unfounded were the suspicions propagated among them of a policy in the general Government and in the Atlantic States unfriendly to their interests in regard to the Mis­sissippi; they have been witnesses to the formation of two treaties, that with Great Britain, and that with Spain, which se­cure to them everything they could desire, in respect to our for­eign relations, towards confirming their prosperity. Will it not be their wisdom to rely for the preservation of these advantaged on the UNION by which they were procured? Will they not henceforth be deaf to those advisers, if such there are, who would sever them from their brethren and connect them with aliens?

To the efficacy and permanency of your Union, a government for the whole is indispensable. No alliances, however strict, between the parts can be an adequate substitute; they must in­evitably experience the infractions and interruptions which all alliances in all times have experienced. Sensible of this mo­mentous truth, you have improved upon your first essay, by the adoption of a constitution of government better calculated than your former for an intimate union, and for the efficacious man­agement of your common concerns. This government, the off­spring of our own choice, uninfluenced and unawed, adopted upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers uniting security with energy, and containing within itself a provision for its own amendment, has a just claim to your confidence and your sup­port. Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acqui­escence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.

All obstructions to the execution of the Laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular de­liberation and action of the constituted authorities are destructive of this fundamental principle and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the illconcerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by com­mon councils, and modified by mutual interests.

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people, and to usurp for themselves the reins of Government; destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.

Towards the preservation of your Government and the per­manency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its ac­knowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments, as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypotheses and opinion, ex­poses to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothe­ses and opinion; and remember, especially, that, for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so exten­sive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty it­self will find in such a Government, with powers properly dis­tributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to with­stand the enterprise of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geo­graphical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehen­sive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, hav­ing its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It ex­ists under different shapes in all governments, more or less sti­fled, controlled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissention, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disor­ders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an in­dividual, and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing fac­tion, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the public councils, and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country, are subjected to the policy and will of another.

There is an opinion, that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patri­otism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in gov­ernments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there be­ing constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution, in those entrusted with its ad­ministration, to confine themselves within their respective con­stitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroach­ment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of recip­rocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositories, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some ofthem in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for, though this, in one in­stance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The prece­dent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit which the use can at any time yield.

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political pros­perity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with pri­vate and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of re­ligious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution in­dulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in ex­clusion of religious principle.

'Tissubstantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon at­tempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

Promote, then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is es­sential that public opinion should be enlightened.

As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as spar­ingly as possible; avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to pre­pare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it; avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertions in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear. The execution of these maxims belongs to your representatives, but it is necessary that public opinion should cooperate. To facilitate to them the performance of their duty, it is essential that you should practi­cally bear in mind, that towards the payment of debts there must be revenue; that to have revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant; that the intrinsic embarrassment inseparable from the selection of the proper objects (which is always a choice of difficulties), ought to be a decisive motive for a candid construction of the conduct of the government in making it, and for a spirit of acquiescence in the measures for obtaining rev­enue which the public exigencies may at any time dictate.

Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it? It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and, at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted jus­tice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any tem­porary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it? Can it be, that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?

In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards an­other an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some de­gree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, ei­ther of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one Nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when ac­cidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The na­tion, prompted by ill will and resentment sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propen­sity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times, it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sin­ister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes per­haps the Liberty, of nations has been the victim.

So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a partici­pation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt dou­bly to injure the nation making the concessions: by unnecessar­ily parting with what ought to have been retained; and by ex­citing jealousy, ill will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the par­ties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote them­selves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opin­ion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base of foolish com­pliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such at­tachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public coun­cils! Such an attachment of a small or weak, towards a great and powerful nation, dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens), the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.

But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial; else it be­comes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, in­stead of a defence against it. Excessive partiality for one for­eign nation, and excessive dislike of another, cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real Patri­ots, who may resist the intrigues of the favorite, are liable to be­come suspected and odious; while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their inter­ests.

The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as lit­tle political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.

Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.

Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pur­sue a different course. If we remain one people, under an effi­cient government, the period is not far off, when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon, to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, in­terest, humor, or caprice?

‘Tis our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of pa­tronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it therefore, let those engage­ments be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.

Taking care always to keep ourselves, by suitable establish­ments, on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.

Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand: neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the nat­ural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to de­fine the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them, conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view, that 'tis folly in one nation to look for disinter­ested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. 'Tis an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.

In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from run­ning the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of na­tions. But if I may even flatter myself that they may be produc­tive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare by which they have been dictated.

How far in the discharge of my official duties I have been guided by the principles which have been delineated, the public records and other evidences of my conduct must witness to you and to the world. To myself, the assurance of my own con­science is, that I have at least believed myself to be guided by them.

In relation to the still subsisting war in Europe, my proclamation of the 22d of April, 1793, is the index to my plan. Sanctioned by your approving voice, and by that of your representatives in both Houses of Congress, the spirit of that measure has continu­ally governed me, uninfluenced by any attempts to deter or di­vert me from it.

After deliberate examination, with the aid of the best lights I could obtain, I was well satisfied that our country, under all the circumstances of the case, had a right to take, and was bound in duty and interest to take, a neutral position. Having taken it, I determined, as far as should depend upon me, to maintain it, with moderation, perseverance, and firmness.

The considerations which respect the right to hold this conduct, it is not necessary on this occasion to detail. I will only observe that, according to my understanding of the matter, that right, so far from being denied by any of the belligerent powers, has been virtually admitted by all.

The duty of holding a neutral conduct may be inferred, without any thing more, from the obligation which justice and humanity impose on every nation, in cases in which it is free to act, to maintain inviolate the relations of peace and amity towards other nations.

The inducements of interest for observing that conduct will best be referred to your own reflections and experience. With me, a predominant motive has been to endeavor to gain time to our country to settle and mature its yet recent institutions, and to progress without interruption to that degree of strength and con­sistency which is necessary to give it, humanly speaking, the command of its own fortunes.

Though, in reviewing the incidents of my administration, I am unconscious of intentional error, I am nevertheless too sensible of my defects not to think it probable that I may have committed many errors. Whatever they may be, I fervently beseech the Almighty to avert or mitigate the evils to which they may tend. I shall also carry with me the hope, that my country will never cease to view them with indulgence; and that, after forty-five years of my life dedicated to its service with an upright zeal, the faults of incompetent abilities will be consigned to oblivion, as myself must soon be to the mansions of rest.

Relying on its kindness in this as in other things, and actuated by that fervent love towards it which is so natural to a man who views in it the native soil of himself and his progenitors for sev­eral generations, I anticipate with pleasing expectation that re­treat in which I promise myself to realize, without alloy, the sweet enjoyment of partaking, in the midst of my fellow citi­zens, the benign influence of good laws under a free govern­ment, the ever favorite object of my heart, and the happy re­ward, as I trust, of our mutual cares, labors and dangers.

PJ 223

CHAPTER 6

REC #1 HATONN

SUN., JAN. 18, 1998 8:21 A.M. YR. 11, DAY 155

SUN., JAN. 18. 1998

Before we dive off into another marathon writing, I need to ex­press my appreciation for service above and beyond anything we could expect and much the less, produced in such a loving and magnificent way.

I asked that this very touchy material be gotten forth and into the hands of the public as quickly as possible, and working around the clock we have gotten some of the most IMPORTANT back­ground information on Antichrist into your hands.

I have been petitioned to keep the papers smaller (the staff tries to put to press ALL of my writings as they come forth) so that financially we can perhaps stay in print longer and not overload you the readers. NO, I will not stop or slow the writings al­though neither I, nor my scribe, have anything to do with the paper.

This information goes directly to the Rise of Antichrist, the reign of Antichrist, and before we are done, it will cover the fall of Antichrist.

This is the most IMPORTANT information ever on your globe. It has been changed, buried, killed over, and used as a manipu­lation to allow "the LIE" to become your very breath of living death.

Can YOU keep up? That is not MY PROBLEM! You who want Truth will keep up and the ones who just want input to make a bit more money or a bit more insight to prophecy and doom will just have to glean what you can, however you wish to handle information flowing past your senses.

I note that we have several at great distance, and I mean GREAT distance, who have been receiving all of this on e-mail, fax or phone. They are IN the hotbeds of ongoing terror and not only do they keep up--they send us daily responses with backup information.

You have to end up in every instance DISCERNING the MAN and JUDGING the outcome of actions or the actions themselves. There will always be lies dumped on you AS LONG AS YOU ACCEPT THEM AND GO ON WITH YOUR SEARCHING. THE INTENT IS TO CONFUSE YOU WITH "NEW" STUFF ENOUGH TO BURY YOU IN CHAOS. THEN, WHEN YOU THINK YOU HAVE FOUND TRUTH, YOU WILL ALSO FIND THE SIGN OF THE EVIL INPUTTER. All YES, EVEN IN SUCH AS THE KEYS OF ENOCH AND THROUGH THE WORKS OF BROTHER PHILIP. AND ALWAYS THERE ARE STORIES REGARDING THESE VERY BOOKS AND THE HOLDERS OF SAME. DO THEY WANT TRUTH TO THE WORLD OR NOT? YOU WILL FIND THEY WANT THE FULL ATTENTION AND MONEY FROM THE BOOKS AT ALL COSTS OF SERVING HUMANITY.

What mean I? Well, we have been asked as in tidal waves of inquiries about these very sectarian books. We found that Brother Philip is NOT "Philip" at all. The "Person" filling that role as pen-name is not "Philip". SECRET OF THE ANDES, as will shortly be referred to, was put to paper mostly of evenings while the writer was quite unable to realize up from down. There was great trouble in the group over this particular man's misbehavior. Ah, but the fun came when this book was pre­sented as a gift to us from Sister Thedra, God rest her soul. She had been WITH the author of that book and related all sorts of interesting tales about the journeys and "Mystery" schools which were SO MYSTERIOUS that they did not exist AT ALL.

With that bit of information in mind, let me say that I chose to use a few passages from the book as reference as the correspon­dent has done here in this letter which I will share--and immedi­ately from the adversary bunch of servants to the downfall of Man, came the cry of "Dharma's books are simply plagiarisms". What are historical records as handed down, readers? We always give full credit to all researchers and authors. Could it be that most of the information presented is purely BS and the books are written to make money off you searching beings? YOU BET YOUR BOTTOM NICKLE!

Many of you have asked why we don't advertise, why we don't push our books, our paper, ourselves. GOD'S INFORMA­TION IS FREE, READERS, SO WHEN THERE IS PRESEN­TATION WE ONLY WISH TO BE ABLE TO STAY IN PRINT UNTIL FUNDS COME FROM OTHER RESOURCES. IT WILL! WE HAVE NEVER CEASED TO FOLLOW EV­ERY LEAD OFFERED FOR THAT RESULT AND, AGAIN, MY TEAM WORKS DAY AND NIGHT TO MAKE SURE THAT VERY FLOW HAPPENS. WE DO HAVE TO HAVE EXPENSES MET OR WE CAN'T PRINT ANYTHING. BUT EVEN WHEN WE CANNOT PRINT ANYTHING--WE STAY PREPARED AND WRITE AND WRITE AND WRITE UNTIL THE FINGERS ARE NUMB--AGAINST THE DAY IT CAN FREELY FLOW. ONCE TO PAPER, PRINTER AND COM­PUTER, SCATTERED AND SHELTERED BY YOU THE SMALL CREW--IT CAN NEVER AGAIN "NOT BE". There are some 70 journals waiting with everything ready to ship to press. We will leave those sitting if necessary and this recent series will be placed in front immediately. If our monitors and assemblers take note, I would think the first two are full as you set up the journals. There were several lengthy writings pref­acing these very pointed and dangerous printings. With the ad­ditional information I have asked to be accompanying the writ­ings I do, I also want Sananda's writings included along with any other pertinent references from our compatriots. I do NOT want just every item we might reference placed in THESE jour­nals of this series.

I repeat: THESE WILL BE THE MOST IMPORTANT BOOKS EVER TO GRACE YOUR GLOBE ABOUT THIS TIME IN HISTORY OF HUMAN EXPERIENCE HERE. Historical TRUTH has been buried, burned and kept from you to better fool you people ALL THE TIME. When scholars recognize the lies and the game plan--they are murdered. No, I suggest that no matter how big that paper or overwhelming these journals may seem to your senses--STUDY THEM CAREFULLY--THEY ARE YOUR TICKET.

I will remind you, however: we give no thought or care to any­one either against us, denouncing us, shouting and yelling about "their" "anything"--period. They may do and judge ANY THING OR ANY WAY THEY CHOOSE. THEY are not our business nor focus, for before the end arrives, THEY WILL ALL BE GONE!

You nice people watching Paula Jones and Billy Boy in the news yesterday had better have not missed the IMPORTANT message from Iraq. Saddam announced that there will be a Jihad (Holy War), already structured and participants at ready, if sanctions against Iraq are not lifted. Yes indeed, it will also include such as Libya, whom you have tried to starve and destroy, and all those nice Arab, Moslem, Islamic nations. THE WAR IN CONFRONTATION IS AT YOUR DOOR.

Are the enemies of the enemy better or worse? Well, that is not my business for either or both "sides" will move in bloodshed, anti-Christ ways of inhumane tramplings, and go just as far as they can go in HATE. And, NO, God will not stop it, for all mankind has freedom of will and choice. All we will do, AT THIS TIME, is serve and offer information to you who want TRUTH.

Do you actually think that all those "Christians" who have bought into the LIE will give up such as a free RAPTURE in exchange for "believing" on the murdered BLOOD of a person, real or conjured, to deceive them? Who will be left, do you suppose?

My goodness, you guys keep leaving out the biggest player of all: ASIA! Are the Mongols going, for instance, to be civil and hug you to pieces? No, but they will be happy, in war, to butcher you to pieces. You see, what religions do is LEAVE GOD OUT OF THE FACT IN ORDER THAT CON­TROLLERS CAN "GETCHA". BUT GOD IS PATIENT AND YOU MAKE THE GAME SO INTERESTING TO WATCH AS YOU HUFF, PUFF, KILL AND MAIM (EVEN YOUR OWN) LIKE ANTS OVER A DEAD BUG. SO, WHO WILL BE LEFT? GOD'S REMNANT, HIS TRUTH BEARERS AND BRINGERS, AND THOSE WHO MUST KEEP THE RECORDS AND HELP BUILD AFTER THE ENCOUNTERS OF ONE FACTION AGAINST ANOTHER. MAN WILL ACTUALLY DESTROY HIS WHOLE ENVIRONMENT AND HIMSELF IN THE CAUSE OF WHAT?--LIES!

One topic offered has brought a worthy response from South Africa and it references Eli, Eli. People here had to all admit they had never heard of this "chant", so well kept is the "meaning", and without the tune the whole escapes notice.

I will refrain from revealing our information sender so we will refer to the party as SA for South Africa:

[QUOTING LETTER:]

Response from SA:

IS GCH TELLING
ANYTHING NEW TO YOU?

There is nothing new under the "SUN" but--it is never boring as we look at it from all the different webbed projections. God experiences Himself through the angle and perspective of every­one and everything like a I-10D hologram. He never gets tired of himself, especially if there's free will at play! (my 'doing-no­justice' perception) but there are always new revelations to a misperception, i.e., The Dr. Jim Hurtak (A Jew) KEYS OF ENOCH factor. One of the many audio tapes sold at his semi­nars is called Eli, Eli, Lamina A 'Sabachthani. Now, in the book SECRET OF THE ANDES by Brother Philip, Archangel Gabriel has this to say:

(quote)

They do not mean what is written. "Father, Father, why has thou forsaken me?" Why should the Master, who vowed con­stantly the Aton -- The One God -- why should He in despera­tion finally doubt the Father and say, "Why bast thou forsaken me?" These are words of cowards, of those who have not ful­filled their mission, not words of The Christ. These have been misinterpreted, for they are not in the Aramaic language of the time. They are in the most ancient Solar or Mother Tongue which, of course, the Master would revert to at that time. The words are not "sabachthani"; they are spelled with a "Z" -­"zbacthani": z-b-a-c-t-h-a-n-i. "Eli, Eli, lama zbacthani" means: "Those who defame me shall keep open my wounds" -- "those who defame me shall keep open my wounds." "Eli, Eli, lama zbacthani." "Father, unto thee I commend my spirit: it is fin­ished." The great war machines of the world are now massing together. In the Holy Land we see the beginning of the end for the Earth. Once again Egypt and Israel. Is it not significant? And it shall grow and grow. [H: And it HAS grown and grown!] The greatest battle that has ever been seen shall take place, not only amongst the elements. The Earth itself shall find a battlefield. The forces of Nature shall be unleashed because of man's wrong thinking and doing, as he has worshipped in word and not in deed, and has not served the master. (end quote)

[END OF LETTER QUOTING]

I suggest that you who don't REALLY know the importance of such an entity as Archangel Gabriel get yourselves busy--in the Phoenix Journals--never mind that Bible. But I will assure that Gabriel will be among the decision-makers as to the longevity of your species in that "time shortening" sequence of events. When he toots his horn three times, and the first is already come and gone a decade ago, the second is now blowing loudly, and in the night when things are quiet--YOU SHALL BE GIVEN TO HEAR IT, and once you hear it you will KNOW because there is NO SOUND LIKE IT ON EARTH. When the call is issued again, the play will be on final run and mankind will have entered his choices in the BOOK OF LIFE. WHERE WILL YOUR IDENTIFICATION OF SOUL BE FOUND?

Dharma, may we please continue on our topic.

Already I am being barraged with questions about who wrote these notations. I would refer you back to the first writings--Victor E. Marsden.

BIRTHING THE PHOENIX

EXPLANATORY NOTES RELATIVE
TO THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION

[QUOTING, Part 12:]

Chapter III

MORE ATTEMPTS AT REFUTATION
THE LONDON TIMES LENDS A HAND

While the Jews have succeeded in having the Protocols sup­pressed, entirely in Russia, Poland, Rumania, and other coun­tries in Eastern Europe, and partially in England and America, they have failed in their many ingenious efforts to have them re­futed by non-Jews. Indeed the so-called refutations with which their henchmen flooded the press in 1920-21 reveal more of the real nature, workings, and associations of the Jews and their agents than they rebut the evidence of the Protocols.
It is noteworthy that not one of these numerous and contra­dictory refutations bears an honest, non-Jewish signature. There is the article of the notorious Princess Radzivill published in the Jewish Tribune (New York) for March 11, 1921, and followed by a statement by her friend, Mrs. Hurlbut. Princess Catherine Radzivill was convicted of forgery in London on April 30, 1902, the amount involved being 3,000 Pounds, and was sentenced to two years in prison (London Times, April 16, 29, and May 1, 1902). On October 13, 1921, suit was filed against her by the Hotel Embassy, New York, for failure to pay her bill of $1,239, and on October 30 she was arrested on the instance of the Hotel Shelbourne, New York, on a charge of de­frauding the hotel of $352. (New York World, Oct. 14 and 31, 1921). Later, she went to live with her friend Mrs. Hurlbut at 506 West 124th Street, New York.

The former makes no mention of Mlle. Glinka and describes the forgery of the Protocols by "Golovinskii and a renegade Jew, Manassevich Manuilov, in Paris in 1904". She was one of the Russian Liberals in Paris in 1884 who furnished Mme. Juli­ette Adam with details of Russian court life. She has since claimed the authorship of the books by "Count Vassilii", really written by Mme. Adam. Further on, oblivious of chronology, she states that General Cherevin willed her his memoirs, in­cluding the Protocols, at the time of his death in 1896. Golovin­skii and Manuilov might, it would seem, have saved themselves trouble by procuring a copy of the document, which, according to Mr. Stephanov's testimony, had been printed and privately circulated in 1897.

Another person who wrote against the Protocols, A. du Chayla, can hardly be taken more seriously. An article of his appeared on May 14, 1921, in the Tribune Juive of Paris; and later, another article on June 13 in the New York Call, a violent Communist sheet, besides articles in Soviet publications. Prof. Nilus mentions in one of his books, entitled On the Bank of the River of God, meeting this Frenchman, who then paraded as a devotee of the Russian Orthodox Church. The character of this adventurer is well drawn in the reply his articles drew from a Russian lady, Madame Fermor, which is given in full.

"Lately there appeared in the Russian paper Poslednii Novosti, Nos. 331-332, a series of articles by Count Alexander du Chayla, in which he casts doubt on the authenticity of a cer­tain document (The Protocols of the Elders of Zion), because obtained by a man who did not inspire confidence.

If the value of a document be based on the credit of the per­son by whom it is produced, one must also analyze the character of him who discredits it.

That is why I am prompted to narrate how I became ac­quainted with Count du Chayla.

I usually spent the summer on my estate in White Russia, in a village near Moguileff, where there is a famous convent. There, one day, about ten years ago, I was visited by the Supe­rior, the Archmandrite Arsene, who introduced a young man, Count du Chayla. Du Chayla had been sent to the convent to study the Russian language and the orthodox religion of which he pretended to be a devotee.

Mr. Sabler had invited him to come to Russia and sent him to the celebrated monastery of Optina Poustine, whence he was sent to our monastery to serve as an example of anti-Catholic propaganda. Sabler was procurator of the Holy Synod at St. Petersburg: he supported Rasputin and other pseudo-mystics and had a disastrous influence on the Russian church, (Cf. Paleo­logue, Memorires, 1927).

It must be admitted that he lived up to his character and showed himself more of a Russian Orthodox than the patriarch himself. Thanks to his zeal, beautifully sculptured angels in the Renaissance style were removed from the chapel of our monastery: du Chayla found them too Catholic. He told me the great joy he felt when he smashed these angels with a hammer. When I reproached him with an act of vandalism, his intolerance betrayed itself in the hatred which he then manifested against the Jews. Many a time I heard him say: "One must have a good pogrom in Russia." One can understand my astonishment when I read in his articles a false accusation of propaganda for pogroms against the White army, which he now blames, he, who so loudly proclaimed that pogroms were a necessity! It is from him that I heard of the existence of Drumont's books which he praised eloquently; he used to advise me to read them that I might understand to what extent the Jews had conquered France. He used to predict that the same fate would overtake Russia, if ever the Jews were granted full civil rights.

Great was my surprise when I read du Chayla's attack on Drumont, whose books he now calls lies. He, who had so much admired Drumont.

As I followed du Chayla's life in Russia, I was amazed to see the extraordinary rapidity of his political and ecclesiastical ca­reer. He became an intimate friend of the Bishops known for their Orthodoxy, and he preached the sacred and absolute power of the Russian Monarch and implacable hatred towards all for­eigners. We saw du Chayla as an intimate friend of the Bishops Anthony, of Volinia and Evlogii of Holm, frequent the famous salon of Countess Ignatieff. As he rose in Russian society, his activities shifted from the religious field; he took up politics, and, as a follower of Count Bobrinsky, leader of the pan-Slavic Party, he was sent to Austria on a secret mission among the Galicians. He was subsequently arrested for espionage.

After his return to Russia, he directed a violent campaign against the smaller racial groups of the empire, especially against the Poles and Finns. As du Chayla was always in need of money, I recommended him to the president of the commis­sion for the affairs of Finland, Mr. Korevo, who used him for anti-Finish propaganda in the foreign press. At the time of the declaration of war, du Chayla was a student in the theological academy of Petrograd; he was appointed chief of a field hospital organized by Bishop Pitirim and provided with funds from Rasputin. Then I lost sight of him until after the revolution, when I heard of him as an agent provocateur, inciting the Cos­sacks against the White Army. In 1919 du Chayla was tried by court martial and convicted of seditious activities in the pay of the Soviets. The sentence was published in the newspapers of the Crimea.

I was astonished to find his name appended to an article in a Russian newspaper notorious for its equivocal position concern­ing the reconstruction of Russia.

(Signed) Tatiana Fermor
June 9th, 1921, Paris

Not satisfied--and rightly so--with these efforts to discredit the Protocols, and yet unable to attach the signature of a noted gentile writer to their denials, the Jews sought another expedient: the seal of approval of one of the best known newspapers would impress the general public. Heretofore the articles had borne the name of private persons: now an official exposure of the Protocols was to be published over the signature of the "Correspondent of The London Times in Constantinople". The identity of the "correspondent" (Philip Graves), was not re­vealed although the most elementary sense of justice would in­sist on giving full credit to the gentleman who had made such a momentous discovery. Nor is there any evidence of his having been in Constantinople. Anyone who writes to the editor of a newspaper is a correspondent, and the number of lies which gain circulation in this fashion is notorious. The "sensational discovery" with The Times, August 16, 17, 18, 1921: reprint entitled, The Truth About The Protocols, 24 pages, is sold at the exorbitant price of one shilling, thus gave to its readers was that the Protocols were a "clumsy plagiarism" of a French book it calls The Dialogues of Geneva, published in Brussels in 1865.

The "correspondent" tells in an essay, off-hand manner and perfect self-assurance, about meeting in Constantinope a Mr. W., who said: "Read this book through and you will find ir­refutable proof that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is a plagiarism."

So it wasn't the correspondent who deserved the credit for the "sensational discovery" after all; but a "Mr. X, a Russian landowner with English connections": Again, it is a pity that the gentleman should not have given his name and received the large reward which would surely be his, from those who have been so active in suppressing and refuting the Protocols.
Then follows the story of Mr. X, with his views on religion, politics, secret societies, and the rest: this Mr. X is an old-fash­ioned gentleman and the reader is ready to believe every word, as reported by "our correspondent". Mr. X explains how he obtained the copy of the Geneva Dialogues from an old Okhrana officer; this establishes the fact that the Russian police had made use of the book to forge the Protocols. In fact the "correspondent" goes on to identify this very copy of the Geneva Dialogues as belonging to A. Sukhotin--there is an "A.S." scratched in the back which is conclusive--and from which the Protocols were "plagiarized" and given to Nilus. Parallel passages from the Dialogues and the Protocols are set opposite each other; and the English reader, never at home in Continental politics, is led into speculations on Napoleon III's relations with the Carbonari, his employment of Corsicans in the police, the employment of Corsicans by the Russian police, the knowledge Corsicans had of the existence of the Geneva Dia­logues, Joly's purpose in writing them, the influence of Philippe, a Lyons mystic, on the Tsar, and so on, until the reader is completely overwhelmed. When he has reached this state, he is told: "At any rate, the fact of the plagiarism has now been conclusively established, and the legend (of the Protocols) may be allowed to pass into oblivion."

[H: I think this is a good place to insert information regard­ing the accusations that Dharma plagiarized material from such as Walter Russell and the University of Science and Philosophy. That case in point was brought against George Green and America West Publishers and Distributors and not "Dharma". The facts continue: THERE NEVER WAS A TRIAL NOR A DECISION MADE. THE CHARGES AGAINST DHARMA WERE OF "CONTEMPT OF COURT". THE ACTUAL MATERIAL IN THE CLAIM WAS NEVER LITIGATED NOR ANY TRIAL EVER BROUGHT BEFORE JURORS. THE JUDGE, ON FABRICATED EVIDENCE, ADJUDGED CONTEMPT AND PROMISED TO TOSS "DHARMA" INTO PRISON IF SHE USED ANY REFERENCES TO THAT MATERIAL AGAIN. BELIEVE ME WHEN I SAY THAT OUR ANTAGONISTS AND ADVERSARIES KEEP CLOSE WATCH ON EVERY WORD WE WRITE. YOU WOULD THINK THE TRUTH WOULD RUB OFF ON, AT THE LEAST, THE READERS, BUT APPARENTLY THIS IS NOT SO--SO GUESS WHO THEY ARE?
The information used was scientific in origin and supposedly public domain. However, full credit was given to the author who was unknown to Dharma--and to Green. Green, how­ever, was a traveling seminar-giver with the head of the University in point and seemed to know what he was doing while failing to get permits, etc. It came to light later that Green had stolen some $400,000 in gold coins from the Institute in­tended for Dharma to be able to continue this very type of work as offered here. No, it has not been a journey free of hardship and false leaders and teachers. The bastard chil­dren always, however, show their colors before they finish their evil games and so, too, have these people in each in­stance.]

The publication of this news from Constantinople was hailed by all the Jews, whose instant enthusiasm is no less revealing than the following letter from a leading Zionist, which appeared in The Times on the same day as the "discovery".

"Editor, London Times.
Sir,

Your Constantinople correspondent, who has done a world service in tracking to their source the Protocols (for they have been carefully published throughout the world), says: "There is no evidence to show how the Geneva Dialogues reached Rus­sia." In your leading article, however, you suggest that the protocols were forged under the auspices of Rachkovskii, head of the Russian secret police in Paris. This appears to be the truth. M. A. du Chayla, a French student of theology at St. Petersburg in 1910, who was in 1918 on the staff of the army of the Cossacks of the Don, had testified through the Tribune Juive (Paris, May 14, 1921) that Nilus told him that the protocols were sent him from Paris by his friend, Mme. K---, who had re­ceived them from General Rachkovskii. M. du Chayla confirms a suggestion of yours, that the courier who brought the ms. from Paris was Alexander Sukhotin. He has seen this very ms., which, being in poor French and varying penmanship, suggests a complex authorship in the Russian police bureau. The fact that the Geneva Dialogues have now been bought from an ex-member of it, completes the chain.

That the object of the publication of 1905 was to drown the Russian revolution in Jewish blood, I, like you, have asserted. But it appears that there was a previous edition in 1902 in the shape of an appendix to the reprint of a pietistic work by Nilus, and the motive behind this earlier publication throws another cu­rious sidelight upon the old Russian court. For that publication was apparently a move in the game to discredit in favor of Nilus a Lyons mystic, Philippe, of whose power over the Tsar the Grand Duchess Elizabeth disapproved. Knowing that Nilus was designed as Philippe's supplanter, Rachkovskii, it is thought, wished to secure his good graces by providing him with a valu­able weapon against Russian liberalism.

I am sorry that your correspondent should conclude with the suggestion that those parts of the Protocols not in the Geneva Dialogues may possibly have been supplied by Jews who spied on their co-religionists; for this far-fetched hypothesis gives a gleam of hope to the considerable number of organs throughout Europe that live only in the Protocols. Now is your correspon­dent accurate in thinking that only moral harm has been done by this historic forgery? M. du Chayla offers evidence that it has helped to goad on those countless pogroms in the Ukraine, of whose horrors Western Europe is almost ignorant. As for Nilus, he appears to be a fanatical mytagogue, honest enough except for that theological twist which betrayed itself when, con­fronted by the suspicion that the Protocols were forged, he replied: "Even if they were, God who could speak through Bal­sam's ass, could also put the truth in a liar's mouth."

Yours, gratefully,

Israel Zangwill

Far End, East Preston, Sussex, August 18, 1921."

[H: I am continually amused at such prattlings for it is KNOWN FACT that all the persons taking over the Russian, later Soviet, machine were ALL JEWS. They each even changed their names so that the Jewish lineage would be overlooked. These were the very people who established COMMUNISM and set forth the worst regime ever thus far thrust on mankind upon a "Christian" Russia. They de­stroyed the "crown" and demanded that Communism be the rule of the day. Have all of you already forgotten such as Stalin (a Jew) and the Republic of Soviet Russia established by the bastards from HELL? What is the matter with your brains, perfect creations of God? He created you in perfec­tion and you have worked ever since at total destruction of that incredible gift of reason and Truth. So be it and Selah­-for it has come upon you, this beast in camouflage of the Prince of Peace, and you shall reap the reward of your re­fusal to see or hear. And, I might suggest that this destruc­tion will be heaped upon you in this generation, this current generation of elders. What of your offspring? What you have planted, as the sower, shall be brought upon your off­spring for they know no better than as YOU HAVE TAUGHT THEM--THE LIES.]

PJ 223

CHAPTER 7

REC #2 HATONN

SUN., JAN. 18, 1998 8:21 A.M. YR. 11, DAY 155

SUN.. JAN, 18. 1998

(Continuing Part 12:)

Since then, to some extent, the Protocols have been forgot­ten. But, Audeatur et altera pars, in the words of Max Nordau. The Times "correspondent" would convince us that there arc similar or identical passages to be found in the Protocols and in the Dialogues; and this we readily admit. We go farther: identi­cal passages will be found in earlier Protocols which go back to the days before the dispersion.

By way of illustration, let it be assumed that the Book of Common Prayer used in the Anglican Church were unknown to the Jews. Suppose, then, that a copy of it were secretly ob­tained by a certain Jew and published, and that the Jews were shocked by the Anglican doctrine of which they learned in this way for the first time. It would then be easy for another Jew to show that the Book of Common Prayer was a plagiarism: it con­tains passages copied, word for word, from the Gospels; the Psalms are a transcript from King James' Bible, and so on. And not only that, but there are many parallels to be found in the secular literature. "At any rate," one can imagine the second Jew saying at the end, "the fact of plagiarism has been conclu­sively established, and we may therefore affirm that no such Book of Common Prayer is used in the worship of the Church of England."

The second Jew would be right in pointing out the parallels in the earlier literature--though his conclusion would be ridiculous--for there is a very real connection: and so it is with the Proto­cols.
One might have thought that The Times, in its desire to pub­lish the truth about the Protocols, would at least have given the correct title of the Geneva Dialogues, it is, Dialogues aux En­fers entre Machiavelli et Montesquieu, published anonymously in Brussels in 1865. Moreover, a minute's search in a library catalogue shows that another book, bearing a similar title, was published some years earlier: namely, Machiavelli, Montesquieu & Rousseau, by Jacob Venedey, published by Franz Dunnicker in Berlin in 1850. The Times, with its interest in plagiarisms, might have been tempted to glance at this latter volume as also at The Prince by Machiavelli and L'Esprit des Lois by Mon­tesquieu. Had it done so, its curiosity would have been amply rewarded: passages quoted from the Protocols as plagiarized from the Dialogues of 1865, are similar to several in Venedey's book of 1850, and both Jacob Venedey and Maurice Joly should be branded as plagiarists. For example, the passage referring to Vishnu is found in Machiavelli, Montesquieu & Rousseau, in the Dialogues, and in Protocol 12.

But the resemblance between the Protocols and Venedey's book does not stop with a few parallel passages: the spirit of both is the same; it is revolutionary, whereas the Dialogues of 1865 are socialistic and polemical. The anonymous author merely borrowed certain descriptive passages in Venedey to give color to his argument. Space does not allow us here to trace the links between Jacob Venedy the Alliance Israelite Uni­verselle, Adolphe Cremieux, Maurice Joly, and Jules Janin.

Now hadn't The Times better discover a copy of Venedey belonging to a former Okhrana officer, so as to explain how the Russian secret police were able to plagiarize the spirit, as well as a few platitudes and descriptive bits, when forging the Proto­cols? Its correspondent in Peiping might make that discovery some day? No, the Peiping correspondent (or any other) will be very careful not to make that discovery, for the simple reason that Venedey was a Jew, whereas The Times' point is that the Jews had nothing to do with the drafting of the Protocols. Its argument is that the author of the Dialogues was a Corsican; that the Corsicans in the Paris Police preserved the Dialogues and gave a copy to the Corsican members of the Russian police, who used it to forge the Protocols: these insidious Corsicans! It is noteworthy that no Corsican has yet raised a voice in protest against the charges made in The Times. Yet it is the Corsicans who are the real victims of a libel, not the Jews. [H: How many of you even know who the Corsicans were? I thought not. Who won the 1997 Super Bowl?] But what of Venedey?

Jacob Venedey, born in Cologne in May, 1805, was early engaged in revolutionary activities which caused his expulsion from Germany. He settled in Paris, where, in 1835, he edited a paper of subversive character, called Le Procrit. Driven from Paris by the police, he moved to Havre, until, thanks to the rep­resentations of Arago and Mignet, friends of Cremieux, he was allowed to return to the capital. Meanwhile his book, Roman­isme, Christianisme et Germanisme, won the praise of the French Academy. Venedey was a close friend and associate of Karl Marx. After spending the year 1843-44 in England, the headquarters of continental revolutionaries, he worked in Brus­sels for the founding, with Marx in 1847, of a secret organiza­tion, "The Communist League of Workers" (later the Societe International de la Democratie).

After the February revolution in 1848, Venedey joined Marx in Germany, where he became one of the chiefs of the revolu­tionary Committee of Fifty (March, 1848), and was sent as commissar into the Oberland to stand against Hecker. Later elected as member of the Left from Hesse-Homburg, he contin­ued to serve on the Committee of Fifty. It was at this time that he brought out in Berlin his Machiavelli, Montesquieu & Rousseau, stressing the views attributed to Machiavelli and Rousseau in favor of despotism and oppression. Another case of plagiarism at work!

When order was restored in Germany, Venedey was expelled from Berlin and Breslau. He was an active member of the Freemasons and affiliated with the Carbonari (Cf. Die Bauhutte, Feb. 1871, the date of Venedey's death); he was also closely as­sociated not only with revolutionaries of his day, but (as might be expected) with the leading Jews, the founders of the Alliance Israelite Universelle. The latter included men of as different political parties as the reactionary-imperialist Fould, the liberal-conservative Disraeli, and the communist-revolutionary Marx, and whether living under an empire, a constitutional monarchy, or a republic, all laboured towards a common aim, the estab­lishment of an international Jewish power. [H: Please don't lose sight of the fact that even these notations are done in 1920 or thereabouts. So, none of the things happening since then are included and boy, were there ever some biggies, such as the Great Depression, the Second World War (not to even mention the myriads of other wars) never proclaimed wars, and a total mind-control program put into action to finish you off as a species or, at the least, a global civiliza­tion.]
[H: At this point in the writings there are some very lengthy footnotes which I feel you must access:]
In his novel Coningsby (London, 1844), Disraeli draws a picture from life of the Jews ruling the world from behind thrones as graphic as anything in the Protocols of Nilus. (It is expected that The Times will shortly be in a position to establish that Coningsby is a plagiarism of a Byzantine novel of the XVI­Ith century.) The passage in which Rothschild (Sidonia) de­scribes this runs as follows:

"If I followed my own impulse, I would remain here," said Sidonia. Can anything be more absurd than that a nation should apply to an individual to maintain its credit, its existence as an empire and its comfort as a people; and that individual one to whom its laws deny the proudest rights of citizenship, the privilege of sitting in its senate and of holding land; for though I have been rash enough to buy several estates, my own opinion is that by the existing law of England, an Englishman of Hebrew faith cannot possess the soil."

"But surely it would be easy to repeal a law so illiberal."

"Oh! as for illiberality, I have no objection to it if it be an el­ement of power. Eschew political sentimentality. What I con­tend is that if you permit men to accumulate property, and they use that permission to a great extent, power is inseparable from that property, and it is in the last degree impolite to make it in the interest of any powerful class to oppose the institutions under which they live. The Jews, for example, independent of the capital qualities for citizenship which they possess in their in­dustry, temperance, and energy and vivacity of mind, are a race essentially monarchical, deeply religious, and shrinking them­selves from converts as from a calamity, are ever anxious to see the religious systems of the countries in which they live, flour­ish; yet since your society has become agitated in England and powerful combinations menace your institutions, you find the one loyal Hebrew invariably arrayed in the same ranks as the leveller and the latitudinarian, and prepared to support rather than tamely continue under a system which seeks to degrade him. The Tories lose an important election at a critical moment; 'tis the Jews come forward to vote against them. The Church is alarmed at the scheme of a latitudinarian university, and learns with relief that funds are not forthcoming for its establishment; a Jew immediately advances and endows it. Yet the Jews, Con­ingsby, are essentially Tories, Toryism indeed is but copied from the mighty prototype that has fashioned Europe. And ev­ery generation they must become more powerful and more dan­gerous to the society which is hostile to them. Do you think that the quiet humdrum persecution of a decorous representative of an English university can crush those who have successively baffled the Pharaohs, Nebuchadnezzar, Rome, and the feudal ages? The fact is you cannot destroy a pure race of the Cau­casian organization. It is a physiological fact; a simple law of nature, which has baffled Egyptian and Assyrian kings, Roman emperors, and Christian inquisitors. No penal laws, no physical tortures, can effect that a superior race should be absorbed in an inferior, or be destroyed by it. The mixed persecuting races disappear, the pure persecuted race remains. And at this mo­ment, in spite of centuries, or tens of centuries, of degradation, the Jewish mind exercises a vast influence on the affairs of Eu­rope. I speak not of their laws, which you still obey; of their literature, with which your minds are saturated; but of the living Hebrew intellect. [H: Now just where do you think Mr. Rothschild is coming from in this outlay as he seems to blast one group of "Jews" while representing the higher intellect of the group within which he would place himself?]

"You never observe a great intellectual movement in Europe in which the Jews do not greatly participate. The first Jesuits were Jews [H: Wow, I didn't expect that confirmation so soon in coming.]; that mysterious Russian diplomacy which so alarms Western Europe is organized and principally carried on by Jews; that mighty revolution (of 1848) which will be in fact a second and greater Reformation, and of which so little is as yet known in England, is entirely developing under the auspices of Jews, who almost monopolize the professorial chairs of Ger­many; NEANDAR, Founder of spiritual Christianity, and who is Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Berlin, is a Jew. [H: Say what? Go back, reader, it says "NEANDAR, FOUNDER OF SPIRITUAL CHRISTIANITY, and who is Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Berlin, IS A JEW.] Benary, equally famous, and in the same university, is a Jew. Wehl, the Arabic Professor of Heidelberg, is a Jew. Years ago, when I was in Palestine, I met a German student who was accumulating materials for the history of Christianity and studying the genius of the place; a modest and learned man. It was Wehl; then unknown, since become the first Arabic scholar of the day, and the author of the life of Mahomet. But for the German professors of this race, their name is legion. I think there are more than ten in Berlin alone.


"I told you just now that I was going up to town tomorrow, because I always made it a rule to interpose when affairs of state were on the carpet. Otherwise, I never interfere. I hear of peace and war in newspapers, but I am never alarmed, except when I am informed that the sovereigns want treasure; then I know that monarchs are serious.

"A few years back we were applied to by Russia. Now there has been no friendship between the Court of St. Petersburg and my family. It has Dutch connections which have generally sup­plied it; and our representations in favour of the Polish He­brews, a numerous race, but the most suffering and degraded of all the tribes, has not been very agreeable to the Czar. However circumstances drew to an approximation between the Romanoffs and the Sidonias. I resolved to go myself to St. Petersburg. I had on my arrival an interview with the Russian Minister of Fi­nance, Count Cancrin; I beheld the son of a Lithuanian Jew. The loan was connected with the affairs of Spain; I resolved on repairing to Spain from Russia. I travelled without intermission. I had an audience immediately on my arrival with the Spanish minister, Senor Mendizabel; I beheld one like myself, the son of a Nuevo Christiano, a Jew of Aragon. In consequence of what transpired at Madrid, I went straight to Paris to consult the President of the French council; I beheld the son of a French Jew, a hero, an imperial marshal, and very properly so, for who should be military heroes if not those who worship the Lord of Hosts?"

"And is Soult a Hebrew?"

"Yes, and others of the French marshals, and the most fa­mous, Massena, for example; his real name was Mannaseh: but to my anecdote. The consequence of our consultations was that northern power should be applied to in a friendly and mediative capacity. We fixed on Prussia, and the President of the Council made an application to the Prussian minister, who attended a few days after our conference. Count Armin entered the cabi­net, and I beheld a Prussian Jew. So you see, my dear Con­ingsby, that the world is governed by very different person­ages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.
[H: The information contained in this "footnote" is as valu­able as any you shall ever gain. Study it carefully for right here was locked up your SPIRITUAL attitudes toward "a" Christ and that "christ" would be presented to you in order that you all march to the same WRONG drummer's beat.]
[Continuing now with that following the footnote interruption:]

Prominent among them and in close touch with Venedey, was Adolphe Isaac Cremieux (1798-1880). A Nimes lawyer with an ardent admiration for Napoleon, he became legal adviser to the Bonaparte family and an intimate of Louis Napoleon with whom he joined in overthrowing the government of Louis Philippe in 1849. A member of the Mizraim Lodge, the Scottish Rite (of which he became supreme Master on the death of Viennet), he was familiar with all new movements; and his influence enabled him to render at least one important service to Jewry by having the Jewish murderers of Father Thomas in Damascus (1841) set at liberty. One of the leaders in the revolution of February 1848, he was appointed minister of justice under the provisional government, and used all his political influence in the election of Louis Napoleon to the presidency of the republic. Cremieux hoped in this way to be named Prime Minister and control French policy for a period, as Disraeli did in England somewhat later. Like Disraeli, he had the financial support of the Roth­schilds; but when the President chose for his banker another Jew, Fould, and named General Cavaignac premier, Cremieux saw he had lost. Bitterly disappointed, he became so hostile to his former friend that, at the time of the coup d'etat in 1851, he was imprisoned at Vincennes. On his release, he identified him­self with the enemies of the emperor; these inluded the commu­nist associates of Marx, Mazzini, Jacob Venedey (already men­tioned), Louis Blanc, Ledru Rollin, Pierre Leroux, and a group of socialists, among whom was Maurice Joly. His father was Philippe Lambert Joly, born at Dieppe, Attorney-General of the Jura under Louis-Philippe for ten years. His mother, Floren­tine Corbara Courtois, was the daughter of Laurent Courtois, paymaster-general of Corsica, who had an inveterate hatred of Napoleon I. Maurice Joly was born in 1831 at Lons-le-Saulnier and educated at Dijon: there he had begun his law studies, but left for Paris in 1849 to secure a post in the Ministry of the Inte­rior under M. Chevreau and just before the coup d'etat. He did not finish his law studies till 1860. Committed suicide in 1878.

Joly, some thirty years younger than Cremieux, with an in­herited hatred of the Bonapartes, seems to have fallen very largely under his influence. Through Cremieux, Joly became acquainted with communists and their writings. Though, until 1871 when his ambition for a government post turned him into a violent communist, he had not in 1864 gone beyond socialism, he was so impressed with the way they presented their argu­ ments that he could not, if the chance were offered, refrain from imitating. And this chance came in 1864-1865, when his hatred of Napoleon, whetted by Cremieux, led him to publish anony­mously in Brussels the Dialogues aux Enfers entre Machiavelli et Montesquieu. In this work he tells us "Machiavelli represents the policy of Might, while Montesquieu stands for that of Right: Machiavelli will be Napoleon, who will himself describe his abominable policy." It was natural that he should choose the Italian Machiavelli to stand for Bonaparte, and the Frenchman Montesquieu, for the ideal statesman: It was equally natural that he should put in the mouth of Machiavelli some of the same ex­pression which Venedey had put in it, and which Joly had ad­mired. His own view was: "Socialism seems to me one of the forms of a new life for the people emancipated from the tradi­tions of the old world. I accept a great many of the solutions of­fered by socialism; but I reject communism, either as a social factor, or as a political institution. Communism is but a school of socialism. In politics, I understand extreme means to gain one's ends--in that at least, I am a Jacobin."

The French authorities, however, penetrated the thinly dis­guised satire: Joly was arrested and sentenced to two years im­prisonment (April, 1865). But the Dialogues had pleased Cremieux as much as they had displeased the emperor, and, when his term expired, his Jewish patron rallied to his support: Joly was able to found a legal review, Le Palais, with Jules Favre, Desmaret, Leblond, Arago, Berryer, and Adolphe Cremieux as its principal stockholders.

With the fall of Napoleon III, Adolphe Cremieux once more took an open part in politics. Pushing to the front his former secretary, Gambetta, he directed through him the negotiations with Bismarck. Bismarck himself was guided by the Jew Barn­berger (1832-1899), a former revolutionary of '48, but who had for years managed the Paris branch of the Jewish bank Bischof­sheim & Goldschmidt; he was also a friend of Cremieux. A third Jew in the negotiations was the son of James Rothschild. Bismarck, who had met the latter's grandfather, knew that Roth­schild's real name was MEYER,and regarded him as an "Israelitish citizen of Frankfurt", hence a German subject. To make matters worse, the victor was obliged to discuss the terms of peace with this renegade subject in French, the language of the vanquished, because Rothschild professed not to understand German (from Corti, House of Rothschild, vol II.). In this way, care was taken that the treaty should be satisfactory, if not en­tirely to the signatories, yet at least so to the Alliance Israelite Universelle.

From then (1871) until his death in 1880, as President of the Alliance Israelite Universelle and supreme Master of the Scot­tish Rite, Cremieux was one of the promoters of the anti-clerical movement following the Franco-Prussian war. His favorite theme was that there should be one cult. Speaking at a general assembly of the Alliance he said: "the Alliance is not limited to our cult; it voices its appeal to all cults and wants to penetrate in all religions, as it has penetrated into all countries. Let us en­deavor boldly to bring about the union of all cults under one flag of 'Union and Progress': such is the motto of humanity. This speech was made on May 31, 1864; "Union and Progress" was the name given to several revolutionary associations and Ma­sonic lodges. "One cult" is strongly reminiscent of Protocol XVI.

One cult, one flag. Are the Protocols of Nilus, or the words of Machiavelli in Joly's book or in Venedeys book, anything but an elaborate exposition of the ideas thus briefly expressed by Cremieux? His activities are one of the best examples of Jewish internationalism. Thus the principal attempt to discredit the Protocols leads directly into historical studies which substantiate and illustrate their doctrine in a remarkable and unexpected manner.

Chapter IV

TEXT AND COMMENTARY

Of the Protocols themselves little need be said in the way of introduction. The book in which they are embodied was pub­lished by Sergyei Nilus in Russia in 1905. A copy of this is in the British Museum, bearing the date of its reception, August 10th, 1906. All copies that were known to exist in Russia were destroyed by the Kerensky regime, and under his successors the possession of a copy by anyone in Sovietland was crime suffi­cient to ensure the owner's being shot on sight. This fact is in itself sufficient proof of the genuinenes of the Protocols. The Jewish journals, of course, say that they are a forgery, leaving it to be understood that Professor Nilus, who embodied them in a work of his own, had concocted them for his own purposes.

Mr. Henry Ford, in an interview published in the New York World, February 17th, 1921, put the case for Nilus tersely and convincingly thus:

"The only statement I care to make about the PROTOCOLS is that they fit in with what is going on. They are sixteen years old, and they have fitted the world situation up to this time. THEY FIT IT NOW."

Indeed they do!

These Protocols give the substance of addresses delivered to the innermost circle of the Rulers of Zion. They reveal the con­certed plan of action of the Jewish Nation developed through the ages and edited by the Elders themselves up to date. Parts and summaries of the plan have been published from time to time during the centuries as the secrets of the Elders have leaked out. The claim of the Jews that the Protocols are forgeries is in itself an admission of their genuineness, for they never attempt to an­swer the facts corresponding to the threats which the Protocols contain, and, indeed, the correspondence between prophecy and fulfillment is too glaring to be set aside or obscured. This the Jews well know and therefore evade.

When did the Meetings take place and by whom were the Protocols promulgated?

The answer to these questions is to a certain extent conjec­tural, but the presumption is strong that they were issued at the First Zionist Congress held at Basel in 1897 under the presidency of the Father of Modern Zionism, the late Theodore Herzl.

Is there in collateral evidence of this?

Yes; and a very striking bit of evidence it is. There has been recently published a volume on Herzl's Diaries, a translation of some passages of which appeared in the Jewish Chronicle of July 14, 1922, and his conversation with Colonel Goldsmid, a Jew brought up as a Christian, an Officer in the English Army, and at heart a New Nationalist all the time. Goldsmid suggested to Herzl that the best way of expropriating the English Aristoc­racy and so destroying their power to protect the people of England was to put excessive taxes on the land. Herzl thought this an excellent idea, and it is now to be found definitely em­bodied in Protocol VI!

The "liberal" victory in the English election of 1906 (the date of the reception of a copy of the Protocols by the British Mu­seum, be it noted), which was essentially a Jewish victory, en­abled the Elders to carry their land-taxing policy into practical effect. In consequence, the only option now left to a large pro­portion of the English Aristocracy is either to sell their estates to Jews or to marry their sons to Jewesses.

The above extract from Herzl's Diary is an extremely signifi­cant bit of evidence bearing on the existence of the Jew World Plot and authenticity of the Protocols, but any reader of intelli­gence will be able from his own knowledge of recent history and from his own experience to confirm the genuineness of every line of them, and it is in the light of this living comment that all readers are invited to study Mr. Marsden's translation of this terribly inhuman document.

[H: Well, there goes the theory out the window that Mr. Marsden did this section on notations and commentaries. The author shall, possibly forever, remain anonymous and that, readers, is the most secure place to be--not for the writer, particularly, be he even still alive, but for anyone as­sociated with him or his acquaintances.]

WHO ARE THE ELDERS?

Who, it may be asked, are the Elders of Zion?

They are sometimes called "the Sages of Zion", and their sayings are quoted as gospel by the Jews themselves.

And here is another very significant circumstance. The pre­sent successor of Herzl as leader of the Zionist movement, Dr. Weizmann, quoted one of these sayings at the send-off banquet given to Chief Rabbi Hertzon October 6th, 1920. The Chief Rabbi was on the point of leaving for his Empire tour--a sort of Jewish answer to the Empire tour of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales. And this is the "saying" of the Sages which Dr. Weiz­mann quoted: "A beneficent protection which God has instituted in the life of the Jews is that He has dispersed them all over the world." (Jewish Guardian, Oct. 8th, 1920.)

Now compare this with the last clause but one of Protocol XI.

"God has granted to us, His Chosen People, the gift of dispersion, and from this, which appears to all eyes to be our weakness, has come forth all our strength, which has now brought us to the threshold of sovereignty over all the world. "
The remarkable correspondence between these passages proves several things. It proves that the Learned Elders exist. It proves that Dr. Weizmann knows all about them. It proves that the desire for a "National Home" in Palestine is only cam­ouflage and an infinitesimal part of the Jew's real object. It proves that the Jews of the world have no intention of settling in Palestine or any separate country, and that their annual prayer that they may all meet "Next Year in Jerusalem" IS MERELY A PIECE OF THEIR CHARACTERISTIC MAKE-BELIEVE.It also demonstrates that the Jews are now a world menace, and that the Aryan races will have to domicile them permanently out of Europe. [H: OOPS! for America.]

WHAT ARE THE ELDERS ' NAMES?
THE THREE HUNDRED

But what are their names? This is a secret which has not been revealed. They are the Hidden Hand. They are not the "Board of Deputies" (the Jewish Parliament in England) or the "Universal Israelite Alliance" which sits in Paris. But the late Walter Rathenau of the Allgemeiner Electricitaets Gesellschaft has thrown a little light on the subject and doubtless he was in possession of their names, being, in all likelihood, one of the chief leaders himself. Writing in the Wiener Freie Presse, De­cember 24th, 1912, he said:

Three hundred men (Jews, of course), each of whom knows all the others, govern the fate of the European continent, and they elect their succes­sors from their entourage.

The Learned Elders are the general officers of these--not three, but--three hundred Fates.

NOTES

• I. -- "AGENTUR" AND "THE POLITICAL"

There are two words in this translation which are unusual, the word "Agentur", and "political" used as a substantive. Agentur appears to be a word adopted from the original and it means the whole body of agents and agencies made use of by the elders, whether members of the tribe or their Gentile tools.

By "the political" Mr. Marsden means, not exactly the "body politic" but the entire machinery of politics.

• II. THE SYMBOLIC SNAKE OF JUDAISM

Protocol III opens with a reference to the Symbolic Snake of Judaism. In his Epilogue to the 1905 Edition of the Protocols, Nilus gives the following interesting account of this symbol:

According to the records of secret Jewish Zionism, Solomon and other Jewish learned men already, in 929 B.C., thought out a scheme in theory for a peaceful conquest of the whole uni­verse by Zion.

As history developed, this scheme was worked out in detail and completed by men who were subsequently initiated in this question. These learned men decided by peaceful means to con­quer the world for Zion with the slyness of the Symbolic Snake, whose head was to represent those who have been initiated into the plans of the Jewish administration, and the body of the Snake to represent the Jewish people--the administration was always kept secret, even from the Jewish nation itself. As this Snake penetrated into the hearts of the nations which it encoun­tered, it undermined and devoured all the non-Jewish power of those States. It is foretold that the Snake has still to finish its work, strictly adhering to the designed plan, until the course which it has to run is closed by the return of its head to Zion and until, by this means, the Snake has completed its round of Eu­rope, and has encircled it--and until, by dint of enchaining Eu­rope, it has encompassed the whole world. This it is to accom­plish by using every endeavor to subdue the other countries by an economical conquest.

The return of the head of the Snake to Zion can only be ac­complished after the power of all the Sovereigns of Europe has been laid low, that is to say, when by means of economic crises and wholesale destruction effected everywhere there shall have been brought about a spiritual demoralization and a moral cor­ruption, chiefly with the assistance of Jewish women mas­querading as French, Italians, etc. These are the surest spread­ers of licentiousness into the lives of the leading men at the heads of nations.

A map of the course of the Symbolic Snake [See page 187] is shown as follows: Its first stage in Europe was in 429 B.C., in Greece, where, in the time of Pericles, the Snake first started eating into the power of that country. The second stage was Rome in the time of Augustus, about 69 B.C. The third in Madrid in the time of Charles V, in 1552 A.D. The fourth in 1790, in the time of Louis XVI. The fifth in London from 1814 onwards (after the downfall of Napoleon). The sixth in Berlin in 1871 after the Franco-Prussian war. The seventh in St. Pe­tersburg, over which is drawn the head of the Snake under the date of 1881. [H: Well, I guess that pretty well covers "Europe" but what about .... ? Remember this book of in­formation was written in 1922 or thereabouts and that is some 76 years past. What do you think could be accom­plished in three quarters of a century if you were already "on a roll"?]

All these states which the Snake traversed have had the foun­dations of their constitutions shaken. Germany, with its appar­ent power, forming no exception to the rule. In economic con­ditions England and Germany are spared, but only till the con­quest of Russia is accomplished by the Snake, on which at pre­sent (i.e. 1905), all its efforts are concentrated. [H: So here we have a reminder that Nilus offered this in 1905 and that is 93 years--or, almost a century. This brings you up to, includ­ing the years deliberately pulled from your calendars, well into the next century which includes the Plan for 2000 al­ready being established and basically operable.] The further course of the Snake is not shown on this map, but arrows indi­cate its next movement towards Moscow, Kieff, and Odessa.

It is now well known to us to what extent the latter cities form the centers of the militant Jewish race. Constantinople is shown as the last stage of the Snake's course before it reaches Jerusalem. (This map was drawn years before the occurrence of the "Young Turk"--i.e., Jewish--Revolution in Turkey.)

• III. The term "Goyim", meaning Gentiles or non-Jews, is used throughout The Protocols and is retained by Mr. Marsden. It is a term of offence and contempt and reveals the innermost spirit of Judaism.

[END OF QUOTING]

I realize that this PART 12 is very lengthy and tiring; therefore, we will not start another session, for the press, today.

When we do offer the next portion we will BEGIN on the translation of the PROTOCOLS themselves, so this is a very ap­propriate breaking point.

My trust is that by the time we have this ready for publishing in book format that these have been run on the entire world IN­TERNET network. Anyone, anywhere, is welcome to take these writings and put them on websites, chat rooms, whatever you have with which to begin dialogue. I won't have available proper computer copies but perhaps if you get in touch with the CONTACT office, you may be able to acquire, at the least, e­mail, and reproduce your own documents.

We copyright none of my work because we are here to bring TRUTH AND INFORMATION, so you have blanket permis­sion to use the material--AS LONG AS IT IS UNTAMPERED AND OFFERED IN WHOLE.

You have no prayer of reaching through on any establishment circuits of television, radio or press, so don't bother. Get the network of citizens busy and the word will be IMPOSSIBLE TO STOP. Take control of your destiny, people, it is YOUR LIFE and YOUR SOULS. Be worthy of the perfection with which you are created.

Blessings upon you who labor in the vineyards of our Father, for His abundance will be upon us as we meet the challenge of HIS adversary.

Dharma, you have accomplished the impossible in these brief hours and know, child, as we move on into tiring shadows of more hours and hours at this console, it is a worthy deed we do and no finer thing could we offer. For through Truth comes the ONLY possibility of FREEDOM for mankind as he has become trapped in the muck of the parasites and leeches.

I AM ATON. Salu.

PJ 223

CHAPTER 8

FACTS ARE FACTS
FROM ONE "JEW" TO ANOTHER
LONG BURIED TRUTH
MUST BE REVEALED

Editor's note: The following writing is essentially the quoting of a letter titled "Facts Are Facts". It is quite a comprehensive historical treatise on the history and behavior of the generally poorly understood Khazarian Zionist "Jews". It was written by Benjamin H. Freedman of New York City to Dr. David Goldstein of Boston and is dated October 10, 1954. This was originally presented back in 1991, in Phoenix Journal #25, called THE Br1TER COMMUNION. More recently it was shared on pages 34-56 of the 11/29/94 issue of CONTACT.

2/16/91 #1 HATONN

If you ones cannot come into understanding that it is the Khazar Zionists who have you by the throat--then the rest of the expla­nation can have no impact or meaning of value. YOU MUST GET THE PLAYERS STRAIGHT!

The following will be a direct quote (copy) from a Special De­livery letter to Dr. David Goldstein LL.D. FROM Benjamin H. Freedman, October 10, 1954.

In the interest of saving space and time, Dharma, simply put it to paper exactly as it is written. I shall begin with the word "QUOTE" and end the document with "END QUOTING". If I make comment at any point, I shall indicate by use of my initial.

"FACTS ARE FACTS"

[QUOTING:)

960 PARK AVENUE
NEW YORK CITY

October 10, 1 9 5 4

SPECIAL DELIVERY

Dr.David Goldstein, LL.D.
Astor Post Office Station
Boston, Massachusetts

My dear Dr. Goldstein,

Your very outstanding achievements as a convert to Catholi­cism impress me as without a comparable parallel in modern history. Your devotion to the doctrines and the dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church defy any attempt at description by me only with words. Words fail me for that.

As a vigorous protagonist persevering so persistently in prop­agating the principles of the Roman Catholic Church--its pur­pose, its policies, its programs--your dauntless determination is the inspiration for countless others who courageously seek to follow in your footsteps.

In view of this fact it requires great courage for me to write to you as I am about to do. So I pray when you receive this communication from me you will try to keep in mind Galatians 4:16, "AmI therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?". I hope you will so favor me.

It is truly a source of great pleasure and genuine gratification to greet you at long last although of necessity by correspon­dence. It is quite a disappointment to me to make your ac­quaintance in this manner. It would now afford me a far greater pleasure and a great privilege also if instead I could greet you on this occasion in person.

[H: you will note that only in the beginning do "words fail him" for this does get tedious and long, so please bear with us until he finally gets to some points after the honey is smeared about most thickly.]
Our very good mutual friend has for long been planning a meeting with you in person for me. I still wish to do that. I look forward with pleasant anticipation to doing this in the not too distant future at a time agreeable to you.

You will discover in the contents of this long letter valid evi­dence for the urgency on my part to communicate with you without further delay. You will further discover this urgency reflected in the present gravity of the crisis which now jeopar­dizes an uninterrupted continuance of the Christian faith in its long struggle as the world's most effective spiritual and social force in the Divine mission of promoting the welfare of all mankind without regard for their diversified races, religions, and nationalities.

Your most recent article coming to my attention appeared in the September issue of the A.P.J. Bulletin, the official publica­tion of the organization calling themselves The Archconfra­ternity of Prayer for Peace and Goodwill to Israel. The headline of your article, News and Views of Jews, and the purpose of the organization stated in the masthead of the publication, "To Pro­mote Interest in the Apostalate to Israel" prompts me to take Father time by his forelock and promptly offer my comments. I beg your indulgence accordingly.

It is with reluctance that I place my comments in letter form. I hesitated to do so but I find it the only expedient thing to do under the circumstances. I beg to submit them to you now with­out reservation of any nature for your immediate and earnest consideration. It is my very sincere wish that you accept them in the friendly spirit in which they are submitted. It is also my hope that you will give your consideration to them and favor me with your early reply in the same friendly spirit for which I thank you in advance.

In the best interests of that worthy objective to which you are continuing to dedicate the years ahead as you have so diligently done for many past decades, I most respectfully and sincerely urge you to analyze and to study carefully the data submitted to you here. I suggest also that you then take whatever steps you consider appropriate and necessary as a result of your conclu­sions. In the invisible and intangible ideological war being waged in defense of the great Christian heritage against its dedi­cated enemies your positive attitude is vital to victory. Your passive attitude will make a negative contribution to the total ef­fort.

You assuredly subscribe fully to that sound and sensible sen­timent that "it is better to light one candle than to sit in dark­ness". My solitary attempts to date "to given light to them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow" may prove no more success­ful with you now than they have in so many other instances where I have failed during the past thirty years. In your case I feel rather optomistic at the moment.

Although not completely in vain I still live in the hope that one day one of these "candles" will burst into flame like a long smouldering spark and start a conflagration that will sweep across the nation like a prairie fire and illuminate vast new hori­zons for the first time. That unyielding hope is the source of the courage which aids me in my struggle against the great odds to which I am subjected for obvious reasons.

It has been correctly contended for thousands of years that "In the end Truth always prevails". We all realize that Truth in action can prove itself a dynamic power of unlimited force. But alas Truth has no self-starter. Truth cannot get off dead-center unless a worthy apostle gives Truth a little push to overcome its inertia. Without that start Truth will stand still and will never arrive at its intended destination. Truth has often died aborning for the most logical reason. Your help in this respect will prove of great value.

On the other hand Truth has many times been completely "blacked out" by repeating contradictory and conflicting un­truths over and over again, and again, and again. The world's recent history supplies somber testimony of the dangers to civi­lization inherent in that technique. That form of treason to Truth is treachery to mankind. You must be very careful, my dear Dr. Goldstein, not to become unwittingly one of the many accessories before and after the fact who have appeared upon the scene of public affairs in recent years.

Whether unwittingly, unwillingly or unintentionally many of history's most noted characters have misrepresented the truth to the world and they have been so believed that it puzzles our generation. As recently as 1492 the world was misrepresented as flat by all the best alleged authorities on the subject. In 1492 Christopher Columbus was able to demonstrate otherwise. There are countless similar other instances in the history of the world.

Whether these alleged authorities were guilty of ignorance or indifference is here besides the point. It is not important now. They were either totally ignorant of the facts or they knew the facts but chose to remain silent on the subject for reasons undis­closed by history. A duplication of this situation exists today with respect to the crisis which confronts the Christian faith. It is a vital factor today in the struggle for survival or the eventual surrender of the Christian faith to its enemies. The times in which we are living appears to be the "zero hour" for the Chris­tian faith.

As you have observed no institution in our modern society can long survive if its structure is not from its start erected upon a foundation of Truth. The Christian faith was first erected upon a very solid foundation of Truth by its Founder. To sur­vive it must remain so. The deterioration, the disintegration, and finally the destruction of the structure of the Christian faith today will be accelerated in direct ratio to the extent that misrep­resentation and distortion of Truth become the substitutes of Truth. Truth is an absolute quality. Truth can never be rela­tive. There can be no degrees to Truth. Truth either exists or it does not exist. To be half-true is as incredible as to be half-honest or to be half-loyal.

As you have undoubtedly also learned, my dear Dr. Gold­stein, in their attempt to do an "ounce" of good in one direction many well-intentioned persons do a "ton" of harm in another di­rection. We all learn that lesson sooner or later in life. Today finds you dedicating your unceasing efforts and your untiring energy to the task of bringing so-called or self-styled "Jews" into the Roman Catholic Church as converts. It must recall to you many times the day so many years ago when you embraced Catholicism yourself as a convert. More power to you, and the best of luck. May your efforts be rewarded with great success.

Without you becoming aware of the fact, the methods you employ contribute in no small degree to dilution of the devotion of countless Christians for their Christian faith. For each "ounce" of so-called good you accomplish by conversion of so-called or self-styled "Jews" to the Christian faith at the same time you do a "ton" of harm in another direction by diluting the devotion of countless Christians for their Christian faith. This bold conclusion on my part is asserted by me with the firm and fair conviction that the facts will support my contention. In ad­dition it is a well known fact that many "counterfeit" recent con­versions reveal that conversions have often proved to be but "infiltrations" by latent traitors with treasonable intentions.

[H: Please, just stay with us a while longer for it DOES get better. If you are "turned Off" by the association of "church" involvement please just read on--it is specific in in­tent but is "infiltration" into all clubs and organizations and all denominations and government, Congress and military. You will see the point as it unfolds herein--Iask that he not "lose you" by boredom of his upstart for it is so integrated into that which I have just given you that it is worth the in­put even at a level of boredom. If ye do not come into Truth--ye will spend countless years wishing you had been a "bit more patient through the boredom".]
The attitudes you express today and your continued activity in this work require possible revision in the light of the facts sub­mitted to you in this letter. Your present philosophy and the­ology on this subject seriously merit, without any delay, recon­sideration on your part. What you say or write may greatly in­fluence a "boom" or a "bust" for the Christian faith in the very near future far beyond your ability to accurately evaluate sitting in your high "white ivory tower". The Christians implicitly believe whatever you write. So do the so-called or self-styled "Jews"whom you seek to convert. This influence you wield can become a danger. I must call it to your attention.

Your reaction to the facts called to your attention in this letter can prove to be one of the most crucial verdicts ever reached bearing upon the security of the Christian faith in recent cen­turies. In keeping with this great responsibility I sincerely commend this sentiment to you hoping that you will earnestly study the contents of this letter from its first word to its very last word. All who know you well are in the fortunate position to know how close this subject is to your heart. By your loyalty to the high ideals you have observed during the many years you have labored so valiantly on behalf of the Christian faith you have earned the admiration you enjoy. The Christian faith you chose of your own free will in the prime of life is very proud of you in more ways than as a convert.

Regardless of what anyone anywhere and anytime in this whole wide-world may say to the contrary events of recent years everywheres establish beyond any question of a doubt that the Christian faith today stands with one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel figuratively speaking of course. Only those think otherwise who deliberately shut their eyes to realities or who do not choose to see even with their eyes wide open. I believe you to be too realistic to indulge yourself in the futile folly of fooling yourself.

It is clear that the Christian faith today stands at the cross­roads of its destiny. The Divine and sacred mission of the Christian faith is in jeopardy today to a degree never witnessed before in its long history of almost 2000 years. The Christian faith needs loyal friends now as never before. I somehow feel that you can always be counted upon as one of its loyal friends. You cannot over-simplify the present predicament of the Chris­tian faith. The problem it faces is too self-evident to mistake. It is in a critical situation.

When the day arrives that Christians can no longer profess their Christian faith as they profess it today in the free world the Christian faith will have seen the beginning of its "last days".What already applies to 50% of the world's total population can shortly apply equally to 100% of the world's total population. It is highly conceivable judging from present trends. The malig­nant character of this malady is just as progressive as cancer. It will surely prove as fatal also unless steps are taken now to re­verse its course. What is now being done towards arresting its progress or reversing its trend?

Mr dear Dr. Goldstein, can you recall the name of the philosopher who is quoted as saying that "Nothing in this world is permanent except change"? That philosophy must be applied to the Christian faith also. The $64. question remains whether the change will be for the better or for the worse. The problem is that simple. If the present trend continues for another 37 years the Christian faith as it is professed today by Christians will have disappeared from the face of the Earth. In what form or by what instrumentality the mission of Jesus Christ will thereupon and thereafter continue to make itself manifest here on Earth is as unpredictable as it is inevitible. [H: IT HAS NOW BEEN EXACTLY 37 YEARS FROM THE TIME OF THE LETTER. SAVE A FEW SHORT MONTHS. PON­DER IT MOST CAREFULLY!]

[ENDOF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

Dharma, allow us a break please for this is indeed a very long writing and it will serve better in bits rather than as a whole. Thank you. Please note the changes in your computer are a re­sult of our own adjustments. If you are in continuing slow boot-up, etc., let one of the others look at it. I prefer, however, that it be left alone until we can come into some further adjustments ourselves. It took a real blast to its electronics day before yes­terday but we don't want to continue on alternate power for it only causes the "enemy" to tinker to regain input on his own systems and we care not that it is all monitored. Salu. Hatonn to stand-by.

PJ 223

CHAPTER 9

2/16/91 #2 HATONN

CONTINUATION: FREEDMAN-GOLDSTEIN

[QUOTING:]

In the existing crisis it is neither logical nor realistic to drive Christians out of the Christian "fold" in relatively large numbers for the dubious advantage to be obtained by bringing a com­paratively small number of so-called or self-styled "Jews" into the Christian "fold".

It is useless to try to deny the fact that today finds the Chris­tian faith on the defensive throughout the world. This realiza­tion staggers the imagination of the few Christians who un­derstand the situation. This status of the Christian faith exists in spite of the magnificent contributions of the Christian faith to the progress of humanity of civilization for almost 2000 years. It is not my intention in this letter to expose the conspirators who are dedicating themselves to the destruction of the Christian faith nor to the nature and extent of the conspiracy itself. That ex­posure would fill many volumes.

The history of the world for the past several centuries and current events at home and abroad confirm the existence of such a conspiracy. The world-wide net-work of diabolical con­spirators implement this plot against the Christian faith while Christians appear to be sound asleep. The Christian clergy ap­pear to be more ignorant or more indifferent about this conspir­acy than other Christians. They seem to bury their heads in the sands like the legendary ostrich. This ignorance or indifference on the part of the Christian clergy has dealt a blow to the Chris­tian faith already from which it may never completely recover, if at all. It seems so sad.

Christians deserve to be blessed in this crisis with a spiritual Paul Revere to ride across the nation warning Christians that their enemies are moving in on them fast. My dear Dr. Gold­stein, will you volunteer to be that Paul Revere?

Of equal importance to pin-pointing the enemies who are making war upon the Christian faith from the outside is the ne­cessity to discover the forces at work inside the Christian faith which make it so vulnerable to its enemies on the outside. Ap­plying yourself to this specific phase of the problem can prove of tremendous value in rendering ineffective the forces respon­sible for this dangerous state of affairs.

The souls of millions of Christians who are totally unknown to you are quite uneasy about the status of the Christian faith to­day. The minds of countless thousands among the Christian clergy are troubled by the mysterious "pressure" from above which prevents them exercising their sound judgment in this situation. If the forces being manipulated against the Christian faith from the inside can be stopped the Christian faith will be able to stand upon its feet against its enemies as firmly as the Rock of Gibralter. Unless this can be done soon the Christian faith appears destined to crumble and to eventually collapse. An ounce of prevention is far preferable to a pound of cure you can be sure in this situation as in all others.

With all respect rightly due to the Christian clergy and in all humility I have an unpleasant duty to perform. I wish to go on record with you here that the Christian clergy are primarily if not solely responsible for the internal forces within the Christian faith inimical to its best interests. The conclusion on my part indicates the sum total of all the facts in my book which add up to just that. If you truly desire to be realistic and constructive you must "hew to the line and let the chips fall where they may". That is the only strategy that can save the Christian faith from a fate it does not deserve. You cannot pussy-foot with the truth any longer simply because you find that now "the truth hurts",--someone you know or like.

At this late hour very little time is left in which to mend our fences if I can call it that. We are not in a position to waste any of our limited time. "Beating it around the bush" now will get us exactly nowheres. The courageous alone will endure the pre­sent crisis when all the chips are down. Figuratively and possi­bly literally there will be live heroes and dead cowards when the dust of this secular combat settles and not dead heroes and live cowards as sometimes occurs under other circumstances. The Christian faith today remains the only "anchor to windward" against universal barbarism. The dedicated enemies of the Christian faith have sufficiently convinced the world by this time of the savage methods they will adopt in their program to erase the Christian faith from the face of the Earth.

Earlier in this letter I stated that in my humble opinion the apathy of the Christian clergy might be charged with sole re­sponsibility for the increasing dilution of the devotion of count­less Christians for the Christian faith. This is the natural conse­quence of the confusion created by the Christian clergy in the minds of Christians concerning certain fundamentals of the Christian faith. The guilt for this confusion rests exclusively upon Christian leadership not upon Christians generally. Con­fusion creates doubt. Doubt creates loss of confidence. Loss of confidence creates loss of interest. As confusion grows more, and more, and more, confidence grows less, and less, and less. The result is complete loss of all interest. You can hardly dis­agree with that my dear Dr. Goldstein, can you?

[H: Now it would appear from the pronouncement of "polls" and the rolls of the so-called Christian Churches that there is a great renewal of faith and seeking and coming back into the Christ-path in all "faiths" of whatever the "Christ" is called. This is not so in the "Western cultures"--THERE IS ONLY A RETURN INTO THE CHURCH HOUSES AND INTO NEW DOCTRINES WRITTEN FOR THIS NEW AND "MODERN RELIGION"--whatever that might be?!? Most of the church houses do not house Christianity. They DO hold bigoted, unforgiving and misled parishioners who anticipate a momentary "lift-off" to some nebulous being in the clouds the minute the Zionists get the temple going in Jerusalem and the temple is desecrated. Let me assure, good people--the temples of God have been so desecrated that there is naught left with which to desecrate them--and the Zionists have simply led you a merry chase through the primroses.]

The confusion in the minds of Christians concerning funda­mentals of the Christian faith is unwarranted and unjustified. It need not exist. It would not exist if the Christian clergy did not aid and abet the deceptions responsible for it. The Christian clergy may be shocked to learn that they have been aiding and abetting the dedicated enemies of the Christian faith. Many of the Christian clergy are actually their allies but may not know it. This phase of the current world-wide campaign of spiritual sab­otage is the most negative factor in the defense of the Christian faith.

Countless Christians standing on the sidelines in this struggle see their Christian faith "withering on the vine" and about ripe enough to "drop into the lap" of its dedicated enemies. They can do nothing about it. Their cup is made more bitter for them as they observe this unwarranted and this unjustified ignorance and indifference on the part of the Christian clergy. This apa­thetic attitude by the Christian clergy offers no opposition to the aggressors against the Christian faith. Retreat can only bring defeat. To obviate surrender to their dedicated enemies the Christian clergy must "about face" immediately if they expect to become the victors in the invisible and intangible ideological war now being so subversively waged against the Christian faith un­der their very noses. When will they wake up?

If I were asked to recite in this letter the many manners in which the Christian clergy are confusing the Christian concept of the fundamentals of the Christian faith it would require vol­umes rather than pages to tell the whole story. Space alone compels me here to confine myself to the irreducible minimum. I will limit myself here to the most important reasons for this confusion. Brevity will of necessity limit the references cited to support the matters presented in this letter. I will do my best under the circumstances to establish the authenticity of the incontestible historic facts I call to your attention here.

In my opinion the most important reason is directly related to your present activities. Your responsibility for this confusion is not lessened by your good intentions. As you have heard said so many times "Hell is paved with good intentions". The confusion your articles create is multiplied a thousand-fold by the wide publicity given to them as a result of the very high regard in which you personally are held by editors and readers across the nation, Christian and non-Christian alike. Your articles con­stantly are continually reprinted and quoted from coast to coast.

[H: And thinking back to the PROTOCOLS, I am sure you will instantly remind me that "The press is controlled!" Ah, indeed, we are making progress! Only the infiltrators from the Zionist element would be given such ear and forum.]

The utterance by the Christian clergy which confuses Chris­tians the most is the constantly repeated utterance that "Jesus was a Jew". That also appears to be your favorite theme. [H: LISTEN UP PLEASE, TO THIS NEXT FOR IT IS FAR BEYOND JUST IMPORTANT!] That misrepresentation and distortion of an incontestible historic fact is uttered by the Christian clergy upon the slightest pretext. They utter it con­stantly, also without provocation. They appear to be "trigger happy" to utter it. They never miss an opportunity to do so. Informed intelligent Christians cannot reconcile this truly unwarranted misrepresentation and distortion of an incon­testible historic fact by the Christian clergy with information known by them now TO THE CONTRARY WHICH COMES TO THEM FROM SOURCES BELIEVED BY THEM TO BE EQUALLY RELIABLE.(Emphasis mine.)

This poses a serious problem today for the Christian clergy. They can extricate themselves from their present predicament now only by resorting to "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth". That is the only formula by which the Christian clergy can recapture the lost confidence of Christians. As ef­fective spiritual leaders they cannot function without this lost confidence. They should make that their first order of business.

My dear Dr. Goldstein, you are a theologian of high rank and a historian of note. Of necessity you also should agree with other outstanding authorities on the subject of whether "Jesus was a Jew". These leading authorities agree today that there is no foundation in fact for the implications, inferences and the innuendoes resulting from the incorrect belief that "Jesus was a Jew".

Incontestible historic facts and an abundance of other proofs establish beyond the possibility of any doubt the incredi­bility of the assertion so often heard today that "Jesus was a Jew". [H: Now aren't you glad you stuck with us through that boring introduction? PUT THE STONES BACK ON THE GROUND LEST YOU SHOW YOUR TOTAL IGNORANCE OF FACTS!]

Without any fear of contradiction based upon fact the most competent and best qualified authorities all agree today that Je­sus Christ was not a so-called or self-styled "Jew". They now confirm that during His lifetime Jesus was known as a "JUDEAN" and not as a "Jew". Contemporary theologians of Jesus whose competence to pass upon this subject cannot be challenged by anyone today also referred to Jesus during His lifetime here on Earth as a "Judean" and not as a "Jew".

[H: Satanalways must wear a sign and our old fraud is be­ginning to show his a bit? Ah, you say, "Hatonn, but you said that once you experienced as a Jew!" Ah and so I did--­both--I said it and I did so. I come this time in company with the one you should know as Emmanuel. Jesus is even incorrect for that label was given this perceived Christed being by Paul the apostle who was both confused and scrambled throughout his days and remains so in many ways, unto this very day and yet efforts to bring clarity to that confusion. So be it, let us continue.]

During his lifetime here on Earth Jesus was not regarded by Pontius Pilate nor by the Judeans among whom He dwelt as "King of the Jews". The inscription on the Cross upon which Jesus was Crucified has been incorrectly translated into the English language only since the 18th century. [H: Now just who do you think would change such important facts to mislead the generations and species of human?) Pontius Pilate was ironic and sarcastic when he ordered inscribed upon the Cross the Latin words "Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudeorum". About to be Crucified, with the approval of Pontius Pilate, Jesus was being mocked by Pontius Pilate. Pontius Pilate was well aware at that time that Jesus (Emmanuel, son of Mary) had been denounced, defied and denied by the Judeans who alas finally brought about His Crucifixion as related by history. (Hatonn: And incorrectly at that! I sug­gest you read, And They Called His Name Immanuel--I Am Sananda. The correct spelling would have been represented as Jmmanuel had it been correctly translated.]

Except for His few followers at that time in Judea all other Judeans abhored Jesus and detested His teachings and the things for which He stood. That deplorable fact cannot be erased from history by time. Pontius Pilate was himself the "ruler" of the Judeans at the time he ordered inscribed upon the Cross the Latin words "Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudeorum: in English "Jesus the Nazarene Ruler of the Judeans". But Pontius Pilate never referred to himself as "ruler" of the Judeans. The ironic and sarcastic reference of Pontius Pilate to Jesus as "Ruler of the Judeans" can hardly be accepted as recognition by Pontius Pilate of Jesus as "Ruler of the Judeans". That is inconceivable by any interpretation.

At the time of the Crucifixion of Jesus Pontius Pilate was the administrator in Judea for the Roman Empire. At that time in history the area of the Roman Empire included a part of the Middle East. As far as he was concerned officially or person­ally the inhabitants of Judea were "Judeans" to Pontius Pilate and not so-called "Jews" as they have been styled since the 18th century. In the time of Pontius Pilate in history there was no religious, racial or national group in Judea known as "Jews" nor had there been any group so identified anywhere else in the world prior to that time.

Pontius Pilate expressed little interest as the administrator of the Roman Empire officially or personally in the wide variety of forms of religious worship then practiced in Judea. These forms of religious worship extended from phallic worship and other forms of idolatry to the emerging spiritual philosophy of an eternal, omnipotent and invisible Divine diety, the emerging Yahve (Jehovah) concept which predated Abraham of Bible fame by approximately 2000 years. As the administrator for the Roman Empire in Judea it was the official policy of Pontius Pi­late never to interfere in the spiritual affairs of the local popula­tion. Pontius Pilate's primary responsibility was the collection of taxes to be forwarded home to Rome, not the forms of reli­gious worship practiced by the Judeans from whom these taxes were collected.

As you well know, my dear Dr. Goldstein, the Latin word "rex" means "ruler, leader" in English. During the lifetime of Jesus in Judea the Latin word "rex" meant only that to Judeans familiar with the Latin language. The Latin word "rex" is the form of the noun from the Latin verb "rego, regere, rexi, rec­tus". The Latin verb "rego, regere, rexi, rectus" in English means as you also well know "to rule, to lead". Latin was of course the official language in all the provinces administered by a local administrator of the Roman Empire. This fact accounts for the inscription on the Cross in Latin.

With the invasion of the British Isles by the Anglo-Saxons the English language substituted the Anglo-Saxon "king" for the Latin equivalent "rex" used before the Anglo-Saxon invasion. The adoption of "king" for "rex" at this late date in British his­tory did not retroactively alter the meaning of the Latin "rex" to the Judeans in the time of Jesus. The Latin "rex" to them then meant only "ruler, leader" as it still means in Latin. Anglo-Saxon "king" was spelled differently when first used but at all times meant the same as "rex" in Latin, "leader" of a tribe.

During the lifetime of Jesus it was very apparent to Pontius Pilate that Jesus was the very last Person in Judea the Judeans would select as their "ruler" or their "leader". In spite of this situation in Judea Pontius Pilate did not hesitate to order the inscription of the Cross "Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudeorum". By the wildest stretch of the imagination it is not conceivable that this sarcasm and irony by Pontius Pilate at the time of the Crucifix­ion was solely mockery of Jesus by Pontius Pilate and only mockery. After this reference to "Jesus the Nazarene Ruler of the Judeans" the Judeans forthwith preceeded to Crucify Jesus upon that very Cross.

[H: Dharma, I am sorry, chela, but this is GOING TO BE WRITTEN AND WE ARE GOING TO WRITE IT, DEAR ONE. Beloved Joy may now go and rejoice with Peace within her heart for I was going to ask her and NB to pen these truths. It can wait no longer for it has been buried in the lies piled upon lies and now you have the proof of who and why it has been dumped upon humanity. Do not cower, child, for I stand at your front, back, and both sides and none shall strike you except for their foolish words--i.e. Mr. Cooper, who only shows his ignorance beyond all belief unto the world. Oberli, make sure that NB and Joy receive this as it comes forth. Can you now see how a whole civilization can be victims of a lie begun with intent for world control? So be it. We will herein cover a lot of territory in historical importance--better yet, it is laid forth by one who would be referred to as "Jew"--my, "What a tangled web ye weave when first ye practice to deceive!"]
In Latin in the lifetime of Jesus the name of the political sub­division in the Middle East known in modern history as Pales­tine was "Iudaea". It was then administered by Pontius Pilate as administrator for the Roman Empire of which it was then a part. The English for the Latin "Iudaea" is "Judea". In Latin "Iudaeus" is the adjective for the noun "Iudaea". In English "Judean" is the adjective for the noun "Judea". The ancient na­tive population of the subdivision in the Middle East known in modern history as Palestine was then called "Iudaeus" in Latin and "Judean" in English. Those words identified the indigenous population of Judea in the lifetime of Jesus. Who can deny that Jesus was a member of the indigenous population of Judea in His lifetime?

And of course you know, my dear Dr. Goldstein, in Latin the Genitive Plural of "Iudaeus" is "Iudaeorum". [H: I believe our "Friar Pope" will enjoy checking this out for all you non-Latin "Priests" of the Holy Church!] The English translation of the Genitive Plural of "Iudaeorum" is "of the Judeans". In­scribed upon the Cross on which Jesus was Crucified was "Iudaeorum". It is utterly impossible to give any other English translation to "Iudaeorum" than "of the Judeans". Qualified and competent theologians and historians regard as incredible any other translation into English of "Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum" than "Jesus the Nazarene Ruler of the Judeans". [H: Further, there is no mistaking the label "Iesus" by which he was called in many places as in "Esu, Issa, Iisa," etc., Christ, Christos, Christed, etc.--you can even now get away with Iesus Sananda and be in the correct "ball-park".] You must agree that this is literally correct.

At the time Pontius Pilate was ordering the "Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum" inscribed upon the Cross the spiritual leaders of Judea were protesting to Pontius Pilate "not to write that Jesus was the ruler of the Judeans" but to inscribe instead that Jesus "had said that he was the ruler of the Judeans". The spiritual leaders of Judea made very strong protests to Pontius Pilate against his reference to Jesus as "Rex Iudaeorum" insisting that Pontius Pilate was not familiar with or misunderstood the status of Jesus in Judea. These protests are a matter of historical record, as you know.

The spiritual leaders in Judea protested in vain with Pontius Pilate. They insisted that Jesus "had said that He was the ruler of the Judeans" but that Pontius Pilate was "not to write that Je­sus was the ruler of the Judeans". For after all Pontius Pilate was a foreigner in Judea who could not understand the local situations as well as the spiritual leaders. The intricate pattern of the domestic political, social and economic cross-currents in Judea interested Pontius Pilate very little as Rome's administra­tor.

The Gospel by John was written originally in the Greek lan­guage according to the best authorities. In the Greek original there is no equivalent for the English that Jesus "had said that He was the ruler of the Judeans". The English translation of the Greek original of the Gospel by John, XIX, 19, reads "Do not inscribe ' the monarch (basileus) of the Judeans (Ioudaios), but that He Himself said I am monarch (basileus) of the Judeans (Ioudaios)". "Ioudaia" is the Greek for the Latin "Iudaea" and the English "Judea". "Basileus" is the Greek "monarch" in En­glish. "Rex" is the nearest word in Latin for "basileus" in Greek. The English "ruler", or its alternative "leader", define the sense of Latin "rex" and Greek "basileus" as they were used in the Greek and Latin Gospel by John.

Pontius Pilate "washed his hands" of the protests by the spir­itual leaders in Judea who demanded of him that the inscription on the Cross authored by Pontius Pilate be corrected in the manner they insisted upon. Pontius Pilate very impatiently replied to their demands "What I have written, I have written". The inscription on the Cross remained what it had been, "Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum", or "Jesus the Nazarene Ruler of the Judeans" in English.

The Latin quotations and words mentioned in this letter are verbatim quotations and the exact words which appear in the 4th century translation of the New Testament into Latin by St. Jerome. This translation is referred to as the Vulgate Edition of the New Testament. It was the first official translation of the New Testament into Latin made by the Christian Church. Since that time it has remained the official New Testament version used by the Catholic Church. The translation of the Gospel by John into Latin by St. Jerome was made from the Greek lan­guage in which the Gospel of John was originally written ac­cording to the best authorities on this subject.

The English translation of the Gospel by John, XIX, 19. from the original text in the Greek language reads as follows, "Pilate wrote a sign and fastened it to the Cross and the writing was 'Jesus the Nazarene the monarch of the Judeans' " . In the origi­nal Greek manuscript there is mention also made of the demands upon Pontius Pilate by the spiritual leaders in Judea that Pontius Pilate alter the reference on the Cross to Jesus as "Ruler of the Judeans". The Greek text of the original manuscript of the Gospel by John establishes beyond any question or doubt that the spiritual leaders in Judea at that time had protested to Pon­tius Pilate that Jesus was "not the ruler of the Judeans" but only "had said that He was the ruler of the Judeans".

There is no factual foundation in history or theology today for the implications, inferences and innuendoes that the Greek "Ioudaios", the Latin "Iudaeus", or the English "Judean" ever possessed a valid religious connotation. In their three respective languages these three words have only indicated a strictly topo­graphical or geographic connotation. In their correct sense these three words in their respective languages were used to identify the members of the indigenous native population of the geographic area known as Judea in the lifetime of Jesus. Dur­ing the lifetime of Jesus there was not a form of religious wor­ship practiced in Judea or elsewhere in the known world which bore a name even remotely resembling the name of the political subdivision of the Roman Empire, i.e. "Judaism" from "Judea". No cult or sect existed by such a name.

[END OF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

Please allow to break the writing at this place. I ask that as the portions are given forth, please make sure that our beloved RK be given them in the segments produced.

We realize this is very heavy to accept and absorb but none-the­-less the time of Truth is upon the lands and so shall it be written for the hourglass lies empty if Man sees not the errors of his journey and acceptance of the lies.

So be it and may the blessings of peace which passes your understanding see you through this time of confrontation. Saalomé

Hatonn to stand-by.

PJ 223

CHAPTER 10

2/17/91 #2 HATONN

CONTINUATION OF THE FREEDMAN LETTER

I desire to take no time in current comments until we have fin­ished this portion and presented the work in point. There IS NOTHING more important for, if you do not set your thinking to straight, there is no point in anything else about your physical circumstance.

Yes, it will be through those who are considered "JEWS" who will make sure truth prevails from out of the lies of the Zionists for it is they who have suffered most and have been sorely treated by those they were taught were their elders and truth-bearers. It will be these beloved ones from the Judean races who MUST set it to right that Man can see the truth and facts of the deceit. As ones of God's people check into the information as given, the confirmation will flow as from the lifespring.

Let us continue:

TERM "JEW" CREATED
IN 1775--A.D.

[OUOTING:]

It is an incontestable fact that the word "Jew" did not come into existence until the year 1775. Prior to 1775 the word "Jew" did not exist in any language. The word "Jew" was introduced into the English for the first time in the 18th century when Sheridan used it in his play "The Rivals", II,i, "She shall have a skin like a mummy, and the beard of a Jew". Prior to this use of the word "Jew" in the English language by Sheridan in 1775 the word "Jew" had not become a word in the English language. Shakespeare never saw the word "Jew" as you will see. Shakespeare never used the word "Jew" in any of his works, the common general belief to the contrary notwithstanding. In his "Merchant of Venice", V.III.i.61, Shakespeare wrote as follows: "What is the reason? I am a Iewe; hath not a Iewe eyes?".

In the Latin St. Jerome 4th century Vulgate Edition of the New Testament Jesus is referred to by the Genitive Plural of "Iudaeus" in the Gospel by John reference to the inscription on the Cross,--"Iudaeorum". It was in the 4th century that St. Jerome translated into Latin the manuscripts of the New Testa­ment from the original languages in which they were written. This translation by St. Jerome is referred to still today as the Vulgate Edition by the Roman Catholic Church authorities, who use it today.

Jesus is referred to as a so-called "Jew" for the first time in the New Testament in the 18th century. Jesus is first referred to as a so-called "Jew" in the revised 18th century editions in the English language of the 14th century first translations of the New Testament into English. The history of the origin of the word "Jew" in the English language leaves no doubt that the 18th century "Jew" is the 18th century contracted and corrupted En­glish word for the 4th century Latin "Iudaeus" found in St. Jerome's Vulgate Edition. Of that there is no longer doubt.

The available original manuscripts from the 4th century to the 18th century accurately trace the origin and give the complete history of the word "Jew" in the English language. In these manuscripts are to be found all the many earlier English equiv­alents extending through the 14 centuries from the 4th to the 18th century. From the Latin "Iudaeus" to the English "Jew" these English forms included successively "Gyu", "Giu", "Iu", "Iuu", "Iuw", "Ieuu", "Ieuy", "Iwe", "Iow", "Iewe", "Ieue", Iue", Ive", "Iew", and then finally in the 18th century, "Jew". The many earlier English equivalents for "Jews" through the 14 centuries are "Giwis", "Giws", "Gyues", "Gywes", "Giwes", "Geus", "Iuys", "Iows", "Iouis", "Iews", and then also finally in the 18th century, "Jews".

With the rapidly expanding use in England in the 18th cen­tury for the first time in history of the greatly improved printing presses unlimited quantities of the New Testament were printed. These revised 18th century editions of the earlier 14th century first translations into the English language were then widely distributed throughout England and the English speaking world among families who had never possessed a copy of the New Testament in any language. In these 18th century editions with revisions the word "Jew" appeared for the first time in any En­glish translations. The word "Jew" as it was used in the 18th century editions has since continued in use in all editions of the New Testament in the English language. The use of the word "Jew" thus was stabilized.

As you know, my dear Dr. Goldstein, the best known 18th century editions of the New Testament in English are the Rheims (Douai) Edition and the King James Authorized Edition. The Rheims (Douai) translation of the New Testament into English was first printed in 1582 but the word "Jew" did not appear in it. The King James Authorized translation of the New Testament into English was begun in 1604 and first published in 1611. The word "Jew" did NOT appear in it either. The word "Jew" ap­peared in both these well known editions in their 18th century revised versions for the first time.

Countless copies of the revised 18th century editions of the Rheims (Douai) and the King James translations of the New Testament into English were distributed to the clergy and the laity throughout the English speaking world. They did not know the history of the origin of the English word "Jew" as the only and as the accepted form of the Latin "Iudaeus" and the Greek "Ioudaios". How could they be expected to have known other­wise? The answer is they could not and they did not. It was a new English word to them.

When you studied Latin in your school days you were taught that the letter "I" in Latin when used as the first letter in a word is pronounced like the letter "Y" in English when it is the first letter in words like "yes", "youth" and "yacht". The "I" in "Iudaeus" is pronounced like the "Y" in "yes", "youth", and "yacht" in English. In all the 4th century to 18th century forms for the 18th century "Jew" the letter "I" was pronounced like the English "Y" in "yes", "young", and "yacht". The same is true of the "Gi" or the "Gy" where it was used in place of the letter "I".

The present pronounciation of the word "Jew" in modern En­glish is a development of recent times. In the English language today the "J" in "Jew" is pronounced like the "J" in the English "justice", "jolly", and "jump". This is the case only since the 18th century. Prior to the 18th century the "J" in "Jew" was pronounced exactly like the "Y" in the English "yes", "youth", and "yacht". Until the 18th century and perhaps even later the English "you" or "hew", and the word "Jews" like "youse" or "hews". The present pronounciation of "Jew" in English is a new pronounciation acquired after the 18th century.

The German language still retains the Latin original pronoun­ciation. The German "Jude" is the German equivalent of the English "Jew". The "J" in the German "Jude" is pronounced exactly like the English "Y" in "yes", "youth", and "yacht". The German "J" is the equivalent of the Latin "I" and both are pronounced exactly like the English "Y" in "yes", "youth" and "yacht". The German "Jude" is virtually the first syllable in the Latin "Iudaeus" and is pronounced exactly like it. The German "Jude" is the German contraction and corruption of the Latin "Iudaeus" just as the English "Jew" is the contraction and cor­ruption of the Latin "Iudaeus". The German "J" is always pro­nounced like the English "Y" in "yes", "youth", and "yacht" when it is the first letter of a word. The pronounciation of the "J" in German "Jude" is not an exception to the pronounciation of the "J" in German.

The English language as you already know, my dear Dr. Goldstein, is largely made up of words adopted from foreign languages. After their adoption by the English language foreign words were then adapted by contracting their spelling and cor­rupting their foreign pronounciation to make them more easily pronounced in English from their English spelling. This process of first adopting foreign words and then adapting them by con­tracting their spelling and corrupting their pronounciation re­sulted in such new words in the English language as "cab" from their original foreign spelling. Hundreds of others must come to your mind.

By this adopting-adapting process the Latin "Iudaeus" and the Greek "Ioudaios" finally emerged in the 18th century as "Jew" in the English language. The English speaking peoples strug­gled through 14 centuries seeking to create for the English lan­guage and English equivalent for the Latin "Iudaeus" and the Greek "Ioudaios" which could be easily pronounced in English from its English spelling. The English "Jew" was the resulting 18th century contracted and corrupted form of the Latin "Iudaeus" and the Greek "Ioudaios". The English "Jew" is eas­ily pronounced in English from its English spelling. The Latin "Iudaeus" and the Greek "Ioudaios" cannot be as easily pro­nounced in English from the Latin and Greek spelling. They were forced to coin a word.

The earliest version of the New Testament in English from the Latin Vulgate Edition is the Wiclif, or Wickliffe Edition published in 1380. In the Wiclif Edition Jesus is there men­tioned as One of the "iewes". That was the 14th century En­glish version of the Latin "Iudaeus" and was pronounced "hew­weeze", in the plural, and "iewe" pronounced "hew-wee" in the singular. In the 1380 Wiclif Edition in English and Gospel by John, XIX.19, reads "ihesus of nazareth kyng of the iewes". Prior to the 14th century the English language adopted the An­glo-Saxon "kyng" together with many other Anglo-Saxon words in place of the Latin "rex" and the Greek "basileus". The An­glo-Saxon also meant "tribal leader".

In the Tyndale Edition of the New Testament in English pub­lished in 1525 Jesus was likewise described as One of the "Iewes". In the Coverdale Edition published in 1535 Jesus was also described as One of the "Iewes". In the Coverdale Edition of the Gospel by John, XIX.19, reads "Jesus of Nazareth, kynge of the Iewes". In the Cranmer Edition published in 1539 Jesus was again described as One of the "Iewes". In the Geneva Edi­tion published in 1540-1557 Jesus was also described as One of the "Iewes". In the Rheims Edition published in 1582 Jesus was described as One of the "Ievves". In the King James Edition published in 1404-1611 also known as the Authorized Version Jesus was described again as one of the "Iewes". The forms of the Latin "Iudaeus" were used which were current at the time these translations were made.

The translation into English of the Gospel by John, XIX.19, from the Greek in which it was originally written reads "Do not inscribe ' the monarch of the Judeans' but that He Himself said 'I am monarch". In the original Greek manuscript the Greek "basileus" appears for "monarch" in the English and the Greek "Ioudaios" appears for "Judeans" in the English. "Ioudaios" in Greek is "Judea" in English. "Ioudaios" in Greek is "Judeans" in English. There is no reason for any confusion.

My dear Dr. Goldstein, if the generally accepted under­standing today of the English "Jew" and "Judean" conveyed the identical implications, inferences and innuendoes as both rightly should, it would make no difference which of these two words was used when referring to Jesus in the New Testament or else­where. But the implications, inferences, and innuendoes to­day conveyed by these two words are as different as black is from white. The word "Jew" today is never regarded as a synonym for "Judean" nor is "Judean" regarded as a synonym for "Jew".

As I have explained, when the word "Jew" was first intro­duced into the English language in the 18th century its one and only implication, inference and innuendo was "Judean". How­ever during the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries a well-organized and well-financed international "pressure group" created a so-called "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" among the En­glish-speaking peoples of the world. This so-called "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" bears no relation whatsoever to the 18th century original connotation of the word "Jew". It is a misrepresentation.

The "secondary meaning" of the word "Jew" today bears as little relation to its original and correct meaning as the "secondary meaning" today for the word "camel" bears to the original and correct meaning for the word "camel", or the "secondary meaning" today for the word "ivory" bears to the original and correct meaning of the word "ivory". The "secondary meaning" today for the word "camel" is a cigarette by that name but its original and correct meaning is a desert animal by that ancient name. The "secondary meaning" of the word "ivory" today is a piece of soap but its original and correct meaning is the tusk of a male elephant.

The "secondary meanings" of words often become the gener­ally accepted meanings of words formerly having entirely dif­ferent meanings. This is accomplished by the expenditure of great amounts of money for well-planned publicity. Today if you ask for a "camel" someone will hand you cigarette by that name. Today if you ask for a piece of "ivory" someone will hand you a piece of soap by that name. You will never receive either a desert animal or a piece of the tusk of a male elephant. That must illustrate the extent to which these "secondary mean­ings" are able to practically eclipse the original and correct meanings of words in the minds of the general public. The "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" today has practically totally eclipsed the original and correct meaning of the word "Jew" when it was introduced as a word in the English lan­guage. This phenomena is not uncommon.

The United States Supreme Court has recognized the "secondary meaning" of words. The highest court in the land has established as basic law that "secondary meanings" can ac­quire priority rights to the use of any dictionary word. Well-planned and well-financed world-wide publicity through every available media by well-organized groups of so-called or self-styled "Jews" for three centuries has created a "secondary meaning" for the word "Jew" which has completely "blacked out" the original and correct meaning of the word "Jew". There can be no doubt about that.

There is not one person in the whole English-speaking world today who regards a "Jew" as a "Judean" in the literal sense of the word. That was the correct and only meaning in the 18th century. The generally accepted "secondary meaning" of the word "Jew" today with practically no exceptions is made up of four almost universally-believed theories. These four theories are that a so-called or self-styled "Jew" is (1) a person who to­day professes the form of religious worship known as "Judaism", (2) a person who claims to belong to a racial group associated with the ancient Semites, (3) a person directly the de­scendant of an ancient nation which thrived in Palestine in Bible history, (4) a person blessed by Divine intentional design with certain superior cultural characteristics denied to other racial, religious or national groups, all rolled into one.

The present generally accepted "secondary meaning" of the word "Jew" is fundamentally responsible for the confusion in the minds of Christians regarding elementary tenets of the Chris­tian faith. It is likewise responsible today to a very great extent for the dilution of the devotion of countless Christians for their Christian faith. The implications, inferences and innuendoes of the word "Jew" today, to the preponderant majority of intelli­gent and informed Christians, is contradictory and in complete conflict with incontestible historic fact. Christians who cannot be fooled any longer are suspect of the Christian clergy who continue to repeat, and repeat, And repeat ad nauseam their pet theme song "Jesus was a Jew". It actually now approaches psy­chosis.

Countless Christians know today that they were "brain washed" by the Christian clergy on the subject "Jesus was a Jew". The resentment they feel is not yet apparent to the Chris­tian clergy. Christians now are demanding from the Christian clergy "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth". It is now time for the Christian clergy to tell Christians what they should have told them long ago. Of all religious groups in the world Christians appear to be the least informed of any on this subject. Have their spiritual leaders been reckless with the truth?

Countless intelligent and informed Christians no longer ac­cept unchallenged assertions by the Christian clergy that Jesus in His lifetime was a Member of a group in Judea which practised a religious form of worship then which is today called "Judaism", or that Jesus in His lifetime here on Earth was a Member of the racial group which today includes the preponder­ant majority of all so-called or self-styled "Jews" in the world, or that the so-called or self-styled "Jews" throughout the world today are the lineal descendants of the nation in Judea of which Jesus was a national in His lifetime here on Earth, or that the cultural characteristics of so-called or self-styled "Jews" throughout the world today correspond with the cultural characteristics of Jesus during His lifetime here on Earth and His teachings while He was here on Earth for a brief stay. Christians will no longer believe that the race, religion, nation­ality and culture of Jesus and the race, religion, nationality and culture of so-called or self-styled "Jews" today or their ancestors have a common origin or character.

The resentment by Christian is more ominous than the Chris­tian clergy suspect. Under existing conditions the Christian clergy will find that ignorance is not bliss, nor wisdom folly. Christians everywhere today are seeking to learn the authentic relationship between the so-called or self-styled "Jews" through­out the world today and the "Judeans" who populated "Judea" before, during and after the time of Jesus. Christians now insist that they be told correctly by the Christian clergy about the racial, religious, national and cultural background of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" throughout the world today and the basis for associating these backgrounds with the racial, reli­gious, national and cultural background of Jesus in His lifetime in Judea. The intelligent and informed Christians are alerted to the exploded myth that the so-called or self-styled "Jews" throughout the world today are the direct descendants of the "Judeans" amongst whom Jesus lived during His lifetime here on Earth.

Christians today are also becoming more and more alerted day by day why the so-called or self-styled "Jews" throughout the world for three centuries have spent uncounted sums of money to manufacture the fiction that the "Judeans" in the time of Jesus were "Jews" rather than "Judeans", and that "Jesus was a Jew". Christians are becoming more and more aware day by day of all the economic and political advantages accruing to the so-called or self-styled "Jews" as a direct result of their success in making Christians believe that "Jesus was a Jew" in the "secondary meaning" they have created for the 18th century word "Jew". The so-called or self-styled "Jews" throughout the world today represent themselves to Christians as "Jews" only in the "secondary meaning" of the word "Jew". They seek to thereby prove their kinship with Jesus. They emphasize this fiction to the Christians constantly. That fable is fast fading and losing its former grip upon the imaginations of Christians.

To allege that "Jesus was a Jew" in the sense that during His lifetime Jesus professed and practised the form of religious wor­ship known and practised under the modern name of "Judaism" is false and fiction of the most blasphemous nature.

If to be a so-called or self-styled "Jew" then or now the prac­tise of "Judaism" was a requirement then Jesus certainly was not a so-called "Jew". Jesus abhored and denounced the form of religious worship practised in Judea in His lifetime and which is known and practised today under its new name "Judaism". That religious belief was then known as "Pharisaism". The Christian clergy learned that in their theological seminary days but they have never made any attempt to make that clear to Christians.

[END OF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

Dharma, here is a good point at which to break the writing. We will continue at the section regarding the Jewish Theological Seminary of America--often referred to as "The Vatican of Ju­daism". Thank you. Salu.

PJ 223

CHAPTER 11

2/17/91 #3 HATONN

THE VATICAN OF JUDAISM
JUDAISM/PHARISAISM

[CONTINUATION OF QUOTING:]

The eminent Rabbi Louis Finkelstein, the head of the The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, often referred to as the "The Vatican of Judaism", in his Forward to his First Edi­tion of this world-famous classic "The Pharisees, The Sociologi­cal Background of Their Faith", on page XXI states:

". . Judaism. . .Pharisaism became Talmudism, Talmudism became Midieval Rabbinism, and Midieval Rabbinism became Modern Rabbinism. But throughout these changes in name. . .the spirit of the ancient Pharisees survives, unaltered. . .From Palestine to Babylonia; from Babylonia to North Africa, Italy, Spain, France and Germany; from these to Poland, Russia, and eastern Europe generally, ancient Pharisaism has wandered. . .demonstrates the enduring importance which attaches to Phari­saism as a religious movement. . ."

The celebrated Rabbi Louis Finkelstein in his great classic quoted from above traces the origin of the form of religious worship practiced today under the present name "Judaism", to its origin as "Pharisaism" in Judea in the time of Jesus. Rabbi Louis Finkelstein confirms what the eminent Rabbi Adolph Moses stated in his great classic "Yahvism, and Other Dis­courses", in collaboration with the celebrated Rabbi H.G.Enelow, published in 1903 by the Louisville Section of the Council of Jewish Women, in which Rabbi Adolph Moses, on page 1 states:

"Among the inumerable misfortunes which have befallen. . .the most fatal in its consequences is the name Judaism. . .Worse still, the Jews themselves, who have gradually come to call their religion Judaism. . .Yet, neither in biblical nor post-biblical, neither in talmudic, nor in much later times, is the term Judaism ever heard. . .The Bible speaks of the religion. . .as 'Torath Yahve', the instruction, or the moral law revealed by Yahve. . .in other places. . .as ' Yirath Yahve', the fear and reverence of Yahve. These and other appelations CONTIN­UED FOR MANY AGES TO STAND FOR THE RELIGION. . .To distinguish it from Christianity and Islam, the Jewish philosophers sometimes designate it as the faith or belief of the Jews. . IT WAS FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS. WRITING FOR THE INSTRUCTION OF GREEKS AND ROMANS. WHO COINED THE TERM JUDAISM, in order to pit it against Hel­lenism. . .By Hellenism was understood the civilization, com­prising language, poetry, religion, art, science, manners, cus­toms, institutions, which. . .had spread from Greece, its original home, over vast regions of Europe, Asia and Africa. . .The Christians eagerly seized upon the name. . .The Jews them­selves, who intensly detested the traitor Josephus, refrained from reading his works. . THE TERM JUDAISM COINED BY JOSEPHUS REMAINED ABSOLUTELY UN­KNOWN TO THEM. . .IT WAS ONLY IN COMPARA­TIVELY RECENT TIMES. AFTER THE JEWS BECAME FAMILIAR WITH MODERN CHRISTIAN LITERATURE.. THAT THEY BEGAN TO_ NAME THEIR RELIGION JU­DAISM." (emphasis supplied)

This statement by the world's two leading authorities on this subject clearly establishes beyond any question or any doubt that so-called "Judaism" was not the name of any form of religious worship practiced in Judea in the time of Jesus. The Flavius Josephus referred to in the above quotation lived in the 1st cen­tury. It was he who coined the word "Judaism" in the 1st cen­tury explicitly for the purpose recited clearly above. Religious worship known and practiced today under the name "Judaism" by so-called or self-styled "Jews" throughout the world was known and practiced in Judea in the time of Jesus under the name "Pharisaism" according to Rabbi Louis Finkelstein, head of The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, and all the other most competent and qualified recognized authorities on the subject.

The form of religious worship known as "Pharisaism" in Judea in the time of Jesus was a religious practice based exclu­sively upon the Talmud. The Talmud in the time of Jesus was the Magna Charta, the Declaration of Independence, the Con­stitution, and the Bill of Rights, all rolled into one, of those who practiced "Pharisaism". The Talmud today occupies the same relative position with respect to those who profess "Judaism". The Talmud today virtually exercises totalitarian dictatorship over the lives of so-called or self-styled "Jews" whether they are aware of that fact or not. Their spiritual leaders make no at­tempt to conceal the control they exercise over the lives of so-called or self-styled "Jews". They extend their authority far be­yond the legitimate limits of spiritual matters. Their authority has no equal outside religion.

The role the Talmud plays in "Judaism" as it is practiced to­day is officially stated by the eminent Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer, the Director of Interreligious Activities of the American Jewish Committee and the President of the Jewish Chaplains Associa­tion of the Armed Forces of the United States. In his present capacity as official spokesman for The American Jewish Committee, the self-styled "Vatican of Judaism", Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer wrote a most revealing and comprehensive article with the title "What is a Jew" which was published as a feature article in Look Magazine in the June 17, 1952 issue. In that ar­ticle Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer evaluated the significance of the Talmud to "Judaism" today. In that illuminating treatise on that important subject by the most qualified authority, at the time, Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer stated:

"The Talmud consists of 63 books of legal, ethical and his­torical writings of the ancient rabbis. It is a compendium of law and lore. IT IS THE LEGAL CODE WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF JEWISH RELIGIOUS LAW AND IT IS THE TEXTBOOK USED IN THE TRAINING OF RABBIS." [H: Please obtain of copy of RAPE OF JUSTICE by Eustace Muffins--which can, I believe, be obtained through America West--to see just how far the judicial system is entangled and practices "law" by the rules of the "Talmud".]

In view of this official evaluation of the importance of the Talmud in the practice of "Judaism" today by the highest body of so-called or self-styled "Jews" in the world it is very neces­sary at this time, my dear Dr. Goldstein, to inquire a little fur­ther into the subject of the Talmud. In his lifetime the eminent Michael Rodkinson, the assumed name of a so-called or self-styled "Jew" who was one of the worlds great authorities on the Talmud, wrote "History of the Talmud" . This great classic on the subject was written by Michael Rodkinson in collaboration with the celebrated Rabbi Isaac M. Wise. In his "History of the Talmud" Michael Rodkinson, on page 70, states:

"Is the literature that Jesus was familiar with in his early years yet in existence in the world? Is it possible for us to get at it? Can we ourselves review the ideas, the statements, the modes of reasoning and thinking, ON MORAL AND RELI­GIOUS SUBJECTS, which were current in his time, and MUST HAVE BEEN REVOLVED BY HIM DURING THOSE THIRTY SILENT YEARS WHEN HE WAS PONDERING HIS FUTURE MISSION? To such inquiries the learned class of Jewish rabbis ANSWER BY HOLDING UP THE TALMUD. Here, say they, is THE SOURCE FROM WHENCE JESUS OF NAZARETH DREW THE TEACHINGS WHICH ENABLE HIM TO REVOLUTIONIZE THE WORLD; and the question becomes, therefor, an interesting one TO EVERY CHRISTIAN. What is the Talmud? THE TALMUD. THEN IS THE WRIT­TEN FORM OF THAT WHICH. IN THE TIME OF JESUS WAS CALLED THE TRADITIONS OF THE ELDERS AND TO WHICH HE MAKES FREQUENT ALLUSIONS. What sort of book is it'?" .

Stimulated by that invitation every Christian worth of the name should immediately take the trouble to seek the answer to that "interesting" question "to every Christian". My dear Dr. Goldstein, your articles do not indicate whether you have taken the time and the trouble to personally investigate "what sort of book" the Talmud is either before or after your conversion to Catholicism. Have you ever done so? If you have done so what is the conclusion you have reached regarding "what sort of book" the Talmud is? What is your personal unbiased and unprejudiced opinion of the Talmud? Is it consistent with your present views as a devout Roman Catholic and a tried and true Christian? Can you spare a few moments to drop me a few lines on your present views?

In case you have never had the opportunity to investigate the contents of the "63 books" of the Talmud so well summarized by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer in his illuminating article "What is a Jew", previously quoted, may I here impose upon your precious time and quote a few passages for you until you find the time to conveniently investigate the Talmud's contents personally. If I can be of any assistance to you in doing so please do not hesitate to let me know in what manner you can use my help.

From the Birth of Jesus until this day there have never been recorded more vicious and vile libelous blasphemies of Jesus, of Christians and the Christian faith by anyone, anywhere, or any­time than you will find between the covers of the infamous "63 books" which are "the legal code which forms the basis of Jew­ish religious law" as well as the "textbook used in the training of rabbis". The explicit and implicit irreligious character and im­plications of the contents of the Talmud will open your eyes as they have never been opened before. The Talmud reviles Jesus, Christians and the Christian faith as the priceless spiritual and cultural heritage of Christians has never been reviled before or since the Talmud was completed in the 5th century. You will have to excuse the foul, obscene, indecent, lewd and vile lan­guage you will see here as verbatim quotations from the official unabridged translation of the Talmud into English. BE PREPARED FOR A SURPRISE.

In the year 1935 the international hierarchy of so-called or self-styled "Jews" for the first time in history published an offi­cial unabridged translation of the complete Talmud in the En­glish language with complete footnotes. What possessed them to make this translation in English is one of the unsolved mysteries. It was probably done because so many so-called or self-styled "Jews" of the younger generation were unable to read the Tal­mud in the many ancient languages in which the original "63 books" of the Talmud were first composed by their authors in many lands between 200 B.C. and 500 A.D.

The international hierarchy of so-called or self-styled "Jews" selected the most learned scholars to make this official transla­tion of the Talmud into English. These famous scholars also prepared official footnotes explaining passages of the Talmud where they were required. This official unabridged translation of the Talmud into English with the official footnotes was printed in London in 1935 by the Soncino Press. It has been always referred to as the Soncino Edition of the Talmud. A very limited number of the Soncino Edition were printed. They were not made available to any purchaser. The Soncino Edition of the Talmud is to be found in the Library of Congress and the New York Public Library. A set of the Soncino Edition of the Talmud has been available to me for many years. They have become rare "collector's items" by now.

[H: Do you also see that it is up to you-the-people as to whether or not these Journals end up removed from the hands of the world population and fall among the "rare" publications accidentally missed in the mass destruction of the information? It is up to you, citizens of the world, as the world nears destruction at the hands of those who have stolen your very "Truth of God Creator". How can you know Truth if all documentation thereof is destroyed by the would be KINGS AND CONTROLLERS OF THE PLANET?]

The Soncino Edition of the Talmud with its footnotes is like a double-edged sword. It teaches the Talmud to countless millions of the younger generation of so-called or self-styled "Jews" who are not able to read the Talmud in the many ancient languages in which the Talmud was written by its authors between 200 B.C. and 500 A.D. It also teaches Christians what the Talmud has to say about Jesus, about Christians and about the Christian faith. Someday this is bound to back-fire. Christians will some day challenge the assertion that the Talmud is the "sort of book" from which Jesus allegedly "drew the teachings which enabled him to revolutionize the world" on "moral and religious sub­jects". The rumbling is already heard in places.

[H: As you read the quotations, I want (especially you ones who objected to Germain and Hatonn using Bull-shit to see if a scribe would edit it out) to have you REALLY PAY AT­TENTION AS WE PUT THIS INFORMATION INTO YOUR HANDS AND SEE IF YOU STILL BELIEVE THE CHRIST FRAGMENT OF GOD/CREATOR/CREATION WOULD LIKELY UTILIZE THESE TERMS.]

The official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud pub­lished in 1935 was "Translated into English with Notes, Glos­sary and Indices" by such eminent Talmudic scholars as Rabbi Dr. I. Epstein, Rabbi Dr. Samuel Daiches, Rabbi Dr. Israel W. Slotki, M. A., Litt, D., The Reverend Dr. A. Cohen, M.A., Ph.D., M.Sc., Jacob Schater, A. Mishcon, A. Cohen, M.A., Ph.D., Maurice Simon M.A., and the Very Reverend The Chief Rabbi Dr., J. H. Hertz wrote the "Foreword" for the Soncino Edition of the Talmud. The Very Reverend Rabbi Hertz was at the time the Chief Rabbi of England.

The following are but a few of the many similar quotations with footnotes from the Soncino Edition of the Talmud, the "sort of book" form which Jesus allegedly "drew the teachings which enable him to revolutionize the world" on "moral and religious" subjects:

(Book) Sanhedrin, 54b-55a: "What is meant by this?--Rab said: Pederasty with a child below nine years of age is not deemed as pederasty with a child above that. Samuel said: Ped­erasty with a child below three years is not treated as with a child above that (2). What is the basis of their dispute?--Rab maintains that only he who is able to engage in sexual inter­course, may, as the passive subject of pederasty throw guilt (upon the actual offender); whilst he who is unable to engage in sexual intercourse cannot be a passive subject of pederasty (in that respect) (3). But Samuel maintains: Scriptures writes, (And thou shalt not lie with mankind) as with the lyings of a woman (4). It has been taught in accordance with Rab: Ped­ erasty at the age of nine years and a day; (55a) (he) who com­mits bestiality, whether naturally or unnaturally: or a woman who causes herself to be bestiality abused, whether naturally or unnaturally, is liable to punishment (5)."

Footnotes:

(1) The reference is to the passive subject of sodomy. As stated in supra 54a, guilt is incurred by the active participant even if the former be a minor, i.e. less than thirteen years old. Now, however, it is stated that within this age a distinction is drawn. (emphasis is in original, Ed.)
(2)Rab makes nine years the minimum; but if one committed sodomy with a child of lesser age, no guilt is incurred. Samuel makes three the minimum.
(3)At nine years a male attains sexual matureness.
(4)Lev. XVII1,22.
(5)Rashi reads ("xxx") (Hebrew characters, Ed.) instead of ("zzz") (Hebrew characters, Ed.) in our printed texts. A male, aged nine years and a day, who commits etc. There are thus three distinct clauses in this Baraitha. The first--a male aged nine years and a day--refers to the passive subject of pederasty, the punishment being incurred by the adult offender. This must be its meaning: because firstly, the active offender is never ex­plicitly designated as a male, it being understood, just as the Bible states, Thou shalt not lie with mankind, where only the sex of the passive participant is mentioned; and secondly, if the age reference is to the active party, the guilt being incurred by the passive adult party, why single out pederasty: in all crimes of incest, the passive adult does not incur guilt unless the other party is at least nine years and a day? Hence the Baraitha sup­ports Rab's contention that nine years (and a day) is the mini­mum age of the passive partner for the adult to be liable." (emphasis in original, Ed.)

Before giving any more verbatim quotations from the "sort of book" from which it is falsely alleged Jesus "drew the teachings which enable him to revolutionize the world" on "moral and re­ligious subjects" I wish to here again recall to your attention the official statement by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer in Look Magazine for June 17, 1952. In that official statement made by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer on behalf of the American Jewish Commit­tee, self-styled "The Vatican of Judaism", informed the 20,000,000 readers of Look Magazine that the Talmud "IS THE LEGAL CODE WHICH FORMS THE BASIS OF JEWISH RELIGIOUS LAW AND IT IS THE TEXTBOOK USED IN THE TRAINING OF RABBIS". Please bear this mind as your read further.
Before continuing I wish also to call your attention to another feature. Confirming the official view of Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer, the New York Times on May 20, 1954 ran a news item under the headline "Rabbis Plan a Fund to Endow Two Chairs". The news item itself ran as follows: "Special to the New York Times, Uniontown, Pa. May 19--Plans for raising $500,000. for the creation of two endowed chairs at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America were announced today at the fifty-fourth annual convention of the Rabbinical Assembly of America. THE PROFESSORSHIPS WOULD BE KNOWN AS THE LOUIS GINSBERG CHAIR IN TALMUD. . .! This is further proof that the Talmud is not yet quite a dead-letter in the "TRAINING OF RABBIS". Is further proof needed on that question?

The world's leading authorities on the Talmud confirm that the official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud translated into English follows the original texts with great exactness. It is almost a word-for-word translation of the original texts. In his famous classic "The History of the Talmud" Michael Rodkinson, the leading authority on the Talmud, in collaboration with the celebrated Reverend Dr. Isaac Wise, states:

"With the conclusion of the first volume of this work at the beginning of the twentieth century, we would invite the reader to take a glance over the past of the Talmud, in which he will see. . .that not only was the Talmud mi destroyed, but was so saved that NOT A SINGLE LETTER OF IT IS MISSING; and now IT IS FLOURISHING TO SUCH A DEGREE AS CAN­NOT BE FOUND IN ITS PAST HISTORY... THE TALMUD IS ONE OF THE WONDERS OF THE WORLD. During the twenty centuries of its existence. . .IT SURVIVED IN ITS EN­TIRETY, and not only has the power of its foes FAILED TO DESTROY EVEN A SINGLE LINE, but it has not even been able materially to weaken its influence for any length of time. IT STILL DOMINATES THE MINDS OF A WHOLE PEO­PLE WHO VENERATE ITS CONTENTS AS DIVINE TRUTH. . .The colleges for the study of the Talmud are in­creasing almost in every place where Israel dwells, especially in this country where millions are gathered for the funds of the two colleges, the Hebrew Union College of Cincinnati and The Jewish Theological Seminary of America in New York, in which the chief study is the Talmud. . .There are also in our city houses of learning (Jeshibath) for the study of the Talmud in the lower East Side, where many young men are studying the Tal­mud every day."

[END OF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

***Dharma, there is something wrong with your computer key­board--write no more until it is checked and cleared. We will take a respite while this is taken care of, please.***

PJ 223

CHAPTER 12

2/17/91 #4 HATONN

[QUOTING CONTINUED:]

This "divine truth" which "a whole people venerate" of which "not a single letter of it is missing" and today "is flour­ishing to such a degree as cannot be found in its history" is il­lustrated by the additional verbatim quotations which follow:

(Book) Sanhedrin, 55b: "A maiden three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. The penalty of adultery may be incurred through her; (if a niddah) she defiles him who has connection with her, so that he in turn defiles that upon which he lies, as a garment which has lain upon (a person affliected with gonorrhea).' (emphasis in original text of Soncino Edition, Ed.)
(Book) Sanhedrin, 58b. "R. Eleazar said in R. Hanina's name; If a heathen had an unnatural connection with his wife, he incurs guilt; for it is written, and he shall cleave, which ex­cludes unnatural intercourse (2). Raba objected: Is there any­thing for which a Jew is not punishable and a heathen is? (3). But Raba said thus: A heathen who violates his neighbor's wife is free from punishment. Why so?--(Scripture saith) To his wife, but not to his neighbor's; and he shall cleave, which ex­cludes unnatural intercourse (4).
Footnotes: (2) His wife derives no pleasure from this, and hence there is no cleaving.
(3)A variant reading of this passage is: Is there anything permitted to a Jew which is forbidden to a heathen. Unnatural connection is permitted to a Jew.
(4)By taking the two in conjunction, the latter as illustrating the former, we learn that the guilt of violating the injunction 'to his wife but not to his neighbor's wife' is incurred only for natu­ral but not for unnatural intercourse." (emphasis in original, Ed.)
(Book) Sanhedrin, 69a. "'A man': from this I know the law only with respect to a man: whence do I know it of one aged nine years and a day who is capable of intercourse? From the verse, And 'if a man'? (2)--He replied: Such a minor can pro­duce semen, but cannot beget therewith; for it is like the seed of cereals less than a third grown (3)."
(footnotes) "(2) 'And" (') indicates an extension of the law, and is here interpreted to include a minor aged nine years and a day.
(3)Such cereals contain seed, which if sown, however, will not grow.
(Book) Sanhedrin, 69b. "Our rabbis taught: If a woman sported lewdly with her young son (a minor), and he committed the first stage of cohabitation with her,--Beth Shammai say, he thereby renders her unfit for the priesthood (1). Beth Hillel de­clare her fit. . .All agree that the connection of a boy nine years and a day is a real connection; whilst that of one less than eight years is not (2); their dispute refers only to one who is eight years old.
(footnotes "(1) i.e., she becomes a harlot whom a priest may not marry (Lev. XXL,7.).
(2)So that if he was nine years and a day or more, Beth Hillel agree that she is invalidated from the priesthood; whilst if he was less than eight, Beth Shammai agree that she is not."
(Book) Kethuboth, 5b. "The question was asked: Is it allowed (15) to perform the first marital act on the Sabbath? (16). Is the blood (in the womb) stored up (17), or is it the result of a wound? (18).
(footnotes) "(15) Lit., 'how is it'?

• (16) When the intercourse could not take place before the Sabbath (Tosaf).
• (17) And the intercourse would be allowed, since the blood flows out of its own accord, no wound having been made.
• (18) Lit., or is it wounded? And the intercourse would be forbidden."

(Book) Kethuboth, 10a-10b. "Someone came before Rabban Gamaliel the son of Rabbi (and) said to him, 'my master I have had intercourse (with my newly wedded wife) and I have not found any blood (7). She (the wife) said to him, 'My master, I am still a virgin' . He (then) said to them: Bring me two handmaids, one (who is) a virgin and one who had intercourse with a man. They brought to him (two such handmaids), and he placed them on a cask of wine. (In the case of) the one who was no more a virgin its smell (1) went through (2), (in the case of) the virgin the smell did not go through (3). He (then) placed this one (the young wife) also (on a cask of wine), and its smell (4) did not go through. He (then) said to him: Go, be happy with thy bargain (7). But he should have examined her from the be­ginning (8)."
(footnotes) "(1) i.e., the smell of wine.
(2)One could smell the wine from the mouth (Rashi). (3)One could not smell the wine from the mouth.
(4)i.e., the smell of wine.
(5)Rabban Gamaliel.
(6)To the husband.
(7)The test showed that the wife was a virgin.
(8)Why did he first have experiment with the two hand­maids."
(Book) Kethuboth, 1 la-1 lb. "Raba said, It means (5) this: When a grown up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this (6), it is as if one puts the finger in the eye (7); but when a small boy has intercourse with a grown up woman, he makes her as 'as a girl who is in­jured by a piece of wood' ".
(footnotes) "(5). Lit., 'says'.

• (6) Lit., 'here', that is, less than three years old.
• (7) Tears come to the eyes again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years."

(Book) Kethuboth, lla-1 lb. "Rab Judah said that Rab said: A small boy who has intercourse with a grown up woman makes here (as though she were) injured by a piece of wood (1). Al­though the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act, nevertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood."
(footnotes) "(1) Although the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act, nevertheless the woman is injured by it as by a piece of wood."
(Book) Hayorath, 4a. "We learnt: (THE LAW CONCERN­ING THE) MENSTRUANT OCCURS IN THE TORAH BUT IF A MAN HAS INTERCOURSE WITH A WOMAN THAT AWAITS A DAY CORRESPONDING TO A DAY HE IS EX­EMPT. But why? Surely (the law concerning) a woman that awaits a day corresponding to a day is mentioned in the Scrip­tures: He hath made naked her fountain. But, surely it is writ­ten, (1)--They might rule that in the natural way even the first stage of contact is forbidden; and in an unnatural way, however, consummation of coition only is forbidden but the first stage of contact is permitted. If so, (the same might apply) even (to the case of) a menstruant also! (2)--The fact, however, is (that the ruling might have been permitted) (3) even in the natural way (4) alleging (that the prohibition of) the first stage (5) has refer­ence to a menstruant woman only (6). And if you prefer I might say: The ruling may have been that a woman is not regarded as a zabah (7) except during the daytime because it is written, all the days of her issue (8)." (emphasis appears in Soncino Edition original, Ed.)
(footnotes) "(13) Lev. XV,28.

• (14) Cf. supra p.17,n.10. Since she is thus Biblically consid­ered unclean how could a court rule that one having intercourse with her is exempt?
• (15) Lev.XX,18.

(1)Ibid.13. The plural "xxxx" (Hebrew characters, Ed.) im­plies natural, and unnatural intercourse.
(2)Why then was the case of 'a woman who awaits a day cor­responding to a day' given as an illustration when the case of a menstruant, already mentioned, would apply the same illustra­tion.
(3)The first stage of contact.
(4)In the case of one 'who awaits a day corresponding to a day'; only consummation of coition being forbidden in her case. (5)Cf. Lev.XX,18.
(6)Thus permitting a forbidden act which the Sadducees do not admit.
(7)A woman who has an issue of blood not in the time of her menstruation, and is subject to certain laws of uncleaness and purification (Lev.XV,25ff).
(8)Lev.XV,26. Emphasis being laid on days."
(Book) Abodah Zarah, 36b-37a. "R. Naham b.Isaac said: They decreed in connection with a heathen child that it would cause defilement by seminal emission (2) so that an Israelite
child should not become accustomed to commit pederasty with it. . .From what age does a heathen child cause defilement by seminal emission? From the age of nine years and one day. (37a) for inasmuch as he is then capable of the sexual act he likewise defiles by emission. Rabina said: It is therefore to be concluded that a heathen girl (communicates defilement) from the age of three years and one day, for inasmuch as she is then capable of the sexual act she likewise defiles by a flux.
(footnotes) "(2). Even though he suffered from no issue."
(Book) Sotah, 26b). "R. Papa said: It excludes an animal, because there is not adultery in connection with an animal (4). Raba of Parazika (5) asked R. Ashi, Whence is the statement which the Rabbis made that there is no adultery in connection with an animal?--Because it is written, Thou shalt not bring the hire of a harlot or the wages of a dog etc.; (6) and it has been taught: The hire of a dog (7) and the wages of a harlot (8) are permissable, as it is said, Even both of these (9)--the two (specified texts are abominations) but not four (10). . .As lying with mankind. (12) But, said Raba, it excludes the case where he warned her against contact of the bodies (13). Abaye said to him, That is merely an obscene act (and not adultery), and did the All-Merciful prohibit (a wife to her husband) for and ob­scene act?" (emphasis in original text, Ed.)
(footnotes) "(4) She would not be prohibited to her husband for such an act.
(5). Farausag near Baghdad v.BB.(Sonc.Ed.)p.15,n.4. He is thus distinguished from the earlier Rabbi of that name. (6)Deut.XX111,19.
(7)Money given by a man to a harlot to associate with his dog. Such an association is not legal adultery.
(8)If a man had a female slave who was a harlot and he ex­changed her for an animal, it could be offered.
(9)Are an abomination unto the Lord ibid.

• (10) Viz., the other two mentioned by the Rabbi.
• (11) In Num. V,13. since the law applies to a man who is in­capable.
• (12) Lev.XVD1,22. The word for 'lying' is in the plural and is explained as denoting also unnatural intercourse.

•(13) With the other man, although there is no actual coition." (emphasis appears in original Soncino Edition, Ed.)
(Book) Yebamoth, 55b. "Raba said; For what purpose did the All-Merciful write 'carnally' in connection with the designated bondmaid (9), a married woman (10), and a sotah (11)? This in connection with the designated bondmaid (is required) as has just been explained (12). That in connection with a married woman excludes intercourse with a relaxed membrum (13). This is a satisfactory interpretation in accordance with the view of him who maintains that if one cohabited with forbidden rela­tives with relaxed membrum he is exonerated (14); what, how­ever, can be said, according to him who maintains (that for such an act one is) guilty?--The exclusion is rather that of intercourse with a dead woman (15). Since it might have been assumed that, as (a wife), even after her death, is described as his kin (16), one should be guilty for (intercourse with) her (as for that) with a married woman, hence we are taught (that one is exoner­ated).
(footnotes) (9) Lev.XIX,20.

• (10) Ibid.XVIII,20.
• (11) Nwn. V,13.
• (12) Supra 55a.
• (13) Since no fertilization can possibly occur.
• (14) Shebu.,18a,Sanh.55a.
• (15) Even though she dies as a married woman.
• (16) In Lev.XXI,2. where the text enumerates the dead rela­tives for whom a priest may defile himself. As was explained, supra 22b, his kin refers to one's wife." (emphasis in Soncino Edition original, Ed.)

(Book) Yebamoth, 103a-103b. "When the serpent copulated with Eve (14) he infused her (15) with lust. The lust of the Is­raelites who stood at Mount Sinai (16) came to an end, the lust of idolators who did not stand at Mount Sinai did not come to an end."
(footnotes) "(14) In the garden of Eden, according to tradi­tion.

• (15) i.e., the human species.
• (16) And experienced the purifying influence of divine Rev­elation."

(Book) Yebamoth, 63a. "R. Eleazar further stated: What is meant by the Scriptural text, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh (5)? This teaches that Adam had intercourse
with every beast and animal but found no satisfaction until he cohabited with Eve.
(footnotes) "(5) Gen.I1,23. emphasis on This is now." (emphasis appears in original Soncino Edition, Ed.)
(Book) Yebamoth, 60b. "As R. Joshua b. Levi related: ' There was a certain town in the Land of Israel the legitimacy of whose inhabitants was disputed, and Rabbi sent R. Ramanos who conducted an enquiry and found it in the daughter of a proselyte who was under the age of three years and one day (14), and Rabbi declared her eligible to live with a priest (15)."
(footnotes) "(13) A proselyte under the age of three years and one day may be married by a priest.

• (14)And was married to a priest.
• (15)i.e., permitted to continue to live with her husband."

P (Book) Yebamoth, 59b. "R. Shimi b. Hiyya stated: A woman who had intercourse with a beast is eligible to marry a priest (4). Likewise it was taught: A woman who had inter­course with that which is no human being (5), though she is in consequence subject to the penalty of stoning (6), is nevertheless permitted to marry a priest (7).
(footnotes) "(4) Even a High Priest. The result of such in­tercourse being regarded as a mere wound, and the opinion that does not regard an accidently injured hymen as a disqualification does not so regard such an intercourse either.
(5)A beast.
(6)If the offense was committed in the presence of witnesses after due warning.
(7)In the absence of witnesses and warning."
(Book) Yebamoth, 12b. "R. Bebai recited before R. Naham: Three (catagories of) women may (7) use an absorbent (8) in their marital intercourse (9), a minor, a pregnant woman and a nursing woman. The minor (10) because (otherwise) she might (11) become pregnant, and as a result (11) might die. . .And what is the age of such a minor? (14). From the age of eleven years and one day until the age of twelve years and one day. One who is under (15), or over this age (16) must carry on her marital intercourse in the usual manner."
(footnotes "(7) (So Rashi.R.Tam: Should use, v.Tosaf s. v.)
(8) Hackled wool or flax. To prevent conception.

• (16) May use an absorbent.
• (17) Lit., 'perhaps' .
• (14) Who is capable of conception but exposed thereby to the danger of death.
• (15) When no conception is possible.
• (16) when pregnancy involves no fatal consequences."

(Book) Yebamoth, 59b. "When R.Dimi came (8) he related; It once happened at Haitalu (9) that while a young worn an was sweeping the floor (10) a village dog (11) covered her from the rear (12) and Rabbi permitted her to marry a priest. Samuel said: Even a High Priest.
(footnotes) "(8) From Palestine to Babylon.
(9)(Babylonian form for Aitulu, modern Airterun N.W. of Kadesh, v.S. Kelin, Beitrage,p.47).

• (10) Lit., 'house'.
• (11) Or 'big hunting dog' (Rashi), 'ferocious dog' (Jast.), 'small wild dog' (Aruk).
• (12) A case of unnatural intercourse.

[H: Is any of this beginning to be a bit outlandish to any of you? Dogs? "A village dog' covered her from the rear.."? Is this not the most confusing bunch of nonsense you have ever seen? Does it cross anyone's mind that you might be dealing with rules set up by ones totally unfamiliar with much of anything suitable to behavior by Earth Human? Oh yes, you have bestiality but hardly anything so allowable as "trivial" in being covered from the rear by a dog--while sweeping the floor yet? Would you believe such a tale if anyone walked up to you and told you this--today? Does anyone begin to relate anything in these outlandish displays of obscenities with what you have heard of the activities of "little gray aliens"?] To continue:

(Book) Kethuboth, 6b. "Said he to him: Not like those Babylonians who are not skilled in moving aside (7), but there are some who are skilled in moving aside (8). If so, why (give the reason of) 'anxious'?(10)--For one who is not skilled. (Then) let them say: One who is skilled is allowed (to perform the first intercourse on Sabbath), one who is not skilled is forbidden?--Most (people) are skilled (11). Said Raba the son of R. Hanan to Abaye: If this were so, then why (have) groomsmen (12) why (have) a sheet?(13)--He (Abaye) said to him: There (the groomsmen and the sheet are necessary) perhaps he will see and destroy (the tokens of her virginity) (14).
(footnotes) "(7) i.e., having intercourse with a virgin with­out causing a bleeding.
Thus no blood need come out, and 'Let his head be cut off and let him not die!' does not apply.

• (9) If the bridegroom is skilled in "moving sideways'.
• (10) He need not be anxious about the intercourse and should not be free from reading Shema' on account of such anxiety.
• (11) Therefor the principle regarding 'Let his head be cut off and let him not die!' does not, as a rule, apply.
• (12) The groomsmen testify in case of need to the virginity of the bride. V. infra 12a. If the bridegroom will act in a man­ner that will cause no bleeding, the groomsmen will not be able to testify on the question of virginity.

•(13) To provide evidence of the virginity of the bride. Cf.Deut.XXII,17 .

• (14) It may happen that he will act in the normal manner and cause bleeding but he will destroy the tokens and maintain that the bride was not a virgin; for this reason the above mentioned provisions are necessary. Where however he moved aside and made a false charge as to her virginity, the bride can plead that she is still a virgin (Bashi)."

After reading these verbatim quotations from the countless other similar quotations which you will find in the official unabridged Soncino Edition of the Talmud in the English lan­guage are you of the opinion, my dear Dr. Goldstein, that the Talmud was the "sort of book" from which Jesus "drew the teachings which enable him to revolutionize the world" on "moral and religious subjects"? You have read here verbatim quotations and official footnotes on a few of the many other subjects covered by the "63 books" of the Talmud. When you read them you must be prepared for a shock. I am surprised that the United States Post Office does not bar the Talmud from the mails. I hesitated to quote them in this letter. [H: I also hesitated to quote them herein because the next barrage of accusations and denouncing will pile upon my people--but truth is truth and if you ones will not take time to look it up for self then hope for your journey is slim in­deed. I MOST CERTAINLY DO NOT EXPECT YOU TO FIND TRUTH BY SIMPLY ASKING A NICE RABBI OR CLERGYMAN. I would like, herein, to remind you of something regarding these Zionists; Your own Jerry Falwell stood forth as leader of your "Moral Majority" and stated before the world: "I am proud to say that I am a Zionist!" Does it mean that he KNEW all these things of heinous con­tent? No, he is simply another of the ignorant and inten­tionally uninformed!]

In support of the contention by the top echelon among the outstanding authorities on this phase of the present status of the Talmud, further proof of the wide influence exerted by the Tal­mud upon the so-called or self-styled "Jews" is supplied by Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer's article "What is a Jew" in the June 17, 1952 issue of Look Magazine. Rabbi Morris N. Kertzer's article contains a lovely picture of a smiling man seated in a chair with a large opened book upon his lap. Seated around him on the floor are about a dozen smiling men and women. They are paying close attention to the smiling man in the chair with the opened book upon his lap. He is reading to the persons on the floor. He emphasizes what he is reading by gestures with one of his hands. Beneath this photograph of the group is the following explanation:

"ADULTS STUDY ANCIENT WRITINGS, TOO. RABBI IN THIS PICTURE, SEATED IN CHAIR, LEADS GROUP DISCUSSION OF TALMUD BEFORE EVENING PRAYER." (emphasis supplied)

This picture and explanation indicate the extent the Talmud is the daily diet of so-called or self-styled "Jews" in this day and age. The Talmud is first taught to children of so-called or self-styled "Jews" as soon as they are able to read. Just as the Tal­mud is the "textbook by which rabbis are trained" so is the Tal­mud also the textbook by which the rank-and-file of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" are "trained" to think from their earliest age. In the translation of the Talmud with its texts edited, corrected and formulated by the eminent Michael Rodkinson, Reverend Dr. Isaac M. Wise, on page XI, it states:

"THE MODERN JEW IS THE PRODUCT OF THE TALMUD" . (emphasis supplied)

To the average Christian the word "Talmud" is just another word associated by them with the form of religious worship practised in their synagogues by so-called or self-styled "Jews". Many Christians have never heard of the Talmud. Very few Christians are informed on the contents of the Talmud. Some may believe the Talmud to be an integral part of the religious worship known to them as "Judaism". It suggests a sort of bible or religious text book. It is classed as a spiritual manual. But otherwise few if any Christian has an understanding of the con­tents of the Talmud and what it means in the daily lives of so-called or self-styled "Jews". As an illustration, my dear Dr. Goldstein, how many Christians have any conception of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer recited in synagogues on the Day of Atonement?

[H: For you readers of AND THEY CALLED HIS NAME IMMANUEL, allow me to point out that the original release of this information was titled TALMUD JMMANUEL. I think it is now evident as to WHY Sananda chose to relabel it. There is now a new copy of the book translated by Billy Meier--again called the TALMUD IMMANUEL. I suggest you be most careful in the reading thereof for it is printed solely for the monetary value and these ones who are repro­ducing the work have done everything they could do to STOP our publishing of the truth. "Talmud" is a perfectly good word but as is always the case with the great deceiver, you do not get goodness and light--but lies and deceit. Therefore, God will refrain from utilizing terms which will mislead you who are efforting to find Truth. A word placed so blatantly upon the cover indicates misuse of the intent if it is there to connote TRUTH!]

In Volume VIII of the Jewish Encyclopedia on page 539 found in the Library of Congress, the New York Public Library and libraries of all leading cities, will be found the official translation into English of the prayer known as the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer. It is the prologue of the Day of Atonement services in the synagogues. It is recited three times by the standing congregation in concert with chanting rabbis at the al­tar. After the recital of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer the Day of Atonement religious ceremonies follow immediately. The Day of Atonement religious observances are the highest holy days of so-called or self-styled "Jews" and are celebrated as such throughout the world. The official translation into En­glish of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer follows:

"ALL VOWS, OBLIGATIONS, OATHS, ANATHEMAS, whether called 'konam', 'konas', or by any other name, WHICH WE MAY VOW, OR SWEAR, OR PLEDGE, OR WHEREBY WE MAY BE BOUND, FROM THIS DAY OF ATONEMENT UNTO THE NEXT, (whose happy coming we await), we do repent. MAY THEY BE DEEMED AB­SOLVED, FORGIVEN, ANNULLED, AND VOID AND MADE OF NO EFFECT; THEY SHALL NOT BIND US NOR HAVE POWER OVER US. THE VOWS SHALL NOT BE RECKONED VOWS; THE OBLIGATIONS SHALL NOT BE OBLIGATORY; NOR THE OATHS BE OATHS." (emphasis supplied).
[H: Go right back now and REALLY READ THAT PRAYER FOR YOU DID NOT PICK UP THE POINT THE FIRST TIME!]

The implications, inferences and innuendoes of the "Kol Nidre (All Vows) prayer are referred to in the Talmud in the Book of Nedarim, 23a-23b as follows:

(Book) "And he who desires that NONE OF HIS VOWS MADE DURING THE YEAR SHALL BE VALID, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, 'EVERY VOW WHICH I MAY MAKE IN THE FUTURE SHALL BE NULL (1). (HIS VOWS ARE THEN INVALID,) PROVIDING THAT HE REMEMBERS THIS AT THE TIME OF THE VOW." (emphasis in original and supplied, Ed.)

(footnotes) "(1) This may have provided a support for the custom of reciting Kol Nidre (a formula for dispensation of vows) prior to the Evening Service of the Day of Atonement (Ran). . .Though the beginning of the year (New Year) is men­tioned here, the Day of Atonement was probably chosen on ac­count of its great solemnity. But Kol Nidre as part of the ritual IS LATER THAN THE TALMUD, and, as seen from the fol­lowing statement of R. Huna b. Hinene, THE LAW OF REVOCATION IN ADVANCE WAS NOT MADE PUBLIC. (emphasis supplied and in original text,Ed.)

The greatest study of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer was made by the eminent psycho-analyst Professor Theodor Reik, the celebrated pupil of the famous Dr. Sigmund Freud. The analysis of the historic, religious and psychological background of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer by Professor Reik pre­sents the Talmud in its true perspective. This important study is contained in Professor Reik's "The Ritual, Psyco-Analytical Studies". In the chapter on the Talmud, on page 168, Professor Reik states:

"THE TEXT WAS TO THE EFFECT THAT ALL OATHS WHICH BELIEVERS TAKE BETWEEN ONE DAY OF ATONEMENT AND THE NEXT DAY OF ATONEMENT ARE DECLARED INVALID." (emphasis supplied)

Before explaining to you how the present wording of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer was introduced into the Day of Atonement synagogue ceremonies, my dear Dr. Goldstein, I would like to quote a passage to you from the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia.
The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia confirms the fact that the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer has no spiritual value as might be believed because it is recited in synagogues on the Day of Atonement as the prologue of the religious ceremonies which follow it. The secular significance of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer is indicated forcefully by the analysis in the Uni­versal Jewish Encyclopedia. In Volume VI, on page 441, it states:

"The Kol Nidre HAS NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL IDEA OF THE DAY OF ATONE­MENT. . .it attained to extraordinary solemnity and popularity by reason of the fact that it was THE FIRST PRAYER RE­CITED ON THIS HOLIEST OF DAYS."

My dear Dr. Goldstein, prepare for the shock of your life. Compelled by what you have now read here about the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer you must be shocked to learn that many Christian churches actually "pealed their bells" on the Day of Atonement in celebration of that holy day for so-called or self-styled "Jews". How stupid can the Christian clergy get? From what I have learned after a cursory inquiry I am unable to say whether it was a case of stupidity or cupidity. With what you already know, together with what you will additionally know before you finish this letter, you will be able to judge for yourself whether it was stupidity or cupidity. There is not one single fact in this entire letter which every graduate of a theo­logical seminary did not have the opportunity to learn.

The following news item was featured in the New York on October 7th only a few days ago. Under a prominent headline "JEWISH HOLIDAYS TO END AT SUNDOWN" the New York World Telegram gave great prominence to the following story:

"Synagogues and temples throughout the city were crowded yesterday as the 24 hour fast began. Dr. Norman Salit, head of the Synagogue Council of America, representing the three major Jewish bodies, had called on other faiths TO JOIN THE FAST.
.Cutting across religious lines, MANY PROTESTANT CHURCHES IN THE CITY PEALED THEIR BELLS LAST NIGHT TO SOUND THE KOL NIDRE,TRADITIONAL MELODY USED AT THE START OF YOM KIPPUR. THE
GESTURE OF GOOD-WILL WAS RECOMMENDED BY THE MANHATTAN OFFICE OF THE PROTESTANT COUNCIL." (emphasis supplied)

That just about "tops" anything I have ever had come to my attention revealing the ignorance and indifference of the Chris­tian clergy to the hazards today facing the Christian faith. From my personal contacts with the Manhattan Office of the Protes­tant Council in the recent past I hold out very little hope for any constructive contribution they can make to the common defense of the Christian faith against its dedicated enemies. In each instance they buckled under the "pressure" exerted upon them by the "contacts" for so-called or self-styled "Jews". If it was not so tragic it would be comic. It was a joke indeed but the joke was on the Christian clergy. Ye Gods! "Many" Christian churches "pealed their bells", as the Protestant Council reports the event, "TO SOUND THE KOL N1DRE, TRADITIONAL MELODY USED AT THE START OF YOM KIPPUR". Just where does betrayal of a trust and breach of faith begin?

The present wording of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer dates from the 11th century. A political reversal in eastern Eu­rope compelled the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Eu­rope to adopt the present wording of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer. That story involves the history of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe.
Before relating here as briefly as possible the history of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" of eastern Europe I would like to quote here another short passage from the Jewish Encyclopedia in Volume VII, on page 540, states:

"AN IMPORTANT ALTERATION IN THE WORDING of the 'Kol Nidre'was made by Rashi's son-in-law, Meir ben Samuel, WHO CHANGED THE ORIGINAL PHRASE 'FROM THE LAST DAY OF ATONEMENT TO THIS ONE' to 'FROM THIS DAY OF ATONEMENT UNTIL THE NEXT' " .

(emphasis supplied)

[END OF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

We will herein stop quoting and for that matter, stop the writing at this point for this sitting. Thank you for the long hours of service, Dharma. I ask you to be particularly attuned to my call for you are in danger and hence is why we had to disengage
your prior computer. We will simply have to work our way through the next few days of bringing forth this information for as you might well note--THE EVIL BROTHERHOOD DOES NOT WANT IT BROUGHT FORTH! When human realizes how he has been duped he shall rise up and stop this madness. Ah, and may it be "in time".

Hatonn to stand-by. I shall keep the shielding in place but I must ask that you remain within my commands lest you be dam­aged. The Truth is going to come forth now and it has confir­mation and credentials of proof--just as you were told at onset by "The Command"--"that you would be given credentials and credibility from that which is the Silver Clouds and would be forthcoming from Earth-place." And so it shall be put to print that Man may see how sadly he has been made the dupe.

Good evening. God grants his protection of his servants. Salu.

PJ 223

CHAPTER 13

2/18/91 #2 HATONN

TODAY'S WATCH

Briefly we will attend today's nonsense for I wish to move for­ward with material which may save your souls--loss of your bodies is simply "collateral damage" as I believe your military and administration refer to death of "innocent civilians".

Several points to note and then we will move on. Firstly, note the involvement of the top Russian leaders with the Iraq "set­up". Then also note the exchanges of notes between countries. Then note the "sudden" discovery of massive gold deposits in the Soviet Union--which will "save the Soviet economy". Come now, you can tell from the assay office pictures that the gold has long been known about and mined. YOUR WORLD IS BEING TOLD THAT RUSSIA IS VERY MUCH ALIVE AND WELL AND YOU HAVE BEEN DUPED INTO SENDING BIL­LIONS TO HER AID--BUT, THE GAME IS BEING PLAYED ACCORDING TO THE RULES OF THE ELITE. KEEP YOUR EYES OPEN!

One of the most IMPORTANT references today regarding Rus­sia is the fact that "...the Russians are concerned about the gath­ering storm and anger of the 60 MILLION MOSLEMS within Russia who are on the march to uprising against the Middle East attack by the United States." It will take more than walking gently and carrying a big stick, America, when you add 60 mil­lion upset Moslems to the Millions and Millions of upset Moslems elsewhere and all the Millions of Islamics in the world. Then, you had better really watch the Chinese for--even though they claim communism as politics--they are Buddha followers for the most part and Buddha taught Christian commandments. This event is getting large indeed, and out of control, World!

You will have far more dramatics regarding the ground war or the propaganda won't be worth anything. I suggest you listen to your media "authorities" as they come forth on TV to "discuss the outlay of news". There is no earthly way you can tell a thing about the news outlay except that you CAN'T BELIEVE A WORD OF IT. The head of CNN has said that what is pro­duced on the news is to simply get instant "coded messages" to one another and the REAL negotiations go on behind the scenes in absolute secrecy while allowing "leaks" as in­tended to distract. Do you know why you continue to watch the lies and believe them? Because you actually don't believe a thing anyone tells you so you select that which pleases your own opinion--no more and no less. You simply, as does the UN councils and national leaders, parrot whatever is said, even unto the same terminology as handed out in the scripting prior to any "official statements".

Next--look at your President Bush today. He is dressed in black military-appearing garb and is carrying a very big stick during his "POWER WALK" as the press called it. This follows a day in Church wherein a citizen objects to Bush's massacre and the man is hauled out by police and arrested and charged with pub­lic disturbance. The man has a child in Saudi Arabia and is against the killing of innocent citizens--AND YOU ARREST HIM! YOU ARREST THE MAN WHO BELONGS TO THE GROUP, FOR SPEAKING OUT, AND ALLOW THE ONE WHO COMMITS GENOCIDE AND GLOBAL ANNIHILA­TION TO GO IN PROTECTION.

You had better further note that this "elderly man Bush" is act­ing in advance of an athlete in Olympic competition--he can out-jog any of his secret service men and at a "walk" can out-run all of the press. THIS IS THE STRATEGIC CLUE TO IDEN­TIFY A REPRODUCTION IN EFFORT TO HAVE HIM AP­PEAR SUPER-HUMAN. THE LIES ARE SO GREAT AND THE DECEPTIONS SO INTENSE AND SO GREAT THAT IT IS INDEED DIFFICULT TO SEE TRUTH THROUGH THE BARRAGE OF BLOODSTAINED DRAPERY.

Let us please return to the Journal in penning.

CONTINUATION OF FREEDMAN'S

LETTER TO GOLDSTEIN

Yes, you will note that the names are of Judean lineage--YOU WILL ALSO NOTE THAT ALMOST ALL OF THE ONES WHO SPEAK ON YOUR TV AND IN THE PRESS ARE OF "JEWISH" LABELS. IF YOU MISS THAT POINT, THEN YOU HAVE MISSED EVERYTHING. WILL BE YOU OF JUDEAN ROOTS WHO WILL PUT A STOP TO THE IN­SANITY OF THE ZIONISTS OR YOU WILL BE TRAM­PLED INTO THE EARTH BY THEIR IRON BOOTS. This is, of course, not easy for the lies have been so massive and you of the heritage of the "holy lands" have sought so long and dili­gently for your roots. Yes, it shall be YOU of the REAL JUDEAN ROOTS WHO WILL BRING THIS TO A HALT OR IT SHALL NOT BE STOPPED. FOR YOU KNOW THE TRUTH OF WHAT IS BEING LAID BARE HEREIN.

[QUOTING CONTINUED:]

You will agree, my dear Dr. Goldstein, that Meir ben Samuel knew what he was doing. The wording of that altered version of the "Kol Nidre"(All Vows) prayer makes the recital of the prayer a release during the coming year from any obligation to respect any oath, vow or pledge made during the coming year. Like any one-year license obtained from the Federal, State or Municipal governments, the altered version of the "Kol Nidre" prayer is also a "license" for one year only. "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer extends immunity in advance for one year from all obligations to observe the terms of oaths, vows and pledges made in the year following the date of the Day of Atonement when the prayer was recited. Each year however it becomes necessary to renew this "license" which automatically revokes in advance any oath, vow or pledge made during the next twelve months, by again appearing in a synagogue on the next Day of Atonement and reciting the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer again. Do you approve of this?

The passage in the Talmud referring to "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer certifies to several serious situations. It certifies that "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer was added as a prologue to the Day of Atonement religious services long after the comple­tion of the Talmud between 500 A.D.-1000 A.D. by the state­ment, "as part of the ritual is later than the Talmud". It con­firms that Meir ben Samuel who authored the present altered version of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer lived in the 11th century. Furthermore, the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe believed it served their purpose better to keep secret from their Christian conquerors their attitude on oaths, vows and pledges, "the law of revocation in advance was not made public."

Without a complete and accurate knowledge of the origin and history of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe, my dear Dr. Goldstein, it is quite impossible for yourself or for anybody to intelligently understand the harmful influence the Talmud has exerted for ten centuries, and the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer for seven centuries upon the course of world his­tory. These two little known factors are the hub and the spokes of the "big wheel" rolling merrily along the road to complete world domination in the not distant future, without arousing sus­picion, and wearing the innocent disguise of an alleged religious belief as their only defense mechanism. This insidious intrigue creates a most effective camouflage for the conspirators. The virility of their plot presents a problem in the defense of the po­litical, economic, social and cultural ideologies developed under a Christian civilization.

[H: STOP--GO BACK AND READ THAT PARAGRAPH AGAIN, ALSO. THANK YOU.]

You will probably also be as astonished as the 150,000,000 Christians years ago when I electrified the nation with the first publication by me of the facts disclosed by my many years of re­search into the origin and the history of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe. My many years of intensive research established beyond any question e any doubt, con­trary to the generally accepted belief held by Christians, that the SO-CALLED OR SELF-STYLED "JEWS" IN EASTERN EUROPE AT ANY TIME IN THEIR HISTORY I? EASTERN EUROPE WERE NEVER THE LEGENDARY "LOST TEN TRIBES" OF BIBLE LORE. THAT HISTORIC FACT IS INCONTROVERTIBLE.

H: Please note that the above said "lost ten tribes". This is why in referring to the Khazars (imitation Jews) we do re­fer to them as the Thirteenth--simply, furthermore, as desig­nation and identification to separate them from the accepted myths. Remember, as we unfold this information, we are limited to that which is in your capability of receiving in understanding and the only means we have in printed or spoken material is through use of your own concepts and terminology. This is the mastery of the deceiver--to change meanings of terms and give you "readings" in secret author­ity and you know not the difference. YOU MUST LEARN THE DIFFERENCE, BROTHERS FOR YOU HAVE AL­LOWED YOURSELVES TO BE VICTIMS UNTO YOUR VERY DOOM.]

Relentless research established as equally true that the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe at no time in their history could be correctly regarded as the direct lineal de­scendants of the legendary "lost ten tribes" of Bible lore. The so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe in modern his­tory cannot legitimately point to a single ancient ancestor who ever set even a foot on the soil of Palestine in the era of Bible history. Research also revealed that the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe were never "Semites", are not "Semites" now, nor can they ever be regarded as "Semites" at any future time by any stretch of the imagination. Exhaustive research also irrevocably rejects as a fantastic fabrication the generally accepted belief by Christians that the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe are the legendary "Chosen Peo­ple" so very vocally publicized by the Christian clergy from their pulpits.

Maybe you can explain to me, my dear Dr. Goldstein, the reason why and just how the origin and the history of the Khaz­ars and Khazar Kingdom was so well concealed from the world for so many centuries? What secret mysterious power has been able for countless generations to keep the origin and the history of the Khazars and Khazar Kingdom out of history text-books and out of class-room courses in history throughout the world? The origin and history of the Khazars and Khazar Kingdom are certainly incontestible historic facts. These incontestible historic facts also establish beyond any question of doubt the origin and history of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe. The relationship to the origin and early history of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe was one of history's best kept secrets until wide publicity was given in recent years on the subject. Do you not think, my dear Dr. Goldstein, that it is time the whole subject was dragged out of its hiding place?

In the year 1948 in the Pentagon in Washington I addressed a large assembly of the highest ranking officers of the United States Army principally in the G2 branch of Military Intelli­gence on the highly explosive geopolitical situation in eastern Europe and the Middle East. Then as now that area of the world was a potential threat to the peace of the world and to the security of this nation. I explained to them fully the origin of the Khazars and Khazar Kingdom. I felt then as I feel now that without a clear and comprehensive knowledge of that subject it is not possible to understand or to evaluate properly what has been taking place in the world since 1917, the year of the Bol­shevik revolution in Russia. It is the "key" to that problem.

Upon the conclusion of my talk a very alert Lieutenant Colonel present at the meeting informed me that he was the head of the history department of one of the largest and highest scholastic rated institutions of higher education in the United States. He had taught history there for 16 years. He had re­cently been called back to Washington for further military ser­vice. To my astonishment he informed me that he had never in all his career as a history teacher or otherwise heard the word "Khazar" before he heard me mention it there. That must give you some idea, my dear Dr. Goldstein, of how successful that mysterious secret power was with their plot to "black out" the origin and the history of the Khazars and Khazar Kingdom in order to conceal from the world and particularly Christians the true origin and history of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe.

The Russian conquest in the 10th-13th centuries of the little­known-to-history Khazars apparently ended the existence for all time of the little-known-to-history 800,000 square mile sovereign kingdom of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in east­ern Europe, known then as the Khazar Kingdom. Historians and theologians now agree that this political development was the reason for the "IMPORTANT CHANGE IN THE WORD­ING OF THE 'KOL 1V173RE' by Meir ben Samuel in the 11th century, and for the policy adopted by the so-called or self-styled "Jews" that "THE LAW OF REVOCATION IN AD­VANCE WAS NOT MADE PUBLIC". Will you be patient with me while I review here as briefly as I can the history of that political emergence and disappearance of a nation from the pages of history?

[Hatonn: For you readers of the Journals, please do not skip over this particular segment simply because we have covered it prior to this in a couple or three of the Journals. You are so misinformed that you need to hear it again and again un­til it comes into your consciousness as reality. These pieces of information being brought forth now are the most important documentations ever brought unto your planet and this is only the beginning of the outlay of "how it REALLY is!" So please get the pieces in mental place so that you will be prepared for the facts yet to come forth.]

Prior to the 10th century the Khazar Kingdom had already been reduced by Russian conquests to an area of about 800,000 square miles. [See enclosed copy of map page 187]. As you will observe on this map reproduced from the Jewish Ency­clopedia the territory of the Khazar Kingdom in the 10th century was still by far the largest of any nation in Europe. The popu­lation of the Khazar Kingdom was made up for the most part of Khazars with the addition of the remnants of the populations of the 25 peaceful agricultural nations which had inhabited this ap­proximate 1,000,000 square miles before their conquest by the invading Khazars. In the 1st century B.C. the Khazars had in­ vaded eastern Europe from their homeland in Asia. The Khaz­ars invaded eastern Europe via the land route between the north end of the Caspian Sea and the south end of the Ural Mountains.

The Khazars were not "Semites". They were an Asiatic Mongoloid nation. They are classified by modern anthropolo­gists as Turco-Finn racially. From time immemorial the home­land of the Khazars was in the heart of Asia. They were a very warlike nation. The Khazars were driven out of Asia finally by the nations in Asia with whom they were continually at war. The Khazars invaded eastern Europe to escape further defeats in Asia. The very warlike Khazars did not find it difficult to sub­due and conquer the 25 peaceful agricultural nations occupying approximately 1,000,000 square miles in eastern Europe. In a comparatively short period the Khazars established the largest and most powerful kingdom in Europe, and probably the wealthiest also.

The Khazars were a pagan nation when they invaded eastern Europe. Their religious worship was a mixture of phallic wor­ship and other forms of idolatrous worship practiced in Asia by pagan nations. This form of worship continued until the 7th century. The vile forms of sexual excesses indulged in by the Khazars as their form of religious worship produced a degree of moral degeneracy the Khazar's king could not endure. In the 7th century King Bulan, ruler at that time of the Khazar King­dom, decided to abolish the practice of phallic worship and other forms of idolatrous worship and make one of the three monotheistic religions, about which he knew very little, the new state religion. After a historic session with representatives of the three monotheistic religions King Bulan decided against Christianity and Islam and selected as the future state religion of the Khazar Kingdom the religious worship then known as "Talmudism", and now known and practiced as "Judaism". This event is well documented in history.

King Bulan and his 4000 feudal nobles were promptly con­verted by rabbis imported from Babylonia for the event. Phallic worship and other forms of idolatry were thereafter forbidden. The Khazar kings invited large numbers of rabbis to come and open synagogues and schools to instruct the population in the new form of religious worship. It was now the state religion. The converted Khazars were the first population of so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe. So-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe after the conversion of the Khazars are the descendants of the Khazars converted to "Talmudism", or as it is now known "Judaism", by the 7th century mass conversion of the Khazar population.

After the conversion of King Bulan none but a so-called or self-styled "Jew" could occupy the Khazar throne. The Khazar Kingdom became a virtual theocracy. The religious leaders were the civil administrators also. The religious leaders im­posed the teachings of the Talmud upon the population as their guide to living. The ideologies of the Talmud became the axis of political, cultural, economic and social attitudes and activities throughout the Khazar kingdom. The Talmud provided civil and religious law.

It might be very interesting for you, my dear Dr. Goldstein, if you have the patience, to allow me to quote for you here from Volume IV, pages I to 5, of the Jewish Encyclopedia. The Jew­ish Encyclopedia refers to the Khazars as "Chazars". The two spellings are optional according to the best authorities. The two are pronounced alike. Either Khazar or "Chazar" is pronounced like the first syllable of "costume" with the word "Czar" added onto it. It is correctly pronounced "cos(tume)Czar. The Jewish Encyclopedia has five pages on the Khazars but I will skip through them:

"CHAZARS: A people of Turkish origin whose life and his­tory are interwoven with THE VERY BEGINNINGS OF THE HISTORY OF THE JEWS OF RUSSIA. . .driven on by the no­madic tribes of the steppes and by THEIR OWN DESIRE FOR PLUNDER AND REVENGE. . .In the second half of the sixth century the Chazars moved westward. . .The kingdom of the Chazars was firmly established in MOST OF SOUTH RUSSIA LONG BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE RUSSIAN MONARCHY BY THE VARANGIANS (855). . .At this time the kingdom of the Chazars moved westward. . .The kingdom of the Chazars stood at the height of its power AND WAS CONSTANTLY AT WAR. . .At the end of the eighth century. . .the chagan (king) of the Chazars and his grandees, IQ₌ GETHER WITH A LARGE NUMBER OF HIS HEATHEN PEOPLE, EMBRACED THE JEWISH RELIGION. . .The Jewish population in the entire domain of the Chazars, in the pe­riod between the seventh and tenth centuries, MUST HAVE BEEN CONSIDERABLE. . .about the NINTH CENTURY, IT APPEARS AS IF ALL THE CHAZARS WERE JEWS AND THAT THEY HAD BEEN CONVERTED TO JUDAISM ONLY A SHORT TIME BEFOR. . .It was one of the succes­sors of Bulan named Obadiah, who regenerated the kingdom and STRENGTHENED THE JEWISH RELIGION. He invited Jewish scholars to settle in his dominions, and founded SYNAGOGUES AND SCHOOLS. The people were instructed in the Bible, Mishnah, and the TALMUD and in the ' divine service of the hazzanim' . .In their writings the CHAZARS USED THE HEBREW LEITERS. . .THE CHAZAR LANGUAGES PRE­DOMINATED. . .0badiah was succeeded by his son Hezekiah; the latter by his son Manasseh; Manasseh by Hanukkah, a brother of Obadiah; Hanukkah by his son Isaac; Isaac by his son Moses (or Manasseh II); the latter by his son Nisi; and Nisi by his son Aaron II. King Joseph himself was a son of Aaron, AND ASCENDED THE THRONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW OF THE CHAZARS RELATING TO SUCCES­SION. . .The king had twenty-five wives, all of royal blood, and sixty concubines, all famous beauties. Each one slept in a separate tent and was watched by a enuch. . .THIS SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN THE BEGINNING OF THE DOWNFALL OF THE CHAZAR KINGDOM. . .The Russian Varangians estab­lished themselves at Kiev. . .until the final conquest of the Chazars by the Russians. . .After a hard fight the Russians con­quered the Chazars. . .Four years later the Russians conquered all the Chazarian territory east of the Azov. . .Many members of the Chazarian royal family emigrated to Spain. . .Some went to Hungary, BUT THE GREAT MASS OF THE PEOPLE RE­MAINED IN THEIR NATIVE COUNTRY."

The greatest historian on the origin and the history of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in eastern Europe was Professor H. Graetz, himself a so-called or self-styled "Jew". Professor H. Graetz points out in his famous "History of the Jews" that when so-called or self-styled "Jews" in other countries hear a rumor about so-called or self-styled "Jews" in the Khazar Kingdom they believe these converted Khazars to be the "lost ten tribes".

These rumors were no doubt responsible for the legend which grew up that Palestine was the "homeland" of the converted Khazars. On page 141 in his "History of the Jews" Professor H. Graetz states:

"The Chazars professed a coarse religion, which was com­bined with sensuality and lewdness. . .After Obadia came a long series of Jewish Chagans (kings), for ACCORDING TO A FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF THE STATE ONLY JEWISH RULERS WERE PERMITTED TO ASCEND THE THRONE. . .For some time THE JEWS OF OTHER COUNTRIES HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE CONVERSION OF THIS POW­ERFUL KINGDOM TO JUDAISM, and when at last a vague rumor to this effect reached them, THEY WERE OF THE OPINION THAT CHAZARIA WAS PEOPLED BY THE REMNANT OF THE FORMER TEN TRIBES."

When the Khazars in the 1st century B.C. invaded eastern Europe their mother-tongue was an Asiatic language, referred to in the Jewish Encyclopedia as the "Khazar languages". They were primitive Asiatic dialects without any alphabet or any written form.

When King Bulan was converted in the 7th century he de­creed that the Hebrew characters he saw in the Talmud and other Hebrew documents was thereupon to become the alphabet for the Khazar language. The Hebrew characters were adapted to the phonetics of the spoken Khazar language in order to pro­vide a means for providing a written record of their speech. The adoption of the Hebrew characters had no racial, political or religious implication.

The western European uncivilized nations which had no al­phabet for their spoken language adopted the alphabet of the Latin language under comparable circumstances. With the inva­sion of western Europe by the Romans the civilization and the culture of the Romans was introduced into these uncivilized ar­eas.
Thus the Latin alphabet was adopted for the language of the French, Spanish, English, Swedish and many other western Eu­ropean languages.

These languages were completely foreign to each other yet they all used the same alphabet. The Romans brought their al­phabet with their culture to these uncivilized nations exactly like the rabbis brought the Hebrew alphabet from Babylonia to the Khazars when they introduced writing to them in the form of the Talmud's alphabet.
Since the conquest of the Khazars by the Russians and the disappearance of the Khazar Kingdom the language of the Khaz­ars is known as Yiddish.

For about six centuries the so-called or self-styled "Jews" of eastern Europe have referred to themselves while still resident in their native eastern European countries as "Yiddish" by nationality. They identified themselves as "Yiddish" rather than as Russian, Polish, Galician, Lithuanian, Rumanian, Hungarian or by the nation of which they were citizens.

They also referred to the common language they all spoke as "Yiddish" also. There are today in New York City as you know, my dear Dr. Goldstein, many "Yiddish" newspapers, "Yiddish" theatres, and many other cultural organization of so-called or self-styled "Jews" from eastern Europe which are identified publicly by the word "Yiddish" in their title.

[END OF QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

Dharma, allow us a rest please. We will take up with the "Yiddish" language when we return so please mark the Journal.

PJ 223

CHAPTER 14

2/18/91 #3 HATONN

TODAY'S WATCH

Hatonn present in the light of Holy God, in service. We shall understand frustrations and denial, chelas, for how can Man know that which has been denied his eyes and ears? Further, we shall keep the humor in all circumstance for it helps lend balance to a most unbalanced experience.

I shall respond to the young man in Saudi Arabia at a later time for I must continue with our work at hand. In all instances you ones must look at the truth of words as they come forth; i.e. "I've skimmed through your articles. . ." How can anyone come to any valid conclusions regarding anything by skimming, things totally out of context? But the great point we must have finally made is he says, ". . .and have come to the conclusion that you are from another planet." This is the first person who has acknowledged that point so vehemently. I am honored, son, since I am the Commander of a Pleiadian vessel called the Phoenix.
My suggestion, however, is to allow that to cause you no dis­comfort for you will be given to KNOW quite soon now exactly how things ARE.

Now, as the young man burning the Journal Expresses to warm himself at night and complaining about using up his matches and lighters--so be it. Man burned the holy books, Newton's works and even burned up the people who brought the Truth--IT CHANGED NOT ONE IOTA OF THE TRUTH. Did the burn­ing at the stake, Bruno, who pronounced and proved the Earth was not the center of the Universe, in conjunction with Caperni­cus, make the Truth less valid? Did the destruction of the works and men who proved the world to be round make the world less round?

There is however, one point of troubling information in the ma­terial, the young man says he majored in Criminal Law, etc. His level of "education" however, indicates that there is even more wrong with your judicial system than even I would outline.

I am also very relieved for you nice Americans that this young man is in Saudi Arabia "defending America and all it stands for?" What does it stand for, son? Further, do you defend a group of citizens by going thousands of miles away to re-seat a monarch with 80 wives while your own home and nation sits naked to any who should wish to attack? How is it that it has come to the point where if you object to the war in principle that you "do not support the troops"! Is it not possible to support the troops and the nation and that for which it stands and still object to a distant war and murder? If I be brainwashed in this matter, I believe that I shall resort to staying cleansed for I care not for the blood of anyone upon my soul. At least fifty children under the age of five-years died in one bombing in Baghdad of a citi­zen shelter which is now admitted by the allies to have been non-military. Is this what you are defending? So be it for I be­lieve this young man might well be as misinformed as the ma­jority of all ones on your globe.

This young man also said that God should decide and is the only one who knows what is to happen in these ending days! Ah, would ye not, then, think it possible God is sending his emis­saries to assist HIS wondrous people from the "damnation of Hell" where the young man has judged me to be placed--without trial even by his "criminal justice system". Let me remind you of some most important data: "For God so loved the world that He sent his Son unto you--and ye crucified Him" and when He ascended unto The Father He said He would go forth and pre­pare a place for YOU--and HE has done so! Perhaps ones should not burn the documents for in the ending the truth might have served better than the watching of a glowing ember or fragment of heat--but IT MOST CERTAINLY IS ONE SURE WAY NOT TO HAVE TO SEE TRUTH--JUST BURY IT! SO BE IT! My committed task it to get the truth to you--YOU MAY DO ANYTHING YOU WISH WITH IT! I remain grate­ful that you have been touched by the words to the extent of bothering to respond--much the less with five pages of written material--that indicates to me that you were touched far more deeply by the "skimming" than thine words project! Life is a most wondrous gift to be not sure WHY ye lay it down! Do ye lay it down for your Mother and lover who weeps for you? Or do you lay it down for a man who takes his "POWER" walks with the big stick each morning and treats your blood as but nothing but a number in his "acceptable losses"? Ponder it, ye readers--most carefully indeed for if this madness be stopped--it shall be ye who do of it!

Now, as to my stupidity and not admitting ever being "wrong", I would suggest that I certainly am first to admit incorrect per­ceptions--i.e., I thought YOU, SIR were mature, educated and humanitarian enough to understand efforts of love and compas­sion--I am obviously "wrong" for ye have outgrown any need of further education or insight to possible misconceptions or his­torical information. I was not aware that the school-systems of this day so thoroughly covered historical and geographical sub­ject materials so extensively that none need further input. Let me assure you, son, that it is the brilliant and educated man who will garner all possible information from whatever comes into his searching hands for he knows he cannot know it all--he does not burn it upon the sands of some desert of which he knew not the location prior to his participation in the "war to defend America".

[QUOTING CONTINUED:]

"YIDDISH"

Before it became known as the "Yiddish" language, the mother-tongue of the Khazars added many words to its limited ancient vocabulary as necessity required. These words were ac­quired from the languages of its neighboring nations with whom they had political, social or economic relations. Languages of all nations add to their vocabularies in the same way. The Khazars adapted words to their requirements from the German, the Slavonic and the Baltic languages. The Khazars adopted a great number of words from the German languages. The Germans had a much more advanced civilization than their Khazar neighbors and the Khazars sent their children to German schools and universities.

The "Yiddish" language is not a German dialect. Many peo­ple are led to believe so because "Yiddish" has borrowed so many words from the German language. If "Yiddish" is a Ger­man dialect acquired from the Germans then what language did the Khazars speak for the 1000 years they existed in eastern Eu­rope before they acquired culture from the Germans? The Khazars must have spoken some language when they invaded eastern Europe. What was that language? When did they dis­card it? How did the entire Khazar population discard one lan­guage and adopt another all of a sudden? The idea is too absurd to discuss. "Yiddish" is the modern name for the ancient mother-tongue of the Khazars with added German, Slavonic and Baltic adopted and adapted numerous words.

"Yiddish" must not be confused with "Hebrew" because they both use the same characters as their alphabets. There is not one word of "Yiddish" in ancient "Hebrew" nor is there one word of ancient "Hebrew" in "Yiddish". As I stated before, they are as totally different as Swedish and Spanish which both likewise use the same Latin characters for their alphabets. The "Yiddish" language is the cultural common denominator for all the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in or from eastern Europe. To the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in and from eastern Eu­rope "Yiddish" serves them like the English language serves the populations of the 48 states of the United States. Their cultural common denominator throughout the 48 states is the English lan­guage, or wherever they may emigrate and resettle. The En­glish language is the tie which binds them to each other. It is the same with the "Yiddish" language and so-called or self-styled "Jews" throughout the world.

"Yiddish" serves another very useful purpose for so-called or self-styled "Jews" throughout the world. They possess in "Yiddish" what no other national, racial or religious group can claim. Approximately 90% of the world's so-called or self-styled "Jews" living in 42 different countries of the world to­ day are either emigrants from eastern Europe, or their par­ents emigrated from eastern Europe. "Yiddish" is a language common to all of them as their first or second language accord­ing to where they were born. It is an "international" language to them. Regardless of what country in the world they may set­tle in they will always find co-religionists who also speak "Yiddish". "Yiddish" enjoys other international advantages too obvious to describe here. "Yiddish" is the modern language of a nation which has lost its existence as a nation. "Yiddish" never had a religious implication, although using Hebrew char­acters for its alphabet. It must not be confused with words like "Jewish". But it is very much.

Directly north of the Khazar Kingdom at the height of its power a small Slavic state was organized in 820 A.D. on the south shore of the Gulf of Finland where it flows into the Baltic Sea. This small state was organized by a small group of Varangians from the Scandanavian peninsula on the opposite shore of the Baltic Sea. The native population of this newly formed state consisted of nomad Slays who had made their home in this area from earliest recorded history. This infant nation was even smaller than our state of Delaware. This newly-born state however was the embryo which developed into the great Russian Empire. In less than 1000 years since 820 A.D. this synthetic nation expanded its borders by ceaseless conquests un­til it now includes more than 9,500,000 square miles in Europe and Asia, or more than three times the area of continental United States, and they have not stopped.

During the 10th, 11th, 12th and 13th centuries the rapidly ex­panding Russian nation gradually swallowed up the Khazar kingdom, its neighbor directly to the south. The conquest of the Khazar Kingdom by the Russians supplies history with the ex­planation for the presence after the 13th century of the large number of so-called or self-styled "Jews" in Russia. The large number of so-called or self-styled "Jews" in Russia and in east­ern Europe after the destruction of the Khazar Kingdom were thereafter no longer known as Khazars but as the "Yiddish" pop­ulations of these many countries. They so refer to themselves today.

In the many wars with her neighbors in Europe after the 13th century Russia was required to cede to her victors large areas which were originally part of the Khazar Kingdom. In this man­ner Poland, Lithuania, Galicia, Hungary, Rumania, and Austria acquired from Russia territory originally a part of the Khazar Kingdom. Together with this territory these nations acquired a segment of the population of so-called or self-styled "Jews" de­scended from the Khazars who once occupied the territory. These frequent boundary changes by the nations in eastern Eu­rope explains the presence today of the so-called or self-styled "Jews" in all these countries who all trace their ancestry back to the converted Khazars. Their common language, their common culture, their common religion, and their common racial char­acteristics classify them all beyond any question of doubt with the Khazars who invaded eastern Europe in the 1st century B.C. and were converted to "Talmudism" in the 7th century.

[H: Interruption for comment. I am asked why these people are continually referred to by Freedman, and me for that matter, as "so-called" or "self-styled"? Because, dear ones, that is how they refer to themselves--"self-styled" for they practice none of the original Judean practices but totally follow the Talmud]

The so-called or self-styled "Jews" throughout the world to­day of eastern European origin make up at least 90% of the world's total present population of so-called or self-styled "Jews". The conversion of King Bulan and the Khazar nations in the 7th century accomplished for "Talmudism", or for "Judaism" as "Talmudism" is called today, what the conversion of Constantine and the western European nations accomplished for Christianity. Christianity was a small comparatively unim­portant religious belief practiced principally in the eastern Mediterranean area until the conversion to the Christian faith of the large populations of the western European pagan nations af­ter the conversion of Constantine. "Talmudism", or "Judaism" as "Talmudism" is known today, was given its greatest stimulus in all its history with the conversion of the large pagan Khazar population in the 7th century. Without the conversion of the Khazar population it is doubtful if "Talmudism", or "Judaism" as "Talmudism" is known today, could have survived. "Talmudism", the civil and religious code of the Pharisees, most likely would have passed out of existence like the many other creeds and cults practiced by the peoples in that area before, during and after "Pharisaism" assumed its prominent position among these creeds and cults in the time of Jesus. "Talmudism", as "Pharisaism" was called later, would have dis­appeared with all its contemporary creeds and cults but for the conversion of the Khazars to "Talmudism" in the 7th century. At that time "Talmudism" was well on its way towards complete oblivion.

In the year 986 A.D. the ruler of Russia, Vladimir III, be­came a convert to the Christian faith in order to marry a Catholic Slavonic princess of a neighboring sovereign state. The marriage was otherwise impossible. Vladimir III thereupon also made his newly-acquired Christian faith the state religion of Russia replacing the pagan worship formerly practiced in Russia since it was founded in 820 A.D. Vladimir HI and his succes­sors as the rulers of Russia attempted in vain to convert his so-called or self-styled "Jews", now Russian subjects, to Russia's Christian state religion, and to adopt the customs and culture of the numerically predominant Russian Christian population. The so-called or self-styled "Jews" in Russia refused and resisted this plan vigorously. They refused to adopt the Russian alphabet in place of the Hebrew characters used in writing their "Yiddish" language. They resisted the substitution of the Russian language for "Yiddish" as their mother-tongue. They opposed every at­tempt to bring about the complete assimilation of the former sovereign Khazar nation into the Russian nation. They resisted with every means at their disposal. The many forms of tension which resulted produced situations described by history as "massacres", "pogroms", "persecution", discrimination, etc.

In Russia at that period in history it was the custom as in other Christian countries in Europe at that time to take an oath, vow or pledge of loyalty to the rulers, the nobles, the feudal landholders and others in the name of Jesus Christ. It was after that conquest of the Khazars by the Russians that the wording of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer was altered. The new altered version of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows" prayer is referred to in the Talmud as "the law of revocation in advance". The "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer was regarded as a "law". The effect of this "LAW OF REVOCATION IN ADVANCE" ob­tained for all who recited it each year on the eve of the Day of Atonement divine dispensation from all obligations acquired un­der "oaths. vows and pledges" to be made or taken in the COM­ING YEAR. The recital of the "Kol 1VIdre" (All Vows) prayer on the eve of the Day of Atonement released those so-called or self-styled "Jews" from any obligation under "oaths. vows or pledges" entered into during the NEXT TWELVE MONTHS. The "oaths. vows and pledges" made or taken by so-called or self-styled "Jews" were made or taken "with tongue in cheek", for twelve months.

[H: Now I am barraged with, "...well, what about the Chris­tians--were they so perfect?" No indeed--they certainly were NOT and now have taken up the slop-over of the "Talmudic" teachings and are calling it "New Teachings for a Modern Society". However, my scribe can only type so fast and we can only do one thing at a time in your time and space limitations. Further, it does no good to say, "Go read the history books and save us this work," for you won't do so--you even "skim" that which we give you and pronounce judgment with practically no study what-so-ever. We have to take it according to the blueprint of God's sequence pro­jections--therefore, NOW, at this sitting we are speaking of Khazar Talmudists now calling themselves Zionists!]

The altered version of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer created serious difficulties for the so-called or self-styled "Jews" when its wording became public property. It apparently did not remain a secret very long, although the Talmud states "the law of revocation in advance was not made public". The altered version of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer soon became known as the "Jews Vow" and cast serious doubt upon "oaths, vows or pledges" given to Christians (or anyone else) by so-called or self-styled "Jews". Christians soon believed that "oaths, vows or pledges" were quite worthless when given by so-called or self-styled "Jews". This was the basis for so-called "discrimination" by governments, nobles, feudal landholders, and others who required oaths of allegiance and loyalty from those who entered their service.

An intelligent attempt was made to correct this situation by a group of German rabbis in 1844. In that year they called an in­ternational conference of rabbis in Brunswick, Germany. They attempted to have the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer completely eliminated from the Day of Atonement ceremonies, and entirely abolished from any religious service of their faith. They felt that this secular prologue to the Day of Atonement ceremonies was void of any spiritual implication and did not belong in any synagogue ritual. However the preponderant majority of the rabbis attending that conference in Brunswick came from eastern Europe. They insisted that the altered version of the "Kol Nidre" (All Vows) prayer be retained exactly as it was then re­cited on the Day of Atonement. They demanded that it be al­lowed to remain as it had been recited in eastern Europe since the change by Meir ben Samuel six centuries earlier. It is today recited in exactly that form throughout the world by so-called or self-styled "Jews". Will the 150,000,000 Christians in the United States react any differently when they become more aware of its insidious implications?

How genuine can the implications, inferences and innuendoes of the so-called "brotherhood" and "interfaith" movements be under these circumstances? These so-called movements are sweeping the nation like prairie fires. If the Talmud is the axis of the political, economic, cultural and social attitudes and ac­tivities of so-called or self-styled "Jews" participating in these two so-called movements, how genuine are the "oaths, vows or pledges" taken or given in connection with these so-called movements by so-called or self-styled "Jews"? It would be a superlative gesture of "brotherhood" or of "interfaith" if the Na­tional Conference of Christians and Jews succeeded in expung­ing from the Talmud all anti-Christ, anti-Christian, and anti-Christianity passages. At a cost of many millions of dollars the National Conference of Christians and Jews succeeded in ex­punging from the New Testament passages which so-called or self-styled "Jews" regarded as offensive to their faith. A great portion of the cost was supplied by so-called or self-styled "Jews". Christians might now supply funds to expunge from the Talmud passages offensive to the Christian faith. Otherwise the so-called "brotherhood" and "interfaith" movements are merely mockeries.

[END QUOTING FOR THIS SEGMENT]

We would take another rest, please. I hope you can begin to understand what a tremendous wall of humanity you face when you march off on this ground war in the Middle East and if the Islamic and Moslem world rise against you. You see, what you don't understand is that the "Christ" teachings are a way of life--not A MAN. Christ is a "state of being", not a Man's name. Whether or not the practice of "religion" of the Islams and Moslems is valid or invalid makes no difference at all-you have "modernized" your "Christianity" to suit the Satanic input by "voting in" all sorts of forbidden practices against the command­ments as given forth--and naming it "modernization". The old world in the Middle East has not and they will rise up against you in the perception that YOU are the anti-christ Satan. Right or wrong will cease to have any meaning as the blood begins to flow for there will be no sitting to a table to disagree and pro­duce documents to debate the point. Those ones in the Middle East of those stoic religions, right or wrong, KNOW THAT FOR WHICH THEY STAND--HOW MANY OF YOU KNOW ABSOLUTELY THAT FOR WHICH YOU STAND AND LAY DOWN FORFEIT THE LIVES OF YOUR CHILDREN? Tell me that for which you stand and I will show you that it is not that which is taking place in Saudi Arabia this day! Salu.