So, for only the second time in the history of this blog -- that's 404 essays so far -- I'm going to republish a piece previously run elsewhere. By tomorrow evening -- I promise! -- this space will
be filled with a new, first-run essay. I'm also working on some YouTube projects; hopefully, we'll see the first of those in a couple of weeks.
On the subject of video -- I'm also including below a two-part video produced by a very industrious fellow named Rick, whose YouTube channel you folks really should check out. That video is an illustrated version of a commentary I did on the subject below for the old Review of the News Online program.
Five years ago the air was thick with dire warnings that the film "The Passion of the Christ" would ignite America's ambient anti-Semitism into a firestorm of persecution. The lead voice in that ensemble was, predictably, the criminally misnamed Anti-Defamation League, which performed its familiar cadenzas of outrage and alarm.
Oddly enough, however, the anticipated persecution never materialized. There were even a couple of well-publicized episodes in which skinhead-type Nazi-wannabes, after seeing the film, repudiated their lifestyles, which would mean that The Passion's impact translated into a net loss for the cause of Jew-hating.
Predictably, the ADL and its allies, after defaming more or less the entire American Christian population, never acknowledged that they were wrong.
In all candor, I've not seen The Passion. I don't agree with much of Mr. Gibson's theology, although I respect his formidable gifts as a filmmaker. From my perspective the key issue here wasn't the film itself, but rather the fashion in which cynical opportunists like Foxman exploited it as an opportunity to engender inter-communal distrust and hostility, and the role played by people of his ilk in promoting "The Fatal Embrace" -- a dependency on the "protective" power of the state, which is the true enemy of liberty, peace, prosperity, and tolerance. -- WNG]
The Pogrom That Wasn't: The Passion of The Christ, Five Years Later
"For almost 2,000 years in Western civilization, four words legitimized, rationalized, and fueled anti-Semitism: 'The Jews killed Christ,'" claimed Abraham Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), in a February 6 [2004] speech in Palm Beach concerning the new film The Passion of the Christ.The unmistakable thrust of Foxman's address was that because Christianity is innately anti-Semitic, Mel Gibson's film could activate the latent anti-Semitism the ADL insists can be found everywhere--including the United States.
"For hundreds of years those four words--acted out, spoken out, sermonized out--inspired and legitimized pogroms, inquisitions and expulsions," continued Foxman. "Many during the Holocaust who killed Jews from Monday to Friday went to church on Sunday and there was no disconnect for them, because, after all, all they were doing was killing 'Christ killers.' So for us, the possible impact of a Passion Play on the global scene with a global producer, with an icon, is not a fantasy, it's a serious anxiety. For us, it is a flashback into history."
Foxman elsewhere asserted that "Holocaust survivors ... can vividly recall their families having to hide in the basement in order to avoid the wrath of Christians emerging from Easter Sunday services."
Here Foxman ignores the well-documented fact that thousands of European Jews survived the Holocaust because Christians hid them in their basements or otherwise protected them from the Nazis. Among those thus sheltered was Foxman himself--who now besmirches pious Christians, rather than collectivist pagans, for the slaughter of millions of innocent Jews.
Foxman's complaint was echoed by countless voices in the punditocracy.
"Since medieval times, passion plays--which, like Gibson's movie, depict the last 12 hours of Christ's life--have often been openly anti-Semitic and used to justify persecution of Jews," opined the Baltimore Sun. "The Passion is hopelessly mired in anti-Semitic stereotypes," declared Entertainment Weekly. "The mere choice of title is dangerously loaded: Passion plays, a centuries-old art form, are often so liable to incite anti-Semitic anger that Catholic theologians crafted guidelines in the '80s for tonal appropriateness."
According to Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer, "the crucifixion is not just a story; it is a story with its own story--a history of centuries of relentless, and at times savage, persecution of Jews in Christian lands." Krauthammer's colleague Richard Cohen denounced Gibson's film--which is drawn largely from the Gospels--as "fascistic."In similar fashion, the New York Daily News ranted: "Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ is the most virulently anti-Semitic movie made since the German propaganda films of World War II." Newsweek expanded the indictment from passion plays and Gibson's film to include the New Testament itself. Posing the question of whether "the Gospels themselves [are] anti-Semitic," the February 16 cover story replies: "Not in the sense the term has come to mean in the early 21st century...."
The magazine goes so far as to imply that the New Testament should carry the spiritual equivalent of the Surgeon General's warning affixed to cigarette packages: "The tragic history of the persecution of the Jewish people ... clearly shows what can go wrong when the Gospels are not read with care."
Boston Globe columnist James Carroll dispenses with such subtlety altogether, suggesting that the New Testament itself is a crime against tolerance: "Even a faithful repetition of the Gospel stories of the death of Jesus can do damage exactly because those sacred texts themselves carry the virus of Jew hatred." New York Times film critic Frank Rich, who execrates Gibson's film as a "porn movie" of the "homoerotic" variety (a description which Rich would generally offer as a compliment, judging from previous reviews), insists that "the fracas over The Passion has made me feel less secure as a Jew in America than ever before."
Strange as it may seem, Rich has it exactly right. It is not the film itself, or the Christian faith that the film reflects, but rather the orchestrated outrage over that film that may undermine relations between Christians and Jews and ultimately imperil the rights and personal security of all Americans.
ADL Smear Campaign
For roughly a year prior to the release of Gibson's film, the Anti-Defamation League waged a campaign traducing both the director and his movie as anti-Semitic. In the course of that campaign, an ADL operative purloined an early draft of the script.
On the basis of a few isolated elements of the stolen script, the ADL condemned the work in progress for displaying "numerous anti-Semitic elements" and demanded that Gibson rework his film to its satisfaction. Failing in its effort to exercise editorial control over the film's content, the ADL urged the director to add a postscript to the film that would constitute, in essence, the metaphorical "Surgeon General's warning" about the supposedly toxic effects of Christianity.[...]
Corrie ten Boom, rescuer of Jews: According to the ADL, she and the rest of her heroic Dutch family just didn't understand the "real" meaning of the New Testament. Rather than leaving audiences to ponder the essential Christian message of redemption, the ADL's suggested coda would leave audiences pondering the supposed collective guilt of Christians for the historic persecution of Jews, up to and including the hideous crimes committed by the anti-Christian pagan Adolf Hitler and his National Socialist regime.
Gibson, to his credit, essentially ignored the ADL, which--in collaboration with the major media and other self-appointed "watchdog" groups--escalated its defamation campaign.
Numerous Jewish religious leaders and scholars who previewed the film--including Rabbi Daniel Lapin and film critic Michael Medved--hailed it as an artistic masterpiece devoid of any anti-Semitic content.
Referring primarily to the ADL, Rabbi Lapin offered the following commentary shortly after Gibson's film was released: "Those Jewish organizations that have squandered both time and money futilely protesting The Passion, ostensibly in order to prevent pogroms in Pittsburgh, can hardly be proud of their performance. They failed at everything they attempted. They were hoping to ruin Gibson rather than enrich him. They were hoping to suppress The Passion rather than promote it. Finally, they were hoping to help Jews rather than harm them. In this, they have failed miserably. By selectively unleashing their fury only on wholesome entertainment that depicts Christianity in a positive light, these critics have triggered anger, hurt, and resentment."
Rabbi Lapin, like countless other devout Jews, is a man of faith and goodwill. Thus it's not surprising that he is insufficiently cynical to understand how staining Christianity with the tar brush of anti-Semitism benefits the ADL and its agenda. In fact, sowing, "anger, hurt, and resentment" through the use of dishonest--and occasionally illegal--tactics is the ADL's stock in trade, and it has been for decades.
The ADL's Rap Sheet
During the late 1970s and early 1980s, an individual named James Mitchell Rosenberg, described by political analyst Laird Wilcox as "a career infiltrator for the Anti-Defamation League," was a fixture at Ku Klux Klan rallies in the Midwest.
For the benefit of television reporters, Rosenberg also posed as a leader of a paramilitary group called the "Christian Patriot's Defense League," which was the subject of a breathless expose entitled "Armies of the Right." He was eventually arraigned on criminal charges, which were dismissed after the intervention of Irwin Suall, his ADL supervisor.
A little more than a decade later, Roy Bullock, described by Wilcox as "a paid ADL operative and well-known figure in the San Francisco homosexual community," engaged in similar undercover work in the Bay Area, attempting to forge spurious links between ADL-designated "hate groups" and actual terrorist organizations. Bullock worked closely with Tom Gerard, an intelligence officer with the San Francisco Police Department.
According to Wilcox, Gerard "regularly took information from police files for transmittal to the ADL and in some cases to Israeli intelligence agencies, with whom the ADL works closely." Gerard avoided criminal charges by fleeing the country.
The ADL bribed its way out of trouble by offering a $75,000 donation to a San Francisco hate crimes investigation fund.
[Fifteen] years ago, the ADL released a 193-page screed entitled The Religious Right: The Assault on Tolerance and Pluralism in America, purporting to document that Christian conservatives pose a menace to Jews and other minorities.
Outraged by this libel, 75 prominent American Jews signed a full-page ad in the New York Times to condemn the ADL. Since Jews have often been victimized by religious bigotry, the ad pointed out, "we have a special obligation to guard against it, and all the more so, when in the case of the ADL attack on our Christian fellow citizens, it emanates from our own community."
Additionally, continued the ad, "Judaism teaches ... that we have the duty to acknowledge the good done to us. In issuing The Religious Right study, the ADL has among other things seriously violated that principle."
On March 1, just shortly after The Passion's debut, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand a $10.5 million defamation judgment against the ADL arising out of a Colorado lawsuit.
William and Dorothy Quigley had filed the suit in the mid-1990s after ADL regional director Saul Rosenthal, speaking in a press conference, accused the couple of being anti-Semites.
In 1994, the ADL intervened in a pointless quarrel between the Quigleys and their Jewish neighbors, the Aronsons. Seeking to prove that the Quigleys were motivated by anti-Semitic prejudice, the ADL suggested that the Aronsons conduct an illegal wiretap of the Quigleys' phone conversations.
Another Christian who just didn't "get it," from the ADL's perspective: Father Bruno (born Henri Reynders) a Belgian Benedictine Monk, led a large and sophisticated rescue operation -- at considerable personal peril -- after being released from a POW camp in 1941. With him in the photo above are five of the hundreds of Jewish children Father Bruno and his associates protected from the Nazis.
The league then went public with its accusations against the Quigleys, who found themselves formally accused of hate crimes (a charge subsequently dropped). As a result of the ADL's actions, the Quigleys were battered with death threats and hate mail (including a package containing dog feces), and were denounced from the pulpit by their priest. The family was driven to hire bodyguards, and William Quigley--who worked in the motion-picture industry--found that his career was effectively destroyed. (This underscores the commercial and career risks encountered by Mel Gibson and his colleagues after they were targeted by the ADL.)
"We're all disappointed," commented ADL Mountain States Region director Bruce DeBoskey to the March 2 Rocky Mountain News. Pointing out that more than a dozen other "human rights" organizations had filed legal briefs in support of the ADL, DeBoskey insisted--apparently with a straight face--that "we do remain committed to our fight against hatred and racism and bigotry and extremism and anti-Semitism."
A Place of Refuge
As the Quigley case illustrates, in contemporary America it's much more dangerous to be labeled an anti-Semite than to be identified as a Jew. This certainly doesn't sound like the sort of thing that would happen in a culture primed for mass pogroms against Jews.
Nevertheless, notes historian Paul Gottfried (a Conservative Jew), the ADL and similar organizations "appeal successfully to their donor base by evoking the specter of Christian traditionalists. This is happening not in Czarist Russia but in a country founded by Protestant sectarians, who have never persecuted Jews, and the campaign of fear and loathing is being directed against enthusiastically philo-Semitic Christians."
In fact, America is unquestionably the most philo-Semitic society in the world. As Orthodox Jewish author David Klinghoffer points out: "You've heard the phrase 'anti-Semitism without Jews,' to describe the hostility to Jews felt in countries ... that don't have any Jews. In the American Jewish community, we've got anti-Semitism without anti-Semites."
In a July 15, 1994 interview with the Jerusalem Post, historian Leonard Dinnerstein, author of the book Anti-Semitism in America, observed that "anti-Semitism in the U.S. has clearly declined to an unimagined degree.... [I]t's become so minuscule as to be virtually irrelevant.... Jews are incredibly secure in the United States, and I see no reason whatsoever why that should change.... The fact is, a lot of American Jews just aren't ready to accept just how well-accepted they are in America."
Citing the ADL's own annual audits of anti-Semitic acts, Dinnerstein concluded that "anti-Semitism is just a tiny blip on the American consciousness." Yet to judge matters from the frenzied reaction The Passion provoked from many pundits, one would assume that America abounds in crypto-anti-Semites willing to stage pogroms on the smallest pretext. Such scapegoating of Christianity is not merely libelous; it is literally demented.
As Professor Benjamin Ginsberg of Johns Hopkins University pointed out in his 1993 study The Fatal Embrace, it is statism--not Christianity--that lies at the root of historic anti-Semitism. In previous eras, Ginsberg explains, Jews were socially marginalized people whose status led them "to seek the protection of the state.... Over the past several centuries ... Jews have played a major role in the strengthening of existing states and in efforts to supplant established regimes with new ones."
In many states, he continues, "Jews were crucial in building and staffing institutions of extraction, coercion, administration, and mobilization.... [T]hese relationships between Jews and the state have been the chief catalysts for organized anti-Semitism."
Digested into simple terms, Ginsberg's compelling thesis is that time and again, Jews have sought to build state power in order to protect themselves from persecution--only to engender the hostility of those whose prosperity and liberties suffer at the hands of the state. And time and again, the state turned its wrath on the same Jewish advisers and agents who had worked so diligently to expand its powers--often with lethal consequences for them and many innocent Jews.
Despite this utterly predictable outcome, Ginsberg observes, "Jews often continued to look to the state for protection even when it was the state itself that was the source of their problems." He cites one particularly tragic example of this "fatal embrace" at work: "[T]o the very end many German Jews could not believe that the German state would fail to protect them from the excesses of Nazi fanatics."
Avoiding the "Fatal Embrace"
As Rabbi Lapin and many other Jewish leaders have pointed out, America's Christian heritage is the single most important reason why Jews have enjoyed unparalleled acceptance and security in this country. A closely related reason is our constitutional system of limited government under law, which was designed to limit state power in a way that would prevent the dreadful consequences of the "fatal embrace" described by Ginsberg.
The ADL's campaign to execrate Mel Gibson and his film by libeling the Gospels and Christianity as being anti-Semitic is a calculated effort to undermine the goodwill of American Christians and to incite inter-communal hostility. Both Jews and non-Jews are hurt by this smear tactic. The only obvious beneficiary (besides the ADL itself, which profits handsomely from such needless rancor) will be the state--which will leave not only Jews, but all of us, in much greater peril.
"Inventing an Enemy," Pt. 1
***
"Inventing an Enemy," Pt. 2
[The foregoing essay originally appeared in the April 5, 2004 issue of The New American; Copyright 2009 by William Norman Grigg]
On sale now.
Dum spiro, pugno!
A very interesting and necessary attack on a shameless, slimy organization.
ReplyDeleteSuch a perception of Christianity as anti-semitic is just plain delusional. Sure, a small minority have used the label Christian to justify their hatred of Jews, but scripture just doesn't support it.
ReplyDeleteI guess we'd have to hate our Savior, as well as much of the first century church. They were Jews, after all.
Most Christians still view Jews as God's chosen people, even though the Jewish religion denies that Christ is the messiah. And most evangelical Christians are so pro-Israel as to behave like Israel (the nation) can do no wrong. They may hope that those Jews finally accept Christ as the messiah, but they don't demonize them for not having done so yet.
The facts just don't support the assertion that Christianity is anti-semetic.
The ADL's campaign to execrate Mel Gibson and his film by libeling the Gospels and Christianity as being anti-Semitic is a calculated effort to undermine the goodwill of American Christians and to incite inter-communal hostility. Both Jews and non-Jews are hurt by this smear tactic. The only obvious beneficiary (besides the ADL itself, which profits handsomely from such needless rancor) will be the state--which will leave not only Jews, but all of us, in much greater peril.
ReplyDeleteAlmost perfectly stated. The only thing that needs to be added here is that the ADL's "leadership", with Foxman at the helm, absolutely and deliberately intends to stoke the few smoldering embers of serious anti-Semitism remaining in the U.S. today into a raging inferno. Why? Because they are statist authoritarians to the core who, very much like their "Evangelical Christian" counterparts who dabble in secular politics, are far more interested in temporal power than than the promotion of actual faith. Indeed, in the ADL's case, evidence suggests that promotion of the principles of the Jewish Faith is an absolute non-priority, Foxman's status as a "rabbi" notwithstanding. Either Foxman and his henchmen are unaware of the toxic after-effects of state-worship by Jews (a ridiculously unrealistic assumption), or intend to harness such toxicity for their own aggrandizement. Only the latter assumption is borne out by the evidence of their actions, a clear indication that the ADL is a staunchly secular political organization in the mold of the original Zionist movement that is only interested in political power. What better way to grab that political power than to fan the flames of persecution to the point that the Israeli-owned American Reigning Establishment can eventually justify obliterating the last remnants of liberty and seizing complete power - with Tel Aviv pulling the strings, of course.
Looking forward to your Youtube (or Hulu, or DailyMotion) projects. Please keep us informed.
ReplyDeleteYou're probably preaching to the choir here on this continual slanderfest the ADL engages in. I've commented on it before several times on different blogs over the years.
The inescapable reality is that ADListic Jews (and that's a sizeable quantity in the U.S., counting actual members and sympathizers) without exception partner with the state in the misguided effort to secure their protection from the hostile, unwashed masses only to have it bite them back later.
The ADL itself, just as the SPLC, GLSEN, or a myriad of other alphabet soup orgs could be ignored easily were it not for their intimate state partnerships and attempts at fueling the legislative freight train, aligning it with their extremist views.
I discount the NRA, GOA and the like from that list precisely because their main goal is attempting to halt the legislation freight train, not fuel it up anew. These orgs are reactive as opposed to proactive in the case of ADL, SPLC, GLSEN, SCLC, etc.
You should've mentioned in passing the The ADL's Holocaust Denial piece where the caption to the photo sums up the ADL's oxymoronic positions: What happens when the State has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force: The Anti-Defamation League agrees with the late, unlamented National Socialist regime that this Jewish woman about to be murdered holding her child had no right to take up arms against the government that ruled her.
Why is it so hard for intelligent folk to see this historically evidenced truth? Well, speaking of truth, intelligence ≠ wisdom.
Another fine piece, Will.
By the way, hope you and yours enjoy a happy Resurrection Day!
ReplyDeleteCan there be anything more idiotic than the idea that Christians believe "the Jews killed Jesus?" Such slanderers really want people to believe that Christians believe Jesus died not because man sinned, and because he wanted to save us, but simply because the Jews killed him. There is not a quicker nor more idiotic way to mindlessly blunder into mutilating the entire meaning of Christianity than by adhering to such an idea.
ReplyDeleteEven if the Jews did kill Jesus, did he not forgive them? Can we, as Christians, be allowed to bear a grudge that our savior did not? A blasphemous and damnable idea.
On another note, I also hate another kind of slander: the slander done against the Church, when people say, "Pius XII was a collaborator. He did nothing to stop Hitler." Of course! He could have called forth his tank divisions and crushed the occupation of Europe, but he didn't. All he did was write the draft for Pius XI's 1937 encyclical, Mit brennender sorge (With Burning Concern) condemning all nationalism and all racial supremacy doctrines as contradictory to Christianity, instantly landing him and the Church he represented on Hitler's "slaughter, but not yet" list.
The same Church of which Albert Einstein said, in the December 23, 1940 Time magazine, "Being a lover of freedom, when the revolution came in Germany, I looked to the universities to defend it, knowing that them had always boasted of their devotion to the cause of truth; but, no, the universities immediately were silenced. Then I looked to the great editors of the newspapers whose flaming editorials in days gone by had proclaimed: their love of freedom; but they, like the universities, were silenced in a few short weeks . . . Only the Church stood squarely across the path of Hitler's campaign for suppressing truth. I never had any special interest in the Church before, but now I feel a great affection and admiration because the Church alone has had the courage and persistence to stand for intellectual truth and moral freedom. I am forced thus to confess that what I once despised I now praise unreservedly."
Never mind the fact that Pius XII hid Jews in his personal residences and in the Vatican itself, obtaining them fake passports and other travel documents, whereupon after the war, he was presented with a cross by some of the Jews he hid at Castel Gandolfo. A cross, being given to a Christian, by Jews! An awesome gesture. When asked where he wanted to place the cross, he said, "Let it be put in the place where they suffered." (Their hiding spot in the basements.)
We could read his encyclical Non Abbiamo Bisogno, (Italian for "We Have No Need") in which he condemns all fascist doctrines, yet again putting a price on his head. The man literally oversaw the waging of spiritual guerrilla warfare, fought with the independent cells of his brother bishops. Men act upon beliefs. Belief is the free acceptance of truth as perceived by the intellect. It is a spiritual thing. The actions of men are fruitless and deadly unless they have embraced true ideas and principles. As a man believes, so will he act. Lies lead to death. Truth leads to life. Lies can only be countered with truth. Physical force can only be morally used to protect physical entities, and then, such force will only be brought to bear when a man is led into a course of action by what he believes.
Pius XII had no armies. But he had the sword of Truth, and this he thrust into the rotten heart of fascism, nationalism and racism. To the hilt.
-Sans Authoritas
Anti semite along with racist, homophobe, sexist, white supremacist and fascist are the only smear words you need to know these days,to earn the approval of those that idolize the state.
ReplyDeleteThey are otherwise known as socialists and their number and influence is legion. They generally, but not always, favor state ownership of the means of production or marxist communism. This, as opposed to merely controlling and regulating businesses, which is fascism. (IOW the left and the right, Rush and Obama, the Dems and the Repubs are related. They are blood brothers that merely prefer different flavors or styles of socialism.)
As for those who worship the host, Mary and the saints and place their conscience sotto i papi, Rome is an uncertain and compromised ally in the battle for freedom from the state, in that as a totalitarian organization she don't much care for competition.
But don't take my word for it. It is little known that Lord Acton's statement, that: "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely (Selct. Works 2:383)" was in the context of Acton's discussion essentially of political and ecclesiastical tyranny. In short, papal infallibility, though long believed, was only officially approved in 1870 by the First Vatican Council at the instigation of Pius IX. Acton, a member of the Roman communion not only opposed the dogma, but attended the council as an observer (as well feared for his life). The doctrine preceded, if not was cut from the same cloth as the divine right of kings. But the Protestant Reformation broke the back of both of these dogmas, otherwise we would not be having this discussion.
Further at that same Reformation, the Reformers saw the pope and Muhammad respectively as the western and eastern antiChrists.
Today, not only antiChrist, but the beast, the secular state, continue to clamor for and claim the undivided worship and fealty of man.
Yet the supposed subject of Mad Max's superstitious and medieval Passion play in technicolor said "You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free (Jn8:32)." Indeed. Accept no substitutes. Rather keep yourselves from idols, whether secular, pseudo religious or the Hollywood spectacular.
[spell corrected version]
ReplyDeleteAnti semite along with racist, homophobe, sexist, white supremacist and fascist are the only smear words you need to know these days, to earn the approval of those that idolize the state. They are otherwise known as socialists and their number and influence is legion. They generally, but not always, favor state ownership of the means of production or marxist communism. This, as opposed to the state merely controlling and regulating businesses, which is fascism. (IOW the left and the right, Rush and Obama, the Dems and the Repubs are related. They are blood brothers that merely prefer different flavors or styles of socialism.)
As for those who worship the host, Mary and the saints and place their conscience sotto i papi, Rome is an uncertain and compromised ally in the battle for freedom from the state, in that as a totalitarian organization she don't much care for competition.
But don't take my word for it. It is little known that Lord Acton's statement, that: "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely (Selct. Works 2:383)" was in the context of Acton's discussion essentially of political and ecclesiastical tyranny. In short, papal infallibility, though long believed, was only officially approved in 1870 by the First Vatican Council at the instigation of Pius IX. Acton, a member of the Roman communion not only opposed the dogma, but attended the council as an observer (as well feared for his life). The doctrine preceded, if not was cut from the same cloth as the divine right of kings. But the Protestant Reformation broke the back of both of these dogmas, otherwise we would not be having this discussion.
Further at that same Reformation, the Reformers saw the pope and Muhammad respectively as the western and eastern antiChrists.
Today, not only antiChrist, but the beast, the secular state, continue to clamor for and claim the undivided worship and fealty of man.
Yet the supposed subject of Mad Max's superstitious and medieval Passion play in technicolor said "You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free (Jn8:32)." Indeed. Accept no substitutes. Rather keep yourselves from idols, whether secular, pseudo religious or the Hollywood spectacular.
Bob S., I'd like to discuss these topics further with you, but not on this site. I clutter up poor, patient Mr. Grigg's site too much as it is.
ReplyDeleteIf you'd like, please drop an email. druschhai@aol.com
-Sans Authoritas
Will and Friends,
ReplyDeleteIn order to understand 20th century and current history, including the things in this essay, we have to keep one fact uppermost and fixed in our minds: The Zionist Jews' principal and overriding motive is the creation of modern Israel AND its settlement with as many Jews as can possibly be persuaded to immigrate there. To this end, Zionists constantly strive to make Jews in other countries feel unsafe, and get them to emigrate.
I once read a testament by an Iraqi Jewish doctor who emigrated to Israel after bombings and synagogue trashings in Baghdad, only to find when he got there that the Ashkenazic Jews who run Israel would not give him a job (he was Sephardic) and moreover the bombings had been done not by Iraqis, but by the Mossad itself, to scare the Iraqi Jews into leaving Iraq.
A similar thing happened in Germany. In 1933, long before any anti-Jewish laws were passed in Germany, the World Jewish Congress in Amsterdam declared "war" on Germany and organized a worldwide boycott of German goods. They pumped up with terror the Jews of Europe, who fled by the millions to America, Argentina, Russia (where Stalin promptly shot them - 300,000 of them) Australia, etc, etc - all over the world. As well as, in limited numbers, to Palestine, where the British did not welcome them, as the influx was causing resentment and friction with the native Palestinians.
This anti-German campaign, believe it or not, was orchestrated by the Zionists in collaboration with the Nazi regime. Initially, Hitler only wanted to get the Jews to leave Germany, by whatever means, not to exterminate them. So did the Zionists. Their objectives were exactly the same. Only after war broke out did the remaining Jews in all of Occupied Europe who - remember this, when you are fighting a war for your nation's survival - had declared war on Germany in 1933, become a "problem" requiring a "final solution." In essence, the hatred among Christians which the Zionists themselves hand-in-glove with Hitler stirred up in Germany against Jews in the 1930's, backfired most horribly.
AND IF THEY TRY IT AGAIN IN AMERICA, IT COULD BACKFIRE AGAIN.
As to why the Palestinians resented Jewish immigration and had riots, such as in 1929, in which Jews were massacred (in tiny numbers by today's standards,) this was because when Palestine was an Ottoman province, all the land not owned by Palestinians was owned by Ottoman absentee landlords who lived in Constantinople. Those absentee landowners had rented the farms out to Palestinians for generations. When the Jews bought this land from the Turks and settled, they drove out the Palestinian tenants, who had farmed it for maybe 200-300 years, so the Jews could farm it themselves. This was the root cause of the anger of the Palestinian Arabs against Jewish immigration.
What would happen if the Mexicans immigrating to the USA were backed with vast sums of money, and bought up thousands of companies, fired all the Anglo workers and would only hire Mexicans, and bought up all the farms in California, selling the produce only to Mexicans while Americans starved? And then, after about 40 years, declared that the Southern USA was now Nueva Espana where only Spanish would be spoken, and ethnically cleansed, using terrorism, all the Anglos to refugee camps in the remaining 40 states? Saying that there should be plenty of room for the Anglos in the other 40 states? Would we Anglos accept this with docility?
It is a strange thing how the Zionist Jews always stab their friends in the back. No country was more tolerant of Jews for 300 years than Germany up till 1920, but the Zionists brought the USA into WWI in order to defeat Germany and win from the British a promise to give them Palestine. This was the main reason Hitler wanted them out of Germany.
No religion was more tolerant of the Jews than Islam. The Jews lived happily and without persecution in countless Islamic countries for a thousand years, far more so than in Christian countries, where THEY WERE PERSECUTED AND MURDERED IN THE THOUSANDS BY CHRISTIANS - LET US NOT STUPIDLY TRY TO DENY THAT FACT - mostly by the Church or the various kings who wanted to seize their wealth. The same exact fate befell the Knights Templar when they grew too rich and King Phillip IV and the Pope crushed them in order to steal their money, in which they failed. The instigators of the innumerable pogroms against the Jews in medieval Europe were not motivated by "Christian" hatred of the "murderers of Jesus,", as the ignorant masses were, but by pure cynical greed.
(In several cases, the pogroms did not start because the Jews had killed Jesus, but by spreading the rumor that the Jews had kidnapped a Christian child, drained its blood which they drank, and then had roasted and eaten it. This slander was repeated again and again. Or they were accused of stealing the Host - the body of Christ - from churches, to perform black magic with it, which the ignorant Christian masses saw as likely to bring down plague, famine and death upon their city. This NEVER happened in any Moslem country.)
Yet the Zionists have deliberately turned the tolerant Moslems and the Jews against each other and made them bitter enemies, in order to get the Jews in those countries to emigrate to modern Israel. What folly.
And the Zionists turned the Jews against the Catholic Church, (BTW Mel Gibson is a Catholic,) after the Pope and the Church did their utmost to rescue Jews and other innocent victims from the Nazis. As Sans Authoritas observed, the Church had zero military power, only the power of human morality and conscience.
[Thank you, SA, for that quote from Albert Einstein, which I had never read before.]
Moreover, the Nazis were fighting the Communists, (most of the leaders of whom were Jews,) who had destroyed hundreds of Christian churches in Russia, murdered tens of thousands of priests and nuns, and prohibited the worship of Christ, on pain of arrest or refusal of a job, an apartment, and food, which were only available through the Soviet State.
Given that Hitler was NOT persecuting the Church, which side should the Pope have been on? Tell me, which? Given the mass murders and persecutions of Christians by Jews in Russia, the Pope's efforts to save Jews in Italy were near to sainthood.
Again, the Zionists stabbed their best friends in the back.
That, dear friends, is exactly what is happening here in America, the greatest friend of the Jews among all the countries of our modern world. The Zionists are stabbing us in the back and sowing fear among the Jews of America. Their plan is to wait as long as necessary for a world situation of chaos on a Biblical scale to occur, which will give them the excuse they long for to drive the remaining Palestinians out of Greater Israel, and gather all the Jews of the world together there.
If you step back and look at this insane "plan" impartially, it is doomed to fail. The only thing which allows modern Israel to survive against 200-1 Muslim-Jewish population odds is the support of rich and powerful Jews in rich and powerful nations of the world. Once all those Jews leave their host countries and emigrate to Israel, their power will be lost and Israel will have to stand alone, which it cannot do for more than a few years, until its Muslim enemies from Morocco to Pakistan gather their strength and crush them.
There is a vast amount of history I could cite, but commentary on this limited blogspace does not allow it. The ADL, AIPAC, JINSA, and all the other American Zionist organizations are foolishly playing with deadly fire which, if they do not stop very soon, could blaze up suddenly and consume the Jews of America.
Quote from G.J. Neuberger at
http://www.nkusa.org/AboutUs/Zionism/greatgulf.cfm
"This love of the land and the Jewish longing for a return to it and for the coming of the Messiah have been exploited innumerable times during the past 2,000 years. Zionism has had many precursors and each has been a curse for the Jews. Individuals who proclaimed themselves the Messiah and messianic movements have sprung up from time to time, from the Roman era through the Middle Ages and down to the modern Zionists. All were in due course exposed and recognized as frauds, and those who had set their hope on them found only disappointment and all too often disaster.
"Racial pride has been the downfall of those Jews in the past who were blinded by their own narrow-minded chauvinism. In what way are the Jews a "chosen people"? Every Jewish man anywhere and at any time when called to the reading of the Torah says, "Who has chosen us from all the peoples and gave us His Torah." This is the way in which the Jews are chosen. The Jewish people are chosen not for domination over others, not for conquest or warfare, but to serve G-d and thus to serve mankind."
I am sorry this post has been so long, but if I made bald statements about Zionism without examples, nobody would accept them.
Friends, if you have any Jewish colleagues that you care about, you should try to open their eyes to resist rampant Zionism, before disaster falls upon us all.
Sincerely,
Lemuel Gulliver.
I'm tired, and by that I mean I am weary at the molecular level.
ReplyDeleteSee. This is what happens when you take care of children. ;-)
Mel Gibson was cool before he started following the cult of the jewish carpenter. We were soldiers was some rah-rah recruiting office crap and the passion of the christ was a big turd too.
ReplyDeleteI have a funny agitprop picture of abe foxman dressed up as uncle sam pointing saying i hate you. He means you goyim cattle or I mean gentile.
ReplyDeleteIs holocaust denial a crime in the people's republik of amerika yet?
ReplyDeleteAccording to the Jesuit Aramaic scholar who worked on the film Mel deleted the following verse from both soundtrack and subtitles:
ReplyDeleteMatthew 27:25
All the people answered, "Let his blood be on us and on our children!"
Mel's brother accused him of cowardice but Mel told him that if he didn't do that they would KILL him and his family.
Wow.
Sometime later a confidant of Mel's in traditional RC, Mark Glenn, recounted some of what Mel went through:
Having had enough of it herself, his wife followed suit and went to bed, leaving our friend in solitude to ponder other thoughts that refused to be chased away the night on which Americans were busy celebrating their freedom, Independence Day.…
The phone ringing at 3 am in the morning could never be a good thing. It was either bad news or a prank. For this particular individual, a phone call at 3 am to this number was particularly worrisome, since, being the most popular actor in the world, he had only given it out to a handful of friends and relatives. He heard his wife and the youngest of their seven children stir as the rings continued.
“Hello?” he answered, expecting to hear the voice of his father or someone else from the family with some kind of important news. “You think you’re pretty smart don’t you?” taunted the voice on the other line. It was a man’s voice, menacing, with a thick Brooklyn accent. The actor had heard the voice before, since this was not the first time he had been called in this manner. The voice continued. “You made me and my friends really mad, and we’re going to make sure that you pay for your crimes, you and your entire family. Think about that when you’re trying to get back to sleep.” The actor started to say something, displaying that angry, determined look on his face that he had famously worn in his movies and which had been seen before by millions of people around the world, but before he could get a word out, the line went dead.
“How did they get this number?” he thought in disbelief. It was a brand new number, and only about 5 people had it. The only way possible was to break into the phone company’s computer banks and retrieve it, which would have required the resources of a government or at the very least, its passive cooperation.
His crime, the thing that had outraged this tiny minority of tyrants and which had driven them to the brink of madness was his decision to make a movie about the one man who was the most revered by the world’s 1 billion Christians and 1.5 billion Muslims, Jesus of Nazareth. In the months leading up to the release of the movie, the Zionist organizations had gone ballistic and had pulled the levers on every machine upon which they held sway in trying to destroy this man and his project. Under their direction, every newspaper, magazine, radio and television program had devoted a considerable amount of their attention to the campaign of smearing him and of making a mockery of his film. Some of these groups, the less cautious, actually petitioned the US government to have this man and his associates arrested as terrorists under the provisions of the Patriot Act.
It was July the 4th, Independence Day in America, and not only his life, but the lives of those whom he loved had just been threatened, again, something that had become a regular event now for over a year as a result of his daring to exercise his freedom of speech and religion. He had gone to the police, the FBI of all people, but nothing was done short of periodic assurances by agency spokesmen that “they were looking into it.”
jews lie about anti semitism.
ReplyDeleteA ruined economy where jews end up with hugly disproportionate amount of the wealth is almost always evident before the jews are pogrommed. Jews control the treasury and the FED and most of the banks that got the bailouts. claiming they do not is silly. Just look at the boards of directors. banks with jew boards got bailouts banks without jew boards are stll being bought for pennies on the dollar by jew banks.
Look around at what Wall St jews have done to the USA.
Abe Foxman emailed me a few years ago writing about the "stab in the back myth". Obviously after seeing what is happening in the USA now it is not a myth.
Jews were in much the same position in Wiemar Germany as they are in the USA today. They owned the central banks and used the nations money supply nepotisticly to buy up the nations media nad other means of propaganda. Jews were almost half the MP's in the Wiemar Parliment and 3 of the 5 PM's.
How did the elite of Germany fall so far so fast if it is a myth?
Jews have got to be the dumbest people on earth not to learn from all their many past punishments. No other group has been pogrommed so many times and no other group thinks calling people names is a good defence. Jews claims that anti semitism comes from anything but their penchant to infiltrate nations money creation systems and use them nepotisticly are silly.
I love the fact that a black guy gets it. The USA is a trickle down society. The forbes list of top 100billionaires has 44 jews and no blacks. Jews control over 40% of the wealth in the USA while blacks and latino's between them control 1%. Blacks and latinos make up over 35% of our population while jews make up less than 3%. Jews pretend to stand behind minorities in the USA but really they just want to pick their pockets. Jews control the media (again if you don't believe it just look at the boards of directors of the major media corps). Jews use the media to portray whites as racist and minorities as criminals while almost alway portraying jews in a good light. Jews have obviously stolen the black and latino US citizens share of the "American Dream"
More Rabbi's have been convicted of child molestation in the USA than priests have been. There are 20 to 30 TIMES more priests then rabbi's in the USA. If the fact that we all heard tons about the priests and nothing about the rabbis in the media does not drive home the fact that jews own/control our media nothing will.
I do not know how to fix this problem but I do know that until whites and blacks get together the jews will divide us and keep stealing, mostly from minorities.