Your donations are appreciated and help keep this site running. Even the smallest amount helps.
Thankyou

 
PROMOTE YOUR SITE
HERE
Only $3 USD/month
TRUTHSPOON.COM
The man they can't recruit!
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: Articles from "I am an Englishman"

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 28 Feb 2017 00:05 #1

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1669
  • Likes received: 614
EDIT
This thread was created in response to my conversation with the poster Ironwand on the David Icke Thread here:

https://truth-zone.net/forum/researchers-and-presenters/65950-the-david-icke-forum.html?start=5280#251844

The site iamanenglishman.org is available on Archive.org's Wayback machine but the snapshots appear to have been
given a "kosher cleanup" and the good articles (ALL those in the 2013 snapshots) have either been memory holed or give a "404" error.
The 2016 snapshot contains no (((J))) articles, and appear to be from his later censored site Airstrip-1.
I guess he was allowed to continue with his blog on the condition he agreed to the deletion of the "non-kosher" stuff.

NONE OF THE ARTICLES I'M POSTING ARE AVAILABLE ANYMORE ON WAYBACK MACHINE!!!....... :wissl:

I'd guess that Jack Black or his host provider was under (((J))) pressure/threat to shut down the site and that was the reason for it's demise.
Anyway (I think it was Nov 2013??) Black posted an announcement saying his site was closing in a month's time and advised readers to copy any articles they found usefull. I didn't have FastStone capture in those days so I copied ALL the article texts and saved them in MS Word format, together with the images. This site opened my eyes to the (((J))) issue from a UK resident perspective.


_____________________________________________________________________________________________

THE RUNNYMEDE TRUST - Part 1 authored by Jack Black from the now defunct "I am an Englishman" site:

The Runnymede Trust was founded by the Jews, Anthony Lester and Jim Rose, in 1968, a few weeks after Enoch Powell's 'rivers of blood' speech in Birmingham.

This was also the same year that the second race relations Act, also fashioned largely by Lester, was introduced.

Rose's Colour and Citizenship was published in 1969. This text acted as an instruction manual for the Runnymede Trust in the 1970s and early 1980s. It also had a major influence on the creation of the Race Relations Act in 1976.

Robin Richardson was director of the Runnymede Trust, from 1991 to 1996. This is how he describes the work of the Runnymede Trust:

"In 1992 the trustees of the Runnymede Trust, chaired by Anthony Lester, began to discuss amongst themselves and with close friends the possibility of a new version, so to speak, of Colour and Citizenship - a document which would act as a charter for the following decade... A new document would need to take account of... the much greater influence of Asian and black organisations and individuals in national and local affairs...

In 1994, Runnymede organised a large residential conference, The Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain. It was here that the idea of a follow-up to Colour and Citizenship was first publicly mooted.

'There is a need for a new public philosophy and a new national consensus,' the conference declared, 'about the nature of Britain as a multi-ethnic society.' The first and over-riding recommendation from the conference was:

'A national commission on multi-ethnic Britain should be set up, to develop further the proposals listed in this report...

The commission was launched in early 1998 by the Home Secretary, Jack Straw... In autumn, 1998, the commission took on several new members and Bhikhu Parekh took over as chair...

What the report itself says is that the future of multi-ethnic Britain depends on six main tasks:

(1) rethinking national identity and the national story;

(2) developing new understandings of identity, and seeing that all people have multiple and shifting identities;

(3) working out a balance of cohesion ('One Nation'), difference and equality;

(4) dealing with racisms - i.e. seeing and addressing racism as multi-faceted;

(5) reducing material inequalities but at the same time avoiding colour-blind and culture-blind approaches;

(6) building a pluralist human rights culture."

The Paul Hamlyn Foundation is known to have been a major funder of The Commission on Multi-ethnic Britain.

Hamlyn, himself, was Jewish.

The words web and spider's do come to mind.

The report prepared by The Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain was released in October, 2000, and was warmly welcomed by New Labour.

It was, as previously stated, based upon an enquiry set up in 1997 by our part-Jewish Home Secretary, Jack Straw.

Here are a few of the things it said:

"Britishness and Englishness are racially coded terms with a Whites-only connotation...

A rethinking of the nation's self-image is needed...

Britishness, as much as Englishness, has systematic, largely unspoken, racist connotations... it is widely understood that Englishness, and therefore by extension Britishness, is racially coded. The unstated assumption is that Britishness and whiteness go together like roast beef and Yorkshire pudding...

To be English, as the term is used, is to be white...

The absence from the national curriculum of a rewritten history of Britain as an imperial force, involving dominance in Ireland, Africa, the Caribbean and Asia, is proving to be an unmitigated disaster...

There ain't no black in the Union Jack".

The report also stated:

"Hostility to the Jews is entirely one-sided, in the sense that it is unreciprocated and functions independently of its object; it is not the result of any particular objective factor or kind of behaviour on the part of Jewish people."

Which is rubbish.

Ask the Palestinians if you don't believe me. For that matter, ask anyone who has ever overtly supported the cause of the British people in this country. The violent protests against Mosley's blackshirts in the thirties were organised and largely carried out by Jewish elements.

Latterly, the Anti-Nazi League have, for the last thirty years, systematically denounced as Nazi, Fascist, racist et al. all those who dared to register their pro-British, anti-immigrant feelings too loudly.
The Anti-Nazi League was set up in 1976 by the Socialist Workers Party and the Board of Deputies of British Jews.

The founder of the Socialist Workers Party was a gentleman by the name of Tony Cliff, whose real name is Ygael Gluckstein. Gluckstein is, as you might imagine, a Jew.

And was it not hostile to have been instrumental in the introduction of an enormous body of legislation designed to subjugate and criminalise the indigenous, white population of Britain if they protested too loudly against the colonisation of their country by hordes of people who were not the least bit like them, as the Jewish Board of British Deputies have admitted to?

Isn't it hostile to have introduced a system so repressive that free speech no longer exists in the Home of the Brave and, if the truth conflicts with the "incitement to racial hatred" mantra, then the truth is no longer a defence in a British court?

Was it not hostile to have overseen the introduction of a system that would describe those as racist who would try to keep the African with AIDS, TB, hepatitis and a variety of non-native diseases out of the country, along with those Asian Mullahs who preach hatred of everything non-Islamic?

Was it not hostile to promote and encourage everything alien within Western society, disparaging, at the same time, everything home-grown, in the magazines and newspapers, on television, in the Hollywood film and the recording industry, to the youngest and most gullible members of Western society for almost a century now?

Whoever gave you, a tiny Asiatic minority within the much larger North-European tribe, the right to determine what the opinions and mindset of the general population would be, through your vast over-representation within the media and entertainment industry?

If the mass of the British population was ever made aware of who was behind the constant drip, drip, drip of anti-British, pro-immigrant propaganda that overtook this country in the second half of the twentieth century, I don't think they would agree with Runnymede's assertion that "hostility to the Jews is entirely one-sided".


One of the many recommendations made by Runnymede's report was that there should be:

"Race equality and cultural diversity inspections in schools".

Do you get that, Mr. England?

If your kid chances to say something the least bit non-PC when the "Diversity Inspectors" come round, well, it's a stern dressing-down and the dunce's cap for him and a visit from the Thought Police for his dad!


When the Runnymede report was released, Nicky Gavron, vice-Chairman of the Runnymede Trust, remarked that the Royal Family should take the lead in promoting racial integration.

She was quoted in The Telegraph, thus:

"It would have been great if Prince Charles had been told to marry someone black. Imagine what message that would have sent out... We don't need them but they're fun for tourists to look at."

Gavron said the Royals sent out the wrong message about Britain today.

"They're a symbol of our unmeritocratic tendency and, of course, they're all white. It is part of a very unattractive hierarchy."

She had a similar complaint about the aristocracy in general, which she believes is:

"... too Anglo-Saxon... The problem with the Empire was the inequality of power. It was something we did to the Indians and Africans, not with them... We should keep the name Trafalgar Square. If you got rid of everything associated with anything bad you'd have nothing at all. A lot of street names coincided with the height of the Victorian empire and the peak of our colonial power, but we can't scrap all of them."

Gavron also said:

"We need to rethink our relationship with other peoples of the world, especially those with whom we have been linked for centuries as a result of our imperial past. We also need to rethink our internal relationships, not only between and within different communities but between religious communities, regions and countries."

As regards much loved British hymns such as Jerusalem and I Vow To Thee My Country, Gavron said:

"I am embarrassed by the words."

She also complained that the Runnymede Trust had received a stream of offensive telephone calls since its report was published.

"We've had non-stop hate mail. We had to turn the telephones off, there were so many racist calls. One started: 'Dear creeps, why don't you go and live abroad? Why not France, they're a bunch of bastards there as well'."

Until Ken Livingston's New Labour rehabilitation, the woman who made these comments was to be New Labour's official candidate for the post of Mayor of London.


Gavron is married to the mega-rich former publisher Robert Gavron.

Gavron was, until March, 2000, the Chairman of the Guardian Media Group, which owns The Guardian newspaper. He is a Governor of the London School of Economics, along with Cherie Blair and Lord Puttnam.

In 1996, he donated £500,000 to the Labour Party and, in June, 1999, he donated £500,000 more.

In that same month Tony Blair ennobled him.

Gavron also gave £500,000 to Tony Blair's private office fund before the 1997 election.

Robert Gavron is also a member of the Runnymede Trust.

He and his wife, who are pictured below, are both Jewish.




When a flurry of pro-British criticism greeted the release of the October, 2000, report, Trevor Phillips, the Chairman of the Greater London Assembly at the time, dismissed the dissent as:

"The knee-jerk reactions of little Englanders." He also said:

"Should Macpherson (the Chairman of the Stephen Lawrence enquiry) have recommended that the law be extended to forbid racist speech in other than public places? Actually, yes, he should."

Here are a few more things that Phillips, who is now the Chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality, has said:

"Most liberal-minded folk would like to think that...

racism is a disease of the uneducated, unenlightened and socially backward, football hooligans, British National Party supporters, policemen."

Thus every British person who has ever expressed distaste for a bloke like Trevor Phillips is "socially backward."

"We regard the danger from the extremists of the right as clear and present."

"If we continue still heading in the wrong direction, the CRE will be compelled to consider using its enforcement powers under the Race Relations Act to make police forces deliver on the commitments they have already made."

"20 to 25 London Labour MPs should be black."

"We are entering a zone of zero tolerance - the time for chat is over."

In other words, if you, the tolerant British majority, don't shape up and behave precisely as we, the intolerant minorities, wish you to behave, we will be forced to deal with you.

In October, 2003, the residents of Firle, East Sussex set fire to a caravan with effigies of gypsies inside it at a village bonfire party.

Villagers chose the effigies in celebration of the fact that some troublesome outsiders had been evicted from the area.

Phillips said the organisers of the bonfire should be prosecuted.

This was how he put it:

"This is clearly an example of incitement to racial hatred. You couldn't really get more provocative than this. The police have to take it seriously. If we are asked at the CRE, we will say this case should be pursued and the people involved should be punished, which can lead to seven years in prison. The idea that you can carry out an act like this and then apologise and get away with it, is exactly what produces a culture that says racism and discrimination and victimisation of people, because of what they are, is OK."

Phillips is also on record as saying:
"I created the Runnymede Trust from virtually nothing".

Which isn't true. It was, as stated in the first sentence of this essay, founded by the Jews, Anthony Lester and Jim Rose, in 1968.

Peter Mandelson, whose father was the editor of The Jewish Chronicle no less, and Trevor Phillips, who is black, are close friends.

Mandelson was best man at Phillips' wedding.


On the 27th of November 2006, Philips said this to a two-day race conference in London:

"The secret of good race relations is face-to-face contact".

I don't think Master Philips could have been thinking of the kind of "good relations" that those who had "face-to-face contact" with the differently raced types found in the Rape and Murder sections at this site, do you?

In the last two years quite a lot of recently deceased British folk have experienced murderous "face-to-face contact" with "different races."

These would be a few of them:

Christopher Yates, John Monckton, Mandy Skedd, Mervyn Fletcher, Kimberley Ipek, Ernest Meads, Claire White, Colin Winstone, Seph Lawrance, Jason Ripley, Kylee Dibble, Colette Lynch, Anne Mendel, Paul Tanner, Desmond Noonan, Daniel Pater, Tommy Slattery, Wayne Martin Reid, Mary-Ann Leneghan, Mary Davis, Inga Losiene, Roger Hendra, Steven Doyle, Hayley Richards, Glyn Edwards, Dean Pike, Christopher Maxfield, Rachel Linder, Tracy Cullum, David Henkel, Richard Whelan, Simon Pearse, Mark Conway, Ray Gange, Lynn Savery, Kynan Eldridge, Westley Odger, Clare Bernal, Stuart Grant, Tracy McCormick, Michael Hanley, Daniel McGann, Nicholas Shepherd, Kimberley Fuller, Iain Cain, Sharon Beshenvinski, Gemma Newman, George Giblett, Richard Holmes, Trevor Owens, Billy Gregory, Anthony May, Barbara Smith, Martin Rankin, Jason Mayze, Thomas ap Rhys Price, Christopher Davis, Zelia Harrison, Aaron Stokes, Matthew Smith, Thomas Winston, Karen Hartshorne, Leyla Djemal-Northcott, Scott Poll, Frederick Goodman, John McFadden, Catherine Grosstephan, Gary Painter, Michael Chapman, Kally Gilligan, Malcolm Barnett, Stephen Keen, John Cooper-Taylor, Melanie and Kerrie Edwards, Steven Jeeves, John Curran, Julian Knight, Lisa Bamford, Peter Woodhams, Anthony Williams, Nathan Williams, Daniel Easterbrook, David Cockerill, David Lees, Sarah Maskell, Mark Dietrich and 52 people in London on 7/7/2005.

And then there would be the thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of British women, girls, boys and men who have been raped and gang-raped in a "face-to-face" kind of way by "different races".

And as for those who've been manslaughtered, slashed, stabbed, mugged, beaten up, pimped, burgled, drugged up, defrauded, threatened and bullied, well we'd be in the hundreds of thousands here I reckon.

Face-to-face, eh?

No thanks, Trev.

Your back is the bit of you I want to see.

This is Trevor Phillips:


The journalist and broadcaster, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, who arrived here from Uganda in 1972, was on the board of the Runnymede Trust when the report was released.

This is how one high profile immigrant expresses her gratitude to those who gave her sanctuary:

"There is an underlying assumption that says white is right. There is a white panic every time one part of their world seems to be passing over to anyone else. But it's foolish to panic about it. So what if we do become a majority? What difference does it make? The empire strikes back really.

There was this extraordinary assumption that white people could go and destroy peoples and it would have no consequence. It astounds me."

"The making and remaking of any nation is not an easy task, and you need real guts and conviction to press on with it. This country has never appreciated the extraordinary contributions of immigrants... the need to make a new social contract between all the citizens and the state so that we know what we stand for".

"Hundreds of thousands of true sons and daughters of this great nation stormed into London to sound off about how deprived they are and how they feel victims of prejudice so bad that, according to the Prince of Wales, they are even worse off than blacks and gays. How intolerable! My heart breaks at the thought of those poor, flushed apple cheeks of country Brits as they watch us blacks and those queers overtaking them in the gallop to privilege...

Oh I hear you yelping all right... Are those who object to my thinking absolutely sure that the Countryside Alliance really would like multiracial Britain to invade its pure little village? Would they welcome a beautiful temple or mosque to stand with the small church spires if a substantial number of us did manage to sneak in by cheating estate agents?... Most shameful of all have been the recent outbursts over asylum centres in countryside locations."

"Bit by bit, the very essence of Britishness is being transformed... I will... spend my life helping to make a more inclusive and dynamic new nation, instead of making do with the decaying remnants of a long gone past."

"Xenophobia and imperial arrogance lurk inside most white Britons".

"Until the people of this country can apologise for their imperial past, none of us can move on".
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
(((MrAnderson))) is a Sayanim Troll
Last Edit: 01 Mar 2017 09:25 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 28 Feb 2017 00:10 #2

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1669
  • Likes received: 614
THE RUNNYMEDE TRUST - Part 2 by Jack Black

"Jack Straw... has said something that one can almost agree with... On GMTV last Sunday, Mr Straw asserted that much of the disgraceful behaviour of English hooligans abroad came out of a distorted sense of patriotism bound up with the 'baggage of empire'."

"Once, I'd have applauded anybody who publicly humiliated the English. Now, I feel more disquiet than wicked delight".

"The numbers of refugees coming to Britain has been going down substantially since 1997." (As of 2005, during the previous six years, Britain had taken in an average of 157,000 known immigrants every year. This does not include around 350,000 foreign "students" or the illegal immigrants that we don't know about)

"We must never underestimate the power of racism and xenophobia to influence resentful whites left behind in this bright, new, zappy digital age."

And yet, the lady can admit to this:

"Rightly or wrongly quite a lot of us (Asian women) believe that in order to fulfil our lives it just won't be possible if we marry an Asian man who however egalitarian before marriage very often becomes extremely sexist afterwards... More and more black and Asian and Chinese people will be marrying whites and each other.

There is no stopping this, it seems to me."

After this acknowledgement of the merit of "whites", she goes on to say:

"I hope it makes this country become more comfortable with its hybridity as a national characteristic."

In other words: "Bring on the melting-pot, sister. Let's get those Anglo-Saxon coils shuffled off!"

And then there was this:

"If I were a white pensioner living on a street in Bradford where Asian men, braggarts and brawlers, pimps and dealers, had taken over, of course I would reach out for the meanest part of me and hate the whole lot of them.

The endless stories of Albanian and Turkish warring gangs; of black men and gun crimes; of hideously deformed mullahs who think they have the right to incite, in the house of God, young Muslim men to hate; and Algerians accused of making poisons and killing policemen, have created a new anger and hostility to our presence across British society".

Finally, during the 4th of June, 2006, edition of Dateline London, Gavin Essler posed this question:

"What's wrong with white guys, by the way?"

To which Alibhai-Brown replied:

"I don't like them. I want them to be the lost species in 100 years".

The Brit-loathing Asian immigrant is pictured below alongside one of her books which features a black Queen on the front cover.



Alibhai-Brown was awarded an MBE in 2001 "for services to journalism".


Elsewhere in the year 2000 report, the authors said that Britain's history needed to be "revised, rethought or jettisoned", and the UK was defined as "a community of communities" rather than a nation.

It said the description of its inhabitants as British "will never do on its own", largely because the term has "racist connotations".

Mike O'Brien, the Home Office minister, said:

"This is a timely report which adds much to the current debate on multi-ethnic Britain. The Government is profoundly committed to racial equality and the celebration of diversity. We are a multi-cultural society."

However, the former Conservative Cabinet Minister, Norman Tebbit, said this:

"If you look around the world, you will find that the greatest conflicts are within states that are multiethnic and multicultural. Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Yugoslavia and the former Soviet Union come to mind.

Even attempts to create multinational societies in stable societies seem to have a destabilising effect, as in Australia and New Zealand... no one is being held hostage in this kingdom and those who arrived recently have come to get away from their own countries and enjoy the benefits of this country."

Gerald Howarth, Tory MP for Aldershot, condemned the recommendations as:

"Social engineering on an enormous scale... It as an extraordinary affront to the 94 per cent of the population which is not from ethnic minorities. The native British must stand up for ourselves."

As a general principal I try hard not to encourage those who rob from the poor to stuff the wallets of the already rich, but I think the Thatcherites, Tebbit and Howarth, got it right this time.


In February, 1999, the most Orwellian declaration of intent that I have ever read in an mainstream British newspaper was presented to the British people.

This is what was said:

"Widespread and vigorous miscegenation (race mixing)... is the best answer...

Teachers are the most effective anti-racist campaigners in the country, this means more than education in other religions, it means a form of political education. Only people who understand the economic forces changing their world, threatening them... have a chance of being immune to the old tribal chants.

And the final answer, frankly, is the vigorous use of state power to coerce and repress...

I firmly believe that repression can be a great, civilising instrument for good.

Stamp hard on certain 'natural' beliefs for long enough and you can almost kill them off...

A new Race Relations Act will impose the will of the state on millions of other lives too."

Is this OK by you, Mr. England?

Are you really prepared to delegate your right to determine your own destiny to someone who believes that he is so far-seeing and so all-knowing that he feels he has the right to "stamp hard" on your "natural beliefs" until they are "killed off"?

Once upon a time the intentions of the New World Order were confined to the novels of Orwell and Huxley, and the smoke filled rooms of the elder statesmen, the international financiers and the multinational corporation owners.

Not any more. If you bought a copy of The Observer on the 28th of February, 1999, you would, probably, have read what is written above.

When I read this article I felt the hairs stand up on the back of my neck. 1984? Brave New World? We had arrived, we were there already. It wasn't paranoia after all, it was real. It didn't matter what we did, it didn't matter what we said, it didn't matter what we wanted, it didn't matter how we voted, the same old dark manipulators would always be in charge and we better start getting used to it, or else.

The liberal commissar responsible for the casual sabre rattle recorded above, was none other than that most languid Master of Political Ceremonies, Andrew Marr, top bloke at the BBC and one of the most powerful political journalists of the age.

The fact that this top-drawer melting-potter has been a member of the Runnymede Trust, himself, is deeply instructive. As you may have inferred from the above, the Commission is devoted to the advancement of everything alien and the silencing of all opinion that would defend a Britain as it used to be and the British as we once were.

The chattering classes have every bit as much of a hold over our lives as the politicians do. They hand our opinions to us on a plate; they shape our beliefs and attitudes. Everything the media throws at us, from cradle to grave, affects the way we behave and think.

Shiny eyed zealots such as Andrew Marr and Tony Blair do not care what we want or feel, they care only for the promised land that their wisdom, their insight and their determination will lead us on to in the future.

We don't know, they do. We don't count, they do. It'll be good for us in the long run, stop squirming, take the medicine you fools, don't you know that, "repression can be a great, civilising instrument for good." Don't you know that, if we "stamp hard on certain natural beliefs for long enough" we "can almost kill them off"!

When the politicians and the media darlings sneer at "populism", they do so for very good reason.

A populist belief is one that most of us hold. It's popular. If we were governed by populist belief, most of us would get what we wanted and the elite at the top of the tree would not.

What the majority in this country have wanted has been almost diametrically opposed to what the elite have wanted for a very long time now. And so contempt is heaped upon and scorn is poured and spin is employed and intimidating laws are created in order to silence those who would inform the majority that, if they stick together and have the courage to hold out for what they want, they may well get it.

Little Johnny-top-bloke just can't abide the notion that those he is used to ordering about might not let him do it any more. He sneers and snarls and stamps his foot.

"How dare they stop me ordering them about? Don't they know that what's good for me and the other top chaps will be good for them in the long run? Don't they know that I know better, I am better and I see further than they do. And besides, I'll nuke the bastards if they don't do as they're damn well told!"
If the hairs on the back of your neck didn't stand up when you first read Marr's article in The Observer, so be it.

If you were anything less than outraged at Marr's pronouncements, well, join the club, old son, the British people have proved, time and time again, that they will put up with just about anything the politicians throw at them. Rebellion just isn't part of the national psyche.

Dying quietly is.

This is Andrew Marr:



Apart from Marr, who is Scottish, some of the board members in the year 2000, when the
aforementioned report was released, were:

Lord Parekh: Chairman: former deputy Chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality - Asian.

Yasmin Alibhai-Brown: Writer and broadcaster. Member of the Home Office race relations forum - Asian.
Dipak Nandy: Director of the Runnymede Trust - Asian.

Baroness Prashar of Runnymede: Chair of the Parole Board, First Civil Service - Asian.

Amina Begum: Social worker with the London borough of Tower Hamlets - Asian.

Michael Chan: Professor of ethnic health, University of Liverpool - Asian.

Tariq Modood: Professor of sociology, University of Bristol - Asian.

Muhammad Anwar: Research professor at the Centre for Research in Ethnic Relations, University of Warwick, Head of research at the Commission for Racial Equality, 1981-9. Member of the BBC, General Advisory Council, 1983-9 - Asian.

Baron Dholakia of Waltham Brooks: Chair, National Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders; Member of the Police Complaints Authority; member of the Commission for Racial Equality. Member of the Home Office Race Relations Forum - Asian.

Trevor Phillips: Broadcaster and Labour Chairman of the Greater London Assembly, future Chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality - Black.

Stuart Hall: Emeritus professor of sociology, Open University - Black.

Sir Herman Ouseley: Former Chairman CRE - Black.

Lady Sue Woodford-Hollick: Chairman of Index on Censorship and founding commissioning editor of multi-cultural programmes for Channel 4. Wife of Labour peer - Black.

Anthony Lerman: Former executive director of the Institute for Jewish Policy Research - Jewish.

Lord Hollick: Former owner of Express Newspapers - Jewish.

Lady Gavron: Vice-Chairman of the Runnymede Trust and ex-deputy Mayor of London - Jewish.

Lord Gavron: Husband of the above - Jewish.


There's a lot to be said for the mob.

The very few who make the decisions on behalf of the rest of us, are afraid of the mob. It's unpredictable. It might do something that the very few haven't catered for. It might do something hostile to the overall mob-bashing plan.

The mob, that's most of us, tends to get what it wants. The herd, that's also most of us, tends to get what the powers that be want them to have. Unfortunately, after forty years of dumbing-down and relentless PC propaganda, most of us are now part of the herd.


In 1991, Lady Jane Birdwood, published The Longest Hatred: An Examination of Anti-Gentilism. In this document she says:

"The Zionist Board of Deputies of British Jews formulated the "Race Laws' which now amend the Public Order Act and various other Statutes. The first Race Relations Bill was introduced into the House of Commons by the immigrant Russian Jew, Sir Frank Soskice in 1965. Draconian amendments to the Race Relations Act of 1976 (which, for example, removed from the Crown the need to prove 'intent' in prosecutions for 'Incitement to Racial Hatred') was passed in the House of Commons with only 132 of the 635 Members being present. It is well known that numerous MPs are privately opposed to the Race Relations law but they were terrified that if they went to the House and spoke up and voted against the amendments they would be:

1. Smeared in the Jewish-controlled mass media as being 'racist', which might deprive them of the votes of the ever-increasing 'ethnic minority' communities and/or

2. Made targets of physical violence by Jewish organised and funded 'anti-racialist/anti-Fascist Rentamob organisations, and/or

3. Deprived of funding and patronage, personal as well as political, from Jewish sources... so on that crucial occasion 80% of our M.P.'s hid away in their funk holes. It is thanks to these craven traitors that the Jews are able to make a farce of Parliament and get their way even against the wishes of the vast majority of the British people. A subsequent series of amendments to the Act were introduced to the House of Commons in 1986 by the Lithuanian Jew, Home Secretary Leon Brittan - now a European Community Commissioner. (Birdwood is wrong here. By 1986, Brittan was no longer Home Secretary.



However, though he was not Home Secretary when the bill was passed, he was when it was first put before parliament)

You may wonder why all the various amendments to the Race Relations Act have had such extensive backing from the Home Office. Quite apart from the Jewish Home Secretaries and campaigning by pressure groups such as the Jewish Board of Deputies, there is the crucial factor of the behind-the-scenes influence of Jewish Civil Servants, one in particular being Neville Nagler.

Throughout the 1970s and 1980s Nagler was the head of the Home Office Department responsible for race relations matters. The Jewish Chronicle has boasted of the influence of this synagogue official. It revealed that whenever a Cabinet Minister made a speech on the subject of race relations, notes for the text were always drafted by Nagler. The Jewish Chronicle also made it clear that Nagler regularly 'liased' with top officials of the Jewish Board of Deputies."

In 1991, Nagler retired from the Home Office and was appointed Chief Executive of the Board of Deputies of British Jews.

This is him:



Leon Brittan, who is a second-generation Lithuanian Jew, was once Margaret Thatcher's Home Secretary.

As of August, 2005, his wife, Lady Diana Brittan, was a trustee of the Runnymede Trust.

She was also the top Jezebel at the national Lottery, doling out the cash to almost every immigrant group that bothered to ask for it.

On one occasion for example, the Community Fund, the body responsible for distributing to "worthy causes", came under fire when it became known that it planned to hand £340,000 to a group which helps asylum seekers fight deportation.

The Daily Mail, subsequently, listed the Community Fund's address and telephone number.

Lady Brittan, Chairwoman of the Community Fund, was appalled and a little while later, in a BBC interview, the indignant Lady said:

"People can walk in off the street and we are very concerned for the safety and security of the people who work on our ground floor…

People have walked in off the street. I don't think staff should be put under that kind of pressure…

Public debate is one thing, public anger is another…

If the effect of what they have printed in the newspaper is to produce sackfulls of deeply abusive letters it speaks for itself."

And the British public speaking up for itself is the very last thing that the Diana Brittans of this world want.

Diana Brittan is pictured below, alongside her husband, Leon.



Richard Stone, who helped William McPherson compile the Stephen Lawrence report, was also a trustee of the Runnymede Trust.

He, too, is Jewish.

This is him:



At this time, there are twelve named trustees of the Runnymede Trust, at the Trust's website.

Four of these are Asian, four are Jewish, two are black, one is Welsh and one is Irish.

Interestingly representative bunch, don't you think?

Given that the native English and Scots still comprise more than 90 percent of the general population of this country.

Oh, and, by the way, there are also two "patrons" of the trust: Trevor Phillips, who is black, and Bikhu Paresh, who is Asian.

In 1994, during another Commons debate to introduce further race relations legislation into law, the MP for Leyton and Wanstead said this:

"In 1985, I introduced the Racial Harassment Bill under the ten-minute rule. It was the first Bill presented to Parliament to make racial attack a criminal offence".

These words were spoken by Harry Cohen, MP, who is Jewish. Leon Brittan was the Home Secretary when Cohen first made it known that tried to get his bill on the statute books.

During the debate, Cohen also said:

"The state, especially, must make its anti-racist position absolutely clear in the law... One other reason for such a law is the rise of the British National Party... It is a threat to democracy and I would not be opposed to banning it. Neo-Nazi organisations have been banned in Germany, for example. If the Government say that there would be civil liberties problems in banning the BNP, they need to make its activities illegal...
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
(((MrAnderson))) is a Sayanim Troll
Last Edit: 28 Feb 2017 01:41 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Roastie

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 28 Feb 2017 00:13 #3

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1669
  • Likes received: 614
THE RUNNYMEDE TRUST - Part 3 by Jack Black

That is why a new law is so important... racial attacks in this country or the holocaust of Nazi Germany, racism equals death. It is in multicultural, multiracial societies where people live together that one has harmony; those societies equal life. We need a law ; we need the state to come out firmly to say that racism will not be tolerated."

Apart from his desire to have an organisation banned which is entirely legal, above board and, in its ethnic composition, happens to be entirely British, Cohen preposterously asserts that:

"In multicultural, multiracial societies where people live together that one has harmony".

Now, strange as it may seem, MPs generally make a concerted effort not to lie.

Instead they will do their damnedest not to give a precise answer to the trickier questions. They will give a partial response, they will answer a different question to the one posed, they will plead ignorance, the need for state secrecy and they will suggest, imply and insinuate that things are very different to the way they really are without being categoric or specific. In Tony Blair's time, this behaviour has come to be known as spin.

Cohen, however, was, obviously, so bound up in his vision of a multicultural Utopia that his enthusiasm for the subject would appear to have affected that part of his brain that governs the spinning mechanism. The facts are these: in all history, whenever unassimilable immigration has occurred tension and chaos have resulted. No indigenous population has ever wanted to be colonised by another, let alone many others as the British have been.

Human beings, along with the rest of the animal kingdom, want to live amongst their own kind, with those whose behaviour they recognise and understand, they don't wish to live alongside those they do not know or care for. That is an absolute lesson of history.

Harry Cohen was not "spinning" on that day in 1994, he was telling a flat, nonsensical and wholly proveable lie.

This is Harry Cohen:



It is possible that the reason why the first race laws were so hastily introduced, after Labour’s 1964 victory, had something to do with Peter Griffiths victory over the sitting MP, Patrick Gordon-Walker, in Smethwick.

Gordon-Walker had been Wilson’s Foreign Secretary-in-waiting and was quite open about his positive attitude to the Commonwealth immigrant, indeed, in 1961, he had opposed the Conservative Government's Commonwealth Immigration Bill, denouncing it as:

"… bare-faced open race discrimination, serving only to keep non-whites out."

Griffiths, along with the vast majority of the British people, did not take kindly to such liberal sentiments, and the use of the slogan by his supporters: "If you want a nigger for a neighbour, vote Labour" struck a resounding chord with the voters of Smethwick.

Upon his arrival in the Commons, Wilson, was moved to describe Griffiths as "… a parliamentary leper." This of a man who had achieved the most massive votive swing seen in any British constituency during the 1964 election, at a time when the national trend was heading in the opposite direction.

The objections of the British people to mass immigration were, as ever, completely ignored by the ruling party, and, just one year after the British people had spoken so categorically in Smethwick, Frank Soskice put the Race Relations bill before Parliament.

As Rajinder Sohpal says in his essay Anti-Discrimination Laws In The UK:

"The Race Relations Act 1965 was pushed through against much public opinion and political opposition."

After the Act was passed such colourfully accurate language as that which Griffiths used in 1964, would no longer be legal.


In 1998 another raft of race law was introduced, overseen this time by a part-Jewish Home Secretary, Jack Straw.

This legislation quietly upped the ante so that the maximum penalty for "incitement to racial hatred" was raised from two to seven years. Ever since that part of the 1986 Public Order Act which dealt with racial matters was instituted, certain learned Judges have been fond of telling those who would have the general population be made aware of such things as I am describing here that "the truth is no excuse".

What do you think?

Seven years for having courage to warn the majority what terrible things the minorities were doing?

This is what our own politicians have been doing to us on the sly for more than forty years now. This is where we are now after forty years of psychological and judicial war upon the British people by those whom we elected to represent our wants and needs in Westminster.


On the 17th December, 1998, after the latest race law had "stamped down hard" on the British people, in a report titled: Response of the Board of Deputies of British Jews to proposals to amend the Race Relations Act, 1976, the Board of Deputies of British Jews the following triumphal communiqué:

"The Board has been at the forefront of the development of proposals for race relations legislation in the UK…

The Defence Policy and Group Relations Division, which monitors the activities of political extremists and racists, has urged successive governments to enact and strengthen race relations legislation… It has also sought allies and made common cause with other religious and minority groups.

The Board played a fundamental part in urging upon government the first Race Relations Act which was based, in part, on reports prepared for the Board by Professor Geoffrey Bindman and Lord Lester of Herne Hill. Subsequently the Board has provided written and oral evidence to enquiries which preceded the passage of the Public Order Act 1986, the Criminal Justice Act 1994 and the Crime and Disorder Act 1998...



The social climate affecting racism and racial discrimination has also evolved during that period, and many proposals have been put forward for correcting deficiencies or anomalies in the legislation… But there remains some scope for improvement.

We regard the proposals of the CRE for legislative change to be well thought out and substantiated… We are pleased to welcome and endorse the CRE’s published proposals.

In particular we draw attention to proposed 1B, which recommends that the Race Relations Act should apply to all aspects of the activities of Government and all Public Bodies. We would support the extension of the RRA to all government and public bodies. These organisations play a leading role in forming public opinion on social issues…

The Board can also see the case for new legislation to combat discrimination and incitement on religious grounds… We are also shortly to respond to the Government’s request that it might consider introducing specific legislation to outlaw Holocaust Denial…

In addition to changes in the main body of national law, changes are needed in the rules and regulations of many institutions and organisations to decrease or remove discrimination on religious grounds."


At the Labour Party conference in September, 1996, Robin Cook, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, committed the New Labour Government-in-waiting to future legislation which would criminalise the "holocaust denier".

The following December, Mike Gapes, the MP for Ilford South, a constituency with a large Jewish community within it, tabled a private members bill to this effect.

Then, on the 12th of February, 1997, Gapes gave notice, in the House of Commons, of his intention to introduce such a bill. He even mentioned how "the Board of Deputies of British Jews" and "the Holocaust Educational Trust" had "given their support."

And then he said something that only a politician or a Jew would have the front to say, he said:

"That suggests that my proposals have widespread backing".

Which is a lie.

However, if Gapes had said:

"That suggests that my proposals have widespread backing from those who matter".

He would have been telling the truth.

In 1998, his bill failed for lack of Parliamentary time.

As for the other stuff, it’s all on the statute books now.

The British Board of Jewish Deputies wanted it. The British Board of Jewish Deputies got it. And the only people who are likely to be affected by it will be those who gave the Jews sanctuary just a little while ago.

This is Mike Gapes:



Part 5, clause 36, of the Anti-Terrorism - Crime and Security Bill, Racial And Religious Hatred, states:

"Racial hatred, in Part 3 of the Public Order Act 1986 will include hatred manifested in Great Britain but directed against a racial or religious group outside Great Britain."

Clause 40 of the same bill stated:

"The clause amends section 27 (3) of the Public Order Act, 1986, to increase the maximum penalty for the racial or religious hatred offences in Part 3 from 2 years imprisonment to 7 years."


When the part-Jewish Jack Straw, the Home Secretary responsible for the introduction of the above, stood at the dispatch box to explain to the Commons why even more laws were needed to bash the Brit in his own homeland, he commented thus upon the contribution to the cause of one of his Jewish kinfolk:

"It would be appropriate to place on record not only my thanks, but the thanks of a huge number of people, for the work of Lord Lester of Herne Hill, who over the years has made probably a greater, more singular, contribution to the development of race relations legislation than anyone else in this country.

It was he who… was the architect of the Race Relations Act 1965, the Race Relations Act 1968 and the Race Relations Act 1976. I have no hesitation in saying that I have listened very carefully to the advice that he has offered."

This is Jack Straw:



Lord Lester has been active on many anti-indigenous fronts over the years.

In a lecture given on the 23rd of October, 2003, he explained his involvement in the massive immigrant putsch of the African Asian, in the 60s and 70s, thus:

"Thirty three years ago I was co-counsel for the applicants before the European Commission of Human Rights in what is known as the East African Asians’ case. The case led to a dramatic improvement in the position of the 200,000 British Asian nationals who were being made refugees by the racist policies of the rulers in East Africa…

It was a test case involving a challenge to the compatibility of section 1 of the Commonwealth Immigrants Act 1968 with the European Convention on Human Rights…

It was the enactment of that law in 1968 that prompted me to call, later that year, for the enactment of a British Bill of Rights to protect the constitutional rights of the individual and of minorities against what John Stuart Mill described as ‘the tyranny of the majority’.

In the introduction to a book on Race and Law, written in collaboration with Geoffrey Bindman and published thirty years ago, I asked optimistically whether the East African Asians Case, then pending before the European Human Rights Commission, might ‘eventually prompt our legislators to bring the whole of the law into harmony not only with the spirit of the Race Relations Act but also with the growing body of International Conventions and Covenants on human rights’.

It was the plight of the British Asians… that continued to inspire me during my thirty year campaign for what became the Human Rights Act 1998…

Much remains to be achieved. The Government has shilly-shallied for the past six years about whether they will ratify the additional Protocols to the European Convention, and the right to complain to the UN Human Rights Committee and the UN Committee Against Racial Discrimination…

And they have threatened to introduce legislation to cut down legal protection for the human rights of asylum-seekers… What was done to British citizens of Asian descent in 1968 is not a remote chapter of history. In times of populist hysteria, racism and xenophobia, it could happen again".

Lester was also responsible for converting Derry Irvine, Tony Blair's mentor and his first Lord Chancellor, to the merits of the European Convention on Human Rights.

This set of pernicious laws enabled Europe to over-ride common sense decisions made by British courts regarding, for example, the deportation of foreign criminals to their own homelands.

This because their "human rights" might be violated if such deportations were carried out.

Derry Irvine, himself, easily persuaded Tony Blair to introduce the Human Rights law into the 1997 New Labour Manifesto.

So, according to Jack Straw, Lord Anthony Lester "has made probably a greater, more singular, contribution to the development of race relations legislation than anyone else".

He was also involved, at the highest level, in the enforced colonisation of Britain by hundreds of thousands of unwanted Kenyan and Ugandan immigrants and the primacy of European Human Rights law within the British legal system can be traced directly to him.

He also co-founded the Brit-loathing construct, The Runnymede Trust.

Bit of a quadruple whammy there, I'd say.

Not exactly what I would call a bloke who has the best interests of the indigenous people of these islands at heart.

Lester, who is pictured below, is, of course, Jewish.



As is, interestingly, is David Miliband, Tony Blair's 2006 Environment Secretary, who, in 1997, was the bright young thing behind the creation of the New Labour Manifesto that Lord Lester had such a singular influence upon.

In an article written in The Guardian of October 20th 1993, the aforementioned solicitor, Geoffrey Bindman, who is also Jewish, said:

"Incitement to racial hatred is an offence under the Public Order Act 1986 but prosecutions require the authorisation of the Attorney-General… The bogey of 'martyrdom' has inhibited action against those who purvey blatantly racist propaganda…

What is needed is a new offence of racial harassment…

The CRE and local authorities need the power to seek injunctions on behalf of individuals or groups…

Practical changes in the law along these lines… would do far more to re-assure the targeted minorities and deter their aggressors than any amount of pious but empty condemnation.

They could be enacted in a short statute, the Racial Violence and Harassment Act, or the necessary clauses, which are already drafted in anticipation, could be included in Mr Howard's next Criminal Justice Bill.

Several MPs are willing to introduce a Private Members' Bill if the Government still refuses to act."

This is Geoffrey Bindman:



In 1994, just such a bill as Bindman described in 1991, was introduced and debated in the House of Commons.

Unusually, it failed to pass into law. The MP who tried to get it onto the statute books at that time was Gerald Kaufman. This wasn't Kaufman's first attempt to criminalise the British people and he admitted as much in an April, 1998, debate in the House of Commons when he said:

"12 years ago, when I was shadow Home Secretary, I introduced in Standing Committee G on 10 April 1986 a new clause that would have created the offence of racial harassment".

Kaufman, pictured below, is also Jewish.



It must seem extraordinary to the unenlightened that those to whom the kind, tolerant and fair-minded British gave sanctuary such a short time before, should prove so ungrateful that they could determine to legislate against their hosts within the same generation that sanctuary was given.

However, an intimate knowledge of Jewish behaviour throughout the millennia could have alerted the British to the dangers of the massive movement westward of this most universally hated of the earth’s peoples before, during and after the war years.

There were, actually, many who spoke out, in this country and elsewhere, against the unrestricted Jewish emigration from Europe that World Jewry were calling for prior to World War II.

At the very highest levels of Government anti-Semitic sentiment was the rule, not the exception.

For example, in July, 1938, an international conference was convened by Franklin D. Roosevelt in, Evian, France.



The annexation of Austria, which created another 200,000 would-be refugees in an instant, was the immediate trigger for the conference.

Of the thirty-one nations attending the conference, the only country willing to help was the Dominican Republic, which offered to accept up to 100,000 Jews. All the other countries that attended the conference, including the UK, refused to help them.

However, once the war had begun, the voices of the Cassandras were silenced, at one end of the argument, by the entirely understandable sympathy that the good-hearted British felt for those who had been disenfranchised by politics and war, and, at the other end, by the unelected Churchill appointee, Victor Rothschild, who introduced the notorious "Regulation 18b" in 1940.

This law allowed for the imprisonment, without trial, of anyone Churchill and Rothschild suspected might cause the warmongers embarrassment. These were, invariably, at the highest levels, the same people who were speaking out against unchecked Jewish immigration.

Victor Rothschild, scion of the all-powerful banking dynasty, was also Jewish.


If we put Frank Soskice, who was a Russian Jew, alongside Leon Brittan, Home Secretary during Thatcher's time, who is a Lithuanian Jew, and Michael Howard, Home Secretary for most of John Major’s premiership, whose parents were of Rumanian/Ukrainian Jewish origin, and then we include the part-Jewish Jack Straw, who was Tony Blair’s first Home Secretary, between 1964 and 2004, the British have had a Jewish/part Jewish Home Secretary for twelve of those years.

If we were to compare this particular statistic with the incidence of Jews in the general population, we could extrapolate that, in the last forty years, at the highest level of government, the Jews had more than fifty times more influence over the rest of us than they should have.


In any society, people need protection.

That includes those who are not a part of the indigenous population. In 1965, when the first race laws were introduced, there was plenty of law on the statute books which offered protection to those whose lives were being made a misery by others. The troublemaker was "bound over to keep the peace", and before this remedy was applied, the same bloke could be threatened with prosecution for exhibiting "behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace."

Every citizen and every would-be citizen were protected equally by such laws. It wasn’t enough though, not for those who wanted to "remake the Gentiles", as Rabbi Lewis Browne put it, in his 1924 book, How Odd of God. Actually, the whole sentence is even more illuminating.

Browne states:

"We must redeem the Jews and remake the Gentiles. That is what the Communists are trying to do in Russia, and, because of their determination and monstrous energy they may actually effect it".

The learned Rabbi didn't bother to point out that, when Lenin died, in the same year that How Odd of God was published, of the top five Soviet leaders, the Georgian Asiatic, Joseph Stalin, was the only non-Jew.

In 1965, the Rabbi Brownes, the "Communists in Russia" and their heirs in this country finally got their way.

They managed to convince a supine parliament that laws were needed in this country which would undermine and disenfranchise those who stood in the way of the multicultural, pluralistic philosophies that they wanted imposed upon the common, British herd. Laws were needed which would promote and encourage the immigrant and dissuade the majority from complaint.

And so, bit by bewildering bit, the destruction of a great society began.
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
(((MrAnderson))) is a Sayanim Troll
Last Edit: 28 Feb 2017 01:59 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 28 Feb 2017 02:05 #4

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1669
  • Likes received: 614
Is anyone surprised the British people voted for Brexit?

Is anyone surprised (((Bliar, Brown, Labour & Co))) are regarded as traitors to the British people?

Is anyone surprised (((Macmillan, Heath, Thatcher, Major, Camoron, Heseldine, May, Conservatives & Co. etc))) are all viewed in the same light?

Two sides of the same Jew controlled coin.
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
(((MrAnderson))) is a Sayanim Troll
Last Edit: 28 Feb 2017 17:11 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 28 Feb 2017 13:04 #5

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1669
  • Likes received: 614
Next.....Jack Black's article on THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION

PART 1

The book, The Jewish Peril, in which The Protocols were first introduced to the masses, was first published extensively by Professor Sergei Alexandrovich Nilus in Russia in 1905.

Excerpts from the book had been seen in Russian newspapers as early as 1903 and Nilus had some of it published as early as in 1901, in a book entitled, The Great Within The Small.

In fact, a variety of tracts and essays containing very similar information were discussed widely in the drawings rooms of the Russian upper classes in the early 1890s.


Justine Glinka, the daughter of a Russian general, who was acting at the time as a kind of high class spy in Paris, had acquired the original documents from a Jewish freemason named Joseph Schorst in 1884, paying 2,500 francs for them.

Justine forwarded her discovery to her handler, General Orgevskii, in St. Petersburg, who in turn handed it to General Cherevin, for transmission to the Tsar. Cherevin, however, was in hock to certain wealthy Jews and did not hand it over.

After Justine returned to Russia she was banished to her estate in Orel, possibly at Cheverin’s request, where she, nevertheless, passed a copy of The Protocols on to the leading man in her area, Alexis Sukhotin. Sukhotin showed the document to two friends, Philip Stepanov and Sergei Nilus.

Stepanov had it printed and circulated privately in 1897. Nilus published it as previously stated and a copy was deposited in the British Museum on the 10th of August, 1906.

In Waters Flowing Eastwards by Mrs. L. Fry we are told this:

"Through Jewish members of the Russian police, minutes of the proceedings of the Basle congress in 1897 had been obtained and these were found to correspond with the Protocols…

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

A few copies of Nilus's second edition were saved and sent to other countries".

In 1897, Philip Stepanov was so concerned at being involved in such a dodgy business that he took the precaution of having the following deposition notaried:

"In 1895, my neighbour in the district of Toula, Major Alexis Sukhotin, gave me a manuscript copy of the Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion. He told me that a lady of his acquaintance, whose name he did not mention, residing in Paris, had found it at the house of a friend, a Jew. Before leaving Paris, she had secretly translated it and had brought this one copy to Russia and given it to Sukhotin.

At first I mimeographed this translation, but finding it difficult to read, I resolved to have it printed, making no mention of the date, town, or printer's name. In this I was helped by Arcadii Ippolitovich Kelepovskii, who at that time was chief of the household of Grand Duke Sergius."

In 1897 the first Zionist conference was held in Basl, Switzerland.

Some have, erroneously, suggested that The Protocols were the minutes taken from a secret meeting of the most important Jews at that conference.

Justine Glinka’s discovery, self evidently, predated this meeting. However, it has been said that Nilus was apprised of what was said at this event and, I suppose it's just possible tat he might have adjusted the original copy to take account of this.

To further complicate matters, in 1850, a Jewish gentleman called Jacob Venedey published a book called Machiavelli: Montesquieu and Rousseau.

This document contains passages that are very similar to some that can be found in The Protocols.

Then, in 1921, The Times suggested that The Protocols had been extensively plagiarised from a book by a French lawyer named Maurice Joly.

Dialogues in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu was published in Brussels in 1864.

A few years after Joly’s book was published, a gentleman by the name of Gougenot de Mousseaux wrote another which said that the world was being taken over by a group of Satan-worshipping Jews and, in 1881, one Abbe Chabauty wrote a voluminous tome that said Satan was using the Jews to prepare the way for the Antichrist.

Another book, published the following year, included several letters supposedly written in 1489 by a Jew who spoke of the chosen tribe rising up to "dominate the world".

It can be seen, then, that, at the time that the Jew, Joseph Schorst, passed the offending documents to Justine Glinka, a good deal of similar material was already making the rounds of the Parisian bookstores and drawing rooms.

Some historians also suggest that The Protocols were forged by Elie de Cyon (Ilya Tsion), a Russian Jewish journalist living in Paris, as a satire on Sergei Witte, the Russian Minister of Finance.

Cyon and many others detested Witte because he was responsible for the first major industrial push in Russia, doubling steel, iron, and coal production and constructing railroads all over the place. As such he became the enemy of those who had their money tied up in agriculture. He also abandoned the gold standard in 1898.

Anyway, in 1897, Gen. Pyotr Ivanovich Rachkovsky, head of the Russian Secret Police in Paris, on instructions from Witte, broke into Cyon 's villa in Switzerland, to look for any scurrilous attacks on his boss. Some say that Rachkovsky may have discovered The Protocols at this point.

If he did, he had something in his possession which could be used against the Jews and, as it was written by his superior’s bete noire, he could, at the same time, use it to destroy Cyon ’s credibility with the Jewish elite and his career as a writer would be over.

Interestingly, the Russian translation of the name Cyon is Zion.


Victor E. Marsden was the first person to translate Nilus’ Protocols into English.

Marsden was the Morning Post’s Russia correspondent. He was married to a Russian woman and had lived there for many years prior to the Bolshevik takeover of the country. He was thrown into the Peter Paul prison after the revolution. However, he managed to escape a little while after he was incarcerated.

What follows was extracted from his translation of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.

The word Goy or Goyim is used many times within the text. This is the most common word that Jews use to describe anyone who is not a Jew.


Protocol 1 states in part:

"It must be noted that men with bad instincts are more in number than the good, and therefore the best results in governing them are attained by violence and terrorisation, and not by academic discussions…

Men in masses and the men of the masses, being guided solely by petty passions, paltry beliefs, traditions and sentimental theorems, fall a prey to party dissension…

The political has nothing in common with the moral. The ruler who is governed by the moral is not a skilled politician, and is therefore unstable on his throne. He who wishes to rule must have recourse both to cunning and to make-believe. Great national qualities, like frankness and honesty, are vices in politics, for they bring down rulers from their thrones more effectively and more certainly than the most powerful enemy. Such qualities must be the attributes of the kingdoms of the GOYIM, but we must in no wise be guided by them.

Our right lies in force…

Let us… direct our attention not so much to what is good and moral as to what is necessary and useful…

It must be understood that the might of a mob is blind, senseless and unreasoning, ever at the mercy of a suggestion from any side… members of the mob, upstarts from the people even though they should be as a genius for wisdom, yet having no understanding of the political, cannot come forward as leaders of the mob without bringing the whole nation to ruin.

Only one trained from childhood for independent rule can have understanding of the words that can be made up of the political alphabet…

A satisfactory form of government for any country is one that concentrates in the hands of one responsible person. Without an absolute despotism there can be no existence for civilization which is carried on not by the masses but by their guide, whosoever that person may be…

The peoples of the GOYIM are bemused with alcoholic liquors; their youth has grown stupid… from early immorality, into which it has been inducted by our special agents, by tutors… by clerks and others, by our women in the places of dissipation frequented by the GOYIM...

Our countersign is - Force and Make-believe. Only force conquers in political affairs…

Violence must be the principle, and cunning and make-believe the rule… This evil is the one and only means to attain the end… Therefore we must not stop at bribery, deceit and treachery when they should serve towards the attainment of our end. In politics one must know how to seize the property of others without hesitation...

Merciless severity is the greatest factor of strength in the State… we must keep to the programme of violence and make-believe. … by the doctrine of severity that we shall triumph and bring all governments into subjection to our Super-Government. It is enough for them to know that we are merciless for all disobedience to cease".

Sound familiar?

15 years after Nilus’ Protocols were first seen, Feliks Dzerzhinsky decribed the ruthless organisation he headed in Bolshevik Russia thus:

"The Cheka is not a court.

We stand for organized terror, this should be frankly admitted. Terror is an absolute necessity during times of revolution… and of the new order of life."

The first Protocol ends thus:

"Far back in ancient times we were the first to cry among the masses of the people the words "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," words many times repeated since these days by stupid poll-parrots who… carried away the well-being of the world... The would-be wise men of the GOYIM, the intellectuals… did not see that in nature there is no equality, cannot be freedom: that Nature herself has established inequality of minds, of characters, and capacities".


Protocol 2 states in part:

"The aristocracy, which enjoyed by law the labor of the workers, was interested in seeing that the workers were well fed, healthy, and strong. We are interested in just the opposite… in diminution, the killing out of the goyim…

The administrators chosen by us from the masses for their servility will not be persons trained for government, and consequently they will easily become pawns in our game, played by our learned and talented counselors, specialists educated from early childhood to administer world affairs".

Sound familiar?

A smirking chimpanzee in the White House and the "Neoconservatives" that run him come immediately to mind.

"Our international rights will then wipe out national rights".

Sound familiar?

League of Nations, United Nations, NATO, Common Market – European Community.

Do you remember the shiny-eyed zealot in Downing Street exulting:

"We are all interdependent now"!

That’s "inter-dependent", not independent.

Protocol 2 continues:

"The GOYIM… ee need not take any account of them, let them amuse themselves until the hour strikes, or live on hopes of new forms of enterprising pastime, or on the memories of all they have enjoyed…

In the hands of the States of to-day there is a great force that creates the movement of thought in the people, and that is the Press. The part played by the Press is… to express and to create discontent… the GOYIM States have not known how to make use of this force; and it has fallen into our hands. Through the Press we have gained the power to influence while remaining ourselves in the shade."

Sound familiar?

The enormous over-representation of Jews in the media of the Western World, from outright ownership down to agony aunt, has been demonstrated elsewhere in this essay, and I won’t repeat myself here. At the time the Protocols were written the Jews were busy investing in newspers, theatrical outlets etc. but their overwhelming dominance of this sphere of influence had yet to come about. So, regardless of the gains the Jews had already made, seen as a statement of intent what is written immediately above is pretty stunning.


Protocol 3 states in Part:

"Nowadays, with the destruction of the aristocracy, the people have fallen into the grips of merciless money-grinding scoundrels who have laid a pitiless and cruel yoke upon the necks of the workers.

We appear on the scene as alleged saviours of the worker from this oppression when we propose to him to enter the ranks of our fighting forces, Socialists, Anarchists, Communists, to whom we always give support in accordance with an alleged brotherly rule of our SOCIAL MASONRY.

The aristocracy, which enjoyed by law the labor of the workers, was interested in seeing that the workers were well fed, healthy, and strong. We are interested in just the opposite, in the diminution, the KILLING OUT OF THE GOYIM…

It is essential for all to know that owing to difference in the objects of human activity there cannot be any equality…

The true knowledge of the structure of society, into the secrets of which we do not admit the GOYIM, would demonstrate to all men that the positions and work must be kept within a certain circle…

This hatred will be still further magnified by the effects of an economic crisis, which will stop dealing on the exchanges and bring industry to a standstill…

Remember the French Revolution, to which it was we who gave the name of ‘Great’: the secrets of its preparations are well known to us for it was wholly the work of our hands.

Ever since that time we have been leading the peoples from one disenchantment to another, so that in the end they should turn also from us in favor of that king-despot of the blood of Zion, whom we are preparing for the world.

At the present day we are, as an international force, invincible, because if attacked by some we are supported by other States".

Sound familiar?

Remember WWII and the 55 million deaths that it cost?


Protocol 4 states in part:

"Who and what is in a position to overthrow an invisible force? And this is precisely what our force is. Gentile Masonry blindly serves as a screen for us and our objects, but the plan of action of our force, even its very abiding-place, remains for the whole people an unknown mystery.

It is indispensable for us to undermine all faith, to tear out of the mind of the GOYIM the very principle of god-head and the spirit, and to put in its place arithmetical calculations and material needs…

All the nations will be swallowed up in the pursuit of gain and in the race for it will not take note of their common foe. But again, in order that freedom may once for all disintegrate and ruin the communities of the GOYIM, we must put industry on a speculative basis: the result of this will be that what is withdrawn from the land by industry will slip through the hands and pass into speculation, that is, to our classes".

Sound familiar?

Money, money, money.


Protocol 5 states in part:

"We have set one against another the personal and national reckonings of the GOYIM, religious and race hatreds, which we have fostered into a huge growth in the course of the past twenty centuries."

Sound familiar?

What better way could there be of fostering "religious and race hatreds" within a stable and homogenous society than by the importing of millions who were not of the same race and did not follow the same religion. Which, of course, is not only what has happened here, the whoe process has been officially encouraged and protected.

Who was the Home Secretary when the first race law was introduced?

The Russian Jew, Frank Soskice.


Protocol 5 continues:

"We are too strong - there is no evading our power. The nations cannot come to even an inconsiderable private agreement without our secretly having a hand in it…

God has endowed us with genius that we may be equal to our task. Were genius in the opposite camp it would still struggle against us… the struggle would be merciless between us, such a fight as the world has never seen. Aye, and the genius on their side would have arrived too late. All the wheels of the machinery of all States go by the force of the engine, which is in our hands…

In all ages the people of the world, equally with individuals, have accepted words for deeds, for they are content with a show and rarely pause to note, in the public arena, whether promises are followed by performance…

In order to put public opinion into our hands we must bring it into a state of bewilderment by giving expression from all sides to so many contradictory opinions and for such length of time as will suffice to make the GOYIM lose their heads in the labyrinth and come to see that the best thing is to have no opinion of any kind in matters political, which it is not given to the public to understand… This is the first secret."

Sound familiar?

Anyone out there ever wonder why the politicians seemed to make so many commonsenseless decisions.

Anyone out there ever wonder why the politicians never seemed to want to listen to you because they always knew so much better than you did?

Anyone out there ever wonder why the politicians always seem to say one thing and do another?

Anyone out there ever wonder why the politicians always seem to get it wrong and yet never take the blame and hardly ever get punished for it?

It’s enough to make us "lose our heads in the labyrinth".

Wouldn’t you say?


Protocol 5 continues:

"There is nothing more dangerous than personal initiative: if it has genius behind it, such initiative can do more than can be done by millions of people among whom we have sown discord. We must so direct the education of the GOYIM communities that whenever they come upon a matter requiring initiative they may drop their hands in despairing impotence…

In place of the rulers of to-day we shall set up a bogey which will be called the Super-Government Administration...

Its hands will reach out in all directions like nippers and its organization will be of such colossal dimensions that it cannot fail to subdue all the nations of the world. We will so wear out and exhaust the Gentiles by all this that they will be compelled to offer us an international authority, which by its position will enable us to absorb without disturbance all the governmental forces of the world and thus form a super-government."

Sound familiar?

For Super-Government Administration read: New World Order, World Government, Gobal Village, League of Nations, United Nations, NATO, Common Market – European Community etc. etc.

etc.


Protocol 6 states in part:

"In every possible way we must develop the significance of our Super-Government by representing it as the Protector and Benefactor of all those who voluntarily submit to us…

To complete the ruin of the industry of the GOYIM we shall bring to the assistance of speculation the luxury which we have developed among the GOYIM, that greedy demand for luxury which is swallowing up everything…

We shall further undermine… by accustoming the workers to… drunkenness and… taking all measure to extirpate from the face of the earth all the educated forces of the GOYIM."

Sound familiar?

"That greedy demand for luxury".

The Me, Me, Me, Want, Want, Want society, encouraged by the "nippers" of the credit card, buy now pay later banking system.

"Accustoming the workers to… drunkenness".

New licencing laws.

"Taking all measure to extirpate… all the educated forces".

Dumbing down.


Protocol 7 states in part:

"We must be in a position to respond to every act of opposition by war with the neighbors of that country which dares to oppose us: but if these neighbors should also venture to stand collectively together against us, then we must offer resistance by a universal war."

Sound familiar?

WWI? WWII? Korea, Vietnam, two Gulf Wars, etc. etc.


Protocol 8 states in part:

"We shall surround our government with a whole world of economists. That is the reason why economic sciences form the principal subject of the teaching given to the Jews. Around us again will be a whole constellation of bankers, industrialists, capitalists and, the main thing, millionaires, because in substance everything will be settled by the question of figures".

Now this must sound familiar.


Protocol 9 states in part:

"Nowadays, if any States raise a protest against us it is… at our discretion and by our direction, for their anti-semitism is indispensable to us for the management of our lesser brethren…

Our Super-Government subsists in extra-legal conditions which are described in the accepted terminology by the energetic and forcible word - Dictatorship… we, the law-givers, shall execute judgment and sentence, we shall slay and we shall spare… We rule by force of will… the weapons in our hands are limitless ambitions, burning greediness, merciless vengeance, hatreds and malice.

It is from us that the all-engulfing terror proceeds. We have in our service persons of all opinions, of all doctrines, restorating monarchists, demagogues, socialists, communists, and utopian dreamers of every kind. We have harnessed them all to the task: each one of them on his own account is boring away at the last remnants of authority, is striving to overthrow all established form of order. By these acts all states are in torture; they exhort to tranquility, are ready to sacrifice everything for peace: but we will not give them peace until they openly acknowledge our international super-government."

So now you know, hey?

Protocol 9 continues:

"In order to annihilate the institutions of the GOYIM… we have… taken hold of the ends of the springs which move their mechanism. These springs lay in a strict but just sense of order; we have replaced them by the chaotic license of liberalism. We have got our hands into the administration of the law, into the conduct of elections, into the press, into liberty of the person, but principally into education."

Sound familiar?

Protocol 9 continues:

"We have fooled, bemused and corrupted the youth of the GOYIM by rearing them in principles and theories which are known to us to be false…

You may say that the GOYIM will rise upon us, arms in hand, if they guess what is going on before the time comes; but in the West we have against this a maneuver of such appalling terror that the very stoutest hearts quail, the Undergrounds, Metropolitans, those subterranean corridors which, before the time comes, will be driven under all the capitals and from whence those capitals will be blown into the air with all their organizations and archives."

Hmmm, interesting.

Perhaps the lovely fluffy Wilsons, Heaths, Thatchers and Blairs have just been buggering us silly because they didn’t want us to suffer the far greater horror of being "blown into the air".

Interesting.

And yet, somehow, not much of an excuse at all.


Protocol 10 states in part:

"When we have accomplished our coup d’etat we shall say then to the various peoples:

‘everything has gone terribly badly, all have been worn out with suffering. we are destroying the causes of your torment, nationalities, frontiers, differences of coinages…

We shall destroy among the GOYIM the importance of the family and its educational value".

Sound familiar, you mums and dads?

"We shall… remove the possibility of individual minds splitting off, for the mob, handled by us, will not let them come to the front nor even give them a hearing".

That lovely, fluffy bunch of people known as the Anti-Nazi League do this on a regular basis.

They have been howling down all Nationalist opinion in this country since the mid-seventies.

The ANL was founded by the Socialist Workers’ Party and the Jewish Board of British Deputies.

The founder of the SWP was Tony Cliff, alias Ygael Gluckstein.

By now you can probably guess Mr. Gluckstein’s tribal origin.

Protocol 10 continues:

"In the near future we shall establish the responsibility of Presidents…

In order that our scheme may produce this result we shall arrange elections in favor of such presidents as have in their past some dark, undiscovered stain… then they will be trustworthy agents for the accomplishment of our plans out of fear of revelations and from the natural desire of everyone who has attained power, namely, the retention of the privileges, advantages and honor connected with the office of President… this right will be given by us to the responsible President, a puppet in our hands".

Sound familiar?

George Bush was a rabid drunk, and a regular adulterer before he became President; and, according to Washington insider, Gore Vidal, he is almost totally illiterate. Vidal wasn’t kidding when he said this.

Bill Clinton is a probable thief. Remember Whitewatergate?

He is also an adulterer and a drug addict.

Several high ups in New Labour are known to have been snared by Operation Ore, an international operation to apprehend paedophiles. It is suspected that at least four MPs fell foul of this operation.

One of the most senior of these was given a massive New World Order promotion almost as soon as his alleged behaviour was uncovered. The Scotsman newspaper suggested that this same individual was paedophillically linked with the Dunblane murderer, Thomas Hamilton.

Tony Blair has had certain files from the police investigation of the Dunblane massacre locked away for 100 years.

It is rumoured that Tony Blair’s daughter, Katherine, has tried to commit suicide on two occasions.

Protocol 10 continues:

"The President will, at our discretion, interpret the sense of such of the existing laws as admit of various interpretation…

By such measure we shall obtain the power of destroying little by little, step by step… to prepare for the transition to an imperceptible abolition of every kind of constitution, and then the time is come to turn every form of government into OUR DESPOTISM.

The recognition of our despot… will come when the peoples, utterly wearied by the irregularities and incompetence of their rulers, will clamor: ‘Away with them and give us one king over all the earth who will unite us and annihilate the causes of disorders, frontiers, nationalities, religions, State debts, who will give us peace and quiet which we cannot find under our rulers and representatives.’

To produce the possibility of the expression of such wishes by all the nations it is indispensable to trouble in all countries the people’s relations with their governments so as to utterly exhaust humanity with dissension, hatred, struggle, envy , by starvation, by the inoculation of diseases, by want, so that the GOYIM see no other issue than to take refuge in our complete sovereignty in money and in all else."

Since the introduction of the MMR jab in 1988, autism has skyrocketed in Britain.

Before the 1980s, one in 2,500 children in Britain was diagnosed as autistic. The figures suggest that at least one in 250 have the condition now.

There were less than 10,000 cases of autism in Britain in the 1950s.

There are now more than half a million.

Tony Blair’s children have not had the MMR jab.

In the year the MMR jab was introduced about 16 children died from measles, mumps or rubella in the UK. This figure was fairly constant throughout the eighties.

In the year the MMR jab was introduced 33,000 people died of the flu in the UK.

The Health Minster who oversaw the introduction of MMR in Britain was Edwina Currie.

She is Jewish.

Protocol 11 states in part:

"We shall make Law, Right and Justice… by decrees of the president… and in case a suitable occasion should arise, in the form of a revolution in the State".

Sound familiar?

"What we want is that from the first moment of its promulgation, while the peoples of the world are still stunned by the accomplished fact of the revolution, still in a condition of terror and uncertainty, they should recognize once for all that we are so strong, so inexpugnable, so super-abundantly filled with power, that in no case shall we take any account of them, and so far from paying any attention to their opinions or wishes, we are ready and able to crush with irresistible power all expression or manifestation thereof at every moment and in every place, that we have seized at once everything we wanted and shall in no case divide our power with them ...

Then in fear and trembling they will close their eyes to everything, and be content to await what will be the end of it all.

The GOYIM are a flock of sheep, and we are their wolves…

There is another reason also why they will close their eyes: for we shall keep promising them to give back all the liberties we have taken away as soon as we have quelled the enemies of peace and tamed all parties....

It is this which has served as the basis for our organization of secret masonry which is not known to, and aims which are not even so much as suspected by, these GOY cattle, attracted by us into the army of masonic lodges in order to throw dust in the eyes of their fellows."


Protocol 12 states in part:

"We shall deal with the press in the following way: what is the part played by the press to-day? It serves to excite and inflame those passions which are needed for our purpose or else it serves selfish ends of parties. It is often vapid, unjust, mendacious, and the majority of the public have not the slightest idea what ends the press really serves…

The pretext for stopping any publication will be the alleged plea that it is agitating the public mind without occasion or justification…

If already now we have contrived to possess ourselves of the minds of the GOY communities to such an extent the they all come near looking upon the events of the world through the colored glasses of those spectacles we are setting astride their noses; if already now there is not a single State where there exist for us any barriers to admittance into what GOY stupidity calls State secrets: what will our positions be then, when we shall be acknowledged supreme lords of the world in the person of our king of all the world ....

And if there should be any found who are desirous of writing against us, they will not find any person eager to print their productions in print the publisher or printer will have to apply to the authorities for permission to do so. Thus we shall know beforehand of all tricks preparing against us…

Literature and journalism are two of the most important educative forces, and therefore our government will become proprietor of the majority of the journals. This will neutralize the injurious influence of the privately-owned press and will put us in possession of a tremendous influence upon the public mind .... This, however, must in no wise be suspected by the public…

All our newspapers will be of all possible complexions, aristocratic, republican, revolutionary, even anarchical, for so long, of course, as the constitution exists… Those fools who will think they are repeating the opinion of a newspaper of their own camp will be repeating our opinion or any opinion that seems desirable for us. In the vain belief that they are following the organ of their party they will, in fact, follow the flag which we hang out for them…

Not one journalist will venture to betray this secret, for not one of them is ever admitted to practice literature unless his whole past has some disgraceful sore or other... These sores would be immediately revealed".


Protocol 13 states in part:

"In order that the masses themselves may not guess what they are about we further distract them with amusements, games, pastimes, passions, people’s palaces".

Well yes, this has to sound familiar.

Particularly in light of the fact that Tony Blair’s government has recently debated the introduction of a Las Vegas style casino culture throughout Britain.

Such "culture" has, invariably, been dominated by the Jews.


Protocol 13 continues:

"Soon we shall begin through the press to propose competitions in art, in sport in all kinds: these interests will finally distract their minds from questions in which we should find ourselves compelled to oppose them. Growing more and more disaccustomed to reflect and form any opinions of their own, people will begin to talk in the same tone as we because we alone shall be offering them new directions for thought…

When, we come into our kingdom our orators will expound great problems which have turned humanity upside down in order to bring it at the end under our beneficent rule."


Protocol 14 states in part:

"When we come into our kingdom it will be undesirable for us that there should exist any other religion than ours of the One God with whom our destiny is bound up by our position as the Chosen People… we shall emphasize its mystical right, on which, as we shall say, all its educative power is based....

The errors of the GOYIM governments will be depicted by us in the most vivid hues. We shall implant such an abhorrence of them that the peoples will prefer tranquility in a state of serfdom to those rights of vaunted freedom which have tortured humanity and exhausted the very sources of human existence... Useless changes of government to which we instigated the GOYIM when we were undermining their state structures, will have so wearied the peoples by that time that they will prefer to suffer anything under us rather than run the risk of enduring again all the agitations and miseries they have gone through.

At the same time we shall not omit to emphasize the historical mistakes of the GOY governments which have tormented humanity for so many centuries by their lack of understanding of everything that constitutes the true good of humanity…

Our philosophers will discuss all the shortcomings of the various beliefs of the GOYIM but no one will ever bring under discussion our faith from its true point of view since this will be fully learned by none save ours who will never dare to betray its secrets.

In countries known as progressive and enlightened we have created a senseless, filthy, abominable literature".

Sound familiar?

Who gave us Page 3 tits?

Rupert Murdoch, closely followed by Robert Maxwell.

Who, after he just given Tony B a £100,000 bung, did Our Dear Leader decide should be the owner of The Express and The Star?

Richard Desmond: a fellow who just happened to own more than 200 top shelf pornographic magazines at the time.

Who did the Daily Mail describe as "pornographer-in-chief" when he was the boss of Channel 4?

Michael Grade: the current Chairman of the BBC.

Who gave us regular soft porn on Channel 5 when he became its first Chairman?

David Elstein.

What links these gentlemen?

They are all Jewish.

Who have always been massively over-represented in the production and dissemination of pornography worldwide?

The Jews.


Protocol 15 states in part:

"We shall slay without mercy all who take arms to oppose our coming into our kingdom."

Karl Marx, who was Jewish, published The Communist Manifesto in 1848, which just happens to be the year known to history as "the year of the revolutions".
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
(((MrAnderson))) is a Sayanim Troll
Last Edit: 28 Feb 2017 13:06 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 28 Feb 2017 13:12 #6

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1669
  • Likes received: 614
Jack Black's article on the PROTOCOLS OF ZION.....part 2


Conservative estimates put the number of deaths attributable to Marxian communism in the 20th century at 200 million.

Protocol 15 continues:

"Every kind of new institution of anything like a secret society will also be punished with death; those of them which are now in existence, are known to us, serve us and have served us, we shall disband…. In this way we shall proceed with those GOY masons who know too much…

In the GOY societies, in which we have planted and deeply rooted discord… the only possible way of restoring order is to employ merciless measures that prove the direct force of authority: no regard must be paid to the victims who fall, they suffer for the well-being of the future…

We shall create and multiply free masonic lodges in all the countries of the world… All these lodges we shall bring under one central administration, known to us alone and to all others absolutely unknown, which will be composed of our learned elders. The lodges will have their representatives who will serve to screen the above-mentioned administration of MASONRY and from whom will issue the watchword and program. In these lodges we shall tie together the knot which binds together all revolutionary and liberal elements. Their composition will be made up of all strata of society. The most secret political plots will be known to us and fall under our guiding hands on the very day of their conception. Among the members of these lodges will be almost all the agents of international and national police…

The class of people who most willingly enter into secret societies are those who live by their wits, careerists, and in general people, mostly light-minded, with whom we shall have no difficulty in dealing and in using to wind up the mechanism of the machine devised by us…

The GOYIM enter the lodges out of curiosity or in the hope by their means to get a nibble at the public pie…You cannot imagine to what extent the wisest of the GOYIM can be brought to a state of unconscious naivete in the presence of this condition of high conceit of themselves… and to reduce them to a slavish submission for the sake of winning a renewal of success…

If we have been able to bring them to such a pitch of stupid blindness is it not a proof, and an amazingly clear proof, of the degree to which the mind of the GOYIM is undeveloped in comparison with our mind? This it is, mainly, which guarantees our success.

And how far-seeing were our learned elders in ancient times when they said that to attain a serious end it behooves not to stop at any means or to count the victims sacrificed for the sake of that end .... We have not counted the victims of the seed of the GOY cattle…

We execute masons in such wise that none save the brotherhood can ever have a suspicion of it, not even the victims themselves of our death sentence, they all die when required as if from a normal kind of illness… By such methods we have plucked out of the midst of MASONRY the very root of protest against our disposition.

While preaching liberalism to the GOY we at the same time keep our own people and our agents in a state of unquestioningly submission…

The prestige of the law has been exploded by the liberal interpretations introduced into this sphere. In the most important and fundamental affairs and questions, Judges decide as we dictate to them… Even Senators and the higher administration accept our counsels. The purely brute mind of the GOYIM is incapable of use for analysis and observation…

In this difference in capacity for thought between the GOYIM and ourselves may be clearly discerned the seal of our position as the Chosen People and of our higher quality of humanness, in contradistinction to the brute mind of the GOYIM…

The aureole of our power demands suitable, that is, cruel, punishments for the slightest infringement…

We are obliged without hesitation to sacrifice individuals, who commit a breach of established order…

When the King of Israel sets upon his sacred head the crown offered him by Europe he will become Patriarch of the world."


Protocol 16 states in part:

"In order to effect the destruction of all collective forces except ours we shall emasculate the first stage of collectivism, the universities, by reeducating them in a new direction. Their officials and professors will be prepared for their business by detailed secret programs of action… They will be appointed with especial precaution…

The ill-guided acquaintance of a large number of persons with questions of polity creates utopian dreamers and bad subjects, as you can see for yourselves from the example of the universal education in this direction of the GOYIM. We must introduce into their education all those principles which have so brilliantly broken up their order…

We shall erase from the memory of men all facts of previous centuries which are undesirable to us, and leave only those which depict all the errors of the government of the GOYIM… we shall swallow up and confiscate to our own use the last scintilla of independence of thought".

Sound familiar?

Which of you had ever heard of Adam Weishaupt and his role in the creation of the Illuminati before you read this?

Which of you knew of the crucial Jewish involvement in the Russian Revolution, one of the most momentous and far-reaching events in all human history, before you read about it here?

Which of you had ever heard of the two Ukranian Holocausts, both far greater than the Jewish version, before you read about them here?

Which of you had ever heard of the Jew, Lazar Kaganovich, the man most responsible for the second of these, before you read about him here?

Almost none of you.

"We shall erase from the memory of men all facts of previous centuries which are undesirable to us".

Thus spake the sixteenth protocol long, long ago.


Protocol 17 states in part:

"We have long past taken care to discredit the priesthood of the GOYIM and thereby to ruin their mission on earth which in these days might still be a great hindrance to us. Day by day its influence on the peoples of the world is falling lower. Freedom of conscience has been declared everywhere, so that now only years divide us from the moment of the complete wrecking of that Christian religion".

Sound familiar?

There cannot be anyone who is not aware that Christianity in this country, particularly the Church of England variety has been on the run for quite some time now.

At a time when the on message priest will not allow our favourite hymns to be played in church for fear of offending the ethnic minorities, it’s not surprising that our state religion is on its way out.

The fact that such ethnic minorities would never dream of setting foot in a church in the first place, is conveniently forgotten by the worthy wagtail during the hymn-banning process.

Prince Charles mounted the PC bandwagon many moons ago when he said:

"I don’t want to be the Defender of the Faith, I want to be the Defender of Faiths".

Pretty yuk-making stuff, if you were one of the few who still attended Church of England services, I imagine.


Protocol 17 continues:

"The King of the Jews will be the real Pope of the universe, the Patriarch of the international church…

While we are reeducating youth in new traditional religions and afterwards in ours… we shall fight against them by criticism calculated to produce schism...

Our contemporary press will continue to convict State affairs, religions, incapacities of the GOYIM, always using the most unprincipled expressions in order by every means to lower their prestige in the manner which can only be practiced by the genius of our gifted tribe".

"Unprincipled expressions"?

Hmmm. You mean expressions such as:

Racist, bigot, hater, anti-Semite, fascist, Nazi, neo-Nazi, white supremacist, dinosaur, little-Englander, hatemonger, holocaust-denier, extremist etc. etc. etc?


Protocol 17 continues:

"In our programs one-third of our subjects will keep the rest under observation".

Sound familiar?

When Eastern Europe came under Communist domination after WWII, this tactic was universally and routinely employed.

Nowadays, in the Owellian world of Chairman Blair, Big Brother keeps an eye on us using a myriad of computer technologies and hundreds of thousands of civil servants.

And then there is the Community Security Trust, a 2,000-strong bunch of Jewish snoops, to lend an unasked-for hand to Big Bro whenever the snoopers feels the need.

You can rest assured that Big Brother will NOT be keeping an eye upon THEM.


Protocol 19 states in part:

"In order to destroy the prestige of heroism for political crime we shall send it for trial in the category of thieving, murder, and every kind of abominable and filthy crime. Public opinion will then confuse in its conception of this category of crime with the disgrace attaching to every other and will brand it with the same contempt."

So, if I break the law regarding "incitement to racial hatred" by pointing out some of those truths that the Jews are desperate to keep hidden, I will be called a "racist", a "fascist" and an anti-Semite for perpetrating this "political crime".

For which crime, by the way, I will go to jail for seven years and be regarded by the Big Brother network and the public at large, if BB has been doing his job properly, as just as much of a criminal as those who go "thieving", those who "murder" and those who commit "every kind of abominable and filthy crime".

For telling the truth.

Good, eh?


Protocol 20 states in part:

"Economic crises have been produced by us for the GOYIM… The concentration of industry in the hands of capitalists out of the hands of small masters has drained away all the juices of the peoples and with them also the States....

Loans hang like a sword of Damocles over the heads of rulers, who, instead of taking from their subjects by a temporary tax, come begging with outstretched palm of our bankers. Foreign loans are leeches which there is no possibility of removing from the body of the State until they fall off of themselves or the State flings them off. But the GOY States do not tear them off; they go on in persisting in putting more on to themselves so that they must inevitably perish, drained by voluntary blood-letting…

So long as loans were internal the GOYIM only shuffled their money from the pockets of the poor to those of the rich, but when we bought up the necessary person in order to transfer loans into the external sphere, all the wealth of States flowed into our cash- boxes and all the GOYIM began to pay us the tribute of subjects…

How clear is the undeveloped power of thought of the purely brute brains of the GOYIM, as expressed in the fact that they have been borrowing from us with payment of interest without ever thinking that all the same these very moneys plus an addition for payment of interest must be got by them from their own State pockets in order to settle up with us. What could have been simpler than to take the money they wanted from their own people? But it is a proof of the genius of our chosen mind that we have contrived to present the matter of loans to them in such a light that they have even seen in them an advantage for themselves…

The GOY rulers … You know to what they have been brought by this carelessness, to what pitch of financial disorder they have arrived, notwithstanding the astonishing industry of their peoples."

Do you remember lend-lease?

We were still paying off the debts accrued during WWII in the 1980s.

Do you remember when Harold Wilson went cap in hand to the "Gnomes of Zurich"?

Governments are indebted at all times to international banking institutions.

These debts have to be paid off and massive interest is demanded.

CUI BONO.

Who sit on their fat behinds and watch as all that lovely lolly come rolling in?

Take a guess.

The US taxpayer has been many trillions of dollars in debt to the international financiers for a very, very long time now.

The US taxpayer has to pay dearly for the servicing of this debt.

In one way or another, so do the rest of us.


Protocol 21 states in part.

"Of foreign loans I shall say nothing more, because they have fed us with national moneys of the GOYIM, but for our State there will be no foreigners, that is, nothing external… We have taken advantage of the venality of administrators and slackness of rulers to get our moneys twice, thrice and more times over, by lending to the GOY governments moneys which were not at all needed by the States…

For the payment of interest it becomes necessary to have recourse to new loans, which do not swallow up but only add to the capital debt. And when this credit is exhausted it becomes necessary by new taxes to cover, not the loan, but only the interest on it.

These taxes are a debit employed to cover a debit".

See above.


Protocol 22 states in part:

"The supreme lord who will replace all now existing rulers, dragging in their existence among societies demoralized by us, societies that have denied even the authority of God… he will be obliged to kill off those existing societies…

These forces now triumph in manifestations of robbery and every kind of violence under the mask of principles of freedom and every kind of violence under the mask of principles of freedom and rights."

Sound familiar?

Every year crime rises all over the Western World. Every day we hear of some bleeding-heart official making excuses for the criminal and turning a deaf ear to the protests of the victimised.

There are something in the region of a hundred organisations devoted to the welfare of the criminal in Britain, there are, at any given time, one, two or three devoted to the welfare of the victim.

It’s nuts.

Governtmentally sponsored lunacy.

And the bloke who takes this non-law into his own hands?

He is ALWAYS punished with more severity than normal.

If Big Bro thinks he can get away with it.

Tony Martin went to prison for life,

The blood of the British people began to boil.

The sentence was quickly reduced to five years for manslaughter.


Protocol 24 states in part:

"I pass now to the method of confirming the dynastic roots of King David to the last strata of the earth.

Certain members of the seed of David will prepare the kings and their heirs, selecting not by right of heritage but by eminent capacities, inducting them into the most secret mysteries of the political, into schemes of government, but providing always that none may come to knowledge of the secrets…

Only the king and the three who stood sponsor for him will know what is coming.

In the person of the king who with unbending will is master of himself and of humanity all will discern as it were fate with its mysterious ways…

The King of the Jews must not be at the mercy of his passions, and especially of sensuality: on no side of his character must he give brute instincts power over his mind. Sensuality worse than all else disorganizes the capacities of the mind and clearness of views, distracting the thoughts to the worst and most brutal side of human activity."

The Protocols end with the words:

"Signed by the Representatives of Zion of the 33rd degree."

The highest rank that a Freemason can attain is the 33rd degree.


A report titled: The Power And Aims Of International Jewry, was drawn up by the US War Department in August, 1919.

This document remained classified until 1973.

Here are some of the things it said:

"We have been informed at second hand that an English translation of the Protocols has been shown to Justice Brandeis and Jacob Schiff each of whom vigorously disclaimed their authenticity, Mr. Schiff asserting that they are a creation of German propagandists. (Brandeis was the first Jewish Judge appointed to the Supreme Court and Schiff was a mega-rich Jewish businessman who was the principal monetary backer of the Russian revolution)

This explanation seems almost impossible considering the circumstances of the Russian publication, facts which perhaps were not made known to him, at the time he saw the translation, much less probable than the suggestion said to have been made by Justice Brandeis that the Protocols are the creation of a fanatic Russian anti-Semite…

As previously stated, the Protocols are attributed to Herzl himself and one certainly must note the identity of thought found in the Protocols on the one hand and in Herzl’s public writings, and in the writings of other prominent past and contemporary Jewish leaders on the other.

Protocol 1, page 1: ‘According to the law of being might is right.’

Protocol 1, page 3: ‘Our right lies in force.’

Herzl - ‘The Jewish State’, page 2: ‘For this, as indeed every point which arises in the commerce of nations, is a question of might. In the world of today and for an indefinite period, it will probably remain so, might precious right.’

A number of similar illustrations such as the quotations relating to the ‘Terrible power of the Jewish purse’ are set out in Appendix A.

Some of the important events which have occurred since 1897 have fulfilled in a striking manner the predictions and aims expressed in the Protocols themselves… The coming of a world war is predicted which the Jews are to secretly promote. The creation of the chaos of Bolshevism is described as to be worked out by Jews all over the world as a step towards Jewish world dominion.

Furthermore, it is impossible to read far in the Protocols and in the public writings of Hess, Herzl and other Jewish Leaders without being impressed with the constant reiteration of certain fundamental principles and ideals. Among the more important of these around which the forces of Jewry are now rallying are the following:

The Jews are a nation held together by their common enemies.

With the Jews Nationality and Religion are inseparable and co-extensive.

All groups of Jews from the extreme radicals to the most conservative, are united in this National Religious Movement.

Once a Jew always a Jew.

The teachings of the Talmud still exercises a profound influence on Jewish life.

Judaism and Socialism are different expressions of the same movement.

The Jews consider themselves the original exponents of internationalism and the League of Nations."


A 1920 review of The Protocols in The Times had this to say:

"What are these 'Protocols?' ... Are they a forgery? If so, whence comes the uncanny note of prophecy, prophecy in parts fulfilled, in parts far gone in the way of fulfilment? Have we been struggling these tragic years to blow up and extirpate the secret organisation of German world dominion ony to find beneath it another, more dangerous because more secret? Have we been straining every fibre of our national body, escaped of a 'Pax Germanica' only to fall into a 'Pax Judaica?'

The 'Elders of Zion,' as represented in their 'Protocols' are by no means kinder taskmasters than William II and his henchmen would have been."


In an article titled The Jewish Peril, published on the 19th of June, 1920, The Christian Science Monitor had this to say:

"It is necessary to plunge into the thorny question as to whether the Jewish Peril, of today, is as much a delusion of its prophets as was the Yellow Peril in its day. What is important to dwell upon is the increasing evidence of the existence of a secret conspiracy, throughout the world, for the destruction of organized government and the letting loose of evil...

The human mind jeers at the theory of mental manipulation, yet prominent politicians, philosophers and soldiers are found, at critical moments, giving expression to views of an absolutely non-moral description, which are not in accordance with their behavior in ordinary life... It is here that the conspiracy of evil against humanity becomes recognizable…

It would be a tremendous mistake to conclude that the Jewish peril, given another name and atmosphere, does not exist. It might, indeed, be renamed, out of one of the grandest of the books of the Old Testament, 'the terror by night,' for it is, essentially, the Psalmist's concept of the forces of mental evil at which, consciously or unconsciously, Professor Nilus is aiming. In other words, that a secret international political organization exists, working unremittingly by means of its Bureau of Psychology, though the world which should be awake to it is entirely asleep to it, is, to the man who can read the signs of the times, a thing unquestionable."


In an interview published in The New York World, on the 17th of February, 1921, Henry Ford, no less, put the case for Nilus thus:

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


The aforementioned Nesta Webster, in a letter written on the 4th of May 4, 1934, said:

"Personally, I am more than ever inclined to believe that the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are genuine. Without them I do not see how one could explain things that are happening today. More than ever, I think the Jews are at the bottom of all our troubles."


David Ash. the Jewish author of the 1995 work, Beware of God, says this:

"Why was Adolf Hitler given a copy of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion by a Jew called Rosenberg? He decided on a pogrom against the Jews after reading them. Mein Kampf was subsequently published.

Why was Adolf Hitler then funded by leading Jewish bankers? This has to be one of the greatest paradoxes in history.

The authors of The Protocols obviously didn't care if millions of their own people died because this furthered their cause of world domination and mass subjugation."


Marcus Eli Ravage was a Rumanian-born Jewish reporter for The New York Tribune.

The Rothschilds thought well enough of Ravage to allow him to write an official biography of the family. In his extraordinary tract, A Real Case Against the Jews, which was published in Century Magazine in 1928, he says:

"You accuse us of stirring up revolution in Moscow. Suppose we admit the charge. What of it?...

You make much noise and fury about undue Jewish influence in your theaters and movie palaces. Very good; granted your complaint is well founded. But what is that compared to our staggering influence in your churches, schools, your laws and your government, and the very thoughts you think every day?...

The ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion,’ which shows that we plotted to bring on the late World War. You believe that book. All right... We will underwrite every word of it. It is genuine and authentic.

But what is that besides the unquestionable historical conspiracy which we have carried out, which we never have denied because you never had the courage to charge us with it, and of which the full record is extant for anybody to read?"

I came across a remark on the internet which claimed Ravage’s words were taken out of context so, if you want to check out the whole of the article, it can be found here:

www.regmeister.net/ravage2.htm


In 1844, Benjamin Disraeli, a Jew who was our Prime Minsiter on two seperate occasions, wrote thus, in his novel, Coningsby:

"Yet here is the International Jew, full dress; he is the Protocolist, too, wrapped in mystery, a man whose fingers sweep all the strings of human motive, and who controls the chief of the brutal forces, money."

Which might mean something,

Or nothing.


It is, perhaps, interesting to compare the hostility heaped upon The Protocols with the respect accorded by so many to the "prophecies" of the Jewish seer, Nostradamus.

Nostradamus’ work, Centuries was a poetically composed stab at what might occur in the future. Now, as with most fortune tellers who predict a great many things, some of his predictions could be said to have taken place if you are prepared to stretch a point or two. However, quite a few of Nostradamus’ "predictions" are actually spliced together from different parts of his writings in order to fit the bill of whichever expert or follower is seeking to advance his reputation when some incident of great moment occurs.

Also, ardent adherents of Nostradamusism are able to infer a great deal that is not actually written down because his poetic style allows for a deal of interpretative licence.

When Nostradamus’ name is mentioned, whether we have ever bothered to read any of his writings or not, we are instantly involved. We are interested in knowing what he foresaw and what else he managed to foretell.

Now, if you read The Protocols, there is no poetry to conjure with, no one has to take a bit from here and a bit from there to make the case. This nineteenth century document that just happens to predict much of what was to come in the twentieth century.

This much must be true. Whoever put The Protocols down on paper was either:

Someone who was intimately acquainted with the plan for the New World Order that was to be brought about in the twentieth century; or

Someone who, in order to try and alert the non-Jewish world to what he believed were the secret intentions of a powerful body Jewish elders and their co-conspirators, was prepared to concoct a document which attempted to predict their future intentions; or

A raving loony who, by an extraordinary coincidence, happened to accurately foretell a hell of a lot of stuff that most at that time would not be remotely aware of; or

Someone who wished to defame the Jews for illicit and dishonest reasons; or

An attempt to deflect attention from some other bunch of megalomaniac nutcases bent on world domination. The Illuminati, a la Cecil Rhodes and co., and the most fanatical of the Jesuits might be contenders for such a prize. Or

A mixture of some or all of the above.

Now, it seems likely that The Protocols were inspired by and constructed from a variety of earlier works and, whoever the author was, he would, probably, have used the previous writings of the likes of Venedey, Joly, de Mousseaux, Chabauty and de Cyon etc. as a blueprint.

Whether this was done in order to enlighten us or as a cynical attempt to make make money for someone who knew that he could sell such a cynical creation to a credulous non-Jewish world, is a matter for debate.

The Jews, themselves, have been at pains to rubbish The Protocols ever since they were first published. However, they have been at even greater pains to ensure that they are never read by the common man, rubbish or not. Which is interesting, don't you think?

Anyway, although there’s certainly a good deal within the above that the Protocol deniers can get their teeth into, there is plenty of historical evidence out there suggests that there was a deal of Jewish involvement in the creation and exposure of these documents.

For what its worth, I reckon that The Protocols were, probably, concocted by some very well informed person in an attempt to warn the rest of us of what he believed that the elite of world Jewry were up to, hoping, perhaps, to galvanise the non-Jew into taking action against them.

That the author should choose the vehicle that he did for this exposition should not be regarded as proof of any intrinsic deceitfulness. The playwright may write a play in order to throw some light upon a subject close to his heart. A novelist may write a novel to expose a body of information that the top blokes would rather have kept sectret, a documentary maker may include a dramatised scene in his documentary in order to illuminate a point he is trying to make.

And a Stephen Spielberg may make a film like Schindler's List to ram home a message to those who wouldn't otherwise have known what the message was.


Anyway, it could certainly be argued that, if The Protocols were not the definitive machinations of the Jewish leadership at the time, those who have tried to con us into believing that they were should be condemned.

However, if The Protocols were designed to inform an uninformed majority of an historical conspiracy that was intended to do them harm, then I say Nilus did us all a favour.

Unfortunately for some, the favour came too late. Within 12 years of the publication of a "forged" document that tried to warn an ingenuous world of what the Jewish elite was capable of, a very real conspiracy had overtaken the people of Eastern Europe. The Russian Revolution ushered in a period of genocide and horror that only really ended with Stalin's death in 1953.

Apart from Lenin, who some say was one quarter Jewish, and Stalin, himself, who was a Georgian Asiatic, Sverdlov, Zinoviev, Trotsky, Kamenev and a sizeable majority of the movers and shakers within the revolutionary hierarchy were Jewish.

Sverdlov countersigned the Tsar's death warrant and the man who headed the firing squad that executed him and his family was also Jewish.

The notoriously ruthless death squads of the Cheka, that roamed Russia imposing the brutal will of the Bolshevik government in the early twenties, were also predominantly Jewish.

Khalatov, who was the head of the Ministry that distributed food throughout the Russian Empire in the1920s when the first Ukrainian famine occurred, was also Jewish. Lazar Kaganovich, who was in charge of the operation that saw between 7 and 9 million Ukrainians perish in the 1930s, was also Jewish.

The fact that so many Jews found themselves at the top of the Bolshevik murder-machine when it seized power in 1917, was not a coincidence. The fact that they behaved with such casual brutality when they were in a position to do so, was not a coincidence either.


The Protocols may be perused in their entirety if you go here:

www.biblebelievers.org.au/przion1.htm

And, if you wish to check out the hoax/forgery argument, you might wish to visit this website:

ddickerson.igc.org/protocols.html


I'll tell you something that I know to be a real "hoax".

The figure of 6,000,000 Jewish dead in WWII is a hoax and it has been known to be so for a long time now.

Check this out:

In 1948, a memorial plaque was erected at Auschwitz which commemorated the 4,000,000 dead that the Germans were alleged to have slaughtered there.

This 4 million figure was the basis for the 6 million "Holocaust" dead that nowadays must not be questioned.

Unfortunately for the Holocaust Industry, an enormous amount of revisonist pressure has been put upon them to come clean over the years and, in 1990, a new plaque was revealed at Auschwitz stating that only 1,500,000 died.

At the same time as the figures at Auschwitz were being revised, the grossly exaggerated statistcis at the other death camps were being overhauled. Dachau, for example, used to have a sign up that said 240,000 Jews died there, gassed in "ovens" by the Nazis. Nowadays, a new sign states that 19,000 people of all races died there, mainly of typhus and starvation. Nowhere does it say that anyone ever died in an "oven".

Thing is, as I'm sure most of you must have noticed, The top Jews and their totalitarian underlings, who boss the rest of us in the West, didn't bother to tell us this stuff, now did they?

I mean, have they revised the 6 million figure downwards since 1990?

They have not. In fact, throughout Europe, there are lots of people in jail right now for daring to question the Jewish orthodox version of history. Just recently, our own David Irving was imprisoned in Austria for falling foul of the "holocaust denier" laws.

So, just in case you're a little baffled by what's going on here, let's do some simple maths.

4 million dead at Auschwitz in 1948, according to the OLD memorial stone and 6 million "Holocaust" dead according to the top blokes of world Jewry and the New World Order.

1.5 million dead at Auschwitz in 1990, according to the NEW memorial stone.

And yet, what's this? The top blokes of world Jewry and the New World Order are still insisting that 6 million Jews died?

Excuse a minute, you fellows, but if 2.5 million has been lopped off the original Auschwitz statistic, then, I'm afraid, to be fair and accurate, you're going to have to take 2.5 million off the total figure as well, no matter how attached you are to the old 6 million stat.

Oh, and seeing as the Dachau numbers have been revised downwards as well, well, let's see, the difference between 240,000 and 19,000 is 221,000, so we're going to have to lose that amount as well.

So, if only the recent evidence, as shown by the memorials at Auschwitz and Dachau, is factored in, then the highest figure of Jewish dead that we can possibly arrive at is 6 million minus 2.5 million, minus another 221,00.

Which is 3,279,000 Jewish dead in WWII.

Not 6,000,000.

Now, the Jews have known about this since 1990.

That's almost all the adult Jews on the planet, not just the top lot. Did any of them ever tell us about this?

Did any of your Jewish friends bother to enlighten you?

They didn't, did they?

Anyway, seeing as you have been schooled, from the moment you were born, as was I, never to question anything that the Hebrews tell you, I guess you're, probably, a bit sceptical.

So here's the proof:

Pictured below is the memorial stone that commemorated the Auschwitz dead from 1948 to 1990:



The plaque below replaced the 1948 plaque in 1990.




If you wish to check out the "Holocaust" fable in more depth, you could take a look at The Biggest Lie at this website.
(Edit by Exorcist.....The Biggest Lie is another Jack Black article from his now defunct site)

Alternatively, you could investigate things for yourself.

If you did so, you would know that I'm not in the business of trying to con any of you into believing something that isn't true.


Mrs. L. Fry tells us that most of the copies of The Protocols known to have existed in Russia in the time of Nicholas II were destroyed during the part-Jewish Kerensky’s brief time in office.

It is, perhaps, instructive to note that, under his Bolshevik successors, the usual punishment for possessing a copy was death.

It is, perhaps, even more instructive to note that Kerensky's Private Secretary was the father of the man who oversaw the introduction of the very first Brit-bashing race law into our country.

Frank Soskice, Harold Wilson's first Home Secretary, was a Russian Jew.
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
(((MrAnderson))) is a Sayanim Troll
Last Edit: 28 Feb 2017 16:04 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 28 Feb 2017 16:43 #7

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1669
  • Likes received: 614
Next......Jack Black's article on the TALMUD:
___________________________________


Within the Talmud there are 63 seperate books, one of which, Abhodah Zarah, says these things:

"Bloodshed is forbidden to a Gentile who may kill neither another Gentile or a Jew; but it is not forbidden to the Jew in regards to the Gentile."

"Theft, robbery, and rape of a beautiful woman and similar deeds are forbidden to every Gentile towards another Gentile, and also towards a Jew: but they are allowed to a Jew against a Gentile."


Isn't it interesting that whilst it is considered utterly correct, moral and fashionable to paint the whole of Western Civilization as evil for our supposed past behaviour towards the Jew, it has been ruled inadmissible, immoral and racist to condemn Judaism for over 2000 years of genocidal antagonism towards the non-Jewish peoples of the earth?

The allegation that Jews are systematically taught to despise non-Jews as part of their religious instruction can be discerned quite readily by studying the Talmud.

Almost all adult Jews are, to some extent, aware of the scorn, spite and downright hatred that the Talmud and historical Jewish orthodoxy directs at the non Jew. They are, therefore, on constant guard against those who would invite an examination of these texts. In the last few decades, on the rare occasion that such material is brought to public attention, its exposure is always villified by Jewish organizations as distorted and misrepresentational, and those who would bring such material to light are inariably described as, "bigot," "hater," "racist," and "anti-semite" by those who would not have these matters investigated.

It’s not just organised Jewry that does what these matters investigated, the "liberal" cannot endure frank and open discussion on any subject where the facts are at odds with his liberal agenda either. That is why words like "bigot," "hater" and "racist" were invented. The moment a fact is introduced into the debate which, if discussed rationally, might enlighten those listening to the debate, the negative buzz word is introduced by the indignant "liberal" and all further close examination of his liberal stance is stifled.

A critical analysis of the contents of the Talmud, and the extent to which hatred for non-Jews is encouraged by Judaism’s holiest book, is, thus, taboo.

Common sense, independent of received politically correct opinion, is off limits when it comes to a close inspection of "the chosen race."

This betrayal of our powers of reason should annoy and frustrate you, if you are a scholar worthy of the name.

Research, examine, do not be content to have your history handed to you on a plate by those who have a vested interest in keeping the facts to themselves. If you are prepared to undertake such an examination, you could do worse than to begin with an investigation of the Talmud.

Those of you who have always taken the politically correct "we must never do anything to upset the poor Jews" position, who think that we should believe without question the Rabbi who says the Talmud does not preach racial hatred, because not to believe him would "upset the poor Jew," should stop reading now.

You are lost; the faculties of common sense and reason that your ancestors posessed, which enabled them to tell right from wrong, good from bad, positive from negative and productive from destructive, in you are dead. You are a creature of the myth makers, you belong to them, you are a lemming, you are already over the edge, there is no hope for you and, probably, no hope for those you have any influence over.

If, however, you have always done your very best never to, "upset the poor Jew," but cannot see why he should raise such a fuss over an impartial investigation of their holiest book, when, surely, such an investigation would silence the, hate-mongers, once and for all, well, then, you should read on.

If you choose not to believe what you are about to read once you have read it, because the, "bigot," "hater," "racist," "anti-Semite," and, "fascist," have, obviously, distorted the Talmudic references herein to suit their own argument, that is OK. All your life you have been led to believe that the opposite was the case and you have trusted, without question, those who led you to believe this contadictory case.

However, I do say that you owe yourself, your children, and their future, this: if you do not believe what is written here, do you not, then, have a responsibilty to put your disbelief to the test? Do you put the book aside, once read, saying:

"No, that’s rubbish, I’ve never read such a load of baloney in my life: anyone who believes this stuff is an ‘anti-semite.’"

That would certainly be a legitimate opinion for you to hold, but only if you have checked at least some of the assertions and quotations contained herein. An opinion without the facts to back it up can never be anything more than guesswork. If you are the kind of person who would read this essay, perhaps out of curiosity, and then do nothing to either verify or disprove its contents, I say that you too are lost and that there is little point in you bothering yourself with it and that you would be doing yourself a favour if you gave it to someone else to read.

Much of the Talmud, as regards the stance it takes against those of non-Jewish origin, is a work of hatred. The rabbis, who compiled the Talmud over many centuries, instruct the reader how they may best practice this hatred. Interesting that it should serve as the "legal code" of a people whose leadership likes to pose as opponents of hatred. Communism and Zionism were both born of this book.


The Talmud, not the Torah or the rest of the Old Testament, is the most consulted authority by Orthodox Jewry.

Indeed, in Edward Boraz' 1996 primer, Understanding the Talmud. A Modern Reader's Guide for Study, Jacob Neusner is quoted thus:

"The Talmud is the single most influential document in the history of Judaism."

Quotations such as those detailed below receive ample coverage in various versions of the Jewish Encyclopedia, enough so that the authenticity of most of the quotations cannot seriously be in any doubt. The Jewish Encyclopedia even details how the English translations use code words such as Amalakites, Cutheans, Canaanites, Egyptians, heathens, Akum, Obhde Elilim, Minim, Nokhrim, Edom, Amme Haarets, Goyim, Apikorosim, Kuthrim, sons of Esau, Kliphoth, the unclean, people of the earth and other descriptions to denote non-Jews in general, using such terms to lessen the impact upon the Gentile who might chance to read the book.
It also suggests that the word "Balaam" is an alias for Jesus Christ.

It should be noted that the word goy/goyim is left as it is and never translated to mean Gentile or non-Jew. This is because the word is still very much in common usage today, in fact most Christians will have heard their Jewish friends use the term. I always used to think, whenever the word was aimed at me, that it was an affectionate put down of some description. Well, it’s a put down all right but it’s not that affectionate. One Hebrew translation of the world would be something approximating "dumb animal".

Whilst we’re on the subject, probably the most common term a Jew would use today for a female Gentile, both in and out of her presence is, "Shiksa."

In the most popular English/Hebrew dictionary, The Joys of Yiddish, (1968) by Leo Rosten, we are told that shiksa comes from the Hebrew word "sheqetz," meaning "blemish," which is bad enough. However this translation is a generous one, as every speaker of Hebrew knows. The Megiddo Modern Hebrew-English Dictionary, published in Israel, correctly defines sheqetz as follows:

"Unclean animal; loathsome creature, abomination."

For popular consumption in English the word shiksa is usually carefully censored. In A Dictionary of Yiddish Slang and Idioms, for example, "shikseh" is simply defined as "non-Jewish girl."

Most Jews know better.

For example, in the essay, Growing Intolerance Threatens the Humane Jewish Tradition, by Allan Brownfeld, which was seen in The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, in March 1999, Ze'ev Chafets, who married a non-Jewish woman in 1997, was quoted thus:

"Jews who would rather cut off their tongue than say ‘nigger' or ‘spic', and consider ‘kike' and 'Hymie' fighting words, talk about ‘goyim' and ‘shiksas' with blithe indifference. They assume that we can't be guilty of prejudice because we are all victims... But terms like 'shiksa' ... no longer sound like charming Yiddishisms to me; they seem like slurs."


Jewish tradition holds that Moses received two Torahs on Mount Sinai.

One was the written Torah contained in the Pentateuch. The second was an oral Torah, which according to Jewish tradition was passed from Moses to religious leaders down through the ages.

Between 70 AD and the end of the third century this oral tradition was written down culminating in the defintive documents which came to be known as the Mishnah and the supplementary Tosefta. The Jewish scholar, Judah Ha-Nasi, 135-219 AD, the foremost religious authority of his generation, was most responsible for this work.

The Mishnah is traditionally considered to be as relevant to the Jew as the original first five books of the Pentateuch, as the thoughts contained within it were supposedly revealed to Moses at the same time. The fact that these thoughts were finally written down almost 1500 hundred years after the Torah in no way compromises the Mishnah in Jewish eyes.

Over the next 300 years or so the Mishnah was discussed, argued over and modified to some extent by Judaism’s most learned scholars. The edited version of the Rabbinical debates and interpretations of the laws and lore contained in the Mishnah that took place throughout that three hundred year plus period, came to be known as the Gemara. Together, the Mishnah and the Gemara make up the original Talmud.

From the eleventh century onwards further commentaries on this original version were composed which were eventually, after some initial hostility from Jewish religious leaders, incorporated into the Talmud.

The Tosephoth of Rabbi Solomon Yitzhaki Ben Isaac (Rashi) was, probably, the most important of these, although he, himself, along with the various commentators that followed him, will surely have gleaned much from the Halakhoth, a severely shortened and simplified edition of the Talmud, which was the first major work of Halakha. It is often printed on the backpages of the Babylonian Talmud.

The Halakhoth was compiled by Isaac ben Jacob Alfasi, (Rif) a Moroccan Rabbi, and first introduced to his fellow Jews in 1032.

The Commentaries of Maimonides followed. The various opinions and Talmudic analyses of Rashi and Maimonides together with those of one or two less well known Rabbis who were influenced by their ideas, constitute what has, in the modern age, come to be accepted by Jewish orthodoxy as the 63 volume work known as the Talmud.

For the purposes of this book I shall deal with these Talmudic writings at the time they were written. Thus, what follows will introduce you to a fractional representation of scholarly Rabbinical thought as it interpreted the original Mosaic laws during the three hundred year period from 200AD to 500AD approximately.

If the ordinary non-Jewish man in the street were to read just a few pages of Talmudic literature, as it has been translated and broadcast by Jewish apostates and non-Jews from Martin Luther onwards, his life would be changed forever. No matter how politically correct he was, no matter how unconcerned he was with the workings of the world outside his own sphere of influence, no matter how many times he had previously stated that politics had nothing to do with him, no matter how many times he had been subjected to WWII "holocaust" propaganda and had, dutifully, taken the message to heart, no matter how preoccupied he was with every other aspect of his life, if he wasn’t a bought and paid for member of the elite caste that had ruled over every aspect of his life from the very beginning of it, then the startling information revealed by a brief acquaintance with the teachings of the ancient Jewish sages would never again allow him to acquiesce in his own mistreatment at the hands of those that he had been taught to regard with a very special respect because of the way they had been, allegedly, mistreated throughout all history by his forefathers.

There is a vast amount of information that can be discovered by the "man in the street" in respect of the hatred preached by the Talmud against the Gentile. Much of what can be accessed via the Internet is routinely rubbished by the a plethora of Jewish "scholars" but there is a vast body of knowledge of Talmudic literature which they are unable to gainsay, because it has been, now, so widely disseminated, read and understood. The usual response to that which cannot be denied is:

"We should not judge the Jews of today by the standards of those who were commenting two thousand years ago."

The problem with that way of thinking is that so many of the orthodox religious Jews of today regard Talmudic lore as sacrosanct. They believe what was written down by the ancient Rabbis and they practice it.

In the modern era it has invariably taken a courageous Jew to speak out against the storms of politically correct propaganda, before the disbelieving non-Jewish community would ever allow itself to become half way convinced of the reality of the situation.

Unfortunately, after over a hundred years of governmental and media inspired disinformation, the western world has become so lacking in courage and moral fibre, that the majority would, in almost every case, prefer to live with the relatively comfortable lie that they are accustomed to, than have to deal with a distinctly uncomfortable truth.


As an introduction to the kind of Rabbinic thought processes that produced the Talmud I would like, first of all, to introduce you to a pearl or two of early Rabbinic wisdom, together with a couple of modern Jewish commentaries upon it, that cannot be wished away by the apologist.

If you recognise yourself as being one of those who resents having "to deal with a distinctly uncomfortable truth" and you are still reading, you may wish to look away now. You have been warned.

"A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition." (Sanhedrin)

"A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated." (Abhodah Zarah)

"When a grown up man has intercourse with a little girl, it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this it is as if one puts the finger in the eye, tears come to the eyes again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years." (Kethuboth)

This last statement may not be as bad as it sounds. It can be argued that this law is attempting to protect the legal status of the girl’s virginity in respect of her future marriage prospects and is not encouraging paedophilia.

The Jewish historian, Israel Shahak confirms the statements above in his 1994 work, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years. Shahak states:

"Acording to the Talmudic Encyclopedia:

'If a Jew has coitus with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three or an adult, whether married or unmarried, and even if he is a minor aged only nine years and one day, because he had wilful coitus with her, she must be killed, as is the case with a beast, because through her a Jew got into trouble. The Jew, however, must be flogged, and if he is Kohen (member of the priestly caste) he must receive double the number of lashes, because he has committed a double offence: a Kohen must not have intercourse with a prostitute, and all Gentile women are presumed to be prostitutes’…

This does not imply that sexual intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman is permitted, quite the contrary. But the main punishment is inflicted on the Gentile woman; she must be executed, even if she was raped by the Jew."

Jane Litman tells us this in her September, 2000 essay, Working with Words of Torah.

"The background sound in the small library is muted but intense. Pairs of scholars lean over their talmudic texts whispering energetically, trying to puzzle out the meaning of the particular sugya, passage. The teacher directs them back toward the group and asks for questions. One student raises a hand:

'I don't understand verse 5:4 of the tractate Niddah. What does the phrase ‘it is like a finger in eye,' mean?

The teacher responds:

'This refers to the hymen of a girl younger than three years old. The Sages believed that in the case of toddler rape, the hymen would fully grow back by the time the girl reached adulthood and married. Therfore, though violated, she would still technically be counted as a virgin and could marry a priest. It's an analogy: poling your finger in the eye is uncomortable, but causes no lasting harm.’

There is a collective gasp of breath among students. Their dismay is palpable. They do not like this particular Talmudic text or the men behind it. But its authors, the talmudic rabbis, hardly wrote it with this particular group of students in mind, mostly thirty, and forty-year old women in suburban Philadelphia taking a four-week class titled ‘Women in Jewish Law,' at their Reform synagogue. The questioner persists.

'I don't understand. Are you saying this refers to the rape of a three year-old girl?'

‘Or younger,' the teacher responds dryly.

'I don't see how it says anything about rape and hymens. You must be mistaken. I don't believe the rabbis are talking about rape at all. I think this statement has nothing to do with the rest of the passage.'

The teacher (I'll admit now that it was me, a second-year rabbinic student) responds:

'Well, that's the common understanding. What do you think it means?' The woman is clearly agitated.

'I don't know, but I do know that it couldn't be about child rape.'

This is week three of the class. The woman does not return for week four. Denial…

I find Ross's model helpful when addressing sacred Jewish texts that are violent or xenophobic, that speak of child abuse, human slavery, or homophobia with gross insensitivity. Like so many of my colleagues and students, I often drift confusedly through denial, anger, grief, rationalization; sometimes reaching acceptance, sometimes not."

Now, if that hasn’t caught your attention you should put this book in the bin, switch on the TV and settle down for a lecture from the heirs of those who wrote the above.

Esther Rantzen; Marjory Proops; Clare Rayner; Miriam Stoppard; Vanessa Feltz; Ruby Wax; Rikki Lake; Jerry Springer; Sally Jesse Raphael; Irma Kurtz; Doctor Ruth; Ann Landers; Geraldo Rivera; Abigail Van Buren; David Letterman, who is half Jewish, and a host of other Jewish advisors who know so much better than you how you should live your life and are ever ready and willing to instruct you. And that’s without beginning to count the enormous number of Jewish politicians and political commentators whose opinion you are subjected to on a daily basis in your newspapers and on your televeision screens!

Or maybe you prefer those who would patronize you to be black? Oprah Winfrey; Montel Williams or our own, home grown Trisha Goddard will supply your every lemming requirement. Of course behind the scenes, their shows are being written, researched, produced and staffed by Jews who are all working for, almost invariably, a company owned by a Jew.

The unfortunate fact is that the acquiessence of the majority in the face of in your face wickedness and their willing promotion of it by, firstly, pretending that it does not exist, and, secondly, when dreadful behaviours become fashionable, participating in them, has played an enormous part in changing the world for the worse. I applaud those of you who are still reading.

Remember, the foremost point of my bringing this material to your attention is not to convince, nor to evangelise, it is to get you to begin to investigate. Once you have begun to seek the truth for yourself a major battle has been won. Once you have begun to question what you have previously been taught you are already waging war.


Rabbi Morris M. Kertzner defines the Talmud thus:

"The Talmud consists of 63 books of legal, ethical and historical writings of the ancient rabbis... It is a compendium of law and lore. It is the legal code which forms the basis of Jewish religious law and it is the textbook used in the training of rabbis."


So, here is my own edition of "legal, ethical and historical writings of the ancient rabbis... the textbook used in the training of rabbis."

In the Talmud, we are told that the Romans had nothing to do with the death of Jesus but that the Jews, themselves, executed him.

In Book 3 of the Zohar we are told:

"Jesus was buried in that… dirt heap... where they throw the dead bodies of dogs and asses, and where the sons of Esau and of Ismael, uncircumcized and unclean like dead dogs, are buried."

In Shulchan Oruch: Coschen Hamischpat we find that:

"Jesus was lowered into a pit of dung up to his armpits. Then a hard cloth was placed within a soft one, wound round his neck, and the tow ends pulled in opposite directions until he was dead."

In the Sanhedrin we read:

"Commentators refer to Jeshu-ha-Notzri by mention of the wicked kingdom of Edom, since that was his nation ... he was hanged on a Passover eve...

The Talmud Records Other Sins of Jesus of Nazarene. He and his disciples practiced sorcery and black magic, led Jews astray into idolatry, and were sponsored by foreign, gentile powers for the purpose of subverting Jewish worship."

Balaam also makes an appearance in this book:

"Balaam the lame was 33 years old when Pintias the Robber killed him... They say that his mother was descended from princes and rulers but consorted with carpenters...

Balaam fornicated with his jackass...

Hast thou heard how old Balaam was? He replied: ‘It is not actually stated but since it is written, bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days it follows that he was thirty-three or thirty-four years old."

It is interesting that Balaam was at an age exactly similar to the age we believe Jesus was when he was executed.


In his 1982 book, The Friars and the Jews. The Evolution of Medieval Anti-Judaism, Jeremy Cohen says:

"The Jesus of the ‘Talmud’... is mentioned as condemned to wallow eternally in boiling excrement... When forced to admit that one Talmudic passage mentioning the crimes of Jesus and his execution did indeed apply to the Christian Jesus, Yehiel still emphasized that the ‘Talmud’ was not responsible for maintaining this opinion among Jews."


In his 1994 history, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, Israel Shahak tells us this:

"The very name Jesus was for Jews a symbol of all that is abominable, and this popular tradition still exists. The Gospels are equally detested, and they are not allowed to be quoted even in modern Israel schools... For theological reasons, mostly rooted in ignorance, Christianity as a religion is classed by rabbinical teaching as idolatry. All Christian emblems and pictorial representations are regarded as idols."


The Talmud also says this:

"For murder, whether of a Cuthean Gentile by a Cuthean, or of an Israelite by a Cuthean, punishment is incurred; but of a Cuthean by an Israelite, there is no death penalty." (Sanhedrin)

"Moses said: 'Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife and he who committeth adultery incurs the death penalty.’ This means only adultery committed by, or with, Jews. The wife of a Gentile is excluded." (Ibid)

"Every foreigner who glorifies Sunday must be killed without asking him." (Ibid)

"Wherever the Hebrews go, they must make themselves the master of their Lords." (Ibid)

"Intercourse with a child of nine and a day is not the same as that with a child of nine." (Ibid)

A Jew is allowed to suppress a non-Jew, for it is written ‘Thou shalt do no wrong to thy neighbor. This is not written concerning the Gentile." (Ibid)

"If a woman sported lewdly with her young son and he committed the first stage of cohabitation with her, Beth Shammal says, he thereby renders her unfit to the priesthood, Beth Hillel declared her fit. All agree that the connection of a boy aged nine years and a day is real connection; whilst that of one less than eight years is not; their dispute refers only to one who is eight years old." (Ibid)

Those who read the uncanonical books (New Testament) will have no portion in the world to come." (Ibid)

"It is more wicked to question the words of the rabbis than that of the Torah." (Ibid)

"Jewish priests raised Balaam from the dead and punished him in boiling hot semen. Christians are boiled in excreta." (Gittin)

"Four billion Jews were killed by the Romans in the city of Bethar." (Ibid)

Oh, really?

Like the six million in the "holocaust" you mean?

"There were 400 synagogues in the great city of Betar and in each one there were 400 teachers of children and each one taught 400 children .... The enemy wrapped them in their scrolls and set them on fire." (Gittin)

400 x 400 x 400 = 64 million.

Ancient demography indicates that there were less than a million Jews in the entire world at that time.

Bit of an exaggeration there, I'd say.

"To heal his flesh a Jew should take dust that lies within the shadow of an outdoor toilet, mix it with honey and eat it." (Gittin)

"To heal the disease of pleurisy a Jew should take the excrement of a white dog and knead it with balsam, but if he can possibly avoid it he should not eat the dogs excrement as it loosens the limbs." (Ibid)

"On coming from a privy a man should not have sexual intercourse till he has waited long enough to walk half a mile, because the demon of the privy is with him for that time; if he does, his children will be epileptic." (Ibid)

"Canaanites are outside the protection of the law and God has exposed their money to Israel." (Baba Kamma)

"If a Jew has a suit against a non-Jew, you will take the Jew's side as far as possible, and you will, say to the non-Jew: ‘Thus it is according to our Law!’ If it is possible, according to the laws of the Gentiles, you will also take the Jew's side and say to the Gentiles: ‘Thus it is according to your Laws!’ If neither of these alternatives is possible, then you must cheat… If a Jew finds an object lost by a heathen it does not have to be returned." (Ibid)

"The name of God is not profaned when, for example, a Jew lies to a Goi by saying: 'I gave something to your father, but he is dead; you must return it to me,' as long as the Goi does not know that you are lying." (Ibid)

"It is not permitted to rob a brother, but it is permitted to rob a non-Jew, for it is written: ‘Thou shalt not rob thy neighbor.’ But these words, said by Jehova, do not apply to a goy who is not thy brother." (Baba Mezia)

"The word 'man' refers to Jews only, and not to non-Jews." (Ibid)

"All things pertaining to the Goyim are like a desert; the first person to come along and take them can claim them for his own." (Baba Bathra)

Now that you’ve had a taste of what lies concealed within the Talmud you should beware of discussing these discoveries with an orthodox Jew.

According to Talmudic law it is his duty to kill you! As it states in the Sanhedrin:

"Every goy who studies the Talmud and every Jew who helps him in it, ought to die."

And:

"A Goi who pries into the Torah is condemned to death, for it is written, it is our inheritance, not theirs."

If you are critical of me for putting you in danger, I apologise.

However, if you are a fraction more perturbed now than you were before you began reading, then, from my point of view, something worthwhile has been accomplished. Besides, you may as well read the whole of this document now, the Talmud makes no distinction as to the amount of forbidden scripture you have committed to memory. Just a glimpse of one word, according to Talmudic law, and you are done for!

"If a man sees that the evil urges is overcoming him he should go to a place where no one knows him, dress in black, cover himself in black and do what his heart wills and not desecrate the name of Heaven in public." (Mo’ed Kattan)

"Three things are said respecting the finger-nails: He who trims his nails and buries the parings is a pious man; he who burns these is a righteous man; but he who throws them away is a wicked man, for mischance might follow, should a female step over them." (Ibid)

"A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or a Jew. But a Jew is not forbidden to do all this to a goy." (Abhodah Zarah)

"Bloodshed is forbidden to a Gentile who may kill neither another Gentile or a Jew; but it is not forbidden to the Jew in regards to the Gentile." (Ibid)

"Theft, robbery, and rape of a beautiful woman and similar deeds are forbidden to every Gentile towards another Gentile, and also towards a Jew: but they are allowed to a Jew against a Gentile." (Ibid)

"Animals of the masculine sex must not be left in the barns of the Gentiles with their men, nor animals of the feminine sex with their women; much less must animals of the feminine sex be left with their men and of the masculine sex with their women.

Nor must sheep be left to the care of their shepherds; nor must any intercourse be had with them; nor must children be given into their care to learn to read or to learn a trade. Animals must not be allowed to go near the Goim, because they are suspected of having intercourse with them. Nor must women cohabit with them because they are over-sexed." (Ibid)

"A Jewish convert to pagan worship who causes trouble to his fellow Jews may be left to die, one may abstain from giving him aid at his time of need." (Ibid)

"A goy who pries into the ‘Talmud’ is guilty of death." (Ibid)

"A certain man was pouring wine from one jar into another by means of a tube, when a Goi came along and touched the tube with his hand. As a result all the wine had to be thrown away." (Ibid)

"Incest is a light sin compared to becoming a Christian." (Ibid)

"The Jews were created to be served by the non-Jews. The latter must plow, sow, weed, dig, mow, bind, sieve and grind. The Jews are created to find all this in readiness." (Zeraim Beraktoth)

"Work is harmful and brings but little." (Ibid)

"Because Jews are holy they do not have sex during the day unless the house can be made dark. A Jewish scholar can have sex during the day if he uses his garment like a tent to make it dark." (Ibid)

"Sinai is the mountain on which Moses received the Jewish laws from the God Jahwe. From this mountain, the hatred of the Jews against all other peoples of the world has spread." (Mo’ed Schabbath)

"Jews must destroy the books of the (Christians)." (Ibid)

"When an Israelite and a Gentile have a lawsuit before them, if they canst, acquit the former according to the laws of Israel, and tell the latter such is our laws; if they cannot get him off in accordance with Gentile law, do so, and say to the plaintiff such is your law; but if he cannot be acquitted according to either law, then bring forward adroit pretext and secure his acquittal. These are the words of Rabbi Ishmael. Rabbi Akiva says:

‘No false pretext should be brought forward, because if found out, the name of God would be blasphemed, but if there be no fear of that, then it may be adduced'." (Baba Kama)

"If the ox of an Israelite bruise the ox of a Gentile, the Israelite is exempt from paying damages; but should the ox of a Gentile bruise the ox of an Israelite, the Gentile is bound to recompense him in full." (Ibid)

"Rabbi Shemuel says advantage may be taken of the mistakes of a Gentile. He once bought a gold plate as a copper of a Gentile for four zouzim, and then cheated him out of one zouz into the bargain. Rav Cahana purchased a hundred and twenty vessels of wine from a Gentile for a hundred zouzim, and swindled him in the payment out of one of the hundred, and that while the Gentile assured him that he confidently trusted to his honesty. Rava once went parts with a Gentile and bought a tree which was cut up into logs.

This done, he bade his servant go and pick him out the largest logs, but to be sure to take no more than the proper number, because the Gentile knew how many there were. As Rav Aghi was walking abroad one day he saw some grapes growing in a roadside vineyard, and sent his servant to see whom they belonged to.

'If they belong to a Gentile,' he said, ‘bring some here to me; but if they belong to an Israelite, do not meddle with them.' The owner, who happened to be in the vineyard, overheard the Rabbi's order and called out:

‘What! is it lawful to rob a Gentile?'

'Oh, no,' said the Rabbi evasively; 'a Gentile might sell, but an Israelite would not'." (Ibid)

"If one finds lost property in a locality where a majority are Israelites, he is bound to proclaim it; but he is not bound to do so if the majority be Gentiles." (Baba Metzia)

"There is no meaner calling than that of agriculture." (Yebamoth)

"A woman who had intercourse with a beast is eligible to marry a priest." (Ibid)

"On the house of the goy one looks as on the fold of cattle." (Erubin)

"When the Messiah comes, all will be slaves of the Jews." (Ibid)

"A man may do with his wife whatever he pleases, as with a piece of meat coming from the butcher, which he can eat according to his fancy, salted, roast, boiled, or like a fish coming from the market." (Nedarim)

"And he who desires that none of his vows made during the year shall be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, every vow which I make in the future shall be null." (Ibid)

The Kol Nidre prayer, the first prayer said in the synagogue on Yom Kippur, is based on the above principle.

Yom Kippur is the Jews’ most important holy festival and, throughout the world more Jews, both religious and secular, attend synagogue on this day than on any other. Needless to say, noone arrives too late to recite the prayer based on the Talmudic scripture cited above.

"There is no reward for a good deed in this world." (Kiddushin)

"You are thus called men, but the Goyim are not called men." (Kerithuth)

"It is forbidden for dogs, women or palm trees to pass between two men, nor may others walk between dogs, women or palm trees. Special dangers are involved if the women are menstruating or sitting at a crossroads." (Pesachim)

"When you go to war do not go as the first, but as the last, so that you may return as the first. Five things has Kanaan recommended to his sons: 'Love each other, love the robbery, hate your masters and never tell the truth.'" (Ibid)

"A Jew is innocent of murder if his intent was to kill a Christian." (Makkoth)


The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion refers to Maimonides (Moses Ben Maimon, 1135-1204) as, "the symbol of the pure and orthodox faith."

The Encyclopaedia Britannica describes Maimonides as, "the greatest of Jewish philosophers."

In 1180, the "Eagle of the Synagogue", produced his celebrated work, Mishnah Torah. Repetition of the Law, which is also known as Iad Chazakah. (The Strong Hand) It contains four parts or volumes and 14 books and includes the whole Talmud.

Maimonides also included much philosophical discussion in this work and attempted to establish many laws of his own. Because of this he was excommunicated by his people and condemned to death. He fled to Egypt and died there in the year 1204.

Over the centuries, however, his reputation within the Jewish world increased. Nowadays, Maimonides opinion on all matters is greatly respected by Orthodox Jews.


Here are some of the Maimonidean thoughts that he introduced into the Talmud:

"The Gentile is human shit. He is just as unclean." (Orach Chajim)

"It is a mitzvah (religious duty) to eradicate Jewish traitors, minnim, and apikorsim, and to cause them to descend to the pit of destruction, since they cause difficulty to the Jews and sway the people away from God, as did Jesus of Nazareth and his students… May the name of the wicked rot." (Ibid)

"Everything a Jew needs for his church ritual no goy is permitted to manufacture, but only a Jew, because this must be manufactured by human beings and the Jew is not permitted to consider the goyim as human beings." (Ibid)

"A pregnant non-Jew is no better than a pregnant animal." (Shulchan Oruch: Coschen Hamischpat)

The above translation is a simplification of the actual law involved, which states that if an ox gored a pregnant non-Jewish slave-woman, the owner of the ox has to pay for the loss of the foetus to the owner of the slave-woman.

"It is the law to kill anyone (Jewish) who denies the Torah. The Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah." (Ibid)

"She who was the descendant of princes and governors (The Virgin Mary) played the harlot with a carpenter". (Ibid)

"Make no agreement and show no mercy to Christians. Either turn them away from their idols, or kill them." (Hilkoth Akum)

"Israelites also, who lapse from their religion and become Epicureans, are to be killed, and we must persecute them to the end. For they afflict Israel and turn the people from God." (Ibid)

"In places where Jews are strong, no idolater must be allowed to remain." (Ibid)

"Do not have pity for them, for it is said: ‘Show no mercy unto them.’ Therefore, if you see an Akum in difficulty or drowning, do not go to his help. And if he is in danger of death, do not save him from death. But it is not right to kill him by your own hand by shoving them into a well or in some other way, since they are not at war with us…

Do not eat with idolaters, nor permit them to worship their idols; for it is written: Make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them. Either turn away from their idols or kill them." (Ibid)

Maimonides decreed that Jewish physicians should not save the life of a Christian unless not saving him would: "… cause the spread of hostility against the Jews."

"It is not permitted to drink the wine of a stranger who becomes a convert, that is, one who accepts the seven precepts of Noah, but is permitted to gain some benefit from it. It is allowed to leave wine alone with him, but not to place it before him. The same is permitted in the case of all gentiles who are not idolaters, such as the Turks.

A Jew, however, is not permitted to drink their wine, although he may use it to his own advantage." (Hilkoth Maakhaloth)

"Do not save Goyim in danger of death." (Hilkkoth Akum)

"Only if you can't convince him to give up his idolatry, should you show him (a goy) no mercy." (Ibid)

"It is a duty to exterminate them with one’s own hands, such as Jesus of Nazareth and his pupils, and Tzadoq and Baitos (the founders of the Sadducean sect) and their pupils, may the name of the wicked rot." (Ibid)

"A Jew may misuse a non-Jewess in her state of unbelief." (Ibid)

"During the Babylonian captivity, the Israelites mingled with all sorts of foreign races and had children, who formed, owing to these unions, a kind of a new confusion of tongues." (Yad Hazaka)


In the late 13th century, Simeon Ben Yohai, together with his son and various other disciples, was the first to put the collection of scholarly Jewish thought, instruction and tradition known as the Zohar, (Splendour) into written form.

Ben Yohai edited and amplified what had previously been passed down orally and his thinking illuminates the whole of this Cabalistic book.

The Talmud relates that for 12 years the Rabbi Simon and his son Eliezer concealed themselves in a cavern, where sitting in the sand up to their necks, they meditated on the sacred law and were frequently visited by the prophet Elias. In this way, Jewish legend adds, the great book of the Zohar was composed and committed to writing by the Rabbis' son Eliezer and his secretary Rabbi Abba.

"Rabbi Jehuda said…

'He is to be praised who is able to free himself from the enemies of Israel, and the just are much to be praised who get free from them and fight against them.'Rabbi Chezkia asked:

'How must we fight against them?' Rabbi Jehuda said:

'By wise counsel thou shalt war against them.'

‘By what kind of war?’

‘The kind of war that every son of man must fight against his enemies, which Jacob used against Esau, by deceit and trickery whenever possible. They must be fought against without ceasing, until proper order be restored. Thus it is with satisfaction that I say we should free ourselves from them and rule over them'." (Book I)

"The People of the Earth are idolaters, and it has been written about them: ‘Let them be wiped off the face of the earth. Destroy the memory of the Amalekites.’" (Ibid)

"Those who do good to Christians will never rise from the dead." (Ibid)

"In the palaces of the fourth heaven are those who lamented over Sion and Jerusalem, and all those who destroyed idolatrous nations... and those who killed off people who worship idols are clothed in purple garments so that they may be recognized and honored." (Ibid)

"Extermination of Christians is a necessary sacrifice." (Book 2)

"Rabbi Abba says: If only idolaters alone had sexual intercourse, the world would not continue to exist. Hence we are taught that a Jew should not give way to those infamous robbers. For if these propagate in greater numbers, it will be impossible for us to continue to exist because of them. For they give birth to sucklings the same as dogs." (Ibid)

"The ass means the non-Jew, who is to be redeemed by the offering of a lamb, which is the dispersed sheep of Israel. But if he refuses to be redeemed, then break his skull.... They should be taken out of the book of the living, for it is said about them: He who sins against me, I shall take out of the book of life." (Ibid)

"The only sacrifice required is that we remove the unclean from amongst us." (Ibid)

"And he created every living thing, that is, the Israelites, because they are the children of the Most High God, and their holy souls come out from Him. But where do the souls of the idolatrous gentiles come from? Rabbi Eliezer says: from the left side, which makes their souls unclean. They are therefore all unclean and they pollute all who come in contact with them." (Ibid)

"Idolatrous people, however, since they exist, befoul the world, because their souls come out of the unclean side." (Ibid)

"It is certain that our captivity will last until the princes of the gentiles who worship idols are destroyed." (Ibid)

"It is certain that our captivity will last until the princes of the gentiles who worship idols are destroyed." (Ibid)


An abbreviated edition of the work of Maimonides was drawn up in 1340 by Jacob ben Ascher, to which he gave the name, Arbaa Turim.

Since the Halakhoth of Alfasi (Rif), the various works of Maimonides and ben Ascher’s Arbaa Turim disagreed on many points there was great need of an incisive edition of Talmudic law which would knit together the various strands of Rabbinical thought and offer concise solutions to controversial matters.

The Schulchan Aruch, first published by the Palestinian scholar and Talmudic interpreter, Joseph Caro, in 1565, fitted the bill admirably. It is the most important of all the books written to simplify and explain Jewish law as stated in the Talmud. The Schulchan Arukh is regarded by the modern Jewish scholar as the obligatory Law Code of the Jews.

The following is Caro’s version of the Kol Nidre prayer.

"All vows, oaths, promises, engagements, and swearing, which, beginning this very day of reconciliation, we intend to vow, promise, swear, and bind ourselves to fulfill, we repent of beforehand; let them be illegalized, acquitted, annihilated, abolished, valueless, unimportant. Our vows shall be no vows, and our oaths no oaths at all."

Here are some of the other interpretations of previous Talmudic opinion that Caro added to the Talmud:

"Marriages taking place amongst Gentiles have no binding strength: their cohabitation is just as the coupling of horses, therefore, their children do not stand as humanly related to their parents."

"It is always a meritorious deed to get hold of a Gentile’s possessions."

"If a Jew has raped a non-Jewish girl, and another who saw it is called as a witness, that Jew must, without compunction, swear falsely."

"Inasmuch as a non-Jewish child at three years and a day is suitable for copulation, her rapist is only unclean until the evening, when he is clean again after taking a dip in the water." (Choschen Ha’mischpa)

"An animal which has been slaughtered by a Gentile or by a Jew has become a non-Jew, is to be considered as a diseased animal." (Ibid)

"A Goi or a servant is not capable of acting as a witness." (Ibid)

"A child must not be nursed by a Nokhri, (‘transient stranger’) if an Israelite can be had; for the milk of the Nokhrith hardens the heart of a child and builds up an evil nature in him." (Ibid)

"The Elders forbade the eating of the bread of the Akum, lest we would seem to be familiar with them." (Ibid)

"A Jew is forbidden to drink from a glass of wine which a Gentile has touched, because the touch has made the wine unclean." (Ibid)

"It is a good deed for every Jew to burn and destroy the non-Jewish church or whatever belongs to it or is done for it, and to throw the ashes into the four winds or to throw them into the water. Furthermore, it is the duty of every Jew to try to uproot every non-Jewish church and to give it a curse name." (Ibid)

"Every Jew has the obligation to see that Christian churches are burned down and wiped out. The faithful must be insulted and the clergy killed… Their idols must be destroyed, or called by contemptuous names." (Ibid)

"It is permitted to deride idols, and it is forbidden to say to a Goi: May your God help you, or I hope you will succeed." (Ibid)

"Therefore if you enter a town and find them celebrating a feast, you may pretend to rejoice with them in order to hide your hatred. Those, however, who care about the salvation of their souls should keep away from such celebrations. You should make it known that it is a hateful thing to rejoice with them, if you can do so without incurring enmity." (Ibid)

"It is forbidden to give free gifts to the Christian with whom a Jew may not treat familiarly… It is not permitted to sell water to an Akum if it is known that it will be made into Baptismal water… No one is allowed to praise them or to say how good an Akum is. How much less to praise what they do or to recount anything about them which would redound to their glory. If, however, while praising them you intend to give glory to God, namely, because he has created comely creatures, then it is allowed to do so." (Ibid)

"A child must not be given to the Akum to learn manners, literature or the arts, for they will lead him to heresy." (Ibid)

"A Jewish wet-nurse is forbidden to nurse the child of a Gentile, even if she would be paid for that, because in so doing she would assist in raising a Gentile. Only in case she is in great pain because of a surplus of milk and such milk can become dangerous to her, is she permitted to do so. The Jew is also forbidden to teach a Gentile a handwork by which he could sustain himself." (Ibid)

"In case of a deathly sickness a Jew is permitted to consume something in case he believes that it may assist his recovery. But also in this case he is not permitted to make use of something which belongs to the most unclean of all, namely, the Christian Church." (Ibid)

"If a Jew is doing good business with an Akum it is not allowed to other Jews, in certain places, to come and do business with the same Akum. In other places, however, it is different, where another Jews is allowed to go to the same Akum, lead him on, do business with him and to deceive him and take his money. For the wealth of the Akum is to be regarded as common property and belongs to the first who can get it.

There are some, however, who say that this should not be done." (Ibid)

"In time of war the Christian are to be killed, for it is written: 'The good among the Christian deserve to be killed’… The Christians are not to be cured, even for money, unless it would incur their enmity… The Akum are not to be cured, even for money, unless it would incur their enmity… The Akum who are not enemies of ours must not be killed directly, nevertheless they must not be saved from danger of death. For example, if you see one of them fall into the sea, do not pull him out unless he promises to give you money." (Ibid)

"Usury is permitted for any reason when dealing with Christians." (Ibid)

"It is not permitted to imitate the customs of the Christian, nor to act like them. Nor is it permitted to wear clothes like the Christian, not to comb the hair as they do... Neither must Jews build houses that look like temples of the Christian." (Ibid)

"If you send a messenger to collect money from an Akum and the Akum pays too much, the messenger may keep the difference. But if the messenger does not know about it, then you may keep it all yourself." (Ibid)

"When Jewish women come out of a bath they must take care to meet a friend first, and not something unclean or a Christian. For if she does, a woman, if she wants to keep holy, should go back and bathe again." (Ibid)

"A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum, for it is written: ‘Return to thy brethren what is lost.’ For he who returns lost property sins against the Law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the Law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely, if by so doing Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people." (Ibid)

"A Jew may do to a non-Jewess what he can do. He may treat her as a piece of raw meat… A Jew may rob a goy, that is, he may cheat him in a bill, if unlikely to be perceived by him." (Ibid)

"Condolences must not be offered to anyone on account of the death of his servants or handmaids. All that may be said is: 'May God restore your lost one, the same as we say to a man who has lost a cow or an ass.' Nor must Christians be avoided for seven days after they have buried someone, as the Law of Moses commands, since they are not men; for the burial of an animal does not pollute one". (Ibid)

"It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces… If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth." (Ibid)

"If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth."

"If you see a heretic, who does not believe in the Torah, fall into a well in which there is a ladder, hurry at once and take it away and say to him: 'I have to go and take my son down from a roof; I will bring the ladder back to you at once,' or something else. The Kuthaei, however, who are not our enemies, who take care of the sheep of the Israelites, are not to be killed directly, but they must not be saved from death." (Ibid)

"A woman must wash herself again if she sees any unclean things, such as a dog, an ass, or Gentile; a Christian, a camel, a pig, a horse, and a leper." (Biur Hetib)

"Rabbi Meir used to state that a man is obligated to make these three blessings each day: Thank you God for not making me a Gentile, a woman or a slave." (Menahoth)

"A woman came before Rabbi Hisda confessing to him that the lightest sin that she committed was that her younger son is the issue of her older son. Since this was her lightest sin she was excused… Rabbi Eleazer Doria did not leave out any harlot in the world without coming to her… yet attained forgiveness because he had not committed the unforgivable sin of accepting Christianity." (Abhodah Zarah)

"It is a great sin to make a present to a Gentile. But it is permissible to give alms to the poor of the Gentiles, to visit their sick and to give the last honors to their deceased and to console their relatives because of the peace, so that the Gentile may think the Jews are good friends of theirs in showing them consolation… Do not say anything in praise of them, lest it be said: How good that Goi is!" (Ibid)

"One should not place cattle in heathens' inns, because they prefer sex with cows." (Ibid)

"Our rabbis have passed it down for us, that a foreign woman must never be allowed to act as midwife at the birth of a child of Israel, because they are given to the shedding of blood. The Elders say, however, that a foreign woman may perform this task provided there are other Jewish women present, but never alone. Rabbi Meir, however, says that it is not allowed even others are present. For they often crush the soft head of the child with their hands and kill it; and they do this without being noticed by those who are present." (Ibid)


The well respected Frankfurt scholar, Rabbi Shimeon wrote Talmudic commentary, which he called, Jalkut.

In this book, he opined:

"Israel is like the lady of the house to whom her husband brings the money. Thus Israel is without the burden of labor and receives the money from the people of the world." (Schim)

"It is forbidden to initiate a non-Jew into the secrets of the law. The Jew who concerns himself with this is as guilty as if he laid waste the world and denied the sacred name of God." (Chadasz)

"It is forbidden to disclose the secrets of the law. He who would do it would be as guilty as though he destroyed the whole world." (Ibid)

In the Gemara, Rabbi Raish Lakish said that he who wears tzitzit (a four cornered fringed garment) at the time of the redemption will be given 2800 servants.

He added:

"Ten men shall take hold, out of all the languages of the nations, shall even take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew."

Rabbi Ulla, in conversation with Judah-ben Ezekiel, said

"Are we perfectly sure that we are not descended from pagans who dishonoured the young daughters of Zion after the capture of Jerusalem?"

Rabbi Eliezer said:

"It is permitted to cut off the head of an idiot on the feast of the Atonement when it falls on the Sabbath." (Pesachim)

And:

"Wherefore has God scattered the Jews among the nations? To recruit for Him proselytes everywhere." (Pesachim)

Rabbi Hisda said:

"Thou shalt have neither a son nor a disciple who will publically let his food burn like did Jesus the Nazarene." (Sanhedrin)

Rabbi Abbahu said:

"If a man say unto thee 'I am God' he lieth; if he saith 'I am the Son of Man' he will live to rue his words; and if he saith 'I ascend into Heaven' he will not bring to pass that which he saith."

Rabbi Chanina said:

"He who strikes an Israelite acts as if he slaps the face of God's Divine Majesty."

Rabbi David Katz said:

"One is allowed to keep a lost object of a gentile and he who returns it commits a sin because he is supporting the wicked people of the world."

Rabbi Meir said:

"The vessels of Gentiles, do they not impart a worsened flavor to the food cooked in them?" (Abhodah Zarah)

Rabbi Elazar said:

"Where revenge is necessary, it is a great thing."

Rabbi Hanina said:

"A non-Jew who hits a Jew is worthy of death by the Hand of God." (Sanhedrin)


The Talmud is full of anecdotes, advice and folk wisdom that, by modern standards, would seem patently absurd to the non-Jew.

We learn from the Talmud for example, that:

"One who eats an ant is flogged five times forty stripes save one."

"Demons ... have wings like angels... they know the future."

"A dog in a strange place does not bark for seven years."

"The bald-headed, and dwarfed, and the blear-eyed are ineligible for the priesthood."

"Only kings ... eat roast meat with mustard."

"The Rabbis have taught that a man should not drink water on Wednesdays and Saturdays after night fall... An evil spirit... on these evenings prowls around."

"These things cause hemorrhoids: eating cane leaves, the foliage and tendrils of a vine, the palate of cattle, the backbones of fish, half-cooked salt fish, wine, lees, etc."

"These things are detrimental to study: walking between two camels... to pass under a bridge beneath which no water has flowed forty days; to drink water that runs through a cemetery."

"It is not right for a man to sleep in the daytime any longer than a horse sleeps. And how long is the sleep of a horse? Sixty respirations."


In the 30th of April, 1999, edition of The Jewish News of Greater Phoenix, Rabbi Schorsch said:

"Sadly, a low estimate of non-Jews pervades much of Talmudic literature. The ‘Mishna’ admonishes Jews not to leave their animals unattended at the inn of a gentile, because gentiles are suspected of engaging in beastiality. Gentiles are described also as liable to rape and murder, so that a lonely Jew should avoid their company... Treatment of the ‘other' remains a problem for Judaism. In a divided world, we are entilted to take whatever measures will advance our narrow interests."


In his book, Universalism and Parochialism in Jewish Law.

Making Sense of Political Loyalties, the Jewish scholar Gordon Lafar says this:

"The Talmud is in disagreement over whether Jews may rob Gentiles but even the liberal authority Rabbi Menachem HaMeiri agrees that a Jew who finds something that was inadvertently lost by a Gentile is not obliged to return it."


In 1233, Pope Gregory IX said this in his Epistle to the Hierarchy in Germany:

"The Talmud contains every kind of vileness and blasphemy against Christian Truth."

He also said:

"Ungrateful for favors and forgetful of benefits, the Jews return insult for kindness and impious contempt for goodness. They ought to know the yoke of perpetual enslavement because of their guilt. See to it that the perfidious Jews never in the future grow insolent, but that they always suffer publically the shame of theirsin in servile fear."


In 1415 Pope Bendict XIII banned the study of the Talmud and in the papal bull, The Jewish Issue, he said:

"The heresies, vanities and errors of the Talmud prevent their knowing the truth."


Martin Luther was the first and most influential of the founders of the Protestant Reformation in Europe.

As such, he is, undoubtedly, the most important figure in the history of the Protestant religion.

Originally, Luther had been a good friend of the "People of the Book" but, after he had learned to read Hebrew and took a look at what they had to say in the Talmud, he changed his mind about his former friends.

Thus, in 1542, Luther published On the Jews and Their Lies.

Here are some of the things he said in this book:

"They should be deprived of their prayer books and Talmuds. Their rabbis must be forbidden under threat of death to teach any more. I had made up my mind to write no more either about the Jews or against them. But since I learned that these miserable and accursed people do not cease to lure... the Christians, I have published this little book, so that I might be found among those who opposed such poisonous activities of the Jews who warned the Christians to be on their guard against them."

"Be on your guard against the Jews, knowing that wherever they have their synagogues, nothing is found but a den of devils in which sheer self-glory, conceit, lies, blasphemy, and defaming of God and men are practiced most maliciously and veheming his eyes on them."

"What shall we Christians do now with this depraved and damned people of the Jews?... I will give my faithful advice: First, that one should set fire to their synagogues... Then that one should also break down and destroy their houses... That one should drive them out the country."

"Moreover, they are nothing but thieves and robbers who daily eat no morsel and wear no thread of clothing which they have not stolen and pilfered from us by means of their accursed usury."

"However, they have not acquired a perfect mastery of the art of lying; they lie so clumsily and ineptly that anyone who is just a little observant can easily detect it."

"Over and above that we let them get rich on our sweat and blood, while we remain poor and they such the marrow from our bones."

"They remain our daily murderers and bloodthirsty foes in their hearts. Their prayers and curses furnish evidence of that, as do the many stories which relate their torturing of children."

"They (rulers) must act like a good physician who, when gangrene has set in proceeds without mercy to cut, saw, and burn flesh, veins, bone, and marrow. Such a procedure must also be followed in this instance. Burn down their synagogues, forbid all that I enumerated earlier, force them to work."

"The Jews are brutes, their synagogues are pig-sties, they ought to be burned, for Moses would do it, if he came back to this world. They drag in mire the divine words, they live by evil and plunders, they are wicked beasts that ought to be driven out like mad dogs."

"Know, O adored Christ, and make no mistake, that aside from the Devil, you have no enemy more venomous, more desperate, more bitter than a true Jew who truly seeks to be a Jew... A Jew, a Jewish heart, are hard as wood, as stone, as iron, as the Devil himself. In short, they are children of the Devil, condemned to the flames of hell."

"They ought to be stopped from usury… Let the young and strong Jews and Jewesses be given the flail, the axe, the hoe, the spade, the distaff, and spindle and let them earn their bread by the sweat of their noses as in enjoined upon Adam's children."

In the book, Luther’s Table Talks, he is quoted thus

"How the Jews love the Book of Esther, which is so suitable to their bloodthirsty, revengeful, murderous appetite and hopes. The sun has never shone on such a bloodthirsty and revengeful people, who fancy themselves to be the chosen people so that they can murder and strangle the heathen."

"The Jews are so hardened that they listen to nothing; though overcome by testimonies they yield not an inch. It is a pernicious race, oppressing all men by their usury and rapine. If they give a prince or magistrate a thousand florins, they extort twenty thousand from the subjects in payment. We must ever keep on guard against them."

"The Jews are so hardened that they listen to nothing; though overcome by testimonies, they yield not an inch. Tis a pernicious race, oppressing all men by their usury and rapine. If they give a prince or a magistrate a thousand florins, they exhort twenty thousand from the subjects in payment. We must keep on our guard against them. They think to render homage to God by injuring the Christians, and yet we employ their physicians; ‘tis a tempting of God. They have haughty prayers, wherein they praise and call upon God, as if they alone were his people, cursing and condemning all other nations."

"Jerusalem was destroyed over fourteen hundred years ago, and at that time we Christians were harassed and persecuted by the Jews throughout the world for about three hundred years. We might well complain that during that time they held us Christians captive and killed us, which is the plain truth. Furthermore, we do not know to the present day which devil brought them into our country. We surely did not bring them from Jerusalem. In addition, no one is holding them here now. The country and the roads are open for them to proceed to their land whenever they wish. If they did so, we would be glad to present gifts to them on the occasion; it would be good riddance. For they are a heavy burden, a plague, a pestilence, a sheer misfortune for our country.

Proof for this is found in the fact that they have often been expelled forcibly from a country, far from being held captive in it. Thus they were banished from France, which was an especially fine nest. Very recently they were banished by our dear Emperor Charles from Spain, the very best nest of all. This year they were expelled from the entire Bohemian crownland, where they had one of the best nests, in Prague.

Likewise, during my lifetime they have been driven from Regensburg, Magdeburg, and other places. If you cannot tolerate a person in a country or home, does that constitute holding him in captivity? In fact, they hold us Christians captive in our own country. They let us work in the sweat of our brow to earn money and property while they sit behind the stove, idle away the time, fart, and roast pears. They stuff themselves, guzzle, and live in luxury and ease from our hard-earned goods.

With their accursed usury they hold us and our property captive. Moreover, they mock and deride us because we work and let them play the role of lazy squires at our expense and in our land. Thus they are our masters and we are their servants, with our property, our sweat, and our labor. And by way of reward and thanks they curse our Lord and us! Should the devil not laugh and dance if he can enjoy such a fine paradise at the expense of us Christians? He devours what is ours through his saints, the Jews, and repays us by insulting us, in addition to mocking and cursing both God and man.

They could not have enjoyed such good times in Jerusalem under David and Solomon with their own possessions as they now do with ours, which they daily steal and rob. And yet they wail that we have taken them captive. Indeed, we have captured them and hold them in captivity just as I hold captive my gallstone, my bloody tumor, and all the other ailments and misfortunes which I have to nurse and take care of with money and goods and all that I have. Alas, I wish that they were in Jerusalem with the other Jews and whomever else they would like to have there."

In a letter to his wife, Luther said this:

"The sun never did shine on a more bloodthirsty and revengeful people as they, who imagine to be the people of God, and who desire to and think they must murder and crush the heathen. And the foremost undertaking, which they expect of their Messiah, is that he should slay and murder the whole world with the sword. As they at first demonstrated against us Christians and would like to do now, if they only could; have also tried it often and have been repeatedly struck on their snouts.

They live among us in our homes, under our protection, use land and highways, market and streets. Princes and government sit by, snore and have their maws open, let the Jews take from their purse and chest, steal and rob whatever they will. That is, they permit themselves and their subjects to be abused and sucked dry and reduced to beggars with their own money, through the usury of the Jews.


For the Jews, as foreigners, certainly should have nothing from us; and what they have certainly must be ours. They do not work, do not earn anything from us, neither do we donate or give it to them. Yet they have our money and goods and are lords in our land where they are supposed to be in exile!

Do not their Talmud and rabbis write that it is no sin to kill if a Jew kills a heathen, but it is a sin if he kills a brother in Israel? It is no sin if he does not keep his oath to a heathen. Therefore, to steal and rob from a heathen is a divine service... And they are the masters of the world and we are their servants - yea, their cattle!

I maintain that in three fables of Aesop there is more wisdom to be found than in all the books of the Talmudists and rabbis and more than ever could come into the hearts of the Jews... Should someone think I am saying too much - I am saying much too little! For I see in (their) writings how they curse us goyim and wish as all evil in their schools and prayers. They rob us of our money through usury, and wherever they are able, they play us all manner of mean tricks... No heathen has done such things and none would to so except the Devil himself and those whom he possesses - as he possesses the Jews.

Maybe mild-hearted and gentle Christians will believe that I am too rigorous and drastic against the poor, afflicted Jews, believing that I ridicule them and treat them with much sarcasm. By my word, I am far too weak to be able to ridicule such a satanic brood. I would fain to do so, but they are far greater adepts at mockery than I and possess a god who is master in this art. It is the Evil One himself. Even with no further evidence than the Old Testament, I would maintain, and no person on earth could alter my opinion, that the Jews as they are today are veritably a mixture of all the depraved and malevolent knaves of the whole world over...

The Jewish people is and remains in Europe an Asiatic people alien to our part of the world, bound to that old law which it received in a distant climate, and which, according to its confession, it cannot do away with."

In February, 1546, he preached a sermon at Eisleben, in which he said:

"How many of this alien people can be tolerated without injury to the true citizen? A ministry in which a Jew is supreme, a household in which a Jew has the key of the wardrobe and the management of the finances, a department or commissariat in which Jews do the principal business, are Pontine marshes which cannot be drained."

A few days after railing against the Jews this one last time, Martin Luther was dead.

Here is one last quote from the founder of Protestant religion:

"For thousands of years, since their emergence on the stage of history, the Jews were a parasitic growth on the stem of other nations, a race of cunning brokers all over the earth. They have cause great evil to many ill-organized states, by retarding the free and natural economic development of their indigenous population."


If you wish to check out a rather more substantial glimpse into the Talmudic world, you could do worse that to take a look at, The Talmud: Judaism's Holiest Book Unmasked, which was compiled in 1892 by the Reverend I. B. Pranatis.

Pranatis was the Master of Theology and Professor of the Hebrew Language at the Imperial Ecclesiastical Academy in St. Petersburg.

Pranatis' document may be found here: www.endofman.com/False_Religion/talmudunmasked.htm


And here are a couple of website addresses where those who would refute most of what is written here as redneck rubbish, may be studied:

A Goy Pries Into the Talmud, by Baron and Cohen, may be seen here: www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Embassy/2634/goy_pries_10.html

And then there is this: www.geocities.com/Athens/Cyprus/8815/Response1.html

A comparison of what is contained at these three websites should bring you somewhat closer to the truth.


I''m not sure whether the Passover Prayer is included in The Talmud but, just in case you think that Jewish nastiness occurs nowhere else in the Jewish oeuvre, check this out:

"Cut off the hope of the unjust; let all heretics perish at once; root out, break up and destroy the Proud Kingdom; hasten to make all peoples subject in our days…

Pour out thy anger upon nations that know thee not, and upon the kingdoms which do not invoke thy name; Pour out thy indignation upon them, and let thy wrathful anger take hold of them; Persecute and destroy them in anger from under the heavens of the Lord."


Then again you could take a peek at the very Jewish God of Old Testament.

The genocidal psychopath contained therein is about as far removed from a pleasant, old fellow with a white beard as your Grandma would be from Ariel Sharon.
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
(((MrAnderson))) is a Sayanim Troll
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 16 May 2018 15:24 #8

  • lovejoy
  • lovejoy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Fresh Member
  • Posts: 81
  • Likes received: 69
Whether the Protocols are real or not, this certainly is.....


And if this is to be believed, they have nearly achieved their goals, all that is left is disarm the citizens.
There are two ways to be fooled
One is to believe what isn't true
the other is to refuse to believe what is true.
Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Exorcist

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 16 May 2018 17:24 #9

  • Lux Interior
  • Lux Interior's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Do you know de way?
  • Posts: 1944
  • Likes received: 830
This is a whole new thread for me, top work exorcist, top work.
liberabo te ab inferno
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 16 May 2018 21:34 #10

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1669
  • Likes received: 614
@Lux

This is not my "top" work. It's prolific research by the site author Jack Black. Jack Black IIRC is a pseudonym.
The Iamanenglishman.com site was the one that really woke me up regarding the (((JQ/NWO/Freemasonic))) corruption.
It took me many days hard work to copy the articles using the tools I had in 2013. I'll post some more articles later.
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
(((MrAnderson))) is a Sayanim Troll
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 16 May 2018 22:48 #11

  • lovejoy
  • lovejoy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Fresh Member
  • Posts: 81
  • Likes received: 69
Exorcist wrote:
Next......Jack Black's article on the TALMUD:
___________________________________


Within the Talmud there are 63 seperate books, one of which, Abhodah Zarah, says these things:

"Bloodshed is forbidden to a Gentile who may kill neither another Gentile or a Jew; but it is not forbidden to the Jew in regards to the Gentile."

"Theft, robbery, and rape of a beautiful woman and similar deeds are forbidden to every Gentile towards another Gentile, and also towards a Jew: but they are allowed to a Jew against a Gentile."


Isn't it interesting that whilst it is considered utterly correct, moral and fashionable to paint the whole of Western Civilization as evil for our supposed past behaviour towards the Jew, it has been ruled inadmissible, immoral and racist to condemn Judaism for over 2000 years of genocidal antagonism towards the non-Jewish peoples of the earth?

The allegation that Jews are systematically taught to despise non-Jews as part of their religious instruction can be discerned quite readily by studying the Talmud.

Almost all adult Jews are, to some extent, aware of the scorn, spite and downright hatred that the Talmud and historical Jewish orthodoxy directs at the non Jew. They are, therefore, on constant guard against those who would invite an examination of these texts. In the last few decades, on the rare occasion that such material is brought to public attention, its exposure is always villified by Jewish organizations as distorted and misrepresentational, and those who would bring such material to light are inariably described as, "bigot," "hater," "racist," and "anti-semite" by those who would not have these matters investigated.

It’s not just organised Jewry that does what these matters investigated, the "liberal" cannot endure frank and open discussion on any subject where the facts are at odds with his liberal agenda either. That is why words like "bigot," "hater" and "racist" were invented. The moment a fact is introduced into the debate which, if discussed rationally, might enlighten those listening to the debate, the negative buzz word is introduced by the indignant "liberal" and all further close examination of his liberal stance is stifled.

A critical analysis of the contents of the Talmud, and the extent to which hatred for non-Jews is encouraged by Judaism’s holiest book, is, thus, taboo.

Common sense, independent of received politically correct opinion, is off limits when it comes to a close inspection of "the chosen race."

This betrayal of our powers of reason should annoy and frustrate you, if you are a scholar worthy of the name.

Research, examine, do not be content to have your history handed to you on a plate by those who have a vested interest in keeping the facts to themselves. If you are prepared to undertake such an examination, you could do worse than to begin with an investigation of the Talmud.

Those of you who have always taken the politically correct "we must never do anything to upset the poor Jews" position, who think that we should believe without question the Rabbi who says the Talmud does not preach racial hatred, because not to believe him would "upset the poor Jew," should stop reading now.

You are lost; the faculties of common sense and reason that your ancestors posessed, which enabled them to tell right from wrong, good from bad, positive from negative and productive from destructive, in you are dead. You are a creature of the myth makers, you belong to them, you are a lemming, you are already over the edge, there is no hope for you and, probably, no hope for those you have any influence over.

If, however, you have always done your very best never to, "upset the poor Jew," but cannot see why he should raise such a fuss over an impartial investigation of their holiest book, when, surely, such an investigation would silence the, hate-mongers, once and for all, well, then, you should read on.

If you choose not to believe what you are about to read once you have read it, because the, "bigot," "hater," "racist," "anti-Semite," and, "fascist," have, obviously, distorted the Talmudic references herein to suit their own argument, that is OK. All your life you have been led to believe that the opposite was the case and you have trusted, without question, those who led you to believe this contadictory case.

However, I do say that you owe yourself, your children, and their future, this: if you do not believe what is written here, do you not, then, have a responsibilty to put your disbelief to the test? Do you put the book aside, once read, saying:

"No, that’s rubbish, I’ve never read such a load of baloney in my life: anyone who believes this stuff is an ‘anti-semite.’"

That would certainly be a legitimate opinion for you to hold, but only if you have checked at least some of the assertions and quotations contained herein. An opinion without the facts to back it up can never be anything more than guesswork. If you are the kind of person who would read this essay, perhaps out of curiosity, and then do nothing to either verify or disprove its contents, I say that you too are lost and that there is little point in you bothering yourself with it and that you would be doing yourself a favour if you gave it to someone else to read.

Much of the Talmud, as regards the stance it takes against those of non-Jewish origin, is a work of hatred. The rabbis, who compiled the Talmud over many centuries, instruct the reader how they may best practice this hatred. Interesting that it should serve as the "legal code" of a people whose leadership likes to pose as opponents of hatred. Communism and Zionism were both born of this book.


The Talmud, not the Torah or the rest of the Old Testament, is the most consulted authority by Orthodox Jewry.

Indeed, in Edward Boraz' 1996 primer, Understanding the Talmud. A Modern Reader's Guide for Study, Jacob Neusner is quoted thus:

"The Talmud is the single most influential document in the history of Judaism."

Quotations such as those detailed below receive ample coverage in various versions of the Jewish Encyclopedia, enough so that the authenticity of most of the quotations cannot seriously be in any doubt. The Jewish Encyclopedia even details how the English translations use code words such as Amalakites, Cutheans, Canaanites, Egyptians, heathens, Akum, Obhde Elilim, Minim, Nokhrim, Edom, Amme Haarets, Goyim, Apikorosim, Kuthrim, sons of Esau, Kliphoth, the unclean, people of the earth and other descriptions to denote non-Jews in general, using such terms to lessen the impact upon the Gentile who might chance to read the book.
It also suggests that the word "Balaam" is an alias for Jesus Christ.

It should be noted that the word goy/goyim is left as it is and never translated to mean Gentile or non-Jew. This is because the word is still very much in common usage today, in fact most Christians will have heard their Jewish friends use the term. I always used to think, whenever the word was aimed at me, that it was an affectionate put down of some description. Well, it’s a put down all right but it’s not that affectionate. One Hebrew translation of the world would be something approximating "dumb animal".

Whilst we’re on the subject, probably the most common term a Jew would use today for a female Gentile, both in and out of her presence is, "Shiksa."

In the most popular English/Hebrew dictionary, The Joys of Yiddish, (1968) by Leo Rosten, we are told that shiksa comes from the Hebrew word "sheqetz," meaning "blemish," which is bad enough. However this translation is a generous one, as every speaker of Hebrew knows. The Megiddo Modern Hebrew-English Dictionary, published in Israel, correctly defines sheqetz as follows:

"Unclean animal; loathsome creature, abomination."

For popular consumption in English the word shiksa is usually carefully censored. In A Dictionary of Yiddish Slang and Idioms, for example, "shikseh" is simply defined as "non-Jewish girl."

Most Jews know better.

For example, in the essay, Growing Intolerance Threatens the Humane Jewish Tradition, by Allan Brownfeld, which was seen in The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, in March 1999, Ze'ev Chafets, who married a non-Jewish woman in 1997, was quoted thus:

"Jews who would rather cut off their tongue than say ‘nigger' or ‘spic', and consider ‘kike' and 'Hymie' fighting words, talk about ‘goyim' and ‘shiksas' with blithe indifference. They assume that we can't be guilty of prejudice because we are all victims... But terms like 'shiksa' ... no longer sound like charming Yiddishisms to me; they seem like slurs."


Jewish tradition holds that Moses received two Torahs on Mount Sinai.

One was the written Torah contained in the Pentateuch. The second was an oral Torah, which according to Jewish tradition was passed from Moses to religious leaders down through the ages.

Between 70 AD and the end of the third century this oral tradition was written down culminating in the defintive documents which came to be known as the Mishnah and the supplementary Tosefta. The Jewish scholar, Judah Ha-Nasi, 135-219 AD, the foremost religious authority of his generation, was most responsible for this work.

The Mishnah is traditionally considered to be as relevant to the Jew as the original first five books of the Pentateuch, as the thoughts contained within it were supposedly revealed to Moses at the same time. The fact that these thoughts were finally written down almost 1500 hundred years after the Torah in no way compromises the Mishnah in Jewish eyes.

Over the next 300 years or so the Mishnah was discussed, argued over and modified to some extent by Judaism’s most learned scholars. The edited version of the Rabbinical debates and interpretations of the laws and lore contained in the Mishnah that took place throughout that three hundred year plus period, came to be known as the Gemara. Together, the Mishnah and the Gemara make up the original Talmud.

From the eleventh century onwards further commentaries on this original version were composed which were eventually, after some initial hostility from Jewish religious leaders, incorporated into the Talmud.

The Tosephoth of Rabbi Solomon Yitzhaki Ben Isaac (Rashi) was, probably, the most important of these, although he, himself, along with the various commentators that followed him, will surely have gleaned much from the Halakhoth, a severely shortened and simplified edition of the Talmud, which was the first major work of Halakha. It is often printed on the backpages of the Babylonian Talmud.

The Halakhoth was compiled by Isaac ben Jacob Alfasi, (Rif) a Moroccan Rabbi, and first introduced to his fellow Jews in 1032.

The Commentaries of Maimonides followed. The various opinions and Talmudic analyses of Rashi and Maimonides together with those of one or two less well known Rabbis who were influenced by their ideas, constitute what has, in the modern age, come to be accepted by Jewish orthodoxy as the 63 volume work known as the Talmud.

For the purposes of this book I shall deal with these Talmudic writings at the time they were written. Thus, what follows will introduce you to a fractional representation of scholarly Rabbinical thought as it interpreted the original Mosaic laws during the three hundred year period from 200AD to 500AD approximately.

If the ordinary non-Jewish man in the street were to read just a few pages of Talmudic literature, as it has been translated and broadcast by Jewish apostates and non-Jews from Martin Luther onwards, his life would be changed forever. No matter how politically correct he was, no matter how unconcerned he was with the workings of the world outside his own sphere of influence, no matter how many times he had previously stated that politics had nothing to do with him, no matter how many times he had been subjected to WWII "holocaust" propaganda and had, dutifully, taken the message to heart, no matter how preoccupied he was with every other aspect of his life, if he wasn’t a bought and paid for member of the elite caste that had ruled over every aspect of his life from the very beginning of it, then the startling information revealed by a brief acquaintance with the teachings of the ancient Jewish sages would never again allow him to acquiesce in his own mistreatment at the hands of those that he had been taught to regard with a very special respect because of the way they had been, allegedly, mistreated throughout all history by his forefathers.

There is a vast amount of information that can be discovered by the "man in the street" in respect of the hatred preached by the Talmud against the Gentile. Much of what can be accessed via the Internet is routinely rubbished by the a plethora of Jewish "scholars" but there is a vast body of knowledge of Talmudic literature which they are unable to gainsay, because it has been, now, so widely disseminated, read and understood. The usual response to that which cannot be denied is:

"We should not judge the Jews of today by the standards of those who were commenting two thousand years ago."

The problem with that way of thinking is that so many of the orthodox religious Jews of today regard Talmudic lore as sacrosanct. They believe what was written down by the ancient Rabbis and they practice it.

In the modern era it has invariably taken a courageous Jew to speak out against the storms of politically correct propaganda, before the disbelieving non-Jewish community would ever allow itself to become half way convinced of the reality of the situation.

Unfortunately, after over a hundred years of governmental and media inspired disinformation, the western world has become so lacking in courage and moral fibre, that the majority would, in almost every case, prefer to live with the relatively comfortable lie that they are accustomed to, than have to deal with a distinctly uncomfortable truth.


As an introduction to the kind of Rabbinic thought processes that produced the Talmud I would like, first of all, to introduce you to a pearl or two of early Rabbinic wisdom, together with a couple of modern Jewish commentaries upon it, that cannot be wished away by the apologist.

If you recognise yourself as being one of those who resents having "to deal with a distinctly uncomfortable truth" and you are still reading, you may wish to look away now. You have been warned.

"A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition." (Sanhedrin)

"A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated." (Abhodah Zarah)

"When a grown up man has intercourse with a little girl, it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this it is as if one puts the finger in the eye, tears come to the eyes again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years." (Kethuboth)

This last statement may not be as bad as it sounds. It can be argued that this law is attempting to protect the legal status of the girl’s virginity in respect of her future marriage prospects and is not encouraging paedophilia.

The Jewish historian, Israel Shahak confirms the statements above in his 1994 work, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years. Shahak states:

"Acording to the Talmudic Encyclopedia:

'If a Jew has coitus with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three or an adult, whether married or unmarried, and even if he is a minor aged only nine years and one day, because he had wilful coitus with her, she must be killed, as is the case with a beast, because through her a Jew got into trouble. The Jew, however, must be flogged, and if he is Kohen (member of the priestly caste) he must receive double the number of lashes, because he has committed a double offence: a Kohen must not have intercourse with a prostitute, and all Gentile women are presumed to be prostitutes’…

This does not imply that sexual intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman is permitted, quite the contrary. But the main punishment is inflicted on the Gentile woman; she must be executed, even if she was raped by the Jew."

Jane Litman tells us this in her September, 2000 essay, Working with Words of Torah.

"The background sound in the small library is muted but intense. Pairs of scholars lean over their talmudic texts whispering energetically, trying to puzzle out the meaning of the particular sugya, passage. The teacher directs them back toward the group and asks for questions. One student raises a hand:

'I don't understand verse 5:4 of the tractate Niddah. What does the phrase ‘it is like a finger in eye,' mean?

The teacher responds:

'This refers to the hymen of a girl younger than three years old. The Sages believed that in the case of toddler rape, the hymen would fully grow back by the time the girl reached adulthood and married. Therfore, though violated, she would still technically be counted as a virgin and could marry a priest. It's an analogy: poling your finger in the eye is uncomortable, but causes no lasting harm.’

There is a collective gasp of breath among students. Their dismay is palpable. They do not like this particular Talmudic text or the men behind it. But its authors, the talmudic rabbis, hardly wrote it with this particular group of students in mind, mostly thirty, and forty-year old women in suburban Philadelphia taking a four-week class titled ‘Women in Jewish Law,' at their Reform synagogue. The questioner persists.

'I don't understand. Are you saying this refers to the rape of a three year-old girl?'

‘Or younger,' the teacher responds dryly.

'I don't see how it says anything about rape and hymens. You must be mistaken. I don't believe the rabbis are talking about rape at all. I think this statement has nothing to do with the rest of the passage.'

The teacher (I'll admit now that it was me, a second-year rabbinic student) responds:

'Well, that's the common understanding. What do you think it means?' The woman is clearly agitated.

'I don't know, but I do know that it couldn't be about child rape.'

This is week three of the class. The woman does not return for week four. Denial…

I find Ross's model helpful when addressing sacred Jewish texts that are violent or xenophobic, that speak of child abuse, human slavery, or homophobia with gross insensitivity. Like so many of my colleagues and students, I often drift confusedly through denial, anger, grief, rationalization; sometimes reaching acceptance, sometimes not."

Now, if that hasn’t caught your attention you should put this book in the bin, switch on the TV and settle down for a lecture from the heirs of those who wrote the above.

Esther Rantzen; Marjory Proops; Clare Rayner; Miriam Stoppard; Vanessa Feltz; Ruby Wax; Rikki Lake; Jerry Springer; Sally Jesse Raphael; Irma Kurtz; Doctor Ruth; Ann Landers; Geraldo Rivera; Abigail Van Buren; David Letterman, who is half Jewish, and a host of other Jewish advisors who know so much better than you how you should live your life and are ever ready and willing to instruct you. And that’s without beginning to count the enormous number of Jewish politicians and political commentators whose opinion you are subjected to on a daily basis in your newspapers and on your televeision screens!

Or maybe you prefer those who would patronize you to be black? Oprah Winfrey; Montel Williams or our own, home grown Trisha Goddard will supply your every lemming requirement. Of course behind the scenes, their shows are being written, researched, produced and staffed by Jews who are all working for, almost invariably, a company owned by a Jew.

The unfortunate fact is that the acquiessence of the majority in the face of in your face wickedness and their willing promotion of it by, firstly, pretending that it does not exist, and, secondly, when dreadful behaviours become fashionable, participating in them, has played an enormous part in changing the world for the worse. I applaud those of you who are still reading.

Remember, the foremost point of my bringing this material to your attention is not to convince, nor to evangelise, it is to get you to begin to investigate. Once you have begun to seek the truth for yourself a major battle has been won. Once you have begun to question what you have previously been taught you are already waging war.


Rabbi Morris M. Kertzner defines the Talmud thus:

"The Talmud consists of 63 books of legal, ethical and historical writings of the ancient rabbis... It is a compendium of law and lore. It is the legal code which forms the basis of Jewish religious law and it is the textbook used in the training of rabbis."


So, here is my own edition of "legal, ethical and historical writings of the ancient rabbis... the textbook used in the training of rabbis."

In the Talmud, we are told that the Romans had nothing to do with the death of Jesus but that the Jews, themselves, executed him.

In Book 3 of the Zohar we are told:

"Jesus was buried in that… dirt heap... where they throw the dead bodies of dogs and asses, and where the sons of Esau and of Ismael, uncircumcized and unclean like dead dogs, are buried."

In Shulchan Oruch: Coschen Hamischpat we find that:

"Jesus was lowered into a pit of dung up to his armpits. Then a hard cloth was placed within a soft one, wound round his neck, and the tow ends pulled in opposite directions until he was dead."

In the Sanhedrin we read:

"Commentators refer to Jeshu-ha-Notzri by mention of the wicked kingdom of Edom, since that was his nation ... he was hanged on a Passover eve...

The Talmud Records Other Sins of Jesus of Nazarene. He and his disciples practiced sorcery and black magic, led Jews astray into idolatry, and were sponsored by foreign, gentile powers for the purpose of subverting Jewish worship."

Balaam also makes an appearance in this book:

"Balaam the lame was 33 years old when Pintias the Robber killed him... They say that his mother was descended from princes and rulers but consorted with carpenters...

Balaam fornicated with his jackass...

Hast thou heard how old Balaam was? He replied: ‘It is not actually stated but since it is written, bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days it follows that he was thirty-three or thirty-four years old."

It is interesting that Balaam was at an age exactly similar to the age we believe Jesus was when he was executed.


In his 1982 book, The Friars and the Jews. The Evolution of Medieval Anti-Judaism, Jeremy Cohen says:

"The Jesus of the ‘Talmud’... is mentioned as condemned to wallow eternally in boiling excrement... When forced to admit that one Talmudic passage mentioning the crimes of Jesus and his execution did indeed apply to the Christian Jesus, Yehiel still emphasized that the ‘Talmud’ was not responsible for maintaining this opinion among Jews."


In his 1994 history, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, Israel Shahak tells us this:

"The very name Jesus was for Jews a symbol of all that is abominable, and this popular tradition still exists. The Gospels are equally detested, and they are not allowed to be quoted even in modern Israel schools... For theological reasons, mostly rooted in ignorance, Christianity as a religion is classed by rabbinical teaching as idolatry. All Christian emblems and pictorial representations are regarded as idols."


The Talmud also says this:

"For murder, whether of a Cuthean Gentile by a Cuthean, or of an Israelite by a Cuthean, punishment is incurred; but of a Cuthean by an Israelite, there is no death penalty." (Sanhedrin)

"Moses said: 'Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife and he who committeth adultery incurs the death penalty.’ This means only adultery committed by, or with, Jews. The wife of a Gentile is excluded." (Ibid)

"Every foreigner who glorifies Sunday must be killed without asking him." (Ibid)

"Wherever the Hebrews go, they must make themselves the master of their Lords." (Ibid)

"Intercourse with a child of nine and a day is not the same as that with a child of nine." (Ibid)

A Jew is allowed to suppress a non-Jew, for it is written ‘Thou shalt do no wrong to thy neighbor. This is not written concerning the Gentile." (Ibid)

"If a woman sported lewdly with her young son and he committed the first stage of cohabitation with her, Beth Shammal says, he thereby renders her unfit to the priesthood, Beth Hillel declared her fit. All agree that the connection of a boy aged nine years and a day is real connection; whilst that of one less than eight years is not; their dispute refers only to one who is eight years old." (Ibid)

Those who read the uncanonical books (New Testament) will have no portion in the world to come." (Ibid)

"It is more wicked to question the words of the rabbis than that of the Torah." (Ibid)

"Jewish priests raised Balaam from the dead and punished him in boiling hot semen. Christians are boiled in excreta." (Gittin)

"Four billion Jews were killed by the Romans in the city of Bethar." (Ibid)

Oh, really?

Like the six million in the "holocaust" you mean?

"There were 400 synagogues in the great city of Betar and in each one there were 400 teachers of children and each one taught 400 children .... The enemy wrapped them in their scrolls and set them on fire." (Gittin)

400 x 400 x 400 = 64 million.

Ancient demography indicates that there were less than a million Jews in the entire world at that time.

Bit of an exaggeration there, I'd say.

"To heal his flesh a Jew should take dust that lies within the shadow of an outdoor toilet, mix it with honey and eat it." (Gittin)

"To heal the disease of pleurisy a Jew should take the excrement of a white dog and knead it with balsam, but if he can possibly avoid it he should not eat the dogs excrement as it loosens the limbs." (Ibid)

"On coming from a privy a man should not have sexual intercourse till he has waited long enough to walk half a mile, because the demon of the privy is with him for that time; if he does, his children will be epileptic." (Ibid)

"Canaanites are outside the protection of the law and God has exposed their money to Israel." (Baba Kamma)

"If a Jew has a suit against a non-Jew, you will take the Jew's side as far as possible, and you will, say to the non-Jew: ‘Thus it is according to our Law!’ If it is possible, according to the laws of the Gentiles, you will also take the Jew's side and say to the Gentiles: ‘Thus it is according to your Laws!’ If neither of these alternatives is possible, then you must cheat… If a Jew finds an object lost by a heathen it does not have to be returned." (Ibid)

"The name of God is not profaned when, for example, a Jew lies to a Goi by saying: 'I gave something to your father, but he is dead; you must return it to me,' as long as the Goi does not know that you are lying." (Ibid)

"It is not permitted to rob a brother, but it is permitted to rob a non-Jew, for it is written: ‘Thou shalt not rob thy neighbor.’ But these words, said by Jehova, do not apply to a goy who is not thy brother." (Baba Mezia)

"The word 'man' refers to Jews only, and not to non-Jews." (Ibid)

"All things pertaining to the Goyim are like a desert; the first person to come along and take them can claim them for his own." (Baba Bathra)

Now that you’ve had a taste of what lies concealed within the Talmud you should beware of discussing these discoveries with an orthodox Jew.

According to Talmudic law it is his duty to kill you! As it states in the Sanhedrin:

"Every goy who studies the Talmud and every Jew who helps him in it, ought to die."

And:

"A Goi who pries into the Torah is condemned to death, for it is written, it is our inheritance, not theirs."

If you are critical of me for putting you in danger, I apologise.

However, if you are a fraction more perturbed now than you were before you began reading, then, from my point of view, something worthwhile has been accomplished. Besides, you may as well read the whole of this document now, the Talmud makes no distinction as to the amount of forbidden scripture you have committed to memory. Just a glimpse of one word, according to Talmudic law, and you are done for!

"If a man sees that the evil urges is overcoming him he should go to a place where no one knows him, dress in black, cover himself in black and do what his heart wills and not desecrate the name of Heaven in public." (Mo’ed Kattan)

"Three things are said respecting the finger-nails: He who trims his nails and buries the parings is a pious man; he who burns these is a righteous man; but he who throws them away is a wicked man, for mischance might follow, should a female step over them." (Ibid)

"A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or a Jew. But a Jew is not forbidden to do all this to a goy." (Abhodah Zarah)

"Bloodshed is forbidden to a Gentile who may kill neither another Gentile or a Jew; but it is not forbidden to the Jew in regards to the Gentile." (Ibid)

"Theft, robbery, and rape of a beautiful woman and similar deeds are forbidden to every Gentile towards another Gentile, and also towards a Jew: but they are allowed to a Jew against a Gentile." (Ibid)

"Animals of the masculine sex must not be left in the barns of the Gentiles with their men, nor animals of the feminine sex with their women; much less must animals of the feminine sex be left with their men and of the masculine sex with their women.

Nor must sheep be left to the care of their shepherds; nor must any intercourse be had with them; nor must children be given into their care to learn to read or to learn a trade. Animals must not be allowed to go near the Goim, because they are suspected of having intercourse with them. Nor must women cohabit with them because they are over-sexed." (Ibid)

"A Jewish convert to pagan worship who causes trouble to his fellow Jews may be left to die, one may abstain from giving him aid at his time of need." (Ibid)

"A goy who pries into the ‘Talmud’ is guilty of death." (Ibid)

"A certain man was pouring wine from one jar into another by means of a tube, when a Goi came along and touched the tube with his hand. As a result all the wine had to be thrown away." (Ibid)

"Incest is a light sin compared to becoming a Christian." (Ibid)

"The Jews were created to be served by the non-Jews. The latter must plow, sow, weed, dig, mow, bind, sieve and grind. The Jews are created to find all this in readiness." (Zeraim Beraktoth)

"Work is harmful and brings but little." (Ibid)

"Because Jews are holy they do not have sex during the day unless the house can be made dark. A Jewish scholar can have sex during the day if he uses his garment like a tent to make it dark." (Ibid)

"Sinai is the mountain on which Moses received the Jewish laws from the God Jahwe. From this mountain, the hatred of the Jews against all other peoples of the world has spread." (Mo’ed Schabbath)

"Jews must destroy the books of the (Christians)." (Ibid)

"When an Israelite and a Gentile have a lawsuit before them, if they canst, acquit the former according to the laws of Israel, and tell the latter such is our laws; if they cannot get him off in accordance with Gentile law, do so, and say to the plaintiff such is your law; but if he cannot be acquitted according to either law, then bring forward adroit pretext and secure his acquittal. These are the words of Rabbi Ishmael. Rabbi Akiva says:

‘No false pretext should be brought forward, because if found out, the name of God would be blasphemed, but if there be no fear of that, then it may be adduced'." (Baba Kama)

"If the ox of an Israelite bruise the ox of a Gentile, the Israelite is exempt from paying damages; but should the ox of a Gentile bruise the ox of an Israelite, the Gentile is bound to recompense him in full." (Ibid)

"Rabbi Shemuel says advantage may be taken of the mistakes of a Gentile. He once bought a gold plate as a copper of a Gentile for four zouzim, and then cheated him out of one zouz into the bargain. Rav Cahana purchased a hundred and twenty vessels of wine from a Gentile for a hundred zouzim, and swindled him in the payment out of one of the hundred, and that while the Gentile assured him that he confidently trusted to his honesty. Rava once went parts with a Gentile and bought a tree which was cut up into logs.

This done, he bade his servant go and pick him out the largest logs, but to be sure to take no more than the proper number, because the Gentile knew how many there were. As Rav Aghi was walking abroad one day he saw some grapes growing in a roadside vineyard, and sent his servant to see whom they belonged to.

'If they belong to a Gentile,' he said, ‘bring some here to me; but if they belong to an Israelite, do not meddle with them.' The owner, who happened to be in the vineyard, overheard the Rabbi's order and called out:

‘What! is it lawful to rob a Gentile?'

'Oh, no,' said the Rabbi evasively; 'a Gentile might sell, but an Israelite would not'." (Ibid)

"If one finds lost property in a locality where a majority are Israelites, he is bound to proclaim it; but he is not bound to do so if the majority be Gentiles." (Baba Metzia)

"There is no meaner calling than that of agriculture." (Yebamoth)

"A woman who had intercourse with a beast is eligible to marry a priest." (Ibid)

"On the house of the goy one looks as on the fold of cattle." (Erubin)

"When the Messiah comes, all will be slaves of the Jews." (Ibid)

"A man may do with his wife whatever he pleases, as with a piece of meat coming from the butcher, which he can eat according to his fancy, salted, roast, boiled, or like a fish coming from the market." (Nedarim)

"And he who desires that none of his vows made during the year shall be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, every vow which I make in the future shall be null." (Ibid)

The Kol Nidre prayer, the first prayer said in the synagogue on Yom Kippur, is based on the above principle.

Yom Kippur is the Jews’ most important holy festival and, throughout the world more Jews, both religious and secular, attend synagogue on this day than on any other. Needless to say, noone arrives too late to recite the prayer based on the Talmudic scripture cited above.

"There is no reward for a good deed in this world." (Kiddushin)

"You are thus called men, but the Goyim are not called men." (Kerithuth)

"It is forbidden for dogs, women or palm trees to pass between two men, nor may others walk between dogs, women or palm trees. Special dangers are involved if the women are menstruating or sitting at a crossroads." (Pesachim)

"When you go to war do not go as the first, but as the last, so that you may return as the first. Five things has Kanaan recommended to his sons: 'Love each other, love the robbery, hate your masters and never tell the truth.'" (Ibid)

"A Jew is innocent of murder if his intent was to kill a Christian." (Makkoth)


The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion refers to Maimonides (Moses Ben Maimon, 1135-1204) as, "the symbol of the pure and orthodox faith."

The Encyclopaedia Britannica describes Maimonides as, "the greatest of Jewish philosophers."

In 1180, the "Eagle of the Synagogue", produced his celebrated work, Mishnah Torah. Repetition of the Law, which is also known as Iad Chazakah. (The Strong Hand) It contains four parts or volumes and 14 books and includes the whole Talmud.

Maimonides also included much philosophical discussion in this work and attempted to establish many laws of his own. Because of this he was excommunicated by his people and condemned to death. He fled to Egypt and died there in the year 1204.

Over the centuries, however, his reputation within the Jewish world increased. Nowadays, Maimonides opinion on all matters is greatly respected by Orthodox Jews.


Here are some of the Maimonidean thoughts that he introduced into the Talmud:

"The Gentile is human shit. He is just as unclean." (Orach Chajim)

"It is a mitzvah (religious duty) to eradicate Jewish traitors, minnim, and apikorsim, and to cause them to descend to the pit of destruction, since they cause difficulty to the Jews and sway the people away from God, as did Jesus of Nazareth and his students… May the name of the wicked rot." (Ibid)

"Everything a Jew needs for his church ritual no goy is permitted to manufacture, but only a Jew, because this must be manufactured by human beings and the Jew is not permitted to consider the goyim as human beings." (Ibid)

"A pregnant non-Jew is no better than a pregnant animal." (Shulchan Oruch: Coschen Hamischpat)

The above translation is a simplification of the actual law involved, which states that if an ox gored a pregnant non-Jewish slave-woman, the owner of the ox has to pay for the loss of the foetus to the owner of the slave-woman.

"It is the law to kill anyone (Jewish) who denies the Torah. The Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah." (Ibid)

"She who was the descendant of princes and governors (The Virgin Mary) played the harlot with a carpenter". (Ibid)

"Make no agreement and show no mercy to Christians. Either turn them away from their idols, or kill them." (Hilkoth Akum)

"Israelites also, who lapse from their religion and become Epicureans, are to be killed, and we must persecute them to the end. For they afflict Israel and turn the people from God." (Ibid)

"In places where Jews are strong, no idolater must be allowed to remain." (Ibid)

"Do not have pity for them, for it is said: ‘Show no mercy unto them.’ Therefore, if you see an Akum in difficulty or drowning, do not go to his help. And if he is in danger of death, do not save him from death. But it is not right to kill him by your own hand by shoving them into a well or in some other way, since they are not at war with us…

Do not eat with idolaters, nor permit them to worship their idols; for it is written: Make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them. Either turn away from their idols or kill them." (Ibid)

Maimonides decreed that Jewish physicians should not save the life of a Christian unless not saving him would: "… cause the spread of hostility against the Jews."

"It is not permitted to drink the wine of a stranger who becomes a convert, that is, one who accepts the seven precepts of Noah, but is permitted to gain some benefit from it. It is allowed to leave wine alone with him, but not to place it before him. The same is permitted in the case of all gentiles who are not idolaters, such as the Turks.

A Jew, however, is not permitted to drink their wine, although he may use it to his own advantage." (Hilkoth Maakhaloth)

"Do not save Goyim in danger of death." (Hilkkoth Akum)

"Only if you can't convince him to give up his idolatry, should you show him (a goy) no mercy." (Ibid)

"It is a duty to exterminate them with one’s own hands, such as Jesus of Nazareth and his pupils, and Tzadoq and Baitos (the founders of the Sadducean sect) and their pupils, may the name of the wicked rot." (Ibid)

"A Jew may misuse a non-Jewess in her state of unbelief." (Ibid)

"During the Babylonian captivity, the Israelites mingled with all sorts of foreign races and had children, who formed, owing to these unions, a kind of a new confusion of tongues." (Yad Hazaka)


In the late 13th century, Simeon Ben Yohai, together with his son and various other disciples, was the first to put the collection of scholarly Jewish thought, instruction and tradition known as the Zohar, (Splendour) into written form.

Ben Yohai edited and amplified what had previously been passed down orally and his thinking illuminates the whole of this Cabalistic book.

The Talmud relates that for 12 years the Rabbi Simon and his son Eliezer concealed themselves in a cavern, where sitting in the sand up to their necks, they meditated on the sacred law and were frequently visited by the prophet Elias. In this way, Jewish legend adds, the great book of the Zohar was composed and committed to writing by the Rabbis' son Eliezer and his secretary Rabbi Abba.

"Rabbi Jehuda said…

'He is to be praised who is able to free himself from the enemies of Israel, and the just are much to be praised who get free from them and fight against them.'Rabbi Chezkia asked:

'How must we fight against them?' Rabbi Jehuda said:

'By wise counsel thou shalt war against them.'

‘By what kind of war?’

‘The kind of war that every son of man must fight against his enemies, which Jacob used against Esau, by deceit and trickery whenever possible. They must be fought against without ceasing, until proper order be restored. Thus it is with satisfaction that I say we should free ourselves from them and rule over them'." (Book I)

"The People of the Earth are idolaters, and it has been written about them: ‘Let them be wiped off the face of the earth. Destroy the memory of the Amalekites.’" (Ibid)

"Those who do good to Christians will never rise from the dead." (Ibid)

"In the palaces of the fourth heaven are those who lamented over Sion and Jerusalem, and all those who destroyed idolatrous nations... and those who killed off people who worship idols are clothed in purple garments so that they may be recognized and honored." (Ibid)

"Extermination of Christians is a necessary sacrifice." (Book 2)

"Rabbi Abba says: If only idolaters alone had sexual intercourse, the world would not continue to exist. Hence we are taught that a Jew should not give way to those infamous robbers. For if these propagate in greater numbers, it will be impossible for us to continue to exist because of them. For they give birth to sucklings the same as dogs." (Ibid)

"The ass means the non-Jew, who is to be redeemed by the offering of a lamb, which is the dispersed sheep of Israel. But if he refuses to be redeemed, then break his skull.... They should be taken out of the book of the living, for it is said about them: He who sins against me, I shall take out of the book of life." (Ibid)

"The only sacrifice required is that we remove the unclean from amongst us." (Ibid)

"And he created every living thing, that is, the Israelites, because they are the children of the Most High God, and their holy souls come out from Him. But where do the souls of the idolatrous gentiles come from? Rabbi Eliezer says: from the left side, which makes their souls unclean. They are therefore all unclean and they pollute all who come in contact with them." (Ibid)

"Idolatrous people, however, since they exist, befoul the world, because their souls come out of the unclean side." (Ibid)

"It is certain that our captivity will last until the princes of the gentiles who worship idols are destroyed." (Ibid)

"It is certain that our captivity will last until the princes of the gentiles who worship idols are destroyed." (Ibid)


An abbreviated edition of the work of Maimonides was drawn up in 1340 by Jacob ben Ascher, to which he gave the name, Arbaa Turim.

Since the Halakhoth of Alfasi (Rif), the various works of Maimonides and ben Ascher’s Arbaa Turim disagreed on many points there was great need of an incisive edition of Talmudic law which would knit together the various strands of Rabbinical thought and offer concise solutions to controversial matters.

The Schulchan Aruch, first published by the Palestinian scholar and Talmudic interpreter, Joseph Caro, in 1565, fitted the bill admirably. It is the most important of all the books written to simplify and explain Jewish law as stated in the Talmud. The Schulchan Arukh is regarded by the modern Jewish scholar as the obligatory Law Code of the Jews.

The following is Caro’s version of the Kol Nidre prayer.

"All vows, oaths, promises, engagements, and swearing, which, beginning this very day of reconciliation, we intend to vow, promise, swear, and bind ourselves to fulfill, we repent of beforehand; let them be illegalized, acquitted, annihilated, abolished, valueless, unimportant. Our vows shall be no vows, and our oaths no oaths at all."

Here are some of the other interpretations of previous Talmudic opinion that Caro added to the Talmud:

"Marriages taking place amongst Gentiles have no binding strength: their cohabitation is just as the coupling of horses, therefore, their children do not stand as humanly related to their parents."

"It is always a meritorious deed to get hold of a Gentile’s possessions."

"If a Jew has raped a non-Jewish girl, and another who saw it is called as a witness, that Jew must, without compunction, swear falsely."

"Inasmuch as a non-Jewish child at three years and a day is suitable for copulation, her rapist is only unclean until the evening, when he is clean again after taking a dip in the water." (Choschen Ha’mischpa)

"An animal which has been slaughtered by a Gentile or by a Jew has become a non-Jew, is to be considered as a diseased animal." (Ibid)

"A Goi or a servant is not capable of acting as a witness." (Ibid)

"A child must not be nursed by a Nokhri, (‘transient stranger’) if an Israelite can be had; for the milk of the Nokhrith hardens the heart of a child and builds up an evil nature in him." (Ibid)

"The Elders forbade the eating of the bread of the Akum, lest we would seem to be familiar with them." (Ibid)

"A Jew is forbidden to drink from a glass of wine which a Gentile has touched, because the touch has made the wine unclean." (Ibid)

"It is a good deed for every Jew to burn and destroy the non-Jewish church or whatever belongs to it or is done for it, and to throw the ashes into the four winds or to throw them into the water. Furthermore, it is the duty of every Jew to try to uproot every non-Jewish church and to give it a curse name." (Ibid)

"Every Jew has the obligation to see that Christian churches are burned down and wiped out. The faithful must be insulted and the clergy killed… Their idols must be destroyed, or called by contemptuous names." (Ibid)

"It is permitted to deride idols, and it is forbidden to say to a Goi: May your God help you, or I hope you will succeed." (Ibid)

"Therefore if you enter a town and find them celebrating a feast, you may pretend to rejoice with them in order to hide your hatred. Those, however, who care about the salvation of their souls should keep away from such celebrations. You should make it known that it is a hateful thing to rejoice with them, if you can do so without incurring enmity." (Ibid)

"It is forbidden to give free gifts to the Christian with whom a Jew may not treat familiarly… It is not permitted to sell water to an Akum if it is known that it will be made into Baptismal water… No one is allowed to praise them or to say how good an Akum is. How much less to praise what they do or to recount anything about them which would redound to their glory. If, however, while praising them you intend to give glory to God, namely, because he has created comely creatures, then it is allowed to do so." (Ibid)

"A child must not be given to the Akum to learn manners, literature or the arts, for they will lead him to heresy." (Ibid)

"A Jewish wet-nurse is forbidden to nurse the child of a Gentile, even if she would be paid for that, because in so doing she would assist in raising a Gentile. Only in case she is in great pain because of a surplus of milk and such milk can become dangerous to her, is she permitted to do so. The Jew is also forbidden to teach a Gentile a handwork by which he could sustain himself." (Ibid)

"In case of a deathly sickness a Jew is permitted to consume something in case he believes that it may assist his recovery. But also in this case he is not permitted to make use of something which belongs to the most unclean of all, namely, the Christian Church." (Ibid)

"If a Jew is doing good business with an Akum it is not allowed to other Jews, in certain places, to come and do business with the same Akum. In other places, however, it is different, where another Jews is allowed to go to the same Akum, lead him on, do business with him and to deceive him and take his money. For the wealth of the Akum is to be regarded as common property and belongs to the first who can get it.

There are some, however, who say that this should not be done." (Ibid)

"In time of war the Christian are to be killed, for it is written: 'The good among the Christian deserve to be killed’… The Christians are not to be cured, even for money, unless it would incur their enmity… The Akum are not to be cured, even for money, unless it would incur their enmity… The Akum who are not enemies of ours must not be killed directly, nevertheless they must not be saved from danger of death. For example, if you see one of them fall into the sea, do not pull him out unless he promises to give you money." (Ibid)

"Usury is permitted for any reason when dealing with Christians." (Ibid)

"It is not permitted to imitate the customs of the Christian, nor to act like them. Nor is it permitted to wear clothes like the Christian, not to comb the hair as they do... Neither must Jews build houses that look like temples of the Christian." (Ibid)

"If you send a messenger to collect money from an Akum and the Akum pays too much, the messenger may keep the difference. But if the messenger does not know about it, then you may keep it all yourself." (Ibid)

"When Jewish women come out of a bath they must take care to meet a friend first, and not something unclean or a Christian. For if she does, a woman, if she wants to keep holy, should go back and bathe again." (Ibid)

"A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum, for it is written: ‘Return to thy brethren what is lost.’ For he who returns lost property sins against the Law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the Law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely, if by so doing Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people." (Ibid)

"A Jew may do to a non-Jewess what he can do. He may treat her as a piece of raw meat… A Jew may rob a goy, that is, he may cheat him in a bill, if unlikely to be perceived by him." (Ibid)

"Condolences must not be offered to anyone on account of the death of his servants or handmaids. All that may be said is: 'May God restore your lost one, the same as we say to a man who has lost a cow or an ass.' Nor must Christians be avoided for seven days after they have buried someone, as the Law of Moses commands, since they are not men; for the burial of an animal does not pollute one". (Ibid)

"It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces… If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth." (Ibid)

"If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth."

"If you see a heretic, who does not believe in the Torah, fall into a well in which there is a ladder, hurry at once and take it away and say to him: 'I have to go and take my son down from a roof; I will bring the ladder back to you at once,' or something else. The Kuthaei, however, who are not our enemies, who take care of the sheep of the Israelites, are not to be killed directly, but they must not be saved from death." (Ibid)

"A woman must wash herself again if she sees any unclean things, such as a dog, an ass, or Gentile; a Christian, a camel, a pig, a horse, and a leper." (Biur Hetib)

"Rabbi Meir used to state that a man is obligated to make these three blessings each day: Thank you God for not making me a Gentile, a woman or a slave." (Menahoth)

"A woman came before Rabbi Hisda confessing to him that the lightest sin that she committed was that her younger son is the issue of her older son. Since this was her lightest sin she was excused… Rabbi Eleazer Doria did not leave out any harlot in the world without coming to her… yet attained forgiveness because he had not committed the unforgivable sin of accepting Christianity." (Abhodah Zarah)

"It is a great sin to make a present to a Gentile. But it is permissible to give alms to the poor of the Gentiles, to visit their sick and to give the last honors to their deceased and to console their relatives because of the peace, so that the Gentile may think the Jews are good friends of theirs in showing them consolation… Do not say anything in praise of them, lest it be said: How good that Goi is!" (Ibid)

"One should not place cattle in heathens' inns, because they prefer sex with cows." (Ibid)

"Our rabbis have passed it down for us, that a foreign woman must never be allowed to act as midwife at the birth of a child of Israel, because they are given to the shedding of blood. The Elders say, however, that a foreign woman may perform this task provided there are other Jewish women present, but never alone. Rabbi Meir, however, says that it is not allowed even others are present. For they often crush the soft head of the child with their hands and kill it; and they do this without being noticed by those who are present." (Ibid)


The well respected Frankfurt scholar, Rabbi Shimeon wrote Talmudic commentary, which he called, Jalkut.

In this book, he opined:

"Israel is like the lady of the house to whom her husband brings the money. Thus Israel is without the burden of labor and receives the money from the people of the world." (Schim)

"It is forbidden to initiate a non-Jew into the secrets of the law. The Jew who concerns himself with this is as guilty as if he laid waste the world and denied the sacred name of God." (Chadasz)

"It is forbidden to disclose the secrets of the law. He who would do it would be as guilty as though he destroyed the whole world." (Ibid)

In the Gemara, Rabbi Raish Lakish said that he who wears tzitzit (a four cornered fringed garment) at the time of the redemption will be given 2800 servants.

He added:

"Ten men shall take hold, out of all the languages of the nations, shall even take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew."

Rabbi Ulla, in conversation with Judah-ben Ezekiel, said

"Are we perfectly sure that we are not descended from pagans who dishonoured the young daughters of Zion after the capture of Jerusalem?"

Rabbi Eliezer said:

"It is permitted to cut off the head of an idiot on the feast of the Atonement when it falls on the Sabbath." (Pesachim)

And:

"Wherefore has God scattered the Jews among the nations? To recruit for Him proselytes everywhere." (Pesachim)

Rabbi Hisda said:

"Thou shalt have neither a son nor a disciple who will publically let his food burn like did Jesus the Nazarene." (Sanhedrin)

Rabbi Abbahu said:

"If a man say unto thee 'I am God' he lieth; if he saith 'I am the Son of Man' he will live to rue his words; and if he saith 'I ascend into Heaven' he will not bring to pass that which he saith."

Rabbi Chanina said:

"He who strikes an Israelite acts as if he slaps the face of God's Divine Majesty."

Rabbi David Katz said:

"One is allowed to keep a lost object of a gentile and he who returns it commits a sin because he is supporting the wicked people of the world."

Rabbi Meir said:

"The vessels of Gentiles, do they not impart a worsened flavor to the food cooked in them?" (Abhodah Zarah)

Rabbi Elazar said:

"Where revenge is necessary, it is a great thing."

Rabbi Hanina said:

"A non-Jew who hits a Jew is worthy of death by the Hand of God." (Sanhedrin)


The Talmud is full of anecdotes, advice and folk wisdom that, by modern standards, would seem patently absurd to the non-Jew.

We learn from the Talmud for example, that:

"One who eats an ant is flogged five times forty stripes save one."

"Demons ... have wings like angels... they know the future."

"A dog in a strange place does not bark for seven years."

"The bald-headed, and dwarfed, and the blear-eyed are ineligible for the priesthood."

"Only kings ... eat roast meat with mustard."

"The Rabbis have taught that a man should not drink water on Wednesdays and Saturdays after night fall... An evil spirit... on these evenings prowls around."

"These things cause hemorrhoids: eating cane leaves, the foliage and tendrils of a vine, the palate of cattle, the backbones of fish, half-cooked salt fish, wine, lees, etc."

"These things are detrimental to study: walking between two camels... to pass under a bridge beneath which no water has flowed forty days; to drink water that runs through a cemetery."

"It is not right for a man to sleep in the daytime any longer than a horse sleeps. And how long is the sleep of a horse? Sixty respirations."


In the 30th of April, 1999, edition of The Jewish News of Greater Phoenix, Rabbi Schorsch said:

"Sadly, a low estimate of non-Jews pervades much of Talmudic literature. The ‘Mishna’ admonishes Jews not to leave their animals unattended at the inn of a gentile, because gentiles are suspected of engaging in beastiality. Gentiles are described also as liable to rape and murder, so that a lonely Jew should avoid their company... Treatment of the ‘other' remains a problem for Judaism. In a divided world, we are entilted to take whatever measures will advance our narrow interests."


In his book, Universalism and Parochialism in Jewish Law.

Making Sense of Political Loyalties, the Jewish scholar Gordon Lafar says this:

"The Talmud is in disagreement over whether Jews may rob Gentiles but even the liberal authority Rabbi Menachem HaMeiri agrees that a Jew who finds something that was inadvertently lost by a Gentile is not obliged to return it."


In 1233, Pope Gregory IX said this in his Epistle to the Hierarchy in Germany:

"The Talmud contains every kind of vileness and blasphemy against Christian Truth."

He also said:

"Ungrateful for favors and forgetful of benefits, the Jews return insult for kindness and impious contempt for goodness. They ought to know the yoke of perpetual enslavement because of their guilt. See to it that the perfidious Jews never in the future grow insolent, but that they always suffer publically the shame of theirsin in servile fear."


In 1415 Pope Bendict XIII banned the study of the Talmud and in the papal bull, The Jewish Issue, he said:

"The heresies, vanities and errors of the Talmud prevent their knowing the truth."


Martin Luther was the first and most influential of the founders of the Protestant Reformation in Europe.

As such, he is, undoubtedly, the most important figure in the history of the Protestant religion.

Originally, Luther had been a good friend of the "People of the Book" but, after he had learned to read Hebrew and took a look at what they had to say in the Talmud, he changed his mind about his former friends.

Thus, in 1542, Luther published On the Jews and Their Lies.

Here are some of the things he said in this book:

"They should be deprived of their prayer books and Talmuds. Their rabbis must be forbidden under threat of death to teach any more. I had made up my mind to write no more either about the Jews or against them. But since I learned that these miserable and accursed people do not cease to lure... the Christians, I have published this little book, so that I might be found among those who opposed such poisonous activities of the Jews who warned the Christians to be on their guard against them."

"Be on your guard against the Jews, knowing that wherever they have their synagogues, nothing is found but a den of devils in which sheer self-glory, conceit, lies, blasphemy, and defaming of God and men are practiced most maliciously and veheming his eyes on them."

"What shall we Christians do now with this depraved and damned people of the Jews?... I will give my faithful advice: First, that one should set fire to their synagogues... Then that one should also break down and destroy their houses... That one should drive them out the country."

"Moreover, they are nothing but thieves and robbers who daily eat no morsel and wear no thread of clothing which they have not stolen and pilfered from us by means of their accursed usury."

"However, they have not acquired a perfect mastery of the art of lying; they lie so clumsily and ineptly that anyone who is just a little observant can easily detect it."

"Over and above that we let them get rich on our sweat and blood, while we remain poor and they such the marrow from our bones."

"They remain our daily murderers and bloodthirsty foes in their hearts. Their prayers and curses furnish evidence of that, as do the many stories which relate their torturing of children."

"They (rulers) must act like a good physician who, when gangrene has set in proceeds without mercy to cut, saw, and burn flesh, veins, bone, and marrow. Such a procedure must also be followed in this instance. Burn down their synagogues, forbid all that I enumerated earlier, force them to work."

"The Jews are brutes, their synagogues are pig-sties, they ought to be burned, for Moses would do it, if he came back to this world. They drag in mire the divine words, they live by evil and plunders, they are wicked beasts that ought to be driven out like mad dogs."

"Know, O adored Christ, and make no mistake, that aside from the Devil, you have no enemy more venomous, more desperate, more bitter than a true Jew who truly seeks to be a Jew... A Jew, a Jewish heart, are hard as wood, as stone, as iron, as the Devil himself. In short, they are children of the Devil, condemned to the flames of hell."

"They ought to be stopped from usury… Let the young and strong Jews and Jewesses be given the flail, the axe, the hoe, the spade, the distaff, and spindle and let them earn their bread by the sweat of their noses as in enjoined upon Adam's children."

In the book, Luther’s Table Talks, he is quoted thus

"How the Jews love the Book of Esther, which is so suitable to their bloodthirsty, revengeful, murderous appetite and hopes. The sun has never shone on such a bloodthirsty and revengeful people, who fancy themselves to be the chosen people so that they can murder and strangle the heathen."

"The Jews are so hardened that they listen to nothing; though overcome by testimonies they yield not an inch. It is a pernicious race, oppressing all men by their usury and rapine. If they give a prince or magistrate a thousand florins, they extort twenty thousand from the subjects in payment. We must ever keep on guard against them."

"The Jews are so hardened that they listen to nothing; though overcome by testimonies, they yield not an inch. Tis a pernicious race, oppressing all men by their usury and rapine. If they give a prince or a magistrate a thousand florins, they exhort twenty thousand from the subjects in payment. We must keep on our guard against them. They think to render homage to God by injuring the Christians, and yet we employ their physicians; ‘tis a tempting of God. They have haughty prayers, wherein they praise and call upon God, as if they alone were his people, cursing and condemning all other nations."

"Jerusalem was destroyed over fourteen hundred years ago, and at that time we Christians were harassed and persecuted by the Jews throughout the world for about three hundred years. We might well complain that during that time they held us Christians captive and killed us, which is the plain truth. Furthermore, we do not know to the present day which devil brought them into our country. We surely did not bring them from Jerusalem. In addition, no one is holding them here now. The country and the roads are open for them to proceed to their land whenever they wish. If they did so, we would be glad to present gifts to them on the occasion; it would be good riddance. For they are a heavy burden, a plague, a pestilence, a sheer misfortune for our country.

Proof for this is found in the fact that they have often been expelled forcibly from a country, far from being held captive in it. Thus they were banished from France, which was an especially fine nest. Very recently they were banished by our dear Emperor Charles from Spain, the very best nest of all. This year they were expelled from the entire Bohemian crownland, where they had one of the best nests, in Prague.

Likewise, during my lifetime they have been driven from Regensburg, Magdeburg, and other places. If you cannot tolerate a person in a country or home, does that constitute holding him in captivity? In fact, they hold us Christians captive in our own country. They let us work in the sweat of our brow to earn money and property while they sit behind the stove, idle away the time, fart, and roast pears. They stuff themselves, guzzle, and live in luxury and ease from our hard-earned goods.

With their accursed usury they hold us and our property captive. Moreover, they mock and deride us because we work and let them play the role of lazy squires at our expense and in our land. Thus they are our masters and we are their servants, with our property, our sweat, and our labor. And by way of reward and thanks they curse our Lord and us! Should the devil not laugh and dance if he can enjoy such a fine paradise at the expense of us Christians? He devours what is ours through his saints, the Jews, and repays us by insulting us, in addition to mocking and cursing both God and man.

They could not have enjoyed such good times in Jerusalem under David and Solomon with their own possessions as they now do with ours, which they daily steal and rob. And yet they wail that we have taken them captive. Indeed, we have captured them and hold them in captivity just as I hold captive my gallstone, my bloody tumor, and all the other ailments and misfortunes which I have to nurse and take care of with money and goods and all that I have. Alas, I wish that they were in Jerusalem with the other Jews and whomever else they would like to have there."

In a letter to his wife, Luther said this:

"The sun never did shine on a more bloodthirsty and revengeful people as they, who imagine to be the people of God, and who desire to and think they must murder and crush the heathen. And the foremost undertaking, which they expect of their Messiah, is that he should slay and murder the whole world with the sword. As they at first demonstrated against us Christians and would like to do now, if they only could; have also tried it often and have been repeatedly struck on their snouts.

They live among us in our homes, under our protection, use land and highways, market and streets. Princes and government sit by, snore and have their maws open, let the Jews take from their purse and chest, steal and rob whatever they will. That is, they permit themselves and their subjects to be abused and sucked dry and reduced to beggars with their own money, through the usury of the Jews.


For the Jews, as foreigners, certainly should have nothing from us; and what they have certainly must be ours. They do not work, do not earn anything from us, neither do we donate or give it to them. Yet they have our money and goods and are lords in our land where they are supposed to be in exile!

Do not their Talmud and rabbis write that it is no sin to kill if a Jew kills a heathen, but it is a sin if he kills a brother in Israel? It is no sin if he does not keep his oath to a heathen. Therefore, to steal and rob from a heathen is a divine service... And they are the masters of the world and we are their servants - yea, their cattle!

I maintain that in three fables of Aesop there is more wisdom to be found than in all the books of the Talmudists and rabbis and more than ever could come into the hearts of the Jews... Should someone think I am saying too much - I am saying much too little! For I see in (their) writings how they curse us goyim and wish as all evil in their schools and prayers. They rob us of our money through usury, and wherever they are able, they play us all manner of mean tricks... No heathen has done such things and none would to so except the Devil himself and those whom he possesses - as he possesses the Jews.

Maybe mild-hearted and gentle Christians will believe that I am too rigorous and drastic against the poor, afflicted Jews, believing that I ridicule them and treat them with much sarcasm. By my word, I am far too weak to be able to ridicule such a satanic brood. I would fain to do so, but they are far greater adepts at mockery than I and possess a god who is master in this art. It is the Evil One himself. Even with no further evidence than the Old Testament, I would maintain, and no person on earth could alter my opinion, that the Jews as they are today are veritably a mixture of all the depraved and malevolent knaves of the whole world over...

The Jewish people is and remains in Europe an Asiatic people alien to our part of the world, bound to that old law which it received in a distant climate, and which, according to its confession, it cannot do away with."

In February, 1546, he preached a sermon at Eisleben, in which he said:

"How many of this alien people can be tolerated without injury to the true citizen? A ministry in which a Jew is supreme, a household in which a Jew has the key of the wardrobe and the management of the finances, a department or commissariat in which Jews do the principal business, are Pontine marshes which cannot be drained."

A few days after railing against the Jews this one last time, Martin Luther was dead.

Here is one last quote from the founder of Protestant religion:

"For thousands of years, since their emergence on the stage of history, the Jews were a parasitic growth on the stem of other nations, a race of cunning brokers all over the earth. They have cause great evil to many ill-organized states, by retarding the free and natural economic development of their indigenous population."


If you wish to check out a rather more substantial glimpse into the Talmudic world, you could do worse that to take a look at, The Talmud: Judaism's Holiest Book Unmasked, which was compiled in 1892 by the Reverend I. B. Pranatis.

Pranatis was the Master of Theology and Professor of the Hebrew Language at the Imperial Ecclesiastical Academy in St. Petersburg.

Pranatis' document may be found here: www.endofman.com/False_Religion/talmudunmasked.htm


And here are a couple of website addresses where those who would refute most of what is written here as redneck rubbish, may be studied:

A Goy Pries Into the Talmud, by Baron and Cohen, may be seen here: www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Embassy/2634/goy_pries_10.html

And then there is this: www.geocities.com/Athens/Cyprus/8815/Response1.html

A comparison of what is contained at these three websites should bring you somewhat closer to the truth.


I''m not sure whether the Passover Prayer is included in The Talmud but, just in case you think that Jewish nastiness occurs nowhere else in the Jewish oeuvre, check this out:

"Cut off the hope of the unjust; let all heretics perish at once; root out, break up and destroy the Proud Kingdom; hasten to make all peoples subject in our days…

Pour out thy anger upon nations that know thee not, and upon the kingdoms which do not invoke thy name; Pour out thy indignation upon them, and let thy wrathful anger take hold of them; Persecute and destroy them in anger from under the heavens of the Lord."


Then again you could take a peek at the very Jewish God of Old Testament.

The genocidal psychopath contained therein is about as far removed from a pleasant, old fellow with a white beard as your Grandma would be from Ariel Sharon.

There are two ways to be fooled
One is to believe what isn't true
the other is to refuse to believe what is true.
Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855)
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 17 May 2018 00:20 #12

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1669
  • Likes received: 614
Jack Black's Article on Harriet Harman



On 20 May 2008, Leo McKinstry reported thus in The Daily Mail:

"Political ideologues live in a permanent state of denial, refusing to accept any evidence that contradicts them. A classic example of this pattern lies in family policy. For decades, feminist zealots have told us that family structure is irrelevant, fathers are unnecessary for child-rearing and marriage is outdated.

These views have had a disastrous influence, encouraging the state to preside over the breakdown in the traditional family. The results are everywhere - in crime, in benefits dependency, poverty and the rising costs to public services.

Yet, amid all this wreckage, hardliners still cling to their dogma. And none is more hardline than the High Priestess of British Feminism, Harriet Harman. In an extraordinary interview published yesterday, she declared marriage was 'irrelevant' to public policy and described high rates of separation as a 'positive development', as it reflected 'greater choice' for couples - never mind the children.

If nothing else, Harman can be credited with consistency. Neither the facts nor the passage of time have changed her mind. She was preaching this dangerous gospel of feminist fascism when she was first elected to Parliament in 1982.

When I came to work for her as a parliamentary aide in the early Nineties, Harman was questioning whether fathers were necessary at all. In her 26 years as MP, she appears to have learnt nothing from representing the poor South London constituency of Camberwell and Peckham. It not only has one of the highest rates of lone parenthood in the country, but is also one of the most deprived and crimeridden areas in Britain. Yet in Harriet Harman's mind, these two points are not connected.

As a naive young Ulsterman, hailing from a middle-class, two-parent home in Belfast, I was shocked at the complete absence of responsible fathers in the big housing estates that dominated the constituency.

Yet this wilful creation of fractured society in her own midst did not bother Harriet.

'Families come in all shapes and sizes', has long been one of the favourite mantras of the Left.

Research studies have shown, however, that children do better when raised in married families... Research, concluded that a stable background means you are less likely to be out of work, live off the State, become single parents or even smoke. Children of married parents do better in exams, according to other studies, and are less likely to have mental difficulties.

The Commons Home Affairs Committee has shown that levels of family breakdown among the black community are propelling teenagers into a life of crime. This was all too evident in Peckham's phenomenal caseload, arising from an army of constituents who were reliant on the state for all their needs, which meant I found working for Harriet an extremely demanding job.

When I first took up the post, many friends in the Labour party told me I was an idiot to do so. She had a tyrannical reputation, notorious for her unreasonable demands and hectoring manner... There was often an air of chaos about her management - she often struggled to remain on top of her paperwork. And for someone in the frontline of politics, Harman could be strangely ill-informed about current affairs and I would have to brief her strenuously for appearances on BBC Question Time, trying to ensure, for instance, that she remembered the names of key players in the Middle East peace process.

She could also be odd about money. At one stage she decided to employ a media negotiator to enhance her earnings from routine broadcast appearances - unheard of in Whitehall. It was a tactic that backfired when an outraged ITV company leaked to the Press her substantial demand for a fee...

I can now see what aggravates so many people about her: the politically correct condescension; smug self-certainty despite a record of incompetence; the whiff of born-to-rule arrogance; the attachment to the shibboleths of multi-culturalism and feminism. Harman is the embodiment of so much that is wrong with New Labour. Born into affluent privilege herself, Harman is that classic socialist type that regards the robust British working class with suspicion. But Harriet's greatest vice - and there are many - is her hypocrisy. She is now the Deputy Leader of a party that, in its latest by-election campaign in Crewe, has descended into the gutter of class warfare, deriding its opponents as 'toffs'.

Yet few figures in modern politics have enjoyed greater privilege than Harman. Her father was a Harley Street surgeon, her uncle the Earl of Longford. She was educated at the exclusive St Paul's Girls' School, before going on to York University and legal training. And like so many of the New Labour elite, she has never had a real job... Before she entered Parliament, she worked as the legal officer for the radical pressure group, the National Council for Civil Liberties.

Further hypocrisy comes in the way she is raising her family - Harman's attachment to the socialist ideal of comprehensive education clearly does not extend to her own life. She sent one of her sons to a grant-maintained school, another to a selective grammar, reinforcing the belief that too many Labour politicians refuse to practise what they preach.

Living in the leafy enclave of Dulwich, Harman's detachment from her constituents' lives was further reflected when she wore a stab-proof vest for a tour of Peckham, even though she was escorted by three police officers...

In 11 years of Labour rule she has no significant achievements to her name. She was sacked from the Cabinet by Blair in 1998 for making a hash of the policy of welfare reform. Since then she has used a succession of jobs, first Solicitor-General and now Minister for Equalities and Leader of the Commons as a platform to propound her dated brand of feminism.

Her mix of incompetence and cash problems was again demonstrated when she was embroiled in the Donorgate row recently, having accepted money for her Deputy Leadership bid without checking the source and then failing to make a proper declaration to the Electoral Commission...

Harman is fond of talking about equality, but her policies move in precisely theopposite direction.

So she has called for the introduction of US-style positive discrimination for job candidates, where female and ethnic minority candidates are favoured over white males. This is in direct contradiction of equal opportunities. Nothing could be more unjust, patronising or discriminatory than awarding jobs on the basis of skin colour or gender. The same is true of her scheme to promote all-black shortlists in elections to increase the number of non-white MPs.

But then Harman has never had time for the British public, preferring to patronise rather than listen. She wants to shape society instead of serving its genuine needs.

Her entire career, based on the elitist belief that she knows best, represents a betrayal of the traditional working class - the very people Labour was founded to represent."

Harman has a deal of form in the marriage-wrecking, absent-dad-is-best book.

As long ago as 1990, she co-authored a report entitled The Family Way, which criticised the family unit and mothers who stay at home. In fact the booklet went so far as to wonder whether:

"... the presence of fathers in families is necessarily a means to social harmony and cohesion".

Erin Pizzey described the work as a:

"... staggering attack on men and their role in modern life".

So, "why does Harriet Harman hate marriage"?

Perhaps because she is a member of a New World Order elite that despises the British working-classes and wants them gone?

Lord Longford was Harman's uncle and the writers Thomas Pakenham, Rachel Billington and Lady Antonia Fraser are her cousins. Fraser is married to the Jewish playwright, Harold Pinter.

Harman is great-granddaughter of Arthur Chamberlain and Louisa Kenrick.

Arthur was the brother of Joseph who served under Gladstone and Salisbury. Louisa's cousin, Harriet, married Joseph and they were the parents of Austen, Chancellor of the Exchequer and Foreign Secretary. Louisa's sister Florence married him after Harriet's death. They were the parents of Neville, Prime Minister from 1937 to 1940.

Another Harman great-grandfather was a wealthy paper merchant.

Harman’s sister, Sarah, was caught passing confidential papers to her when she was Solicitor General.

Sarah Harman was, subsequently, found guilty of "conduct unbefitting a solicitor" and forced to resign.

Wikipedia has this to say about Harman:

"Between 1978 and 1982 she was legal officer for the National Council for Civil Liberties, before becoming MP for Peckham in a by-election in 1982. She became Labour's front-bench spokesman for Social Services in 1984, and then Health in 1987. After the 1992 general election she was elected to the Shadow Cabinet and became shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, then Shadow Secretary of State for Health.

After the 1992 general election she was elected to the Shadow Cabinet and became shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, then Shadow Secretary of State for Health...

Whilst holding this post she was involved in a media controversy when she sent her eldest son to a grant maintained school, then her younger son to a grammar school. Labour policy opposed these forms of education, but she retained high office with the support of the Labour leader, Tony Blair.

(Tony Blair has also sent his children to top Grammar schools)

After Labour's victory in the 1997 general election, she became Secretary of State for Social Security...

During this period Harman became regarded as an over-promoted New Labour apparatchik.

Harman was sacked in 1998".

Of Harman's decision to send her son to the grant-maintained London Oratory, (where Tony Blair sent his sons) the black MP, Diane Abbot, said this:

"She made the Labour Party look as though we say one thing and do another".

Abbot would later refrain from sending her own son to the local Comprehensive, preferring instead to enrol him at an elite Grammar, some way away from all the nasty gun-toters.

Wikipedia continued:

"She made a return to the front bench in 2001 with her appointment to the office of Solicitor General, thus becoming the first female Solicitor General ever".

In 2003, our Solicitor General was fined £400 and banned from driving for seven days after being convicted of driving at 99 mph.

It was reported in January 2004 that the Solicitor General's son, in his first year at the University of Warwick, had been caught smoking marijuana, but not been expelled from his halls of residence in accordance with the university's policy.

The media contrasted his treatment with that of another fellow first-year, who had died on the way home after suffering the usual punishment, getting lost, and wandering on to some train tracks.

In 2007, Harman was issued with a £60 fixed penalty notice and given three penalty points on her license for driving at 50 mph on a stretch of road with a 40 mph limit.

The Jewish property developer and major New Labour donor, David Abrahams, gave £5,000 to Harman's bid to become the New Labour Party's Deputy Leader.

When Harman was interviewed on the BBC Radio 4 PM programme on 27 November 2007, she was evasive when asked to confirm or deny that her campaign team had contacted Abrahams' secretary soliciting money.

Harman is now the Deputy Leader of New Labour.

Harman is married to Jack Dromey, Trade Union Leader and former Labour Party Treasurer.

He is on record as having said:

"Our economy needs migrant labour, they are essential. It would be impracticable but also immoral to deport half a million people. Who would clean? Who would cook? The time has come for a debate around amnesty for those workers".

"We will act as the champion of migrant workers, they enrich our life. Migrant workers should be organised and not marginalised. We will confront the cancer of racism in the workplace. We will ensure action in parliament. We will combat racism in the community. The brain-dead boot boys of the BNP will never have a place in the T&G."

Dromey said something similar in a speech at the TUC conference on 15 September 2004:

"I love living in Herne Hill/Brixton, with its thriving Afro-Caribbean culture. Next door is Peckham with the largest African community in Britain. I know of no more decent and hard-working peoples. Give me the Peckham African community any day to the brain-dead BNP boot boys of Burnley…

Our task is not to fear migrant workers, BUT INSTEAD TO WELCOME THEM TO OUR SHORES".

Dromey's Irish father was "welcomed to our shores" in 1938.

He, too, became a trades union leader.

In 20 June 2007, The Christian Voice told us this:

"Before she became an MP, Harriet Harman was the legal officer in the late 1970s for the National Council for Civil Liberties. When Miss Harman joined NCCL in 1978, PIE, THE PAEDOPHILE INFORMATION EXCHANGE, had already been affiliated for three years. ANOTHER GROUP, PAEDOPHILE ACTION FOR LIBERATION, a Gay Liberation Front offshoot, HAD ALSO BEEN AFFILIATED TO NCCL UNTIL IT WAS ABSORBED BY PIE. PIE, WHICH CAMPAIGNED FOR ADULTS TO HAVE SEX LEGALLY WITH CHILDREN, ONLY BROKE OFF ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH NCCL WHEN IT WENT UNDERCOVER IN 1982, the same year that Harriet Harman left her NCCL post to become Member of Parliament for Peckham.

NCCL PEOPLE WERE EARLIER INVOLVED IN KEEPING THE NAME OF AN NCCL COUNCIL-MEMBER, JONATHAN WALTERS, OUT OF THE PEOPLE NEWSPAPER WHEN IT RAN AN EXPOSÉ OF PAEDOPHILE ACTION FOR LIBERATION, OF WHICH HE WAS SECRETARY, IN 1975. The People still ran the story, but Walters was not named.

Even more extraordinary is the fact that A CURRENT CABINET MINISTER WAS RUNNING THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CIVIL LIBERTIES AT THE TIME ALL THIS WAS GOING ON.

The Rt Hon PATRICIA HEWITT MP, SECRETARY OF STATE FOR HEALTH, BECAME GENERAL SECRETARY OF NCCL IN 1974. THE VERY NEXT YEAR, 1975, NCCL INVITED THE PAEDOPHILE INFORMATION EXCHANGE AND PAEDOPHILE ACTION FOR LIBERATION TO AFFILIATE.

In the year after, 1976, the now-notorious paedophile Tom O'Carroll was invited to address the NCCL conference, which promptly voted to 'deplore' the use of chemical castration treatments for paedophiles.

Also in 1975, Patricia Hewitt joined the Campaign for Homosexual Equality, as a 'straight', in the same year that Keith Hose of the Paedophile Information Exchange addressed its second annual conference.

Hose moved a motion of censure on the conference organising committee for 'relegating paedophilia to ancillary status in conference.' The motion was seconded by Trevor Locke, who just happened to be a member of the Executive Council of the NCCL.

'AN AWARENESS AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE SEXUALITY OF CHILDREN IS AN ESSENTIAL PART OF THE LIBERATION OF THE YOUNG HOMOSEXUAL,' the motion went on.

It was duly passed.

Jack Dromey, whom Harriet Harman married in 1982, and who is now Treasurer of the Labour Party, was also involved with the NCCL. HE SERVED ON ITS EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE FROM 1970 TO 1979, SO HE WAS THERE WHEN THE DECISION TO INVITE THE TWO PAEDOPHILE GROUPS TO AFFILIATE WAS MADE.

NCCL also set up a gay rights sub-committee at the same time, MEMBERS OF WHICH INCLUDED PROMINENT PAEDOPHILES PETER BREMNER (ALIAS ROGER NASH), MICHAEL BURBIDGE, KEITH HOSE AND TOM O'CARROLL. And of course Walters and Locke were on the Executive.
Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice, commented:

'It is timely that the ghosts of the 1970's past should come back to haunt these three leading Labour Party politicians. Harriet Harman, Jack Dromey and Patricia Hewitt were in their mid- or late-twenties at the time, but that cannot really excuse the way NCCL came to regard paedophiles as an oppressed minority whose civil liberties needed to be fought for.

'All three of them really need to explain WHY THEY WERE SO FRIENDLY TOWARD SO MANY… HOMOSEXUAL PAEDOPHILES IN THEIR YOUTH. WHY DID THEY ALLOW THE NCCL GAY RIGHTS SUB-COMMITTEE TO BE STUFFED WITH THEM? WHY WERE THEY HAPPY TO WORK WITH PAEDOPHILIA SUPPORTERS ON THE NCCL EXECUTIVE?

It cannot have been sympathy with child-molestation, so was it a complete lack of judgment or was it moral cowardice?

'NCCL has now been rebranded as 'Liberty' and is doing great work standing up to the Government to defend the civil liberties of us all. But thirty years ago some rather peculiar things went on, and I think we should be told why’.”

www.christianvoice.org.uk/Press/press041.html

Harriet Harman, MP for Camberwell and Peckham, voted for war with Iraq.

She did not vote for an amendment which sought to prevent the invasion of Afghanistan. She also voted for the military action which led to led to the widespread bombing of Iraq in 1998.

Twenty two EDMs were introduced into Parliament, since New Labour came to power, which were critical of the government's use and sale of cluster bombs, land mines and artillery shells containing depleted uranium.

Harman signed none of them.

At least sixteen EDMs were introduced into Parliament, since New Labour came to power, which sympathised with Armed Forces personnel who have been seriously damaged by deliberate exposure to radiation at nuclear test sites; chemical and nerve gas experimentation at Porton Down on unsuspecting volunteers; Gulf War Syndrome and other wholly preventable illnesses.

Harman signed none of them.

She voted to allow the adoption of children by homosexual couples and to lower age of consent for gay sex to 16.

She voted against the motion which opposed government plans to cut student funding and voted for student top-up fees.

She voted for the establishment of Foundation hospitals (privatisation by the back door) in all four of the most important Commons divisions

Of the seventeen EDMs (and their amendments) which were explicitly or implicitly critical of the Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe, Harman signed none of them.

During the lifetime of the New Labour government, Harman has had plenty of opportunity to sign some of the many EDMs introduced into Parliament which were suspicious and/or critical of GM "Frankenstein food" technology.

She didn't sign any.

She also voted for an amendment to a bill which, according to Stephen Byers, who was a member of the Select Committee which tabled the new clause:

"... would create a new specific offence of racially motivated violence".

She also signed an EDM, introduced by the black Jew, Oona King, welcoming:

"... all-party support that the Race Relations Bill has received throughout its passage in both Houses of Parliament; and calls on all public authorities - the police, central and local government, the NHS and others, all of whose functions will be covered by the amended Race Relations Act 1976, to seize the opportunity provided by this legislation to tackle all forms of racial discrimination".

When Harman signed this pernicious EDM, she will have known that it was designed to bear down upon the native, white population of Britain only.

Harman also voted for criminal behaviour to be punished with more severity if that behaviour be "racially" or "religiously" aggravated.

She also mentioned the murder of Damilola Taylor many times in the House of Commons. She also mentioned the death in prison custody of the black man, Alton Manning. She also signed an EDM commemorating Stephen Lawrence.

However, Harman never mentioned the murder of her constituent, Leslie Watkinson. Leslie, a 66-year-old former Salvation Army Major, was knocked to the ground just yards from his home by three black youths who stole his pension. Nor did Harman mention the murder of Hilda Ashdown, who was killed by two black men.



Nor did she mention the murder of Angela Demetriou, who was killed by her black neighbour.

In fact, Harman has never brought a black/Asian-upon-white murder to the attention of the British people in the House of Commons. Nor has she ever signed an EDM commemorating any of the many British dead who have been murdered by first and second-generation immigrants.

The monstrous, aristocratic anti-Brit pictured below is now the Deputy Leader of a political party that was set up to represent the British working-classes.

Photo missing



I met Harriet Harman and Jack Dromey in a late night drinking den once.

She was thrusting her bosom out, hands on hips and posing coquettishly. I remember her insisting that my pal and I DID know who she was. (I knew who she was alright but I was pretending not to)

Dromey, squirt-like, was trying to hide under the table and, very definitely, did not like his wife sharing herself with two proper chaps. After a while he got brave enough to cheep something along the lines of:

"We should be getting home now".

Which, I have to admit, is exactly what I think now.

They, along with a good many others, should be on their way.

End of Article
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
(((MrAnderson))) is a Sayanim Troll
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 17 May 2018 00:34 #13

  • Rocco
  • Rocco's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Member
  • MAGA
  • Posts: 6454
  • Likes received: 1444
"iamanenglishman.com - This Domain Has Expired, To Renew Please Contact Your Provider"
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 17 May 2018 00:45 #14

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1669
  • Likes received: 614
Rocco
Please read the start of my 1st post on this thread.........Iamanenglishman.org was (((Shoahed))) as were many of the source sites he linked to.
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
(((MrAnderson))) is a Sayanim Troll
Last Edit: 17 May 2018 00:47 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 17 May 2018 01:30 #15

  • Rocco
  • Rocco's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Member
  • MAGA
  • Posts: 6454
  • Likes received: 1444
Exorcist wrote:
Rocco
Please read the start of my 1st post on this thread.........Iamanenglishman.org was (((Shoahed))) as were many of the source sites he linked to.
.com is down. .org only has a homepage up, all other pages are down. I found a blogger blog. Is this a mirror? ironwand.blogspot.nl
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 17 May 2018 12:31 #16

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1669
  • Likes received: 614
@ Rocco

Thanks for the link......Great find. :thumbup:

https://ironwand.blogspot.co.uk//

Everyone should visit the site and peruse the info there. I'll have a detailed look later but many of the links to his YouTube vids appear to have been (((Shoahed))). Business as Jusual.

It's not a mirror of the original site. Loads of articles from his original site are missing. He seems to have started another site on a Netherlands server after his original site was shut down.
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
(((MrAnderson))) is a Sayanim Troll
Last Edit: 17 May 2018 12:46 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Rocco

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 17 May 2018 19:13 #17

  • Lux Interior
  • Lux Interior's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Do you know de way?
  • Posts: 1944
  • Likes received: 830
DeGothia.
liberabo te ab inferno
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 23 Aug 2018 14:51 #18

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1669
  • Likes received: 614
Jack Black's article from "I am an Englishman" Site:

Jewish backers of Cameron and Blair.


On 13 October 2006, The Jewish Chronicle published the article, Team Cameron’s Big Jewish Backers.

This is it:
"Prominent members of the Jewish community are playing a major role in financing David Cameron’s bid for power, a JC investigation can reveal.

The biggest Jewish donor to the party while Mr Cameron has been leader is gaming magnate Lord Steinberg, who has donated £530,000, plus a loan of £250,000. Hedge-fund owner Stanley Fink has donated £103,000, even though he was a declared supporter of Mr Cameron’s leadership rival, Liam Fox. A further £250,000 has been loaned by philanthropist Dame Vivien Duffield.

During Mr Cameron’s campaign to lead his party, Jewish figures gave his team additional donations of more than £60,000. According to the JC’s inquiries, direct donations to 'Team Cameron' in the leadership battle came from philanthropist Trevor Pears (around £20,000), Bicom chair Poju Zabludowicz (£15,000 plus £25,000 to the party), Next chief executive Simon Wolfson (£10,000 plus £50,000 to the party), former Carlton TV boss Michael Green (£10,000) and Tory deputy treasurer and key Cameron fundraiser Andrew Feldman (£10,000 through his family firm, Jayroma).

Beyond the donors, a small but influential group of Jewish Conservative officials and politicians were also key players in Mr Cameron’s campaign for the leadership. Among them was party treasurer and managing director of Cavendish Corporate Finance, Howard Leigh...

Mr Leigh worked closely with Mr Feldman in running the so-called 'Team Cameron,' and both will now be charged with broadening the party’s donor base. Mr Feldman is a close friend of Mr Cameron, whom he met as an undergraduate at Oxford University.

Other senior figures around the leader include Oliver Letwin, head of policy. A former shadow Home Secretary and shadow Chancellor, Mr Letwin is, like Mr Cameron, an Old Etonian.

Welwyn Hatfield MP Grant Shapps, who seconded Mr Cameron’s bid to become Tory leader, decided early on that he was the man 'of the future.' He backed his campaign, he told the JC, because 'I saw that he had great leadership qualities.' As a vice-chairman of the Conservative Party, he said, he would be taking the Cameron message to supporters around the UK.

Although he is popular with Jewish Tories, Mr Cameron’s criticism of Israel’s actions in Lebanon sparked doubts about his stance — voiced particularly by Tory donor and former party treasurer Lord Kalms.

However, Conservative Friends of Israel chair Richard Harrington stressed that the leader had given LFI "every possible access" and had met CFI officials several times.

The Key Players:

Andrew Feldman - Destined to be charged with raising money for the new-look Conservative Party, Andrew Feldman met Mr Cameron at Brasenose College, Oxford. He is a close friend and tennis partner of the leader...
Mr Feldman attended Haberdashers’ Aske’s school... Having acted as fundraiser for Mr Cameron’s leadership campaign, he is now deputy treasurer of the party and is in Mr Cameron’s economic-policy group.

Michael Green - former chairman of Carlton Television, gave financial support to David Cameron’s leadership campaign but would not discuss details.

'I am a big supporter of David Cameron... I have supported David Cameron’s quest to become leader,' he said.

Lord Steinberg became a life peer in 2004 and is a major donor to the Conservatives... 70-year-old Baron Steinberg of Belfast was a founder of Stanley Leisure plc, the gaming company, serving as executive chairman from 1957 to 2002 and non-executive chairman since then. He is a former deputy treasurer of the Tory party and is a founder and chairman of his family charitable trust. His political interests are listed in Dod’s, the parliamentary guide, as Northern Ireland, tax and gambling, and Israel.

A donor to David Cameron’s leadership campaign and to the Conservative Party, Simon Wolfson, will be continuing a family tradition when he becomes an adviser to Mr Cameron on improving economic competition and wealth creation.

The son of Lord Wolfson, who was chief of staff to Margaret Thatcher, Mr Wolfson, chief executive of the Next clothing chain, is one of the youngest advisors to be appointed by Mr Cameron.

Along with MP John Redwood, Mr Wolfson will jointly chair the advisory group that will seek to reduce red tape and improve education and skills in the workplace. It will also examine the country’s transport infrastructure...

As vice-chairman of the Conservative Party and seconder to David Cameron’s campaign, backbencher Grant Shapps will find the next few months extremely busy as he tours the constituencies to persuade Tories of the virtues of the new leadership."

http://www.thejc.com/home.aspx?Paren...98 &ATypeId=1

Edit: Link now "Shoahed" :arowup: :wissl:

So, according to The Jewish Chronicle, one of the "the key players… Andrew Feldman, is a close friend and tennis partner of the leader."

Know anyone else who might be a close friend and tennis partner of another leader?

That would be bloke called Levy, wouldn't it?

And a bloke who was a "key player" in another Brit-bashing regime was "Lord Wolfson… chief of staff to Margaret Thatcher".

Let's contrast the article above with the November 1996, front page of The Sunday Times which introduced us to the essay, Blair's Secret Donors Exposed:
"Tony Blair is receiving hundreds of thousands of pounds in undisclosed donations through a private account despite the Labour party's commitment to openness about its funding. A Sunday Times investigation has discovered some of Britain's richest tycoons have given donations under an arrangement made by Blair's office to disguise their identities.

They include Sir Trevor Chinn, chairman of Britain's biggest motor dealers who was knighted by the Tories, and Sir Emmanuel Kaye, a multi-millionaire… The fund… is being used to help pay Blair's staff and other private expenses. No trace of the donations appears in the labour party's accounts… The Labour Leader's Office Fund is particularly mysterious. It was established about a year ago and was manged by Blick Rothenburg, a City accountancy firm.

Michael Goldstein, a partner in Blick Rothenburg, who looked after the fund, said, 'I really don't now anything about it. Where did you get our name from'?…

David Rothenburg, the firm's senior tax partner, was in Israel this weekend and unavailable for comment.

Many of the donors are pillars of the British establishment and have long and distinguished entries in Who's Who… Alex Bernstein, former chairman of Granada… is understood to have donated… Bob Gavron, a publishing millionaire who has publicly donated directly to the Labour party, has also given £35,000 to Blair's private office.

Chinn, 61, is chairman of Lex Service and President of the Joint Israel Appeal, Britain's biggest fundraising charity for Israel…

The Labour Leader's Office Fund was set up last year by Jonathan Powell, Blair's chief of staff and brother of Sir Charles Powell, an aide to Margaret Thatcher… Blair is understood to have wanted to develop a source of finance that would give him independence from the Labour party… to help pay for his private office…

Labour has made great play of its new policy of declaring all donations of more than £5,000 to the party, and has challenged the Tories to come clean on their sources of funding."

The four businessmen named in the Sunday Times article, Sir Trevor Chinn, Sir Emmanuel Kaye, Alex Bernstein and Bob Gavron, are all Jewish.

The firm that was chosen to handle the secret account, Blick Rothenburg, is Jewish, as is David Rothenburg, the firm's senior tax partner.

Michael Goldstein, who "looked after the fund," is also Jewish.


David Cameron took this year's summer holiday in Corfu with none other than his favourite tennis partner and fundraiser, Andrew Feldman.

END OF ARTICLE
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
(((MrAnderson))) is a Sayanim Troll
Last Edit: 24 Aug 2018 14:54 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Roastie

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 23 Aug 2018 17:49 #19

  • Exorcist
  • Exorcist's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Member
  • Posts: 1669
  • Likes received: 614
Another Jack Black article titled:

WHERE THE PAEDOPHILE RULES


On the 2nd of August, 1997, The Jewish Chronicle reported thus:

"Police were called to Stamford Hill, the heart of the strictly Orthodox community in London, during the weekend, when bricks were hurled at a house, a car was attacked by a crowd armed with metal bars, and a family was forced to leave its home.

Police reports said over 100 people were involved in disturbances on Saturday and Sunday nights. The violence flared during demonstrations by strictly Orthodox Jews against the sentencing of 18-year-old Stamford Hill resident Eli Cohen for indecent assault against a five-year-old girl.

Trouble started early on Friday evening when a brick smashed a window at the home of the girl's family, who cannot be named for legal reasons.

As Shabbat ended the father of the family was warned that demonstrations were likely. His wife left the house and drove away, keeping in touch with her husband by car phone.

‘I was in the car, together with two daughters of a family friend, when a large number of men stopped cars in front of me and behind me and then took metal bars to try to smash the windows,' the mother said.

One man who witnessed the demonstration outside the family's home said:

‘The street was crammed solid with people. The crowd were chanting ‘moiser', (a Jew who gives evidence against another Jew to a non-Jew) and ‘get out of town’."


The Jewish community of Stamford Hill was furious for two reasons:

Firstly, that charges were brought against a Jew for something that many Orthodox Jews do not regard as a crime.

Secondly, that the little girl's parents had committed the unforgivable sin of mesira by reporting the rape of their daughter to the Gentile authorities.

The Orthodox Jews who went on the rampage in Stamford Hill did so because one of their own was under attack and the penalty that the authoritative compilation of commentary on Jewish oral law, The Talmud, prescribes for a Moser, a Jew who gives evidence against another Jew to a non-Jew, is death.

The fact that Eli Cohen is a child-molesting paedophile was of no concern to these (((cunts))).



Edit....:arowup:...word in triple brackets added by Exorcist

As for the 5-year-old girl who was molested, this bunch could not have given a toss about her.

Do you want to know why?


Check this out:

In The Talmud, Kethuboth, 11a-11b, it says: (in the unedited versions)

"When a grown up man has intercourse with a little girl, it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this it is as if one puts the finger in the eye, tears come to the eyes again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years."


Now, I guess the nit-picking Rabbi could argue that the law quoted above is attempting to protect the legal status of the girl’s virginity, in respect of her future marriage prospects, and is not encouraging paedophilia, but I don't think too many others would want to dispute similarly.

For example, when confronted with the kind of Talmudic guidance and logic as that found in Kethuboth, some liberal-minded Jews can't actually stomach what they find.

As Jane Litman found, when faced with the teachings of the ancient rabbis, the odd Jewish innocent responds by arguing that they couldn't have possibly meant what they wrote.


In her September, 2000, essay, Working with Words of Torah, Litman told us this:

"The background sound in the small library is muted but intense. Pairs of scholars lean over their talmudic texts whispering energetically, trying to puzzle out the meaning of the particular sugya, passage. The teacher directs them back toward the group and asks for questions. One student raises a hand:

'I don't understand verse 5:4 of the tractate Niddah. What does the phrase ‘it is like a finger in eye,' mean? The teacher responds:

'This refers to the hymen of a girl younger than three years old. The Sages believed that in the case of toddler rape, the hymen would fully grow back by the time the girl reached adulthood and married. Therefore, though violated, she would still technically be counted as a virgin and could marry a priest.

It's an analogy: poling your finger in the eye is uncomortable, but causes no lasting harm.’

There is a collective gasp of breath among students. Their dismay is palpable. They do not like this particular Talmudic text or the men behind it. But its authors, the talmudic rabbis, hardly wrote it with this particular group of students in mind, mostly thirty, and forty-year old women in suburban Philadelphia taking a four-week class titled ‘Women in Jewish Law,' at their Reform synagogue.

The questioner persists.

'I don't understand. Are you saying this refers to the rape of a three year-old girl?'

‘Or younger,' the teacher responds dryly.

'I don't see how it says anything about rape and hymens. You must be mistaken. I don't believe the rabbis are talking about rape at all. I think this statement has nothing to do with the rest of the passage.'

The teacher (I'll admit now that it was me, a second-year rabbinic student) responds:

'Well, that's the common understanding. What do you think it means?'

The woman is clearly agitated.

'I don't know, but I do know that it couldn't be about child rape.'

This is week three of the class.

The woman does not return for week four.

Denial…

I find Ross's model helpful when addressing sacred Jewish texts that are violent or xenophobic, that speak of child abuse, human slavery, or homophobia with gross insensitivity.

Like so many of my colleagues and students, I often drift confusedly through denial, anger, grief, rationalization; sometimes reaching acceptance, sometimes not."


There are bits of The Talmud that come to the rescue of the Orthodox doubter.

If the violated child is of non-Jewish origin paedophilia does not seem to be regarded as too much of a sin.

Thus, in Abhodah Zarah, 37a, it says: (in the unedited versions)

"A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."


The pre-emininent Jewish historian, Israel Shahak, also suggests that the ancient Jewish sages were pretty forgiving of the believer who forced himself upon a female of any age, as long as that female was not a Jew.

Thus, in his magnum opus, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, first published in 1994, Shahak says:

"According to the Talmudic Encyclopedia:

'If a Jew has coitus with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three or an adult, whether married or unmarried, and even if he is a minor aged only nine years and one day, because he had wilful coitus with her, she must be killed, as is the case with a beast, because through her a Jew got into trouble.

The Jew, however, must be flogged, and if he is Kohen (member of the priestly caste) he must receive double the number of lashes, because he has committed a double offence: a Kohen must not have intercourse with a prostitute, and all Gentile women are presumed to be prostitutes'...

This does not imply that sexual intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman is permitted, quite the contrary. But the main punishment is inflicted on the Gentile woman; she must be executed, even if she was raped by the Jew."


Now, if that hasn’t caught your attention you should put this book in the bin, switch on the TV and settle down for a lesson from the heirs of those who wrote the above.

Esther Rantzen, Marjory Proops, Clare Rayner, Miriam Stoppard, Vanessa Feltz, Ruby Wax, Rikki Lake, Jerry Springer, Sally Jesse Raphael, Irma Kurtz, Doctor Ruth; Ann Landers, Abigail Van Buren and a host of other Hebraic advisors, who all know so much better than you how you should live your life and conduct your affairs, are always ready and willing to instruct you.

The ancient Jewish sages and all of those listed above are much more closely related to the rioters who found the prosecution of a Stamford Hill paedophile so infuriating, than we are.

The politicians and the mainstream press never told you any of this, now did they?
Remember, folks, the point of my bringing this material to your attention is not to convince or to evangelise, it is to get you to begin to investigate.

Once you have begun to seek the truth for yourself a major battle has been won.

Once you have begun to question what you previously took for granted, you are already waging war.
NUKES ARE A HOAX
TRUTH IS HATE FOR THOSE THAT HATE THE TRUTH
Meet the New Boss.....Same as the Old Boss

http://www.stopthecrime.net/Henry-Makow---Illuminati----(2008).PDF
(((ROCCO))) is a Sayanim Troll
(((MrAnderson))) is a Sayanim Troll
Last Edit: 24 Aug 2018 12:07 by Exorcist.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Roastie, porridge

Articles from "I am an Englishman" 23 Aug 2018 23:39 #20

  • Roastie
  • Roastie's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Silver Member
  • Posts: 2003
  • Likes received: 1664
Exorcist wrote:
Another Jack Black article titled:

WHERE THE PAEDOPHILE RULES


On the 2nd of August, 1997, The Jewish Chronicle reported thus:

"Police were called to Stamford Hill, the heart of the strictly Orthodox community in London, during the weekend, when bricks were hurled at a house, a car was attacked by a crowd armed with metal bars, and a family was forced to leave its home.

Police reports said over 100 people were involved in disturbances on Saturday and Sunday nights. The violence flared during demonstrations by strictly Orthodox Jews against the sentencing of 18-year-old Stamford Hill resident Eli Cohen for indecent assault against a five-year-old girl.

Trouble started early on Friday evening when a brick smashed a window at the home of the girl's family, who cannot be named for legal reasons.

As Shabbat ended the father of the family was warned that demonstrations were likely. His wife left the house and drove away, keeping in touch with her husband by car phone.

‘I was in the car, together with two daughters of a family friend, when a large number of men stopped cars in front of me and behind me and then took metal bars to try to smash the windows,' the mother said.

One man who witnessed the demonstration outside the family's home said:

‘The street was crammed solid with people. The crowd were chanting ‘moiser', (a Jew who gives evidence against another Jew to a non-Jew) and ‘get out of town’."


The Jewish community of Stamford Hill was furious for two reasons:

Firstly, that charges were brought against a Jew for something that many Orthodox Jews do not regard as a crime.

Secondly, that the little girl's parents had committed the unforgivable sin of mesira by reporting the rape of their daughter to the Gentile authorities.

The Orthodox Jews who went on the rampage in Stamford Hill did so because one of their own was under attack and the penalty that the authoritative compilation of commentary on Jewish oral law, The Talmud, prescribes for a Moser, a Jew who gives evidence against another Jew to a non-Jew, is death.

The fact that Eli Cohen is a child-molesting paedophile was of no concern to these (((cunts))).



Edit....:arowup:...word in triple brackets added by Exorcist

As for the 5-year-old girl who was molested, this bunch could not have given a toss about her.

Do you want to know why?


Check this out:

In The Talmud, Kethuboth, 11a-11b, it says: (in the unedited versions)

"When a grown up man has intercourse with a little girl, it is nothing, for when the girl is less than this it is as if one puts the finger in the eye, tears come to the eyes again and again, so does virginity come back to the little girl under three years."


Now, I guess the nit-picking Rabbi could argue that the law quoted above is attempting to protect the legal status of the girl’s virginity, in respect of her future marriage prospects, and is not encouraging paedophilia, but I don't think too many others would want to dispute similarly.

For example, when confronted with the kind of Talmudic guidance and logic as that found in Kethuboth, some liberal-minded Jews can't actually stomach what they find.

As Jane Litman found, when faced with the teachings of the ancient rabbis, the odd Jewish innocent responds by arguing that they couldn't have possibly meant what they wrote.


In her September, 2000, essay, Working with Words of Torah, Litman told us this:

"The background sound in the small library is muted but intense. Pairs of scholars lean over their talmudic texts whispering energetically, trying to puzzle out the meaning of the particular sugya, passage. The teacher directs them back toward the group and asks for questions. One student raises a hand:

'I don't understand verse 5:4 of the tractate Niddah. What does the phrase ‘it is like a finger in eye,' mean? The teacher responds:

'This refers to the hymen of a girl younger than three years old. The Sages believed that in the case of toddler rape, the hymen would fully grow back by the time the girl reached adulthood and married. Therefore, though violated, she would still technically be counted as a virgin and could marry a priest.

It's an analogy: poling your finger in the eye is uncomortable, but causes no lasting harm.’

There is a collective gasp of breath among students. Their dismay is palpable. They do not like this particular Talmudic text or the men behind it. But its authors, the talmudic rabbis, hardly wrote it with this particular group of students in mind, mostly thirty, and forty-year old women in suburban Philadelphia taking a four-week class titled ‘Women in Jewish Law,' at their Reform synagogue.

The questioner persists.

'I don't understand. Are you saying this refers to the rape of a three year-old girl?'

‘Or younger,' the teacher responds dryly.

'I don't see how it says anything about rape and hymens. You must be mistaken. I don't believe the rabbis are talking about rape at all. I think this statement has nothing to do with the rest of the passage.'

The teacher (I'll admit now that it was me, a second-year rabbinic student) responds:

'Well, that's the common understanding. What do you think it means?'

The woman is clearly agitated.

'I don't know, but I do know that it couldn't be about child rape.'

This is week three of the class.

The woman does not return for week four.

Denial…

I find Ross's model helpful when addressing sacred Jewish texts that are violent or xenophobic, that speak of child abuse, human slavery, or homophobia with gross insensitivity.

Like so many of my colleagues and students, I often drift confusedly through denial, anger, grief, rationalization; sometimes reaching acceptance, sometimes not."


There are bits of The Talmud that come to the rescue of the Orthodox doubter.

If the violated child is of non-Jewish origin paedophilia does not seem to be regarded as too much of a sin.

Thus, in Abhodah Zarah, 37a, it says: (in the unedited versions)

"A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."


The pre-emininent Jewish historian, Israel Shahak, also suggests that the ancient Jewish sages were pretty forgiving of the believer who forced himself upon a female of any age, as long as that female was not a Jew.

Thus, in his magnum opus, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years, first published in 1994, Shahak says:

"According to the Talmudic Encyclopedia:

'If a Jew has coitus with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three or an adult, whether married or unmarried, and even if he is a minor aged only nine years and one day, because he had wilful coitus with her, she must be killed, as is the case with a beast, because through her a Jew got into trouble.

The Jew, however, must be flogged, and if he is Kohen (member of the priestly caste) he must receive double the number of lashes, because he has committed a double offence: a Kohen must not have intercourse with a prostitute, and all Gentile women are presumed to be prostitutes'...

This does not imply that sexual intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman is permitted, quite the contrary. But the main punishment is inflicted on the Gentile woman; she must be executed, even if she was raped by the Jew."


Now, if that hasn’t caught your attention you should put this book in the bin, switch on the TV and settle down for a lesson from the heirs of those who wrote the above.

Esther Rantzen, Marjory Proops, Clare Rayner, Miriam Stoppard, Vanessa Feltz, Ruby Wax, Rikki Lake, Jerry Springer, Sally Jesse Raphael, Irma Kurtz, Doctor Ruth; Ann Landers, Abigail Van Buren and a host of other Hebraic advisors, who all know so much better than you how you should live your life and conduct your affairs, are always ready and willing to instruct you.

The ancient Jewish sages and all of those listed above are much more closely related to the rioters who found the prosecution of a Stamford Hill paedophile so infuriating, than we are.

The politicians and the mainstream press never told you any of this, now did they?
Remember, folks, the point of my bringing this material to your attention is not to convince or to evangelise, it is to get you to begin to investigate.

Once you have begun to seek the truth for yourself a major battle has been won.

Once you have begun to question what you previously took for granted, you are already waging war.

Great thread .... still reading your saved articles by Jack Black.

Re: The paedophile Eli Cohen. I found this now defunct Jewish website, with press information about the case.

Thursday, May 16, 1991
Case of Phillip Eli Cohen

(AKA: Eli Cohen, Phillip Cohen)

This page is dedicated to the courage bravery of the child survivors and family members in this case.

"Convicted of 13 charges of indecently assaulting a boy and four offenses of indecently assaulting a girl. The assaults were described as being sadistic. Eli Cohen was sentenced to six months for assaulting the girl and put on a 12 month probation. The alleged assaults began in 1986, when the boy was seven and the girl 1 1/2

At one point the mother was offered hundreds of thousands of pounds to stop her young children giving evidence against two men accused of abusing them, she refused. At that point there were a series of attacks against the family. They had no choice but to move to various secret location after their home was besieged by a mob –– even though Rabbi Henoch Dov Padwa condemned the acts of intimidation and violence.

If you have a photograph of Phillip Eli Cohen or any more information about this case, please forward it to The Awareness Center."

theawarenesscenter.blogspot.com/2013/03/case-of-phillip-eli-cohen.html
“The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie." Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Last Edit: 23 Aug 2018 23:41 by Roastie.
Only registered members can reply. Create an Account to join the discussion.
User(s) who Liked this post: Exorcist
Moderators: novum, rodin, Flare
Powered by Kunena Forum

Annual Server Target

Whether its 50 cents or five dollars, your donations are appreciated and help keep this community site running so we can all continue to enjoy using it. Secure transactions via paypal.
This target is to meet our server cost for one year, June 2018 - May 2019, in USD.
$ 340 - Target
( £ 260 GBP )
donation thermometer
donation thermometer
$ 370 - Raised
( £ 284 GBP )
donation thermometer
109%
Updated
2nd April 2019

No one is obliged to donate, please only donate what you can afford. Even the smallest amount helps. Being an active member is a positive contribution. Thank You.