Category Archives: Media

Christ-Hating Zios & Shabbos Goyim

Posted on by

From Mask of Zion:

So when the ostensibly “Christian” British state, known and hated the world over for its “Christian” missionary activities that cloaked so many if not all of its genocidal invasions, chucks its “Christian” identity to the wayside and castigates a man like Dieudonné, who identifies himself as an “Islamic-Christian (23)”, while welcoming filth-peddlers and desecrationists like Sarah Silverman and Larry David, it is betraying an upsetting truth that many Brits may not be able to accept: Their country is not the great power that they’ve been brainwashed into believing it is since birth. Their country is a subcontractor for a far more powerful, far more sinister force. Their country is not Christian. Their country has no love or respect for Jesus Christ The Messiah. Their country is not sovereign. Their country is on its knees, its forehead at the feet of the Rothschilds and other “chosenite” overlords. Their country is subservient to Jewish supremacy.

As is America. The US and UK regimes are empires and imperialists only in name, for they do not serve their own interests but the interests of Organized Jewry, which sends its Christ-hating spokespersons into the public eye to bash and humiliate what they allegedly hold most dear while they remain deafeningly silent. But when opponents of Zionist-subverted Western policy criticize the parasitic, plutocratic elite running the West into the ground, they are not greeted with the same silence. They are not even greeted with accusations of “anti-Westernism”. No, they are bombarded with the gobbledegook of “anti-Semitism”. Pounded with the sheer irrationalness of “Jew-hatred”. Browbeaten for spitting on the “memory” of the “Holocaust”. This is not just an exercise in hypocrisy alone. Hypocrisy represents the mere obviousness of the matter. This is proof, the kind comprised of unbreakable stone embedded in unshakeable ground, that imperialism, while a terribly real threat that must be combated and stopped, is only vice president in the hegemonic power structure; its agents are “shabbos goyim” and its boss is Zionism. “

Bataclan Attacks: Silent Assassins Or Shouting Jihadis?

Posted on by

Stephen Farrell in the  New York Times:

Silent Gunmen Killed People in the Bataclan, Witness Says:

“They didn’t shout anything, they didn’t say anything. They were wearing black clothes and they were shooting at people on the floor, executing them. I was luckily at the top of the stage, on the front of the stage.”

[Witness, radio reporter, Julien Pierce in an interview with CNN, November 14, 2015.]

But another witness contradicts this flatly, see People’s Pundit Daily, “Witness To Paris Attack: Gunmen Shouted Allahu Akbar,” November 13, 2015:

“A witness named Louis, who was in the Bataclan, told France Info radio that the men opened fire and shouted “Allahu Akbar.”

Levels Of Brain-washing

Posted on by

First Level Brain-washing: General Public:

Reaction:

“The Paris attacks were committed unprovoked by Islamicists (ISIS) who hate us (France/America/substitute country name) for our freedoms.”

RESULT: Anger directed against Islamic countries, Muslims, all brown people.

Helps NWO-instigated ongoing psyop called “war on terror.”

Second Level Brain-washing: Informed Public/Activists:

Reaction:

“The Paris attacks were blow-back by radicalized young men who join ISIS, who hate us  (France, America/substitute country name) for attacking them before.”

RESULT: Anger directed against French, American and allied Muslim governments.

Helps NWO-instigated ongoing psyop to dismantle all governments.

Deprogrammed public & activists:

Reaction:

“The Paris attacks were committed by Western intelligence operatives, working with their golem, ISIS and with hired operatives of Western-allied Muslim outfits to instigate public support for more funding for the “war on terror.”

RESULT: Anger directed against Western intelligence outfits and the Western elites who run them.

Obstructs NWO’s continuing psyop on the world, called the “war on terror,” which might better be called the “war OF terror.”

Hint:

Open defecation is a social problem in India and Indonesia, not in Syria. Middle-class Syrian Muslims are not likely to be involved in anything like that.

Conclusion: the “migrants” are operatives.

Note that the CIA has, for several years, been using feces and menstrual blood in its intelligence operations abroad: for example, these “Egyptian feminist” activists, who front for Western intelligence.

[I deleted the link because of the images. You can find them by googling for Egyptian feminists sh** and bleed, or looking up the archives of Reason magazine.]

The secondary benefit Western intelligence agencies derives from the usage of feces and menstrual blood is that the public begins to be habituated to such images in the news, which helps promote genres of porn involving feces and menstruation.

The intelligence agencies are ultimately run by financiers/elites that depend on the global porn trade, so the use of these images can be seen as government-funded advertising to increase big porn’s market-share.

The images also make homosexuality more acceptable, for reasons I needn’t flog.

A further benefit to the agencies is that by running public campaigns against open defecation in Asia, on the one hand, while simultaneously running intelligence operations involving open defecation, on the other, the Western public is conditioned to associate militant brown (“like feces”) Isis operatives with, first, Islam and Muslims in general, and, secondly, with all brown-skinned people, especially South Asians and Indians.This conflation helps transform rational debate over immigration into something visceral and racial that solidifies resentment and anger toward all foreigners and thus supports imperial aggressions.

Lack of hygiene ( a social and economic problem) becomes conflated with “brown people” (color and race) and these in turn become conflated with attacks against the West leading to the notion of an anti-white foreign invasion generated by the third-world.

Syria, of course, is not a “third-world” country.

The propaganda classic, “Camp of the Saints,” made exactly the same move, conflating impoverished people in Calcutta with a migrant invasion of Europe, and in the process exacerbating white working-class anxieties.

The author, Jean Raspail, is a royalist, but, like all too many who fawn on blood-elites, he himself is  working-class.

The Calcuttan slum-dwellers who, in the book, land up in Paris, in the real world, cannot even afford to leave their slum, let alone, Bengal or India.

In the book, the slum-dwellers from Calcutta are uniformly depicted in the most loathsome terms, as perpetually copulating, disease-ridden sub-human monstrosities, swamping the shores of the “beloved city” of France.

The “beloved city” is a phrase from Revelations that actually refers to Jerusalem, so that in Raspail’s white-nationalist supremacist vision, the Christian end-times becomes fused with British Israelism and white Europeans become the “true Israel,” surrounded in the last times by the demonic forces of Gog and Magog, now equated with the third-world.

This is simply sleight-of-hand, intended to distract from the groups actually orchestrating the “clash of civilizations.”

Jeff Rense Link

Posted on by

Jeff Rense, the conspiracy site (which also retails “aliens” and other sci-fi stuff) has linked my piece on Merkel’s Ashkenazy and communist affiliations. I thank him heartily, but warily, since when one gets attention from bigger sites, it often ends up in the services of other agendas, some hostile.

Is November slated for some big-time shake-up (ala the Million Mask March in London) that the powers-that-be have planned and every little dissident voice must be roped in….or not?

No idea. But I see the same link showing up on some fairly racialist/racist sites, below which Indian immigrants are characterized as “shit-skins,” among other epithets.

I suppose it’s all the anti-migrant feeling being fanned by the NWO-orchestrated migrant/refugee incursion into Europe.

To be expected.

Meanwhile, I’m watching that one piece get more hits in one morning than my whole blog sometimes gets in a couple of weeks.month.

Why Christians Must Defend Their Traditions

Posted on by

The argument is made that Christians best imitate Jesus by not taking offense at insults and attacks on their traditions and icons.

There are many reasons why this is false.

There is the obvious one that Jesus himself did not tolerate the desecration of the Temple.

He actively threw the money-changers out of its precincts, over-turned their tables, chased away their animals, and put them out of business.

Then, there is the invective Jesus used  – “serpents,” “devils,” “liars,” “hypocrites.”

Is this Jesus meek and mild?

No.

There never was a Jesus meek and mild.

That is a concoction of well-bred, middle-class Sunday School misses.

They cannot be blamed for knowing nothing about real men, but we can.

Jesus slept out in the open, with only stones for his pillow.

He went for days without food or sleep.

He preached and healed in sun and rain on the hills and on the lake-shore, in front of sweaty, restless crowds of thousands of peasants.

He worked and lived with illiterate fishermen and carpenters, who drank and swore.

He routinely castigated the lawyers and scribes and the powerful members of the Sanhedrin.

Indeed, the entire Gospel story is the story of the relentless persecution of Jesus by the religious “mafia” that had an iron grip on the spiritual life of the Judeans.

That was the iron grip that Jesus broke on the cross.

So, using Jesus as an excuse for our cowardice doesn’t work.

But there are other reasons.

As the symbols of a tradition are denigrated with impunity, they lose their power over the minds of the young.

Young people don’t yet have the experience or discernment to filter out the abuse and distortion.

The young go by what they are told, not so much in words as in deeds, by their elders and their peers.

When the adults around do not respond to the tidal wave of filth and abuse directed at the Christian tradition, the young do not take Christianity seriously.

They see it only as the butt of jokes. The punch-line of comedy routines.

Faith flourishes with physical persecution. The shedding of blood creates martyrs.

But faith is hard-pressed to survive Saturday Night Live and a moral martyrdom of unending, undefended humiliation.

Jesus Christ will survive it. So will his saints.

But the rabble who perpetrate this barbarism and the cowards who countenance it will not survive with their  humanity intact.

Semitic Semantics

Posted on by

The word Jew is a very protean term, referring at times to race and at times to culture or religion. The correct term today should be Judaic or Judaist.

This leads to constant confusion, misdirection, and contradiction, to the advantage of the ruling class, which claims the mantle of ancient Israel.

But what we call Jews today are a mixed race people quite different from the Hebrew Israelites, who are now, retroactively and erroneously, equated with them.

The correct term for today’s “Jews” should be Judaics or Judaists.

 

ASHKENAZY JEWS

Most of the people who call themselves Jews today have partial descent from converts from Khazaria, a medieval East European kingdom wedged between the Muslim and the Christian world, which chose the Hebrew faith as a way to survive.

The Khazarians intermingled with Eastern European people in the surrounding regions and later moved into Germany, becoming today’s Ashkenazy (European) Jews.

The Ashkenazim constitute much of modern Jewry (Khazarian Judaists), it is said.

This may or may not be true, because statistics about Jews (Khazarians of Judaist culture) seem to vary wildly.

The Khazarian theory of Ashkenazy origin has been vindicated, according to some people, by the research of Israeli geneticist Elhaik, but it has its detractors.

They claim it is simply an anti-Semitic canard.

Even critics of the theory, however, admit that there is ample European (in the maternal line) and “non-Semitic” Middle-Eastern blood (in the paternal line) in modern Ashkenazy Jews (Khazarian Judaists).

But, shockingly, their maternal descent from Europeans means that the Ashkenazim are irrefutably not ethnic Jewish (Judahites), according to Jewish (Judahite) law.

I repeat, the DNA evidence proves that according to Jewish law, Ashkenazim are not of Jewish (Judahite) descent, because Jewish (Judahite) law requires the mother to be Jewish.

SEPHARDIC JEWS

The rest of the modern Jews (Judaics), a far fewer number, is descended from the Edomites (Idumeans) who were living in Judea at the time of Jesus.

That is why they were called Jews, to begin with.

Jew is simply the short form for the word, Judean or “of Judea.”

The word Judean/Jew thus had nothing to do with race or ethnicity.

It referred simply to people living in the region of Judea.

The Idumeans/Edomites living in Judea were forcibly circumcised and incorporated into the Israelite (Hebrew) religion under John Hyrcanus, in the 2nd century BC.

Their numbers included many of the Pharisees who lived in the time of Jesus, most of whom were killed in the siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD.

This was the fate of most of the male population in Jerusalem.

The females were enslaved by the victorious Romans.

The Jewish men who survived the destruction lived on in the land, converting to Christianity and then Islam.

Eventually, they became the people we know today as Palestinians, who are thus also a mixed race, although probably less so than the dispersed Edomites.

The converted Idumeans (including, probably, some Idumean-Israelites) living in Judea were the people whom Jesus claimed in Revelation 3:9  were of the “synagogue of Satan” and were not really Jews (Judahites).

To be clear, in saying this, Jesus was not really referring to the Idumean ethnic heritage.

Some of the Idumeans had mixed with the native Israelites around them by then, so that some of the converts  may actually have been partly descended from the northern Israelite tribes that had been conquered by the Assyrians in the 8th century BC (722 BC) and then dispersed in Assyria, Babylon, and in Israel and Judea.

Credit: keyway.ca

Map Of The Assyrian Empire

These dispersed tribes were the so-called Lost Tribes.

That suggests that some  of the Idumeans too probably had some Israelite or even Judean blood in them.

But Jesus was really talking about the beliefs of the Idumean converts, not their genes.

They followed a mixture of the pure faith taught by Moses and the Prophets with the pagan beliefs of the Canaanites and Hittites, with whom the Edomites, since the days of Esau, had intermarried.

The Idumean (Edomite) converts to Israelite faith were after all descended from Abraham, as they claimed.

But, they were not – and never had been –  descendants of Judah (Judahites).

As I noted earlier, Judahite is one of the two origins of the abbreviated term, “Jew.”

The other is Judean – referring to the area, Judea.

The Idumeans/Edomites  did not follow Jewish customs fully but added pagan beliefs.

These semi-pagan mixed Idumean-Israelites in Judea, along with other Idumean-Israelites in the surrounding regions and in the Hebrew or Israelite diaspora that was settled in Babylon and in Egypt, supposedly emigrated all over the Middle East and into regions of Europe (Spain, Italy, Germany, England) in the centuries immediately after Christ. These dispersed tribes became what we call today Sephardic Jews. Sephardic is derived from the old Jewish name for Spain, Sefarad.

Some claim that the Jews were scattered because the Romans dispersed them, although exiling conquered people was not characteristic of the Romans, who usually left some of the vanquished to till the soil.

Of course, is always possible that the Romans made an exception for the Jews, in response to the ferocity with which they resisted conquest.

More likely, the Jews who intermarried with European women in the first and second centuries after Christ were traders who were Levantine converts, rather than original Israelites of any kind.

In any case, it is a fact that the maternal stock of current Sephardic Jews is European, not Near Eastern, and dates back to this Jewish diaspora.

To repeat, Jewishness is traced through the maternal line, and since these diasporic Idumean-Israelites spawned what we call the Sephardic Jews, they too, by Jewish law, are not Jews.

Like the Ashkenazy, but even more so, the Sephardim took with them the pagan lore of Babylon and Egypt.

This religion contradicted the Torah teachings of the Israelites.

It was replete with astrology, gnosticism, ritual practices, esoteric texts, angelology and demonology.

TALMUDIC JEWS VERSUS TORAH JEWS

Now, the Hebrew Bible of the Ashkenazy and Sephardic Jews is called TaNaKh  and it includes the Law, the Prophets, and other writings.

But these are not held in as much veneration as the interpretations of the TaNaKh by the Jewish sages (Rabbis).

The Rabbinical interpretations were codified in the centuries after 200 AD and form the written text (Talmud) of what in Jesus’ time was still oral and referred to as the Tradition of the Elders.

IDUMEAN JEWS OF JESUS’ TIME VERSUS ASKHENAZY JEWS OF TODAY

Jesus felt that the Elders had subverted the original faith in Yahweh with a ritualistic, formulaic legalism that killed the spirit of true faith and substituted notions of racial purity for purity of faith.

Jesus denounced this perversion of the Hebrew faith in the strongest possible terms.

But since the current crop of Ashkenazy Jews is most likely unrelated to the original Idumean-Israelite Judeans whom Jesus denounced, it is quite incorrect to claim that animosity by non-Jews toward the Ashkenazy leadership today (the Rothschild financial cabal) has anything whatsoever to do with the enmity between the Idumean-Edomite Judeans and Idumean-Israelite Judeans, on the one hand and Jesus, on the other.

In short, the accusation that the Gospels are the origin of current “anti-Semitism” is bogus  and an anti-Christian slander.

The current Jews are not the descendants of the Israelite-Idumean mixture whom Jesus cursed.

They were utterly destroyed in 70 AD.

Moreover, the genealogical records necessary to prove genetic descent from any of the tribes of Israel, were destroyed with the Temple at the time.

Without these, any subsequent claims of descent are either tenuous or completely specious.

What Jesus said then to the Judeans and Judahites of his time does not and can not automatically attach to the Ashkenazy and Sephardim today, on the grounds of genetic descent.

Contemporary Judaists are mostly a Euro-Turko-Mongolic people, with, at most (although not certainly), some small admixture of the original Israelite blood.

This is true also of the Sephardic Jews, who have a better claim to a partial descent from the Idumean-Israelite mixture.

They too cannot be blamed for deicide, as it used to be called.

According to the Gospel, in the final destruction of Jerusalem, all of Jesus’ enemies during his ministry were judged for the blood they had shed in their own life-times.

They were judged, as well, for the blood-shed of all past history, from the archetypal crime of Abel’s murder onward to the death of Jesus.

That chapter in history was closed on the cross.

It is finished, as Jesus said.

Neither the current Ashkenazy Jews nor the current Sephardic Jews have anything to do with it.

But, in so far as they adopt attitudes and beliefs that resemble those of the Pharisees, they, as well as all other people of any or no faith, are culpable for their own wrong beliefs and actions.

To sum up, there is very little or no genetic descent of current Jews from the ancient Idumean-Edomites (and Idumean-Israelites) who persecuted Jesus.

There is only the possibility of  spiritual descent.

And that possibility is shared equally by Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus and anyone else who hurls curses at Jesus Christ.

Spiritual descent is a matter of choice and belief.

It comes about when people adopt the attitudes and beliefs of the Pharisaic persecutors of Jesus.

TALMUDIC JUDAISM AND KABBALISM

The writings of the Elders were codified in the Talmud in 200 AD and 500 AD, and thereafter, and to them were added, in the later middle ages, texts like the Zohar and Kabbalah.

The Talmud, Zohar, and Kabbalah explicate, in sometimes mystic, sometimes racial, sometimes moral or legal terms, the TaNaKh, formulated in writing some thousand years earlier (approximately 500 BC) by the Hebrew-speaking people that constituted the ancient nation called Israel.

The Talmud, Zohar, and Kabbalah also add completely new teachings, esoterica, occult texts, and mysticism, some of which is deeply antagonistic to the austere spirit of the Torah.

Some of the Talmud’s and Kabbalah’s teachings are truly amoral and perverse.

Others are profoundly wise and could have been spoken by Jesus himself.

The ancients Israelites included both the Judeans (the Israelite tribes living in Judea, descended from Judah and Benjamin) and the northern tribes (the descendants of the other sons of Israel/Jacob:- Reuben, Naphtali, Dan, Gad, Manasseh, etc.).

Is any of this Hebrew stock to be found among contemporary Jews?

Surely there could be some genetic ties, or, at least, similarities, between both groups.

But, equally surely, these genetic markings are mingled with the genetic markers of many other groups, because of centuries of intermarriage.

Race-mixing was always in the history of the Israelites.

EDOMITES, HITTITES, AND MOABITES

Esau, the brother of Jacob in Genesis, who is the forefather of the nation of Israel, intermarried with the pagan Hittites.

But, so did Jacob’s own descendants, the Israelites.

So did the sons of Judah or the Judahites (Jews, in short form).

Ruth, the ancestress of  Jesus, belonged to the Moabites, one of the deadliest enemies of the Israelites and Judahites.

ABRAHAM’S SEED IS JESUS

Given this history, how can anyone claim that Israelite or Judahite is a term for a pure genetic stock?

Yet, they do.

Many naive Jewish people today – and Christian dupes –  consider modern Jews both a pure ethnicity and a unique religion.

A people set apart and a culture set apart.

The Bible states otherwise.

Abraham and Isaac were counted as righteous, long before Jacob was called Israel and long before Judah sired Judahites and before Israelites ever set foot in Judea.

Righteousness preceded both Israel and Judea, both Judah and the Judahites.

The seed of Abraham in whom the whole world was blessed was not any supposed Master Race of Israelites or Jews, with genetic superiority to the rest of mankind.

This is a toxic carnal and ethnocentric revision of the Hebrew scriptures.

The blessed seed (singular) of Abraham was not a people, but a person – a unique prophet, like Moses.

He was the uniquely begotten and uniquely sacrificed “son,” like Isaac.

The blessed seed was Jesus, to whom all nations were to be gathered, according to the divine covenant with Abraham.

As a matter of record, people of all nations have been gathered into belief in Jesus.

The moral reign of Jesus Christ is visible all around us, despite all the blood-shed and mayhem wrought by those who would erase God from the history of man.

The Good Shepherd who gave his life for his flock is a figure beloved all over the world. 

Christ’s moral reign does not offend anyone but reprobates, no matter what their religion.

Muslims and Hindus accept Jesus as a divine messenger.

Righteous Jews have seen through the calumnies of the Rabbinate and accepted Christ’s moral status.

But there is no nation in the world that would accept without a fight the divine right of a Master Race of Jews to rule as overlords of the earth.

 

 

 

 

“Conservative” Catholic Papers Fire Pope Critics

Posted on by

“First Things,” a conservative Catholic paper, has fired Maureen Mullarkey for criticizing Pope Francis, going to the extent of publicly ridiculing her conservative views.

Other supposedly conservative Catholic papers have also fired Pope Francis detractors:

Adam Shaw, a Fox news website editor, was fired from a Catholic News Service gig.

The National Catholic Register has fired Patrick Archbold, using liberal talking-points to make its case.

Why are all these “conservative” Catholics suddenly so eager to echo the Liberal party-line?

Were they ever real conservatives?

Are they under pressure from bigger bosses?

Are we only now finding out the extent of the subversion and infiltration of conservative Catholic circles at the behest of the ruling cabal?

As a non-Catholic, I can only feel intensely sorry for traditionalists of that faith.

And more than ever I am thankful that I have never  put all my faith “in princes nor in the son of man,” no, not even (or, maybe, especially) when they claim to speak infallibly.

Note:

I really do not have a major problem with the content of most of what Pope Francis has said publicly (from urging people to care about the poor, to supporting refugees, to asking us to care about the environment).

What I don’t like is the overwhelming priority he has given to these social issues over reaffirming the Church’s teachings on the family and on sexuality….a reaffirmation that is much more needed than the repetition of concerns voiced often enough by political groups.

Even Francis’ social teaching is marred by his ignorance of economic science and his partisanship on man-made global warming.

And all of his exhortations ring hollow when you realize how closely they follow the globalist agenda that is pushed by the intelligence agencies.

 

Is Pope Francis Practicing Talmudism Covertly?

Posted on by

Why did Pope Francis mention Moses and not Jesus in his addresses to the White House and the UN?

Is it because he wanted to cite a figure that would not “offend”?

But Muslims venerate Jesus, even if they do not regard him as the Son of God. They would not be offended.

It follows that Francis avoided Jesus, to avoid giving offense to religious Jews.

Historically, many – but not all – Jews have regarded Jesus as a blasphemer and apostate.

But, if interfaith peace is the goal, why not mention Abraham, who is the fountain-head of all three faiths?

Why Moses?

The answer lies in looking at Jewish texts.

Moses is held up as the greatest of the prophets by Maimonides, one of the most authoritative of Jewish rabbis and the codifier of the Shloshah Asar Ikkarim (“Thirteen Fundamental Principles”), a distillation of the Taryag mitzvoth (613 regulations) binding on orthodox Jews.

From Chabad.org:

1. Belief in the existence of the Creator, who is perfect in every manner of existence and is the Primary Cause of all that exists.

2. The belief in G-d‘s absolute and unparalleled unity.

This would conflict with the doctrine of the Trinity in orthodox Christianity – that is why Francis praises Chagall’s White Crucifixion – because it effaces the divine Jesus and substitutes the human Jewish rabbi, thereby erasing the core of Christianity.]

3. The belief in G-d’s non-corporeality, nor that He will be affected by any physical occurrences, such as movement, or rest, or dwelling.

[Again, this conflicts with the doctrine of the Incarnation most fundamentally.]

4. The belief in G-d’s eternity.

5. The imperative to worship G-d exclusively and no foreign false gods.

[Maimonides and many great Rabbis saw Jesus as a heretic, sorcerer, and blasphemer.]

6. The belief that G-d communicates with man through prophecy.

The belief in the primacy of the prophecy of Moses our teacher

[This diminishes Jesus, who is superior to all the prophets, according to Christian teaching.]

8. The belief in the divine origin of the Torah.

9. The belief in the immutability of the Torah.

[Jesus taught that the Mosaic law was given because of the degradation of the people and that it did not fully reflect God’s law, as his perfection of it did.]

10. The belief in G-d’s omniscience and providence.

11. The belief in divine reward and retribution.

12. The belief in the arrival of the Messiah and the messianic era.

[Christians believe that the Messiah has already arrived. As for the Messianic era, some Christians regard this as heresy and others as true.]

13. The belief in the resurrection of the dead.