2/5 페이지 처음처음 1 2 3 4 5 마지막마지막
Results 3 to 4 of 9

제목: PJ#229, RISE OF ANTICHRIST VOL. 3

  1. #3
    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#229, RISE OF ANTICHRIST VOL. 3

    PJ 229
    CHAPTER 3
    REC #1 HATONN

    FRI., FEB. 20, 1998 7:49 A.M. YR. 11, DAY 188

    FRI., FEB. 20, 1998
    "MILITARY ACTION BUT NO WAR"
    (Madeleine Albright, Secretary of State, U.S.A.)
    Yesterday, at a better-planned little PUBLIC meeting the Al­bright fiasco went better with a screened GROUP present but I find this one question to be more interesting than the others, or at the least, the answer given by Ms. Albright.

    The question had to do with having a war. Ms. Albright, not being all bright, responded: "Oh this is just a military action, not a war. " A "military action" but no war? This obviously MEANS that it is KNOWN the dumpees are not able to fight back against the dumpors! So you just go blow up a bunch of innocent people, wipe out citizen ability to survive--but it "ISN'T WAR"?

    I SIMPLY DO NOT BELIEVE YOU CAN GET MUCH LOWER THAN THIS, AMERICA!

    THE ONE SURE THING FOR THE DEMISE OF BILLY ZIPPER IS TO SEND THOSE BOMBERS! YOU HAD BET­TER WAKE UP, WORLD. EVIL IS STILL NOT A POPU­LAR ACTIVITY IF AND WHEN THE WORLD KNOWS ABOUT IT. INDISCRETION IS PART OF THE POLITICAL GAME BUT OUTRIGHT EVIL IS STILL FROWNED UPON THROUGH THE REST OF THE WORLD--AND THIS TIME, VISIBLE OR INVISIBLE--THE U.S., BRITAIN AND CANADA STAND ALONE AS THE EVIL EMPIRE!
    PATRIOT GROUPS
    AND BIOLOGICAL AGENTS
    The first thing I want to discuss is the topic of Col. James "BO" Gritz. Just because I mention his name DOES NOT mean that somehow I involve him in anything. Those nice warm PA­TRIOT groups involve him because they assume if they get into trouble he will come to bail them out of whatever mess they have gotten into on their short-time thinking.

    I don't have anything to discuss "about" Gritz other than one emphatic FACT. Bo Gritz is in no way at all a traitor to this country, a fanatic anything, or whatever ones choose to call him who wish to damage him. He took an oath to protect HIS COUNTRY under the most disciplined circumstances, and if he fails to have "thank you" graces, perhaps you could be a bit more kind and generous while you don't know anything about much of anything.

    Gritz is a TRAINED Delta Force Special Forces Officer (LEADER) and he has been involved in some things beyond any of your wildest dreams and nightmares. And for anyone out of any "movement" calling themselves "patriots" who would come, say, all the way from Ohio to get "close" enough to mention a possibility of being involved with Gritz--and then play with deadly biologicals, is unthinkable and unacceptable.

    What the man thinks of me or my scribe is NONE OF MY BUSINESS.

    Col. Gritz lives in a remote little site in Nevada and there will be every effort to connect him to this Harris, Levitt THING.

    When I speak of offering "cover" for the Colonel it is not what you seem to think that to mean. He has a reason for doing what he is doing and whether he be just an individual trying to make a positive difference or an infiltrator for the whatever--he is doing what he knows to be right.

    It may well be that, like you, Bo doesn't have his Spiritual TRUTH quite straight, but he knows about the nation even if he can't quite identify the "enemy". Actually, he has even identi­fied the enemy. The best any of us can do is try to stay clear of the idiots claiming to want to save something while destroying and then breaking laws to leave themselves open for the "blame" for outrageous actions while the powers-that-be perpetrate the actual actions.

    But whose side is the man on? He is on HIS SIDE. He has a family, children, and he knows what lies ahead for you all in this clamp-down, take-over-governments machine. He presses for you to be prepared for what is ahead, from defense of self to storage of some supplies. He would like to see working com­munities with some hope of survival--wouldn't we all?

    I wonder why nobody mentioned George Green or others who also live in Las Vegas for connections to these false patriots and why you just nail onto Gritz? STOP IT, SILLY CHILDREN. You destroy the very things that eventually COULD SAVE YOUR BACON.

    I have offered his stories as he had given them forth AND HE KNOWS THAT THEY ARE NOT TRUE--SO HE CAN CALL ME "FALSE". I SHALL CONTINUE TO SHELTER WHERE I CAN DO SO. Did he really do all those things in Asia, Cambodia, Shan, etc? He said he did and I remind you all: if a man intro­duces HIMSELF to me and calls himself Jesus Christ or any other name--I will address him from that moment on (until in­formation changes) as Mr. Christ. Of course things were and are not as presented, but what in your government or intelli­gence circles IS?

    Whatever you do or don't perceive Gritz to be--he has one of the most focused and brilliant minds of your generations. If he lacks a few social and political graces as we would like to re­ceive, then let us look at our own flaws and then if we are each PERFECT, cast a stone.

    Yes he was a Mason and yes he was a Mormon--there is nothing hidden about either. The Anti-Christ is very devious and hard to catch, especially as you try one religious CALL after another. Where do you find God? Well, most look in all the wrong faces and places, so let's not be judging.

    I don't care whether Harris was working on live anthrax or vac­cines for same, he should not have been causing such trouble when your nation is planning to go to war and is destroying things to make it look like YOU ARE DOING IT TO YOUR­SELVES. This is NOT an act of patriotism--it is the act of warped minds and selfish "saviour" attitudes.

    What will SAVE your world? TRUTH! When ALL the lies stop and when it is not acceptable to have politicians lie and then rig meetings for political gain--then you may have a place to start.

    Everybody hooked in with either government or intelligence services is REQUIRED TO LIE AND BE ABLE TO DO SO WHILE PASSING LIE DETECTOR TESTS. BELIEVE IT!

    And, yes, I suggest to those in the "Preparedness" group to be very, very careful for you have ENEMIES and disinformation people AMONG YOU, but you already know that, don't you?

    When people MOVE OUTSIDE THE LAW to save something else--they are WRONG! Two wrongs will never make even half a "right". When you learn to live in honest integrity within the laws of land and God, you will have learned what strength and power IS.

    It is a bit like the President debacle. Why go over all the possi­bilities--if he had not lied and broken laws and moral guidelines for his own purposes, he would NOT BE IN THE MESS IN THE FIRST PLACE. Has anyone heard of NOT BREAKING THE LAW AND HAVING MORAL FOUNDATIONS ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY BE AN EXAMPLE FOR YOUR GROWING CHILDREN WITHIN A FREE NATION? When your top leaders are criminals, liars, cheats and immoral people‑-you have a criminal, lying, cheating and immoral NATION. And, of all the things Bo Gritz learned, it was that you can't even run for President and beat the machinery set to FIX ELECTIONS. But you can't HAVE A SAVIOR for the United States or any other "taken" nation--the nation of citizens have to SAVE THEMSELVES.

    You are going to come to find that Antichrist and World Elite are not Jews, Gentiles, Catholics, Protestants, Mormons or Na­tive Americans, Europeans, or any of these THINGS. If you break the laws of GOD (CHRIST LAWS) YOU are among the Antichrist. Antichrist has no one structure--but the dangerous ones to your world ARE THE ONES AT THE TOP LEVELS OF CONTROL--EVERY TIME.

    Wouldn't it be nice to point a finger and say, "Ah there goes a Mason so he is the Antichrist." Or, "That man is in the Illumi­nati and he is the Antichrist." It is not that simple, is it? For CHRIST IS A STATE OF BEING TOWARD, EVER TOWARD, perfection in TRUTH. The Masons began as BUILDERS. Ev­ery good thing that you have or begat will be corrupted if YOU ALLOW IT--but mostly in your ignorance YOU CORRUPT IT AND THEN GET MAD AT SOMEONE ELSE AND BLAME THEM FOR YOUR PLIGHT.

    I can only remind each and all of you that if you live by the bomb (tinker with them or use them), by the sword, or by the gun, you will be taken DOWN with and over them. Even the CONCEPT utilized for simple "defense" will bring you down because that is the WAY you will be caught and prosecuted, in­nocent or guilty.

    Anyone can take exception with me, that is not difficult no mat­ter who I might be. The proof of my teachings are exampled all about you now.

    The war between good and evil WILL BE WON THROUGH SPIRIT AND WISDOM. Where have you placed YOURS? So be it.

    Issue of June 26, 1920
    [QUOTING:] PART 8, GLOBAL PARASITES

    JEWISH QUESTION BREAKS INTO
    THE MAGAZINES
    "We must force the Gentile governments to adopt measures which will promote our broadly conceived plan already approaching its triumphal goal by bringing to bear the pressure of stimulated public opinion which has in reality been organized by us with the help of the so-called 'great power' of the Press. With few exceptions, not worth considering, it has already fallen into our hands." The Seventh Protocol

    Once upon a time an American faculty member of an Ameri­can university went to Russia on business. He was expert in a very important department of applied science and a keen ob­server. He entered Russia with the average American's feeling about the treatment which the government of that people ac­corded the Jew. He lived there three years, came home for a year, and went back again for a similar period, and upon his second return to America he thought it was time to give the American public accurate information about the Jewish Question in Russia. He prepared a most careful article and sent it to the editor of a magazine of the first class in the Eastern United States. The editor sent for him, spent most of two days with him, and was deeply impressed with all he learned--but he said he could not print the article. The same interest and examina­tion occurred with several other magazine editors of the first rank.

    It was not because the professor could not write--these editors gladly bought anything he would write on other subjects. But it was impossible for him to get his article on the Jews accepted or printed in New York.

    [H: Can you see that it is not "Jew" or Jewish? It was de­cided by the Antichrist would-be-CONTROLLERS and One­World-Kings that it WOULD BE THROUGH USE OF THIS CLANNISH ELEMENT OF "DIFFERENT" PEOPLE WHO SET THEMSELVES ASIDE OF THEIR OWN ACCORD--THAT THEY COULD MAKE THEIR SUCCESSFUL PLAY OF TAKING THE WORLD. Face it, the so-called Jewish people are the first to pay in misery, and actual genocide is their plight in every game so far played among the nations.
    Didn't you notice that Netanyahu FIRST went to the Jewish people in America on his last visit to get financing beyond what you already pay Israel--and got a NASTY RECEP­TION and a sound "No"? So, what did he do next? He marched over to Jerry Falwell's "christian fundamentalists" and got everything he wanted and MORE. UNLESS YOU KNOW WHAT IS WRONG--YOU CAN'T FIX IT.]

    The Jewish Question, however, has at last broken into a New York magazine. Rather it is a fragment of a shell hurled from the Jewish camp at the Jewish Question to demolish, if possible, the Question and thus make good the assertion that there is no such thing.

    Incidentally, it is the only kind of article on the Jewish Ques­tion that the big magazines, whose mazes of financial controllers make most interesting rummaging, would care to print.

    Yet, the general public may learn much about the Question even from the type of article whose purpose is to prove that the Questions doesn't exist.

    Mr. William Hard, in the Metropolitan for June, has done as well as could be expected, considering the use he was supposed to make of such material as he had at hand. And doubtless the telegraph and letter brigades, which keep watch over all printed references to the Jews, have duly congratulated the good editors of the Metropolitan for their assistance in soothing the public to further sleep.

    It is to be hoped, for the sake of the Question, that Mr. Hard's effort will have a wide reading, for there is very much to be learned from it--much more than it was anybody's intention should be learned from it.

    It may be learned, first, that the Jewish Question exists. Mr. Hard says it is discussed in the drawing-rooms of London and Paris. Whether the mention of drawing-rooms was a writer's device to intimate that the matter was unimportant and frivolous, or merely represented the extent of Mr. Hard's contact with the Question is not clear. He adds, however, that a document re­lating to the Question was "traveled a good bit in certain official circles in Washington". He also mentions a cable dispatch to the New York World, concerning the same Question, which that paper published. His article was probably published too early to note the review which the London Times made of the first doc­ument referred to. But he has told the reader there is a Jewish Question, and that it does not exist among the riff-raff, either, but principally in those circles where the evidence of Jewish power and control is most abundant. Moreover, the Question is being discussed. Mr. Hard tells us that much. If he does not go further and tell us that it is being discussed with great serious­ness in high places and among men of national and international importance, it is probably because of one of two things, either he does not know, or he does not consider it consonant with the purpose of the article to tell.

    However, Mr. Hard has already made it clear that there is a Jewish Question, that it is being discussed, that it is being dis­cussed by people who are best situated to observe the matter they are talking about.

    The reading of Mr. Hard's article makes it clear also that the Question always comes to the fore on the note of conspiracy. Of course, Mr. Hard says he does not believe in conspiracies which involve a large number of people, and it is with the ut­most ease that his avowal of unbelief is accepted, for there is nothing more ridiculous to the Gentile mind than a mass con­spiracy, because there is nothing more impossible to the Gentile himself. Mr. Hard, we take it, is of non-Jewish extraction, and he knows how impossible it would be to band Gentiles together in any considerable number for any length of time in even the noblest conspiracy. Gentiles are not built for it. Their conspir­acy, whatever it might be, would fall like a rope of sand. Gen­tiles have not the basis either in blood or interest that the Jews have to stand together. The Gentile does not naturally suspect conspiracy; he will indeed hardly bring himself to the verge of believing it without the fullest proof.

    It is therefore quite easy to understand Mr. Hard's difficulty with conspiracy; the point is that to write his article at all, he is forced to recognize at almost every step that whenever the Jew­ish Question is discussed, the idea of conspiracy occupies a large part in it. As a matter of fact, it is the central idea in Mr. Hard's article, and it completely monopolizes the heading--"Great Jewish Conspiracy".

    The search for basic facts in Mr. Hard's article will disclose the additional information that there are certain documents in existence which purport to contain the details of the conspiracy, or--to drop a word that is unpleasant and may be misleading and which has not been used in this series--the tendency of Jewish power to achieve complete control. That is about all that the reader learns from Mr. Hard about the documents, except that he describes one as "strange and horrible". Here is indeed a re­grettable gap in the story, for it is to discredit a certain docu­ment that Mr. Hard writes, and yet he tells next to nothing about it. Discreditable documents usually discredit themselves. But this document is not permitted to do that. The reader of the ar­ticle is left to take Mr. Hard's word for it. The serious student or critic will feel, of course, that the documents themselves would have formed a better basis for an intelligent judgment. But laying that matter aside, Mr. Hard has made public the fact that there are documents.

    And then Mr. Hard does another thing, as well as he can with the materials at hand, the purpose of the article being what it was, and that is to show how little the Jews have to do with the control of affairs by showing who are the Jews that do con­trol certain selected groups of affairs. The names are all brought forward by Mr. Hard and he alone is responsible for them, our purpose in referring to them being merely to show what can be learned from him.

    Mr. Hard leans heavily on Russian affairs. Sometimes it would almost seem as if the Jewish Question were conceived as the Soviet Question, which it is not, as Mr. Hard very well knows, and although the two have their plain connections, it is nothing less than well-defined propaganda to set up Bolshevist fiction and knock it down by Jewish fact for the purpose of the latter. However, what Mr. Hard offers as fact is very instruc­tive, quite apart from the conclusion which he draws from it.

    Now, take his Russian line-up first. He says that in the cabi­net of Soviet Russia there is only one Jew. But he is Trotsky. There are others in the government, of course, but Mr. Hard is speaking about the cabinet now. He is not speaking about the commissars, who are the real rulers of Russia, nor about the ex­ecutive troops, who are the real strength of the Trotsky-Lenin regime. No, just the cabinet. Of course, there was only one Jew prominent in Hungary, too, but he was Bela Kun. Mr. Hard does not ask us to believe, however, that it is simply be­cause of Trotsky and Kun that all Europe believes that Bolshe­vism has a strong Jewish element. Else the stupid credibility of the Gentile would be more impossible of conception than the idea of a Jewish conspiracy is to Mr. Hard's mind. Why should it be easier to believe that Gentiles are dunces than that Jews are clever?

    However, it is not too much to say that Trotsky is way up at the top, sharing the utmost summit of Bolshevism with Lenin, and Trotsky is a Jew--nobody ever denied that, not even Mr. Braunstein himself (the latter being Trotsky's St. Louis, U.S.A., name).

    But then, says Mr. Hard, the Mensheviks are led by Jews, too! That is a fact worth putting down beside the others. Trot­sky at the head of the Bolsheviks; at the head of the Mensheviks during their opposition of the Bolsheviks were Lieber, Martov and Dan--"all Jews", says Mr. Hard.

    There is, however, a middle party between these extremes, the Cadets, which Mr. Hard says, are or were the strongest bourgeois political party in Russia. "They now have their head­quarters in Paris. Their chairman is Vinaver--a Jew."

    There are the facts as stated by Mr. Hard. He says that Jews, whose names he gives, head the three great divisions of political opinion in Russia.

    And then he cries, look how the Jews are divided! How can there be conspiracy among people who thus fight themselves?

    But another, looking at the same situation may say, look how the Jews control every phase of political opinion in Russia! Doesn't there seem to be some ground for the feeling that they are desirous of ruling everywhere?

    The facts are there. What significance does it bring to the average mind that the three great parties of Russia are led by Jews?

    But that does not exhaust the information which the matter-of-fact reader may find in Mr. Hard's article. He turns to the United States and makes several interesting statements.

    "There is Otto Kahn," he says. Well, sometimes Otto Kahn is there, and sometimes he is in Paris on important international matters, and sometimes he is in London advocating certain al­liances between British and American capital which have to do in a large way with European political conditions. The most conservative men in America are really the most radical; their motives and methods go to the very roots of certain matters; and they are radicals in their own field. The men who controlled the last Republican Convention--if not the last, the most recent--are styled conservatives by those whose vision is circumscribed by certain limited economic interests; but they are the most radical of radicals, they have passed the red stage and are white with it. If it were known what is in the back of Mr. Kahn's mind, if he should display a chart of what he is doing and aiming to do, the term which would then most aptly describe him might be quite different. Anyway, we have it from Mr. Hard, "There is Mr. Kahn."

    "On the other hand," says Mr. Hard, "there is Rose Pastor Stokes." He adds the name of Morris Hillquit. They are, in Mr. Hard's classification, radicals. And to offset these names he adds the names of two Gentiles, Eugene V. Debs and Bill Haywood and intimates that they are much more powerful lead­ers than the first two. Students of modern influences, of which Mr. Hard has long appeared as one, do not think so. Neither Debs nor Haywood ever generated in all their lives a fraction of the intellectual power which Mrs. Stokes and Mr. Hillquit have generated. Both Debs and Haywood live by the others. To ev­ery informed person, as to Mr. Hard in this article, come the Jewish names to mind when the social tendencies of the United States are passed under reflection.

    This is most instructive indeed, that in naming the leaders of so-called conservatism and radicalism, Mr. Hard is driven to use Jewish names. On his showing the reader is entitled to say that Jews lead both divisions here in the United States.

    But Mr. Hard is not through. "The man who does more than any other man--the man who does more than any regiment of other men--to keep American labor anti-radical is a Jew--Samuel Gompers." That is a fact which the reader will place in his list--American labor is led by a Jew.

    Well, then, "The strongest anti-Gompers trade union in the country--The Amalgamated Clothing Workers--and very strong indeed, and very large--is led by a Jew--Sidney Hillman."

    It is the Russian situation over again. Both ends of the movements, and the movement which operates within the movement, are under the leadership of Jews. This, whatever the construction put upon it, is a fact which Mr. Hard is com­pelled by the very nature of his task to acknowledge.

    And the middle movement, "the Liberal Middle" as Mr. Hard calls it, which catches all between, produces in this article the names of Mr. Justice Brandeis, Judge Mack and Felix Frankfurter, gentlemen whose activities since Armistice Day would make a very interesting story.

    For good measure, Mr. Hard produces two other names, "Baron Gunzberg--a Jew" who is "a faithful official" of the Rus­sian Embassy of Ambassador Bakhmetev, a representative of the modified old regime, while the Russian Information Bureau, whose literary output appears in many of our newspapers, is conducted by another Jew, so Mr. Hard calls him, whose name is familiar to newspaper readers, Mr. A.J. Sack.

    It is not a complete list by any means, but it is quite impres­sive. It seems to reflect importance on the documents which Mr. Hard endeavors to minimize to a position of ridiculous unimportance. And it leads to the thought that perhaps the doc­uments are scrutinized as carefully as they are because the read­ers of them have observed not only the facts which Mr. Hard admits but other and more astonishing ones, and have discov­ered that the documents confirm and explain the observations. Other readers who have not had the privilege of learning all that the documents contain are entitled to have satisfaction given to the interest thus aroused.

    The documents did not create the Jewish Question. If there were nothing but the documents, Mr. Hard would not have written nor would the Metropolitan magazine have printed the article here discussed.

    What Mr. Hard has done is to bring confirmation in a most unexpected place that the Question exists and is pressing for dis­cussion. Someone felt the pressure when "The Great Jewish Conspiracy" was ordered and written.

    Issue of June 26, 1920

    [END OF QUOTING]

    Dharma, go back up to the top of the copy and place the date of publication, when we have it. It may take a bit of time for us but I think it important that these articles are recognized as being done long ago and are not of our work but very important as historical foundation for our discussions. When you realize that these are, at this time of writing, some 78 years ago and done by one of the world's leading industrial producers, perhaps you can see how usurped the very Jewish people were and ARE.

    There is something else to be noted here and that is that the Protocols WERE VERY MUCH AROUND AND VERY MUCH RECOGNIZED all the way back, at the least, to the turn of the century. Therefore, when people tell you they are fabrications, forgeries, or false information--you KNOW BET­TER.

    These go hand in hand with TALMUDIC "religion" and have very little to do with any TORAH mandates or Spiritual aspect.

    As you listen to the NEW LEADERS of your nation right here in the U.S.A., as the lawyers and Judges prattle and speculate--there is more and more frequent use and reference to "Talmudic law" and its acceptance in the Judicial system THAT IS. You heard it casually referred to between Marsha Clarke and Judge Ito (Japanese yet) in the Simpson case, and you hear it used al­most daily now in the "panels" of expert observers on the talk circuits regarding the President's indiscretions. This goes be­yond the mundane Admiralty or Maritime law bases of judicial take-over--this is the final hookers to have no judicial justice AT ALL. Remember that Kol Nidre--NOBODY BUT THE IGNO­RANT HAVE TO TELL THE TRUTH--BY LAW. Plausible denial AND LYING ARE TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE. Well, not to me.

    The prattle goes like this: "If you are President, it's alright to dink around with a little kid, but it is not ok to lie under oath." What OATH? After all, it goes on to be prattled: "...politicians HAVE TO lie". Say what?

    I don't know about YOU in particular, but I know that lying is the most acceptable thing you people do and you claim it is to keep from hurting or offending. "Little white lies" you call them. If someone asks for help you say, "I gave at the of­fice..." or "Well, I have this tax problem..." or "I wanted to go but I had..." and the big one, "Well, I had this little fling affair but I didn't want to hurt my wife/husband so...". THIS IS WHERE IT BEGINS, GOOD CITIZENS--RIGHT THERE AND WITH YOU and your own acceptance of bad behaviors, irresponsible attitudes and "me-ness" (if it feels good and I can hide it--fine, go for it). But you know something? These atti­tudes DO DAMAGE--starting with SELF.

    Do you ever fudge? Do you ever find self guilty of these little things--ARE YOU JEWISH? Then why do you blame someone else? The QUESTION is truly not Jewish or Gentile--it is WRONG VS. RIGHT. And a full-blown military excursion where you go kill people half a world away--unilaterally without recourse, IS WAR.

    ANTI-CHRIST IS ANYONE WHO ACTS AGAINST THE LAWS AND GUIDELINES OF CHRIST! NOW, IS THAT SIMPLE ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND?

    So, have I fudged about, say, Col. Bo Gritz and the tales which were not true? No, but I knew the difference--but I only re­peated what was personally told to me by Mr. Gritz himself and in his public literature. Man has no other source upon which to base his understanding except that which he LEARNS, and if you refuse to learn truth, you are trapped within the LIE. I re­peat what was said last night by a TV Host: "Did it ever occur to anyone to not break the law in the first place?" It is sort of like "safe sex"--did anyone think of solving the problems by RESPONSIBILITY and not playing in the clandestine and dan­gerous games? Catching a disease is one of the lesser lasting damages from "unsafe sex".

    If you learned that it was fine to play around, then you DID NOT LEARN THAT FROM CHRIST--THEREFORE, SINCE THERE IS ONLY "CHRIST" AND "ANTICHRIST", WHICH WAS YOUR TEACHER?

    I am being hard on everyone? OH? How so? I would not have assumed that any of YOU would practice irresponsible behav­iors--if you follow the RIGHT TEACHERS. So, scribe, per­haps we won't have to work so hard later if we do our work now--we don't have to change the world, save anyone or the world, JUST TELL THE TRUTH. God promised the WORD OF TRUTH and never did HE suggest we stuff it down any­one's gullet!

    Moreover, don't be offended by callers who claim their way is righteous and yours is incorrect and go on to explain how they do their good works sponsoring Boy's choirs and good candi­dates for power places. We can't afford to do the paper much the less sponsor Boy's choirs from Europe to America. Culture comes when a world is good enough to endorse and support good culture--until then it is simply a bunch of little boys singing, in this instance, Catholic songs.

    And what of such as Yanni? Yanni is a Ramtha student now almost totally orchestrated by the CIA. Shocking? Can't be the truth? Oh yes indeed it is so. How do you think such inroads were made into China and India to do a "New Age" concert? His lady is a long-time intimate supporter of J.Z. and the "movement". Don't be blind just because you are titillated by some show or tell.

    So, who is this 64,000-year-old E.T., Ramtha? He is now a 64,032-year-old E.T., I suppose. Do I know him? Of course, we all come to know these "barbarians" as he describes himself, "Master".

    "But Yanni is Greek..." you exclaim. Yes, and so is Latsis of the Greek Mafia. Greece fell, Rome fell, Egypt fell, all the GREAT civilization FELL. IS IT NOW YOUR TURN? AND, OH YES INDEED, THIS THING YOU CALL THE "CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION" WILL FALL BECAUSE YOU HAVE LEFT OUT ONE THING: CHRIST. Adonai.
    CHAPTER 4
    REC #1 HATONN
    SAT., FEB. 21, 1998 8:01 A.M. YR. 11, DAY 189

    SAT., FEB. 21, 1998
    THE SHAME AND THE BLAME
    IS ON "YOU". AMERICA, U.S.A.
    We actually had a high-level marketing person FROM AN­OTHER NEWSPAPER call and tell us to stop running the mate­rial we are covering.

    Number one: We will run TRUTH until somebody who can stop the insanity does so.

    Number two: If another paper runs something publicly that is worthy of note, we will use it if we have permission. If no permission is granted, we will not even further recommend any of you readers take that paper. NOBODY has an inside track on this world MESS, and unless they are writing pure fiction under copyright, do they have the "Wag the Dog" corner on the do­mestic mess.

    Number three: For goodness sakes, readers, KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING BEFORE YOU DO IT--OR AT THE LEAST KNOW WHAT TO DO WHEN YOU ARE STOPPED FROM DOING IT.

    Why have I been writing about "Jews" and Israeli matters? Be­cause of the following:

    [QUOTING, SPOTLIGHT, Feb. 23, 1998:]

    EDITORIAL
    THINK ABOUT IT
    Throughout history there have been thousands of wars. The victor may commit genocide. He may stack human skulls in pyramids, rape and enslave the women and kill the men. He can raze the cities and burn the crops.

    These are things a victor MAY do. But there is one thing he absolutely HAS TO DO.

    A victor always must control the subjugated nation's foreign policy and armed forces. This is certain.

    IS IT NOT TRUE THAT AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY HAS BEEN TAKEN OVER AND IS RUN FOR THE BENEFIT OFA FOREIGN NATION?

    Of course this is true.
    Therefore, is America a conquered vassal of a foreign na­tion, even though most Americans are unaware of it?

    Answer that question HONESTLY, if you are capable of honesty. THINK ABOUT IT. [END OF QUOTING]

    Make sure Ms. Albright's picture is affixed; you know, that Secretary of State, U.S.A. who "didn't know she was Jewish".

    (Make sure Ms. Albright's picture is affixed;
    you know, that Secretary of State, U.S.A.
    who "didn't know she was Jewish".)
    SPOTLIGHT's same paper has a most interesting Front Page ar­ticle. Note while you read this information regarding disinfor­mation just how much totally bad information is being fed to your leaders in order for you, as a nation, to become world killers, first class! Remember the President and the scallywags are telling you that Saddam has some 80 palaces of sizes ranging from huge and palatial to even bigger than many states in the U. S.?

    Well, the U.N. diplomats have now found all EIGHT of them, gone through them thoroughly, found living quarters of rather small size and grounds of small size with perhaps a pond or so. There is NOTHING in them that so much as suggests there is anything amiss--IN ANY OF THEM.

    THERE IS A MOVE ON NOW TO GET U.S. CITIZENS OF DIPLOMATIC STATURE, ARAB DIPLOMATS, PERHAPS THE U.N. DELEGATES AND AMBASSADORS, AND SET­TING UP HOUSEKEEPING IN ALL OF THE PLACES TARGETED FOR BOMBS--AND SEE HOW EAGER MR. CLINTON IS TO PLAY PAC-MAN VIDEO GAMES. IS­RAEL WANTS TO HAVE ANY EXCUSE TO USE NEU­TRON BOMBS ON AN ENEMY--AND THAT IS SOON GO­ING TO BE "YOU" GOOD BUDDIES. YOU ARE TO­TALLY CONTROLLED BY THIS ISRAELI CRIMINAL EL­EMENT AND YOU WILL EITHER WAKE UP OR IT IS OVER FOR AMERICA AND THE SO-CALLED "FREE WORLD". YOU ARE RIGHT FACE-TO-FACE WITH IT, AMERICA.
    [QUOTING:]

    CLINTON HOODWINKED ON IRAQ
    DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN BY MOSSAD
    by Martin Mann
    Once again a foreign intelligence service has hoodwinked an American President. This time the subject is Iraq. [H: By the way, "hoodwinked" is a good old Masonic term.]

    The Clinton administration is being relentlessly driven toward another armed clash with Iraq--and a disastrous confrontation with the vast world of Islam. The motivating factor is a stream of deceptive and fabricated intelligence reports fed to the White House, congressional leaders and the U.S. mainstream media by the Israeli government and its powerful Washington lobby.

    The SPOTLIGHT has learned exclusively from briefings and documents provided by high-level diplomatic sources that Presi­dent Bill Clinton's decision to order U.S. forces in the Gulf on a war footing came after he was shown top secret strategic esti­mates arguing that the regime of Iraqi strongman Saddam Hus­sein could be toppled by "crippling" air raids.

    UNRELIABLE REPORTS
    But Middle Eastern diplomatic sources warn that these re­ports are based on information put out by the Mossad, Israel's secret service, after its agents purportedly co-opted and de­briefed a key Iraqi defector last December. [H: "Purportedly" is THE key word here. My goodness, readers, aren't you sick unto death of the cheats, liars and Kol Nidre misfits? What does it take to wake you up and get you "mad as hell" so you don't take it anymore? You were once the shining light of the world in freedom, respect, and JOY. You were the dream of every foreign person as a place to live and BE. YOU HAVE BECOME THE EVIL EMPIRE ABOVE ALL OTHERS! YOU ARE TOTALLY RUN BY THE AN­TICHRIST!
    Well, we are run by the help of honest people who support just the mere writing of the word. And here is some non-difficult intelligence reporting: Again, Dr. Young reports that we don't even have enough funds to publish this paper. Well, we dug up funds enough for this one--but how do we do the next? Every other truth-bringer is in the same posi­tion and, therefore, we each do that which we can and push as hard as we can to survive. But is survival enough? You must face your enemy NOW, World, for he has just eaten and is digesting America (all countries represented therein).]

    In a detailed intelligence summary distributed both to the White House and the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Mossad identified the defector as Iraqi Lt. Col. Wafik al­Sammarrai. He was described as a former chief of Saddam Hussein's military intelligence service, who was said to have de­fected in late 1996 while on a trip to Greece.

    Col. al-Sammarrai allegedly told Israeli interrogators that a number of Iraq's armed forces commanders were "fed up" with Saddam Hussein's one-man rule and opposed his "suicidal" con­frontation with the West.

    According to the Mossad summary sent to Washington through back channels, the renegade Iraqi officer identified some of these disaffected generals by name.

    If pounding, merciless U.S. air raids smashed the Iraqi ruler's palaces, his national communications network including Baghdad TV and radio, as well as other key installations, the generals would "see the light" and oust Saddam Hussein, Col. al-Sammarrai reportedly assured his Israeli interrogators.

    WARNING NOTICE
    But senior Middle Eastern diplomatic sources have provided this populist newspaper's diplomatic correspondent with access to a warning notice circulated last month by the Arab League among the leaders of its 21 member states.

    The confidential memorandum points out that the Mossad's intelligence summary, attempting to justify all-out bombardment of Iraq, sounds like a fabrication.

    It appears to be just another "disinformation, cover and de­ception operation of the sort Israel has launched on numerous past occasions" to mislead and manipulate U.S. strategy, the Arab League circular cautions.

    [H: How many of you readers are even yet informed (by the time you get this paper) about the cute games of yesterday and the day before BY YOUR U.S. GOVERNMENT AND THE MOVIE MAKERS? THEY GOT CAUGHT WITH THE FILM OF BOMBING RUNS AND STRIKES AL­READY READY TO SHOW YOU-THE-PEOPLE, Is this Mr. Spielberg at his finest, or what? WAG THE DOG, PEOPLE; THIS IS SICKER THAN SICK. YOU PLAN TO GO BOMB A BUNCH OF PEOPLE AND YET THE NICE PRECISION STRIKES MOVIE YOU WILL BE SHOWN AS PUBLIC ONGOING "REPORTING" IS NOT ONLY READY, IT IS EDITED AND WAITING. THE EDITING CREW GOT CAUGHT AND, OF COURSE, THE REAL LIES STARTED LIKE A BLIZZARD, BUT ALL THE STORIES WERE DIFFERENT--OH WELL. AND WHAT HAPPENED ON THE MOON WITH YOU GUYS? AN­TICHRIST HAS GOTCHA, AMERICA!]

    It cites several inconsistencies in the Mossad's intelligence summary, including the fact that Col. al-Sammarrai "is known to have left Iraq well before 1996; in fact, he has been described as a paid international anti-Saddam operative ever since 1993."

    As for the Israeli intelligence summary's claim that aerial warfare will set the stage for military uprising in Iraq, indepen­dent observers around the world scoffed at the proposition.

    Even the staid London Times--the voice of Britain's ruling Establishment, claimed by Clinton as his closest ally--dismissed the notion with a single word: "Lunacy".

    OPPOSITION
    The Saudi government responded to these developments with an official announcement by Prince Sultan, its defense minister and second prime minister, widely respected as the Arab world's wisest and most statesmanlike leader.

    "Saudi Arabia is opposed to bombing raids or other military action against the nation and people of Iraq," Prince Sultan pro­claimed.

    Egypt--known in ordinary times as Washington's best-paid and least troublesome Mideast client--went even further. Presi­dent Hosni Mubarak announced that he would convene an emer­gency Arab summit to adopt "measures to prevent any armed aggression against Iraq". [H: And, you will note: THAT HAS HAPPENED!]
    [END OF QUOTING]

    While we are on the topic and have permission to further spread the information, and with unlimited gratitude to SPOTLIGHT who has had to fight these Antichrists for years, let us share some more "REAL STUFF". I ask that we please give all in­formation regarding Spotlight AND Liberty Lobby. If you won't hear us, readers, LISTEN TO THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN AROUND YOUR PLACE, LEARNING THE HARD WAY.

    [QUOTING:]

    ANATOMY OF DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN:
    IT'S IRAN-CONTRA AFFAIR ALL OVER AGAIN

    by Martin Mann
    Today's Mideast deception campaign has a "made in Israel" la­bel, just like the Iran-Contra scandal.

    Ten years ago, National Review, the nominally conservative magazine published by talk-show host William F. Buckley, [a Jew with a British accent], provided the anatomy of a mammoth disinformation and deception operation by Israel. This was the so-called Iran-Contra affair. Now another Israeli operation against the U.S. government threatens to plunge the country into war, and Israel is using the same blueprint. [H: No! It is not against the U.S. government. Just like back then--THEY ARE THE U.S. GOVERNMENT!]

    But the story of how National Review turned into a vehicle for the ministate's black propaganda mendacities is important again this year, when the Israel lobby is once again inflaming public opinion--this time against Iraq--with a similar campaign of lies and distorted "threat assessments".

    Buckley and his magazine became unwitting instruments of Israel's entrapment [H: Oh Barf, Mr. Mann.] scheme because both were known for their unconditional support of President Ronald Reagan and of Zionism at the time, evidence assembled by this populist newspaper has suggested.

    In the fall of 1986, the Reagan administration faced a poten­tially fatal crisis: headline stories involving some of its top offi­cials in a conspiracy to sell high-tech armaments to Iran and to funnel some of the proceeds to the Nicaraguan anti-communist fighters known as the "Contras". [H: When all this shakes out you will learn it had nothing to do with Communism and ev­erything to do with CIA-Administration DRUG RUNNING. ARMS WERE ALSO BEING FUNNELLED TO IRAQ AND SADDAM HUSSEIN ALONG WITH BOODLES OF MONEY.]

    To defend themselves against charges of criminal conspiracy, Reagan's top aides decided to tell their story--an account of "what really happened"--to a friendly and trusted U.S. publica­tion.

    The White House chose Buckley and his National Review, known for their unswerving loyalty to Reaganism and to the ide­als of a "Greater Israel". [H: Now, this is right on the mark.]
    On Friday, November 14, 1986--the morning after Reagan gave a speech in which he told the nation of the Iran problem for the first time--the writer assigned by Buckley to the case, Neil C. Livingstone, an "anti-terrorist" expert, sat down in Washington's posh Hay-Adams hotel with Lt. Col. OLIVER NORTH for a secret briefing on the affair. [H: Don't forget this is the SAME Oliver North who went with George Bush, James Baker HI, Lloyd Bentsen, and another couple of thugs, to the hospital to get Russell Herman to sign over the "Super-Fund" Peruvian contract of such current fame. They really couldn't do much more to him, however, for they HAD ALREADY KILLED HIM; he was just waiting to die and even though they hastened his departure-time a bit, he held strong and DID NOT MEET THEIR DEMANDS. INSTEAD, HE AND V.K. DURHAM HAD PUT THAT CONTRACT TO PUBLIC RECORD FOR YOU-THE-PEO­PLE. HOW BLIND YOU ARE AND HOW CARELESS WITH THE GREAT GIFTS OF GOD AND THE SACRI­FICES OF "REAL" MEN. WAS RUSSELL SO GREAT IN HIS INTENTIONS ALL ALONG? NO, HE WAS A FULL PARTNER WITH THEM, SO CERTAINLY HE KNEW WHAT HE WAS DOING AND DID IT FOR YOU AND YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE TIME OF DAY FOR HIM OR HIS GIFT.]

    In a lead article in the January 30, 1987 issue of National Re­view, Livingstone reported on what he learned at that briefing under a splashy cover headline: "What Ollie North Told Me Before He Took the Fifth." [H: And believe me when I tell you that Billy Zipper is "just not himself" lately. He is hav­ing to go to Camp David for revamping every weekend these days. He can't even help what he is doing--he is nothing but a brain-controlled robot.]

    "What follows is, I believe, the true story behind the secret diplomacy with Iran, as told to me by Ollie North," Livingstone wrote.

    In essence, North told the National Review writer that the Reagan Administration, "acting in concert with Israel", had de­cided to sell missiles to Iran after it received secret intelligence reports of menacing Soviet preparations to invade and seize this oil-rich Gulf nation.

    Although Livingstone's article did not specify just where these blockbuster "intelligence" reports came from, it is known today, from the confessions of Col. Robert "Bud" McFarlane, who served as national security director in the Reagan White House at the time, that the reports of a planned Soviet takeover of Iran came from three top Mossad agents.

    AGENTS NAMED
    McFarlane has identified them as David Kimche, then a deputy director of the Israeli secret service; Amiram Nir, the chief intelligence adviser in the Israeli prime minister's office; and Manucher Ghorbanifar, a millionaire arms dealer and Zionist deception operative.

    These Mossad middlemen urgently warned the Reagan White House that legions of Soviet agents--"as many as 600 KGB op­eratives and Spetsnaz [Russian Special Forces unit]" Livingstone reported in National Review--had been infiltrated into Teheran to subvert Iran's fundamentalist Islamic government.

    The undercover Bolshevik invasion of Iran was first of all de­signed to fan the flames of the Iran-Iraq war then in full swing. The Iranian high command was being lured into disastrous as­saults in well-defined Iraqi lines by Soviet disinformation, Ollie North related to Livingstone.

    "Once the Iranian military were destroyed and the [Iranian] Revolutionary Guards were drawn out of Teheran, Moscow's Iranian allies will seize the government, and, as in Afghanistan, request Soviet military assistance," North told the National Re­view writer.

    To comply with that request, hundreds of thousands of Soviet troops were already being massed near the Iranian border, North disclosed.

    As Washington national security officials came to "recognize the seriousness of this threat" reported by Israeli intelligence, President Reagan gave the go-ahead for contacting and arming the "moderate" factions in the Iranian government, who were al­ready said to be in touch with the Mossad, North explained to Livingstone.

    AFTERMATH
    What followed was the tragic-comic aerial mission to Teheran by a secret team of Reagan aides, who were sent to contact the "Iranian moderates" promised by the Mossad-- only to find that they didn't exist.

    In the aftermath, Reagan's national security chief, Col. Mc­Farlane, who felt duped and disgraced by the Mossad's David Kimche, attempted to kill himself.

    Today it is well known that the so-called Israeli "intelligence reports" were at the heart of the Iran-Contra scandal. All of the Mossad's warnings about a Soviet plan to grab Iran were lies, cunning fabrications designed to stampede the Reagan Adminis­tration into endorsing secretive but highly lucrative Israeli arms sales to Iran.

    [END OF QUOTING]

    AND HERE IS A COMFORTING SOMETHING ABOUT "WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION"--FOR REAL:

    [QUOTING, same paper, same page:]

    U.S. TACTICAL NUKES ON STANDBY IN GULF
    by Mike Blair
    Military experts say nuclear weapons must be on board U.S. ships in the Persian Gulf.

    U.S. aircraft carriers poised in the Middle East to launch strikes against Iraq are carrying tactical nuclear bombs and mis­siles with which to arm jet fighter-bombers.

    This is the opinion of a retired Air Force intelligence officer who spoke with The SPOTLIGHT, on the guarantee of anonymity, about the potential tinder box that is about to be ig­nited in the Persian Gulf.

    "Since President Clinton has signed a directive [SPOTLIGHT, Feb. 16] changing the rules to allow the use of tactical nuclear weapons to blast Iraq, it stands to reason that such weapons are already aboard aircraft carriers on station there," the retired officer explained.

    "Certainly," he added, "if a decision is made to use such weapons in retaliation for Iraq's use, or apparent use, of bio­logical and chemical weapons against our troops, or Israel, our military could not be expected to have to wait until they are de­livered to the carriers from bases outside the area."

    PPD-60 CONFIRMED
    The retired intelligence officer was referring to a Presidential Order signed last November, Presidential Policy Directive No. 60, or PPD-60, as it is more commonly known.

    The directive alters U.S. nuclear policy to allow the use of tactical nuclear weapons in the event that Saddam Hussein re­leases any chemical or biological weapons against U.S. forces or neighboring countries, (read: Israel), according to reports being specifically mentioned in the document.

    It is believed that the directive would allow the use of B61 se­ries of tactical nuclear warheads, the so-called "mini-nukes" which have an explosive force of about one kiloton, which makes them about 300 to 500 times more powerful than the largest conventional non-nuclear warheads available to the U.S. military. [H: Very definitely "weapons of mass destruction" any way you cut this pie.]

    The retired Air Force officer [H: He isn't named because we want him to remain "retired" and not "dead".] told The SPOTLIGHT that he believes the nuclear warheads are aboard the U.S. carriers and probably on U.S. surface-to-surface guided missile cruisers and destroyers deployed to the Gulf re­gion. [H: How does this make you feel about the security of your own sons, husbands, fathers and brothers?]

    He said he doubts that they are deployed to Bahrain and Kuwait, from which U.S. Air Force planes will strike Iraq, be­cause the U.S. military would not have total control of these foreign bases.

    However, bases in Bahrain are known to be a jump-off point for U.S. F-15 E fighter bombers and B-1 subsonic bombers, both of which carry laser-guided bombs including an enhanced GBU28, which can penetrate 11 feet of reinforced concrete.

    Both Red China and Russia have announced very vocal oppo­sition to the planned U.S. air strikes against Iraq.

    The question on the minds of many foreign policy experts is whether Russian President Boris Yeltsin was thinking specifi­cally of the U.S. use of tactical nuclear weapons when he stated that an air strike against Saddam Hussein's domain "could spark World War III.

    Actually, the U.S. has pledged not to use nuclear weapons on a signer of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Iraq is a sig­natory. Israel IS NOT.

    That argument does not appease either the Russians or the Red Chinese, both of which are capable of launching nuclear attacks against the United States.

    [END OF QUOTING]

    Now for you who want me to stop writing about these topics, I will tell you now: NO. In addition to other nasties, this is a major opportunity, whether there is, or is not, war, to get an unlimited number of Israelis INTO THE UNITED STATES PERMANENTLY on the basis of their "danger" in Israel, from Iraq. By the PLANELOADS these "now-called refugees" are flooding out of Tel Aviv and INTO THE U.S. AND OTHER INTERIM PLACES WHERE THEY WILL THEN BE TRANSFERRED INTO THE U.S. WITHOUT NEED OF PASSPORTS, PERMISSION, PERMITS OR ANY OTHER REQUIREMENTS.

    I believe it is now appropriate to close this writing with an arti­cle from THE TORONTO STAR, Feb. 20, 1998.

    [QUOTING:]

    FARRAKHAN MAKES FIERY PLEA
    CHALLENGES MAJOR FAITHS IN TORONTO SPEECH
    Rebecca Bragg, staff reporter
    Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan wrapped up a 53-na­tion tour in Toronto last night with a fiery plea for a "revolution" in ATTITUDE among all faith groups.

    In a speech before about 3,000 people at the CNE Coliseum, Farrakhan, who has come under fire in the past for anti-Semitic remarks, slammed all the world's major religions for straying from the intent of their prophets.

    And while no faith was singled out for special criticism, Far­rakhan took aim at people who gave lip service to their religions without making a corresponding commitment to action.

    "Goodness is measured by the quality of your service to God and the quality of your service to man," the charismatic but controversial American leader thundered.

    Too many Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists and Hindus "refuse to attempt the uphill road" and take actions such as "freeing a slave or feeding an orphan", Farrakhan said.

    Although everyone who attended the speech was subjected to a thorough body search before they were allowed in the audito­rium, there wasn't a hint of disorderly conduct all evening.

    Farrakhan's Toronto supporters--women dressed in white tu­nics and hljab (headscarves), clean-cut young men in suits with trademark white shirts and bow ties--were helpful but otherwise unobtrusive.

    Although the vast majority of people in the audience were Black, not all were Muslim, and the event opened first with Is­lamic prayers in Arabic, then Christian prayers in English.

    CANADA AND THE U.S.
    GOVERNMENTS DRAW CRITICISM ON IRAQ
    While the Nation of Islam has been criticized for anti-White bigotry, its followers, mainly in the United States, have also been praised for their commitment to clean living and commu­nity involvement.

    Nothing that Farrakhan, 64, said last night could have been construed as racially divisive.

    But his attitude toward a possible military strike against Iraq left no room for doubt that governments of the Untied States and Canada are in the WRONG.

    "My dear Prime Minister, what has Iraq done to you?" Far­rakhan asked rhetorically.

    "We can't let these politicians rule when they're [crazy] as hell."

    Whatever weapons Saddam Hussein now has in his army were sold to him by Western countries, he told the crowd.

    "As long as Saddam was killing Muslims in Iran, the West didn't give a damn what weapons he used," Farrakhan said.

    Now, with the Iraqi people having endured seven years of deprivation since the Gulf War, "Nothing but a damn group of cowards would make war on a nation that has no ability to fight back," he said.

    [END OF QUOTING]

    Our plea is always, "God please have mercy on us." NO, readers, THERE WILL BE NO MERCY FOR YOUR DELIBERATE ALLOWANCE OF THIS KIND OF ACTION. NONE. THE RETALIATION FROM THE ARAB AND OTHER PEO­PLES OF THE WORLD WILL FALL ON THE DOORSTEPS OF THOSE WHO ALLOWED THE ANTICHRIST OF THE JEWISH FORMAT TO RUN RAMPANT. YOU WILL BE CAUGHT BETWEEN THOSE WHO WOULD KILL YOU ON ONE SIDE AND THOSE WHO WILL WIPE OUT COUN­TRIES WHO HAVE HARBORED THESE ALIENS. IF "YOU" ARE IN THE COUNTRY OF THE BASTARDS, YOU WILL NOT BE SHOWN MUCH MERCY, MY FRIENDS. THAT PHOENIX EMBLEM ON THE JOURNALS AND THAT LOGO ON CONTACT WILL BE "YOUR" TICKET TO SAFETY--I SUGGEST YOU NOT LET THIS RESOURCE DIE BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE MANY TICKETS TO "ANYWHERE" AVAILABLE TO YOU--AND THIS IS GO­ING TO BE BETTER THAN ANY BLOOD SMEARED ACROSS YOUR DOORWAY FOR A "PASSOVER" CERE­MONY.

    Now to close with a confirming notice about what I wrote yes­terday about reparations to Holocaust survivors:

    [QUOTING:]

    BETTER THAN GOLD
    [H: Let's see, the war was in the '40s, half a century ago!]

    Fifty-four years have passed and 100 BILLION Duetsch Marks of German reparations have been paid to "Holocaust sur­vivors" but the Conference of Jewish Material Claims Against Germany has just come up with 18,000 "NEW" Eastern Eu­ropean survivors WHO WILL RECEIVE AN ADDITIONAL DM50 MILLION for each of the next four years from an ever compliant Bonn government.

    [END OF QUOTING]

    I simply have not the time to speak on all things, so we must fo­cus on that which may allow you to LIVE A LITTLE LONGER.

    Good afternoon; have a nice day. Adonai.

  2. #4
    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#229, RISE OF ANTICHRIST VOL. 3

    PJ 229
    CHAPTER 5
    REC #1 HATONN

    SUN., FEB. 22, 1998 8:49 A.M. YR. 11, DAY 190

    SUN., FEB. 22, 1998

    POWER OF THE PRESS AND MEDIA
    Today, just as in 1920, the power of the press and media is THE most compelling tool of any regime. You will, as people, be­lieve what you are told to believe.

    I watch right now, as ones get up to speak on the subject of bombing innocent people in Iraq, that the big mouths (all Jew­ish, it happens to be) say things like, "Well, when we declare intent and the President decides to bomb Iraq ALL THE PEO­PLE OF THE U.S. WILL JOIN WITH US AND BEHIND US--THEY ALWAYS DO!"

    Do you hear me? "They always do...!!!" I see a foolish robot who knows nothing of "real life" standing up before people, for ONCE, while he says, "We (YOU) must sacrifice, and I will lead." BS squared. I see him speaking to the aroused dis­senters, ready to clobber the speaker. Why don't you clobber the guilty once in a while instead of the innocent of someone somewhere else?

    These "MOUTHS" who determine your life and death, friends, NEVER go to battle, never even dirty their grubby hands. They decide and are then shocked if you disagree. What do they do then? They make you AGREE and then send you off to kill and be killed. Is THIS GODLY? No, it is stupidity in its highest form.

    What would you do if you called a war and nobody came? Well, you are about to witness that, blind lambs: Saddam Hussein has done the one thing that no tyrant can abide: He isn't going to do anything in response to your evil. BUT HIS BROTHERS OF THAT WORLD--WILL, WHEN THE TIME IS PERFECT FOR THEIR RESPONSE.

    AND MOREOVER, GOD WILL EVEN THE PLAYING FIELD AGAINST THAT DAY.

    Let us move on with our series so that we can then turn to more pressing business.

    [QUOTING:] PART 9, GLOBAL PARASITES

    ARTHUR BRISBANE LEAPS TO THE
    HELP OF JEWRY
    "What are you prating about? As long as we do not have the Press of the whole world in our hands, everything you may do is vain. We must control or influence the papers of the whole world in order to blind and deceive the people."
    --Baron Montefiore
    Once more the current of this series on the Modern Jewish Question is interrupted to give notice of the appearance of the Question in another quarter, the appearance this time consisting of a more than two-column "TODAY' editorial in the Hearst pa­pers of Sunday, June 20, from the pen of Arthur Brisbane. It would be too much to say that Mr. Brisbane is the most influen­tial writer in the country, but perhaps he is among the dozen most widely read. It is, therefore, a confirmation of the state­ment that the Question is assuming importance in this country, that a writer of Mr. Brisbane's prominence should openly dis­cuss it.

    Of course, Mr. Brisbane has not studied the Question. He would probably admit in private conversation--though such an admission would hardly be in harmony with the tone of certainty he publicly adopts--that he really knows nothing about it. He knows, however, as a good newspaper man, how to handle it when the exigencies of the newspaper day throw it up to him for offhand treatment. Every editorial writer knows how to do that. There is something good in every race, or there have been some notable individuals in it, or it has played a picturesque part in history--that is enough for a very readable editorial upon any class of people who may happen to be represented in the com­munity. The Question, whatever it may be, need not be studied at all; a certain group of people may be salved for a few para­graphs, and the job need never be tackled again. Every news­paper man knows that.

    And yet, having lived in New York for a long time, having had financial dealings of a large and obligating nature with cer­tain interests in this country, having seen no doubt more or less of the inner workings of the great trust and banking groups, and being constantly surrounded by assistants and advisors who are members of the Jewish race, Mr. Brisbane must have had his thoughts. It is, however, no part of a newspaper man's business to expose his thoughts about the racial groups of his community, any more than it is a showman's business to express his opinion of the patrons of his show. The kinds of offense a newspaper will give, and the occasions on which it will feel justified in giving it, are very limited.

    So, assuming that Mr. Brisbane had to write at all, it could have been told beforehand what he would write. The only won­der is that he felt he had to write. Did he really feel that the Jews are being "persecuted" when an attempt is made to un­cover the extent and causes of their control in the United States and elsewhere? Did he feel, with good editorial shrewdness, that here was an opportunity to win the attention and regard of the most influential group in New York and the nation? Or--and this seems within the probabilities--was he inclined simply to pass it over, until secretarial suggestions reached him for a Sun­day editorial, or until some of the bondholders made their wishes known? This is not at all to impugn Mr. Brisbane's mo­tives, but merely to indicate on what slender strings such an ed­itorial may depend.

    But what is more important--does Mr. Brisbane consider that, having disposed of the Sunday editorial, he is through with the Question, or that the Question itself is solved? That is the worst of daily editorializing; having come safely and inoffensively through with one editorial, the matter is at an end as far as that particular writer is concerned--that is, as a usual thing.

    It is to be hoped that Mr. Brisbane is not through. He ought not to leave a big question without contributing something to it, and in his Sunday editorial he did not contribute anything. He even made mistakes which he ought to correct by further study. "What about the Phoenicians?" he asks. He should have looked that up while his mind was opened receptively toward the sub­ject, and he would not have made so miserable a blunder as to connect them so closely with the Jews. He would never find a Jew doing that. It is permissible, however, in Jewish propa­ganda intended for Gentile consumption. The Phoenicians themselves certainly never thought they were connected in any way with the Jews, and the Jews were equally without light on the subject. If in nothing else, they differed in their attitude to­ward the sea. The Phoenicians not only built boats but manned them; the Jew would rather risk his investment in a boat than himself. In everything else the differences between the two peoples were deep and distinct. Mr. Brisbane should have turned up the Jewish Encyclopedia at that point in his dictation. It is to be hoped he will resume his study and when he has found something that is not printed in "simply written" Jewish books will give the world the benefit of it. It is hardly like the ques­tion of the rotundity of the Earth; this Question is not settled and it will be discussed.

    Mr. Brisbane is in a position to pursue some investigations of his own on this subject. He has a large staff, and it is presumed that some of its members are Gentiles of unbiased minds; he has a world-wide organization; since his own modification of speech and views following upon his adventure in the money-making world, he has a "look-in" upon certain groups of men and cer­tain tendencies of power--why does he not take this Question as a world problem and go after the facts and the solution?

    It is a task worthy of any newspaper organization. It will as­sist America to make the contribution which she must make if this Question is ever to be turned from the bugbear it has been through all the centuries. All the talk on Earth about "loving our fellow men" will not serve in lieu of an investigation, be­cause it is asking men to love those who are rapidly and insidi­ously gaining the mastery of them. "What's wrong with the Jew?" is the first question, and then, "what's wrong with the Gentile to make it possible?"

    As in the case of every Gentile writer who appears as the Jew's good-natured defender, Mr. Brisbane is compelled to state a number of facts which comprise a part of the very Question whose existence is denied.

    "Every other successful name you see in a great city is a Jewish name," says Mr. Brisbane. In his own city the ratio is even higher than that.

    "Jews numbering less than one per cent of the Earth's popu­lation possess by conquest, enterprise, industry and intelligence 50 per cent of the world's commercial success," says Mr. Bris­bane.

    Does it mean anything to Mr. Brisbane? Has he ever thought how it will all turn out? Is he willing to absolve that "success" from every quality which humanity has a right to challenge? Is he entirely satisfied with the way that "success" is used where it is supreme? Would he be willing to undertake to prove that it is due to those commendable qualities he has named and nothing less commendable? Speaking of the Jew-financed Harriman railroad campaign, is Mr. Brisbane ready to write his endorse­ment upon that? Did he ever hear of Jewish money backing railroads that were built for railroad purposes and nothing else?

    It would be very easy to suggest to Mr. Brisbane, as editor, a series of articles which would be most enlightening, both to himself and his readers, if he would only put unbiased men at work gathering the facts for them.

    One of the articles might be entitled "The Jews at the Peace Conference". His men should be instructed to learn who were the most prominent figures at the Peace conference; who came and went most constantly and most busily; who were given freest access to the most important persons and chambers; which race provided the bulk of the private secretaries to the important personages there; which race provided most of the sentinels through whom engagements had to be made with men of note; which race went furthest in the endeavor to turn the whole pro­ceeding into a festival rout by dances and lavish entertainment; which civilians of prominence oftenest dined the leading confer­ees in private session.

    If Mr. Brisbane, with the genius for reporting which his or­ganization deservedly has, will turn his men loose on that as­signment, and then print what they bring him, he will have a story that will make a mark even in his remarkable career as an editor.

    He might even run a second story on the Peace Conference, entitled, "Which Program Won at the Peace Conference?" He might instruct his men to inquire as to the business which brought the Jews in such quality and quantity to Paris, and how it was put through. Particularly should they inquire whether any jot or tittle of the Jews' world program was refused or modified by the Peace Conference. It should also be carefully inquired whether, after getting what they went after, they did not then ask for still more and get that, too, even though it constituted a discrimination against the rest of the world. Mr. Brisbane would doubtless be surprised to learn that of all the programs submitted to that conference, not excepting the great program on which humanity hung so many pathetic hopes, the only program to go through was the Jews' program. And yet he could learn just that if he inquired. The question is, having obtained that in­formation, what would Mr. Brisbane do with it?

    There are any number of lines of investigation Mr. Brisbane might enter, and in any one of them his knowledge of his coun­try and of its relation to this particular Question would be greatly enlarged.

    Does Mr. Brisbane know who owns Alaska? He may have been under the impression, in common with the rest of us until we learned better, that it was owned by the United States. NO, it is owned by the same people who are rapidly to own the United States.

    Is Mr. Brisbane, from the vantage point afforded by his posi­tion in national journalism, even dimly aware that there are ele­ments in our industrial unrest which neither "capital" nor "labor" accurately define? Has he ever caught a glimpse of an­other power which is neither "labor" nor "capital" in the pro­ductive sense, whose purpose and interest it is to keep labor and capital as far apart as possible, now by provoking labor, now by provoking capital? In his study of the industrial situation and its perfectly baffling mystery, Mr. Brisbane must have caught a flash of something behind the backmost scene. It would be good journalistic enterprise to find out what it is.

    Has Mr. Brisbane ever printed the names of the men who control the sugar supply of the United States--does he know them--would he like to know them?

    Has he ever looked into the woolen situation in this country, from the change of ownership in cotton lands, and the deliberate sabotage of cotton production by banking threats, right on through to the change in the price of cloth and clothing? And has he ever noted the names of the men he found on that piece of investiation? Would he like to know how it is done, and who does it? Mr. Brisbane could find all these things and give them to the public by using his efficient staff of investigators and writers on this Question.

    Whether Mr. Brisbane would feel free to do this, he himself best knows. There may be reasons why he would not, private reasons, prudential reasons.

    However that may be, there are no reasons why he should not make a complete study of the Question--a real study, not a superficial glance at it with an eye to its "news value"--and ar­rive at his own considered conclusion. There would be no intolerance about that. As it is now, Mr. Brisbane is not qualified to take a stand on either side of the Question; he simply brushes it aside as troublesome, as the old planters used to brush aside the anti-slavery moralists; and for that reason the recent defense of the Jew is not a defense at all. It is more like a bid for favor.

    Mr. Brisbane's chief aversion, apparently, is toward what he calls race prejudice and race hatred. Of course, if any man should fear that the study of an economic situation would plunge him into these serious aberrations of mind, he should be advised to avoid that line of study. There is something wrong either with the investigation or with the investigator when prejudice and hatred are the result. It is a mighty poor excuse, however, for an intelligent man to put forward either on his own behalf or on behalf of those whose minds he has had the privilege of molding over a course of years.

    Prejudice and hatred are the very conditions which a scien­tific study of the Jewish Question will forestall and prevent. We prejudge what we do not know, and we hate what we do not un­derstand; the study of the Jewish Question will bring knowledge and insight, and not to the Gentile only, but also to the Jew. The Jew needs this as much, even more than the Gentile. For if the Jew can be made to see, understand and deal with certain matters, then a large part of the Question vanishes in the solu­tion of ideal common sense. Awaking the Gentile to the facts about the Jew is only part of the work; awaking the Jew to the facts about the Question is an indispensable part. The big initial victory to be achieved is to transform Gentiles from being mere attackers and to transform Jews from being mere defenders, both of them special pleaders for partisan views, and to turn them both into investigators. The investigation will show both Gentile and Jew at fault, and the road will then be clear for wis­dom to work out a result, if there should perchance be that much wisdom left in the race.

    There is a serious snare in all this plea for tolerance. Toler­ance is first a tolerance of the truth. Tolerance is urged today for the sake of suppression. There can be no tolerance until there is first a full understanding of what is tolerated. Ignorance, suppression, silence, collusion--these are not tolerance. The Jew never has been really tolerated in the higher sense be­cause he has never been understood. Mr. Brisbane does not as­sist the understanding of this people by reading a "simply writ­ten" book and flinging a few Jewish names about in a sea of type. He owes it to his own mind to get into the Question, whether he makes newspaper use of his discoveries or not.

    As to the newspaper angle, it is impossible to report to the world even superficially without coming everywhere against the fact of the Jews, and the Press gets around that fact by referring to them as Russians, Letts, Germans and Englishmen. This mask of names is one of the most confusing elements in the whole problem. [H: And thus, why it is done.] Names that actually name, statements that actually define are needed for the clarification of the world's mind.

    [H: It can be further described as being either EXPLICIT or IMPLICIT. For instance, a few days ago at the Ohio State University "open meeting" Mr. Cohen was asked EXPLIC­ITLY: "How much are these military operations costing a day?"
    Answer: Some five minutes of non-answer and NEVER was the question answered or attempted to be answered. There were some very IMPLICIT responses about it costing not MUCH MORE than running an army on a daily budget and expense schedule--if the army was at "home". But there was never an answer. Until you are explicit you will run on in­nuendos and implicit misunderstandings. Mr. Cohen could have been explicit if by nothing more than saying, "I don't know." But you see, he DOES KNOW and therefore must be implicit so that YOU DON'T FIND OUT THE ANSWER! If I ask you about Jesus or Confucius, I don't want you tell me about Buddha or Socrates. If I wanted that response from you I would have asked you about Buddha or Socrates.
    And when "war" was mentioned to Ms. Albright she says, "Oh we are going to have only a military incursion, not a war." A what? Is this implicit enough by simple contradictory statements in ONE STATEMENT? A military incur­sion IS WAR. That is explicit and no implicit drivel makes a whit of difference except that you know YOU ARE BEING DECEIVED--DELIBERATELY]

    Mr. Brisbane should study this question for the light such a study would throw on other matters with which he is concerned. It would be a help to that study if from time to time he would publish some of his findings, because such publication would put him in touch with a phase of Judaism which mere complimen­tary editorials could not. No doubt Mr. Brisbane has been del­uged by communications which praise him for what he has written; [H: Remember that men such as Hitler, Stalin, and any considered "bad" men WROTE SOME FINE THINGS AS WELL. But to ban the speaking of or reference to these historically "important" (not famous, important) people is a worse COVER-UP OF THE CENSORS THEMSELVES THAN A REFLECTION ON THE "BADNESS" OF SUCH INDIVIDUALS. THIS IS WHY YOU SHOULD ALWAYS TRY TO READ BANNED BOOKS AND SQUELCHED IN­FORMATION.] the real eye-opener would come if he could get several bushels of the other kind. Nothing that has ever come to him could compare with what would come to him if he should publish even one of the facts he could discover by an indepen­dent investigation.

    Having written about the Jews, Mr. Brisbane will probably have a readier eye henceforth for other men's pronouncements on the same subject. In his casual reading he will find more references to the Jew than he has ever noticed before. Some of them will probably appear in isolated sentences and paragraphs of his own papers. Sooner or later, every competent investiga­tor and every honest writer strikes a trail that leads toward Jew­ish power in the world. The Dearborn Independent is only do­ing with system and detail what other publications have done or are doing piecemeal.

    [H: And so too can you describe CONTACT.]

    There is a real fear of the Jew upon the publicity sources of the United States--a fear which is felt and which ought to be an­alyzed. Unless it is a very great mistake, Mr. Brisbane himself has felt this fear, though it is quite possible he has not scruti­nized it. It is not the fear of doing injustice to a race of people--all of us ought to have that honorable fear--it is the fear of doing anything at all with reference to them except unstintingly prais­ing them. An independent investigation would convince Mr. Brisbane that a considerable modification of praise in favor of discriminate criticism is a course that is pressing upon American journalism.

    Issue of July 3, 1920

    [END OF QUOTING]

    Take this off please so it can be sent to Dr. Young while we write the next segment.

    I would not push for more today but the next segment is proba­bly one of the more IMPORTANT topics of the entire series, and it should be offered immediately with this chapter. Thank you.

    In the radiance of TRUTH shall all be known. Adonai.
    CHAPTER 6
    REC #2 HATONN
    SUN., FEB. 22, 1998 10:58 A.M. YR. 11, DAY 190

    SUN., FEB. 22, 1998
    [QUOTING:] PART 10, GLOBAL PARASITES
    DOES A DEFINITE JEWISH
    WORLD PROGRAM EXIST?
    In all the explanations of anti-Jewish feeling which modern Jewish spokesmen make, these three alleged causes are com­monly given--these three and no more: religious prejudice, eco­nomic jealousy, social antipathy. Whether the Jew knows it or not, every Gentile knows that on his side of the Jewish Question no religious prejudice exists. Economic jealously may exist, at least to this extent, that his uniform success has exposed the Jew to much scrutiny. A few Jewish spokesmen seek to turn this scrutiny by denying that the Jew is preeminent in finance, but this is loyalty in extremity. The finances of the world are in control of Jews; their decisions and their devices are themselves our economic law. But because a people excels us in finance is no sufficient reason for calling them to the bar of public judg­ment. If they are more intellectually able, more persistently in­dustrious than we are, if they are endowed with faculties which have been denied us as an inferior or slower race, that is no rea­son for our requiring them to give an account of themselves. Economic jealously may explain some of the anti-Jewish feeling; it cannot account for the presence of the Jewish Question except as the hidden causes of Jewish financial success may become a minor element of the larger problem. And as for social antipa­thy--there are many more undesirable Gentiles in the world than there are undesirable Jews, for the simple reason that there are more Gentiles.

    None of the Jewish spokesmen today mention the political cause, or if they come within suggestive distance of it, they limit and localize it. It is not a question of the patriotism of the Jew, though this too is very widely questioned in all the countries. You hear it in England, in France, in Germany, in Poland, in Russia, in Rumania--and, with a shock, you hear it in the United States. Books have been written, reports published and scat­tered abroad, statistics skillfully set forth for the purpose of showing that the Jew does his part for the country in which he resides; and yet the fact remains that in spite of these most zeal­ous and highly sponsored campaigns, the opposite assertion is stronger and lives longer. The Jews who did their duty in the armies of Liberty, and did it doubtless from true-hearted love and allegiance, have not been able to overcome the impression made upon officers and men and civilians by those who did not.

    But that is not what is here meant as the political element in the Jewish Question. To understand why the Jew should think less of the nationalities of the world than do those who comprise them is not difficult. The Jew's history is one of wandering among them all. Considering living individuals only, there is no race of people now upon the planet who have lived in so many places, among so many peoples as have the Jewish masses. They have a clearer world-sense than any other people, because the world has been their path. And they think in world terms more than any nationally cloistered people could. The Jew can be absolved if he does not enter into national loyalties and prej­udices with the same intensity as the natives; the Jew has been for centuries a cosmopolitan. While under a flag he may be correct in the conduct required of him as a citizen or resident, inevitably he has a view of flags which can hardly be shared by the man who has known but one flag.

    The political element inheres in the fact that the Jews form a nation in the midst of the nations. Some of their spokesmen, particularly in America, deny that, but the genius of the Jew himself has always put these spokesmen's zeal to shame. And why this fact of nationhood should be so strenuously denied is not always clear. It may be that when Israel is brought to see that her mission in the world is not to be achieved by means of the Golden Calf, her very cosmopolitanism with regard to the world and her inescapable nationalistic integrity with regard to herself will together prove a great and serviceable factor in bringing about human unity, which the total Jewish tendency at the present time is doing much to prevent. It is not the fact that the Jews remain a nation in the midst of the nations; it is the use made of that inescapable status which the world has found rep­rehensible. The nations have tried to reduce the Jew to unity with themselves; attempts toward the same end have been made by the Jews themselves; but destiny seems to have marked them out to continuous nationhood. Both the Jews and the world will have to accept that fact, find the good prophecy in it, and seek the channels for its fulfillment.

    Theodor Herzl, one of the greatest of the Jews, was perhaps the farthest-seeing public exponent of the philosophy of Jewish existence that modern generations have known. And he was never in doubt of the existence of the Jewish nation. Indeed, he proclaimed its existence on every occasion. He said, "We are a people--One people."

    He clearly saw that what he called the Jewish Question was political. In his introduction to The Jewish State he says, "I be­lieve that I understand anti-Semitism, which is really a highly complex movement. I consider it from a Jewish standpoint, yet without fear or hatred. I believe that I can see what elements there are in it of vulgar sport, of common trade jealousy, of in­herited prejudice, of religious intolerance and also of pretended self-defense. I think the Jewish Question is no more a social than a religious one, notwithstanding that it sometimes takes these and other forms. It is a national question, which can only be solved by making it a political world-question to be discussed and controlled by the civilized nations of the world in council."

    Not only did Herzl declare that the Jews formed a nation, but when questioned by Major Evans Gordon before the British Royal Commission on Alien Immigration in August, 1902, Dr. Herzl said: "I will give you my definition of a nation, and you can add the adjective 'Jewish'. A nation is, in my mind, an historical group of men of a recognizable cohesion held together by a common enemy. That is in my view a nation. Then if you add to that the word 'Jewish' you have what I understand to be the Jewish nation."

    Also, in relating the action of this Jewish nation to the world, Dr. Herzl wrote--"When we sink, we become a revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers of the revolutionary party; when we rise, there rises also our terrible power of the purse." [H: Anything look familiar here?]
    This view, which appears to be the true view in that it is the view which has been longest sustained in Jewish thought, is brought out also by Lord Eustace Percy, and re-published, ap­parently with approval, by the Canadian Jewish Chronicle. It will repay a careful reading:

    "Liberalism and Nationalism, with a flourish of trumpets, threw open the doors of the ghetto and offered equal citizenship to the Jew. The Jew passed out into the Western World, saw the power and the glory of it, used it and enjoyed it, laid his hand indeed upon the nerve centers of its civilization, guided, directed and exploited it, and then--refused the offer... More­over--and this is a remarkable thing--the Europe of nationalism and liberalism, of scientific government and democratic equal­ity, is more intolerable to him than the old oppressions and per­secutions of despotism... In the increasing consolidation of the Western nations, it is no longer possible to reckon or complete toleration....

    "In a world of completely organized territorial sovereignties he (the Jew) has only two possible cities of refuge: He must ei­ther pull down the pillars of the whole national state system or he must create a territorial sovereignty of his own. In this per­haps lies the explanation both of Jewish Bolshevism and of Zionism, for at this moment Eastern Jewry seems to hover un­certainly between the two.

    "In Eastern Europe Bolshevism and Zionism often seem to grow side by side, just as Jewish influence molded Republican and Socialist thought throughout the nineteenth century, down to the Young Turk revolution in Constantinople hardly more than a decade ago--not because the Jew cares for the positive side of radical philosophy, not because he desires to be a partaker in Gentile nationalism or Gentile democracy, but because no ex­isting Gentile system of government is ever anything but dis­tasteful to him."

    [H: As you read along here, do not be distracted from ONE MAIN POINT: "GENTILE" IS EVERYTHING AND EV­ERYONE ELSE, EXCEPT A JEW. THIS "GENTILE" DEFINITION FITS ALL OTHER THAN JEWS! THAT MEANS ALL MOSLEMS, ISLAMICS, ACTUALLY ATHE­ISTS AND AGNOSTICS AS THEY WOULD DESCRIBE THEMSELVES, CONFUCIANS, YOU NAME IT...! Exam­ple? Well, let's see: Mr. Farrakhan, Mr. Quadafi, Mubarek, the Sultan of Brunei, Hussein and Hussein (Iraq and Jordan), Little Crow and Sitting Bull. IN THE JEW­ISH RECOGNITION THERE ARE JEWS AND GEN­TILES--PERIOD! SO, THERE IS NO REASON HERE TO MISINTERPRET WHERE "YOU" FIT. In the new Judeo-Christian RAPTURE crew, only you sucker Christian Gen­tiles are going to get deaded--for the Judeo part of that equation is not planning to go anywhere. They simply PLAN TO GET RID OF YOU GENTILES. IS THAT SIM­PLE ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND? THE PLANS ARE TO DEPOPULATE THE EARTH--WITH GETTING RID OF YOU GENTILES--PERIOD. THIS DOES MEAN, HOW­EVER, THAT THE HARDEST BIT WILL BE THE "POOR JEWISH PEOPLE" SO THAT THE ELITE WILL NOT BE "FOUND OUT". NOT PRETTY? NO, IT IS ABOUT AS UGLY AS YOU CAN GET.]
    All that is true, and Jewish thinkers of the more fearless type always recognize it as true. The Jew is against the Gentile scheme of things. He is, when he gives his tendencies full sway, a Republican as against the monarchy, a Socialist as against the republic, and a Bolshevist as against Socialism.

    What are the causes of this disruptive activity? First, his es­sential lack of democracy. Jewish nature is autocratic. Democracy is all right for the rest of the world, but the Jew wherever he is found forms an aristocracy of one sort or another. Democ­racy is merely a tool of a word which Jewish agitators use to raise themselves to the ordinary level in places where they are oppressed below it; but having reached the common level they immediately make efforts for special privileges, as being entitled to them--a process of which the late Peace Conference will re­main the most startling example. The Jews today are the only people whose special and extraordinary privileges are written into the world's Treaty of Peace. But more of that at another time.

    No one now pretends to deny, except a few spokesmen who really do not rule the thought of the Jews but are set forth for the sole benefit of influencing Gentile thought, that the socially and economically disruptive elements abroad in the world today are not only manned but also moneyed by Jewish interests. For a long time this fact was held in suspense owing to the vigorous denial of the Jews and the lack of information on the part of those agencies of publicity to which the public had looked for its information. But now the facts are coming forth. Herzl's words are being proved to be true--"when we sink, we become a revolutionary proletariat, the subordinate officers of the revolu­tionary party "--and these words were first published in English in 1896, or 24 years ago.

    Just now these tendencies are working in two directions, one for the tearing down of the Gentile states all over the world, the other for the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. The latter project has the best wishes of the whole world, but it is far from having the best wishes of the whole, or even the larger part of Jewry. The Zionist party makes a great deal of noise, but it is really an unrepresentative minority. It can scarcely be designated as more than an unusually ambitious colonization scheme. (NOTE: The statements indicated are those of non-Zionist Jews. The real Jewish program is that program which is executed. It was the Zionist program that was followed by the Peace Conference. It must therefore be regarded as the official program.) It is doubtless serving, however, as a very useful public screen for the carrying on of secret activities. International Jews, the controllers of the world's governmental and fi­nancial power, may meet anywhere, at any time, in war time or peace time, and by giving out that they are only considering the ways and means of opening up Palestine to the Jews, they easily escape the suspicion of being together on any other business. The Allies and enemies of the Gentile nations at war thus met and were not molested. It was at a Zionist conference--the sixth, held in 1903--that the recent war was exactly predicted, its progress and outcome indicated, and the relation of the Jews to the Peace Treaty outlined.

    That is to say, though Jewish nationalism exists, its en­shrinement in a state to be set up in Palestine is NOT the project that is engaging the whole Jewish nation now. The Jews will not move to Palestine just yet; it may be said that they will not move at all merely because of the Zionist movement. Quite an­other motive will be the cause of the exodus out of the Gentile nations, when the time for that exodus fully comes.

    As Donald A. Cameron, late British Consul-General at Alexandria, a man fully in sympathy with Zionism and much quoted in the Jewish press, says: "The Jewish immigrants (into Palestine) will tire of taking in one another's washing at three per cent, of winning one another's money in the family, and their sons will hasten by train and steamer to win 10 per cent in Egypt... The Jew by himself in Palestine will eat his head off; he will kick his stable to pieces." Undoubtedly the time for the exodus--at least the motive for the exodus--is not yet here.

    The political aspect of the Jewish Question which is now en­gaging at least three of the great nations--France, Great Britain and the United States--has to do with matters of the present or­ganization of the Jewish nation. Must it wait until it reaches Palestine to have a State, or is it an organized State now? Does Jewry know what it is doing? Has it a "foreign policy" with re­gard to the Gentiles? Has it a department which is executing that foreign policy? Has this Jewish State, visible or invisible, if it exists, a head? Has it a Council of State? And if any of these things is so, who is aware of it?

    The first impulsive answer of the Gentile mind would be "No" to all these questions--it is a Gentile habit to answer im­pulsively. Never having been trained in secrets or invisible unity, the Gentile immediately concludes that such things cannot be, if for no other reason than that they have not crossed his path and advertised themselves.

    The questions, however, answered thus, require some expla­nation of the circumstances which are visible to all men. If there is no deliberate combination of Jews in the world, then the control which they have achieved and the uniformity of the poli­cies which they follow must be the simple result, not of deliber­ate decisions, but of a similar nature in all of them working out the same way. Thus, we might say that as a love for adventure on the water drove the Britisher forth, so it made him the world's great colonist. Not that he deliberately sat down with himself and in formal manner resolved that he would become a colonizer, but the natural outworking of his genius resulted that way. But would this be a sufficient account of the British Em­pire?

    Doubtless the Jews have the genius to do, wherever they go, the things in which we see them excel. But does this account for the relations which exist between the Jews of every country, for their world councils, for their amazing foreknowledge of stu­pendous events which break with shattering surprise on the rest of the world, for the smoothness and preparedness with which they appear, at a given time in Paris, with a world program on which they all agree?

    The world has long suspected--at first only a few, then the secret departments of the governments, next the intellectuals among the people, now more and more the common people themselves--that not only are the Jews a nation distinct from all the other nations and mysteriously unable to sink their national­ity by any means they or the world may adopt to this end, but that they also constitute a state; that they are nationally con­scious, not only that, but consciously united for a common de­fense and for a common purpose. Revert to Theodor Herzl's definition of the Jewish nation, as held together by a common enemy, and then reflect that this common enemy is the Gentile world. Does this people which knows itself to be a nation re­main loosely unorganized in the face of that fact? It would hardly be like Jewish astuteness in other fields. When you see how closely the Jews are united by various organizations in the United States, and when you see how with practiced hand they bring those organizations to bear as if with tried confidence in their pressure, it is at least not inconceivable that what can be done within a country can be done, or has been done, between all the countries where the Jews live.

    At any rate, in the American Hebrew of June 25, 1920, Herman Bernstein writes thus: "About a year ago a repre­sentative of the Department of Justice submitted to me a copy of the manuscript of The Jewish Peril by Professor Nilus, and asked for my opinion of the work. He said that the manuscript was a translation of a Russian book pub­lished in 1905 which was later suppressed. The manuscript was supposed to contain 'protocols' of the Wise Men of Zion and was supposed to have been read by Dr. Herzl at a secret conference of the Zionist Congress at Basel. He expressed the opinion that the work was probably that of Dr. Theodor Herzl... He said that some American Senators who had seen the manuscript were amazed to find that so many years ago a scheme had been elaborated by the Jews which is now be­ing carried out, and that Bolshevism had been planned years ago by Jews who sought to destroy the world."

    This quotation is made merely to put on record the fact that it was a representative of the Department of Justice of the United States Government, who introduced this document to Mr. Bern­stein, and expressed a certain opinion upon it, namely, "that the work was probably that of Dr. Theodor Herzl". Also that "some American Senators" were amazed to note the comparison between what a publication of the year 1905 proposed and what the year 1920 revealed.

    The incident is all the more preoccupying because it occurred by action of the representative of a government who today is very largely in the hands of, or under the influence of, Jewish interests. It is more than probable that as soon as the activity became known, the investigator was stopped. But it is equally probable that whatever orders may have been given and appar­ently obeyed, the investigation may not have stopped.

    The United States Government was a little late in the matter, however. At least four other world powers had preceded it, some by many years. A copy of the Protocols was deposited in the British Museum and bears on it the stamp of that institution, "August 10, 1906". The notes themselves probably date from 1896, or the year of the utterances previously quoted from Dr. Herzl. The first Zionist Congress convened in 1897.

    The document was published in England recently under aus­pices that challenged attention for it, in spite of the unfortunate title under which it appeared. Eyre and Spittswoode are the ap­pointed printers to the British Government, and it was they who brought out the pamphlet. It was as if the Government Printing Office at Washington should issue them in this country. While there was the usual outcry by the Jewish press, the London Times in a review pronounced all the Jewish counter-attacks as "unsatisfactory".

    The Times noticed what will probably be the case in this country also, that the Jewish defenders leave the text of the Protocols alone, while they lay heavy emphasis on the fact of their anonymity. When they refer to the substance of the docu­ment at all there is one form of words which recurs very often--"It is the work of a criminal or a madman."

    The Protocols, without name attached, appearing for the most part in manuscripts here and there, laboriously copied out from hand to hand, being sponsored by no authority that was willing to stand behind it, assiduously studied in the secret de­partments of the governments and passed from one to another among higher officials, have lived on and on, increasing in power and prestige by the sheer force of their contents. A mar­velous achievement for either a criminal or a madman! The only evidence it has is that which it carries within it, and that internal evidence is, as the London Times points out, the point on which attention is to be focused, and the very point from which Jewish effort has been expended to draw us away.

    The interest of the Protocols at this time is their bearing on the questions: Have the Jews an organized world system? What is its policy? How is it being worked?

    These questions all receive full attention in the Protocols. Whosoever was the mind that conceived them possessed a knowledge of human nature, of history and of statecraft which is dazzling in its brilliant completeness, and terrible in the objects to which it turns its powers. Neither a madman nor an inten­tional criminal, but more likely a super-mind mastered by devo­tion to a people and a faith could be the author, if indeed one mind alone conceived them. It is too terribly real for fiction, too well-sustained for speculation, too deep in its knowledge of the secret springs of life for forgery.

    Jewish attacks upon it thus far make much of the fact that it came out of Russia. That is hardly true. It came by way of Russia. It was incorporated in a Russian book published about 1905 by a Professor Nilus, who attempted to interpret the proto­cols by events then going forward in Russia. This publication and interpretation gave it a Russian tinge which has been useful to Jewish propagandists in this country and England, because these same propagandists have been very successful in estab­lishing in Anglo-Saxon mentalities a certain atmosphere of thought surrounding the idea of Russia and Russians. One of the biggest humbugs ever foisted on the world has been that foisted by Jewish propagandists, principally on the American public, with regard to the temper and genius of the truly Russian people. So, to intimate that the Protocols are Russian, is par­tially to discredit them.

    The internal evidence makes it clear that the Protocols were not written by a Russian, nor originally in the Russian language, nor under the influence of Russian conditions. But they found their way to Russia and were first published there. They have been found by diplomatic officers in manuscript in all parts of the world. Wherever Jewish power is able to do so, it has sup­pressed them, sometimes under the supreme penalty.

    Their persistence is a fact which challenges the mind. Jewish apologists may explain that persistence on the ground that the Protocols feed the anti-Semitic temper, and therefore are pre­served for that service. Certainly there was no wide nor deep anti-Semitic temper in the United States to be fed or that felt the greed for agreeable lies to keep itself alive. The progress of the Protocols in the United States can only be explained on the ground that they supply light and give meaning to certain previ­ously observed facts, and that this light and meaning is so startling as to give a certain standing and importance to these otherwise unaccredited documents. Sheer lies do not live long, their power soon dies. These Protocols are more alive than ever. They have penetrated higher places than ever before. They have compelled a more serious attitude to them than ever before.

    The Protocols would not be more worthy of study if they bore, say, the name of Theodor Herzl. Their anonymity does not decrease their power any more than the omission of a painter's signature detracts from the art value of a painting. In­deed, the Protocols are better without a known source. For if it were definitely known that in France or Switzerland in the year 1896, or thereabouts, a group of International Jews, assembled in conference, drew up a program of world conquest it would still have to be shown that such a program was more than a mere vagary, that it was confirmed at large by efforts to fulfill it. The Protocols are a World Program--there is no doubt any­where of that. Whose program, is stated within the articles themselves. But as for outer confirmation, which would be the more valuable--a signature, or six signatures, or twenty signa­tures, or a 25-year unbroken line of effort fulfilling that pro­gram? [H: Try now, 78 years later.]

    The point of interest for this and other countries is not that a "criminal or a madman" conceived such a program, but that, when conceived, this program found means of getting itself ful­filled in its most important particulars. The document is comparatively unimportant; the conditions to which it calls attention are of a very high degree of importance.

    Issue of July 10, 1920.

    [END OF QUOTING]

    Are our people crazy or insane to present this material? No, neither. It is information from very substantial resources and sources, and in knowing TRUTH, freedom from the fear and terror comes. Would the "Jews" come against us? They al­ready have done so in every criminal and madman type of as­sault, so what more can they do without making total fools of themselves? If the Jewish attitude be correct in that there are only Jews and Gentiles, then I would suggest that Gentiles out­number the Jews of this definition--more than some thousand to one. What is to fear in that ratio? So what is the difference? The Jews never lost sight of their Satanic-oriented worldly goals and it has not yet occurred to all those Gentiles to unite or get goals worthy of the GOD THEY REPRESENT--you know, THAT CREATOR OF BALANCE, HONOR, INTEGRITY, PEACE AND PROSPERITY.

    With ONE tool you can totally collapse the house of cards built on the blood and sweat of all Gentiles everywhere. You have to understand that the Arab world people--ARE SEMITES--GEN­TILES. With this realization there is only a tiny, TINY handful of super-controllers who will literally collapse in the face of "right-ness". This can come in unity from Pakistan to Wiscon­sistan or Tejasastan, Istanbul (Constantinople) to Sri Lanka (Ceylon), Stalingrad or St. Petersburg. You see changing names does not change the FACTS. Is Greece Elias or Athena? We move on now to being, as well, UNABLE TO EVEN WRITE IN THE ENGLISH ALPHABET THAT WHICH IS DEPICTED IN THE ARABIC OR GREEK OR CHINESE OR, OR, OR. Is Iran Iran or Persia? Is it Hatonn or Aton? You can paint out a leopard's spots or change them to painted stripes, but you do not change the leopard, do you?

    There IS, HOWEVER, one thing you of God are going to learn and that is that all humans are not HUmans. Looking "like" something else does not make you something else, it simply makes you a bad imposter.

    God Creator created greater HUman species. Satan DEVEL­OPED lower human species. There is a BIG AND MON­STROUSLY LARGE DIFFERENCE. You, as an individual, have an opportunity and a choice TO BE EITHER ONE. One is infinite and the other destined for downfall. One is eternal and the other very, very "mortal" indeed.

    I am a bit like [radio personality] Imus (in the morning) where he makes some interesting thoughts for you to hear; i.e., "If adultery matters in your house, why doesn't it matter in the White House?" And this great observation: "With Clinton we elected a philanderer and he is just keeping up his end of the bargain." Well, readers, you have elected your puppet-masters and they are just keeping up their end of the bargain. It's a rot­ten job but "somebody has to do it".

    You have to understand the mindset of these driven people. No matter how much they GET it is never enough for they cannot ever achieve or attain that which they really desire and that is Godship and inclusion within the blessed family of HUman; YOU ALREADY HAVE IT.

    Now, may we please move on to create that which we need to bring change into this weary and worn old world. Pain and agony was not her intended lot and neither is it yours. God's people are destined for JOY and abundance. This old suffering garbage is a lot of hooey and now you know where the idea originates. Suffering and whining can be of Satan's crew; it is not acceptable for Creator's children.

    Love multiplies and adds as you divide it with others. You never have to subtract Joy wherein you find Love. It is pretty straightforward and simple arithmetic.

    Now am I to go back to being sorry and apologetic somehow over flooded plains and washouts or houses off cliffsides? No thank you--you SHOULD KNOW BETTER THAN TO HAVE A HOUSE IN A FLOODPLAIN. WHO DO YOU SUPPOSE SOLD YOU THAT BILL OF GOODS TO GET YOUR MONEY FROM YOU? And, wait and see what these miserly old greed-mongers get from you AFTER the rains. They will pick up zil­lions of acres of "wetlands" and make more rules and regula­tions for your placements and you will slip further down the shackle stakes. You never seem to learn and THEY NEVER SEEM TO GET ENOUGH. So be it. Adonai.

주제글 정보

Users Browsing this Thread

이 주제글은 현재 4명이 열람중입니다. (0명의 회원과 4명의 손님)

유사한 글

  1. PJ#228, RISE OF ANTICHRIST VOL. 2
    By wave in forum Phoenix Journals Archives
    관련글: 9
    최신 글: 2013-01-12, 20:51
  2. PJ#227, RISE OF ANTICHRIST VOL. I
    By wave in forum Phoenix Journals Archives
    관련글: 7
    최신 글: 2013-01-12, 20:46

이 주제글의 글단추(태그)

글쓰기 규칙

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