hANOVER fIST

Alan Hart — 9/11 : Open letter & challenge to ADL’s Abe Foxman - My Catbird Seat

2011-09-09T16:18:00.000-07:00

Alan Hart — 9/11 : Open letter & challenge to ADL’s Abe Foxman

- 08. Sep, 2011 in 9/11, Activism, Commentary/Analysis, Israel, Media, Middle east, News/Politics, Palestine, U.S. Foreign Policy, World, Zionism -
13

Abraham Foxman has been the director of the Anti-Defamation league since 1987

Mr. Foxman, your assertion that criticism of Israel is by definition a manifestation of anti-Semitism, is Zionist propaganda nonsense for a blackmail purpose, the purpose being to silence criticism and prevent informed and honest debate about Israel’s policies and actions.

by Alan Hart / My Catbird Seat

Dear Abe Foxman,

In your lengthy article Decade of Deceit: Anti-Semitic 9/11 Conspiracy Theories 10 Years Later, you label a number of named writers and commentators including me who say that Israel’s Mossad was or even might have been involved in the 9/11 terror attack as anti-Semitic, and you assert that they are demonizing “the Jews”. You also say: “Anticipating criticism, a number of these anti-Semitic conspiracists now try to immunize themselves against charges of anti-Semitism by making disclaimers up front about not being anti-Semitic. Their own works and record, however, blatantly contradict their innocuous self-characterizations.”

I have to assume that I am one of the “number” in the above quotation because when you introduce at the end of your piece a few sentences of what I have said on the subject of 9/11, you do so with these words: “After pre-emptively trying to dismiss charges of anti-Semitism, Hart asserts…”

I also have to assume that you have not read (surprise! surprise!) my epic book, Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, three volumes in its American edition (www.claritypress.com). Except those who are brainwashed by Zionist propaganda and deluded to the point of clinical madness, nobody could read this book and conclude that I was anti-Semitic. The first picture in it is of Golda Meir when she was prime minister, inscribed it in her own hand “To a good friend, Alan Hart.” Do you believe, Mr. Foxman, that old lady was so stupid that she couldn’t have seen through me if I was anti-Jew?

As I say in the book and on every public platform on which I speak, THE key to understanding is knowledge of the difference between Judaism and Zionism. Here is how I am going to summarise this difference in a speech in Germany on this September 11.

JUDAISM is the religion of Jews, not “the” Jews because not all Jews are religious. Like Christianity and Islam, Judaism has at its core a set of moral values and ethical principles.

ZIONISM is a sectarian, colonial-like nationalism which created a state for some Jews in the Arab heartland mainly by terrorism and ethnic cleansing, and by doing so demonstrated contempt for, and made a mockery of, Judaism’s moral values and ethical principles. In reality mainstream Judaism and Zionism are total opposites.

I’m also going to wonder aloud how many in my German audience are aware of two particular background facts. One is of that the return of Jews to the land of biblical Israel by the efforts of man – one possible but wholly inadequate definition of Zionism – was proscribed by Judaism. The other is that prior to the obscenity of the Nazi holocaust, the vast majority of Jews everywhere, and especially many eminent American Jews including the then owner of The New York Times, were totally opposed to Zionism’s Palestine project. Why? They believed it to be morally wrong. They feared it would lead to unending conflict with the Arabs and the wider Muslim world. But most of all they feared that if Zionism was allowed by the big powers to have its way, it would one day provoke violent anti-Semitism on a grand scale.

I am then going to give the two main reasons why knowledge of the difference between Judaism and Zionism is the key to understanding.

The first is that when you know the difference, you can understand why it is perfectly possible to be passionately anti-Zionist (anti Zionism’s colonial enterprise) without being in any way, shape or form anti-Semitic in the sense of loathing and even hating all Jews everywhere just because they are Jews.

The second is that when you know the difference between Judaism and Zionism, you can understand why it is wrong to blame all Jews everywhere for the crimes of the hard core Zionists in Israel.

Defenders of Israel right or wrong assert that Judaism and Zionism are one and the same in order to make the charge, as you do Mr. Foxman, that criticism of Israel is by definition a manifestation of anti-Semitism. That, I will tell my German audience, is Zionist propaganda nonsense for a blackmail purpose, the purpose being to silence criticism and prevent informed and honest debate about Israel’s policies and actions. And I will add this: “When you know the difference between Judaism and Zionism, you don’t have to be frightened about being falsely accused of anti-Semitism for speaking and writing the truth of history as it relates to the making and sustaining of the conflict in and over Palestine that became Israel. You can say to your Zionist accuser, ‘Go to hell!’.

Mr. Foxman, I’m not going to tell you to go to hell. I have a constructive suggestion to make. If you truly believe that I am anti-Semitic, why don’t you say so explicitly in writing (on ADL’s web site will be fine) and then I can sue you. And that will give us the Mother and Father of a test case to determine what anti-Semitism is and is not. (For some of my in-depth thinking on this matter you may care to visit Kanan 48 . There you’ll find an article of mine with the headline Anti-Semitism – Zionist myth vs truth and reality.)

While you are thinking about how to respond to my suggestion, you might like to consider two particular statements I make in my book and on most public platforms.

The first is this. I do not blame the Zionist lobby for acting in the way it does. It is only playing the game according to the rules. I blame a corrupt, pork-barrel system of American politics which puts what passes for democracy sale up to the highest bidders.

The second is this. The Jews, generally speaking are the intellectual elite of the Western civilization and the Palestinians are by far the intellectual elite of the Arab world. What these two peoples could do together in peace and partnership is the stuff that dreams are made of. They could change the region for the better and by doing so give new hope and inspiration to the whole world.

And I’ll add this. I have two driving motivations.

One is to contribute to the understanding needed if there is ever to be an acceptable amount of justice for the Palestinians. Without it the future is predictable – catastrophe for all, possibly in the shape of a Clash of Civilizations, Judeo-Christian v Islamic.

The other is to contribute to the understanding needed to stop Holocaust II, shorthand for another great turning against the Jews. My Gentile views on this aspect of the matter are in tune with the warning words of Yehoshafat Harkabi, Israel’s longest serving Director of Military Intelligence. In his book Israel’s Fateful Hour, published in 1986, he wrote this:

Israel is the criterion according to which all Jews will tend to be judged. Israel as a Jewish state is an example of the Jewish character, which finds free and concentrated expression within it. Anti-Semitism has deep and historical roots. Nevertheless, any flaw in Israeli conduct, which initially is cited as anti-Israelism, is likely to be transformed into empirical proof of the validity of anti-Semitism. It would be a tragic irony if the Jewish state, which was intended to solve the problem of anti-Semitism, was to become a factor in the rise of anti-Semitism. Israelis must be aware that the price of their misconduct is paid not only by them but also Jews throughout the world.

In the world today we are witnessing a rising tide of anti-Israelism provoked by Israel’s arrogance of power, its contempt for international law and its appalling self-righteousness. (In Harkabi’s view self-righteousness is the biggest threat to Israel’s existence). If Israel stays on its present course, the danger is, as Harkabi warned, that anti-Israelism will be transformed into anti-Semitism, leading to another great turning against Jews everywhere and quite possibly starting in America. In my view the real danger of that happening will be greatly reduced if those (mainly Westerners) among whom most of the Jews of the world live are made aware of the difference between Judaism and Zionism.

Also to be said is that the Jews of the world (those in North America and Europe especially) could and should act to best protect their own interests by distancing themselves from the Zionist state and its crimes. In the Prologue to Volume One of my book which is titled Waiting for the Apocalypse, I quote Dr. David Goldberg, a prominent liberal London rabbi, as saying the following in 2001: “It may be time for Judaism and Zionism to go their separate ways.” Today I would say to him, it’s not “may be” time, it is time.

Awaiting your response.

Sincerely,
Alan Hart

Extended Footnote for the record: Text of my overview of 9/11.

The starting point for any serious and honest discussion of 9/11 has to be this question: Did the impact of the planes and the heat of their burning fuel bring the Twin Towers down? If the answer is “Yes”, there’s no need for conspiracy theories. If the answer is “No”, the speculative question has to be – Who did it and how and why?

My own answer is “No”. In my analysis there’s enough evidence – visual, technical and scientific, and from eye-witnesses including fire fighters – to invite the conclusion that the Twin Towers, like Building Seven, were pre-wired for controlled demolition.

For context, the first observation I’d like to offer is that the mainstream media’s complicity in suppressing even questions and debate about what really happened on 9/11 is consistent. What I mean is that for the past 63 years – from the creation of the Zionist (not Jewish!) state of Israel mainly by terrorism and ethnic cleansing to the present – the mainstream media has been complicit in Zionism’s suppression the truth about the making and sustaining of the conflict in and over Palestine that became Israel. Put another way, the mainstream media has been content to peddle Zionism’s propaganda lies. The two biggest lies can be summed up in a very few words:

The first is that poor little Israel has lived in constant danger of annihilation, the “driving into the sea” of its Jews. The truth, as I document in detail through the three volumes of the American edition of my book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, is that Israel’s existence has never, ever, been in danger from any combination of Arab force. Zionism’s assertion to the contrary was the cover that allowed Israel to get away where it mattered most – in the Western world and America especially – with presenting its aggression as self defense and itself as the victim when it was and is the oppressor.

The second is that Israel “never had Arab partners for peace” That is complete nonsense. Just two of many examples to make the point… From almost the moment he came to power in 1951, Eygpt’s President Nasser wanted an accommodation with Israel. He had secret exchanges with Israel’s foreign minister, Moshe Sharret, who was in my view the only completely rational Israeli leader of his time. For wanting to make peace with Nasser and the Arabs, Sharett was destroyed by Israel’s founding father and first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion… Example number two: By the end of 1979, the pragmatic Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO, had prepared the ground on his side for peace with Israel on the basis of a genuine and viable two-state solution – peace on terms which any rational government and people in Israel would have accepted with relief. But then, as is still the case today, Israel’s leaders and most of its Jewish citizens were not rational.

Prior to 9/11, the best single example of the mainstream media’s complicity in the suppression of the truth as it relates to conflict in the Middle East is Israel’s attack on the American spy ship, the USS Liberty, on 8th June 1967, the 4th day of the 6-Day war. (I was the first Western correspondent to the banks of the Suez Canal with the advancing Israelis, so I was in the Sinai desert at the time). That attack killed 37 Americans and seriously wounded more than 90 others. If things had gone according to the plan of the man who ordered that attack, Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dayan, the Liberty would have been sunk with all hands on board, leaving nobody to tell the story of what really happened… If it had been an Arab/Muslim attack on an American vessel, it’s reasonable to speculate that America would have resorted to a military strike, if not war, on the country or countries it held responsible. What did President Johnson do? Out of fear of offending the Zionist lobby and its stooges in Congress, he ordered a cover-up which remains in force to this day. And the mainstream media went along with it. As it still does.

The following are my summary thoughts on the possible/probable involvement of Israel’s Mossad in 9/11. Two scenarios – A or B.

In Scenario A it’s not impossible that 9/11 started out as an Arab/Muslim idea. But even if this was the case, Mossad would have had an inside track very quickly. From almost the moment of the Zionist state’s birth, Mossad put great effort into placing agents inside every Arab regime, every Arab military and security establishment and every Arab/Muslim liberation movement and terrorist group. Many of Mossad’s best and most effective agents were Moroccan and other North African Jews because they could pose most perfectly as Arabs. (In a moment I’ll tell you the short story of Mossad’s penetration of the Abu Nidal terrorist group).

In Scenario A the question is: Did Mossad tell anybody? My speculation is that it told some in the CIA and a few of Zionism’s neo-con associates, Jews and non-Jews, including Vice President Cheney (I call him the real Doctor Strangelove) and the likes of Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle. In this scenario Mossad could have asked, “What do we do about this?” And the answer could have been something like, “We’ll use it for the Pearl Harbour-like pretext we need.”

In this scenario, 9/11, even if it started out as an Arab/Muslim idea, was a joint Israeli/Mossad and American/neo-con conspiracy.

For background a very short story about Mossad’s penetration of the Abu Nidal terrorist group. Abu Nidal was a member of Arafat’s Fatah but he broke with it when Arafat had come to terms with the reality of Israel’s existence and was preparing the ground on his side for compromise with Israel. The Abu Nidal group, based mainly in Iraq, was responsible for the assassinations, mainly in Europe, of more than 20 of Arafat’s emissaries who were telling Western governments behind closed doors that the Fatah-dominated PLO was serious about compromise with Israel. An investigation by Arafat and Abu Iyad, Fatah’s counter intelligence chief, subsequently revealed that Abu Nidal was an alcoholic - he consumed between one and two bottles of whisky a day, and for much of most days he was drunk, not sober. His number two was running the show and targeting those to be assassinated and directing the killing. Abu Nidal’s number two was a Mossad agent.

It was, in fact, two Palestinian students in London who were activated by the Abu Nidal group to assassinate Israeli ambassador Argov. It was that assassination attempt in 1982 that gave Israeli Prime Minister Begin and Defense Minister Sharon the pretext they needed to launch their invasion of Lebanon all the way to Beirut, for the purpose of exterminating the entire leadership of the PLO and destroying its infrastructure… Ambassador Argov survived and quite some time after the event, he indicated that he suspected Israel’s involvement (he could only have meant targeting) in the attempt to kill him.

Scenario B has to be considered because it’s a fact that some of the Arab/Muslim plotters, actual or alleged, were under surveillance by various Western intelligence agencies for years before 9/11. The agencies who were tracking them as possible/probable terrorists included the those of America, Germany and Israel.

In this scenario it’s not impossible that the idea for 9/11 was put into the heads of possible/probable Arab/Muslim terrorists by Mossad agents.

In this scenario, Mossad was actually running the show with key American neo-cons fixing things in America to make sure the attack was successful. From all that happened on the day, I’m not convinced that President Bush was in the pre-9/11 fixing loop. I think Cheney was most probably in control of the American executive oversight of what was essentially a Mossad false flag operation.

Question: How did 9/11 serve the interests of the lunatic right in Israel and its neo-con associates in America?

In their view Saddam Hussein represented the only foreseeable potential Arab challenge to Greater Israel’s continued military domination of the whole Arab world. He had to be removed. By falsely claiming that Iraq was implicated in the 9/11 attack, Zionism and its neo-con associates in America set the stage for President Bush to be conned into going to war.

As we know, Zionism’s intention to get rid of Saddam Hussein was not a secret. In 1996, under the chairmanship of Richard Perle, widely known in informed circles as the “Prince of Darkness”, American Zionism presented a policy document with the title A CLEAN BREAK: A NEW STRATEGY FOR SECURING THE REALM.

It urged incoming Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to have no second thoughts about making a clean break with the Rabin policy of negotiating with the PLO and trading land for peace. Israel’s claim to all the land it occupied was “legitimate and noble”, the policy paper said. “Only the unconditional acceptance by Arabs of our rights is a solid basis for the future.” After the clean break Israel would be free to shape its “strategic environment”. What would that involve? Among other things, “re-establishing the principle of pre-emption (pre-emptive strikes)… focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq… weakening, containing and even rolling back Syria, Hizbollah and Iran.”

In fact the commitment of Zionism’s in-America fixers and their neo-con associates to getting rid of Saddam Hussein goes back further than 1996. They were angry when President Bush the First refused to complete the job when he assembled a coalition to eject Iraq from Kuwait. After that Zionism’s in-America fixers and their neo-con associates needed two things – a president who was dumb enough to buy their ideas – they got that with George “Dubya” Bush; and a “Pearl Harbour” like event to trigger the action. They got that with 9/11.
But there was much more to it. 9/11 was a win-win for Zionism in a number of ways.

Predictably it provoked a rising tide of Islamophobia throughout the Western world and across America especially. In the minds of uninformed and ignorant Americans (i.e. most Americans), that in turn gave added credibility to the Zionist state’s claim to be America’s only true and reliable ally in the whole of the Arab and wider Muslim world.

As I say in the Dear America introduction to the American edition of Volume 1 of my book, when Americans asked “Why do they hate us?”, they were more or less all Arabs and Muslims everywhere. And I ask this question: What would Americans have learned if, instead of rushing to declare his war on global terrorism, President Bush had caused the Why-do-they-hate-us question to be addressed seriously?

The short answer I give in my Dear America Introduction – the long answer is in the three volumes of my book – begins with the statement that the overwhelming majority of all Arabs and Muslims everywhere do NOT hate America or Americans. What almost all Arabs and Muslims everywhere DO hate is American foreign policy – its double standards in general and, in particular, its unconditional support for an Israel which ignores UN resolutions, demonstrates its contempt for international law and human rights conventions and resorts to state terrorism… A truth is that for decades very many Arabs and other Muslims would, if they could, have migrated to America to enjoy a better life there. Today, however, the number of Arabs and other Muslims who would opt for American residence and citizenship if they could is greatly reduced because of the fact, sad but true, that the monster of Islamophobia is on the prowl across the Land of the Free and licking its lips.

Unlike most Americans, most Arabs and other Muslims know that America’s unconditional support for Israel is not in America’s own best interests. In fact it’s not in anybody’s best interests including those of the Jews of the world and Israel itself.

Remember Where YOU Were On 9/11?

2011-08-01T18:11:00.000-07:00

Nearly ten years after the events of September 11th, 2001, one can still hear the "official" story being parroted.

Doesn't matter; who cares what cowards think?

Trust me...if you continue to promulgate the biggest lie in the world, you are nothing but a coward.

The document I now present to you has been sourced throughout, mainly from "mainstream" articles and reports. I present to you...Remember Where YOU Were On 9/11? Who Did This?

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident." -- Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860
OPENING STATEMENT :: THE HISTORY

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates taught his students that the pursuit of truth can only begin once they start to question and analyze every belief that they ever held dear. If a certain belief passes the tests of evidence, deduction, and logic, it should be kept. If it doesn't, the belief should not only be discarded, but the thinker must also then question why he was led to believe the erroneous information in the first place. Not surprisingly, this type of teaching didn't sit well with the ruling elite of Greece.

Many political leaders throughout history have always sought to mislead the thinking of the masses. Socrates was tried for "subversion" and for "corrupting the youth". He was then forced to take his own life by drinking poison. It's never easy being an independent thinker! Today, our ruling government/media complex doesn't kill people for pursuing the truth about the world (at least not yet!) They simply label them as "extremists" or "paranoid", destroying careers and reputations in the process. For many, that's a fate even worse than drinking poison hemlock!

Every news story you are about to review in this comprehensive research paper is true and easily verifiable. This investigation represents 10 months of careful study, research, analysis, source verification and logical deduction. Every event and quote presented here is 100% accurate. There are over 190 detailed footnotes which I encourage, no, urge, readers to explore and verify for themselves. The Internet version of this paper will allow users to obtain instant verification for each and every footnote by clicking on the footnotes/links. Others can obtain easy verification by entering the key search words (provided at the end of the paper) into the Yahoo or Google.com search engines.

Due to the fact that well organized efforts are under way to suppress these facts, some of these news links are mysteriously disappearing even as we speak. Fortunately, this information has all been transcribed by many web users and is has therefore been preserved from the censors. These footnote searches will take you directly to the news sites of many well known established media organizations throughout the world as well as opening up doors to a world of knowledge and information that has been concealed from you. With just a little common sense and a few clicks of a mouse, Google and Yahoo now enable anyone with an ounce of curiosity to become a Sherlock Holmes.

This is no opinion piece. Rather it is a collection of buried, but undeniable facts, events, and quotes which, when assembled in one place, will state their own conclusions. In putting together this research in a logical and sequential format, great care was taken to confirm and double confirm every piece of information. Any and all questionable data which could not be independently verified to this author’s satisfaction was discarded.

Taken individually, each story, quote and event may not amount to a full case. But when taken collectively, this mountain of facts should hammer home the truth to even the most skeptical reader. There are of course those who have fallen under the hypnotic spell of the TV talking-heads and "experts" whom they worship as authority figures. Unaccustomed to thinking for themselves, no amount of truth can sway them from their preconceived prejudices. They will even deny that which they see with their own eyes. They are victims of a psychological affliction known as "the lemming effect". Lemmings are small rodents who have been known to follow each other as they charge to their deaths into raging rivers or off of cliffs. Lemminghood is an innate psychological phenomenon, present in most mammals and observable in common people as well the most sophisticated and educated elites. Lemminghood is not an intellectual phenomenon - it is psychological. As such, no socio-economic class is immune to its strangulating effect. A grant- seeking university scientist can be a lemming just as much as a fashion obsessed teen-age girl. One blindly follows the latest trendy theory while the other blindly follows the latest trendy clothing style. What's the difference? Neither can resist the force of nature.

The power to fit in with one's social peers can be irresistible. To a human lemming, the logic behind an opinion doesn't count as much as the power and popularity behind an opinion. Man, like lemming, behaves collectively. And it could be no other way. Naturally, the individual must be equipped with this trait. Otherwise, the smallest steps toward civilization could never have been made. Lemminghood is a survival trait, an inborn instinct in the majority of people. However, as with all natural phenomena, this tendency can be manipulated and used for harmful purposes.

It is this lemming effect which enables entire segments of a society to lose their sense of judgment all at the same time. This research paper will likely be wasted on many lemmings. For lemmings, denial is a basic psychological defense mechanism used to not only shield themselves from unpleasant realities, but also to reassure themselves that they will still fit within the acceptable range of opinion held by their peer group. Lemmings are absolutely terrified at the thought of being labeled as an "extremist" or a "conspiracy theorist". At all costs, their beliefs must always be on the "right" side of the issue and conform within the boundaries of their lemming peers. Lemmings simply cannot bear the burden of responsibility, or the discomfort, which comes with thinking independently. They'll resist any efforts to change their misguided beliefs with all their mental energy. We can try to open their closed minds and free them from their self-imposed blindness, but it’s not easy fighting the force of human nature. The chains of ideological conformity have too strong of a grip, and breaking them is a difficult task. With the limited resources at our disposal, it is next to impossible to compete with the media lemming-masters. Nevertheless, some of us must make the meager attempt, and thus lay the foundation upon which the truth might one day rise again.

There are those among us who do have the courage and intellectual capacity to break free of the shackles of lemminghood and accept the truth when it is presented in a clear and logical sequence. To those open minded and independent thinkers I wish to state clearly and unequivocally. I intend to set forth in this paper an overwhelming body of evidence which should forever destroy the notion that a Saudi Arabian caveman and his band of half-trained, nerdy Arab flight school attendees, orchestrated the most sophisticated terror operation in world history. The idea is utterly laughable. And yet, due to the blithering barrage of bullshit dished out by the government/media complex, "patriotic" Americans have accepted this ridiculous fairy tale with a religious conviction. As a public service to my fellow Americans, I have published the results of my research in the hopes of liberating as many people as I can from the oppressive yoke of media brainwashing and state sponsored lies. Do you have what it takes to break free? If so, read on!

FEMA Photographer Kurt Sonnenfeld - Complete WTC Photos

2011-07-30T22:40:00.001-07:00

Special thanks to AboveTopSecret.

The Truth About 9/11 - Rev. Dr. Matthew F. Hale

2011-07-29T05:44:00.000-07:00

The Truth about 9-11: How Jewish Manipulation Killed Thousands - Book now completely free here - in one downloadable PDF file

http://www.honestmediatoday.com/truth_about_911_Free_online_book.htm

This is now available online in PDF format. You can choose from one of two files. Both formats are roughly 5.4 MB:

This version of the book has one page per sheet (8.5 x 11-inch), and is useful for printing or reading in normal view. Click here to see in normal view in PDF format:

http://www.HonestMediaToday.com/WTC_1page.pdf

And this version is useful for printing out in booklet format, with two pages per sheet. (For printing out in booklet format at somewhere like Kinkos Copies, you'd tape one set of two side-by-side pages to the back of another, then select the print option for both sides.) Click here to see in booklet-view in PDF format:

http://www.HonestMediaToday.com/WTC-print_layout.pdf

Read below for more about this book, or to view in HTML, one-page at a time, linked one after another, which can be found at the bottom of this article.

-----------------------

Not too long before Rev. Dr. Matthew F. Hale was arrested on contrived charges, he had published a book that told the inner-details of what occurred on September 11, 2001. Some feel that Rev. Dr. Hale was actually arrested for writing this book. Certainly, the charges against him were entrapment at best. (A government agent, Tony Evola, said that he [Evola] wanted to commit a grand crime, to which Rev. Dr. Hale responded that he wanted nothing to do with it. This was the sole reason for Rev. Dr. Hale's imprisonment.)

Convicted under the Patriot Act, an act designed to punish American patriots for daring to put America's best interests before Israel, Rev. Dr. Hale has been denied proper legal representation and has not been allowed to adequately defend himself in court. This is Big Brother's way of hiding His crimes: arresting people on bogus charges and not allowing them to properly fight the charges.

This book--now here in HTML format--tells the entire truth: The terrorists attacked America because of its support for Israel, and Israel knew of the terrorists' plans but did not inform America so that America might become more entangled in the Mid-East conflict and side with Israel. Further, there is credible evidence to suggest that Israel not only allowed this to occur but might have possibly assisted said terrorists with this entire process simply to ensure that the ensuing hatred against the Arab states would be created by a successful mission.

Big Brother does not want you to read this book. It cannot be refuted, and proves beyond the shadow of a doubt its claims: that Israel knew about 9-11 beforehand, that Israel allowed 9-11 to occur with the hope of getting America involved in its wars (such as Iraq, though the Israelis want Iran next), and that Israel might have been involved in the entire nefarious ordeal.

These claims are not idle chatter but easily verified facts within this highly detailed and footnoted expose'. Doubt if you may; but if you dare to read this book, you will discover it is indeed true without question. The facts are there; the facts are publicly available. And now you can see the facts for yourself in this well-researched and footnoted book. NO BOOK ON THE INTERNET OR ELSEWHERE PROVES THIS ARGUMENT BETTER THAN REV. DR. MATT HALE'S BOOK.

If you like this book, please consider making a donation to Matt's father to assist with Rev. Dr. Hale's ongoing legal fees:

Russell Hale
217 Randolph St.
East Peoria, Illinois 61611

Russell Hale has no part in this website, and did not ask for a donation. But he needs your help. He has already mortgaged his home. Again, he needs your help. And so does his son. Don't let the Patriot Act get away with silencing one more American Patriot: Free Rev. Dr. Matthew Hale!

CLICK HERE - http://www.honestmediatoday.com/truth_about_911.htm - to begin the journey if you'd like to view the HTML version; use your "Favorite Places" to bookmark where you left off. Of course, if you start reading this, you will find it very difficult to stop, because what you uncover will shock you.

80 pages of the most informative book you will ever read.

Once you start reading this, you'll want to finish it, as it tells the chilling story of what truly occurred on that fateful day.

The Key To Winning The Battle For Truth - Avoid Mistruths And Distractions

2011-07-21T09:21:00.000-07:00

The events taking place cannot occur without the consent of the brainwashed...and this is the situation I hope to illustrate.

Israel has the unflinching support of those who call themselves "Christian Zionists" - these are the people who (besides the fifth columnists in our government) support Israel's actions with funding and blind loyalty.

But...what if the reason for their blind support is a very craftily manufactured LIE?

I have wondered long and hard the day I was confronted by one of these maniacs, who out of the blue, blurted out his support of Israel, because he was a Zionist...a Zionist black man.

Interesting.

So...this is a question that, not having been answered to my satisfaction, has awaited resolution.

Recently, I came across some information regarding the Scofield Bible. It seems that the document is a FORGERY...much the way that the Protocols of The Elders of Zion have been labeled...except that the information offered by the Protocols can be seen in everyday life; whereas the Scofield Bible has been altered to make references to a land that DOESN'T EXIST.

According to the information offered, at the time of the writing of the Bible, the word "Jew" did not exist; "Israel" was a reference to a PERSON...NOT a LAND.

Please go to this link: http://whtt.org/show/ - there is audio along with the slideshow...take a moment to check it out.

I am coping the information from We Hold These Truth's webpage, just in case it is "Orwellized":

Christian Scripture: The Zionist Deception

Charles E. Carlson Jun 20, 2009

Judeo-Christianity is less than 200 years old. The Jewish Zionism movement has played the key part in assuring its growth. We see the result in the creation of a new “Christianity” which in its extreme form is known as Christian Zionism. It was first fed by Oxford University Press’s Scofield Reference Bible published in New York in 1908. and updated several times. Bible editors, including Oxford, have failed to correct obvious changes in common usage of words, such as "Jew" and "Israel" that provide misleading, Zionist friendly inferences.

Oxford sold a new 20th Century theology to evangelical seminaries. The Scofield usage has become a standard in most study or reference Bibles used by a wide range of evangelicals, and even penetrating into mainline church bible studies and broadcast media. These books are the subject of many articles by this author and others.1

Apostle Paul’s Book of Romans provides an inspiring account of the struggle to convert spiritually empty Israelites and agnostic Greeks to Jesus’ Way in the First Century. Christian Zionism teaches that Paul was talking about, not his own generation, but the State of Israel created 1900 years after his death. They argue that Political Israel is uniquely blessed by God, and that Christians must also revere, honor, and love it else they will suffer God’s punishment.

Several words are still found in our Bibles that did not exist at the time of Jesus and his followers, and could not have been words they used, but words that were placed there in the Sixteenth Century versions. Examples are:

Jesus: there was no "J" in the Aramaic, Greek, or Hebrew languages. I know Arabs named Issa, after Jesus. However Jesus’ name is not an issue because it has only one meaning.

"Jew": there was no such word in the First Century. Not only was there no “J” but it is used in improper historical contexts in the New Testament; The continued misuse of "Jew" in the bibles since 1947 implies that Jews today might be expected to have some of the same gene pool and beliefs as an Israelite of 3000 years ago. Most do not.

"Judean": a place that began with the Greek letter Iota (I) and is used in scripture as both a place and a people. This may be the actual word from which the mistranslation of the word Jew is derived. In many instances the popular translations still use “Jew” where the original Greek text clearly read Ioudaia, or in our vernacular, one who lived in Judea.

"Israel": does appear in the original Greek New Testament texts, but only as a people, never as a place. Paul used Israel in several contexts: first as an ancient tribe named after the man, Israel; as the specific belief system or religion of that tribe, as an example, Paul used “Israelite” to describe himself and a few faithful followers of the Abrahamic code; finally, “Israel” means all those of all races who follow the Messiah, Jesus in the New Covenant under God. Paul does not use Israel as a place or country.2

A typical, doctored, Judeo-Christian presentation is found in a little Bible bookmark distributed by a local Judeo-Christian church. In every case it uses "Jew", Judean, and Israel for the end purpose of connecting the New Testament to the modern political place or state of Israel. These are the main points on the bookmark:
“Christians should pray especially for ISRAEL because of…"

“The close relationship between Israel, God’s purpose for Israel, and the true church.”

“God’s command with special promise of blessings (for Israel).”

“The church can not be complete without the select remnant of Israel.”

“It is God’s will that all Israel will be saved”

“The scriptural directive, “to the Jews first”

“The great multitude to be saved in the future through their (Jews’) ministry.”

This bookmark tract works to synthesize Christianity with Judaism. My response is to parody a familiar marriage ceremony verse, what God separated let no man try to put back together.

The Christians must pray for Israel tract contains a list of 39 bible references, 14 from the book of Romans. Its unnamed author claims that all these passages support the assumption that the new political state of Israel is a fulfillment of God’s plan. They do not. Unfortunately the reader must read each passage in its own context to find the error. The Judeo-Christian amalgamation depends upon the reader not reading. In the interest of brevity I will answer those from Romans.4

I ask a simple question. Who or what did Judeo-Christians think “Israel” was pre-1947, before there was a political state of Israel? If “Israel” of the bible today means the present day State of Israel, what did it mean a hundred years before there was such a State? It should be obvious that Israel meant then, and still means, one of the three contexts in which Paul used it, none of which was a place or a state.

The Christian New Testament answers this vital question many times, stating again and again that those who follow Christ are the New Covenant sons of Abraham. It is uncontested by Christians, Muslims, and Torah Jews that the man “Israel” was the grandson of Abraham. All but Jews believe from his linage the Messiah was to come. In Galatians 3:28-29, Apostle Paul stated: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Whoops, the Christian Zionist track lists this passage, but it conveniently leaves off the last sentence about those who belong to Jesus being the sons of Abraham and heirs to the promise, the new Israel of God. Why is this part left off by Judeo-Christians? Because it refutes the notion that modern, political Israel is God's chosen people.

Paul amplified on this answer in the book of Romans when he referred to himself as an “Israelite” among the living remnant of the ancient faith. He taught that the remnant who had not abandoned the faith of Abraham were also the new Israel if they followed Jesus.

The word “Jew” did not exist when Jesus, Paul, and the Disciples lived and when later their words were scribed in Greek. We cannot be sure what they called their faith, if not The Way or followers of Jesus. "The lost sheep of the House of Israel,” were their first converts and the first Disciples.

Many centuries later, translators, such as the committee who did the King James Edition, replaced the words recorded in the Greek texts with the convenient little modern word “Jew.” In most cases, Paul seems to have used Judeans (or Ioudeans ) for those secularized descendants of once faithful Israelites. The translators simplified the multiple language problem and renamed those whom Paul was trying to convert as either “Jews” or “Gentiles?” Some translators might have enjoyed pinning the Jew name on those who killed Jesus.

Israeli “Jews” could not have killed Jesus

Israeli Jews are almost all Ashkenazi, or “Eastern European Jewish persons of a different stock,” to quote Wikipedia. They lack the Arab gene pool, only a very few have ancestors who were ever in the holy land. Their recorded in many volumes, some found in synagogue libraries. A good source is Andrew Hurley‘s, Holocaust II: Saving Israel from Suicide.3

Jews first claimed to have Arab lineage by inference after Israel was declared a State in 1947. The Jews came there from Europe claiming the Right of aliyah, or Law of Return (1950). Suddenly the word “Jew” was reinterpreted in the New Testament to mean “the chosen people” who were “returning” from Europe! Christians started to send them money. It was beneficial to find their religion named all over the Christian bible…how could Christians oppose their “return” even though most had no roots in the Middle East? This paved the way for political Christian Zionism to flourish.

The Apostle Paul said in the book of Romans that God had blinded the eyes of the corrupted Israelites on account of their long unrepentant sins. Jesus, John the Baptist, and Apostle Paul all addressed the Pharisees variously as Generation of vipers and sons of Satan. The borrowed biblical name “Israel” is a convenient one for Zionists, it is the basis of their claim to the Palestinians’ land.

It is not unusual that people to not name their own faith because they see it as the only faith. Christian was not part of Jesus’ or Paul’s vocabulary. As best we know, they called their new faith something very simple, perhaps “The Way.” And as we stated they might have referred to themselves as followers of Christ or Jesus. Paul called himself an “Israelite” not a Jew. Jesus was called a Galilean, not a Jew. The Roman governor Pilate, placed a sign on his cross, Iesous Rex Ioudaia, wrongly translated Jesus King of Jews.

Traditional Christians, from Catholics to Baptists, have always believed that the “Israel” of Paul’s letters are those who followed Jesus. Only Judeo-Christians of the present millennium deny it.

In contrast to the ancient Way, modern Judeo-Christianity began no earlier than 1850 in the U.S. with persons converted by Scotsman John Nelson Darby. Evangelical Dispensationalism had a limited following until after 1948, when Israel became a State and Oxford University Press wrote political Israel into the bible as a fulfillment of prophesy. This helped to explode it into the world’s newest major religion.

Paul taught that only followers of Christ (no matter what race, religion, sex, or age they live in) are the New Covenant sons of Abraham and spiritual heirs to Jesus’ kingdom…a heavenly kingdom, not an earthly one. Judeo Christians, in contrast, believe “All Israel will be saved,” meaning literally all Jews, and that Jesus’ Kingdom is yet to come, will be on earth first, then for some, including themselves, in heaven. Paul was certainly not a Christian Zionist.

To understand the level of Zionist deceit and the propensity of Judeo Christians to self-deceit we only look at the acts and statements of the venerated Jewish state. In a story in Jewish World titled Why Not Intermarry, by Rabbi Shraga Simmons, we read these amazing words from a self-professed Zionist:

"Jewish survival is not merely an ethnic issue, but also a moral issue, because the Jews are not only an ethnic group, they are a moral force. The values that the civilized world takes for granted -- monotheism, love your neighbor, peace on earth, justice for all, universal education, all men are created equal, dignity of the individual, the preciousness of life -- were all revolutionary ideas taught by the Jewish people. The Jews as a moral force continues to this day… this is not to say that only Jews are capable of conscience or of goodness. It is to say that of all the nations throughout world history, only the Jews have defined their national mission as bringing moral clarity to the world.”

Has this Rabbi ever heard of Gaza or Lebanon? He has indeed, for he lives in Israel, and he holds up the aborting, warring, atheistic state of Israel to be “the moral force for the world.”

Rabbi Simmons: “The experience of visiting Israel is the quintessential act of Jewish self-discovery. Being in an "all-Jewish" environment steeped in millennia of history, Israel provides a new perspective on the role of the Jewish people in the world, and of each Jew's personal connection.”

Zionists are, and must be, propagandists. They must be willing to call black white even if you are looking them in the eye. I wish there was no reader left on the planet who did not know what Israeli Jews have done to the Palestinians and the Lebanese.

Judeo Christians say they believe in confessing the sins in their own lives, but they refuse to see the sins and brutality of Zionists. They have allowed themselves to make Israel an evil object of worship. Only when Christian Zionists’ support for Israel collapses in shame will political Israel be compelled to start practicing morality and justice toward its neighbors.

ENDNOTES
1 Roots of Christian Zionism, Scofield’s Bible Distortions. Power point show:
http://www.whtt.org/show

2 Concordant Greek Text, Concordant Literal New Testament and Keyword Concordance, Concordant Publishing Concern, Canyon Country CA

3 Hurley, Andrew J, Holocaust II: Saving Israel From Suicide http://eshop.cp.whtt.org/eshop.php?id=28 See also"Shlomo Sand: "When & How Was the Jewish People Invented?" - http://www.daily.pk/world/middle-east/10271.html?task=view and http://www.wariscrime.com/2008/10/17/news/shlomo-sand-when-and-how-was-the-jewish-people-invented/

4 Book of Romans: examining the book of Romans from the prospective of those who say we must pray for the State of Israel. (NIV) Answers by author.

Romans 1:16 - I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.
Answer by CEC: Whoops, remember there was no “Jew” in the time of Paul. First to the Israelites of Paul‘s time, not the Zionists Jews of today.

Romans 1: 16 – I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.
Answer by CEC Yes indeed, Jesus is good for mankind, even including Israelis, but nowhere do they get a free ride!

Romans 2:9-10 - 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile;10 but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.
Answer by CEC: Whoops again, remember, no “Jew” in the time of Paul, Just Ioudeans, and where does Paul say he is talking about someone two thousand years in the future? He does not. And, where is Zionist Israel in this, 2000 years later?

Romans 9: 1-5 - 1 I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit— 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, 4 the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. 5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.

Answer by CEC: Paul is a missionary, lamenting for “the sake of my brothers, those of my own race.” Paul sees the fallen Israelites (probable including his own family) as going to hell if they do not follow Jesus’ Way. How natural that is, but this has nothing to do with Zionists from Europe who chanced along two thousand years later...if it does, show me!

Romans 11:5 So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace.
Answer by CEC: Does this not speak of a “remnant” in Paul’s time, an even the patriarchs like Abraham before his time? Where does Paul or Jesus mention future state of political Israel?

Romans 11: 11– Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12

Answer by CEC: No, no, again...Paul repeats so you will get it, Get it?

Romans 11:12 - But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring!
Answer by CEC: Paul is an optimist where his relative are concerned. But never claimed to be a prophet into the 21st Century.

Romans 11: 23-27 23 And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!
All Israel Will Be Saved. 25 I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: “The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. 27 And this is[f] my covenant with them when I take away their sins.”

Answer by CEC: Paul has good news for his relatives, stop disbelieving, its not too late! Yes, it's fine to pray for the people of political Israel, that each one may find Christ; but don't waste your effort praying for an evil, criminal murderous state.

Romans 11: 28-32 - 28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, 29 for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable. 30 Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, 31 so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy as a result of God's mercy to you. 32 For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Answer by CEC. Is this not Paul lecturing to his contemporaries about God’s mercy and justice for all mankind. It has nothing to do with any state in the future. God deals with men one on one, according to Paul, not with politics. Paul says all those who believe in Jesus are the New Israel of God.

Romans 11: 11-15 – 11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring! 13I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I make much of my ministry 14in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them. 15For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?
Romans 11: 25 – I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in.
Romans 11:32 - For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Answer by CEC Was this not “Israel,” the one Paul knew about? Paul did not mention a future secular state that assumes a three thousand year-old name.
Answer by CEC: Is this getting tedious for you ? It is for me...the Christian Zionist technique is always based on deception because the truth will not work. All literature, including the New Testament, is written to be read in context, not in fragments, as they would have us read it. Any story must be viewed as the author wrote it, one continuous story, not a scrabble game of scripture scraps and pieces, not a jigsaw puzzle to be solved, as Christian Zionists always present it. If one reads the entire book of Romans it is clear that God is using the Messiah Jesus to reach all men one by one, and not all will respond. In God's eyes there is no Greek, Israelite, atheist or Jew 2000 years later. Each person may choose to come to God or die without God. There is no doubt why Paul, the converted Israelite, aimed this 11th chapter of Romans at his living breathing relatives.
(End of Bible verses cited on the tract, all those from the book of Romans.)

5 "Why Not Intermarry" - Rabbi Shagra Simmons: http://whtt.org/printerfriendly.php?news=2&id=3101

If this information is correct...then those who refer to themselves as "Christian Zionists" are aiding and abetting murder, occupation of land, terror, assassination and any and all crime perpetrated against the indigenous populations, all for a FANTASY.

There will be NO RAPTURE.

There will be NO BALL OF FIRE.

There will be NO ASCENT INTO HEAVEN.

Not for you deluded sheep.

Was King Tut "Jesus"? An Excerpt From Michael Bradley's Attack On America

2011-07-02T08:16:00.000-07:00

The biblical Hebrews were absolutely unique among Caucasus invaders in their refusal to adopt goddesses from the older Mediterranean-to- India civilization. Most of the Caucasus invaders did so to a greater or lesser degree. The characteristic symptom that these Mesopotamian, Persian and Greco-Roman empires were still at least somewhat psychosexually balanced and transitional is that, except for the Hebrews, they still preserved a place for vital and powerful goddesses in their religions. It is true, however, that in some of these cultures many of the goddesses had been demoted to be mere "wives" of the major thunder-and-lightning sky gods.

In Europe, the Greco-Roman or "Hellenistic" polytheistic and pagan civilization was the last muted whisper of a much older "Ice Age" Western culture that had existed, in at least some basic respects, since the so-called "Upper Paleolithic" about 20,000 BC.

Only in Egypt did the Great Goddess, called Isis in this area, manage to retain her position as the major deity until 31 BC just before the start of the orthodox so-called "Christian Era". The son and husband of Isis, under many names, was the messiah originally worshipped in a very recognizable Christian form since about 6000 BC in the predynastic Nile delta.

Messiah was originally an Egyptian word, not a Hebrew word or concept, and actual recognizable Christianity had been worshipped since 1400 BC along the Nile. It became the official state religion of Egypt under the Greek Ptolomies about 320 BC. Many people may eventually come to practice "true Christianity" again. Egyptian Messiah elsewhere on this site may interest some readers.

As for the biblical Hebrews themselves, those stubbornly male-dominant descendants of very ancient Caucasus invaders of Palestine, they embarked upon one of the greatest self-delusions in intellectual history.

And, determined to believe firmly in it, they were able to pull off deceptions that fooled at least two foreign powers: possibly Ancient Egypt in circa 1375 BC and certainly Persia (circa 530 BC) and the
United States (AD 1947) and one strong foreign religious influence -- Christianity. These manipulations still cause wars and headlines.

This history is much too complicated and convoluted to cover fully in a "brief" essay-overview like this. Details are provided in Majestic 5 and Egyptian Messiah elsewhere on this Site. But a sketchy outline, at least, is absolutely necessary and it is offered here.

Modern archaeology in the "Holy Land" between 1910 and the present has not turned up any definitely identifiable Hebrew artifacts that are older than about 850 BC. But be warned that just the right artifacts, of just the right pre-850 BC age, are very likely to be conveniently "discovered" as the present Israeli-Palestinian conflict intensifies.

It is evident that the Hebrews in Palestine had always remained a minor part of the "Middle Eastern" population that found a niche only around Jerusalem among the dominant Philistines. Our modern word "Palestine" derives from Philistine. And the Philistines gradually became known as the Phoenicians who dominated the region up until the very well-known historical time of the Persian conquests and the subsequent victory of Alexander the Great.

One of the characteristics of the Neanderthal mindset is a hunger for "identity in the dimension of time" and this comes from the "war of physical and glacial adaptations" referred to earlier. This Neanderthal hunger for identity in the dimension of time is the basic argument of The Iceman Inheritance.

Biblical Hebrews saw a chance to enhance and exaggerate their importance and their identity when Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon attacked Jerusalem in 597 BC and again in 587 BC. He carried much of Jerusalem's population off to captivity in Babylon.

Possibly in order to encourage and reinforce the threatened cultural cohesion and identity of their captive people, Hebrew scribes, priests and tribal historians ("rabbis") concocted a glorious past history for them. As the Old Testament would have it...

Briefly, after the Exodus from Egypt under Moses (circa 1350 BC), the Children of Israel spent "forty years" in the wilderness of the Sinai Peninsula. They subsisted on the oily food called "manna from heaven" supplied by the Lord. This miracle of manna was absolutely necessary to the mythic Old Testament "history". Everyone in Palestine knew that there was not enough food or water in the moonscape of the Sinai Peninsula for a horde of the traditional size to have survived for even one year, never mind the biblical forty.

Because of his past sins, Moses himself, although the greatest leader of the Chosen People, was not permitted to enter the Promised Land and "no man" knows where his tomb is. The popular Hebrew folk tradition and accepted fact that Moses had never led the Israelites into the "Promised Land" of Palestine had to be dealt with...somehow. A punishment by the Lord for his past sins seemed the best "explanation".

The successor of Moses, called Joshua ben Nun, conquered the "Promised Land" of Palestine, then occupied by the Canaanites, Philistines and other tribes. There is a very deep psychological story behind this "Joshua ben Nun" (i.e. Jesus, son of the Fish), but we cannot go into everything in a "brief" psychobiological over-view of Western history as this essay purports to be. The land taken by this "Joshua" was apportioned between the 12 tribes of Israel (circa 1300 BC). But there was continual opposition from the former inhabitants, especially from the Philistines.

This initial conquest was followed by about four hundred years of leadership by judges and popular tribal leaders, during which time the Mosaic Laws were gradually adopted by at least most of the Israelites. At the end of this period, the Israelites asked their most prominent prophet or leader, Samuel, to establish a kingship. The first Israelite king, Saul, displeased the Lord by not committing genocide thoroughly enough against some Amalekites and was deposed.

The second king of the Hebrews, a great king named David, consolidated Joshua's conquest against mainly the Philistines and established a great "empire" from the Nile to the Euphrates (David was traditionally crowned in 1063 BC). David's son, Solomon, ruled this empire during a long lifetime (circa 950 BC) before, on his death, the single empire broke up into two strong kingdoms.

The northern kingdom called "Israel" had its capital in Samaria. The southern kingdom of "Judah" had its capital in Jerusalem.

According to this "history", Assyria attacked the northern kingdom of Israel in 722-721 BC, utterly defeated it and carried all of its people off to some unknown fate. These are the ten "Lost Tribes" of Israel.

Then, a little more than a century later, Nebudchadnezzar of Babylonia attacked the southern kingdom of Judah and carried off the population of Jerusalem into the "Babylonian Captivity". But Babylon, in its turn, was conquered about seventy years afterwards by Cyrus the Great of Persia. He freed the Israelites and allowed them to return to their beloved Jerusalem and the Promised Land.

Now, it cannot be said too strongly that there is absolutely no archaeological evidence for any of this concocted history in Palestine.

Most of this so-called "history" takes place before 850 BC and the time of the very first carbon-dated Hebrew artifacts in Palestine. And also and just as important as archaeology, this Hebrew "history" does not agree with any of the other chronicles and histories of any of the neighbouring peoples around Palestine. But these other cultural records do agree with archaeology in the general region of Palestine.

There was no conquest of Palestine by Joshua. No empire of David and Solomon in Palestine. No two strong kingdoms of Israel and Judah in Palestine.

Although Assyria did attack Palestine in 722-721 BC and it was certainly a traumatic event in Palestine, there is no prior archaeological evidence of these "Lost Tribes" and no archaeological evidence of Hebrew occupation of Samaria and the area around it.

The disappearance of what must have been the majority of the supposed "Hebrew" population in Palestine did handily and conveniently explain, however, what had happened to the necessarily large population of David and Solomon's empire. This empire had supposedly existed just two centuries before Assyria's assault on Palestine. But as every Hebrew knew very well, there was no large remnant population of Hebrews or Israelites in Palestine circa 520 BC when Cyrus the Great "restored" them to rule of the "Holy Land".

These "Ten Lost Tribes" were an absolutely necessary corollary myth to support the primary myth of an ancient Israelite empire in Palestine.

It was a time when few people were literate, and the Israelite captives in Babylon had been torn from their roots and tribal continuity anyway, and so they believed this "history" when their priests recited it.

But more to the point, someone else believed it.

Cyrus the Great of Persia attacked and defeated Babylon in 538 BC. The biblical hero Daniel had been the cupbearer to one of the defeated Babylonian co-kings, Belshazzar...and he became cupbearer to the conqueror Cyrus too. He became more than a cupbearer, he became something of a friend and advisor to Cyrus because Cyrus knew little or nothing about the various peoples that Babylon had subjugated during its long career of conquest. This local knowledge was important for the ongoing rule of Persia's new lands.

In brief, Daniel convinced Cyrus the Great that this concocted Hebrew history was true. And he convinced Cyrus to "restore" the Hebrews to the control of Palestine. This Cyrus did between 538 BC and 518 BC, and he sent elements of the Persian army to back-up and support the Hebrew occupation and rule of Palestine.

As the Bible tells us, the native Palestinians did not like the situation any more then than they did some 2,450-odd years later in AD 1947 when the Jews pulled off the same ploy for the second time with the creation of the modern state of Israel.

The truly significant difference was that in 1947-1948 modern Israel was to be populated by Ashkenazi "Jews" and not even by biblical Jews. The only military and tactical difference was the minor point that in 1947-1948 the Americans substituted for Persians. But the Americans acted with the same gung-ho military activity as the Persians had done and with the same lack of basic research and verification.

It is very obvious, though, that the so-called "Holocaust" of the Nazi era and World War II played an important part in creating American and even world sympathy for those Central European "Jews" who survived. This sympathy permitted North American "Jews", using Hollywood movies publicly and much money privately, to lobby for and promote the creation of modern Israel as a place where the "always-victimized 'Jews' " could be safe.

Precisely because this so-called "Holocaust" played so crucial a role in the establishment of modern Israel, the following history may prove to be extremely enlightening for some readers. Perhaps we should take another long and very objective look at claims for this so-called "Holocaust" ...and, while we are doing so, it would be nice to define it.

Because so much of Western geopolitics is still based on the "history" of the Old Testament incorporating as its basic theme a traditional Jewish homeland in the "Promised Land" of Palestine, it might be worth at least a very brief look at the story told by archaeology, linguistics and other traditions. What actually happened?

The first thing to admit is that there is not enough publicly-released data to construct an alternative history that can be supported by objective scientific evidence. For example, one of Israel's most prominent archaeologists, Dr. Ze'ev Herzog of Tell Aviv University, does not even think that the Israelites ever resided in Egypt and left in the so-called "Exodus". There is no known Egyptian or other account recording the specifically Israelite residence in Egypt, their bondage there and their supposed Exodus. There are no known and identifiable "Hebrew" artifacts of the proper "bondage-and-Exodus" historical period in Egypt.

Herzog thinks that the nomadic Hebrews just trickled into Palestine from the general direction of Sumeria and kept a low profile as minor herdsmen among the resident Canaanites and later Philistines. There was no period of residence and "bondage" in Egypt, no "Exodus" from Egypt, no Israelite conquest of Canaan, no Israelite empire of David and Solomon and no successor kingdoms of Israel and Judah. For Jewish-Israeli archaeologist Ze'ev Herzog, it is all pure myth.

Nonetheless, their Egyptian residence, bondage and Exodus is such a strong motif and focus to Hebrew history that many researchers have believed that there must be at least a kernel of truth to it. Scraps of evidence from various sciences have now begun to suggest, not prove, an outline of real Israelite history that can accommodate the "Exodus".

It was, yet again, Howard Carter's discovery of Tutankhamun's tomb in 1922 and study of the artifacts all during the late 1920s and mid-1930s that gave the first clue to the actual nature of the Exodus story.

By the late 1930s, enough was known about Tutankhamun and his close relatives to make a shrewd guess as to who "Moses" had really been and what the "Exodus" had truly represented. None other than Sigmund Freud first suggested the following general reconstruction in Moses and Monotheism (1939). This is possibly because Sigmund Freud knew Howard Carter personally and may have been told certain things that were not made public in Carter's famous book, The Tomb of Tutankhamun (3 vols: 1933).

Carter's discoveries in the tomb of Tutankhamun became something of an "international incident" during the 1920s and 1930s when the famous "curse of the mummy" gained public notoriety. This curse was shown to have been real, all right, in September 2002 with the publication in Great Britain of The Exodus Conspiracy based on dramatic revelations in Howard Carter's private letters.

Carter had found papyrus records in Tutankhamun's tomb that disclosed the real story of Moses and the Exodus. This was a secret that Howard Carter kept during his lifetime at the request of British Government officials.

Although the exact contents or present location of these papyrus records are still not known, archaeological and linguistic discoveries since 1922 have made it increasingly clear what the Exodus was all about. It seems that the deaths caused by this supposed "curse of the mummy" had a purely earthly and mundane origin in Zionist assassins trying to preserve a Jewish and Zionist claim to part of "Palestine". The 1920s and 1930s were a critical time in the development of modern Israel.

Just five years before the discovery of Tutankhamun's tomb, the British Government had committed itself, in a 1917 letter to Lord Rothschild, to the so-called "Balfour Declaration" establishing the principle of British support for a "traditonal Jewish homeland in Palestine".

All during the time that Tutankhamun's treasures were being studied and the "curse of the mummy" was claiming its 1920s and 1930s victims from among those who knew Carter personally, Zionists were busy settling in Palestine. Nothing could be allowed to prevent or disrupt this initial Jewish settlement of what later became modern Israel. Because of the immense public interest in "King Tut" and the "curse of the mummy", Howard Carter's papyrus records from the tomb of Tutankhamun could possibly have done just that.

For those who are a bit puzzled as to why modern Britain has so staunchly supported President George Bush in his Middle East policies, the answer is not only Britain's desperate need for Iraqi oil.
The fact is that Britain first made modern Israel possible. The U.S. did not "invent" Israel, as Britain's Balfour Declaration did, but only supported Zionists with UN endorsement of modern Israel and with more resources than Britain could supply after World War II. The "curse of the mummy" still haunts Britain's policy in the Middle East.

It is, perhaps, no accident that the wife of Howard Carter's sponsor, Lord Carnarvon, was the illegitimate daughter of the same Lord Rothschild to whom the Balfour Declaration was addressed. Lord Carnarvon, the very first victim of the so-called "mummy's curse", had already written to the British Museum about these papyrus records found in the tomb of Tutankhamun when he was suddenly taken ill because of an "insect bite". When he seemed to be recovering, his loving wife came out from England to "nurse" him back to health. He died less than a week after she arrived in Cairo.

Here is a very brief version of the apparently real story of the Exodus.

It is thought that Tutankhamun's supposed father and (much more certainly) predecessor was the heretical Pharaoh Akenaten who believed in just the One God, "Aten". Most books on Egyptian history written by conventional Egyptologists have presented Akenaten as being a purely Egyptian product. But from the late 1930s, and much more especially since Ahmed Osman's work in the 1980s and 1990s, there has been increasing reason to doubt this view. It seems that the One God "Aten" was known and worshipped in biblical Goshen even before Akenaten was born.

The biblical "Land of Goshen" boasted a number of fairly large lakes. These were marshes left in the lowlands of northeastern Egypt by the "Ice Age" rainy periods, or "pluvials", that substituted for snow in warmer Egypt. The Nile may also have fed these marshes after the end of the "Ice Age" by saturating the lowlands of the Nile Delta, especially the more pronounced depressions. The present Suez Canal makes use of these same depression and marshes.

We will remember that this "Land of Goshen" was the very place where the Old Testament says that the Israelites settled when they relocated into Egypt to escape famine. The major town of Goshen was called Avaris. It is also known that the Hyksos or "Shepherd Kings", when they invaded Egypt, made their capital at Avaris. This town and fortress was on the shores of one of the lakes. Ancient Egyptian records show that a barge on one of the lakes of Goshen near Avaris was named Aten Gleams during the reign of Amenhotep III, Akenaten's father, about twenty years before Akenaten was born.

The "Lord Aten", the One God, may therefore have been a genuine Hebrew conception that came into Goshen in the vicinity of Avaris with the Hyksos-led invasion of Caucasus people. The reason why an Egyptian pharaoh, the famous or infamous Akenaten, came to worship Aten leads us to yet another complication.

It seems that Amenhotep III first married his sister, a little girl called Sitamun, and a supposed Isis-descendant, in the approved Ancient Egyptian manner in order to ascend to the throne. Sitamun may have been only three years old at the time. But he then fell heavily in love with Tiye, a girl from Goshen who was either Hebrew or half-Hebrew. Amenhotep III married Tiye and, against all previous Egyptian custom, made her his "Great Royal Wife" -- meaning that she would be the mother of his heir.

Indeed, it was none other than Amenhotep III who presented Tiye with a pleasure barge named Aten Gleams mentioned above. This means that Amenhotep III must have known that Tiye and her Hebrew relatives in Goshen were generally considered to be worshippers of "Aten". Amenhotep III enlarged the existing lake in order to give Aten Gleams more scope for short cruises and, from the timing of things, Ahmed Osman thinks that Akenaten was very probably conceived on the barge in Year 6 of Amenhotep III's reign. Tiye is thought to have been about 14-16 years old at the time. Queen Tiye is now thought to have been the mother of the heretic pharaoh Akenaten who introduced the worship of Aten to all of Egypt.

But Amenhotep III wasn't blind to the potential implications of what he had done. Any son born of his union with Tiye could not be, by definition, a son of an Isis-descendant as Ancient Egyptian custom had demanded from "time immemorial" (i.e. about 6000 BC). He therefore apparently ordered that any son of himself and Tiye was to be killed at birth. This was to preserve the Egyptian customs of royal succession. And here we have the outlines of the biblical Old Testament account of the birth of Moses.

I think that we can also see here the outlines of a Hebrew "honey trap", as modern intelligence agencies would call it. That is to say, a sexual machination to insinuate the Goshen Hebrews into the Egyptian power structure by using Tiye as bait. It is interesting that most other biblical heroines did precisely the same thing. They sacrificed themselves sexually in order to ensure a Hebrew victory or to enhance Hebrew geopolitical power (the same thing, really). And that is about the only Neanderthal political use for women.

Akenaten survived and when he "duly" took the throne through Tiye's machinations, he attempted to impose belief in his Aten upon all Egyptians and forbade any worship of Egypt's many other ancient gods and goddesses. This was a most unpopular move, and particularly with the typically conservative and traditional army upon which Akenaten depended. Within a few years, no one really knows how many, Akenaten was forced to abdicate and it seems more than possible that he was also forced into exile.

This was pieced together by Egyptologists between 1910 and 1930 from scraps of records. Akenaten had been erased from all official Egyptian historical sources and monuments. It was punishable by death, during decades after his abdication, even to mention his name.

The London-based Islamic Egyptologist, Ahmed Osman, cites evidence in several books that Akenaten was forced from the biblical "Goshen", where his followers were concentrated, into the nearby northwestern part of the Sinai Peninsula. This was not then considered to be a part of Egypt proper and was thus a place of technical exile.

Even Akenaten naturally had some followers, and these people went into exile with him so that they could continue to worship Aten. This seems to have been the "Exodus" and "Moses" seems to have been either Akenaten himself (Ahmed Osman) or a high priest of Aten (Sigmund Freud).

Akenaten's putative "son" and (much more certainly) successor was a young man of 19 or 20 years old when he assumed the Egyptian throne. We observed earlier that Tutankhamun exhibited some marked Negro physical characteristics. These Black traits could hardly have come from Akenaten.

Although Akenaten's lips show a marked eversion, this feature wasn't very likely to have been a heritage from Negro genes but from a Caucasian pathology. Akenaten possessed a very strange physique, the subject of much conjecture. The Scottish Egyptologist, Cyril Aldred, wrote that Akenaten suffered from Frolich's Syndrome while others have thought that he may also have suffered from Marfan's Syndrome.

Tutankhmun's somewhat Black African appearance cannot be attributed to Akenaten's known wife, either. She was Nefertiti, and her purely Caucasoid type of exquisite beauty is displayed for all to see in the famous bust of her that is possibly the treasure of the Berlin Museum.

Although originally named "Tutankhaten", both his advisors and the army considered it much more politic for him to adopt the name Tutankhamun in honour of Egypt's traditional and national major god of the times. Tutankhamun's brief reign was one of tolerance and reconciliation. He allowed worship of the old gods and goddesses, he restored their temples and he financially re-enfranchised their priests and priestesses...although he himself apparently worshipped Aten until the end of his very brief life.

This gives us even more reason to suspect that Tutankhamun was probably not the biological offspring of Akenaten and Nefertiti. After the blasphemous heresy of Akenaten (from the Egyptian point of view), the entire thrust of the realm's powerful counsellors and advisors must have been a "a return to decent traditional Egyptian values", as a modern politician might have put it.

This "Egyptian way of life" was last represented by Amenhotep III's proper marriage to his little sister, Sitamun. Amenhotep III ruled for forty-two years and, during this time, Sitamun naturally grew up as "a wife" of the Pharaoh, if not the Great Royal Wife. There's nothing improbable about the notion that Tutankhamun was actually the son of Amenhotep III and Sitamun. But there is nothing to prove it, either. We know nothing of Sitamun's racial characteristics, but she is likely to have been a typical representative of the "Mediterranean Race" with rather more Negro admixture.

However, there may have been plenty of female Isis-descendants among royal daughters and Amenhotep III had his choice of them as wives or concubines. But it seems that Tutankhamun must have been to son of Sitamun or one of these other royal princesses. It is very doubtful that Akenaten could have been his biological father and even more unlikely that Nefertiti was his mother. It is almost unthinkable that he could have ascended the throne as a known true son of Akenaten.

There is some slight evidence that Tutankhamun went into the Sinai in order to try to effect a reconciliation with Akenaten. But Akenaten considered him to be an apostate and a traitor. There is at least some evidence in both Hebrew and Egyptian sources that Tutankhamun was killed "on a tree" by the Jewish Chief Priest of "the Lord Aten" at the time, one "Pinhas" ("Panhesy" in Egyptian, a high official under the deposed Akenaten). The method of "Ancient Hebrew" execution was to hang the victim on a tree and break his bones with the blows of metal or hardwood rods.

This torture-death may have been of early Hebrew or Hyksos invention, but it was later replaced by stoning offenders to death. This resulted in some long bone fractures, but the victim usually died from fatal head injuries.

Tutankhamun's mummy shows that many of his arm and leg bones were broken and that he was virtually dismembered at the elbows and knees. He'd been killed by the "ancient" method.

At least, this name "Pinhas" is preserved in Hebrew sources (Talmud) as a hero who executed "Jesus", described as a false prophet who was leading Israel astray. This same Pinhas or Panhesy , on the other hand, seems also to be the "Wicked Priest" who killed the "Teacher of Righteousness" according to the Essene Dead Sea Scrolls.

The real life of Tutankhamun seems to have become the traditional template for the most famous messiah, Jesus -- or so Ahmed Osman has argued in seveeral books, citing unnerving evidence for some Judeo-Christian scholars. The basic story was much later distorted by St. Paul for religious and political reasons (see below). Significantly, prophesies about the Messiah's "second coming" sometimes emphasized that this next time "not a bone of him shall be broken". This would seem to substantiate the fact that Jesus was indeed executed by the "Ancient Hebrew" method and not by later stoning. Unfortunately, no one knows exactly when the older method of execution was replaced by stoning and we can therefore not double check the time of Jesus's death by this knowledge.

The Egyptian chariot commander recovered the mutilated body of Tutankhamun and, in retribution for the "Israelite" torture and murder of him, attacked the Hebrew horde. He drove a military wedge between them and Palestine and also forced them deeper into the Sinai Peninsula. This is described biblically as a "plague" that took 35,000 Israelite lives shortly after the "Exodus".

The surviving "Israelites" of the refugee horde were forced to flee even deeper into the northeastern part of the Sinai Peninsula, away from Palestine, but they couldn't stay there because there is no adequate source of food and water for a large number of people with livestock. There is linguistic evidence that the Israelites crossed the modern Gulf of Aqaba near its head and continued down the eastern, or Arabian, coast of the Red Sea to the region of modern day Yemen.

They may have been harried for some of the distance, but probably not much further than the Gulf of Aqaba, by Egyptian chariotry. This is the famous biblical crossing of the "Red Sea". They may still have been led by "Moses" (Akenaten or Pinhas/Panhesy), but Moses may also have been among the 35,000 Israelite casualties inflicted by the Egyptian chariot commander. In any event, later Hebrew tradition lost track of him.

It is about this time in the Old Testament narrative that "Joshua ben Nun" is introduced as the chosen successor of Moses. When he actually took over from Moses is impossible to say, especially since this "Joshua" could not have actually existed as portrayed in the Old Testament. The names Joshua and Jesus (Ye'shua) are precisely the same in Hebrew. Indeed, in the present Greek version of the Old Testament, there is no "Joshua" -- straightforward "Jesus" conquered the Holy Land for the Children of Israel.

Sigmund Freud was the first to realize the momentous historical implications of these names, while Ahmed Osman has diligently researched the actual evidence that supports an amazing revelation. If Moses was Akenaten, then who was Akenaten's known successor?

He was none other than Tutankhamun, the pharaoh who was interred with the Christian vestments, trappings and artistic motifs on his tomb walls that so amazed Howard Carter. Freud the psychiatrist realized that, as a sort of psychological guilt compensation, the Hebrews turned their real murder victim into their mythic champion, "Joshua", the conqueror of the Promised Land.

But that also must mean that the Messianic name of "Jesus" was applied to Tutankhamun around 1350 BC! Otherwise, Joshua would not have been named Joshua. And this is more than just possible because the words Ye'shua, Iesus, Essa (the Aramaic name for Jesus, used in the Koran) and Issa (the modern Arabic name for Jesus) all mean roughly the "issue (or son) of Isis". The modern English word issue actually does come, via Latin, from this more ancient etymology. Now we know why Joshua ben Nun was named "son of the Fish" and why the earliest Christian symbol was a fish.

The full document can be found at http://michaelbradley.info/esau/esau-chapter3.html

9/11Unveiled

2011-07-02T07:55:00.000-07:00

Check out 9/11 Unveiled by The Wisdom Fund.

"The facts presented in 9/11 Unveiled (read excerpts) should cause thinking people to question the official explanation of 9/11, and ask why our "free press" has, uncritically, accepted the official explanation."

Get the PDF here.

Arabic translation also available.

Orwell's Optimism The Deep State, Self-Deception, 9/11, and the Legend of "FBI Maverick" John O'Neill - Essay by Allan Weisbecker

2011-06-10T06:08:00.000-07:00

Former FBI Agent and head of security at the WTC Complex John O'Neill was NO HERO. Read this essay - I have only posted the last page:

Orwell's Optimism
The Deep State, Self-Deception, 9/11, and the Legend of
"FBI Maverick" John O'Neill

Essay by Allan Weisbecker

There’s Something About Johnnie (a summation)

As I say at the outset, this essay is meant to do multiple duty. In doing so, however, the practical points made in my deconstruction of the John O’Neill Legend may get lost in the philosophical (might I say 'Orwellian’) shuffle or in my debunking of the false methodologies of inquiry that have led to the dissemination of misinformation. So here is a summation of the evidence/logic presented, and which I believe puts the lie to the misdirection of the John O’Neill Legend:

1. O’Neill’s active participation in the TWA 800 cover up -- the second most horrendous mass murder in U.S. history -- which was likewise second only to the 9/11 cover up in its blatant mendacity and historical implications. Not only is O’Neill’s role prima facie proof positive that he was not 'the real thing’ (however you define it) but it also indicates the degree to which he is ('is’ not 'was’) capable of toeing the deep state line. (I urge the reader to do his/her own research into the TWA 800 affair – a good starting point is Jack Cashill’s film, Silenced. Were it not for 9/11, TWA 800 would still be a deep state misdeeds issue today.)

2. The utter nonsensicalness of the notion that the a non-colluder would be given the opportunity to discover the pre-existing demolition equipment with which the WTC was packed in the three weeks prior to the attacks; it’s also likely that final prep work had to be done and therefore overseen by a colluder. (It’s an oft-made point made by the Truth movement that a Bush sat on the board of the company overseeing WTC security in the years prior to 2001; the idea that the plotters would go from that sort of control – or whatever total control they obviously had -- to the diametric opposite at the last minute is absurd.)

3. The notion that the perpetrators would try to silence O’Neill by assuming he would die in the attacks is equally absurd. A surviving John O’Neill as 'the real thing,’ having witnessed the horror and also obviously having been an intended victim, would have become the first and most fervent 'Truther.’

4. The lack of real intel/information coming from John O’Neill. Unlike true whistleblowers like Cowleen Rowley, Sibel Edmonds, Able Danger’s Anthony Shaffer, and others, in the end O’Neill only dispersed the (non-specific) bin Laden-as-existential-threat misinformation that we now know to be false, and which is an essential tenet of the official story.

5. The lack of evidence that O’Neill carried out the duties he should have on that day, i.e., the evacuation of the complex, helicopter rescue attempts, and so forth.

Murray Weiss, in his kowtow to the Legend, The Man Who Warned America, lists these as the known O’Neill phone calls between the first plane hit and the first tower collapse:

O’Neill called his son J.P. to say that he was okay. According to Weiss,this was the first call O’Neill made from his South Tower office when Flight 11 hit the North Tower.

O’Neill then (at 8:50, likely the next call) took a call from his estranged wife, Christine, assuring her that he was okay. That he took the call and was speaking to her five minutes after the attack had begun tells us that he was not making other calls, or contacting security people, or, for that matter, trying to make a P.A. announcement that everyone should evacuate the WTC complex.

O’Neill called an FBI buddy named Pat Paterson (O’Neill left a message), who figures O’Neill called to say 'I told you so’ – meaning that O’Neill was right in predicting an attack on the WTC. In any event, Paterson could not have helped in O’Neill’s duties that day, so the call was personal.

O’Neill called his girlfriend Valerie James. James says that O’Neill called at 9:17 and expressed concern that he might lose his job. He took the time to describe the carnage he was witnessing

Anna DiBattista, one of O’Neill’s other girlfriends, called O’Neill at 9:29. He took the call and 'could not have sounded calmer’ as he again took the time to describe the carnage he was witnessing. (One can assume that he still wasn’t all that busy.)

O’Neill called an FBI girlfriend named Fran Townsend to tell her he was okay. (That Ms Townsend was still another of O’Neill’s paramours is in subtext in Weiss’s book.

Six calls. All personal. All indicating that O’Neill was not busy doing the things that I would have done, had I been in his circumstances that day.

6. Then there’s good old ex-FBI Agent Mark Rossini (ejected from the Bureau essentially for being a sleazebag), whose words ring in my ear to this day: 'John is a great guy.’

7. A final thought, and this comes under the heading of both instinct and my own experiences with sociopathic personalities: When O’Neill took the WTC security job, he told a good half dozen people words to the effect that bin Laden/al Qaeda would likely strike the towers, and soon.

I believe that John O’Neill was laying groundwork for his status as Legend. As sociopaths are wont to do, he was already reveling in the idea of fooling the world.

It’s our job to set the world straight, and at the very least frustrate that objective . (Hence my anger at the likes of Anti-Iluminati and Jonathon Elinoff, who to this day persist in publicly championing O’Neill misinformation even after I’ve pointed out its nonsensicalness.)

As this essay comes to a close (and assuming you've hung in from the beginning) I try to imagine your state of mind ('you', the personal you)...

Aggravation?

Outrage?

Boredom (God forbid)?

Enlightenment?

My hope is that some percentage of you (the general 'you') will come away with the realization that we are all subject to the same sort of self-deception that Orwell describes as 'doublethink', and that the only defense against it is self-reflection.

ACTIVE SELF-REFLECTION.

Many thanks for your time and attention, the two most valuable things you have to give.

If you found my essay worthwhile, please forward it.

Special Unit: SENATOR And The Murder Of Robert Francis Kennedy

2011-05-21T08:51:00.000-07:00

Is there any doubt whatsoever that a cover-up had been in the making?

Waco - A New Revelation (2011)

2011-05-12T05:25:00.000-07:00

First...the videos:

Waco: A New Revelation is the film that triggered a new Congressional investigation of the Waco tragedy, and caused the Justice Department and the FBI to reverse their long-held positions on Waco. It has generated a firestorm of events unprecedented in the history of documentary film-making.

After six years of painstaking investigation, the complete story of the tragedy in Texas is finally coming to light. This compelling feature-length documentary presents new revelations about the events that led up to the deaths of 79 men, women and children at Mount Carmel on April 19, 1993.

Waco: A New Revelation presents evidence addressing the following questions:

Mount Carmel on April 19th, 1993

* Why didn't the Branch Davidians and their children come out of the Mount Carmel compound?

* Did the FBI actually start the Waco fire using pyrotechnic devices?

* Why was critical evidence missing from the evidence locker nearly six years after the event?

* What was the role of the elite U.S. Army Delta Force during the final assault -- and why was their presence denied untill now?

* Does the trail of evidence lead to the first lady Hillary Clinton, President Clinton and the White House?

* Delta Force involvement? Both houses of Congress and the Department of Justice open new investigation.

FBI Cover-Up

Freedom of Information Act allows MGA Studio's film makers into the evidence lockers first. In the spring of 1998, under the Freedom of Information Act, investigators from MGA Studio's film division became the first private citizens to gain access to the Waco investigation evidence lockers. What they found was shocking.

Upon examination, the evidence gathered under the supervision of federal officials appeared to contradict the FBI's congressional testimony, raising serious and disturbing questions about events surrounding the siege at Mt. Carmel and the deaths of the Davidians.

Gene Cullen: Since 1993, former members of the FBI, former Special Forces and CIA operatives have come forward with new evidence to suggest that the FBI's claim is inaccurate.

With the tenth anniversary of the Branch Davidian siege, find out what really happened.

USA | Color | 110 min

Director: Jason Van Vleet

Producer: Rick Van Vleet, Stephen M. Novak, Michael McNulty & Jason Van Vleet

Executive Producer: Rick Van Vleet & Stephen M. Novak

Original Music Score: Daniel D. Hoeye & Aric R. Johnson

Narrated by: Former FBI Special Agent Dr. Fredric Whitehurst

Now...my rant:

Janet Reno LIED.

Charles Schumer LIED.

Jeff Jamar LIED.

Lon Horiuchi should be hung by his balls with razor wire.

This is the most horrific act of UTTER EVIL ever perpetrated on citizens of this great country.

Do NOT let this stand.

Dr Steve R Pieczenik Interview - Federal Jack

2011-05-05T07:36:00.000-07:00

Dr. Pieczenik interview on May 3, 2011 on the Alex Jones Show! This is a must watch interview!!
Alex talks with Council on Foreign Relations member Steve R. Pieczenik, who served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, and James Baker. In April 2002, Pieczenik told the Alex Jones Show that Bin Laden had already been “dead for months”.

Alex talks with Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, the U.S. government insider who said last week that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001 and that he was prepared to testify in front of a grand jury how a top general told him directly that 9/11 was a false flag inside job. Pieczenik was used by Tom Clancy to base his character Jack Ryan from Patriot Games on.

In this interview he addresses the question as to why he is not afraid of retaliation or being silenced, then he lays out a straight threat to the current admin and the intelegence agencies to stop the lies and start working for the American people!!

Please be sure to read the piece posted on Veterans Today regarding this posited information.

Jewish Persecution | Timeline of Judaism | History of AntiSemitism

2011-04-28T00:29:00.000-07:00

Jewish Persecution | Timeline of Judaism | History of AntiSemitism

Lesser Known Highlights of Jewish International Relations In The Common Era (an Abbreviated sampling)

DATE	PLACE	EVENT


250 C.E.	Canhage	Expulsion

224 C.E.	Italy	Forced Conversion

325 C.E.	Jerusalem	Expulsion

351 C.E	Persia	Book Burning

357 C.E.	Italy	Property Confiscation

379 C.E.	Milan	Synagogue Burning

415 C.E.	Alexandria	Expulsion

418 C.E.	Minorca	Forced Conversion

469 C.E.	Ipahan	Holocaust

489 C.E.	Antioch	Synagogue Burning

506 C.E.	Daphne	Synagogue Burning

519 C.E.	Ravenna	Synagogue Burning

554 C.E.	Diocese of Clement (France)	Expulsion

561 C.E.	Diocese of Uzes (France)	Expulsion

582 C.E	Merovingia	Forced Conversion

612 C.E.	Visigoth Spain	Expulsion

628 C.E.	Byzantium	Forced Conversion

629 C.E.	Merovingia	Forced Conversion

633 C.E.	Toledo	Forced Conversion

638 C.E.	Toledo	Stake Burnings

642 C.E.	Visigothic Empire	Expulsion

653 C.E.	Toledo	Expulsion

681 C.E.	Spain	Forced Conversion

693 C.E.	Toledo	Jews Enslaved

722 C.E.	Byzantium	Judaism Outlawed

855 C.E.	Italy	Expulsion

876 C.E.	Sens	Expulsion

897 C.E.	Narbonne	Land Confiscation

945 C.E.	Venice	Ban on Sea Travel

1009 C.E.	Orleans	Massacre

1012 C.E.	Rouen, Limoges & Rome	Massacre

1012 C.E.	Mayence	Expulsion

1021 C.E.	Rome	Jews Burned Alive

1063 C.E.	Spain	Massacre

1095 C.E.	Lorraine	Massacre

1096 C.E.	Northern France & Germany	1/3 of Jewish Population Massacred

1096 C.E.	Hungary	Massacre

1096 C.E.	Ralisbon	Massacre

1099 C.E.	Jerusalem	Jews Burned Alive

1100 C.E.	Kiev	Pogrom

1140 C.E.	Germany	Massacres

1146 C.E.	Rhine Valley	Massacre

1147 C.E.	Wurzburg	Massacre

1147 C.E.	Belitz (Germany)	Jews Burned Alive

1147 C.E.	Carenton, Ramenu & Sully (France)	Massacres

1171 C.E.	Blois	Stake Burnings

1181 C.E.	France	Expulsion

1181 C.E.	England	Property Confiscation

1188 C.E.	London & York	Mob Attacks

1190 C.E.	Norfolk	Jews Burned Alive

1191 C.E.	Bray (France)	Jews Burned Alive

1195 C.E.	France	Property Confiscation

1209 C.E.	Beziers	Massacre

1212 C.E.	Spain	Rioting and blood bath against the Jews of Toledo.

1215 C.E.	Rome	Lateran Council of Rome decrees that Jews must wear the "badge of shame" in all Christian countries. Jews are denied all public sector employment, and are burdened with extra taxes.

1215 C.E.	Toulouse (France)	Mass Arrests

1218 C.E.	England	Jews Forced to Wear Badges

1231 C.E.	Rome	Inquisition Established

1236 C.E.	France	Forced Conversion/Massacre

1239 C.E.	London	Massacre & Property Confiscation

1240 C.E.	Austria	Property confiscation. Jews either imprisoned, converted, expelled, or burned.

1240 C.E.	France	Talmud Confiscated

1240 C.E.	England	Book Burning

1240 C.E.	Spain	Forced Conversion

1242 C.E.	Paris	Talmud Burned

1244 C.E.	Oxford	Mob Attacks

1255 C.E.	England	Blood libel in Lincoln results in the burning / torture of many Jews & public hangings.

1261 C.E.	Canterbury	Mob Attacks

1262 C.E.	London	Mob Attacks

1264 C.E.	London	Mob Attacks

1264 C.E.	Germany	Council of Vienna declares that all Jews must wear a "pointed dunce cap." Thousands murdered.

1267 C.E.	Vienna	Jews Forced to Wear Horned Hats

1270 C.E.	Weissenberg, Magdeburg, Arnstadt, Coblenz, Singzig, and Erfurt	Jews Burned Alive

1270 C.E.	England	The libel of the "counterfeit coins" - all Jewish men, women and children in England imprisoned. Hundreds are hung.

1276 C.E.	Bavaria	Expulsion

1278 C.E.	Genoa (Spain)	Mob Attacks

1279 C.E.	Hungary & Poland	The Council of Offon denies Jews the right to all civic positions. The Jews of Hungary & Poland are forced to wear the "red badge of shame."

1283 C.E.	Mayence & Bacharach	Mob Attacks

1285 C.E.	Munich	Jews Burned Alive

1290 C.E.	England	King Edward I issues an edict banishing all Jews from England. Many drowned.

1291 C.E.	France	The Jewish refugees from England are promptly expelled from France.

1292 C.E.	Italy	Forced conversions & expulsion of the Italian Jewish community.

1298 C.E.	Germany	The libel of the "Desecrated Host" is perpetrated against the Jews of Germany. Approximately 150 Jewish communities undergo forced conversion.

1298 C.E.	Franconia, Bavaria & Austria	Reindfel's Decree is propagated against the Jews of Franconia and Bavarai. Riots against these Jewish communities, as well as those in Austria, result in the massacre of 100,000 Jews over a six-month period.

1306 C.E.	France	Expulsion

1308 C.E.	Strasbourg	Jews Burned Alive

1320 C.E.	Toulouse & Perpigon	120 Communities Massacred & Talmud Burned

1321 C.E.	Teruel	Public Executions

1328 C.E.	Estella	5,000 Jews Slaughtered

1348 C.E.	France & Spain	Jews Burned Alive

1348 C.E.	Switzerland	Expulsion

1349 C.E.	Worms, Strasbourg, Oppenheim, Mayence, Erfurt, Bavaria & Swabia	Jews Burned Alive

1349 C.E.	Heilbronn (Germany)	Expulsion

1349 C.E.	Hungary	Expulsion

1354 C.E.	Castile (Spain)	12,000 Jews Slaughtered

1368 C.E.	Toledo	8,000 Jews Slaughtered

1370 C.E.	Majorca., Penignon & Barcelona	Mob Attack

1377 C.E.	Huesca (Spain)	Jews Burned Alive

1380 C.E.	Paris	Mob Attack

1384 C.E.	Nordlingen	Mass Murder

1388 C.E.	Strasbourg	Expulsion

1389 C.E.	Prague	Mass Slaughter & Book Burning

1391 C.E.	Castille, Toledo, Madrid, Seville, Cordova, Cuenca & Barcelona	Forced Conversions & Mass Murder

1394 C.E.	Germany	Expulsion

1394 C.E.	France	Expulsion

1399 C.E.	Posen (Poland)	Jews Burned Alive

1400 C.E.	Prague	Stake Burnings

1407 C.E.	Cracow	Mob Attack

1415 C.E.	Rome	Talmud Confiscated

1422 C.E.	Austria	Jews Burned Alive

1422 C.E.	Austria	Expulsion

1424 C.E.	Fribourg & Zurich	Expulsion

1426 C.E.	Cologne	Expulsion

1431 C.E.	Southern Germany	Jews Burned Alive

1432 C.E.	Savory	Expulsion

1438 C.E.	Mainz	Expulsion

1439 C.E.	Augsburg	Expulsion

1449 C.E.	Toledo	Public Torture &. Burnings

1456 C.E.	Bavaria	Expulsion

1453 C.E.	Franconia	Expulsion

1453 C.E.	Breslau	Expulsion

1454 C.E.	Wurzburg	Expulsion

1463 C.E.	Cracow	Mob Attack

1473 C.E.	Andalusia	Mob Attack

1480 C.E.	Venice	Jews Burned Alive

1481 C.E.	Seville	Stake Burnings

1484 C.E.	Cuidad Real, Guadalupe, Saragossa & Teruel	Jews Burned Alive

1485 C.E.	Vincenza (Italy)	Expulsion

1486 C.E.	Toledo	Jews Burned Alive

1488 C.E.	Toledo	Stake Burnings

1490 C.E.	Toledo	Public Executions

1491 C.E.	Astorga	Public Torture & Execution

1492 C.E.	Spain	Expulsion

1495 C.E.	Lithuania	Expulsion

1497 C.E.	Portugal	Expulsion

1499 C.E.	Germany	Expulsion

1506 C.E.	Lisbon	Mob Attack

1510 C.E.	Berlin	Public Torture & Execution

1514 C.E.	Strasbourg	Expulsion

1519 C.E.	Regensburg	Expulsion

1539 C.E.	Cracow & Portugal	Stake Burnings

1540 C.E.	Naples	Expulsion

1542 C.E.	Bohemia	Expulsion

1550 C.E.	Genoa	Expulsion

1551 C.E.	Bavaria	Expulsion

1555 C.E.	Pesaro	Expulsion

1556 C.E.	Sokhachev (Poland)	Public Torture & Execution

1559 C.E.	Austria	Expulsion

1561 C.E.	Prague	Expulsion

1567 C.E.	Wurzburg	Expulsion

1569 C.E.	Papal States	Expulsion

1571 C.E.	Brandenburg	Expulsion

1582 C.E.	Netherlands	Expulsion

1593 C.E.	Brunswick	Expulsion

1597 C.E.	Cremona, Pavia & Lodi	Expulsion

1614 C.E.	Frankfort	Expulsion

1615 C.E.	Worms	Expulsion

1619 C.E.	Kiev	Expulsion

1635 C.E.	Vilna	Mob Attack

1637 C.E.	Cracow	Public Torture & Execution

1647 C.E.	Lisbon	Jews Burned Alive

1648 C.E.	Poland	1/3 of Jewry Slaughtered

1649 C.E.	Ukraine	Expulsion

1649 C.E.	Hamburg	Expulsion

1652 C.E.	Lisbon	Stake Burnings

1654 C.E.	Little Russia	Expulsion

1656 C.E.	Lithuania	Expulsion

1660 C.E.	Seville	Jews Burned Alive

1663 C.E	Cracow	Public Torture &. Execution

1664 C.E.	Lemberg	Mob Attack

1669 C.E.	Oran (North Africa)	Expulsion

1670 C.E.	Vienna	Expulsion

1671 C.E.	Minsk	Mob Attacks

1681 C.E.	Vilna	Mob Attacks

1682 C.E.	Cracow	Mob Attacks

1687 C.E.	Posen	Mob Attacks

1712 C.E.	Sandomir	Expulsion

1727 C.E.	Russia	Expulsion

1738 C.E.	Wurtemburg	Expulsion

1740 C.E.	Liule Russia	Expulsion

1744 C.E	Bohemia	Expulsion

1744 C.E.	Livonia	Expulsion

1745 C.E.	Moravia	Expulsion

1753 C.E.	Kovad (Lithuania)	Expulsion

1757 C.E.	Kamenetz	Talmud Burning

1761 C.E.	Bordeaux	Expulsion

1768 C.E.	Kiev	3,000 Jews Slaughtered

1772 C.E.	Russia	Expulsion

1775 C.E.	Warsaw	Expulsion

1789 C.E.	Alsace	Expulsion

1801 C.E.	Bucharest	Mob Attack

1804 C.E.	Russian Villages	Expulsion

1808 C.E.	Russian Countryside	Expulsion

1815 C.E.	Lubeck & Bremen	Expulsion

1820 C.E.	Bremes	Expulsion

1843 C.E.	Austria & Prussia	Expulsion

1850 C.E.	New York City	500 People, Led by Police, Attacked & Wrecked Jewish Synagogue

1862 C.E.	Area under General Grant's Jurisdiction in the United States	Expulsion

1866 C.E	Galatz (Romania)	Expulsion

1871 C.E.	Odena	Mob Attack

1887 C.E.	Slovakia	Mob Attacks

1897 C.E.	Kantakuzenka (Russia)	Mob Attacks

1898 C.E.	Rennes (France)	Mob Attack

1899 C.E.	Nicholayev	Mob Attack

1900 C.E.	Konitz (Prussia)	Mob Attack

1902 C.E.	Poland	Widespread Pogroms

1904 C.E.	Manchuria, Kiev & Volhynia	Widespread Pogroms

1905 C.E.	Zhitomir (Yolhynia)	Mob Attacks

1919 C.E	Bavaria	Expulsion

1915 C.E.	Georgia (U.S.A.)	Leo Frank Lynched

1919 C.E.	Prague	Wide Spread Pogroms

1920 C.E.	Munich & Breslau	Mob Attacks

1922 C.E.	Boston, MA	Lawrence Lowell, President of Harvard, calls for Quota Restrictions on Jewish Admission

1926 C.E.	Uzbekistan	Pogrom

1928 C.E.	Hungary	Widespread Anti-Semitic Riots on University Campuses

1929 C.E.	Lemberg (Poland)	Mob Attacks

1930 C.E.	Berlin	Mob Attack

1933 C.E.	Bucharest	Mob Attacks

1938-45 C.E.	Europe	Holocaust

German POW's Diary Reveals More Of Ike's Holocaust

2011-04-28T00:21:00.000-07:00

German POW's Diary Reveals More Of Ike's Holocaust
12-29-3

Note - The following diary extract has been provided by the nephew of the author under the conditions we honor his request for anonymity. -ed

A transcript of my Uncle's words...from my Mother's diary:

"Suddenly an American Jeep moved towards us and several American Soldiers surrounded us. There was no officer in charge, and the first thing the 'Amis' did - they liberated us, I mean, from our few valuables, mainly rings and watches........ We were now prisoners of war- no doubt about it!

The first night we were herded into a barn, where we met about 100 men who shared the same fate. To make my story short, we were finally transported to Fuerstenfeldbruck near Munich. Here we, who were gathered around Hermann, interrupted him and gasped in dismay.

Fuerstenfeldbruck had become known to us as one of the most cruel POW camps in the American zone.

Then my brother continued:

Again we were searched and had to surrender everything, even our field utensils, except a spoon. Here, in freezing temperature, 20,000 of us were squeezed together on the naked ground, without blanket or cover, exposed day and night to the winter weather.

For six days we received neither food nor water! We used our spoons to catch drops of rain.

We were surrounded by heavy tanks. During the night bright searchlights blinded us, so that sleep was impossible. We napped from time to time, standing up and leaning against each other. It was keeping us warmer that sitting on the frozen ground.

Many of us were near collapse. One of our comrades went mad, he jumped around wildly, wailing and whimpering. he was shot at once. His body was lying on the ground, and we were not allowed to come near him. He was not he only one. Each suspicious movement caused the guards to shoot into the crowd, and a few were always hit.

German civilians, mainly women of the surrounding villages, tried to approach the camp to bring food and water for us prisoners. they were chased away.

Our German officers could finally succeed to submit an official protest, particularly because of the deprivation of water. As a response, a fire hose was thrown into the midst of the densely crowded prisoners and then turned on. Because of the high water pressure the hose moved violently to and fro. Prisoners tumbled, fell, got up and ran again to catch a bit of water. In that confusion the water went to waste, and the ground under us turned into slippery mud. All the while the 'Amis' watched that spectacle, finding it very funny and most entertaining. They laughed at our predicament as hard as they could. Then suddenly, they turned the water off again.

We had not expected that the Americans would behave in such a manner. We could hardly believe it. War brutalizes human beings.

One day later we were organized into groups of 400 men .... We were to receive two cans of food for each man. This is how it was to be done: The prisoners had to run through he slippery mud, and each one had to grab his two cans quickly, at the moment he passed the guards. One of my comrades slipped and could not run fast enough, He was shot at once ....

On May 10th , several truckloads of us were transported the the garrison of Ulm by the Danube..... As each man jumped into the truck, a guard kicked him in the backbone with his rifle butt.

We arrived in the city of Heilbronn by the Neckar, In the end we counted 240,000 men, who lived on the naked ground and without cover.

Spring and summer were mild this year, but we were starving. At 6;00 am we received coffee, at noon about a pint of soup and 100 grams of bread a day........

The 'Amis' gave us newspapers in German language, describing the terrors of the concentration camps. We did not believe any of it. We figured the Americans only wanted to demoralize us further.

The fields on which we lived belonged to the farmers of the area...soon nothing of the clover and other sprouting greens were left, and the trees were barren. We had eaten each blade of grass.....

In some camps there were Hungarian POW's. 15,000 of them. Mutiny against their officers broke out twice amongst them. After the second mutiny the Americans decided to use German prisoners to govern the Hungarians. Since the Hungarians were used as workers they were well fed. There was more food than they could eat. But when the Germans asked the Americans for permission to bring the Hungarians' leftovers into the camps of the starving Germans, it was denied. The Americans rather destroyed surplus food, than giving it to the Germans.

Sometimes it happened that groups of our own men were gathered and transported away. We presumed they were discharged to go home, and naturally, we wished to be among them. Much later we heard they were sent to labor camps! My mother's cousin, feared that he would be drafted into the Hitler Youth SS, he volunteered to the marines, in 1945 his unit was in Denmark. On April 20th they were captured by the Americans. his experience in the POW camp was identical that of my brother's. They lived in open fields, did not receive and food and water the first six days, and starved nearly to death. German wives and mothers who wanted to throw loaves of bread over the fence, were chased off. The prisoners, just to have something to chew, scraped the bark from young trees. my cousins job was to report each morning how many had died during the night. "and these were not just a few!" he adds to his report he wrote me.

It became known, that the conditions in the POW camps in the American Zone were identical everywhere. We could therefore safely conclude, that it was by intent and by orders from higher ups to starve the German POW's and we blamed General Eisenhower for it. He, who was of German descent could not discern the evildoers during the Nazi time from our decent people. We held that neglect of knowledge and understanding severely against him.

I wish to quote the inscription on the grave stones of those of my German compatriots who have already passed away:

"We had to pass through fire and through water. But now you have loosened our bonds."

Sugar: The Bitter Truth

2011-04-27T05:44:00.000-07:00

Robert H. Lustig, MD, UCSF Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology, explores the damage caused by sugary foods. He argues that fructose (too much) and fiber (not enough) appear to be cornerstones of the obesity epidemic through their effects on insulin.

Series: UCSF Mini Medical School for the Public [7/2009] [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 16717]

Inside Job - The Movie

2011-04-19T16:24:00.000-07:00

If there is one film you should see...that film is Inside Job by Charles Ferguson.

President Andrew Jackson’s Veto Message Regarding the Bank of the United States; July 10, 1832

2011-04-19T10:21:00.000-07:00

President Andrew Jackson’s Veto Message

Regarding the Bank of the United States; July 10, 1832

WASHINGTON, July 10, 1832

To the Senate.

The bill ” to modify and continue ” the act entitled “An act to incorporate the subscribers to the Bank of the United States ” was presented to me on the 4th July instant. Having considered it with that solemn regard to the principles of the Constitution which the day was calculated to inspire, and come to the conclusion that it ought not to become a law, I herewith return it to the Senate, in which it originated, with my objections.

A bank of the United States is in many respects convenient for the Government and useful to the people. Entertaining this opinion, and deeply impressed with the belief that some of the powers and privileges possessed by the existing bank are unauthorized by the Constitution, subversive of the rights of the States, and dangerous to the liberties of the people, I felt it my duty at an early period of my Administration to call the attention of Congress to the practicability of organizing an institution combining all its advantages and obviating these objections. I sincerely regret that in the act before me I can perceive none of those modifications of the bank charter which are necessary, in my opinion, to make it compatible with justice, with sound policy, or with the Constitution of our country.

The present corporate body, denominated the president, directors, and company of the Bank of the United States, will have existed at the time this act is intended to take effect twenty years. It enjoys an exclusive privilege of banking under the authority of the General Government, a monopoly of its favor and support, and, as a necessary consequence, almost a monopoly of the foreign and domestic exchange. The powers, privileges, and favors bestowed upon it in the original charter, by increasing the value of the stock far above its par value, operated as a gratuity of many millions to the stockholders.

An apology may be found for the failure to guard against this result in the consideration that the effect of the original act of incorporation could not be certainly foreseen at the time of its passage. The act before me proposes another gratuity to the holders of the same stock, and in many cases to the same men, of at least seven millions more. This donation finds no apology in any uncertainty as to the effect of the act. On all hands it is conceded that its passage will increase at least so or 30 per cent more the market price of the stock, subject to the payment of the annuity of $200,000 per year secured by the act, thus adding in a moment one-fourth to its par value. It is not our own citizens only who are to receive the bounty of our Government. More than eight millions of the stock of this bank are held by foreigners. By this act the American Republic proposes virtually to make them a present of some millions of dollars. For these gratuities to foreigners and to some of our own opulent citizens the act secures no equivalent whatever. They are the certain gains of the present stockholders under the operation of this act, after making full allowance for the payment of the bonus.

Every monopoly and all exclusive privileges are granted at the expense of the public, which ought to receive a fair equivalent. The many millions which this act proposes to bestow on the stockholders of the existing bank must come directly or indirectly out of the earnings of the American people. It is due to them, therefore, if their Government sell monopolies and exclusive privileges, that they should at least exact for them as much as they are worth in open market. The value of the monopoly in this case may be correctly ascertained. The twenty-eight millions of stock would probably be at an advance of 50 per cent, and command in market at least $42,000,000, subject to the payment of the present bonus. The present value of the monopoly, therefore, is $17,000,000, and this the act proposes to sell for three millions, payable in fifteen annual installments of $200,000 each.

It is not conceivable how the present stockholders can have any claim to the special favor of the Government. The present corporation has enjoyed its monopoly during the period stipulated in the original contract. If we must have such a corporation, why should not the Government sell out the whole stock and thus secure to the people the full market value of the privileges granted? Why should not Congress create and sell twenty-eight millions of stock, incorporating the purchasers with all the powers and privileges secured in this act and putting the premium upon the sales into the Treasury?

But this act does not permit competition in the purchase of this monopoly. It seems to be predicated on the erroneous idea that the present stockholders have a prescriptive right not only to the favor but to the bounty of Government. It appears that more than a fourth part of the stock is held by foreigners and the residue is held by a few hundred of our own citizens, chiefly of the richest class. For their benefit does this act exclude the whole American people from competition in the purchase of this monopoly and dispose of it for many millions less than it is worth. This seems the less excusable because some of our citizens not now stockholders petitioned that the door of competition might be opened, and offered to take a charter on terms much more favorable to the Government and country.

But this proposition, although made by men whose aggregate wealth is believed to be equal to all the private stock in the existing bank, has been set aside, and the bounty of our Government is proposed to be again bestowed on the few who have been fortunate enough to secure the stock and at this moment wield the power of the existing institution. I can not perceive the justice or policy of this course. If our Government must sell monopolies, it would seem to be its duty to take nothing less than their full value, and if gratuities must be made once in fifteen or twenty years let them not be bestowed on the subjects of a foreign government nor upon a designated and favored class of men in our own country. It is but justice and good policy, as far as the nature of the case will admit, to confine our favors to our own fellow-citizens, and let each in his turn enjoy an opportunity to profit by our bounty. In the bearings of the act before me upon these points I find ample reasons why it should not become a law.

It has been urged as an argument in favor of rechartering the present bank that the calling in its loans will produce great embarrassment and distress. The time allowed to close its concerns is ample, and if it has been well managed its pressure will be light, and heavy only in case its management has been bad. If, therefore, it shall produce distress, the fault will be its own, and it would furnish a reason against renewing a power which has been so obviously abused. But will there ever be a time when this reason will be less powerful? To acknowledge its force is to admit that the bank ought to be perpetual, and as a consequence the present stockholders and those inheriting their rights as successors be established a privileged order, clothed both with great political power and enjoying immense pecuniary advantages from their connection with the Government.

The modifications of the existing charter proposed by this act are not such, in my view, as make it consistent with the rights of the States or the liberties of the people. The qualification of the right of the bank to hold real estate, the limitation of its power to establish branches, and the power reserved to Congress to forbid the circulation of small notes are restrictions comparatively of little value or importance. All the objectionable principles of the existing corporation, and most of its odious features, are retained without alleviation.

The fourth section provides ” that the notes or bills of the said corporation, although the same be, on the faces thereof, respectively made payable at one place only, shall nevertheless be received by the said corporation at the bank or at any of the offices of discount and deposit thereof if tendered in liquidation or payment of any balance or balances due to said corporation or to such office of discount and deposit from any other incorporated bank.” This provision secures to the State banks a legal privilege in the Bank of the United States which is withheld from all private citizens. If a State bank in Philadelphia owe the Bank of the United States and have notes issued by the St. Louis branch, it can pay the debt with those notes, but if a merchant, mechanic, or other private citizen be in like circumstances he can not by law pay his debt with those notes, but must sell them at a discount or send them to St. Louis to be cashed. This boon conceded to the State banks, though not unjust in itself, is most odious because it does not measure out equal justice to the high and the low, the rich and the poor. To the extent of its practical effect it is a bond of union among the banking establishments of the nation, erecting them into an interest separate from that of the people, and its necessary tendency is to unite the Bank of the United States and the State banks in any measure which may be thought conducive to their common interest.

The ninth section of the act recognizes principles of worse tendency than any provision of the present charter.

It enacts that ” the cashier of the bank shall annually report to the Secretary of the Treasury the names of all stockholders who are not resident citizens of the United States, and on the application of the treasurer of any State shall make out and transmit to such treasurer a list of stockholders residing in or citizens of such State, with the amount of stock owned by each.” Although this provision, taken in connection with a decision of the Supreme Court, surrenders, by its silence, the right of the States to tax the banking institutions created by this corporation under the name of branches throughout the Union, it is evidently intended to be construed as a concession of their right to tax that portion of the stock which may be held by their own citizens and residents. In this light, if the act becomes a law, it will be understood by the States, who will probably proceed to levy a tax equal to that paid upon the stock of banks incorporated by themselves. In some States that tax is now I per cent, either on the capital or on the shares, and that may be assumed as the amount which all citizen or resident stockholders would be taxed under the operation of this act. As it is only the stock held in the States and not that employed within them which would be subject to taxation, and as the names of foreign stockholders are not to be reported to the treasurers of the States, it is obvious that the stock held by them will be exempt from this burden. Their annual profits will therefore be I per cent more than the citizen stockholders, and as the annual dividends of the bank may be safely estimated at 7 per cent, the stock will be worth 10 or 15 per cent more to foreigners than to citizens of the United States. To appreciate the effects which this state of things will produce, we must take a brief review of the operations and present condition of the Bank of the United States.

By documents submitted to Congress at the present session it appears that on the 1st of January, 1832, of the twenty-eight millions of private stock in the corporation, $8,405,500 were held by foreigners, mostly of Great Britain. The amount of stock held in the nine Western and Southwestern States is $140,200, and in the four Southern States is $5,623,100, and in the Middle and Eastern States is about $13,522,000. The profits of the bank in 1831, as shown in a statement to Congress, were about $3,455,598; of this there accrued in the nine western States about $1,640,048; in the four Southern States about $352,507, and in the Middle and Eastern States about $1,463,041. As little stock is held in the West, it is obvious that the debt of the people in that section to the bank is principally a debt to the Eastern and foreign stockholders; that the interest they pay upon it is carried into the Eastern States and into Europe, and that it is a burden upon their industry and a drain of their currency, which no country can bear without inconvenience and occasional distress. To meet this burden and equalize the exchange operations of the bank, the amount of specie drawn from those States through its branches within the last two years, as shown by its official reports, was about $6,000,000. More than half a million of this amount does not stop in the Eastern States, but passes on to Europe to pay the dividends of the foreign stockholders. In the principle of taxation recognized by this act the Western States find no adequate compensation for this perpetual burden on their industry and drain of their currency. The branch bank at Mobile made last year $95,140, yet under the provisions of this act the State of Alabama can raise no revenue from these profitable operations, because not a share of the stock is held by any of her citizens. Mississippi and Missouri are in the same condition in relation to the branches at Natchez and St. Louis, and such, in a greater or less degree, is the condition of every Western State. The tendency of the plan of taxation which this act proposes will be to place the whole United States in the same relation to foreign countries which the Western States now bear to the Eastern. When by a tax on resident stockholders the stock of this bank is made worth 10 or 15 per cent more to foreigners than to residents, most of it will inevitably leave the country.

Thus will this provision in its practical effect deprive the Eastern as well as the Southern and Western States of the means of raising a revenue from the extension of business and great profits of this institution. It will make the American people debtors to aliens in nearly the whole amount due to this bank, and send across the Atlantic from two to five millions of specie every year to pay the bank dividends.

In another of its bearings this provision is fraught with danger. Of the twenty-five directors of this bank five are chosen by the Government and twenty by the citizen stockholders. From all voice in these elections the foreign stockholders are excluded by the charter. In proportion, therefore, as the stock is transferred to foreign holders the extent of suffrage in the choice of directors is curtailed. Already is almost a third of the stock in foreign hands and not represented in elections. It is constantly passing out of the country, and this act will accelerate its departure. The entire control of the institution would necessarily fall into the hands of a few citizen stockholders, and the ease with which the object would be accomplished would be a temptation to designing men to secure that control in their own hands by monopolizing the remaining stock. There is danger that a president and directors would then be able to elect themselves from year to year, and without responsibility or control manage the whole concerns of the bank during the existence of its charter. It is easy to conceive that great evils to our country and its institutions millet flow from such a concentration of power in the hands of a few men irresponsible to the people.

Is there no danger to our liberty and independence in a bank that in its nature has so little to bind it to our country? The president of the bank has told us that most of the State banks exist by its forbearance. Should its influence become concentered, as it may under the operation of such an act as this, in the hands of a self-elected directory whose interests are identified with those of the foreign stockholders, will there not be cause to tremble for the purity of our elections in peace and for the independence of our country in war? Their power would be great whenever they might choose to exert it; but if this monopoly were regularly renewed every fifteen or twenty years on terms proposed by themselves, they might seldom in peace put forth their strength to influence elections or control the affairs of the nation. But if any private citizen or public functionary should interpose to curtail its powers or prevent a renewal of its privileges, it can not be doubted that he would be made to feel its influence.

Should the stock of the bank principally pass into the hands of the subjects of a foreign country, and we should unfortunately become involved in a war with that country, what would be our condition? Of the course which would be pursued by a bank almost wholly owned by the subjects of a foreign power, and managed by those whose interests, if not affections, would run in the same direction there can be no doubt. All its operations within would be in aid of the hostile fleets and armies without. Controlling our currency, receiving our public moneys, and holding thousands of our citizens in dependence, it would be more formidable and dangerous than the naval and military power of the enemy.

If we must have a bank with private stockholders, every consideration of sound policy and every impulse of American feeling admonishes that it should be purely American. Its stockholders should be composed exclusively of our own citizens, who at least ought to be friendly to our Government and willing to support it in times of difficulty and danger. So abundant is domestic capital that competition in subscribing for the stock of local banks has recently led almost to riots. To a bank exclusively of American stockholders, possessing the powers and privileges granted by this act, subscriptions for $200,000,000 could be readily obtained. Instead of sending abroad the stock of the bank in which the Government must deposit its funds and on which it must rely to sustain its credit in times of emergency, it would rather seem to be expedient to prohibit its sale to aliens under penalty of absolute forfeiture.

It is maintained by the advocates of the bank that its constitutionality in all its features ought to be considered as settled by precedent and by the decision of the Supreme Court. To this conclusion I can not assent. Mere precedent is a dangerous source of authority, and should not be regarded as deciding questions of constitutional power except where the acquiescence of the people and the States can be considered as well settled. So far from this being the case on this subject, an argument against the bank might be based on precedent. One Congress, in 1791, decided in favor of a bank; another, in 1811, decided against it. One Congress, in 1815, decided against a bank; another, in 1816, decided in its favor. Prior to the present Congress, therefore, the precedents drawn from that source were equal. If we resort to the States, the expressions of legislative, judicial, and executive opinions against the bank have been probably to those in its favor as 4 to 1. There is nothing in precedent, therefore, which, if its authority were admitted, ought to weigh in favor of the act before me.

If the opinion of the Supreme Court covered the whole ground of this act, it ought not to control the coordinate authorities of this Government. The Congress, the Executive, and the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution. Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others. It is as much the duty of the House of Representatives, of the Senate, and of the President to decide upon the constitutionality of any bill or resolution which may be presented to them for passage or approval as it is of the supreme judges when it may be brought before them for judicial decision. The opinion of the judges has no more authority over Congress than the opinion of Congress has over the judges, and on that point the President is independent of both. The authority of the Supreme Court must not, therefore, be permitted to control the Congress or the Executive when acting in their legislative capacities, but to have only such influence as the force of their reasoning may deserve.

But in the case relied upon the Supreme Court have not decided that all the features of this corporation are compatible with the Constitution. It is true that the court have said that the law incorporating the bank is a constitutional exercise of power by Congress; but taking into view the whole opinion of the court and the reasoning by which they have come to that conclusion, I understand them to have decided that inasmuch as a bank is an appropriate means for carrying into effect the enumerated powers of the General Government, therefore the law incorporating it is in accordance with that provision of the Constitution which declares that Congress shall have power ” to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying those powers into execution. ” Having satisfied themselves that the word “necessary” in the Constitution means needful,” “requisite,” “essential,” “conducive to,” and that “a bank” is a convenient, a useful, and essential instrument in the prosecution of the Government’s “fiscal operations,” they conclude that to “use one must be within the discretion of Congress ” and that ” the act to incorporate the Bank of the United States is a law made in pursuance of the Constitution;” “but, ” say they, “where the law is not prohibited and is really calculated to effect any of the objects intrusted to the Government, to undertake here to inquire into the degree of its necessity would be to pass the line which circumscribes the judicial department and to tread on legislative ground.”

The principle here affirmed is that the “degree of its necessity,” involving all the details of a banking institution, is a question exclusively for legislative consideration. A bank is constitutional, but it is the province of the Legislature to determine whether this or that particular power, privilege, or exemption is “necessary and proper” to enable the bank to discharge its duties to the Government, and from their decision there is no appeal to the courts of justice. Under the decision of the Supreme Court, therefore, it is the exclusive province of Congress and the President to decide whether the particular features of this act are necessary and proper in order to enable the bank to perform conveniently and efficiently the public duties assigned to it as a fiscal agent, and therefore constitutional, or unnecessary and improper, and therefore unconstitutional.

Without commenting on the general principle affirmed by the Supreme Court, let us examine the details of this act in accordance with the rule of legislative action which they have laid down. It will be found that many of the powers and privileges conferred on it can not be supposed necessary for the purpose for which it is proposed to be created, and are not, therefore, means necessary to attain the end in view, and consequently not justified by the Constitution.

The original act of incorporation, section 2I, enacts “that no other bank shall be established by any future law of the United States during the continuance of the corporation hereby created, for which the faith of the United States is hereby pledged: Provided, Congress may renew existing charters for banks within the District of Columbia not increasing the capital thereof, and may also establish any other bank or banks in said District with capitals not exceeding in the whole $6,000,000 if they shall deem it expedient.” This provision is continued in force by the act before me fifteen years from the ad of March, 1836.

If Congress possessed the power to establish one bank, they had power to establish more than one if in their opinion two or more banks had been ” necessary ” to facilitate the execution of the powers delegated to them in the Constitution. If they possessed the power to establish a second bank, it was a power derived from the Constitution to be exercised from time to time, and at any time when the interests of the country or the emergencies of the Government might make it expedient. It was possessed by one Congress as well as another, and by all Congresses alike, and alike at every session. But the Congress of 1816 have taken it away from their successors for twenty years, and the Congress of 1832 proposes to abolish it for fifteen years more. It can not be “necessary” or “proper” for Congress to barter away or divest themselves of any of the powers-vested in them by the Constitution to be exercised for the public good. It is not ” necessary ” to the efficiency of the bank, nor is it “proper” in relation to themselves and their successors. They may properly use the discretion vested in them, but they may not limit the discretion of their successors. This restriction on themselves and grant of a monopoly to the bank is therefore unconstitutional.

In another point of view this provision is a palpable attempt to amend the Constitution by an act of legislation. The Constitution declares that “the Congress shall have power to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever” over the District of Columbia. Its constitutional power, therefore, to establish banks in the District of Columbia and increase their capital at will is unlimited and uncontrollable by any other power than that which gave authority to the Constitution. Yet this act declares that Congress shall not increase the capital of existing banks, nor create other banks with capitals exceeding in the whole $6,000,000. The Constitution declares that Congress shall have power to exercise exclusive legislation over this District “in all cases whatsoever,” and this act declares they shall not. Which is the supreme law of the land? This provision can not be “necessary” or “proper” or constitutional unless the absurdity be admitted that whenever it be “necessary and proper ” in the opinion of Congress they have a right to barter away one portion of the powers vested in them by the Constitution as a means of executing the rest.

On two subjects only does the Constitution recognize in Congress the power to grant exclusive privileges or monopolies. It declares that “Congress shall have power to promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.” Out of this express delegation of power have grown our laws of patents and copyrights. As the Constitution expressly delegates to Congress the power to grant exclusive privileges in these cases as the means of executing the substantive power ” to promote the progress of science and useful arts,” it is consistent with the fair rules of construction to conclude that such a power was not intended to be granted as a means of accomplishing any other end. On every other subject which comes within the scope of Congressional power there is an ever-living discretion in the use of proper means, which can not be restricted or abolished without an amendment of the Constitution. Every act of Congress, therefore, which attempts by grants of monopolies or sale of exclusive privileges for a limited time, or a time without limit, to restrict or extinguish its own discretion in the choice of means to execute its delegated powers is equivalent to a legislative amendment of the Constitution, and palpably unconstitutional.

This act authorizes and encourages transfers of its stock to foreigners and grants them an exemption from all State and national taxation. So far from being “necessary and proper” that the bank should possess this power to make it a safe and efficient agent of the Government in its fiscal operations, it is calculated to convert the Bank of the United States into a foreign bank, to impoverish our people in time of peace, to disseminate a foreign influence through every section of the Republic, and in war to endanger our independence.

The several States reserved the power at the formation of the Constitution to regulate and control titles and transfers of real property, and most, if not all, of them have laws disqualifying aliens from acquiring or holding lands within their limits. But this act, in disregard of the undoubted right of the States to prescribe such disqualifications, gives to aliens stockholders in this bank an interest and title, as members of the corporation, to all the real property it may acquire within any of the States of this Union. This privilege granted to aliens is not “necessary” to enable the bank to perform its public duties, nor in any sense “proper,” because it is vitally subversive of the rights of the States.

The Government of the United States have no constitutional power to purchase lands within the States except “for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings,” and even for these objects only “by the consent of the legislature of the State in which the same shall be.” By making themselves stockholders in the bank and granting to the corporation the power to purchase lands for other purposes they assume a power not granted in the Constitution and grant to others what they do not themselves possess. It is not necessary to the receiving, safe-keeping, or transmission of the funds of the Government that the bank should possess this power, and it is not proper that Congress should thus enlarge the powers delegated to them in the Constitution.

The old Bank of the United States possessed a capital of only $11,000,000, which was found fully sufficient to enable it with dispatch and safety to perform all the functions required of it by the Government. The capital of the present bank is $35,000,000-at least twenty-four more than experience has proved to be necessary to enable a bank to perform its public functions. The public debt which existed during the period of the old bank and on the establishment of the new has been nearly paid off, and our revenue will soon be reduced. This increase of capital is therefore not for public but for private purposes.

The Government is the only “proper” judge where its agents should reside and keep their offices, because it best knows where their presence will be “necessary.” It can not, therefore, be “necessary” or “proper” to authorize the bank to locate branches where it pleases to perform the public service, without consulting the Government, and contrary to its will. The principle laid down by the Supreme Court concedes that Congress can not establish a bank for purposes of private speculation and gain, but only as a means of executing the delegated powers of the General Government. By the same principle a branch bank can not constitutionally be established for other than public purposes. The power which this act gives to establish two branches in any State, without the injunction or request of the Government and for other than public purposes, is not “necessary” to the due execution of the powers delegated to Congress.

The bonus which is exacted from the bank is a confession upon the face of the act that the powers granted by it are greater than are “necessary” to its character of a fiscal agent. The Government does not tax its officers and agents for the privilege of serving it. The bonus of a million and a half required by the original charter and that of three millions proposed by this act are not exacted for the privilege of giving “the necessary facilities for transferring the public funds from place to place within the United States or the Territories thereof, and for distributing the same in payment of the public creditors without charging commission or claiming allowance on account of the difference of exchange,” as required by the act of incorporation, but for something more beneficial to the stockholders. The original act declares that it (the bonus) is granted ” in consideration of the exclusive privileges and benefits conferred by this act upon the said bank, ” and the act before me declares it to be “in consideration of the exclusive benefits and privileges continued by this act to the said corporation for fifteen years, as aforesaid.” It is therefore for “exclusive privileges and benefits” conferred for their own use and emolument, and not for the advantage of the Government, that a bonus is exacted. These surplus powers for which the bank is required to pay can not surely be “necessary” to make it the fiscal agent of the Treasury. If they were, the exaction of a bonus for them would not be ” proper.”

It is maintained by some that the bank is a means of executing the constitutional power “to coin money and regulate the value thereof.” Congress have established a mint to coin money and passed laws to regulate the value thereof. The money so coined, with its value so regulated, and such foreign coins as Congress may adopt are the only currency known to the Constitution. But if they have other power to regulate the currency, it was conferred to be exercised by themselves, and not to be transferred to a corporation. If the bank be established for that purpose, with a charter unalterable without its consent, Congress have parted with their power for a term of years, during which the Constitution is a dead letter. It is neither necessary nor proper to transfer its legislative power to such a bank, and therefore unconstitutional.

By its silence, considered in connection with the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of McCulloch against the State of Maryland, this act takes from the States the power to tax a portion of the banking business carried on within their limits, in subversion of one of the strongest barriers which secured them against Federal encroachments. Banking, like farming, manufacturing, or any other occupation or profession, is a business, the right to follow which is not originally derived from the laws. Every citizen and every company of citizens in all of our States possessed the right until the State legislatures deemed it good policy to prohibit private banking by law. If the prohibitory State laws were now repealed, every citizen would again possess the right. The State banks are a qualified restoration of the right which has been taken away by the laws against banking, guarded by such provisions and limitations as in the opinion of the State legislatures the public interest requires. These corporations, unless there be an exemption in their charter, are, like private bankers and banking companies, subject to State taxation. The manner in which these taxes shall be laid depends wholly on legislative discretion. It may be upon the bank, upon the stock, upon the profits, or in any other mode which the sovereign power shall will.

Upon the formation of the Constitution the States guarded their taxing power with peculiar jealousy. They surrendered it only as it regards imports and exports. In relation to every other object within their jurisdiction, whether persons, property, business, or professions, it was secured in as ample a manner as it was before possessed. All persons, though United States officers, are liable to a poll tax by the States within which they reside. The lands of the United States are liable to the usual land tax, except in the new States, from whom agreements that they will not tax unsold lands are exacted when they are admitted into the Union. Horses, wagons, any beasts or vehicles, tools, or property belonging to private citizens, though employed in the service of the United States, are subject to State taxation. Every private business, whether carried on by an officer of the General Government or not, whether it be mixed with public concerns or not, even if it be carried on by the Government of the United States itself, separately or in partnership, falls within the scope of the taxing power of the State. Nothing comes more fully within it than banks and the business of banking, by whomsoever instituted and carried on. Over this whole subject-matter it is just as absolute, unlimited, and uncontrollable as if the Constitution had never been adopted, because in the formation of that instrument it was reserved without qualification.

The principle is conceded that the States can not rightfully tax the operations of the General Government. They can not tax the money of the Government deposited in the State banks, nor the agency of those banks in remitting it; but will any man maintain that their mere selection to perform this public service for the General Government would exempt the State banks and their ordinary business from State taxation? Had the United States, instead of establishing a bank at Philadelphia, employed a private banker to keep and transmit their funds, would it have deprived Pennsylvania of the right to tax his bank and his usual banking operations? It will not be pretended. Upon what principal, then, are the banking establishments of the Bank of the United States and their usual banking operations to be exempted from taxation ? It is not their public agency or the deposits of the Government which the States claim a right to tax, but their banks and their banking powers, instituted and exercised within State jurisdiction for their private emolument-those powers and privileges for which they pay a bonus, and which the States tax in their own banks. The exercise of these powers within a State, no matter by whom or under what authority, whether by private citizens in their original right, by corporate bodies created by the States, by foreigners or the agents of foreign governments located within their limits, forms a legitimate object of State taxation. From this and like sources, from the persons, property, and business that are found residing, located, or carried on under their jurisdiction, must the States, since the surrender of their right to raise a revenue from imports and exports, draw all the money necessary for the support of their governments and the maintenance of their independence. There is no more appropriate subject of taxation than banks, banking, and bank stocks, and none to which the States ought more pertinaciously to cling.

It can not be necessary to the character of the bank as a fiscal agent of the Government that its private business should be exempted from that taxation to which all the State banks are liable, nor can I conceive it “proper” that the substantive and most essential powers reserved by the States shall be thus attacked and annihilated as a means of executing the powers delegated to the General Government. It may be safely assumed that none of those sages who had an agency in forming or adopting our Constitution ever imagined that any portion of the taxing power of the States not prohibited to them nor delegated to Congress was to be swept away and annihilated as a means of executing certain powers delegated to Congress.

If our power over means is so absolute that the Supreme Court will not call in question the constitutionality of an act of Congress the subject of which “is not prohibited, and is really calculated to effect any of the objects intrusted to the Government,” although, as in the case before me, it takes away powers expressly granted to Congress and rights scrupulously reserved to the States, it becomes us to proceed in our legislation with the utmost caution. Though not directly, our own powers and the rights of the States may be indirectly legislated away in the use of means to execute substantive powers. We may not enact that Congress shall not have the power of exclusive legislation over the District of Columbia, but we may pledge the faith of the United States that as a means of executing other powers it shall not be exercised for twenty years or forever. We may not pass an act prohibiting the States to tax the banking business carried on within their limits, but we may, as a means of executing our powers over other objects, place that business in the hands of our agents and then declare it exempt from State taxation in their hands. Thus may our own powers and the rights of the States, which we can not directly curtail or invade, be frittered away and extinguished in the use of means employed by us to execute other powers. That a bank of the United States, competent to all the duties which may be required by the Government, might be so organized as not to infringe on our own delegated powers or the reserved rights of the States I do not entertain a doubt. Had the Executive been called upon to furnish the project of such an institution, the duty would have been cheerfully performed. In the absence of such a call it was obviously proper that he should confine himself to pointing out those prominent features in the act presented which in his opinion make it incompatible with the Constitution and sound policy. A general discussion will now take place, eliciting new light and settling important principles; and a new Congress, elected in the midst of such discussion, and furnishing an equal representation of the people according to the last census, will bear to the Capitol the verdict of public opinion, and, I doubt not, bring this important question to a satisfactory result.

Under such circumstances the bank comes forward and asks a renewal of its charter for a term of fifteen years upon conditions which not only operate as a gratuity to the stockholders of many millions of dollars, but will sanction any abuses and legalize any encroachments.

Suspicions are entertained and charges are made of gross abuse and violation of its charter. An investigation unwillingly conceded and so restricted in time as necessarily to make it incomplete and unsatisfactory discloses enough to excite suspicion and alarm. In the practices of the principal bank partially unveiled, in the absence of important witnesses, and in numerous charges confidently made and as yet wholly uninvestigated there was enough to induce a majority of the committee of investigation-a committee which was selected from the most able and honorable members of the House of Representatives-to recommend a suspension of further action upon the bill and a prosecution of the inquiry. As the charter had yet four years to run, and as a renewal now was not necessary to the successful prosecution of its business, it was to have been expected that the bank itself, conscious of its purity and proud of its character, would have withdrawn its application for the present, and demanded the severest scrutiny into all its transactions. In their declining to do so there seems to be an additional reason why the functionaries of the Government should proceed with less haste and more caution in the rene\val of their monopoly.

The bank is professedly established as an agent of the executive branch of the Government, and its constitutionality is maintained on that ground. Neither upon the propriety of present action nor upon the provisions of this act was the Executive consulted. It has had no opportunity to say that it neither needs nor wants an agent clothed with such powers and favored by such exemptions. There is nothing in its legitimate functions which makes it necessary or proper. Whatever interest or influence, whether public or private, has given birth to this act, it can not be found either in the wishes or necessities of the executive department, by which present action is deemed premature, and the powers conferred upon its agent not only unnecessary, but dangerous to the Government and country.

It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes. Distinctions in society will always exist under every just government. Equality of talents, of education, or of wealth can not be produced by human institutions. In the full enjoyment of the gifts of Heaven and the fruits of superior industry, economy, and virtue, every man is equally entitled to protection by law; but when the laws undertake to add to these natural and just advantages artificial distinctions, to grant titles, gratuities, and exclusive privileges, to make the rich richer and the potent more powerful, the humble members of society-the farmers, mechanics, and laborers-who have neither the time nor the means of securing like favors to themselves, have a right to complain of the injustice of their Government. There are no necessary evils in government. Its evils exist only in its abuses. If it would confine itself to equal protection, and, as Heaven does its rains, shower its favors alike on the high and the low, the rich and the poor, it would be an unqualified blessing. In the act before me there seems to be a wide and unnecessary departure from these just principles.

Nor is our Government to be maintained or our Union preserved by invasions of the rights and powers of the several States. In thus attempting to make our General Government strong we make it weak. Its true strength consists in leaving individuals and States as much as possible to themselves-in making itself felt, not in its power, but in its beneficence; not in its control, but in its protection; not in binding the States more closely to the center, but leaving each to move unobstructed in its proper orbit.

Experience should teach us wisdom. Most of the difficulties our Government now encounters and most of the dangers which impend over our Union have sprung from an abandonment of the legitimate objects of Government by our national legislation, and the adoption of such principles as are embodied in this act. Many of our rich men have not been content with equal protection and equal benefits, but have besought us to make them richer by act of Congress. By attempting to gratify their desires we have in the results of our legislation arrayed section against section, interest against interest, and man against man, in a fearful commotion which threatens to shake the foundations of our Union. It is time to pause in our career to review our principles, and if possible revive that devoted patriotism and spirit of compromise which distinguished the sages of the Revolution and the fathers of our Union. If we can not at once, in justice to interests vested under improvident legislation, make our Government what it ought to be, we can at least take a stand against all new grants of monopolies and exclusive privileges, against any prostitution of our Government to the advancement of the few at the expense of the many, and in favor of compromise and gradual reform in our code of laws and system of political economy.

I have now done my duty to my country. If sustained by my fellow citizens, I shall be grateful and happy; if not, I shall find in the motives which impel me ample grounds for contentment and peace. In the difficulties which surround us and the dangers which threaten our institutions there is cause for neither dismay nor alarm. For relief and deliverance let us firmly rely on that kind Providence which I am sure watches with peculiar care over the destinies of our Republic, and on the intelligence and wisdom of our countrymen. Through His abundant goodness and heir patriotic devotion our liberty and Union will be preserved.

Thanks to the fine fellows at The Money Masters for this information - let's take our country back.

Charedi Rabbis Rush To Disavow Anti-Gentile Book - The Jewish Forward

2011-04-10T02:57:00.000-07:00

Charedi Rabbis Rush To Disavow Anti-Gentile Book

By Allan Nadler

Published December 19, 2003, issue of December 19, 2003.

Leaders of the country’s most prominent ultra-Orthodox yeshiva are scrambling to distance themselves from a book by one of their disciples, which argues that gentiles are “completely evil” and Jews constitute a separate, genetically superior species.

Written by Rabbi Saadya Grama — an alumnus of Beth Medrash Govoha, the renowned yeshiva in Lakewood, N.J. — the self-published book attempts to employ classical Jewish sources in defense of a race-based theory of Jewish supremacy. Grama’s book, published in Hebrew under the title “Romemut Yisrael Ufarashat Hagalut,” includes flowery endorsements from the most revered religious scholars at the renowned Lakewood yeshiva, including the institution’s foremost religious leader, or rosh yeshiva, Rabbi Aryeh Malkiel Kotler.

Yet, in a statement issued Tuesday in response to queries from the Forward, Kotler rejected Grama’s philosophy and said that he had not carefully reviewed the text prior to endorsing it.

“We have seen the objectionable statements that allegedly appear in a sefer [book] written by Rabbi Grama, a former student at our yeshivah,” wrote Kotler, whose late grandfather Rabbi Aharon Kotler founded the Lakewood yeshiva. “I did glance briefly at the book but did not read it carefully — which is the general practice in providing approbations to the many books by alumni that come across a desk like mine.”

In his rare statement to the press, Kotler added: “In looking at the specific points allegedly contained in the sefer, I can certainly tell you that they are not reflective of normative Jewish thought and are certainly not the philosophy of our yeshivah. Our philosophy asserts that every human being is created in the image of the Lord and the primacy of integrity and honesty in all dealings without exception. I strongly repudiate any assertions in the name of Judaism that do not represent and reflect this philosophy.”

The statement Tuesday struck a dramatically different chord from Kotler’s earlier endorsement of the book, in which he said Grama has written “on the subjects of the Exile, the Election of Israel and her exaltation above and superiority to all of the other nations, all in accordance with the viewpoint of the Torah, based on the solid instruction he has received from his teachers.”

Kotler’s disavowal of the book on Tuesday came at the end of an intense, day-long scramble during which the Anti-Defamation League and the chancellor of Yeshiva University condemned the book, and several ultra-Orthodox communal spokesmen tried to convince the Forward not to report its existence. During the course of the day, a popular bookstore in the heavily Orthodox Boro Park section of Brooklyn told the Forward that it had just pulled the book off of the tables at the author’s request.

The controversy over Grama’s book comes as the yeshiva is close to securing $500,000 in federal funds for a Holocaust library (see accompanying story on Page 4).

Coincidentally, in his book, Grama argues that the Holocaust was both a divine punishment against the Jews for assimilation and also proof of the “true nature and face” of the non-Jewish world. The book’s title could be translated in several ways, including “The Grandeur of Israel and the Issue of Exile” and “Jewish Superiority and the Question of Exile.”

Grama did not return a call seeking clarification on this point and other questions about his polemic.

In his book, Grama writes: “The difference between the people of Israel and the nations of the world is an essential one. The Jew by his source and in his very essence is entirely good. The goy, by his source and in his very essence is completely evil. This is not simply a matter of religious distinction, but rather of two completely different species.”

Grama’s explanation of the Holocaust, as well as his other theories, drew harsh criticism from Rabbi Norman Lamm, chancellor of Yeshiva University and the rosh hayeshiva of its affiliated seminary. Lamm said that his only knowledge of the book came from passages provided to him by the Forward, but that he rejected what he understood to be Grama’s arguments.

“It is a book by someone who has obviously taken leave of his senses and adopted the kind of racism that was used against Jews since the beginning of time,” said Lamm, one of Modern Orthodoxy’s most prominent leaders. “I almost feel like offering a conjecture that it was written by an antisemite posing as a rabbi.”

Lamm added: “The passages that I have read managed to offend everyone — the Torah, the martyrs of the Holocaust, the Jewish ideals of justice and the essential divinity that inheres in every human being regardless of religion, race or ethnic origin.”

In an effort to back up his arguments, Grama draws on an array of racist sources ranging from medieval theological tracts to the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche to the works of Nazi figures. Among other things, Grama argues:

• The differences between Jews and gentiles are not religious, historical, cultural or political. They are, rather, racial, genetic and scientifically unalterable. The one group is at its very root and by natural constitution “totally evil” while the other is “totally good.”

• Jewish successes in the world are completely contingent upon the failure of all other peoples. Only when the gentiles face total catastrophe do the Jews experience good fortune.

• The Jews themselves brought about their own destruction during the Holocaust, since they arrogantly endeavored to overcome their very essence, dictated by divine law, by leaving their ghettoes and trying to assimilate into Christian European society. The confrontational approach of the Zionists, their boycott of German products and anti-Nazi demonstrations in particular, only exacerbated the peril to European Jewry. For this they were massacred by Hitler who, while himself an evil person, was acting as God’s agent in punishing the Jews.

Grama also argues that in opposition to Zionism’s advocacy of Jewish national self-assertion and self-defense, which he views as an imitation of “gentile ways,” the Torah mandates that the Jews, while in exile, should employ such means as appeasement, deception, duplicity and even “bribery” in their dealing with gentiles, so as to avoid their wrath.

Grama’s full-blown racialist theories appear to break new ground, building on a handful of hints of national and racial chauvinism occasionally found in the writings of a few earlier rabbinic figures, but combining them into a racialist doctrine with no precedent in rabbinic literature. To be sure, a minority stream exists in the rabbinic tradition — from the 11th- and 12th-century Hebrew romantic poet Yehuda Halevy to the 18th century chasidic sage Levi Yitzhak of Berditchev — which sees the differences between Jew and gentile as innate, rather than merely religious. Perhaps the most extreme version of this view is found in the central text of Chabad chasidism, Tanya, whose author, Rabbi Shneur Zalman of Lyadi, Chabad’s founder, maintained that Jewish and gentile souls are fundamentally different, the former “divine” and the latter “animalistic.” That viewpoint has gained ground in recent decades, particularly among charedi thinkers.

Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburgh, who is considered one of the leading ideologues of the Israeli Chabad movement, has written and spoken widely on the superiority of Jews and was briefly imprisoned in Israel for racial incitement. Yated Ne’eman, an Orthodox weekly in upstate New York that is affiliated with one of Israel’s main charedi dailies, has published essays on the question of whether medical research can be understood to apply to Jews given the innate physiological differences between Jews and gentiles.

Such arguments, however, have historically stood in tension with the prevailing rabbinic view that the righteous gentiles of the world — those who exhibit the basic ethical and moral behavior encapsulated in the “Seven Laws of Noah” — had the same access to personal salvation as fully observant Jews. This view was summed up in the 12th century by Moses Maimonides, arguably the most important Jewish sage of the past millennium, when he wrote in his code of Jewish law: “Anyone who accepts the Seven Laws of Noah and is careful to observe them is one of the righteous among the nations of the world and he has a portion in the world to come.”

Critics complained that Grama’s racial theories also conflicts with ancient and medieval rabbinic rules mandating equal treatment in all realms for converts to Judaism.

Grama frequently quotes Biblical verses that advocate terribly harsh treatment of the pagan inhabitants of ancient Canaan, implying that the same standards ought to be applied to his non-Jewish neighbors in America. By doing so, he appears to disregard extensive rabbinic deliberations dating back to the early medieval period whose general consensus was that Christianity and Islam are licit, monotheistic faiths. The net result of these medieval rabbinic deliberations was to limit the application of such Biblical laws to ancient pagans, and to mandate that Muslims and Christians could not be classified together with the idol-worshippers of earlier times.

When informed of Grama’s arguments, the associate national director of the Anti-Defamation League, Kenneth Jacobson, described them as “pure racism.”

“It shows that we in our community are quite capable of the same kind of hatred that exists in other communities,” Jacobson said. “We have an obligation to reject hatred in our community, just as we do when it comes out of other communities.”

Allan Nadler is the Director of the Jewish Studies Program at Drew University and Senior Advisor for Academic Affairs at the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research.

Congress is set to allocate $500,000 to Beth Medrash Govoha, known as the Lakewood yeshiva, for the establishment of a “Holocaust library.”

The grant was included in the 2004 Omnibus Appropriation Conference Agreement that is expected to be signed by President Bush later this month. According to congressional staffers, New Jersey’s two senators, Democrats Jon Corzine and Frank Lautenberg, inserted the money into the bill after being lobbied by Rabbi Aharon Kotler, grandson of the yeshiva’s foremost religious leader, Rabbi Aryeh Malkiel Kotler.

The allocation comes as attention is focusing on a book written by Rabbi Saadya Grama, a graduate of the yeshiva, arguing that gentiles are “completely evil” and Jews constitute a separate, genetically superior species. The book included endorsements from several of the top rabbis at the Lakewood yeshiva. But this week, Aryeh Malkiel Kotler issued a statement to the Forward saying that he had not read the book “carefully” before endorsing it and objected strongly to its alleged contents (see Page 1).

When asked about the book, Lautenberg said in a statement: “If these translations accurately portray the sentiments of Rabbi Grama’s book, I find it deeply troubling that any representative of the school would endorse these views.”

Corzine staffer David Wald would not comment on the book. But, regarding the Holocaust library, he said: “We supported the appropriation… to replace historically-important documents.”

Which documents would reside in the library is unclear. The request for federal aid sent by Aharon Kotler to the senators requested funds for “Holocaust Memorial Libraries.”

“Beth Medrash Govoha’s Holocaust Memorial Libraries will replace the institution’s famous collections of books and manuscripts that were destroyed in the Holocaust,” Kotler wrote. “The collections will include the wartime archives of U.S. and European community leaders, and thousands of scholarly works, from the pre-Holocaust, Holocaust, and immediate post-Holocaust eras.”

Later in the request, Kotler wrote, “Exhibits on the Holocaust and other events from that era will be a prominent activity at the Library/Memorial.”

Kotler said that he would be willing to discuss the project at a later date, but not the same week that the Forward was writing an article on Grama’s book.

Binyamin Speigel, the yeshiva’s head librarian, said he could not provide details regarding the library. “We don’t have a Holocaust library. It’s in future plans,” he told the Forward. Asked to provide more details, Speigel responded: “We don’t have exact plans.”

Statements from Corzine’s and Lautenberg’s offices indicate that both believe the library was meant to preserve documents nearly lost in the Holocaust. In a statement from Lautenberg, the senator declared: “I worked to secure federal funding for this library, which will house a large collection of historical documents, books and other artifacts that survived the Holocaust.” Corzine’s aide, Wald, said the funds would be used “to replace historically-important documents.”

Ami Eden and Steven I. Weiss contributed to this report.

Read more: http://www.forward.com/articles/7311/

Disavow this evil and be on the moral side of history.

Make your choice.

Predictably, YouTube censors Alan Lawson's video on the 'Holocaust', hate speech and 'stupid' Germans - Vineyard Of The Saker

2011-04-01T13:46:00.000-07:00

Predictably, YouTube censors Alan Lawson's video on the 'Holocaust', hate speech and 'stupid' Germans

Dear Sirs,

Re: Spurious Copyright Claim
YouTube Account: http://www.youtube.com/user/alawson911

I have just received the following notice:

We have disabled the following material as a result of a third-party notification from James Allan Khan claiming that this material is infringing:

Holocaust, Hate Speech & Were the Germans so Stupid?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gycNMf0xAc

I think that this is a spurious action; an attempt to infringe my right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 20 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.

While making the video in question I was careful to ensure that any material noted as being the subject of a copyright notice was not used. Furthermore, I have been unable to find any reference to a person named James Allan Khan on the Internet, using Google's search engine.

As with all of my videos, this one was made for educational purposes; I will not derive any financial benefit from uploading it, and I sincerely think that the material I've used is in the public interest and, therefore, comes under the protection of Fair Use in the copyright law (title 17, U. S. Code) as follows:

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
2. The nature of the copyrighted work
3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

If the accuser, James Allan Khan can demonstrate otherwise, I will remove the material in question and re-upload the edited video. If not, I think that it is incumbent on the owners of YouTube to try and prevent Mr. Kahn and others like him from stifling a free exchange of ideas on its otherwise excellent website.

One of the main issues I have with being accused of a copyright infringement, and having one of my videos suspended, more accurately suppressed, is that my accuser was not, apparently, required to make any specific charge as to what image or images or quoted text he has based his claim on (the only musical content in the video is my own work: a single chord).

Accusers should be bound to give YouTube's legal department a reasonable amount of detail regarding the alleged infringement—at the very least the item that has been allegedly infringed—and this should be passed on to the alleged culprit, who should be given a reasonable amount of time to dispute such a claim, before any action is taken.

Shortly, I will be uploading a video regarding this notice, giving others the benefit of what I have learned from what I think is a spurious attack on my right to freedom of expression as well as my time in having to respond to what I regard as a nuisance accusation.

Sincerely,

Anthony Lawson
-------
Addendum by The Saker

Here is the "offending" video:

Holocaust, Hate Speech & Were the Germans so Stupid? from SomberImperil on Vimeo.

If Blogger also removes this video, I will make it available for download from Rapidshare, Megaupload, Mediafire, The Pirate Bay, Demonoid, Torrent411, Rutor, Rutracker, OneBigTorrent, Wawa-Mania, Quebec-team, TorrentSpain and whatever number of file hosting sites needed to keep it available to those who care about the truth.

The Saker

It's gone, by the way...he did offer a download link to the video - get it while you can:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=JMYGT6PP

http://rapidshare.com/files/455170203/Holocaust_-_Hate_Speech_-_Were_the_Germans_so_Stupid.mp4

http://www.mediafire.com/?or4dxxg32o8bu1r

http://vimeo.com/21508099

Facts Regarding The Attack Upon the U.S.S. Liberty By Israel

2011-03-04T19:07:00.000-08:00

Time to set the record straight...do your own research and verify every claim presented below. Also‎, be sure to speak to the survivors of this false-flag event, and ask them point-blank if there is any possible way the pilots did NOT know that this was an American ship. Regardless of the "defense" that the U.S.S. Liberty could have betrayed positions of the Israeli military; there exists NO JUSTIFICATION of the actions taken, except to pin the attack on Egypt and wipe them off of the map.

1. The U.S.S. Liberty was flying the United States "Holiday" Flag which was much larger than a standard flag.

2. The U.S.S. Liberty requested an escort, but was denied.

3. The Israeli Air Force knew the frequencies which to jam in order ...to prevent any S.O.S. communication. They would have had to been given these frequencies and it would have positively identified the ship as AMERICAN!

4. The U.S.S. Liberty was the most sophisticated spy ship the United States owned and could monitor all communications, but were instructed not to listen to any communication in Hebrew.

5. The U.S.S. Liberty had an 18 foot [in diameter] satellite dish which was 30 feet above the stern deck. which could not possibly be mistaken for an Egyptian "horse hauler", especially in 1967.

6. A stiff wind that day had unfurled the over-sized "Holiday" flag, making it completely extended and visible to anyone.

7. Three Israeli fighter jets made passes that morning and positively identified the ship as the U.S.S. Liberty. Later in the attack, two of three fighters attacked while the third jet pilot, who was a dual-citizen with the United States, refused to attack as he knew it was the U.S.S. Liberty. He broke radio silence and positively identified the ship as the U.S.S. Liberty. Years later, after eight years in prison for not firing on the U.S.S. Liberty, he came to the United States and contacted the survivors of the attack, but before they could debrief and record him, he disappeared and was never heard from again.

8. The Israeli fighter planes were not marked and carried "non-standard" battle packs which were designed to destroy all communication capabilities of the ship. This requires pre-planning. If you gauge the responses to the fighter jet squadrons that were launched initially in defense of the attack upon the U.S.S. Liberty, they were ready to engage any and all enemies...except our TRUE ENEMY.

9. The initial attack by the Israeli Air Force concentrated on the communication equipment and used Napalm on the deck to prevent anyone from stringing a wire by hand for communication purposes.

10. A young 19 year old Seaman named Terry Halbardier, who now lives in Maui, managed to avoid these attempts and got a wire up long enough to send out an S.O.S. This was picked up by the Air Craft Carrier U.S.S. Saratoga, commanded by Admiral Lawrence Geiss, who was also sailing in the Mediterranean.

11. Bombers were dispatched from the Air Craft Carrier with Cairo as their coordinates, but were recalled after the S.O.S. was received from the U.S.S. Liberty. We were already aiding Israel in Operation Sinai, and obviously needed some incident to convince the American people of the justness of this cause. Israel had already falsely claimed that Egypt had struck first.

12. The Israeli Navy then attacked the U.S.S. Liberty with fast moving torpedo boats. Any strike from one of these torpedoes would have cut the ship in half. Captain McGonagle managed to avoid four of these with precision sailing, but the fifth hit the U.S.S. Liberty dead center of a major beam, which is the only reason that the ship was not totally destroyed.

13. Captain McGonagle then ordered the men to scuttle the ship and man life rafts. Then the Israeli Navy began shooting at the life boats and destroyed them to prevent any survivors. George Golden did not carry out the order to scuttle the ship, but instead ordered ballast shifted to the opposite side of the ship to counterbalance the two million gallons of water the ship had taken on in an attempt to keep the ship afloat. This allowed time for a Russian ship to sail upon the encounter and ended the Israeli attack - due to additional witnesses. This is important, because this now began a new phase of the operation which was "Cover-Up" of the attack.

14. After the S.O.S. was received by the Carrier, Admiral Geiss then dispatched fighter jets without immediate permission from Washington, in defense of the U.S.S. Liberty. When this was discovered in Washington, Council on Foreign Relations member, Robert McNamara, sent orders to Admiral Geiss to recall the fighters. They were then recalled.

15. Admiral Geiss assumed that the reason the fighters were recalled was that they carried nuclear arms. He then ordered other planes without nuclear capability to defend the U.S.S. Liberty. This time, President Johnson got on the phone personally with Admiral Geiss and said he didn't care if the ship went to the bottom, he did not want to embarrass our "allies". The fighters were once again recalled.

16. After the ship was repaired in Malta and returned to the United States, the surviving crew members were split up and individually rewarded for their silence which was agreed upon to last for 25 years. This certainly would not have been necessary in a "Friendly Fire" incident.

17. The Congressional Medal of Honor was awarded to Captain McGonagle, but this ceremony was not done at the White House by the President, but rather in secret by the Secretary of the Navy in an obscure Naval Yard in Washington only after the Israeli Government had given assurances that it had no objections.

18. This was the only time in United States history that United States Servicemen were murdered on a Navy ship that NO Congressional investigation or any other kind of investigation was conducted.

19. Israel now possesses and displays proudly one of the shot up life boats of the U.S.S. Liberty in one of their museums in Tel Aviv for all Israeli citizens to see.

Quotable Quotes From The "Chosen Ones"

2011-02-23T06:45:00.001-08:00

We Went to War for Israel

2011-02-21T11:09:00.000-08:00

Ryan Dawson hits another one outta the park.

9/11 Blueprint For Truth - The Architecture Of Destruction [2008]

2011-02-16T10:17:00.000-08:00

33min_Blueprint_for_Truth from AE 9/11 Truth on Vimeo.

The Last Days Of The Big Lie

2011-02-08T05:43:00.000-08:00

I guess it's time to take the gloves off.

The burden of proof is now on YOU.

Is Dominick Suter Back In The U.S.?

2011-02-08T05:40:00.000-08:00

I found a great blog called Under The Radar Media a while ago; they had a very cogent breakdown of Urban Moving Systems's finances.

Reprinting below the text from the older site, which has moved to a WordPress blog.

Under The Radar Media has moved to WordPress
by Maasanova

Attention subscribers and readers, I've moved Under The Radar media to WordPress and will be posting all future content there. Click here to visit the new blog. If you are searching for a particular post, you will find it by scrolling down to the bottom or by searching though the post archive.

Kind regards,

Maasanova

Under The Radar Media
Urban Moving Systems: the US-Israeli 9/11 Financial Nexus
Thursday, June 19, 2008 by Maasanova

With the global awakening of what really happened on 9/11 surging ahead at full steam, many people are now aware of facts such as prior government knowledge of the attacks, the mysterious collapse of WTC 7, all of the military and terror drills going on at the same time of the attacks, and the possibility that WTC 1, 2 and 7 were brought down by controlled demolition, and not by fire.

What is not known by the majority of these people, but is as equally important as WTC 7 is the story of Urban Moving Systems. It is no surprise that the hidden history of Urban Moving Systems remains unknown to of the majority of the American population, and even within the 9/11 truth community, since it's story was never included in the official 9/11 Commission Report, and has been absent from all of the popular 9/11 "truth movies."

Please watch this seven minute video for more details:

So what exactly was Urban Moving Systems and how does it tie into 9/11?

"Dominick Suter, owner of the company Urban Moving Systems, flees the country to Israel. The FBI later tells ABC News, “Urban Moving may have been providing cover for an Israeli intelligence operation.” Suter has been tied to the five Israeli agents caught filming the WTC attack. The FBI had questioned Suter around September 12, removing boxes of documents and a dozen computer hard drives. However, when the FBI returns a few days later, he is gone." [source: ABC News 6/21/2002]

So according to the FBI, an Israeli intelligence gathering operation was set up in Weehawken, NJ posing as a fake moving company, whose employees failed polygraph tests, whose owner was questioned but then mysteriously flees the US. And why did our corrupt media and elected officials conceal this fact from the American people via the 9/11 whitewash commission?!? Maybe it was because this inconvenient fact would have made it hard for the Bush Administration to pin the horrific terrorist attacks on suicidal Muslim highjackers? What do you think?

Well, it is time for the story of Urban Moving Systems to become as commonly known as WTC7 and controlled demolitions to the American people. On Tuesday, June 17, 2008 I was doing a bit of random 9/11 research and I came across a website called FedSpending.org, after I googled 'urban moving systems'.

FedSpending.org is a project of OMB Watch, a Washington based, non-profit citizen's watchdog group that is intended to promote government accountability and citizen participation. All I can say is that this website has delivered, and I was pleased to have come across this piece of internet gold with relatively little digging:

As you can see based on the government data that was released on August 28, 2007, Urban Moving Systems was awarded federal funding in the amount of $498,750 and non-federal funding in the amount of $166,250 for a total of $665,000 and the payout date was June 22, 2001. So in other words, our government, whether knowingly or unknowingly funded an Israeli intelligence gathering operation tied to an FBI investigation, with American taxpayer's dollars!

But wait, it gets even nastier. Urban Moving Systems was also a moving scam operation as well. In December of 2001, the State of New Jersey obtained a court order giving inspectors from Consumer Affairs access to the facility allowing all citizens who had goods stored at Urban Moving Systems' Weehawken warehouse access to retrieve their belongings.

The complaint also alleges that Suter violated the Mover's Act by, among other things, failing to provide Consumer Affairs the name of a current contact person or agent, not adequately responding to consumer requests for access to their belongings and not having an agent available for at least 20-30 per week to allow consumers access to their belongings.

The State of New Jersey, at the same time, filed a lawsuit in Hudson County Superior Court against Urban Moving Systems and its owner Dominick Suter alleging violations of both the State's Consumer Fraud Act and regulations set forth in the Public Movers and Warehousing Licensing Act. You can read more about that here.

So...considering that this piece of subhuman garbage is still on the FBI's Wanted list, you would think that we've heard the last of him, yes?

Imagine my surprise...he's BACK!

Zionist Student Crying Because American Professor Tells The Truth About Israel

2011-02-07T06:37:00.000-08:00

And so, the Holocau$t Card dies a fallow death.

Norman Finkelstein lost both his parents during World War 2; he, more than anyone walking around today, can tell you that what we have been subject to for all too long was a Holocau$t Industry.

Norman has just pulled the curtain back from the giant distraction...crocodile tears.

Just as he says...if you decry evil behaviour, it doesn't matter who performs said bahaviour.

9/11 Experiments: Eliminate the Impossible

2011-02-03T09:42:00.000-08:00

I wish this video had been available eight years ago...this could have put an end to all of the nonsense We The People have endured for so long.

War By Deception 2011 - Anti-NeoCons

2011-02-02T14:58:00.001-08:00

The American Dream

2011-01-13T14:46:00.000-08:00

Happy New Year 2011!

2011-01-01T06:50:00.000-08:00

I believe the "elite" are filling their shorts with Yoo-Hoo as we speak.

This is what hasn't happened:

No war with Iran;
The North American Union (the planned merger of Canada, the United States and Mexico) hasn't taken place;
The Amero has not replaced the dollar (Hal Turner hasn't been fed footlongs by his fellow inmates...yet);
WikiLeaks hasn't fooled anyone with a brain;
Everyone has forgotten about the $2.3 TRILLION that went missing on 9/10/01;
"Osama bin Laden, aka Tim Osman" hasn't risen from the grave;
The United States hasn't begun the 110th expulsion of a target demographic

I think you can tell as to which event I am looking forward to witnessing.

Some links for 2011:

Mossad assassins' Master Card numbers

Breaking Apart The "Official" 911 Coincidence Theory
Introduction to the Holocaust™ Hoax

RESPONSIBILITY IS THE KEY TO POWER - J.B. Campbell

2011-01-01T05:50:00.000-08:00

JB Campbell: Responsibility is the Key to Power
December 28, 2010 posted by J. Bruce Campbell · 47 Comments
By JB Campbell STAFF WRITER
We are ruled by parasites. We are ruled by people who not only don’t work but expect us to work for them. This is totally irresponsible on our part. And we have been carefully trained to be irresponsible because responsibility is the key to power. We can gain total power over our lives but not without accepting full responsibility for everything.

Billions of dollars are spent to make us irresponsible. They are spent by us, that is, it’s our money that’s being spent. Churches, schools, unions, Hollywood, advertising, sports but mostly the government spend our money in ways to make us irresponsible. We spend away our power on meaningless things and harmful things. So much so that our money itself has become almost worthless, because the most important harmful things we buy are government bonds that are then given to the owners of the Federal Reserve Corporation as collateral on the paper they sell us that we call “dollars.” The FRC calls them “notes,” or IOUs. They’re not dollars, they’re not notes – they’re just paper that we either accept in trade or we don’t trade.

Just about every bad thing that’s happened to us can be traced back to bad money. Bad money makes bad things happen. When we allow loan sharks to be our only suppliers of currency, our culture rots. We can easily trace the rot. It began in 1913, when the Federal Reserve Act was enacted by our elected representatives. I have written that the Masonic US Constitution is a masterpiece of deception without any redeeming features, which had to be tamed by the Bill of Rights. Patrick Henry called it a design for empire, which is what we have had ever since Lincoln invaded the Southern States. The closest the framers got to redemption was the rule they made that the Congress would mint coins and regulate the value thereof. The dollar was strong and worth something until 1913, when the Warburgs seized control of our currency on behalf of the Rothschild Group. A Colt Six-Shooter, for example, cost about twelve dollars. Today the same gun (made by US Fire Arms) costs a hundred times that. A Ford truck cost three hundred dollars. Today one costs more than thirty thousand dollars and even that isn’t enough to keep the company afloat because our currency is rotting.

Within four years we were in the first of many international wars. No coincidence. The loan sharks, at no cost to themselves, make war loans to governments that can never be repaid. They’re not supposed to be repaid, but only to put us all in permanent debt to them. Our debts to them from WWI still haven’t been repaid and can’t be repaid, due to the little add-on percentage thing they call “interest.” Interest wrecks everything for us, including our rotting money. If everyone has to pay back more than he borrowed – and everyone does – then the only way to have enough extra is to inflate the currency supply. And if you have to pay the loan sharks a percentage on top of that, and “taxes” on top of that, well, the whole thing spirals out of control pretty quickly. Which is where we are today.

Out of control.

How do we get control back? There’s only one way. We men must assume total responsibility for everything.

One of the most irresponsible things we do is vote. Another is to pay taxes. Allowing policemen “to protect and serve” us. Putting our children in “public schools.” Listening to preachers, priests and ministers about anything. Might as well listen to a rabbi. All totally irresponsible. But that’s how we’re trained to live and that’s how we are controlled. We have to break out of this trap and start thinking as men, not slaves. And we are slaves, make no mistake. Heavily armed slaves.

Never in human history has a people been in our unique position: Americans are some of the most well-armed people in the world, maybe the most well-armed. People think this is a result of the 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights and that is partly true. But the actual, modern, massive arming of the American population was done by the CIA.

A CIA agent by the name of Sam Cummings “resigned” from the agency and started a company called Interarms, based in Virginia, back in the 1950s. Cummings had toured European battlefields as a young man and scavenged discarded machine guns, rifles and anti-tank weapons. He simply put them in his car and made his way to England where he started storing them in a warehouse in Manchester. When he joined CIA he told the director, Allen Dulles, about all the guns over there. Dulles was surprised and gave him the assignment to go back and get a tally and buy them up. Cummings did so and then soon left the agency to start his massive surplus firearms importing and distribution company, based in both Manchester and Virginia. All machine guns, submachine guns, rifles and pistols entering this country came through Interarms to be distributed through various jobbers and retailers. There are probably more guns in this country than there are cars, and unlike cars, guns generally don’t wear out.

Allen Dulles and his brother were founding members of the Council on Foreign Relations in 1921. The CIA has always been staffed, like the State Department, with CFR members at the top. That’s why it’s known as the Rockefeller Secret Police.

So why would the CFR want Americans to be so heavily armed? For the same reason it wanted Hitler’s Germany to be heavily armed and able to put up a convincing fight. There has to be a credible threat, as we learn in The Report From Iron Mountain. The people must believe it’s real. If another civil war is planned, then both sides have to be armed. And the designated loser can always be disarmed later if there’s no food. No food is the specialty of the Jews. Also, Americans have never demonstrated a propensity for attacking their oppressors, as we see below. We might defend ourselves a little, but we let ourselves be pushed around by cops, attorneys and judges. It hasn’t occurred to us to get even with the ones who sent us to Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan or Iraq. We just take it, like good little boys. That has to stop.

America was literally flooded with cheap surplus military weapons and Cummings had a CIA-granted monopoly on this importation and distribution. Then he began to arm other countries and became the most infamous gun runner in the world. But Cummings always said, as he repeats in his biography, that he never sold or supplied weapons without the direct okay from the CIA, that is, from his patron, Allen Dulles, or John McCone or Richard Helms or George Bush.

Any questions?

On the other side of the coin, we have the anti-gun groups Handgun Control, Inc and the National Coalition to Ban Handguns. Both organizations were funded and founded by an active CIA agent named Edwin O. Welles. Both organizations admit that handguns are just the camel’s nose in the tent. They want all the guns, or so they say. All they managed to do was to disarm us mentally. I suspect that that was all they meant to do.

The result of this CIA activity is that we are at once heavily armed but mentally disarmed. We have the guns and the idea that we are armed and free but mysteriously we have no will to use them as they were meant to be used. I’m sure this is an interesting phenomenon to the CIA and Mossad psychiatrists who study us so carefully. Yes, our rulers are uneasy that we have all these great guns but time has shown that it hasn’t occurred to us to use them to liquidate our sadistic oppressors, the greedy loan sharks.

It occurred to me, which was why I started the militia movement in the 1980s. It seemed to me that American men were in a downhill slide into national cowardice, thanks to all the public education and religion and anti-heroic Hollywood movies, plus the outrageous prosecutions of gun owners and those few who did use guns to defend themselves and their loved ones. It all added up to making American men into cowards. Obviously a lot of us didn’t want to be cowards and millions of us came to consider ourselves members of the militia just as soon as I suggested it. The militia was really just a state of mind. But it was not the state of mind that I was trying to create. I wanted to create revolutionaries to help overthrow our renegade gangsters headquartered in Manhattan. I wanted to create a state of mind that would treat Gun Police as rats to be exterminated. Ultimately, we would have to exterminate the head gangsters. No doubt the gangsters understood the implications and, as former CIA director William Colby wrote to John DeCamp, the militia had to be dealt with, justly or otherwise, not because militiamen had guns and practiced with them, but because there were so many of them and because they were made up of “society’s ordinary, successful citizens.” It was definitely a trend and it had to be stopped. As I have written many times, it was stopped by the atrocity at Oklahoma City. Colby himself was stopped soon after some of his admissions were made public.

Ironically, what undoubtedly frightened Colby and the others more than the militia was the ’93 shootout in Waco. I don’t think anyone will claim that the followers of “David Koresh” were typical Christians, considering they made money for the cult by dealing in guns. I wouldn’t try to say that they were militia people, either. They were unusual, quiet fanatics. But they had the grit that we all need when the chips are down. They defended themselves and killed homicidal Yankee aggressors, just as the Afghans are doing today. The Mt. Carmel gunfight, siege and massacre amounted to the modern-day but even more ghastly Alamo. The psychological effect of the deaths of four with many other casualties on the swaggering Gun Police was devastating and orders went out to avoid such a catastrophe in the future. The psychological effect of the mass murder fifty-one days later certainly helped me in my efforts to grow the militia movement, which was suddenly taken much more seriously thanks to those great Waco martyrs.

But I still couldn’t sell my plan for the actual overthrow of the Manhattan gangsters. The militia became a defensive state of mind, not offensive. It was gaining momentum and strength of numbers right up through April 19, 1995, when explosives were detonated inside the Murrah Building, killing around 168 federal employees and their children. Then it was all over, overnight.
There was no depth to the militia movement, which name I used only because some men need the authority, or permission, to be men. The old word, “militia,” gave them that authority. The Militia Act of 1792 stated that one function of the militia was “to suppress combinations too powerful for the ordinary course of judicial proceedings.” That seemed to fit my needs exactly, because I was trying to suppress the Council on Foreign Relations and its co-conspiracies which were definitely too powerful for the ordinary course of judicial proceedings.

There was no training to provide the needed depth and heart for withstanding the psychological assault of the OKC massacre. American men had had no training for such an atrocity. American vets were not reliable because of their massive brainwashing and conditioning to follow orders and their reliance on rank. The militia idea was too radical to ex-soldiers and marines who tended to fall back on their military ways. The militia was paramilitary with no rank, no leadership, no cults of personality. It was pretty much the same as the Leaderless Resistance advocated by Louis Beam, who renewed the concept developed by Col. U.L. Amoss. The constant threat was infiltration and false leadership by police and federal agents. And there was just no action, but rather a lot of talk and running around and stockpiling guns and ammo. And so, it fell apart when the chips were down.

We don’t need the authority of “the militia” now. We have everything we need. Any guns and ammo we don’t already have are down at the armory, waiting for us to pick them up. All we need is action against the gangsters. But to get the action, there still is something lacking and that is our acceptance of responsibility.

In an essay called Jewish Rule, I wrote that American men have to accept responsibility for what the Jews have maneuvered our government to do to the rest of the world. One reader thought this was an outrageous idea and that it was in conflict with my accusation of the Jews for all their crimes against humanity. Yes, the Jews are responsible for all the death and destruction, but we are responsible for allowing them to have it done by our government, in our name. Either we are men or we are slaves to the Jews. Which one would you say we are?

What that reader didn’t understand is that the path to power is our acceptance of total responsibility for everything our government has done. This is not a gag, because we actually are responsible. Billions are spent to keep us from realizing that, as mentioned. But now there’s less and less excuse not to know. For example, there’s a huge wall the Jews built around what’s left of Palestine. A big prison wall. That’s the symbol of Jewish Rule. They are deliberately starving an entire people to death and a few months ago they slaughtered humanitarians who were trying to bring food and supplies to those people. We know and everyone knows that America approves of Jewish sadism against humans. We are responsible for all that suffering, whether we admit it or not. When we admit it, we take responsibility.

The Jews destroyed Lebanon again, just a few years ago. That’s what the Jews do. The Jews stole over two trillion dollars from the Pentagon. That’s also what they do. The Jews knocked down the World Trade Center because they didn’t want to pay to demolish it legally. That sort of insurance fraud is known as “Jewish lightning.” They just took it to a new level and parlayed it into a couple of anti-Moslem wars with one more about to break. But now a whole lot of us, thanks to the Internet, know a hell of a lot about these things. That puts us under a certain obligation to do something. Especially now that we know the following… the Jews want Iran destroyed by nuclear annihilation.

It’s their bomb, after all. They invented it and built it and dropped it on hundreds of thousands of civilians. And gave it to Stalin and made a few hundred for themselves. It’s their scientific claim to fame, the only important invention they can brag about. As we know, they keep quiet on that subject. But I digress. This is about responsibility.

The most responsible man in the world right now is an Iranian engineer named Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. That makes him the most powerful man in the world. He is the role model, the man we need to emulate. Not only is he the president of Iran, but he has been accused for years of being one of the revolutionaries who took the 52 American embassy personnel hostage and held them for 444 days.

All American diplomats are spies whose jobs are to subvert and undermine the countries in which they work, and to place paid stooges in power. What our government did to the Iranians was so outrageous, but it took them about twenty-five years to get even a little.

The Iranians had a very popular prime minister in the early ‘50s named Mohammad Mossadegh. The British government’s oil company, BP, had been hogging all the profits taken out of Iran and Mossadegh had asked for an equal share, the way Aramco did with the Saudis. The Brits refused and Mossadegh nationalized Iranian oil, offering the greedy Brits twenty-five percent. The British answer, after obtaining a UN starvation blockade identical to that against Iraq in the ‘90s, was to get Alan Dulles’ CIA to overthrow Mossadegh for them in 1953. Our CIA put Mossadegh in prison (solitary confinement) for three years and then permanent house arrest until his death. Dulles put the corrupt and Israel-friendly Shah in dictatorial power over the people for the next quarter-century, which only ended when their smoldering rage ignited into anti-American riots in ’79.

If Ahmadinejad did in fact take part in the hostage action, that makes him a man of action, not just a great theoretician, as he proved in his appearance at the United Nations. But what placed Mr. Ahmadinejad in the Hall of Fame was his courageous descent into the belly of the beast. He was, for some demented reason, invited a few years ago to address the Council on Foreign Relations after his tour d’force at the United Nations. He didn’t do this at their actual headquarters at 58 E. 68th Street, but at the Intercontinental Hotel on 48th Street. They probably didn’t want him to see their actual headquarters.

Might give him ideas.

This, to me, was the most profound moment in modern history. The one important man in the world who understands exactly what the Council on Foreign Relations is and how it has destroyed our world was invited to speak and defend his past statements – to them.

He defended nothing but rather went on the attack. He continued to belittle the Jewish fairy tale of the Six Million and asked again why the Palestinians should pay the price for something that has never been established? He asked them if the Council on Foreign Relations had one voice of support for the Palestinians? Silence was their answer. The man knew that Israel is the CFR’s little monster. He was playing with them.

Brent Scowcroft, GHW Bush’s consiglieri, was left shaking his head. “He’s a master of counterpunch, deception and circumlocution.”

Translation: We couldn’t handle him.

Some of them might have been a little uneasy at the thought of this clear-thinking, straight-talking man having captured and held State Department employees for over a year. After all, the Council on Foreign Relations was organized to run the US State Department. That’s what the word “Foreign” refers to, with the ultimate goal of merging our country with foreign countries. The CFR’s maiden effort toward this end was scheduled for this year, at which time we were to be merged with Mexico and Canada. Obviously this isn’t going to happen this year, but it’s still their plan – if we do not burn down the building known as Harold Pratt House before then. It will also have to be bulldozed because it’s made of stone. Again, the address of this den of iniquity is 58 E. 68th Street in Manhattan, which is actually on the corner of Park Avenue and 68th. Harold Pratt was a director of Standard Oil and a Rockefeller relative.

Many Jews were upset at the invitation to Ahmadinejad and claimed they considered resigning from the CFR! Sure. So the affair was billed as a “meeting,” rather than the customary dinner. The Jews said they would not eat with him. Hors d’oeuvres were offered but the president wouldn’t touch them.

Touche.

“And as he left, it was with a jab to his hosts. ‘At the beginning of the session, you said you were an independent group,’ he said. ‘But almost everything that I was asked came from a government position.’ Then he smiled, thanked everyone and left the room with a light step.” [NY Times, 21 Sept 06]

Mr. Ahmadinejad knows that the Council on Foreign Relations is the de facto government of the United States. He knows that the nuclear attack that is planned for his country was designed by the members of this iniquitous club of Rothschild/Rockefeller. But he still went there and messed their minds up. He so enraged those pampered, perfumed pimps that one of them said later:
“‘If this man represents the prevailing government opinion in Tehran, we are heading for a massive confrontation with Iran,’ he said.” [ibid]

We know what that meant. It meant that the Iranians are going to be irradiated. The question is, are we going to allow our Manhattan gangsters to get away with it? They are certainly our responsibility. And of course, the CFR disclaims all responsibility while claiming all power. “We’re just a think-tank – a private study group.” But the fact is that you can’t have power without responsibility, once honest men figure out what you’ve been doing. They have to answer for their actions, and for their crimes against humanity. They have to answer to us. If they don’t answer to us, they’ll have to answer to some angry foreigners. You just can’t keep mass murdering for ninety years and building the empire and ruining other countries without someone stopping you. Not in this day and age. It has to be American men stopping them. If someone else came over and wiped out the CFR, we would be in permanent disgrace. Our manhood would be irretrievably lost.

The Iranians are perfectly within their rights to attack the United States based on the many reports of our and Israel’s plan to attack them. The fact is, though, that Moslems do not engage in unprovoked action. They generally don’t engage in very drastic action even when they are provoked, although they have flexed their muscles in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon, purely in self-defense. But we have driven them into a corner, and even a rabbit will bite you if you give it no way out of a corner. If Moslems were as murderous as the Jews claim, Israel would no longer exist as a Zionist entity. It is the Jews and Judaized Americans and Englishmen who attack without provocation, as they continue to prove. Jews are the masters of murder, as they proved with the USS Liberty, 9/11, in Lebanon, not to mention their genocide of Palestinians, of Russians and Ukrainians – and Germans.

The CFR is funded with Rothschild/Rockefeller money laundered at the tax-exempt foundations, money from the Federal Reserve Corporation, the energy corporations and the narcotics corporations. They have all the money in the world. They have all of our money but it’s still not enough. A CFR member named Dov Zakheim couldn’t account for over two trillion dollars from the Pentagon. Imagine that! Its members are Jews, Freemasons and those sexual perverts from the Brotherhood of Death at Yale University, often combinations of all three. There are virtually no normal people in the Council on Foreign Relations; they are mainly psychopaths who must be stopped before they destroy us all. There was one guy who may have been in there by mistake, Matt Simmons, but he died suddenly this year following his denunciation of the BP destruction of the Gulf of Mexico.

We should have a little background on the world’s most homicidal organization, the Council on Foreign Relations… An interesting history of the CFR can be found on their own website, of all things:

www.cfr.org/about/history/

It’s not how I would have told it, but it reveals a narcissistic self-fascination and is an admission that they have run this government for almost a hundred years. The 20th Century was a mountain, an Everest, of dead bodies, only because of Them. And they’re not done. The first generation’s dead, the second’s dying but the third’s just getting warmed up. We normal people may wonder why these ghouls would want to preside over a graveyard. Don’t bother. It’ll never make sense. Just deal with what they’ve already done. These guys have a depopulation program that will boggle your mind. They plan to kill about 90% of the world’s people – maybe more. That’s not why I want to kill them all, for I doubt that they can pull this off. Mainly I want to get even for the ones they’ve already killed.

Everyone dies. It’s how someone died that counts when it comes to getting even. The Council on Foreign Relations caused millions of people to die in the most horrific ways imaginable. Problem is, they died in our name. Our presidents, our congress, our military. Our State Department killed more than any of them by setting up and supporting every Communist government in the world, ever since the first one in 1917. That’s where the big killing was done, by our Communists. And the State Department is run by the Council on Foreign Relations. Don’t ever forget that.

And now Israel is guiding us into a nuclear holocaust. “Holocaust” means “burnt whole.”

Israel was created by the CFR, which has subsidized it with our money since 1948. Israel earns all those stolen billions by destabilizing the Middle East and inflating the price of oil, because the CFR represents oil and banking, which are pretty much the same thing. Oil is real wealth and banking is fake wealth, but we don’t get one without the other.

They don’t want any more oil. There’s too damn much oil. They want less oil. They want us to pay more for less oil. They don’t need any more money because there’s too much money and it’s not worth much anyway. They just don’t want us to have any money. If we have money then we can afford to go after them. If we’re broke, then we can’t. It’s that simple. Who is in charge of our currency supply? Ben Shalom Bernanke. And if we’re sick with man-made diseases with no cures, then we can’t go after them. Poisoning through medicine was perfected by Jews centuries ago. If there’s a food shortage then we can’t go after them. Remember what Joseph did to the Egyptians? Same as Kaganovich did to the Ukrainians, and Eisenhower to the Germans. So we have to go after them before we go broke, get sick or starve. It’s going to be a race.

Their oil war in Iraq is being fought to keep most Iraqi oil in the ground. A nuclear attack on Iran will keep Iranian oil in the ground. If they could have kept Chavez in jail after their coup, he wouldn’t have been giving Venezuelan oil away to our poor people, or offering to lower the price to a permanent level that would still make his huge heavy oil reserves viable. If the CFR kills Chavez then that heavy oil will stay in the ground. The oil price is intended to skyrocket again, which should throw our already crippled economy into total chaos again. And this will take our minds off the CFR’s planned merger of America with Mexico and Canada.

The path to power is our acceptance of total responsibility. That means, as Americans, we accept responsibility for what our government has done in the past – all the way back to the beginning – and for what it’s doing now. Wrongs have to be righted, not immediately but they must begin to be righted. Some wrongs can’t be righted all the way because we’ve killed a lot of people. We can’t right that. But we can acknowledge the wrong we’ve done to others as a first step. And we’ve done the wrongs, by proxy, at least. Our parents and their parents let them be done just as we have.

For starters, we ought to learn the truth about the great American family holiday called Thanksgiving. Learn about that and see how America has treated others, even before it was called America. Our government exterminated the Indians, starting with Thanksgiving. What was done to the Indians was done to the Germans. Our government waged total war on other Americans from 1861 to 1865. Our government’s Jewish agents did it to the Russians and then the Chinese and so many others, recently the Palestinians and now the Iraqis. But the whole thing started with the American genocide of the American Indians. Those we didn’t exterminate we exiled to barren “reservations” and gave rotten diets and bad medicine. They’re dying out, as they’re supposed to do. How do we right that? The first step is to own up to it. Then we very humbly go to the tribes and ask them how they want to proceed from here? (The casinos are as destructive as alcohol and are often controlled by the professional money-changers.)

The Indians were the ones who had true personal liberty. When our European ancestors got here, they were a bunch of repressed religious fanatics, self-righteous and holy. They were also control-freaks with minds totally warped by their insane Christianity, especially the Old Testament believers in the Chosen People. Of course, they thought they were the Chosen People, same as the Jews do. They soon found a people who were generous and what we now call “democratic.” Study for yourself the truth about the Native Americans which is easily available on the Internet. Those sanctimonious, psalm-singing sons of bitches began to kill the natives who kept them from starving because they showed a good way to live which threatened the control of the holy Joes in charge of the Europeans. This bunch of faithful killers became what today we call Yankees. The grasping, self-righteous Yankee mentality would become the scourge of America, eventually wiping out the natives and, in 1865, the idea of secession found in the Declaration of Independence. Don’t bring up Slavery because the Yankees wanted that Southern cotton at the cheapest price they could get, and you know what that meant. They just didn’t want the Southerners to keep buying goods from England and Europe instead of from them.

The Old Testament would prove to be the undoing of Russia, too. The Russian Jews who wandered over here first lived in Russia’s Pale of Settlement. That’s where the Russians let them live after they were run out of Khazaria by the Golden Horde. They were a bunch of converts to Judaism and were so hard-core that they eventually asked the Russian government if they could have the judicial power to execute those among them who were unbelievers in Yahweh. The Russians said, Hell no, you can’t do that! This prohibition on the rabbis to execute heretics and backsliders was the gravest of crimes, in “Orthodox” eyes, and led to what became the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, although many attempts at revolution were made by the Jews before that.

So we have this combination of Old Testament-guided people in the Council on Foreign Relations, a combination of Jews and Yankees – estimated at 70% Jews. That doesn’t make the CFR a religious organization, obviously. But its roots are in the totalitarian dictatorship of Deuteronomy and Leviticus. Zionism means that the Russian Jews must emigrate from Russia to Palestine, seize it from the Palestinians and change the name to Israel, or Zion. And from there they would make the Law go forth. The Law is Deuteronomy. At this point you should actually read Deuteronomy, just to see what the Palestinians, the Iraqis and the Iranians are up against. It’s what the Russians were up against when all those Trotsky Jews were shipped over to St. Petersburg from New York. What the Germans were up against when Eisenhower gave all those Morgenthau Jews the green light in 1945 to slaughter POWs and civilians, in accord with Theodore Kaufman’s manual, Germany Must Perish!. We’re going to be up against it, too.

The Council on Foreign Relations created the United Nations in 1945. The UN eventually set up shop on prime Manhattan real estate donated by the Rockefellers, themselves a strange combination of Yankees and Jews. Yankee CFR member and Soviet spy Alger Hiss was the UN’s first Secretary General! The first new nation that the United Nations created was “Israel” in 1948. It is a fake nation, a fake nation of parasites that does not deserve to exist, as it is sitting on a foundation of lies.

So, we are responsible. For one thing, the UN is in America. Israel is supported by American tax money and our unpayable debt. We must repudiate this debt because it was incurred by fraud. Israel is the greatest fraud in history, and the most vicious. The UN is just a fraud, but it is the framework for what the CFR has in mind for us. The first step is the North American Union in which we will degenerate into another Third World dump and answer to the US, Mexican and Canadian armies.

We are responsible for everything we’ve done except for the debt. The debt to the Federal Reserve Corporation and to the Wall Street lenders and the bonds we trade for their counterfeit cash are based on fraud. Fraud nullifies all contracts, with no statute of limitations. We must repudiate the debt by nationalizing it. The Federal Reserve Corp would cease to exist because most of its directors are CFR. The rest would get the message and quit.

The Council on Foreign Relations has had a great ride since 1921. Its founding members had seized control of the US government ten years earlier through their control of Woodrow Wilson. They created the Federal Reserve and its collection agency, the IRS. They got us to invade Mexico. They started World War I. They created the Communist dictatorship in Russia. They almost got us in the League of Nations. When that failed, they formed the Council on Foreign Relations to design a real world war and a new, improved League of Nations. That only took them twenty years. After ninety years of mass murder, with much more in store, however, it is time to call a halt to their crimes against humanity. This cannot be done politely or by civil suit or by filing charges against them. What federal agency would prosecute them?

No federal or state or county or local agency will prosecute them. It will be up to us.
This essay amounts to a warrant for the entire membership, regardless of ethnicity, of the Council on Foreign Relations. It is also my personal opinion. You can figure just what kind of warrant it should be. This will be up to the reader and it will eventually be up to the millions of men who never read this but who will demand to know who is responsible for the coming national suicide of America. The word will get out that engine of our destruction is this malignant, toxic, private ministry of war known as the CFR.

Maybe this man has put into words what some readers are thinking:
“Supposing that in fact, you indeed, stand by all of your claims; that is, you are indeed, a ‘true blue’ defender of all that is good and true, and even, beautiful, then I have a question: Given your suppositions about the alleged omnipotence of your adversaries: Would it not seem a little odd that you are allowed to make your claims so freely — given the Power you ascribe to Them? Might it be possible, if not likely, that what I see as ‘your work’ (I know you – not) on the Internet is in fact, a service to Them who would like to identify potential ‘terrorists’ and would-be troublemakers

If so, you are, so far, only serving those that you so wildly denounce because you and the website[s] on which your work is posted are the most heavily surveilled on the planet.”

The answer to these questions is, regardless of who is writing something, does it sound true or not? If something’s true, then it doesn’t matter if the one saying it has one motive or another. Even if Netanyahu said something that’s true, it’s still true. If something doesn’t sound true, then ignore it. Find the truth your own way. But if something is true and you ignore it, then watch out because the truth’s going to get you eventually. Maybe sooner than eventually.

I never said that our adversaries are omnipotent. I just said they’re mass murderers. If I thought they were omnipotent I wouldn’t write anything about them. As a matter of fact, I think they are extremely vulnerable once their little magic spell they’ve got on us breaks. This is how you break it, by speaking truth to power. I think our power is far greater than theirs, in terms of both numbers and truth. Do your homework and speak the truth.

The answer to the question about maybe making things worse for us by speaking the truth is: most of us, if we have any sense, are afraid of danger. The idea is to get past the fear and learn to defeat the aggressor rather than fear him. I mean, guys ride bulls, don’t they? Race cars, climb mountains? They learn how to deal with the threat with new skills and techniques and become, if they survive the learning process, professionals or at least skilled amateurs. This just happens to be more meaningful than racing motorcycles or the other blood sports.

And, if some guys have the guts and skill to master the blood sports, why is it that they chicken out when it comes to bloody politics? They’re both life and death. One’s fun and the other is not so fun. You can make a lot of money as a bull rider or racing driver. Bloody politics will bankrupt you, so that’s a good reason. It can also get you arrested and/or killed.

The questioner asks why this writer hasn’t been arrested or killed so far, if what I write about them is true? They’ve thought about it. Two FBIs told me that in Montana in ’96. The Secret Service threatened to kill me in ’91 if I got near Bush’s old man. Maybe they don’t want another Waco. Maybe they need a bogeyman, a home-grown Osama. I won’t indulge them in what they think they need. I’ll just keep saying what I think they need, which is a real ass-whipping.
Maybe they’ve tried. I was attacked three times in 2003. Attacked by poison on my steering wheel. I developed severe kidney problems two times and was permanently disfigured. If I hadn’t been married to a great doctor/healer, I might have croaked. The third time I found it on the wheel in time. Typical Jewish MO, but it could have been the feds.

Let’s start accepting our responsibility. All of it. Taking responsibility for our government’s past crimes will give us total power over our future. We will change America’s role in the world from a colonizing, war criminal superpower to a responsible and respectful and independent nation. Our first responsibility is to give the Council on Foreign Relations and anyone who works for the CFR a real ass-whipping.

Roddy says BoA Can't Do Business, Next Day He's A Prison Bitch

2010-12-27T19:07:00.000-08:00

I was looking for this video ages ago...but better late than never.

Are We The People going to demand Donald Rumsfeld, Dov Zackheim and everyone else involved, return the "missing" $2.3 TRILLION dollars that went missing on September 10th, 2001?

Remember..."all that's necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do NOTHING".

That being said, let's end with 9/11 Mysteries, the excellent film narrated by John Alan Martinson.

Conspiracy Theory - Jesse Hits The Bullseye

2010-12-24T15:37:00.000-08:00

So...we're done, right?

The 9/11 Commision Report officially doubles as toilet paper...and not very good paper, at that.

Please do everything in your power to protect April Gallup.

Coincidence...Right

2010-12-22T18:44:00.000-08:00

I want to respond to the fucktard who says I need psychotherapy from the Jewish Ritual Murder posting.

Asshole...keep your shitty shock therapy to yourself and your raisin-sized balls. The "Catholic Church" absolves you? Who cares? I see you haven't named any rabbis who decry such evil. What...are they all too busy sucking on bloody baby penis to wave it off? You can eat me, fuckwit. Here's the news: despite over nine years of obfuscation, the truth is coming out, and you fuckers had better start paddling your Neanderthal asses to Israel, or get ready to stretch that neck from the nearest lamppost.

If it was good enough for Mark Madoff...it's good enough for you bastards. By the way...it's clear that he was murdered by one of you bastards. how's this - why not go out on a high note: get some Korans, dressed up as sand niggers, go to some strip clubs, whoop it up...then meet me at Logan Airport. I'll be sure to tell the TSA rapists to leave the K-Y off of the plungers.

We'll have a good old time.

A Direct Challenge To The WaterHeads At CounterKnowledge And Any Dishonest Intellectuals

2010-12-15T10:40:00.000-08:00

I had an epiphany this morning.

This was courtesy of, indirectly, David McGowan. Thanks, pal.

A fellow by the name of Lyle Burkhead has made the breakthrough I should have had ages ago...but sometimes one just needs to come at things from a different perspective.

So...what exactly is it that has me in such a lather? It is this: As of this day, Wednesday, December 15th, 2010, there stands NO PROOF WHATSOEVER that there were ever gas chambers in existence during World War 2 for the express purpose of murder.

NONE.

Do we have here just another dull-witted "denial" of the Holocaust?

My answer here will be an emphatic NO. If you've ever read my past material on this blog, you will see that I dispute the facts of the Holocaust; indeed, many aspects of the "official" story have been disproven - for example, Anne Frank's diary; the shrunken heads, the lampshades and soap made from Jews; Benjamin Wilkorminski's story; Misha DeFonseca/Monique van der Wal's tale of being raised by wolves, Herman Rosenblat's tale of the "girl with an orange"; I could go on and on...but the biggest aspect of this tale involves the presence and/or feasibility of the "gas chambers", in which the majority of the "six million" Jews purportedly lost their lives.

A number of researchers have been to these facilities, and their various researches have determined that the edifices could in no way serve as homicidal gas chambers. the buildings were not airtight; the doors were not secure; and, most importantly, they did not test positive for the presence of residues that would be present if the rooms were used as gas chambers. Just perform a search, and this information will become apparent.

The paper discusses the chicanery involved in convincing you and I of the "certainty" of this aspect of the Holocaust story. Where I failed to notice the flim-flammery of the story was because of the skill in which Michael Shermer, editor of Skeptic Magazine, works his semantics. he goes on and on about proving the science of the story, and then proceeds to present NOT ONE WHIT OF PROOF.

As a September 11th scholar, this should have made itself apparent, and here's my correlation: how does one account for this aspect of the Holocaust not being required to adhere to the normal standard of proof, much like how on September 11th, 2001, we were fed a tale in which standard practices were ignored, obfuscated and outright dismissed?

We were told that "jet fuel" and "the impacts of the planes" contributed to the destruction of WTC Buildings 1 & 2. Of course, no explanation is given as to why WTC Building 7 collapsed in much the same fashion as the others, where no plane impact was committed. Intercept practices were not performed as they had multiple times previously; other procedures were changed without justification; and, most glaring to my perception, none of these failures were punished; rather, whistleblowers were not afforded protection from reprisals; ridiculous cover stories were offered to explain away inconsistencies; yet those "explanations" served to discredit other established "aspects" of the events of September 11th, 2001.

The burden of proof is usually upon proving that some event did in fact occur; the fact remains that one cannot prove a negative. So, when a revisionist opines that the gas chamber story doesn't hold water, he is not bound to prove that the whole of the Holocaust did not occur; rather, that burden of proof is upon those who insist on going along with the story that these facilities did indeed exist, at the specific time period, for that express purpose. For some reason, we have been blinded into going along with this logical fallacy.

I have seen the light...will you?

The Schramm Project

2010-12-10T01:29:00.000-08:00

T r a n s l a t o r ' s P r e f a c e

J e w i s h R i t u a l - M u r d e r
a H i s t o r i c a l I n v e s t i g a t i o n

I was first approached nearly a year ago by researcher , with a request for help in translating Hellmut Schramm's book, Der jüdische Ritualmord : Eine historische Untersuchung [Jewish Ritual-Murder : a Historical Investigation]. I agreed to translate one chapter into English, with the possibility of my making a deeper commitment should I deem the book worth such an investment of my time and energy. To my great surprise, I not only found Schramm's work to be worth translating, but I became determined to perform the entire translation myself and see it made available in English.

Perhaps this is the place for me to state my own educational/political background and my approach to this topic. I have a bachelor's degree in Mathematics, but I also took a heavy course concentration in European History, particularly of the period prior to 1600, and I have fluency in reading German. In high school -- this was before the long slow slide of the educational system into its present lobotomized condition -- I took four years of Latin and have periodically refreshed my Latin skills. Aside from formal course work, I've maintained a life-long interest in History and consider myself well-read (for a lay person) in the subject. I do not hold any advanced degrees; nor can I point to a long list of credentials which might imbue my writing with the aura or status which attends the opinions of 'experts.' Therefore, as you read my comments -- and as you read Schramm -- it is your own intelligence, common sense, and life experience which must be the final arbiter of the validity or invalidity of the phenomenon of Jewish ritual-murder (JRM).

I believe that it is becoming increasingly clear -- and even to those disinclined to think or analyze events around them -- that Jewish/Zionist control of what I term the 'Propasphere,' * is very real; in Germany, Austria, France, and other European countries, to voice mere doubts about the so-called 'Holocaust' -- the number of Jewish dead and/or the cause of their deaths -- is punishable as a felony-level crime, and there have been literally thousands who have been imprisoned for writing forensic analyses and/or carefully reasoned and well-documented articles which contest the 'party line' on such issues. 'Israel' -- occupied Palestine -- directs the foreign policy of the United States and other countries, and billions in foreign aid, military help, grants (outright gifts), loans, 'reparations' for supposed crimes, have flowed in one direction -- toward Israel -- ever since the end of the Second World War. The actual circumstances involved in the creation of the Soviet state, of the Third Reich, and the truth as opposed to the propaganda about the 'Jewish Question,' are finally emerging after years of distortion. Many who are reading this are already well aware of the scholarly work of Kevin McDonald -- as well as the honest writing of such Jews as Shahak and Freedman. The essence of what they have to say was succinctly captured by Nietzsche, when he wrote:

         The two sets of valuations, good/bad and good/evil, have waged a terrible battle on
         this earth, lasting many millennia; and just as surely as the second set has for a long time
         now been in the ascendant, so surely are there still places where the battle goes on and
         the issue remains in suspension... The watchwords of the battle, written in characters which
         have remained legible throughout human history, read: "Rome vs. Israel, Israel vs. Rome."
         No battle has ever been more momentous than this one.

That deep and abiding antipathy felt by Jews (whether religious or not) toward non-Jews and in particular toward Aryans, runs like a poisonous theme throughout the Talmud, and has been explicitly expressed by many prominent Jews -- rabbis, politicians, financiers, writers, etc. -- in unmistakably clear words. Jewish boasting about the degree of control which Jews now have in all facets of the media, banking, and government has been well documented and the sources for all of this are widely available through the Internet and in any large library; it is not my purpose to rehearse them here, but only to make it quite clear that that control and that marrow-deep animosity are factors which I took as a given from the very beginning of the project of translation.

But it is important that I also make it clear that, in regard to the subject of JRM, I was totally skeptical at the beginning; had I been asked to make a wager, I certainly would have bet that JRM was not a real phenomenon. I suspected that, like a lot of mythical material, it expressed a metaphysical truth: that it was a metaphor for the essence of the relationship between the various Jewish communities in the Diaspora and their host populations in Europe and elsewhere over the centuries. At most, I thought that perhaps a sporadic case or two of Jewish murderers killing children, or the like, had taken on lurid overtones in the retelling. After all -- whenever this topic is encountered in print or is spoken of anywhere in the Propasphere, is it not always referred to as the "blood-libel"? And isn't an entire package of images contained in this term? What comes to mind is a scene from Frankenstein, with a mob of peasants, carrying torches and howling, about to set upon some hapless victim of its ignorance and superstition. The substitution of such images in lieu of a genuine neutrality toward the question is a rather fine example of how insidious the media, particularly television, have been in transposing such issues to a pre-set frame of reference which guarantees how discourse will occur and how it will terminate. The official 'party line' on JRM is that all such incidents were crimes which ignorant and superstitious peasants blamed on innocent Jews during the Middle Ages. The truth, however, is different: these accusations predate both the Middle Ages and the start of the Christian era. Reports from a range of sources, varying widely in chronology and geographical setting, show remarkable consistency, and learned, conscientious investigators were often involved in ascertaining what actually occurred. In many cases -- such as the Damascus double murders -- men of known rectitude, intelligence and of wide experience in the world, such as Sir Richard Burton, confirmed its existence.

The position I have come to after translating this work, is that the accusation of JRM has always been based upon a real and not an imaginary, phenomenon, a historical reality. I believe that, for all practical purposes, and for a variety of reasons, genuine cases of JRM were beginning to peter out at around the turn of the 20th century. I believe that they were perpetrated by what are usually referred to as the "ultra-Orthodox" Jews; after the mid 17th century, that means the Hassidim in particular; that up until the late 19th century, the existence of JRM was more generally known to exist by the Jews themselves, although its practice was anything but universal among them. I believe that today, very few Jews know its history and most of them do indeed honestly regard it as a "libel." What has convinced me of it as historical reality are the following:

1. Descriptions of the various incidents go back in the historical record to around 170 B.C., and then occur over the next approximately 2000 years wherever a Jewish community of any size has lived;
2. The details of the cases -- what today would be called the "signature" and the modus operandi of these crimes are remarkably consistent, especially considering the lack of communication over widely separated geographical locations during much of that millennium-and-a-half.
3. Contrary to the way it is always portrayed, JRM is not just an hysterical collection of horror stories originating in ignorant peasant minds, but has been considered genuine by educated persons who actually had opportunity to investigate the crimes committed, and who left detailed documentation in the form of trial protocols, etc.
4. There have been rare but genuine defections by Jews who left Judaism voluntarily and not in an attempt to gain leniency or favors, and who wrote about this practice.
5. Even assuming confessions were gained by torture, in several cases the judicial authorities saw to it that witnesses and accused were questioned separately, with no opportunity to compare notes. In some of these cases, physical evidence was found which corroborated the statements of the accused in such a way as to establish their guilt beyond question. In other cases, Jews were actually caught in the act.
6. As with other phenomena associated with the Jews, this one has been associated with no other "minority group" world-wide -- rather odd if it were just the result of some sort of myth-creating tendency, or something analogous to it.
7. The details of purported cases of JRM, separated by more than 500 years, show the same patterns, the same confessional features, and so forth.
8. There are highly suggestive passages even in Jewish sacred writings which indicate that this practice was not only condoned but prescribed. References to the use of sacrificial human blood appear in various religious Jewish works, and in the writings of well-known Jewish luminaries, as Schramm delineates; according to the tractates of the Jewish philosopher Maimonides, blood obtained by the piercing of the body is a curative beverage -- the blood of animals is not what is meant. In a very rare and little-known book by Rabbi Chaim Wital, Ets-Chaim (XVII Century), we read that "the murder of goys and the drinking of their blood increases the holiness of Israel for the Jews."

What must be appreciated is the nature of Judaism itself. As many have begun to perceive, Judaism has a sort of Siamese twin relationship with 'anti-Semitism,' and it is the kind of Siamese twinship in which the two entities are conjoined at vital organs -- which renders their separation an impossibility, which, if it were performed, would doom them both. As a culture, the Jewish people have not produced any science, technology, art, or writing (aside from the Talmud, the Jewish scriptures, and other religious works). They have performed well -- sometimes brilliantly -- in the arts and sciences of Aryan culture, but the Jewish race itself -- and it is a race or sub-race/taxon -- has never created a specifically Jewish art or science of any kind. This, indeed, makes it unique. Its own sense of identity is so bound up with a sense of being chosen, of being not only superior to all other peoples, but a different order of being entirely. Not only this, but the central meaning of human (i.e. Jewish only) life and even of the Universe itself is inseparably related to the existence of the Jews and of their enemies, the goyim. In 1994, Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the 'Lubavitcher Rebbe,' and leader of the Chabad sect of Hassidim, died. This man -- who had received countless honors, testimonials, etc. from heads of state and who had followers throughout the world, who had enormous influence in 'Israel,' and who was regarded as the Messiah by his disciples and as a paragon of humanitarianism by many in the Gentile world -- had this to say about why non-Jews are allowed to exist:

         [...] the body of a Jewish person is of a totally different quality from the body of
         [members] of all nations of the world.... A non-Jew’s entire reality is only vanity. It
         is written, ‘And the strangers shall guard and feed your flocks’ (Isaiah 61:5). The entire
         creation [of a non-Jew] exists only for the sake of the Jews...
         [Excerpt from Allan C. Brownfeld's review of Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, Jewish
         Fundamentalism in Israel, Pluto Press, London, 1999.].

As readers will discover, this Schneerson was a member of a famous dynasty of Jews, each of which succeeded in turn to the position of Zaddik -- holy man -- of the Chabad Hassidim. The Propasphere face of the Hassidim -- that presented to the public -- is that of a group of 'fools for God,' who sing and pray their way through the day and eschew worldly pleasures. The reality is very different. Several prominent Hassidim have been convicted of large swindles (of course, by Talmudic logic, Jews are only required to deal uprightly with other Jews); the ultra-Orthodox/Orthodox Jews enjoy what amounts to control of the world diamond market -- hardly an 'unworldly' endeavor. In addition, no fewer than three of Schneerson's direct forebears were implicated in various ritual-murders, including the Beilis case (1911).

Another feature of the religion is that there are degrees of access to knowledge; for a long time before the Talmud was written down, its core existed as oral law; in Judaism, the oral law is at least co-equal to the written law, and is sometimes viewed as superior to it. Beyond the Talmud itself, there is the Cabbala, which is really a system of magic, with esoteric rituals, many of which exist only as oral tradition and which have never been committed to writing.

Schramm completed his book in 1941. The future must have seemed hopeful due to the early military victories of Germany, and before Britain proved to be intransigent and America became involved in the war. Schramm writes as one utterly convinced of the truth of what he is saying, and he makes no pretense at 'objectivity' -- for him, the case for JRM has been proved beyond doubt.

After having read the entire work, I find that I disagree in some minor points with Schramm's views:

1. I believe that some (although fewer than one might think!) cases of alleged JRM were garden-variety 'regular' murders -- although not any of the cases which Schramm chose to explore at chapter length.
2. I do not believe that the practice of JRM was quite as common as Schramm believes it to have been. But we must also keep in mind that the situation in Europe and Asia Minor vis-a-vis the Jews was radically different during the first decades of the 20th century. Jewish communities were unimaginably more insular and more traditional than is the case today for any but the most ultra-Orthodox Jews.
3. I believe that the practice of JRM was waning even during the last decade or so of the 19th century, that it continued to do so after the turn of the century, and that, if it still exists today, it exists as a very rare phenomenon.

I believe that, as concerns JRM, there has been a process of forgetting, deliberate only in the sense that it is purposeful and not in the sense of having been consciously invoked, by Jewry. This mechanism, I think, is not so very different from the process of creation of the gas chamber/ 6-million-died myth of the 'Holocaust' -- it's a rearrangement and distortion of what actually happened in the (perceived) interests of Jewry.

In the final analysis, the reason why I have performed this translation is that I see a 1984-like surgery being performed on History; this is, of course, not restricted to the topic of the 'Holocaust' and related subjects, but is interposing a distorting lens between the present and the past -- a lens which skews and warps one people and one people only: non-Jewish Whites. In fact, something much more profound than a simple distortion is taking place. The historical sense itself is being destroyed. This is, in part, a result of the notions of Modernism and Progress, which sees all that came before the present as prelude, which views the past of any era as if it were a Hollywood costume drama -- in other words, a way of seeing the world (for the past is an inescapable part of the world) as a fashion statement, no more, no less. The real tragedy of our times, concurrent with and connected to the threat to White racial survival, is this robbing of life of its depth and contact with Nature, and its reduction to an entirely derivative and artificial experience of the lowest common denominator.

Acknowledgements . . .

I would like to thank researcher for assisting me in this difficult project. His help has been invaluable in finding other pertinent information regarding this subject.

It seems that this topic has again resurfaced, thanks to Dr. Schramm's book now having been translated, and other efforts as well. In particular, among these efforts to renew the research into the topic of Jewish occult murder is a new and highly controversial video tape about Jewish ritual murder by Worldwide Revisionist News & Views, entitled Human Sacrifice among the Fanatical Hasidic Jews and Other Cults from Ancient Times to the Present.

Many people have praised this video effort. Dr. Ed Fields of the newspaper The Truth at Last has called this video "a real breakthrough." Harrell Rhome, M.Div., Ph.D., said that "this fast-paced documentary," which is nearly 2 hours long, is "virtually irrefutable, and is most educational." Rev. Dr. Matthew F. Hale (J.D.) says that "this is an excellent video demonstrating without question that the accusation of Jewish ritual-murder is indeed true."

This video is available from the following address for $25.00 inlcuding shipping and handling:

Eagle Publications
POB 6303
Corpus Christi TX 78466-6303.

There are other recent efforts to stop this cruel and extremely vicious act from occurring by revealing its nature as well. For instance, Michael Hoffman wrote about this in an article that appeared in one of his newsletters. Syrian Defense minister, attorney, and Dr. (of History) Moustafa Tlass has published a book in English called The Matzo of Zion, which may be available shortly. The book Blood Ritual, another investigative study into this matter by Philip DeVier, Ph.D., has recently been published, and is available through the National Alliance.

In the Russian language, linguist Vladimir Dal's book Notes about the Ritual Murders, has recently been republished, which may be available soon in English. Also in Russian, Yuri Vorobyevsky's Path to the Apocalypse, Vol. III, has an interesting chapter about ritual murder as well. A new website -- http://www.RitualMurder.org -- also describes many such incidents. In short, efforts to reveal this phenomenon and stop this terribly vicious act from occurring are taking place more every day across the globe.

R. Belser
December, 2001

To Jewish Ritual-Murder : a Historical Investigation

--------------------------------------------------------

* The Propasphere is every facet of public life -- educational institutions, the media, government, churches, entertainment -- as a complete and seamless system of propaganda, with each part reinforcing the message of the others. As such, the great and profound effectiveness of this sphere of deception lies in the fact that it is perceived as reality itself. It is a world of surfaces only - of verbal and non-verbal cues, of inferences, innuendos, and it makes use of one of the key behavioral levers in the psychology of most people: the fear of the contempt or disapproval of others. For example, the 'correct' attitude toward: interracial dating (trendy and 'cool'); the Jews and 'Israel' (innocent victims always and to be supported unequivocally and without limit); toward the White race (the 'cancer of the human race') -- is conveyed continually and relentlessly by television. The context in which these messages appear may run the gamut from situation comedy, dramatic series, talk show, or even a sporting event; whatever the venue, the globalist, NWO, anti-White, pro-Zionist ethos is omnipresent as the 'default setting' like a carrier wave.

Because of its masquerade as reality in the public sphere, it is simultaneously incorporated into private life. Television, by its property of literally bringing public life into the center of private life (i.e., the living room, bedroom, or kitchen), by the fact that it is present almost universally in every home and actually provides a sort of 'white noise' background for daily life -- and by the fact that it is a highly visual medium, has an innate tendency to atrophy the active mental processes -- analysis, synthesis, and imagination and to supply a homogeneous Weltanschauung. To an astonishing degree, the images which accompany thought are the images provided by television; the catch- words, rationales, etc. -- even the conversational exchanges of daily life -- follow a furrow already pre-plowed by those presented on television. In essence, an alarming percentage of the population is living a second-hand life within the parameters set by television.

Gordon Duff's Redress of Jerry Rivers; String Up Eric Cantor, Traitor to America

2010-11-16T19:17:00.000-08:00

Let's start with GORDON DUFF: DEAR GERALDO RIVERA, 9/11 MURDER IS NOT A JOKE

TickerGrail has a good piece on the subject, as well.

Next...Dprogram does a great piece on Eric Cantor, who decides that swinging by the neck is better than serving one's country...but if you ask him, he'll say that exactly what he's doing.

Eric...go run for the Knesset, but get the hell out of my country.

Last, but not least...I love beating this dead nag...John Costella, along with many other individuals of conscience and integrity, are applying the final nails to the coffin which within bears the ClimateGate scandal - here, you can download his analysis as a PDF.

I was pleased to find that John was also a photography expert, and, as such, has been able, along with like researchers, to put the lie to what may be the biggest hoax in all of assassination history...the Zapruder film.