There exists a Sicilian Mafia. There exists a Russian mafia. Does speaking of these criminal organizations implicate the Italian or Russian people as a whole? These organizations consist of a tiny subset of mostly Italians and Russians, respectively. Similarly, there are also Jewish criminal organizations and, as with any other organized criminal network, when i speak of the Jewish-Zionist criminal cabal, aka the Khazarian Mafia, i am not implicating the Jewish people as a whole any more than i would be implicating all Italians when speaking of the Sicilian Mafia.
While one can openly criticize the Sicilian or Russian mafias, despite the fact that many key members were Jews (Meyer Lansky, Jack Ruby, Hymie Weiss, Bugsy Siegel, Semion Mogilevich, Monya Elson, Marat Balagula, Vyacheslav Ivankov, Vladimir Ginsberg, Ludwig Fainberg, etc.), exposing the names and activities of the Jewish-Zionist criminal cabal is a very slippery slope laden with land mines. While using the words "Italian" or "Russian" to describe the criminal activities of a few Italians or Russians is acceptable, one must be extraordinarily cautious when using the words "Jew", "Jewish" or "Zionist" when associating a few Jews with similar activities. Even when one chooses their words with the utmost care, there remains a very real risk of being targeted by powerful, pro-Jewish, pro-Zionist organizations, such as the Anti-Defamation League, the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, the mainstream media and the U.S. government, any of which are eager to label anyone critical of Jewry, Israel or Zionism as being Jew-hating, Nazi-loving anti-Semites. And if it is a Jew doing the criticizing, they are sometimes given the label of "self-hating Jew".
The pressure applied by international Jewry upon the governments of many countries has resulted in legislation which has placed limits upon free speech. Once one is introduced to Jewish history and Zionist ideology, it becomes crystal clear why free speech is one of the most significant threats to the Jewish-Zionist criminal cabal who, in direct violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, lobbies to suppress free speech under the guise of combating "hate speech". Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
I will close this section with the following quote from Kevin Alfred Strom (often incorrectly attributed to Voltaire):
To determine the true rulers of any society, all you must do is ask yourself this question: Who is it that I am not permitted to criticize?
Project Avalon is a website run by Bill Ryan. The core of the site is the Project Avalon Forum where a wide variety of topics are discussed, many of which are related to the social and political problems we face today. Membership is restricted and involves submitting a lengthy application which asks for personally identifying information. This application is then reviewed by the moderator team and, i assume, Bill himself.
I once had a great deal of respect for Bill Ryan. He was a core member and, as i recall, co-founder of Project Camelot along with Kerry Cassidy, though they would later part ways. Project Camelot is rather well known among the alternative information and conspiracy research communities for its large collection of video interviews with various whistleblowers, many of which are highly interesting and provocative. The interviewees consist of wide array of people alleging to be extraterrestrial contactees, whistleblowers, those having connections to deep underground military bases (DUMBs), spiritual healers, intuitives, remote viewers, ex-government contractors, Illuminati insiders and many more. The list of names is long and includes Steven Greer, Bob Dean, Jordan Maxwell, David Wilcock and Jim Humble. While the credibility of some of these people cannot be questioned, it is not so clear in other cases and Kerry will often readily admit this, thus leaving the viewer to decide for themselves. Much to their credit, Project Camelot has never retracted an interview unless forced to do so, so far as i am aware.
Project Camelot was instrumental in the earlier years of my research into a variety of subjects, the study of which eventually resulted in an awakening of sorts or, more accurately, a radical transformation of my entire world view. Kerry represents the spiritual side of Camelot while Bill seemed to be more of a science-based guy, but one with an open mind. He seems to have gravitated more toward the spiritual end of the spectrum at some point, which i think is fine, except that he apparently left behind some basic principles of science and logic in the process, as i shall soon demonstrate.
Together Bill and Kerry made a brilliant team in my opinion. They were able to extract more information from a witness than either could have done alone. I didn't know if there was a romantic element, but i thought they would have made a great couple; Kerry, the intuitive shamanic type who just might bare her teeth if provoked, and Bill, the rough, outdoorsy mountain climber and quintessential gentleman. Behind the scenes however, a tension brewed that would eventually result in their parting of ways. I was quite saddened when i learned their paths would diverge and, as i'm sure many others had, i wondered whether Camelot would survive the loss of Bill, a crucial member.
At some point Bill Ryan created the Project Avalon Forum where he began to take a somewhat different direction than the Project Camelot platform. In the latter part of May, 2015, i decided to submit an application to join the forum and, after the obligatory and somewhat invasive approval process, i was quite pleased to have been accepted. Two days later i terminated my membership, making my stay at Avalon possibly one of the shortest in the forums' history.
Precipitating my demise at the Project Avalon Forum was a thread which was started by Paul, apparently a senior forum moderator, which he titled 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion' -- and a call for a more benevolent leadership. Paul's post referred to a paper written by Miles Mathis, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. I thought it was an interesting post but Mathis' paper did raise a few flags in my mind and so i wrote a reply to Paul's post (quoted at the end of this page) which pointed a finger at the Jewish-Zionist criminal cabal. I made it very clear, as i had done in an earlier post, that i was not targeting Jews in general:
were it just a history thing, i wouldn't care, but the history given to us by the victors of WW2 and the Jewish criminal cabal (and i am not saying Jews in general) has had, and continues to have an unbelievable (literally) impact upon our lives [...]
Because of my perceived quality of the forum, as well as the subjects covered, i had assumed that a), many Avalon members were probably aware of the enormous political and social influence wielded by international Jewry who, though they consist of only a tiny minority of Jews, occupy a significant portion of what many currently refer to as "the 1%", and b), that an Avalon moderator was likely of a higher caliber than other forum moderators in general and would thus be more fair and open minded. After all, topics in the forum include all sorts of conspiracy theories, chemtrails, eugenics, population control, mind control, the secret space program, etc..
My assumptions were grossly inaccurate.
My post prompted an immediate backlash from Paul who split the original thread, removing my post and isolating it in a new thread which was not available to the public (it is reproduced below) where he then proceeded to subject me to a verbal water-boarding. In addition, Paul sent me a rather ominous private message stating that i was probably not a good fit for the forum. While it was readily apparent that something very strange had just happened, i didn't understand why. Was Paul offended by my post because he may be Jewish? Or perhaps, like so many of us, he bought into the Jewish-Zionist-allied post World War II programming that we have been subjected to for the last seven decades or so. At any rate, i was stunned and wrote a lengthy rebuttal (also quoted below) to Paul's nonsensical and baseless accusations in which he essentially pasted the infamous anti-Semite sticky-note square upon my forehead after twisting my words in a childish attempt to make it stick better. Considering the writing i have done regarding Germany's role in World War II, Hitler, and the holocaust, other than a minuscule number of one-liner hate mails, virtually all of the feedback regarding my work has been either neutral or positive, making Paul's attack the first real accusation of anti-Semitism that has ever been leveled against me. I suppose i've been christened. Paul's answer to my lengthy rebuttal was to ignore every question, point and plea i had made:
Your abilities to rationalize your actions, and to misinterpret my warnings, are both considerable.
This is unfortunate.
Paul's non-answer answer immediately reminded me of this quote:
“Care must be taken not to give a platform for deniers… or seek to disprove the deniers’ position through normal historical debate and rational argument" — Guidelines for Teaching about the Holocaust at the Stockholm International Forum, 2000
So at this point it was pretty clear there was going to be a rift between Paul and myself and thus i started to question whether i wanted to remain a member of the Avalon community. Before finalizing my decision however, i decided to write the following private message to Sierra, another moderator, who i had picked at random since, other than Bill (and i didn't see the need to bother him with this), i knew none of the moderators:
do i fit here at avalon?
so i'm "the new guy" and already i have managed to get myself in some "hot water" it appears
my purpose in messaging you is to ask that you direct the other moderators to this thread which explains the situation:
i am NOT asking anyone to back me - my statement speaks for itself - what i would appreciate is knowing whether you folks think i fit in with this community, nothing more
is the subject matter which i addressed too controversial for this forum? i guess that is the decision i am asking you folks to make
Sierra's reply came a short time later. It was one of Impending Doom:
The moderator's have seen your thread (it has been reported) and no I don't think you fit. If you had replaced every single occurrence of the word "Jew" with "Zionist" you might have gained better traction in this moderated community, not to mention greater service to Truth.
Some of the very highest, and best people on Avalon are Jewish. We don't encourage the ancient and tiresome Blame the Jews Game.
We don't like the blame game period. Blame breeds hatred. Blame is the classic Illuminati tactic along with fear, to generate war, pain, suffering, and death. Blame is a complete (that's the entire point) waste of time. If you are busy dealing out blame, you are not working on your own spiritual evolution, now are you?
Ah, so it's word games we must play; substitute "Jew" with "Zionist" since most people probably don't know what Zionism is, and point the finger at the illusive Illuminati, whoever they are, rather than the real criminals right under our noses who can be identified by name and who are negatively impacting our everyday lives and wallets, such as the international Bankers and their affiliates who are at the very center of the Jewish-Zionist criminal cabal. Unfortunately, pointing out the obvious, is obviously not always allowed regarding certain topics at Avalon since the Jewish community there is tired of the "tiresome Blame the Jews Game". I get it! Unfortunately i 'got it' a little too late. The writing was clearly on the wall and, had i not asked to have my forum account terminated, there was no doubt it would only be a matter of time until it was terminated for me.
More importantly, i now had an answer as to why Paul attacked both myself and my post; the Project Avalon Forum is staffed, at least in part, by unethical, biased Jews with questionable agendas. Whether they are simply ignorant of history or spreading disinformation intentionally, i do not know, but Bill Ryan was apparently fine with Paul's post because he later 'thanked' him for it.
One of the primary purposes of Project Avalon, allegedly, is to discuss solutions to some of the biggest problems facing the world today. These problems obviously include politics, finance and the media, all of which are all heavily influenced by Jewish-Zionist interests. Who would be in a better position to deflect attention away from the cabal than those who are sympathetic to Zionist ideology? This is precisely what Sierra attempted to do when she/he made a laughable effort to shift the blame for war, pain, suffering and death upon the "Illuminati". This tactic of redirecting blame toward invisible foes is also used by people such as Alex "Bullhorn" Jones and other key players in the so-called 'alternative media' (and i am certainly not demonizing alternative media as a whole since it is clearly the only outlet for the truth in many cases). When Alex, who is either accidentally or willfully ignorant of historical facts, and i am quite certain it is the latter, is not busy demonizing Hitler and those "evil Nazis" for disarming the German population and putting fluoride in the public water supply to make them docile and for slaughtering six million Jews, he's fingering the next best target; the ever-illusive "Illuminati", a super-secret society that is often accused of running the world and which seems to morph into whatever demon best fits ones cause at any given moment.
There's something else of importance here that i failed to point out in the Avalon forum thread; Paul's original post was about a paper by Miles Mathis who Paul sees as "one of the best original thinkers of our time". The title of the paper is The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion and it was published in April, 2015. In it, Mathis attempts to make the case that the incriminating protocols were not authored by Jews at all, but rather by aristocrats, thereby absolving the Jewish elite of the dirty deed. Given what has already been revealed, i find that quite interesting. We have a forum where "Some of the very highest, and best people on Avalon are Jewish" in which a moderator who, at a minimum, is very protective of Jewry, is eager to shift the responsibility for authoring the protocols -- a document which has been a constant thorn in the side of Jewry since it was exposed -- to non-Jews. The irony is that the authenticity and author of the document are of no consequence because anyone who reads it with even a mediocre understanding of Jewish-Zionist influence, behavior and an understanding of what is happening in the world around them, will immediately realize that the protocols are disturbingly accurate. As far being "one of the best original thinkers of our time", consider what else Mathis has written about:
4/17/15, Stephen Hawking died and has been replaced. I show lots of photographic evidence that Hawking died in 1985 and has been played by an impostor since then.
4/3/15, The Boston Marathon Bombing Trial. I show you that the trial, like the event itself, is fake. Included is a brief analysis of the Gabby Giffords shooting, which is related.
2/25/15, The Patty Hearst Kidnapping was Fake. Also related commentary on Clint Eastwood and Dirty Harry.
11/2/14, The O. J. Simpson Trial was Faked, and so were the murders. Lots of photographic and legal evidence.
8/26/14, The Zodiac Murders were Faked. And so were the Houston and Cottingham murders.
8/3/14, Proof John Lennon's Death was Faked. Also includes a short analysis of Michael Jackson's alleged death.
6/29/14, The Tate Murders were Faked. That's right. Manson is another creation of the MATRIX. Over 80 pages of photographic evidence.
6/19/14, The Bikini Atoll Nuclear Tests Were Faked. Easy photographic evidence.
1/6/13, The Alleged Sandy Hook Tragedy. Another staged event.
His titles read like covers of The Enquirer. While i will be the first to admit that many things are not at all what they seem, and that i have only skimmed through a few of his papers and have not checked into his background, i suspect his articles are intended to act as distractions, just like The Enquirer, the "Illuminati" and, now, "the aristocrats". It looks to me as though Miles Mathis, in Alex Jones fashion, is yet another attention grabbing, fear-mongering mouthpiece who provides just enough believable material to keep his audience coming back for more.
In conclusion, it is my opinion that Bill Ryan and the members of Project Avalon have some important information to share, however i believe it is blatantly obvious that the Avalon Forum is heavily influenced by certain core members who are sympathetic to the aspirations of international Jewry and Zionist ideologies or, at the very least, have a strong desire to deflect any criticism of "gods chosen people". In a community where i would have thought truth and honesty were welcome assets among intelligent, open-minded people, i instead found limitations upon which truths are acceptable.
Perhaps my debunking of Bills "Orbs" thread didn't exactly win me any friends either, but i'm the kind of man doesn't hesitate to expose faults, nor do i care where the chips fall. Note that it is not Bill Ryan that i am singling out here, though admittedly i am casting a bit more light upon him since he is the Big Kahuna at Project Avalon and apparently has a background in math and science.
Bill's "orbs" thread was 12 pages long when i last checked and full of... orbers? Orbers are also found all over the interwebs. I must also state very clearly that in no way shape or form am i positing that the provable explanation i provide here for a particular type of "orb" explains every photograph of an orb, however there is no doubt in my mind that it does indeed explain many of the "orb" photographs found on the web at present and it almost certainly explains the photographs provided Bill Ryan. Lastly i am not claiming to be the first to debunk this type of "orb" phenomenon as many others have already done so, including some folks in Bill's own forum thread, however logic and reason were ignored since, as humans, many of us prefer a mystery rather than simple explanations, even when the latter is backed by bullet-proof evidence.
For those that don't know what "orbs" are, well, it depends on who you ask but basically, for many people, they are anything other than what the type addressed here actually are: tiny floating debris (dust) captured in photographs. Some insist they are spiritual beings, guardians, energetic entities, fairies, probes, etc.. Here is what Bill says in his opening post regarding his experience:
Earlier this summer, I visited a grove of Giant Sequoia in Yosemite National Park with a good friend, another Avalonian. As the sun was setting, we were able to find one magnificent tree – a real beauty – which was not fenced off from the public.
We took a few photos… and were rewarded by a quite dazzling display of orbs. The high-resolution images are linked below (too large to post here)… and the detail is fascinating.
This was not pollen or dust. Immediately afterwards, I took another photo of the same tree without either of us in the picture – and the orbs had completely disappeared.
Here's one of the photographs Bill included in his post, showing him leaning against a tree, surrounded by "orbs":
And here is a crop of a 6 MP image i captured in a darkened hallway by sprinkling baking flour in front of the camera lens. Exposure, ISO and flash were set to 'auto':
Many of us have probably seen dust floating through the air in our home during the early morning or late afternoon hours when a slice of bright sunlight is cutting through a room. Sometimes one can make out the actual fibers because your eye can focus on the dust which is illuminated by the sunlight. Many "orb" photographs are captured with cameras in low light conditions when the camera flash is triggered, as both Bill's' and my photographs were, or there is another light source that is lighting up an area directly in front of the lens. Because the particles are so close to the lens and so well lit, and because the lens is focused on something in the distance, the particles are extremely blurred which causes them to appear much larger and more spherical in shape than they actually are. If you refer to the image with Bill in it, you will notice that all of the "orbs" are in front of him, rather than some being partially behind him as one might expect if he were surrounded by them.
This next photograph is an enlargement of the brightest particle from my "orb" image. These particles can look quite interesting, even resembling a living cell, complete with an outer membrane and nucleus:
So much for "orbs", at least those of this particular type. And i was sort of becoming fond of the little guys until a 10 minute science experiment revealed the truth.
While one may see this article as the result of a disgruntled forum member who was essentially given the boot, that is not the case and that is not what this is about. I think there are some very interesting discussions at Project Avalon, however if you read my other work, it is obvious that exposing hidden things is a sort of a passion of mine. I would also make the following points: 1), i was a member for only two days, so it's not like i had a lot of time invested in the forum. 2), i was the the victim of a moderator's wrath and because of the tension which was likely to persist, i wasn't overly anxious to remain there. 3), i wasn't banned; i requested that my account be deleted:
This is Paul's post which i would later comment on. Paul seems to be a key moderator at the Project Avalon Forum:
"The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" -- and a call for a more benevolent leadership
Miles Mathis, in my view one of the best original thinkers of our time, has a new paper out on THE PROTOCOLS of the Learned Elders of Zion (pdf).
Miles (as he usually does) takes a fresh look at his chosen topic. He finds evidence within this renowned document that it was written at the behest of European royalty, in the late 1800's, who were finding themselves on what would prove to be the losing end of an epic struggle with the Banksters (financially most powerful families). He reads the document as a defense of the benefits of rule by royalty, and an attack on the dangers of rule by financiers.
But then, after spending the first half of this modest (just 12 pages of quite readable prose) paper analyzing the protocols, Miles then takes a surprising (to me) and delightful twist, and proposes a way out of this mess ... the first such proposal that I've seen that I find persuasive and plausible (sorry Wade F and Dennis L <grin> <hugs>.)
I recommend the above paper to your consideration.
You can find more such fine work at Miles' website: The personal art and counter-criticism site of MILES WILLIAMS MATHIS. See especially his Updates page to get links to his latest papers and commentary.
This is my reply to Paul's post which prompted the backlash:
"The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" -- and a call for a more benevolent leadership
i like this guy - he seems pretty sharp - thanks for the post Paul
ok, so some feedback on this paper ...
Mathis thinks that the the Jewish elites would not use the blunt language that is used in the protocols...
"In the same way, the title “WE SHALL DESTROY GOD" is overplayed. Although I think the financiers have long been trying to destroy organized religion, I do not think they would put it this way in their own documents. They don't need to “destroy God," since they don't believe in him. They might talk about destroying Christianity, or destroying belief in God, but not about destroying God. For them, that would be like saying WE SHALL DESTROY SANTA CLAUS."
not sure it's at all important to argue the point, but i would argue the point
here are some quotes from various Jewish-Zionist elites - i have not verified some of these to the n'th degree, but i believe them to be authentic...
“The killing by a Jew of a non-Jew, i.e. a Palestinian, is considered essentially a good deed, and Jews should therefore have no compunction about it." — Yitzhak Ginsburg ‘Five General Religious Duties Which Lie Behind the Act of the Saintly’, Rabbi Baruch Goldstein, ‘May his Blood be Avenged’
“There is only one power which really counts. The power of political pressure. We Jews are the most powerful people on earth, because we have this power, and we know how to apply it." — Vladimir Jabotinsky, Jewish Daily Bulletin, July 27, 1935
“Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel. Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat. That is why gentiles were created." — Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, head of Shas Council of Torah Sages during a sermon delivered Oct. 2010 in Jerusalem
“We Jews, we, the destroyers, will remain the destroyers for ever. Nothing that you will do will meet our needs and demands. We will for ever destroy because we need a world of our own…" — Maurice Samuels, You Gentiles, 1942
then he gets into more into who wrote the document and the blame game...
"they are trying to pin everything on the Jews, but we know that all the top financiers are not Jews. So why would the aristocrats imply they are? Because some of the top financiers are Gentiles who ditched the aristocracy and put their cards in with the new money. But since the aristocrats are all about blood, they don't wish to attack their own."
i just think that's an important point to remember for those that rail against the Jews, forgetting about everyone else, however there is something more interesting about this statement...
in spite of what i said about putting too much focus on the Jewish elites, they happen to be a very hot topic for me at this particular time - i don't know where Mathis is from, but in the U.S. there is no doubt the Jewish elite enjoy an extreme degree of control and influence in all major areas, especially politics and finance - no way will one ever win a presidency without the approval and media coverage and financial contributions provided by Jewish lobby groups, period, and this goes back to, and includes, J. Kennedy who made deals with Israel to become pres, which was by a very slim margin as i recall - all went south when he started putting pressure on Ben-Gurion, Dimona and one of the Jewish lobby groups according to Michael C. Piper who wrote a very good book on the assassination which makes a strong, well referenced case for Israeli/Mossad involvement in the killing.
Mathis seems to be saying that the aristocrats are existentially using the Jews as a tool to divert blame, and given the overwhelming influence of the the Jewish cabal in the U.S. and elsewhere, i would have to question that, though, admittedly, i have sometimes wondered if what Mathis is implying is exactly correct, but how can he be correct given the blatantly obvious influence of the Jews in the U.S.?
continuing with the same paragraph...
"In this way, they are like the Jews they criticize. For all of them, blood is blood, even after it has committed treason."
not sure i'm understanding this correctly, but if he's implying that Jews stick together, rather than the aristocrats, he's dead wrong according to my understanding - for example, there are a lot of anti-Zionist Jews, even in Israel, and many factions of Jews (actually, apparently 80-85% of the Jews calling themselves Jews in Israel aren't Jews at all, but rather descendants of the Khazars)
"If aliens are watching us—as some think—and if they were given permission to break the non-interference clause, they would change human society most quickly by targeting a few dozen people. If they replaced the right 50 people, say, with benevolent look-alikes, human history would reverse overnight."
well, something's going to have to happen 'cause we ain't gonna vote our way out
so then he continues with how to speed-up the inevitable by working with and educating (or re-educating) the elites - great, i'm all for it. here's another solution: ignore them - plant a garden, don't buy garbage, dump the boob-tube, take your shoes off and go play with the kids outside - the machine will grind itself to death without any assistance
either way, education is key; how can we educate the masses before the whole house goes up in flames?
are we doing EXACTLY what we are SUPPOSED TO BE DOING?
maybe we're supposed to be killing and polluting and acting like idiots - maybe that is the entire reason for the human experience - maybe it's true that there must be balance and you must have evil to have good
personally i think that's a relevant question, however i also think that it is extremely dangerous to not know the correct answer and since i don't know the answer, i have to do what feels right and it sure as hell doesn't feel right so sit back and watch the world burn
Paul's reply to my post:
Re: Split thread from "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"
My reasons for splitting the above three posts off from the original thread where they were posted, "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" -- and a call for a more benevolent leadership, are as follows.
That original thread presented a paper by Miles Mathis: THE PROTOCOLS of the Learned Elders of Zion (pdf).
Miles' paper discusses a well known historical document entitled "THE PROTOCOLS of the Learned Elders of Zion" (which I will term "The Protocols", below.) In Miles' paper, he presents the position that The Protocols were commissioned by the European aristocrats who were at the time (late 1800's) being defeated by some very powerful financial families, some of whom were Jewish. As Miles documents, The Protocols present these aristocrats in a favorable light, and these Jewish (some of them were Jewish) financiers in a dreadful light.
As Miles documents in his paper, The Protocols are (in his words) "a strange mixture of truth and propaganda, and you have to enter the bog with a pretty good map to make it to the other side."
- The opening post of this split thread confused a paragraph very specifically discussing whether Zionists would want to DESTROY GOD, with discussing whether Zionists would want to use strong language in general. There is no basis for that confusion in Miles' paper - even the very paragraph quoted from Miles on this, in the opening post above, makes that very, very clear. Nonetheless, the opening post of this split thread did confuse the two, using the confusion to justify including several incendiary Zionist supremacist quotations. Such a flimsy excuse for such a blatant distraction is not appropriate in my book.
- The PROTOCOLS of the Elders of the Zion were clearly written during and discussing events over a century ago in Europe, but the opening post of this split thread takes Miles' paper to task for its lack of a more detailed discussion of Zionist influence on the US in recent decades, saying "how can he [Miles] be correct given the blatantly obvious influence of the Jews in the U.S.?".The opening post of this thread then uses that confusion to justify introducing several hot button topics, such as JFK's assassination, Jewish lobby groups, and a book by Michael C. Piper, that have in a time long after The Protocols were written. Such blatant confounding of the historical time line is not appropriate in my book.(Note also the opening post of this thread drops all qualifications such as "financiers" or "Zionists", and out right targets "the blatantly obvious influence of the Jews in the U.S.". I am not optimistic that such careless use of language was accidental.)
- The opening post of this split thread presents the following quote from Miles' paper:"In this way, they are like the Jews they criticize. For all of them, blood is blood, even after it has committed treason."It (the opening post) then goes on to wonder whether the quote refers to the aristocrats or the Jews as sticking together "blood is blood". An even slightly larger variant of that quote would make it transparently clear that Miles was saying that for the aristocrats, blood is blood:"But since the aristocrats are all about blood, they don't wish to attack their own. In this way, they are like the Jews they criticize. For all of them, blood is blood, even after it has committed treason. Maybe they hope to turn these treasonous Gentile bluebloods back to the true path."However, the opening post of this split thread uses the excuse that perhaps Miles means is "implying that Jews stick together" to take stabs at the lack of solidarity amongst Jews. Such blatant inability to read is not appropriate in my book.
This topic, perhaps as much as any is both (1) important to understanding our human predicament, and (2) a bog filled (quite deliberately) with numerous landmines.
Accurate reading and historical perspective are vital to these discussions, and to improving our human predicament.
Perhaps the opening poster said it best: "in spite of what i said about putting too much focus on the Jewish elites, they happen to be a very hot topic for me at this particular time".
Please do not allow the heat of the topic to short circuit logic or discernment, especially on such important topics.
I will endeavor to keep discussions of important topics on this forum productive, and to keep out, by whatever measures are necessary, disruptions that are more driven by heat than by logic or discernment. Thread splitting, as I have done here, is just one of the several tools that we have available to us.
My rebuttal to Paul's attack:
Re: Split thread from "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"
wow-wee - the iron hammer falls squarely upon e.Man's head - have to say that i didn't see that one coming
It seems to me however that your beef with my post is not about *what* i wrote or the several "infractions", if you will, that you have pointed out, but rather *who* i wrote about. Please, allow me to elaborate...
Were we talking about the Italian mafia, and i said "Italian elites", would you have taken such drastic action as to isolate my posts, chastise me publicly and send a rather threatening PM?
But the Jewish mafia, well that's a whole new ball-game, isn't it? As soon as the word "Jew" or "Jewish" comes into play, it is automatically hate speech and it seems pretty clear to me that this is essentially what i am being accused of, under the guise of not following protocol and straying off topic. There can be criticism of an Italian criminal cabal, but not of a Jewish criminal cabal, is that it? That is surely the sense i am getting here, as i think i can make clear.
Let me begin my defense by expanding upon a statement i made earlier, emphasis added this time...
"were it just a history thing, i wouldn't care, but the history given to us by the victors of WW2 and the Jewish criminal cabal (and i am not saying Jews in general) has had, and continues to have an unbelievable (literally) impact upon our lives, politics, the media, finance, etc., and i personally think that that it is important to understand the real history and motives in order to better access and develop solutions for the many problems we face"
Let there be no mistake whatsoever regarding my overall position regarding Jews...
1. I am not racist, nor do i hate people based on their religion, color, history, beliefs, appearance, etc., nor am i currently, or have i ever been a member of any race-centric organization, which includes the nazis, neo-nazis, skin-heads, kkk, white supremacists, or any other hate-based or race-based org, nor do i view my race as superior to another, nor do i view me as superior to others.
2. Although i made it clear earlier, i think i'd better expand upon my statement "and i am not saying Jews in general". Again, had the discussion been about any people other than the Jews, i would seriously question such a backlash would have occurred. Nevertheless, there are criminal organizations that are centered around races, religions and ideologies (the Italian mafia for example, right?). So what's wrong with "the Jewish mafia"? Or the "Jewish criminal cabal"? Or the Jewish elites? Does speaking of the Italian mafia/cabal/elites imply all Italians? Of course not; it implies a tiny subset of Italians who happen to be criminals. There is no difference when i refer to the Jewish cabal/mafia. It is not the Jewish people at large that are remotely responsible for many of the problems we face today - quite the opposite - they themselves are perhaps the biggest victims of the Jewish-Zionist elite! I have no more of a beef with Jews or those who call themselves Jews or those who are Jewish anymore than i have with Italians or those who call themselves Italians or Christians.
We have problems in our social and political systems - lots of problems - and knowing who is responsible and why is, in my opinion, necessary to developing relevant solutions to those problems, not that the Jewish-Zionist elites are responsible for all the worlds problems by any stretch, but the fact is that they are responsible for a lot of the most significant problems (if you want to look at it that way - another way to look at is is that we, the 99%, allowed these problems to manifest).
Now if you want to accuse me of being critical of the Jews, fine; i stand absolutely guilty! But understand that i am not singling out the Jews; i am singling out the "1%", Jewish or otherwise, who are the unethical criminals driving policy. Many, but certainly not all Jews, have been brainwashed into accepting the philosophy of their criminal leaders, just as many, but not all non-Jews have been brainwashed in a similar manner. In that vain, yes, i am critical of the Jews - and of all of the rest of us - for swallowing the poison doled out by the 1%.
You then go on to quote me:
"Perhaps the opening poster said it best: "in spite of what i said about putting too much focus on the Jewish elites, they happen to be a very hot topic for me at this particular time"."
You criticize me as though focusing on a single topic is... what? bad? Or is it because Jewry is the topic? Should one be criticized for focusing your attention on your passion because of the subject matter? Or admitting that they are interested in a particular topic? I think your statement is based upon semantics and i think there is little doubt that it is the sensitive subject matter that is the core issue.
Here you state that i misinterpreted something written by Mathis. Again, semantics. My first question is whether my alleged misinterpretation is grounds for the rather brutal flogging i have been subjected to? Am i, or anyone, expected to interpret things as you interpret them? Of course not, but again, i don't think the issue is my interpretation at all.
"The opening post of this split thread confused a paragraph very specifically discussing whether Zionists would want to DESTROY GOD, with discussing whether Zionists would want to use strong language in general."
Did i really misinterpret what Mathis said? Well, let's have a look - he states:
"Why do I think the Protocols are fiction? Because they taste like fiction. They don't read like the real minutes of a meeting, nor like a game plan, nor like a white paper. The psychology is all wrong. People don't talk about themselves this way. Jewish leaders would whitewash their own actions far better than this, even talking amongst themselves. Despots never call themselves despots, for example. No matter how Machiavellian leaders are, they always try to sugarcoat their actions, especially to themselves. As an example, we can study Protocol 4:
WE SHALL DESTROY GOD
It is blatantly clear to me that Mathis is using this protocol to make a point regarding the language used in the protocols. The content of the protocol he quotes is completely irreverent.
My rebuttal to Mathis was to demonstrate that some Jewish-Zionist elites do, in fact, use such brutal and blunt language and therefore the accuracy of his statement is somewhat questionable in my mind.
Continuing with your opinions...
"The PROTOCOLS of the Elders of the Zion were clearly written during and discussing events over a century ago in Europe, but the opening post of this split thread takes Miles' paper to task for its lack of a more detailed discussion of Zionist influence on the US in recent decades, saying "how can he [Miles] be correct given the blatantly obvious influence of the Jews in the U.S.?"."
You're reading into my statements something that simply isn't there and, again, is staggeringly trivial. I never criticized Mathis for not writing more regarding the Jewish-Zionist influence - i simply asked a question. My full quote ( i see that "existentially" should have been "essentially"):
"Mathis seems to be saying that the aristocrats are existentially using the Jews as a tool to divert blame, and given the overwhelming influence of the the Jewish cabal in the U.S. and elsewhere, i would have to question that, though, admittedly, i have sometimes wondered if what Mathis is implying is exactly correct, but how can he be correct given the blatantly obvious influence of the Jews in the U.S.?"
As for your critique of my indiscriminate "influence of the Jews in the U.S." statement, granted, i could have been more specific, however i would also argue that the Jews in general, because of this criminal cabal, enjoy some benefits in the U.S. that they may not otherwise have. It's like being the white person on the bus; you may not hate blacks or agree that Rosa should be restricted to a particular seat, but nevertheless you benefit because you're white in that you can sit wherever you wish.
This is really quite amazing to me - i can't imagine anyone being targeted for the utterly trivial things i am being targeted for here. Your criticism of me is based almost entirely on semantics. Again, this strongly indicates to me that it is not the overall subject matter that i am being water-boarded for, but rather it is because you simply don't like what i have to say. Were this thread about anything other than Jews and Zionism, would i really be taken to task over asking a simple question that is quite obviously very relevant to the topic? And what is wrong with taking Mathis to task, as you put it? Am i not allowed to challenge the statements people make? Or might it be that i am not allowed to question those for which you apparently have a great deal of respect for? I don't [think] any of these is the issue. I think it's my challenging a criminal cabal -- the 1%, a healthy portion of which happens to be Jewish -- and pointing out that they're Jewish.
This is not about straying off-topic or criticizing people or my alleged misunderstanding of what Mathis wrote or minor infractions which are being blown way out of proportion; it is about me criticizing people who you do not wish to see criticized. Since you do not seem to have the hutzpa to admit this (and i'm sorry, i don't know how else to out it), you are twisting what i have said to make it appear that i am antisemitic and, in turn, using that invented assumption against me in what is an obvious effort to have me ejected from this forum.
I understand why that is and i suspect it isn't personal, but i had hoped that the moderators of this particular forum, even if they do not agree with someone, would not try to vilify and threaten those they do not agree with and do so under false pretenses.
This is a perfect example of what i mean (emphasis added):
"The opening post of this thread then uses that confusion to justify introducing several hot button topics, such as JFK's assassination, Jewish lobby groups, and a book by Michael C. Piper, that have in a time long after The Protocols were written. Such blatant confounding of the historical time line is not appropriate in my book."
Here it is glaringly obvious that you are attacking me for the reason that you perceive your knowledge of history to be accurate, while mine is not. Have you read Piper's book? Have you seriously studied the history you claim i am blatantly confounding? Do you deny the overwhelming power that Jewish lobby groups posses in the U.S. political sphere? Really? Am i not allowed an opinion that you find objectionable?
Since my membership is apparently on the line here because "Such blatant confounding of the historical time line is not appropriate in my book" and other statements, i think it is only fair that i be permitted to request that you provide evidence that reinforces your opinion that my knowledge of the historical and current facts i have discussed in my original post are in error, including the power of the Jewish lobby groups in the U.S. and Zionist philosophy in general. Or that i be permitted to make my case.
I think the rest of your concerns with my post were pretty much addressed in what i have said thus far, so i won't bother to comment upon them unless requested.
Lastly, i would welcome any and all moderators to read this post and make a decision as to whether i fit in here. If not, that is fine, but i prefer to know now rather than 6 months or a year down the road.
One of the primary purposes of this forum, according to my understanding, is to find ways to dig us out of the immense hole we have excavated for ourselves through complicity, politics, pollution, broken social, education and monetary systems, etc.. It is my opinion that, in order to best do that, it might be a good idea to have a clear understanding of the specifics that led to this mess in the first place. I am not saying that this is the only way or even the right way to solve our problems, but i think it is a possibly way and all i can do is what i think is right.
If we cannot discuss who caused these problems and name names, than it is my opinion that the effectiveness of any given solution may be compromised. If you get bit by a dog, there are all kinds of solutions that can be developed to avoid a future attack; you can stay indoors; you can avoid the area where you were bit; you can kill all the dogs, etc., but wouldn't knowing which dog bit you be of great value in developing a relevant solution? How do you know that all dogs will act in the same way?
In this silly geo-political game today, there's a lot of dogs. I happen to be focused on one of them at this particular time, more or less, and that dog happens to be the Jewish-Zionist criminal cabal that is, provably, blatantly and factually influencing our lives - your life. When we speak of the 1%, it is Jewish elites that make up a large portion of that 1%. Are we to assume there is no organization among them? It isn't my fault - that's the way it is. And avoiding taboo subject matter is not, to me, how you solve problems.
I am sorry, but i am not at all afraid to point out the obvious, i don't give a rats ass who gets implicated. Let the chips fall where they may.
So i'm sure some will be wondering what my solutions might be? Simple; EDUCATION!
I don't want to put the Bush's, the Cheney's, the Wolfiwitz's or the Netanyahu's in prison ... well, ok, i sorta do, but i'd rather change their way of thinking. Karma, you know? What comes around, goes around, and violence (and i see imprisonment as violent) is not the best answer in my opinion.
The Jews as a whole are not the problem, but when there is a blatantly obvious effort by a Jewish-Zionist criminal cabal to screw the rest of us and the Earth for their own self-serving benefit, INCLUDING THE JEWISH PEOPLE, i'll be damned if i'm going to refrain from pointing that out because it's not politically correct to criticize Jews. How can you talk about the Italian mafia without mentioning "Italian"? And when you do talk of this, there are probably very few people that assume you are talking about the Italian people as a whole. But the Jewish mafia? Whole different story, isn't it? Swap out ONE WORD and all of a sudden you're an anti-Semitic, Jew-bashing neo-nazi skin-head who hates every Jew that was ever born, not that i'm accusing you personally of going that far in your written critique of me, but that does seem to be the implication, at least to some degree.
I'm not asking or expecting anyone to agree with me. I know full well the programming that we all have been subjected to for nearly 7 decades regarding Germany's role in WW2 and the Jews. All i am asking is that you allow me the opportunity to make a case and, if i am not welcome to do that, then, by all means, dump me because i defiantly do not belong here.
I will close with this quote:
“To determine the true rulers of any society, all you must do is ask yourself this question: Who is it that I am not permitted to criticize?" — Kevin Alfred Strom
Paul would counter my lengthy, heart-felt plea by ignoring it entirely:
Re: Split thread from "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"
Your abilities to rationalize your actions, and to misinterpret my warnings, are both considerable.
This is unfortunate.