1/4 페이지 1 2 3 4 마지막마지막
Results 1 to 2 of 7

제목: PJ#223, BIRTHING THE PHOENIX VOL. 2

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    宇宙生命一家, 無次 Justice Future Society Institute wave's Avatar
    가입일
    2004-07-16
    게시글
    1,180
    힐링에너지
    100

    Default 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 officer 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.
    첨부된 파일 첨부된 파일
    Last edited by web master; 2013-01-16 at 00:24.

  2. #2
    宇宙生命一家, 無次 Justice Future Society Institute wave's Avatar
    가입일
    2004-07-16
    게시글
    1,180
    힐링에너지
    100

    Default 응답: PJ#223, BIRTHING THE PHOENIX VOL. 2

    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.

주제글 정보

Users Browsing this Thread

이 주제글은 현재 2명이 열람중입니다. (0명의 회원과 2명의 손님)

유사한 글

  1. PJ#222, BIRTHING THE PHOENIX VOL. I
    By wave in forum Phoenix Journals Archives
    관련글: 6
    최신 글: 2013-01-12, 13:26
  2. PJ#011, CRY OF THE PHOENIX
    By wave in forum Phoenix Journals Archives
    관련글: 12
    최신 글: 2011-01-18, 02:39
  3. 관련글: 0
    최신 글: 2009-01-11, 03:26

이 주제글의 글단추(태그)

글쓰기 규칙

  • 새 글 작성이 불가능함
  • 응답글 작성이 불가능함
  • 파일 첨부가 불가능함
  • 내 글 수정이 불가능함
  •