I would like to thank the reader who posted a comment regarding the veracity of the Protocols of Zion. This is indeed a very important question, and one which we side-step at our peril. The question the reader asked was as follows:
'Rufus, is the Protocols of Zion literally word-for-word true?
I don't think it is. For example it suggests than in newspapers, "ONLY LIES PRINTED".
So Jews own all the newspapers in the Western world, and they only print lies. So when my local newspaper prints something about someone who has died in a car crash, it's a lie and it never took place, right?
Or would that just be... absurd?'
I think the Protocols are worthy of study, and certainly they do have an important influence on world events, but I also believe that it would be an error to view them uncritically.
The Protocols are supposed to be the minutes of a secret Zionist meeting, and as such, they can only really be an outline. Looking at events which have unfolded since the time the Protocols were released to the public, they do fit very closely with what the minutes describe. I find it a little hard to imagine that the Protocols just happened to be smuggled out, and that their release was not by design.
If, as I suspect, the Protocols were deliberately leaked, then the reason for this was to provide us with a focal point to rally against. Now, why would a secretive organisation, with an agenda for total domination of the Earth, refer to itself as the Learned Elders of Zion? Learned Elders certainly, but Zion? This automatically draws attention to the Jews, and certainly insofar as the major banking cartels are Jewish-controlled, the link does make sense. However, chutzpah aside, is it really likely that the authors of the Protocols would so openly use terms which would draw attention to the Jewish people, and be so lapsidaisical as to allow for their plans to be exposed to the public, unless that is exactly what they wished?
The Protocols of Zion were signed by the Committee of the 33rd Degree, which has obvious connections with Freemasonry. A cursory examination of internal Masonic literature reveals a vast amount of 'Judæo-Christian' references. The construction of Masonic Temples is undeniably Biblically-based, with the striking similarity to the internal structure of Synagogues. The links between the Protocols and Jewry do seem quite compelling, but does that mean that they are a blueprint for the Jews as a whole?
The Protocols are being fulfilled, but the lot of ordinary Jews is not correspondingly improving. The Obamination formerly known as the USA is financing non-Jewish illegal emigration into Israel. As reported in the Israeli magazine, KR8, multi-culturalism is being imposed on the Jewish State with the full collusion of the government. The following are excerpts from the KR8 article:
'...the Obama administration is providing funds to Israel (via the UN) for every illegal African immigrant that enters the Jewish state...considering that hundreds of illegals penetrate Israel's borders daily, someone is profiting from this venture handsomely.
To return to the initial question; can the Protocols be taken as literally word for word true? The Protocols do not state that Only Lies will be printed in the media. Protocol 15 states:
An example of the media being used to fulfil the objective of destroying our link to natural reality, is the treatment of Michael Jackson and the children he allegedly fathered. Michael Jackson was African, and the woman who gave birth to the children he claimed as his own, is European. To look at images of the three children concerned, it is evident that the youngest is a half-caste, but the eldest two are Europeans (or at least Caucasian); thus they cannot be Michael Jackson's children. In the world of media distortion as described in the Protocols, the bare-faced lie is told that an African and a European can produce European children. Much is made of Jackson's skin disorder which turned his skin white over time, but the disorder could not impact upon his off springs' racial features. The real father of the two elder children is probably Dr Klein, who is Jewish, but in order to promote the Lamarckian Theory of Evolution (which is even more problematic than Darwinism), the media allow for the nonsense that the two White children could be Michael Jackson's! Of course, whilst attention is taken up by a lie which the multi-cultists like to peddle, the reason that Jackson was murdered is not examined at all; which of course brings us back to the Protocols.
So can the Protocols be trusted? I would have to say that insofar as they describe the plan to create a One World State, with a mongrelised mass serving a Self-Chosen elite, they are so accurate that we cannot afford to ignore them. However, by deliberately blurring the Hidden Elite with the Jews as a whole, the Protocols can be troublesome. Not all Zionists are Jews, and as we are now witnessing in Israel, being a Jew does not make one immune to the machinations of the Zionists. We are at a point in time where the real meaning of 'Zion' is yet to become clear, but as is evident in the enforcement of the One World Multi-Culti nightmare on the people of Israel, it is possible that Zion (Jerusalem, Yerusalayim, Sion) really does mean the global capital and the forces loyal to it, and that the nation of Israel has all along been a distraction; a distraction complete with a loyal army of Jewish human shields, who have fallen into the trap of applauding a dogma which purports to promote Jewish supremacy, and by so doing have unwittingly helped to create an instrument which will ultimately destroy them too.
The Protocols of Zion were signed by the Committee of the 33rd Degree, which has obvious connections with Freemasonry. A cursory examination of internal Masonic literature reveals a vast amount of 'Judæo-Christian' references. The construction of Masonic Temples is undeniably Biblically-based, with the striking similarity to the internal structure of Synagogues. The links between the Protocols and Jewry do seem quite compelling, but does that mean that they are a blueprint for the Jews as a whole?
The Protocols are being fulfilled, but the lot of ordinary Jews is not correspondingly improving. The Obamination formerly known as the USA is financing non-Jewish illegal emigration into Israel. As reported in the Israeli magazine, KR8, multi-culturalism is being imposed on the Jewish State with the full collusion of the government. The following are excerpts from the KR8 article:
What is fairly well known is that the police bring the 'refugees' from the Egypt/Israel border, right up, all the way to south Tel Aviv, the central bus station. But that's not all. What else is now coming to light, is that with these funds, these illegals are somehow opening businesses and will soon start their own newspaper! Government inspectors frequently close down illegal Jewish-owned businesses, but not the illegal businesses belonging to the illegal immigrants.
What is clear is that this volume of immigration is unsustainable for Israel, not only economically, but culturally too, as the poor neighbourhood of Hatikva, south Tel Aviv, is decimated by crime and ghettoisation.
Once again we have ample proof of the government not acting in the best interests of the people, and are exploiting them for their own gain. These funds run into many millions of dollars per year. Why isn't Obama giving funds to help many of Israel's Jewish Ethiopian community to settle in? These were refugees airlifted to Israel in several high profile operations and who still face difficulty getting used to a new way of life. Is this because they're Jewish Mr. Obama? Or is it because they're not Muslims hell-bent on jihad?'
From what is quoted above, it is apparent that the ordinary Jews in Israel are experiencing the same multi-culti assault as the rest of us. There have recently been riots in protest against the infiltration of culturally and ethnically incompatible peoples into Israel. It would appear that the Protocols of Zion do not in reality apply to all Jews, but only to those who rule behind the Jewish name. Considering that there are many non-Jews who are a part of the Zionist Network, the Zionist web is clearly more complicated than we have been led to believe. Is this the reason that the Protocols were leaked, and that their text was so fully interwoven with anti-Gentile references?
To return to the initial question; can the Protocols be taken as literally word for word true? The Protocols do not state that Only Lies will be printed in the media. Protocol 15 states:
- We shall be in a position, as may be required from time to time, to excite or calm the public mind on political questions, to persuade or to confuse, sometimes printing truth, sometimes lies, facts or their contradictions. We will do this according to how well these messages are received, and always very cautiously feeling the ground before stepping upon it...
So can the Protocols be trusted? I would have to say that insofar as they describe the plan to create a One World State, with a mongrelised mass serving a Self-Chosen elite, they are so accurate that we cannot afford to ignore them. However, by deliberately blurring the Hidden Elite with the Jews as a whole, the Protocols can be troublesome. Not all Zionists are Jews, and as we are now witnessing in Israel, being a Jew does not make one immune to the machinations of the Zionists. We are at a point in time where the real meaning of 'Zion' is yet to become clear, but as is evident in the enforcement of the One World Multi-Culti nightmare on the people of Israel, it is possible that Zion (Jerusalem, Yerusalayim, Sion) really does mean the global capital and the forces loyal to it, and that the nation of Israel has all along been a distraction; a distraction complete with a loyal army of Jewish human shields, who have fallen into the trap of applauding a dogma which purports to promote Jewish supremacy, and by so doing have unwittingly helped to create an instrument which will ultimately destroy them too.
7 comments:
I had heard of Lamarckian theory before, although had forgotten about it until you mentioned it here. I personally do believe in the truth of Darwinian evolution and am an atheist as well.
The Scottish thinker, Lord Monboddo (who has a mansion named after him in Aberdeenshire), came up with some pre-evolutionary ideas prior to Darwin (and Alfred Russell Wallace).
He was also a friend of Dr. Johnson and David Hume, who is also mentioned in this article:
http://www.johnderbyshire.com/Reviews/HumanSciences/unnaturalselection.html
I feel at this point that I'm just namedropping, but it's interesting that David Hume came up with this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction
Which is similar to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation
Which is similar to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-essentialism
Which is similar to this:
http://www.heretical.com/sexsci/dsod.html
...
But this was supposed to be about the Protocols of Zion. To be honest, no, I am not a fan of Jewish conspiracies.
There are three main ways of looking at politics:
http://ozconservative.blogspot.co.uk/2009/06/modernism-traditionalism.html
1. Left-liberalism (socialism, Marxism etc.)
Typically in favour of multiculturalism, feminism, immigration, "affirmative action", political correctness, etc. May also have elements of anti-capitalism and anti-nationalism, especially as you go further and further to the left. At best indifferent, and at worst openly hostile, to white heterosexual males. Supportive of a large public sector, which means lots of QUANGOs, charities and public services to cater for immigrants, unemployables, etc at the expense of the taxpayer.
2. Right-liberalism (libertarianism, laissez-faire free-market capitalism, etc.)
Typically in favour of nation states based upon civic nationalism that trade with one another. Often in favour of a small public sector and minimal government intervention. Not necessarily socially conservative though, just capitalist. Is generally happy to go along with any changes to society that left-liberals have brought about.
3. True conservatism (ethno-nationalism, traditionalism, paleoconservatism, etc.)
Typically in favour of ethnically homogenous communities, opposed to globalization and multiculturalism and ideally having as much as possible in terms of economics done locally. Traditionalist, but often castigated as 'racist' and 'sexist' and so on by left-liberals.
Of these three, #1 predominates in academia and the public sector - a fixation on human rights, social justice and 'progressivism' is readily apparent. #2 predominates within business, the private sector. #3 predominates amongst no-one who matters and is widely seen as not socially acceptable because it is 'racist' etc.
...
But isn't "racism" genetic-self interest (primarily of white heterosexual males)?
In many contexts in which that word is used, it could be easily substituted for "actions, feelings or words which are likely to promote white heterosexual male genetic self-interest".
So from that perspective, "racism" is as logical as not driving your car off a cliff - it is part of the universal human drive to avoid death. Death of the individual is natural selection (or the lack thereof), death of the genes is sexual selection (or the lack thereof).
The most radically "equal" human society at the genetic level would be one in which all humans - yes, all humans - are dead. Individualism is sterility.
"Normal people" just have their lives - their jobs, their spouses, their children - and take society as it is. They just have their lives, and they live them.
Whilst that seems all very fair and well, the "race suicide" of white people on a global scale in the long term seems a virtual certainty (I recommend the work of Arthur Kemp, Lothrop Stoddard and Richard McCulloch for those of you who want to read more about this).
For ordinary white people, wherever they may live in the world, the status quo will not hold. Assuming humanity survives, in 1000 years' time, and probably much sooner, white people will be as extinct as the dodo. As biologically extinct as the dodo.
The boyband, Busted, once sang a song "Year 3000". It mentioned something about a woman's "great, great, great granddaughter" being "pretty fine". Now obviously the number of 'greats' involved would be much larger in an 1000 year period counting all the generations, but that's just artistic license. Now although they may have been thinking of a white female as the subject here, they can forget about that! If there are any humans left in the year 3000, they will probably be of African descent.
The special beauty of white females has been noted by such diverse figures as Anders Breivik, James von Brunn, David Lane, etc. No surprise then, that most pornography features white females - their naked bodies are all over the internet for all and sundry to leer and drool at. And a significant amount of pornography also features white females having sex with black men.
There is an album called "Fear of a Black Planet" by Public Enemy. A black planet is probably what humanity will eventually end up with (at least, something certainly thoroughly non-white).
As far as I'm concerned, a planet on which white people are extinct is about as good as a planet on which humans are extinct - at least, in terms of white heterosexual male genetic self-interest. That's why the band Porcupine Tree, being the race-nihilists that they are, spoofed that album title and called an album "Fear of a Blank Planet".
Beliefs of religious fervosity come back to secular societies. It seems that humans as creatures often tend to form strong, idealistic beliefs. Whether it's environmentalism, or wealth redistribution, or aid to people in far-off places, the altruism of postmodern left-liberalism has at its core a neglect of white heterosexual male genetic self-interest, in the name of social egalitarianism. But it is not an egalitarianism of the genes. Social egalitarianism is mandatory eunuchdom, and furthermore it is cultural cuckoldry. Why was it that my generation alone was chosen for eunuchdom, destined for genetic suicide?
If white heterosexual male genetic self-interest is of null importance, then why bother having a partner or having children? Why work at a job? Why live? Why not kill yourself? Why do "normal people" just continue with their lives as if no threat to their genetic self-interest exists?
No one can provide me with adequate answers to these questions.
Oh yeah, and whilst I remember, it occurred to me that provided that humanity survives, then probably hundreds of years into the future, when white people are as extinct as the dodo, the remaining people will still be able to watch porn of black men having sex with white women. And maybe, they will laugh about it a little bit, and say "well that's how we got rid of them! Haha, losers, you are an evolutionary dead end, biologically extinct, gone forever, never to ever, ever, ever return".
There was a post there which also got swallowed up by the spam filter, and it contained some highly significant information.
That pretty much sums up my take on the Protocols. One minor point. While the rebuilding of the Temple is said to be part of Biblical prophecy, from my own research into these matters its a deliberate misinterpretation, albeit a popular one. It revolves around the last 'week' of Daniel's 70 week prophecy and relies on there being a gap of 2,000 plus years between the 69th and 70th week. There is no gap.
On the subject of Darwinism versus Creationism I've surprised myself with the fact that the more I look into these things the less convincing evolution became and the more I've come to realise that, yes, we were created.
The death of mono-culturalism has now spread to Arabs being drafted into the IDF!
http://youtu.be/-HuHf32TUvk
Madness!
Firstly, it is a grave error to refer to the Protocols as the blueprint for a jewish conspiracy, it is nothing of the sort, it is however a document which outlines the plans of elitist Ashkenazim/Talmudic jews.
As one who has studied the mutterings of these Talmudics/Elders I can assure you that it has been conceded by them themselves many times publicly that the Protocols are a 'forgery', the definition of forgery is the copy of an original, so from their own mouths they concede that such minutes were indeed genuinely recorded.
The Talmudics always tie in the Protocols with their own 'jewish world conspiracy' stories, this is in fact a LIE and an excellent example of their employing their own conspiracy theory to muddy the waters, what the Protocols have been PROVEN to be is the plan by self-appointed number from amongst the Talmudics (approximately 200) who have deemed themselves as their Elders. That they are working to this agenda is without question.
To the 'Elder', their fellow jew is expendable if it serves their needs towards nearing their goal.
This is why their dealings with the Bandit State is only superficial as they have no intention of setting up camp there especially when the nuking of the Bandit State is but one option they WILL eventually employ as a means to their ends!
Post a Comment