Why I believe the Jews are not behind everything

Joined
Oct 31, 2021
Messages
630
Interesting analysis of the alleged Talmud text which refers to Jesus...seems there is no real consensus on this.


This text is anti-humanity and supremacist. I read somewhere that, there were despicable fights and abominable swearing at the time of writing/compiling it (among the authors/compilers). I didn't find signs of this specific piece of text coming from some/any place of Peace.

Should I have uncontrollable greed within me and I regard malevolence as acceptable then it would also be easy for me to claim that other people have no soul but me. Obviously, should those other people aren't cognisant of TheOmniPresentPotentScient Creator, His/Its presence & characteristics, and neither are aware of their own selves and what they are doing on this planet. Then I can evidently attest that, it would be a piece of cake for me to dehumanize them and turn them my subservient.

But even in the midst of all this charade of mine and the pretentious garb that I will put on, I still (would) remain a speck of dust like every other breathing alive human body on the planet. And will be gone, merged with the dust, in one nano second as per His liking/wish. Its by design!


That is why not malevolence but benevolence is His characteristic that humanity ought to be honing.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
3,788
Interesting analysis of the alleged Talmud text which refers to Jesus...seems there is no real consensus on this.

This was analyzed in the disputation of Paris, where a Jew who converted to Christianity translated the Talmud for the king of France, Saint Louis. The people were shocked because they thought the jews followed the old testament, but now discovered jews had a secret doctrine which was basically satanism.
Saint Louis ordered all copies of the Talmud to be burned in hopes that the jews would return to their old religion. Unfortunately, they did not, and their practice of Satanism grew until 1666, when Sabbatai Zevi declared himself the messiah and taught Jews to practice all evil possible in hopes of bringing in the promised land. His doctrine was that the entire world will have to be completely good or completely evil before the promised land, so he said they should choose completely evil as it was easier. 1/3 of Jews at the time followed him and his teaching and continued it for hundreds of years
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2021
Messages
560
No doubt there is some rather crazy stuff in the Talmud but I am not sure if everything in there is taken really seriously by all rabbis. For example, in the OT, homos are supposed to be stoned but you don't see anyone doing this these days. I remember reading some of it (well some translations because I dont really know Hebrew), and there was something about taking dust from a toilet to use as medecine. Who would do that? Seems like some stuff in there comes from ignorance and superstition which is rather understandable since it was written a long time ago and in a period when Jews were in captivity in Babylon.
 

Sibi

Star
Joined
Aug 11, 2021
Messages
1,578
"It seems clear by now that there is no consensus whether Jesus is mentioned at all in the Talmud. Most of the supposed "blasphemies" of Jesus and Mary in the Talmud do not refer to them at all. However, there can be no denying, and no rabbi would deny this, that the authors of the Talmud did not believe in Jesus' messiahship or his divinity. If you are looking for Christian fellowship then Jewish literature is not the place to look. However, there is no basis at all to state unequivocally that the Talmud calls Jesus a bastard or that Mary was a prostitute who had sex with many men. As has been shown, those passages definitely do not refer to Jesus. "
 

polymoog

Superstar
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
7,221
i dont accept that they were “forced” into the profession of usury, that their only option in the Middle Ages was to be immoral loan sharks en masse. That sounds a little too convenient, especially when in biblical times Jesus condemned them for money lending. They had full power over their kingdom at that time, no one was “forcing” them to usuriously lend money, just like no one is forcing them to control the fractional reserve banking system today.
i am willing to listen. what other trades were they allowed in europe?

I disagree that Jewish comedians succeeded because they were the best in their field for sure. It’s all marketing. I’ve seen comedians locally that are 100x funnier than those guys, but they’ll never get signed for a tv show. They’ll never have a manager working around the clock to market their shows so they sell out. There was one singer, I think Allanis Morissette (Jewish coincidentally), who was a nobody and wasn’t selling shows. Her manager plastered signs all around town saying, “Show Saturday:Sold out”, and through tactics like that managed to actually sell out big shows for her and get her a career when no one was interested.
little tricks like that can get an act noticed, but when it comes down to showing what they have to the audience, they will never last.
the early 20th century was jewish- dominated in terms of entertainment: irving berlin, george/ira gershwin, harry richman, al jolson, etc. if they werent good, why wouldnt they be shoved off to the wayside for better people? i understand that the general public is stupid, but even the public as a whole can get a sense of when it is being entertained well or not.

Watch Seinfeld without the laugh track. It’s literally not funny. its all marketing and tv magic.
agree 100%. ones taste in humor varies, and seinfeld was never funny to me, but quite a few others will like him or billy crystal or lewis black, larry david, or adam sandler amusing. we can go into finer details, but youll find that theyre overrepresented as a race.
if you argue that they were pushed ahead of other comedians because of their race, what would be the point? other comedians could push a left-wing/NWO agenda without being part of the tribe.
it would make the most sense for the NWO to have the best distractions available for the public to keep them asleep, so why wouldnt they put the best in those positions?

Look at the jews staffing the Biden administration. (The trump, Obama, and Bush administrations etc were the same)
this was never in dispute. ive posted that myself in the past.

Sure if you have a copyright dispute or want a transgender surgery, likely it’s going to be a Jewish lawyer or doctor helping you out. Notably, being a doctor changed from a very humble blue collar profession in the 18th and 19th centuries to an extremely high profit and gate kept industry, based on drugs made from petroleum instead of natural remedies while Jewish prominence steadily came to the fore there.
youre missing my point. the fact is, jews saw a means of living where good money could be made and went for it. again, passing the medical and bar exam isnt easy. to have so many jewish doctors and lawyers would either mean that they have higher IQs (which you said is not true, at least based on israeli tests-- and i do recall reading the same stats you have) or theyre intense, driven people. in either case, it gets them ahead.

So yeah, ethnocentrism,nepotism,collusion,usury and immoral business dealings having absolutely nothing to do with it, andgetting kicked out of 109 nations 359 times in 2000 years was all just goys being antisemitic for no reason, is unlikely in all senses.
even if you argue that nepotism is the root cause of their success, its very impressive (to me, at least), that they started from barely no control (in the US, at least) and managed to take control of everything within such a short period of time.

in any event, my post describes the jewish perspective, not true history.
the average, semireligious reformed jew has no idea about what occurred during the holocaust, what is written in the talmud, how they were banished from different countries countless times, or the protocols. they know none of it. but they were raised with the beliefs of their last few generations, and with the positions in society theyve gained (justly or not), make great leftists.
 
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
3,788
i am willing to listen. what other trades were they allowed in europe?
Well that carries an enormous assumption behind it. Why would they only be able to live as a parasite of money lending, in other words, producing nothing.
Why didn’t they plow a field? Raise a cow? Have a village? Trade goods and services amongst themselves? Instead they propose this illusion that they were forced to be usurious money lenders. As if they had no choice but to be a parasite on another society. Why not live like every other people did? Were the ground and trees anti semites too and wouldn’t give them grain and fruits if they planted them?
And it’s not because they were eternally banned from land, lots of countries welcomed them at different times, and they could’ve started their own communities that they cultivated and defended like every other group of people to ever exist.

if you argue that they were pushed ahead of other comedians because of their race, what would be the point? other comedians could push a left-wing/NWO agenda without being part of the tribe.
they promote a Jewish world view and Jewish values. Take this clip of Larry david. A famous clip where he ”hilariously” takes a piss on a painting of Jesus. This is a quintessentially Jewish scene, it came from the Jewish imagination, and it promotes Jewish values. This is the same with most Jewish stars. That’s the reason they would promote someone from their own race. Any old goyim wouldn’t do.
this was never in dispute. ive posted that myself in the past.
Yet it leaves the meritorious and hard working explanation in the dust wouldn’t you agree? If the Biden, Trump, Obama, and Bush administration happened to be majority Jewish, did that arise because of their hard work and talent or because of ethnic nepotism, collusion and corruption? Those people were all devoid of talent but followed through with advancing Jewish interests in major ways.
even if you argue that nepotism is the root cause of their success, its very impressive (to me, at least), that they started from barely no control (in the US, at least) and managed to take control of everything within such a short period of time.
Youre free to be impressed by it, but that’s just an initial reaction. Determining whether the effects it has is a good or bad thing is another. It’s like being impressed that a mob family controls every business deal in chicago, sure its impressive. Jeffery Epstein worked for Israel and managed to gather black mail on hundreds of nodes of world power, from politicians to celebrities. Is that impressive? I mean yeah, I couldn’t do that. Pretty messed up though, would definitely be a better world if he hadn’t done that.

—————————————————————————
So what tips the balance of the scale? Is it raw talent, or ethnic nepotism that plays more of a role in Jewish control of specific industries. Let’s look
—-So porn takes no talent and is completely controlled by Jews, so that one falls into ethnic nepotism and willingness to morally degrade oneself for money.
—-Politics takes no talent, politics is about who you know, so that one scores another point for ethnic nepotism
—-The entertainment industry I argue is built on marketing, not talent, just look atthe top 20 hit singles per year for the last 20 years. It’s not subjective, any musically adept person will tell you those songs are not works of musical genius or even interesting. And the Jewish aspect of the industry is usually managerial, but even when they’re the face of entertainment, the same principle applies, it’s because of marketing, not talent. So again a point for nepotism.
—-Academia, now we’re getting into something people assume takes talent, yet anyone who’s been through academia will know, academia is all about falling in line with power, it’s all about toeing the party line. Some top academics are total crack pots, yet their works are considered doctrine, because it fits in well with majority consensus of the power class of academia. Academia is majority Jewish, and success in the field is granted by falling in line with them, and they can and will make your career miserable if you don’t, another point for ethnic nepotism.
—-medicine, while pharmaceutical industries are Jewish controlled and you won’t get anywhere in medicine if you don’t promote the high profit allopathy part of it, this is so in grained in people that becoming a doctor doesn’t need to be a Jewish dominated field. Jews succeed in this field, but I don’t see evidence that they are vastly over represented. Perhaps in certain fields like psychiatry, abortion and transgender clinics. Likely if you wanted to start a pharmaceutical company (Martin skreli was demonized in the media and went to prison for doing so) But you don’t have the domination in this field, they succeed just like anyone else would I believe in becoming a doctor, so this goes down to talent. Interestingly, they aren’t vastly over represented as doctors like the other fields (25% domination or more).

I think MSM media is an obvious one, they aren’t succeeding there because of talent so I didn’t even write one for it, that’s all ethnic nepotism and its vastly Jewish dominated
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 31, 2021
Messages
630
No doubt there is some rather crazy stuff in the Talmud but I am not sure if everything in there is taken really seriously by all rabbis. For example, in the OT, homos are supposed to be stoned but you don't see anyone doing this these days. I remember reading some of it (well some translations because I dont really know Hebrew), and there was something about taking dust from a toilet to use as medecine. Who would do that? Seems like some stuff in there comes from ignorance and superstition which is rather understandable since it was written a long time ago and in a period when Jews were in captivity in Babylon.
Now that you've mentioned OT/NT and compared it with talmud, it would only be fair that you query a (so called) chosen one that, should the text is irrelevant in this day and age then why it is not being done with completely (or revised merely)?

The revision of Bible was/is accepted but of the talmud, isn't necessary? Doesn't computes!!

The conspiracy is deep. It is so transparent by now that Christ followers are duped and gaslighted. But then their Cognitive Dissonance kicks in, like your did, to (sorta) defend precisely because the brainwashing is gargantuan/generational.

On top of it, the elites gave the word/term God to humanity. I didn't asked for this specific word in the English language, it was forced on me. Same for you most definitely. That word/term (God) has no universal meaning. Post listening this word, you may just as well assume an old male/man of white skin and having a beard, living among the clouds watching everyone down below and none would bat an eye or even go in the vicinity to correct this misrepresentation/misunderstanding/err in your understanding. Whereas the word/term OmniPresent has an inherent Universal meaning to it, which cannot be misunderstood (universally) by anyone and everyone who speaks English language.
And it should be obvious that TheOmniPresent will have no chosen ones, precisely because It/He is OmniPresent.

The game, the charade is deep, blud. Humanity doesn't sees it and its all gonna be crumbling down very soon in fact.
Just wait and watch.
 
Joined
Oct 31, 2021
Messages
630
even if you argue that nepotism is the root cause of their success, its very impressive (to me, at least), that they started from barely no control (in the US, at least) and managed to take control of everything within such a short period of time.
No offence, bruvv. But exempli gratia- should I concur and smirk to tricking and defrauding, it would naturally imply that I am (somewhat) trickster and a conspicuous fraud too.

What is ought to be condemned, is ought to be condemned. Even the most basic of commandments i.e. the 10, are unequivocal on that.

in any event, my post describes the jewish perspective, not true history.
the average, semireligious reformed jew has no idea about what occurred during the holocaust, what is written in the talmud, how they were banished from different countries countless times, or the protocols. they know none of it. but they were raised with the beliefs of their last few generations, and with the positions in society theyve gained (justly or not), make great leftists.
That's I mentioned above, victim-pampering!

In my understanding a real humane chosenone will be that who can literally ignite the talmud and shove it in a dustbin. Nothing less.
Nothing less, because I am cognisant of the human psyche and how it works.

You assume that the average chosen one doesn't knows what is written in talmud but you obviously will never have no proof to back up this claim of yours.
 

FilthPig

Veteran
Joined
Jul 28, 2021
Messages
690
—-Academia, now we’re getting into something people assume takes talent, yet anyone who’s been through academia will know, academia is all about falling in line with power, it’s all about toeing the party line. Some top academics are total crack pots, yet their works are considered doctrine, because it fits in well with majority consensus of the power class of academia. Academia is majority Jewish, and success in the field is granted by falling in line with them, and they can and will make your career miserable if you don’t, another point for ethnic nepotism.
This scandal in the Adademic world came to mind.Two kinds of peopel excell in modern academic world - gasbags and intellectual charlatans.When it comes to pushing bullshit into peoples minds then there aint anybody else better at it than these people.

And remember the time when all those leading jewish scientists participated in "Mindshift conference" that took place in Epsteins island ? Very trustworthy gang
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 31, 2021
Messages
560
Now that you've mentioned OT/NT and compared it with talmud, it would only be fair that you query a (so called) chosen one that, should the text is irrelevant in this day and age then why it is not being done with completely (or revised merely)?

The revision of Bible was/is accepted but of the talmud, isn't necessary? Doesn't computes!!

The conspiracy is deep. It is so transparent by now that Christ followers are duped and gaslighted. But then their Cognitive Dissonance kicks in, like your did, to (sorta) defend precisely because the brainwashing is gargantuan/generational.

On top of it, the elites gave the word/term God to humanity. I didn't asked for this specific word in the English language, it was forced on me. Same for you most definitely. That word/term (God) has no universal meaning. Post listening this word, you may just as well assume an old male/man of white skin and having a beard, living among the clouds watching everyone down below and none would bat an eye or even go in the vicinity to correct this misrepresentation/misunderstanding/err in your understanding. Whereas the word/term OmniPresent has an inherent Universal meaning to it, which cannot be misunderstood (universally) by anyone and everyone who speaks English language.
And it should be obvious that TheOmniPresent will have no chosen ones, precisely because It/He is OmniPresent.

The game, the charade is deep, blud. Humanity doesn't sees it and its all gonna be crumbling down very soon in fact.
Just wait and watch.
What do you mean revision of the Bible? There was not any. Rabbis put commentaries in the Talmud to place the verses into their historical context so, this is some kind of revision I would say.
 

billy t

Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
747
Good topic! I admit I will never understand anti-semitism.
Define "anti-Semitism". You are basically using the terminology that the Jews use to prevent anyone criticizing them.

This is not a racial issue. I reiterate, this is not a racial issue. It is an IDEALOGICAL one. Most Jews are not even from the offspring off Abraham. Rather, they are Europeans who converted to Judaism. They still call themselves 'Jews' so that is what I will call them. Someone could be African and convert to Judaism and they would be a Jew. People who throw around words like "anti-semitic" have not understood the topic at all.

Jews pull the race card to prevent people from criticizing them. Wake up to their tricks!

Yes, not all Jews are evil but to deny that they are behind most of the evil that we are seeing in the world right now is to bury your head in the sand.

What is funny is when non Jews try to defend them when in their eyes you are nothing but a filthy gentile. The Jews would treat you the same way as they treat the Palestinians if they had the opportunity. We are all gentiles to them. Stop making excuses for them. Recognize your enemy or just stay sleeping while they have their boots on your throat.
 

billy t

Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
747
Talmud is a touchy subject because its content is rather straight forward and cant be spinned.No wonder Sibi is pretending it dont exist. It's for the eyes of the Rabbis only and every non-jew who happens to read it must be put to death,no ?
Since he is calling me a troll i guess im gonna "troll" with some more facts.I kinda like it how upset they get when they encounter facts they cant spin or disprove. They just get mad and pretend those facts dont exist.
Trolololol ...








Just keep posting bro and ignore those who continue to make excuses for the Zionist state. I bet many of them are paid to come here and cause confusion. I have a lot of experience with these types of individuals.
 

billy t

Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
747
There is no doubt that the Jews say horrible things about Jesus and his mother (peace be upon them). Its in the Talmud and other Jewish writings. Nobody who has looked into Judaism denies this. Jews lie about it because lying is part of their religion.
 

billy t

Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
747
"It seems clear by now that there is no consensus whether Jesus is mentioned at all in the Talmud. Most of the supposed "blasphemies" of Jesus and Mary in the Talmud do not refer to them at all. However, there can be no denying, and no rabbi would deny this, that the authors of the Talmud did not believe in Jesus' messiahship or his divinity. If you are looking for Christian fellowship then Jewish literature is not the place to look. However, there is no basis at all to state unequivocally that the Talmud calls Jesus a bastard or that Mary was a prostitute who had sex with many men. As has been shown, those passages definitely do not refer to Jesus. "
Nonsense. The passages are very explicit. Stop making excuses for the Yahood.
 

A Freeman

Star
Joined
Nov 11, 2019
Messages
4,617
Protocols of the Elder of Zion - A Fraud
In 1921, the London Times presented conclusive proof that the Protocols was a "clumsy plagiarism." The Times confirmed that the Protocols had been copied in large part from a French political satire that never mentioned Jews—Maurice Joly's Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu (1864). Other investigations revealed that one chapter of a Prussian novel, Hermann Goedsche's Biarritz (1868), also "inspired" the Protocols.

--------
Excerpt form “THE LONDON TIMES”, Wednesday, August 17, 1921, pp. 9, 10
“JEWISH PERIL” EXPOSED. HISTORIC “FAKE.”

We published yesterday an article from our Constantinople Correspondent, which showed that the notorious “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”— one of the mysteries of politics since 1905—were a clumsy forgery, the text being based on a book published in French in 1865.

The book, without title page, was obtained by our Correspondent from a Russian source, and we were able to identify it with a complete copy in the British Museum.

The disclosure, which naturally aroused the greatest interest among those familiar with Jewish questions, finally disposes of the “Protocols” as credible evidence of a Jewish plot against civilization.

We publish below a second article, which gives further close parallels between the language of the Protocols and that attributed to Machiavelli and Montesquieu in the volume dated from Geneva.


PLAGIARISM AT WORK
While the Geneva Dialogues open with an exchange of compliments between Montesquieu and Machiavelli, which covers seven pages, the author of the Protocols plunges at once in medias res.

One can imagine him hastily turning over those first seven pages of the book which he has been ordered to paraphrase against time, and angrily ejaculating, “Nothing here.” But on page 8 of the Dialogues he finds what he wants; the greater part of this page and the next are promptly paraphrased, thus:—

[Start Quote from Dialogues on Evil Instincts of Man]

Geneva Dialogues, p. 8.​
“Among mankind the evil instinct is mightier than the good. Man is more drawn to evil than to good. Fear and Force have more empire over him than reason….​
Every man aims at domination: not one but would be an oppressor if he could: all or almost all are ready to sacrifice the rights of others to their own interests…​
“What restrains those beasts of prey which they call men from attacking one another? Brute un-restrained Force in the first stages of social life, then the Law, that is still force regulated by forms. You have consulted all historical sources: everywhere might precedes right. Political Liberty is merely a relative idea….”​

[End Quote from Dialogues on Evil Instincts of Man]

**

[Start Quote from Protocols on Evil Instincts of Man]

Protocols, p.1 (“The Britons Edition).​
“It must be noted that people with corrupt instincts are more numerous than those of noble instinct. Therefore in governing the world the best results are obtained by means of violence and intimidation, and not by academic discussions. Every man aims at power; every one would like to become a dictator if he only could do so, and rare indeed are the men who would not be disposed to sacrifice the welfare of others in order to attain their own personal aims.​
“What restrained the wild beasts of prey which we call men? What has ruled them up to now? In the first stages of social life they submitted to brute and blind force, then to law, which in reality is the same force, only masked. From this I am led to deduct that by the law of nature right lies in might. Political freedom is not a fact but an idea.”​

[End Quote from Protocols on Evil Instincts of Man]

The gift of liberty according to the Machiavelli of the Geneva Dialogues, of self-government according to the Protocols (page 2), leads speedily to civil and social strife, and the State is soon ruined by internal convulsions or by foreign intervention following on the heels of civil war. Then follows a singular parallel between the two books which deserves quotation:—

[Start Quote from Dialogues on Using Deceit Against Internal Enemies]

Geneva Dialogues. p. 9.​
“What arms will they (States) employ in war against foreign enemies? Will the opposing generals communicate their plans of campaign to one another and thus be mutually in a position to defend themselves? Will they mutually ban night attacks, traps, ambushes, battles with inequality of force? Of course not: such combatants would court derision. Are you against the employment of these traps and tricks, of all the strategy indispensable to war against the enemy within, the revolutionary?”​

[End Quote from Dialogues on Using Deceit Against Internal Enemies]

**

[Start Quote from Protocols on Using Deceit Against Internal Enemies]

Protocols, p. 2.​
“… I would ask the question why is it not immoral for a State which has two enemies, one external and one internal, to use different means of defence against the former to that which it would use against the latter, to make secret plans of defence, to attack him by night or with superior force?”​

[End Quote from Protocols on Using Deceit Against Internal Enemies]

RIGHT AND WRONG.
Both “Machiavelli” and the author of the Protocols agree (Prot. p. 3, Geneva Dialogues, p. 11) almost in the same words that politics have nothing in common with morality. Right is described in the Protocols as “an abstract idea established by nothing,” in the Dialogues as an “infinitely vague” expression. The end, say both, justifies the means. “I pay less attention,” says Machiavelli, “to what is good and moral than to what is useful and necessary.” The Protocols (p. 4) use the same formula, substituting “profitable” for “useful.” According to the protocols he who would rule “must have recourse to cunningness (sic) and hypocrisy.” In the second Dialogue (p. 15) Montesquieu reproaches Machiavelli for having “only two words to repeat—‘Force’ and ‘guile.’” Both Machiavelli and the “Elders” of the Protocols preach despotism as the sole safeguard against anarchy. In the Protocols the despotism has to be Jewish and hereditary. Machiavelli’s despotism is obviously Napoleonic.

There are scores of other parallels between the books. Fully 50 paragraphs in the Protocols are simply paraphrases of passages in the Dialogues. The quotation per me reges regnant, rightly given in the Vieille France edition of the Protocols (p. 29), while regunt is substituted for regnant in the English version (p. 20), appears on p. 63 of the Geneva Dialogues. Sulla, whom the English version of the Protocols insists on calling “Silla,” appears in both books.

“After covering Italy with blood, Sulla reappeared as a simple citizen in Rome: no one durst touch a hair of his head.” —Geneva Dialogues, p. 159.​
“Remember at the time when Italy was streaming with blood, she did not touch a hair of Silla’s head, and he was the man who made her blood pour out.” —Protocols, p. 51.​

Sulla, who after the proscriptions stalked “in savage grandeur home,” is one of the tyrants whom every schoolboy knows and those who believe that Elders of the 33rd Degree are responsible for the Protocols, may say that this is a mere coincidence. But what about the exotic Vishnu, the hundred-armed Hindu deity who appears twice in each book? The following passages never were examples of “unconscious plagiarism.”

Geneva Dialogues, p. 141:—

Machiavelli.—“Like the God Vishnu, my press will have a hundred arms, and these arms will give their hands to all the different shades of opinion throughout the country.”​

Protocols, p. 43:—

“These newspapers, like the Indian god Vishnu, will be possessed of hundreds of hands, each of which will be feeling the pulse of varying public opinion.”​

Geneva Dialogues, p. 207:—

Montesquieu.—“Now I understand the figure of the god Vishnu; you have a hundred arms like the Indian idol, and each of your fingers touches a spring.”​

Protocols, p 65:—

[Protocls. —] “Our Government will resemble the Hindu god Vishnu. Each of our hundred hands will hold one spring of the social machinery of State.”​

TAXATION OF THE PRESS.
The Dialogues and the Protocols alike devote special attention to the Press, and their schemes for muzzling and control thereof are almost identical, absolutely identical, indeed, in many details. Thus Machiavelli on pp. 135 and 136 of the Dialogues expounds the following ingenious scheme:—

[Dialogues, pp. 135 and 136 —]

“I shall extend the tax on newspapers to books, or rather I shall introduce a stamp duty on books having less than a certain number of pages. A book, for example, with less than 200 or 300 pages will not rank as a book, but as a brochure. I am sure you see the advantage of this scheme. On the one hand I thin (je rarifie) by taxation that cloud of short books which are the more of journalism; on the other hand I force those who wish to escape stamp duty to throw themselves into long and costly compositions, which will hardly ever be sold and scarcely read in such a form.”​

The Protocols, p. 41, has:—

“We will tax it (the book press) in the same manner as the newspaper Press—that is to say, by means of Excise stamps and deposits. But on books of less than 300 pages we will place a tax twice as heavy. These short books we will classify as pamphlets, which constitute the most virulent form of printed poison. These measures will also compel writers to publish such long works that they will be little read by the public and chiefly so on account of their high price.”​

Both have the same profound contempt for journalists:

Geneva Dialogues, pp. 145, 146:—

Machiavelli.—“You must know that journalism is a sort of Freemasonry; those who live by it are bound… to one another by the ties of professional discretion; like the augurs of old, they do not lightly divulge the secret of their oracles. They would gain nothing by betraying themselves, for they have mostly won more or less discreditable scars…”​

Protocols, p. 44:—

“Already there exists in French journalism a system of Masonic understanding for giving countersigns. All organs of the Press are tied by mutual professional secrets in the manner of the ancient oracles. Not one of its members will betray his knowledge of the secret, if the secret has not been ordered to be made public. No single publisher will have the courage to betray the secret entrusted to him, the reason being that not one of them is admitted into the literary world without bearing the marks of some shady act in his past life.”​

CONTEMPT FOR THE PEOPLE.
But this contempt is nothing compared to that which both Machiavelli and the Elders evince towards the masses whom tyranny is to reduce to a more than Oriental servitude.

Geneva Dialogues, p. 43:—

Machiavelli.—“You do not know the unbounded meanness of the peoples… groveling before force, pitiless towards the weak, implacable to faults, indulgent to crimes, incapable of supporting the contradictions of a free régime, and patient to the point of martyrdom under the violence of an audacious despotism… giving themselves masters whom they pardon for deeds for the least of which they would have beheaded twenty constitutional kings.”​

Protocols, p. 15:—

“In their intense meanness the Christian peoples help our independence—when kneeling they crouch before power; when they are pitiless towards the weak; merciless in dealing with faults, and lenient to crimes; when they refuse to recognize the contradictions of freedom; when they are patient to the degree of martyrdom in bearing with the violence of an audacious despotism. At the hands of their present dictators, Premiers, and ministers, they endure abuses for the smallest of which they would have murdered twenty kings.”​

ATTITUDE TO THE CHURCHES
Both the Elders and Machiavelli propose to make political crime thoroughly unpopular by assimilating the treatment of the political criminal to that of the felon. Both devote not a little attention to police organization and espionage; the creator of Machiavelli had evidently studied Napoleon III.’s police methods, and suffered at the hands of his agents. Each proposes to exercise a severe control over the Bar and the Bench. As regards the Vatican, Machiavelli-Napoleon, with recent Italian history in mind, aims at the complete control of the Papacy. After inflaming popular hatred against the Church of Rome and its clergy, he will intervene to protect the Holy See, as Napoleon III did intervene, when “the chassepots worked wonders.” The Learned Elders propose to follow a similar plan: “when the people in their rage thro themselves on to the Vatican we shall appear as its protectors in order to stop bloodshed.” Ultimately, of course, they mean to destroy the church. The terrible chiefs of a Pan-Judaic conspiracy could hardly have any other plan of campaign. Machiavelli, naturally, does not go so far. Enough for him if the Pope is safely lodged in the Napoleonic pocket.

Is it necessary to produce further proofs that the majority of the Protocols are simply paraphrases of the Geneva Dialogues, with wicked Hebrew Elders, and finally an Israelite world ruler in the place of Machiavelli-Napoleon III., and the brutish goyim (Gentiles) substituted for the fickle masses, “gripped in a vice by poverty, ridden by sensuality, devoured by ambition,” whom Machiavelli intends to win?

The questions now arise, how did the originals become known in Russia, and why were the Protocols invented?

(To be continued.)

_________________________________

Excerpt form “THE LONDON TIMES”, Thursday, August 18, 1921, pp. 9, 10
THE PROTOCOL FORGERY. USE IN RUSSIAN POLITICS. METHODS OF SECRET POLICE. SOME CONCLUSIONS.

In articles from our Constantinople Correspondent, published yesterday and on Tuesday, we proved that the so-called “Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” which have been believed by some since their publication in 1905 to indicate a Jewish plot against civilization, were a clumsy forgery.

To-day our Correspondent reviews the use to which the Protocols were put in recent Russian politics, and summarizes his conclusions.

______________________________________

THE PROTOCOLS IN RUSSIA. (From Our Constantinople Correspondent.)

There is no evidence as to how the Geneva Dialogues reached Russia. The following theory may be suggested.

The Third Napoleon’s secret police, many of whom were Corsicans, must have known the existence of the Dialogues and almost certainly obtained them from some of the many persons arrested on the charge of political conspiracy during the reign of Napoleon III. In the last two decades of the 19th century and in the early years of the 20th there were always a few Corsicans in the Palace Police of the Tsar, and in the Russian secret service. Combining courage with secretiveness, a high average of intelligence with fidelity to his chief, the Corsican makes a first-class secret agent or bodyguard. It is not improbable that Corsicans who had been in the service of Napoleon III., or who had kinsmen in his secret service, brought the Geneva Dialogues to Russia, where some members of the Okhrana or some Court official obtained possession of them. But this is only a theory.

SERGEI NILUS.

As to the Protocols, they were first published in 1905 at Tsarskoye Selo in the second edition of a book entitled “The Great Within the Small,” the author of which was Professor Sergei Nilus. Professor Nilus has been described to the writer as a learned, pious, credulous Conservative, who combined much theological and some historical erudition with a singular lack of knowledge of the world. In January, 1917, Nilus, according to the introduction to the French version of the Protocols, published a book, entitled “It is here, at Our Doors!!” in which he republished the Protocols. In this latter work, according to the French version, Professor Nilus states that the manuscript of the Protocols was given him by Nicolaievich Sukhotin, a noble who afterwards became Vice-Governor of Stavropol.

According to the 1905 edition of the Protocols they were obtained by a woman who stole them from “one of the most influential and most highly initiated leaders of Freemasonry. The theft was accomplished at the close of the secret meeting of the ‘initiated’ in France, that nest of Jewish conspiracy.” But in the epilogue to the English version of the Protocols Professor Nilus says, “My friend found them in the safes at the headquarters of the Society of Zion which are at present situated in France.” According to the French version of the Protocols, Nilus in his book of 1917 states that the Protocols were notes of a plan submitted to the “Council of Elders” by Theodor Hertzl at the first Zionist Congress which was held at Basle, in August, 1897, and that Hertzl afterwards complained to the Zionist Committee of Action of the indiscreet publication of confidential information. The Protocols were signed by “Zionist representatives of the 33rd Degree” in Orient Freemasonry and were secretly removed from the complete file of the proceedings of the afore-said Zionist Congress, which was hidden in the “Chief Zionist office, which is situated in French territory.”

Such are Professor Nilus’ rather contradictory accounts of the origin of the Protocols. Not a very convincing story! Theodor Hertzl is dead; Sukhotin is dead, and where are the signatures of the Zionist representatives of the 33rd Degree!

Turning to the text of the Protocols, and comparing it with that of the Geneva Dialogues, one is struck by the absence of any effort on the part of the plagiarist to conceal his plagiarisms. The paraphrasing has been very careless; parts of sentences, whole phrases at times, are identical: the development of the thought is the same; there has been no attempt worth mentioning to alter the order of the Geneva Dialogues. The plagiarist has introduced Darwin, Marx, and Nietzsche in one passage in order to be “up to date”; he has given a Jewish colour to “Machiavelli’s” schemes for dictatorship, but he has utterly failed to conceal his indebtedness to the Geneva Dialogues. This gives the impression that the real writer of the Protocols, who does not seem to have had anything to do with Nilus and may have been some quite unimportant précis writer employed by the Court or by the Okhrana, was obliged to paraphrase the original at short notice. A proof of Jewish conspiracy was required at once as a weapon for the Conservatives against the Liberal elements in Russia.

Mr. X, the discoverer of the plagiarism, informs me that the Protocols, shortly after their discovery in 1901, four years before their publication by Professor Nilus, served a subsidiary purpose, namely, the first defeat of monsieur Phillippe, a French Hypnotist and thought-reader, who acquired considerable influence over the Tsar and the Tsaritsa at the beginning of the present century. The Court favourite was disliked by certain great personages, and incurred the natural jealousy of the monks, thaumaturgists, and similar adventurers who hoped to capture the Tsar through the Empress in their own interest, or in that of various cliques. Phillippe was not a Jew, but it was easy to represent a Frenchman from “that nest of Jewish conspiracy” as a Zionist agent. Phillippe fell from favour, to return to Russia and find himself once more in the Court’s good graces at a later date.

THE FIRST REVOLUTION

But the principal importance of the Protocols was their use during the first Russian Revolution. This revolution was supported by the Jewish element in Russia, notably by the Jewish Bund. The Okhrana organization knew this perfectly well; it had its Jewish and crypto-Jewish agents, one of whom afterwards assassinated M. Stolypin; it was in league with the powerful Conservative faction; with its allies it sought to gain the Tsar’s ear. For many years before the Russian revolution of 1905-1906 there had been a tale of a secret council of Rabbis who plotted ceaselessly against the Orthodox. The publication of the Protocols in 1905 certainly came at an opportune moment for the Conservatives. It is said by some Russians that the manuscript of the Protocols was communicated to the Tsar early in 1905, and that its communication contributed to the fall of the Liberal Prince Sviatopolk-Mirski in that year and the subsequent strong reactionary movement. However that may be, the date and place of publication of Nilus’s first edition of the Protocols are most significant now that we know that the originals which were given him were simply paraphrases.

CONCLUSIONS.

The following conclusions are, therefore, forced upon any reader of the two books who has studied Nilus’s account of the origin of the Protocols and has some acquaintance with Russian history in the years preceding the revolution of 1905-1906:—

1. The Protocols are largely a paraphrase of the book here provisionally called the “Geneva Dialogues.”​
2. They were designed to foster the belief among Russian Conservatives, and especially in Court circles, that the prime cause of discontent among the politically minded elements in Russia was not the repressive policy of the bureaucracy, but a world-wide Jewish conspiracy. They thus served as a weapon against the Russian Liberals, who urged the Tsar to make certain concessions to the intelligentsia.​
3. The Protocols were paraphrased very hastily and carelessly.​
4. Such portions of the Protocols as were not derived from the Geneva Dialogues were probably supplied by the Okhrana, which organization very possibly obtained them from the many Jews it employed to spy on their co-religionists.​

So much for the Protocols. They have done harm not so much, in the writer’s opinion, by arousing anti-Jewish feeling, which is older than the Protocols and will persist in all countries where there is a Jewish problem until that problem is solved; rather, they have done harm by persuading all sorts of mostly well-to-do people that every recent manifestation of discontent on the part of the poor is an unnatural phenomenon, a factitious agitation caused by a secret society of Jews.
------
No rationally-minded human+Being could look at the irrefutable fact that the overwhelming majority of the Protocols have already been fulfilled within the past 115 years or so since its discovery (the English translation) and logically believe that document is supposedly a fake. Its successful implementation speaks for itself.

Only those who are attempting to cover it up would make such an obviously false claim that the Protocols are allegedly a fraud.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 31, 2021
Messages
630
:rolleyes:


ALL religions claim to be the "chosen ones".
Who else to be blamed other than the chosen ones (and more so, the elites that help the chosen-ones charade to continue on the planet) themselves, unfortunately.

Secondly, no where in Qur'an it says that the other religion followers have no soul, etc.

Any text that makes such claim is unequivocally satanic and ought to be ignited. None can put it any other way.

AFAIU, even the term Kafir is used for a wholly non-believer in TheOmniPresent i.e. an atheist. No where in Qur'an it says that a Kafir has no soul. Its ridiculous, despicable.

Why complain now? The damage is done already.
They (jews) started this chosen / non-chosen crap on the planet in the first place. Mustav looked in the mirror then.

Islam came much after, MUCH AFTER, Judaism and Christianity. Its TheCreator's obvious and necessary response to the bastardization of entire humanity on/and the planet.

If you find Islam to be a problem then know this as well that should it weren't for Judaism (and the paedo elites who used this specific cohort for their totalitarian planetary enslavement), Islam may not have had came into being in the first place.


Every human being should and must understand that they are a human being first and foremost, before they go on to mingle with this group or that group of people on the planet.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2021
Messages
560
Who else to be blamed other than the chosen ones (and more so, the elites that help the chosen-ones charade to continue on the planet) themselves, unfortunately.

Secondly, no where in Qur'an it says that the other religion followers have no soul, etc.

Any text that makes such claim is unequivocally satanic and ought to be ignited. None can put it any other way.

AFAIU, even the term Kafir is used for a wholly non-believer in TheOmniPresent i.e. an atheist. No where in Qur'an it says that a Kafir has no soul. Its ridiculous, despicable.

Why complain now? The damage is done already.
They (jews) started this chosen / non-chosen crap on the planet in the first place. Mustav looked in the mirror then.

Islam came much after, MUCH AFTER, Judaism and Christianity. Its TheCreator's obvious and necessary response to the bastardization of entire humanity of the planet.

If you find Islam to be a problem then know this as well that should it weren't for Judaism (and the paedo elites who used this specific cohort for their totalitarian planetary enslavement), Islam may not have had came into being in the first place.


Every human being should and must understand that they are a human being first and foremost, before they go on to mingle with this group or that group of people on the planet.
The very same thing you accused me of doing ("gaslighting"), you are doing yourself defending Islam.
 
Top