FYI: BEST-SELLING WAR DIARY FRAUD!
There are few episodes in war more stirring than the witnessing of a child in peril. The heart quickens. We are focused. We want to help–to do something. Few things are worse than to feel unable to rescue such a child. To read a booklet–a diary–written by an intelligent and winning lass, noting the passing events in a wartime situation unfavorable to her own people is a very special sharing. Her perils become one’s own, as the pages turn on her day to day experiences. There are good moments in these times–a sort of glimpse of the sun briefly breaking through the usual gloom of one’s days. We meet members of her family thtrough her own dear pen. We share her thoughts and hopes. We also share her fears and sense of peril. This kind of reading can be wrenching emotionally.
How betrayed we’d feel to learn that it was largely a commercial racket executed by close relatives to exploit the moment for personal gain, as well as undeserved sympathy! Yet, that is basically the case with the famous “diary” allegedly written by little Anne Frank. How could the post-World War II sweetheart of America have been a fake? Well, Anne Frank was real enough. She was undoubtedly a nice, intelligent little girl. That’s not the issue. The issue is: Was she the girl of her famous diary, or was that little girl a piece of fiction? To what extent?
Consider:
“The truth about the Anne Frank Diary was first revealed in 1959 by the Swedish journal Fria Ord. It established that the Jewish novelist Meyer Levin had written the dialogue of the ‘diary’ and was demanding payment for his work in a court action against Otto Frank. A condensation of the Swedish articles appeared in the American Economic Council Letter, April 15th, 1959, as follows:
” ‘History has many examples of myths that live a longer and richer life than truth, and may become more effective than truth.
” ‘The Western World has for some years been made aware of a Jewish girl through the medium of what purports to be her personally written story, ANNE FRANK’S DIARY. Any informed literary inspection of this book would have shown it to have been impossible as the work of a teenager.
” ‘A noteworthy decision of the New York Supreme Court confirms this point of view, in that the well known American Jewish writer, Meyer Levin, has been awarded $50,000 to be paid him by the father of Anne Frank as an honorarium for Levin’s work on the ANNE FRANK DIARY.
” ‘Mr. Frank, in Switzerland, has promised to pay to his race kin, Meyer Levin, not less than $50,000 because he had used the dialogue of Author Levin just as it was and ‘implanted’ it in the diary as being his daughter’s intellectual work.’
“Further inquiries brought a reply on May 7th, 1962 from a firm of New York lawyers, which stated:
” ‘I was the attorney for Meyer Levin in his action against Otto Frank, and others. It is true that a jury awarded Mr. Levin $50,000 in damages, as indicated in your letter. That award was later set aside by the trial justice, Hon. Samuel C. Coleman, on the ground that the damages had not been proved in the manner required by law. The action was subsequently settled while an appeal from Judge Coleman’s decision was pending.
” ‘I am afraid that the case itself is not officially reported, so far as the trial itself, or even Judge Coleman’s decision, is concerned. Certain procedural matters were reported in 141 New York Supplement, Second Series 170, and in 5 Second Series 181. The correct file number in the New York County Clerk’s office is 2241-1956 and the file is probably a large and full one….’
“Here, then, is just one more fraud in a whole series of frauds perpetrated in support of the ‘Holocaust’ legend and the saga of the Six Million. Of course, the court case bearing directly on the authenticity of the ANNE FRANK DIARY was ‘not officially reported.’ “ [THE TRUE HISTORY OF THE HOLOCAUST, based upon Mr. Richard Harwood's DID SIX MILLION JEWS REALLY DIE IN WWII?, page18.]
Alas, here we see that even though a man made exceedingly rich since the publication of the ANNE FRANK DIARY in 1952, Otto Frank, Anne’s father, tried to defraud his confederate in the enterprise, Meyer Levin. Well, it is said that there is no honor amongst thieves. Further, the welling power of Jews to corrupt the American government, if necessary to protect an issue–such as the “holocaust”–from any suggestion of deceit. Therefore, the judge in this case is “turned” apparently to help preserve the fraud which was growing by the month. I recall the 1950s as years in which Hollywood made a plethora of WWII-based films, most of them finding ways to hammer away at the evil of the Nazis. By doing this Jews, as the antithesis of the Nazis, were quietly elevating themselves into superior moral beings. Folks, it was an evil vs. good scenario, and there could not be allowed any besmirching of the “good guys.” Afterall, from the “holocaust” would arise Jewry Restored, rising from the dead, as it were, holy and wise. Of course, being very rich helped the medicine go down. It is not necessary for all Jews to be rich; it is necessary that nonJewish elites in America be “sprinkled with sugar” however. It is apparent that white middle class America worships Mammon, which they dub “Christianity,” and view rich Americans “Heavenly figures.” By blessing the rich, they hope to receive blessings as well.
Therefore, with understanding of the psychology of the classes of America, “con men” can lay very successful plans to perpetrate a fraud. They can also thwart exposure, usually.
Yet, in America and Europe a scattering of smart, honest and brave men and women began to question suspicious assertions , which were accepted as truths by the lesser sorts of people. The matter of little Anne Frank came up. It is a pity that a nice little girl, after her death, had her good name befouled by greedy living relatives. Let us remember this: Anne Frank did not lie; her father did.
I have read that part of her “diary” was written in crayon, which I discredit, as I’ve seen no authentic statement to that effect. Still, it isn’t farfetched at a time of war-caused scarcity, that she might employ a crayon to express herself, rather than nothing at all. This is sort of touching. Further, I’ve seen reports that part of the “diary” was written in ballpoint pin. This was asserted as a shocking indicator of fraud, as ballpoint pens were said not to exist at the time od Anne Frank’s travail. I cannot speak to the issue, as I’m not at this point sure either of the date of invention and distribution of ballpoint pens, nor whether the use of ballpoint pen writing, all or in part, occurred. It would seem to be a natural error that Meyer Levin and Otto Frank might overlook, while inserting posthumous “ghostwritings.”
Naturally, the jewish media tried to “bulk up” the story in the form of the New York Times. Consider:
“…on June 8, 1989, The New York Times came to the rescue of the famous diary and reported that–at last–an ‘authenticated version’ of the diary had been produced by the Netherlands State Institute for War Documentation. In other words, the previous version (or versions, as the case may be) were not, in fact, ‘authenticated’ after all, and the diary that has been printed in dozens of languages and brought to the stage and screen may not have been genuine.
“The newspaper failed to mention, however, that in 1959 a Swedish journal, Fria Ord, reported that Jewish novelist Meyer Levin had sued Otto Frank, the father….” [THE BARNES REPORT,Jan./Feb., 2001, p.51]
Well, of course, The New York Times would skip this aspect! It’s not news “fit to print” in their view, soiling as it does the reputation of the ANNE FRANK DIARY. One must recall that this bit of propaganda is coerced reading in many American public schools. Mark Twain must go. Shakespeare must go. Anne Frank? Never!
Consider:
“Although today, THE DIARY OF ANNE FRANK continues to be hailed as a ‘must read’ (it is required reading at all academic levels) University of Chicago historian Peter Novick notes the fact that, at the time the diary was released, made into a stage play, and later adapted for the screen, the movie version–all of the hoopla notwithstanding–was not a hit at the box office….
“Lawrence Langer, described as a specialist in Holocaust literature, has complained, according to Novick, about Anne’s ‘failure to practice Jewish rituals, the lack of a mention of Passover in the two years covered by her diary, and in general, her ‘limited concern with Jewish issues….’
“According to Novick,…’The theater reviewers for two Zionist magazines, JEWISH FRONTIER and MIDSTREAM, pointed out that while in the diary Anne had referred to [the Jewish holiday] Hanukkah once in passing, immediately adding that [the Christian holiday] ‘St Nicholas Day was much more fun’, the play dwells at length on the Hanukkah celebration and ignores St. Nicholas day. ‘All of this is good public relations for the Jews’ traditional observances,’ remarked the reviewer in MIDSTREAM, ‘but it is not what Anne Frank wrote in her diary.’ “ [supra]
Indeed! Fraud, greed,propaganda and misrepresentation all by Jews or Jewish interests, trampling the honest effort of a little girl in trying times. Incidentally, Anne Frank was not put to death in a “gas chamber in Auschwitz, as is sometimes claimed or implied. Consider:
“The story of Anne Frank’s ordeal and her widely presumed ‘murder’ at the hands of the Nazis is an international article of faith. However, the fact is that when Anne and her family were deported from Holland–after the Nazis broke down that famous door–she was sent to Auschwitz in September of 1944,
“Miss Frank was then subsequently relocated from Auschwitz to the Bergen-Belsen camp where she died of typhus–no, she wasn’t ‘gassed’–in March of 1945.
“As revisionists point out, if German policy was to exterminate Jews, Anne Frank would have been killed at Auschwitz, allegedly the chief Nazi ‘extermination’ site.” [THE FACTS--AND THE MYTHS--ABOUT THE HOLOCAUST, Andrew F. Carter, p.11]
What Mr. Carter does not state in his interesting booklet is that the Allies were as responsible for Anne Frank’s untimely death as were the Nazis. Spurning German peace “feelers” and pursuing an unconditional surrender that would likely have been as disastrous to Germany’s people as that of World War I, the Allies bombed away the greater part of the German infrastructure, creating scarcity and destroying the means of delivering what dwindling supplies of food and medicine that Germany possessed, and forcing Germany to struggle on with its war effort.
[There is a real possibility that a genocidal program against the Germans was viewed by key advisers of Roosevelt and Churchill as more important than "saving" the Jews and others confined in concentration camps. From the nuclear bomb project, to the total war bombing mentality, to the halting of General Patton's Third Army, so as to allow the Russians to dismember Germany permanently, so it seemed once, were all factors. So was the cruel post-war policies enacted against the German people, who were, for the most part, in desperate straits. This would include the Morgenthau Plan]
The destruction of Germany’s infrastructure meant scarcity. The confined populations’ vulnerabilities to disease, especially typhus, was pronounced. Most inmate deaths occurred due to typhus, other diseases, natural causes, all of which were probably enhanced by inadequate food and lack of medicine.
When Anne Frank was removed to Bergen-Belsen, she was firstly given some protection from the approaching Russian army, whose decorum was suspect. Had she stayed, she may have faced abuse. Secondly, within Germany’s traditional lands, she had hope of medicine and food adequate to help her fight off her typhus. Throughout the war the Germans demonstrated an admirable professional discipline in dealing with the people who fell within their sphere of authority. Alas, more than the Americans and their “Allies.”
No wonder Anne Frank stated that she wanted to be Dutch. She recognized good people when she saw them.
FYI: PERSECUTION HOAXES
More than fifteen years ago, I encountered a rare academic: he was interested in truth and had the “”cajones” to share his discoveries with the world. In this case the academic work was done at the University of Kansas at Lawrence, KS. His name was Laird Wilcox. He founded the WILCOX COLLECTION ON CONTEMPORARY POLITICAL MOVEMENTS, housed in the Kenneth Spencer Research Library situated on that university’s campus. Amongst his papers and documents was a collection entitled “The Hoaxer Project Report.” I purchased a copy of the second edition, published in 1991. This is a simple collection which featured false claims made by Jews of incidents of “anti-semitism” and “persecution.” In every case the incident was, in fact, the work of one or more Jews. This helps “pad” the claims of such Jewish organizations as the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith that a “rising tide of anti-semitism threatens Jews.” The F.B.I. duly notes all these claims in its reports. Then “dogs of the Jews” in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives begin work on a law to stop “hate crimes” by curtailing “freedom of speech” and, more importantly, “freedom of ideas.” On Capitol Hill–and Washington, D.C., generally,–the prevailing belief is that the people should let experts from our finest universities, such as Harvard, Yale, Princeton, et al, do the thinking for America. Men, such as Senator Ted Kennedy, have always been ready to write up a law to present to Congress, which has the purpose of protecting Jews and other minorities against White Anti-Semitism and Racism. They may not use the word “white,” but it is always meant to be inferred. Jewish spokespersons always pretend that such legislation is consistent with America’s “treasured values,” but it is really consistent with shielding Jews from inquiry or investigation as they go about their “Jewish World Agenda,” as a New Jersey politician put it.
From the Jewish point of view, if people cannot see what they are doing, then how can they know until it’s too late? They assert that it is so much better not to go the “bloody revolution” route, when one can achieve the same results by a gradual fait accompli. With politicians such as Speaker of the House, Madame Pelosi, publicly pledging to tie America’s future to the eternal benefit of the State of Israel (sic), Jewish leaders, here and abroad, have every reason to think that their “Agenda” is going along smoothly and beautifully. Now, to stop the few Americans speaking out boldly in small media outlets and on the internet is all that’s needed to eliminate the threat of “sunshine and visual clarity.”
To that end self-censorship is expected by academia and the media. Neither Harvard University “eggheads” nor The Washington Post would consider violating this principle by speaking the FULL truth forthrightly. Hence, only small annoyances such as the Hoaxer Project Report must be attended to by “corrective” legislation. A Senator Joe Biden is usually available to sponsor such a work, although there are bold Jewish senators always ready to “step up” for their people. Let us, then, consider the first of the many documented examples of Jewish fraud.
“LAURIE A. RECHT, a legal secretary who had vigorously supported court-ordered desegregation in Yonkers, NY, reported receiving death threats over several months following a meeting where she had been booed by angry white families opposed to the plan. RECHT, who is Jewish, had become a media heroine for her courage and was awarded an honorary Doctor of Humane Letters degree by the College of New Rochelle. To catch the perpetrators, the F.B.I. had installed a TV camera outside her apartment and attached security equipment to her telephone line. The equipment showed that no threatening calls had been received, and the hidden camera recorded Ms. RECHT writing a threat on the wall next to her apartment. Ms. RECHT has been indicted on several federal charges as a result of her hoax.” [THE HOAXER PROJECT REPORT, Laird Wilcox, p.13]
I believe that it is worth noting how precipitously and unscholarly the College of New Rochelle rushed to present Ms. Recht with an award for her labors. Since educators today generally reflect freemasonry’s influence, a “rush to judgment” typically characterizes their approach. If something is “politically correct,” then they don’t want to be sober and reserved in their approach. Let’s “award” and party, NOW!
Let’s have another of the seemingly innumerable instances of Jewish self-serving fraud, shall we?
“In San Francisco, talk-show host MORTON DOWNEY, JR., is ‘assaulted’ in an airport restroom. A swastika is marked on his face and patches of hair are torn from his scalp, supposedly by neo-nazi ’skinheads.’ Later that day he appears on TV with a much larger swastika painted on his face than was there when he first reported the incident, and related his shocking account of bigotry and racism. Airport security officers by the door reported no unusual traffic in or out of the restroom, and individuals in the restroom denied that any such incident took place. Although DOWNEY refused to back down, the incident is reported as a fabrication and a hoax by police. Later, Downey said he was ‘drunk’ and didn’t even remember the incident.” [supra]
You can easily imagine that Mr. Downey might figure that such an event would hype his ratings for a while. That would tend to keep him employed. Further, all Jews are aware that there are orgainizations within Jewry that are always scanning for such events to promote as “anti-semitism.” Hence, Mr. Downey could well expect to gain worldwide exposure, as Jewish influenced media would certainly feature the story for days on end, The F.B.I. would be called on to confirm a rising tide of anti-semitism. That, too, would be bruited about the media for days. It’s a “win-win” situation for Jews. They have become masters of this game.
Let’s hear of another incident, shall we?
“A series of fires in Hartford, CT, frightened the Jewish community and evoked media comparisons with the ‘Night Of Broken Glass’ when Nazis terrorized Jews in pre-World War II Germany. The fires occurred at Young Israel Synagogue, Emmanuel Synagogue, the home of RABBI SOLOMAN KRUPKA, and at the home of State Representative JOAN KEMLER, who is Jewish.
“Police involvement in the matter was intense, as nationwide media attention focused on the incident which had become the impetus for various legislative proposals to curb ‘bigotry and violence.’ Police staked out entire square blocks of Hartford, hoping for a copy-cat incident to occur in order to charge someone with arson. An early suspect in the case, BARRY DOV SCGUSS, a 17-year 0pold Jewish student, finally confessed to all four arsons. Although the total penalties for four counts of arson could have amounted to virtually life in prison had a real anti-Semite been apprehended, SCHUSS was given a suspended sentence, ordered to undergo psychiatric treatment, and placed on five years probation. SCHUSS had been an avid reader of holocaust literature and admitted that he had set the fires to enhance public awareness of anti-Semitism.” [supra, p.14]
One cannot correctly assert that because the “holocaust” itself is a monstrous deceit, anyone who “avidly” studies it must suffer from “Inductive Deceit Syndrome.” The record of Jewish deceit far pre-dates the institutionalization of “holocaust studies” in America. Nor can the assertion of “mental illness” be presented as a sound defense, because, firstly, Jews are handicapped by “mental illness” at higher rates than any other people, and no one knows what, if anything, can be asserted successfully as a normal range for Jews. Can Jews be judged by European standards? Carl Jung had asserted that Jews think differently from Europeans. It would seem that these two people should not even be trying to live under one national roof. The Most High of Israel said through His prophet Amos: “If we do not think alike, can we long walk together?” Jews perceive normalcy as “insanity.” Secondly, mental illness does not negate the factualness, or lack thereof, of an event. A mentally ill individual can speak truthfully about an incident, while at all times being “mentally ill.” At the same time a perfectly sane individual may be lying about an event. Therefore, one must observe the event described, not the person describing the event.
Let’s have a final episode of Jewish fraud presented on this particular post and call it a “wrap.”
“Two unnamed Jewish teenagers spray-painted swastikas and anti-Semitic remarks on the home and car of a Jewish family in Marlboro Township, NJ. The two had been arrested for throwing firecrackers at passing cars and a subsequent investigation linked them with the anti-Semitic writing and a series of burglaries. Charges included seven counts of criminal mischief, four counts of burglary and two counts of theft. The two teens were not prosecuted for ‘hate crimes,’ however. Marlboro Township Detective Sgt. ROBERT HOLMES said, ‘It’s tough to prove their actions are anti-Semitic if they’re both Jewish.’ “ [supra, p.15]
Naturally, no one would suppose that “framing” nonJews in a fraud crime is worth the charge its written on. Jews are accustomed to luxuriate in their alleged history of mistreatment by Europeans, expecting to receive the “top bunk” in a dual legal system wherein the “book” is thrown at white folks alleged to have committed a “hate crime,” such as condemning an Executive Branch shot-through with Israel Uber Alles “Advisers.” Never has such an unworthy people, such as Jews, had so many fools fighting one another to be first to turn over power and wealth to them to administer. Since Jews always look to advance the Jewish World Agenda, they are becoming candidates for the first true World Tyrant. Is insanity catching?
Downnlaced, 2008.
CRIME BEAT: PIONEERS ATTACKED!
Whooping it up on the Plains
We often hear of the dangers of “the Big City.” Crime is said to be rampant. A decent person is not safe even behind bolted doors. There are many chilling warnings. Yet, the worst criminal events may well have happened in the very heart of the rustic, beautiful America. The CRIME BEAT series follows the lead of the old Crime magazines in presenting interesting cases of horror which our fellow humans have had to endure. As with those Crime magazines, we like to present cases from the past occasionally. This is one such story. Consider:
“…Sarah Morris was not in a wagon moving west through strange country but was sitting quietly in her Colorado home surrounded by all that was familiar.
” ‘They set the house and stables afire, and drove us into the pilgrim room. At last the door of the pilgrim room got in flames, and we had to leave. We ran out towards the river, through the corral, hoping to make our escape.
My husband said perhaps we could escape that way. When we got to the corral we found we could not. He told me to stop, as they would probably take me prisoner, and he possibly might get away. They surround him, and kill him and another man as they were running to the river. The Indians stood so thickly about me, I could not see him when he was killed….I received five wounds from arrows and six stabs from knives. They also struck me across the head with their whips.’
There were no provocative acts to warrant this savage attack on this farmer/herder family. Modern apologist for criminal behavior will probably assert that their mere presence was a provocation warranting this level of force by these Indians. At CRIME BEAT there is no tolerance for such acts. The effort to blame the European settlers for the horrors inflicted upon them is not sound. Further, the Europeans did not induce savagery; it was already present and employed against other Indians of the Plains held to be enemies. Torture-murder is always a hallmark of crime. It should not provoke sympathy or pity for its practioners. Let hear more of this horror.
“…if the victim weathered the initial attack, her chances of survival rose greatly, for Indians quickly killed or tortured to death those of no value to them. In most cases, however, the women would have gladly died rather than endure the degradation that was to come.
“While her husband helplessly watched on, one woman fled to a nearby tent when Indians suddenly surrounded her uncompleted Nebraska home. The editor of a local newspaper tells what happened:
” ‘[she] was led from her tent and every remnant of clothing torn from her body. A child that she was holding to her breast was wrenched from her arms and she was knocked to the ground. In this nude condition the demons gathered round her and while some held her down by standing on her wrists and their claws cluthched in her hair, others outraged her person. Not less than thirty repeated the horrible deed! While this was going on another crew was trying to stop the heart-broken wailings of the child by tossing strings of beads about its face, and others were dancing about in the brush and grass, with revolvers cocked, yelping like madmen.’
Today, such doings are labeled things like “wilding,” and the like, and “understood” as the product of discrimination, poverty and lack of jobs. At CRIME BEAT this event is understood in terms of man’s capacity to do evil in the form of hurtful, savage deeds. Our view is shared by a minuscule portion of the population. As a matter of fact, the evil doings afflicted upon the Indians upon this woman are perpetrated in prisons in America today. As the authorities allow it, they may be described as “armchair parcipants.” Be that as it may, the crimes taking place on the plains of Nebraska continued.
“After the murders and rapes, the Indians either continued their raids or turned homeward with the captives. In their stunned condition, few women failed to follow. Five Colorado captives who did refuse had their hair plaited onto horses’ tails and were dragged helplessly along.” [SCALP DANCE, Thomas Goodrich, pp.119-20]
Did the five woman survive such an ordeal? Hard to to be hopeful, but if they did, they were in for a degrading and possibly otherwise violent end. This was a brief historiette of a criminal horror which occurred in the plains of western America in the decade following the War Between The States. There were many. Today, Americans hear of how the Indians suffered, but these were not a people with clean hands. Among them were hands red with European blood, and grotesque were their hands, as strands of scalped hair glued to their fingers.
Downnlaced, 2008.
FYI: THE ISRAELITES WERE NORDIC
One of the premier problems facing the Lightbearers is not merely “the darkness” they encounter everywhere, but the strong ramparts that invariably defend citadels of darkness. Knowledge is not precisely the enemy to the Lords of Darkness; it is true and correct knowledge in opposition to what is upheld by such Lords that is the enemy to be feared and combatted.
It is in the spirit of a Lightbearer that I offer the view that the israelites were a special and distinct group of people. I believe that their original appearance was distinctly different also. If, as I assert, the Israelites were a fair-complexioned people, bearing the usual traits of the people who became identified by the word, Caucasian, then this was not in vain.
I recall that in the ’70s, after Mr. Jenson had made a controversial paper on comparative intelligence available, Time magazine reported in an article that behavioral scientist were dis mayed tio discover that African American babies, or very young children, when presented the option of selecting either a brown baby-doll or a “white” baby-doll, selected the “white” baby-doll. Because of the extreme youth of the individuals, it was difficult to assert that they were “victims” of cultural bias, which is the usual claim in these matters.
My own belief is strictly-speaking “faith-informed.” I believe that the Adamic man was brought into the world to bring the pre-Adamic people into knowledge of the true God, Yahwey. When the Adamic man sinned, his mission was compromised to the extent that the Messiah must now accomplish the major work. However, the Adamic man still had the mission of “teacher” to perform. In my view the Adamic man became the primary agent of knowledge to the pre-Adamic man. In this way the Adamic man would help prepare the world for its Messiah.
The fact that the Adamic man was fair, or ruddy, in complexion is merely a device to draw the pre-Adamic people to such people. They were attracted to the “light,” as it were. Drawn willingly, willingly they learned, and in this process prepared the way for “Paradise Regained.”
What did the Adamic man look like? The name itself indicates someone capable of “blushing” or “flushing.” This indicates a thinner skin, as well as a fairer skin. For example, the term “blue-blood,” which presently connotes a royal or aristocratic lineage, was originally applied in Iberia to separate the Adamic Iberian from “imposters.” For even though the skin of fair people may darkened some under the light of the sun, the unexposed skin will still display the original, natural fairness. In the Adamic man the blood vessels, appearing to be blue under the fair skin, create a beautiful translucent marbling which was once prized. It is this characteristic which was noted by the term, “blue blood.” It is a racial characteristic, rather than a social strata.
Therefore, after the Flood, only Noah, his wife, and their children bore this Adamic signature. It is possible that Adamic man went eastward prior to the Flood, escaping its destruction but losing their original identity through amalgamation with pre-Adamic people over time. It was the Most High’s will that Noah and his family only would bear this mark into the future. As some of them proceeded in a southerly direction, in the persons of Eber, Shem, Mizraim, Canaan, et al, they brought the knowledge which had been acquired prior to the Flood event.
Incidentally, I don’t believe in a global flood, but a flood in the “world” of the fallen Adamic people–a world referenced by Peter in an epistle. Just as “America,” for the soldiers in Vietnam, was the “world,” so the “world” of the Flood was not literally the entire Earth. This is a view–not doctrine.
Have you ever wondered about the origins of the long, flowing clothing worn by Arabs and others? In east Africa the local populations wore rather scanty attire. They did not need protection from the sun, as the ample supply of melanin acted as “sun block” for their skin. The same situation applied in coastal India (and a far distance therein). However, for Adamic man the journey southward would increasingly mean exposure to intense sunlight. Further, the nights could be quite cool. I believe that Noah’s children developed this clothing to protect their fair and/or ruddy complexions from the burning sun. These flowing robes, et al, also served to keep them comfortable at night. Hence, the children of Noah may be credited with developing a pre-central cooling/heating system from textiles. Their attire stabilized the affects of weather in an important way. This is a view–not proven science.
Parenthetically, most scientist despise Bible-based concepts and Apochrypha, and therefore one may anticipate their asserting that such clothing was invented by Chinese or Hottentots.
What do we know of the descendants of Noah-Eber-Shem? What did they look like? We know that Abraham’s wife, Sarah, was described as as fair and very beautiful. King David was described as having “ruddy” complexion. As Abraham was a close relative of his wife, I believe it is a very good bet that he, too, was fair. Is this a “marker” of the Israelites? Consider:
“The most concrete evidence as to the ethnological characteristics of the true Israelites is to be found in the period c. 1400-900 B.C., and when they had been in occupation of the Promised Land for over 500 years. This evidence shows conclusively that the Israelites were of the Nordic type, a fact that has taken the scholarly world completely by surprise….It is evident that to the element of surprise, not a little confusion has been added, in that the predominating and almost sole type to be found in the lands of Israel’s settlement was Nordic, but has wrongly been called ‘Amorite’ by even the highest authorities on the subject.” (Emphasis added.) [UNCOVERING THE MYSTERIES OF YOUR HIDDEN INHERITANCE, Robert Alan Balaicius, Appendix C-5, p.171, citing ISRAEL'S MIGRATIONS OR AN ATTACK ANSWERED (1947), C.F. Parker, p.9]
In Scripture there are indications that Israel would be blind to its identification for a long period subsequent to its bondage in Assyria.. The great epistlist, Paul, even says that it was planned by the Most High, lest the Israelite Christians become vain and misguided. Under the tutelage of their clergy and academia, they have become so misguided as to be “blockheads,” suggesting that the Most High will cause them to suddenly develope perception at some point not too distant. If not, then we understand perfectly why Yahshua asked during His ministry if He’d find any faith at all at the time of His return. But consider:
” ‘Nowhere do we find that the Amorites predominated in all the land occupied by Israel in the time of…[Israel's] settlement. They [Amorites] were annihilated on the east of the Jordan [River] by Moses (Deut. ii 24-37).‘
“Parker continues, ‘The census figures of the Bible testify to the great strength and numerical superiority of…Israel…As Israel was at her greatest power under David and Solomon, and her internal enemies were subdued and in the minority, it is clear…the predominating type throughout the land of Israel was Israelitish, not Amorite as has [erroneously] been supposed. According to [Professor] Sayce and others, the predominating type in the land of Israel at the time of her greatest supremacy was Nordic; therefore, the Israelites were Nordic [and hence, the 'Amorites' were not Nordic].’ “ [Supra,pp.171-172, citing C.F. Parker, supra, p.10]
Unlike neighboring Edom, which always had a relatively small population, the population of Israel became immense. At the time of the Assyrian Bondage, the Northern Kingdom was populated by several million Israelites. A few hundred years later the Judahite historian, Josephus, proclaimed that the Northern Kingdom still resided north of Assyria in numbers beyond counting. Therefore, when the Israelites came to dominate the land once controlled by Canaanite tribes, it was a thorough domination, as opposed to being a ruling minority within a larger, alien people. Always, scientists and historians try to diminish these Israelite people. Why? Consciously or unconsciously, they are attempting to make the Israelites consistent with that known body of people, Jewry. Using their academic qualifications, they assert the right to put the facts and evidence on a Jewish-measured Procrustean Bed, lopping off anything that doesn’t fit, as obviously incorrect. folks, behold your intellectual leaders!
“Parker adds, ‘Foreign testimony in this respect is most valuable, in that it is impartial.’ He relates that during the time of Rehoboam (c.927 B.C.) the ruler of Egypt (Shishak) invaded Israel and took captives, recording these campaigns by inscribing them on the walls of the Egyptian temple at Karnak. These records reveal Israelites were taken captive from the cities of Gaza, Megiddo, Rabbati, Taanach, Shunem, Haphraim (of Issachar), Mahanaim (east of Jordan), Gibbeon (of Benjamin), Ajalon (Judah), Jehud (border of Dan), and other places (1 Kings 11:40; 14:25; II Chronicles 12:1).
“The time these Israelites were taken captive to Egypt was 200 years before the majority of Israel was taken captive to Assyria, and about 325 years before the remaining residue of the people of the land of Judah was taken to Babylon…
“Not only did the Egyptians meticulously record the details of their conquests in writing, but they also impressively recorded their campaigns by engraving in stone the profiles of the people they captured, thus identifying their racial type. Quoting Professor Sayce (from HIGHER CRITICISM AND THE MONUMENTS, 1894, pp.353-354), Parker records, ‘…The prisoners brought back to Egypt served as models, and the Egyptian artists drew their outlines with almost photographic fidelity. Now it is remarkable that the heads which surmount the names of Shishak’s…[captives from the land of Israel] are [called] ‘Amorites’….They [the Egyptian artists] reproduced the features of…[a] fair-skinned, light haired, blur-eyed and long-headed…race….It must have been the prevailing type. In no other way can we account for its having been selected by the sculptors of Shishak to typify the population of the Kingdom of Judah to the entire exclusion of any other type.’ ” [UNCOVERING THE MYSTERIES...,supra, p.172]
Now, Professor Sayce is a famous scholar, yet, even he thought that the “fairheaded” figures shown must represent Amorites. He was mistaken. This is a very fruitful lesson to learn when the Establishment attempts to do another academic “mugging” of the Israelites (not to be confused for Jews by lazy readers). But lets receive one more citation on this matter.
“Parker then concludes, ‘These are plain statements, yet the significance of them has been missed: it is that the latest findings of archaeology demonstrate conclusively that the Israelites (not Amorites) were Nordics.
” The accuracy of this conclusion is put beyond doubt when we discover…the Israelites obtained their Nordic characteristics from their ancestors the Hebrews, who were also Nordics, as is clear from the statements by Sir Leonard Woolley…in his excellent book [pp.291-292] ABRAHAM, RECENT DISCOVERIES AND HEBREW ORIGINS (1935):
” ‘c.2278. After the conquest of the Guti, Ur-Nammu, governor of Ur, sets himself up as king and establishes the Third Dynasty of Ur. The great imperial age of Ur is continued by Dungi (2260)…[to] Ibi-Sin (2195). During this time, the first appearance of Amorites (sic) [Israelites] amongst the population of southern Mesopotamia, these being probably the Habiru or Hebrew immigrants…’ “ [supra, Parker pp.12-13]
Although for some, Mr. Woolley may seem suggestive but not conclusive on this issue. Therefore, to strengthen the matter, consider:
“The Nordic people [erroneously called 'Amorite'] occupied exactly the territory of Israel, even to that [portion of land east of the Jordan River]–a fact which further confirms their identity as Israelites….Sayce identifies these people as similar to the ‘fair Kelts of an Irish village’; but he also traces them into Britain and Ireland! There is no break in the chain of evidence, and the accuracy of his identification is further established when he remarks [from his THE HITTITES (1925)]:”
” ‘Now it is curious that wherever this particular branch of the white race has extended it has been accompanied by a particular form of Cromlech, or sepulchral chamber built of large uncut stones….placed upright in the ground and covered over with other large slabs, the whole chamber being subsequently concealed under a tumulus of small stones or earth. Frequently the entrance to the cromlech is approached by a sort of corridor. These cromlechs are found in Britain, in France, in Spain, in North Africa, and in Palestine, especially on the eastern side of the Jordan, and the skulls that have been exhumed from them are skulls of men of the dolichocephalic or long-headed type.’ “ [supra, Parker, p.16ff]
Now, these are hardly the ends of the evidence available. However, it touches upon what has been noted by scholars. Mr. C.F. Parker has kindly taken the trouble to correct errors in scholarship. The physical identities of the Israelites have been established. Unfortunately, no amount of effort can make the willfully blind “see.”
Downnlaced, 2008.
FYI: THE TRUTH ABOUT NUREMBERG
Although there is little chance that an American student will ever hear anything other than approval from their teachers in regard to the legal procedures at the War Trials held at Nuremberg, the fact of the matter is that they were contrary to our own system of law and the general thrust of Anglo-Saxon law, as it developed in the United States of America. You won’t hear that from your law professors at any law department at any university or college in America–except soto voce. Here, then, is the truth from unimpeachable sources. Please consider:
“U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, one of America’s most respected ‘liberal’ thinkers had harsh words for the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials: ‘I thought at the time and still think,’ he wrote, ‘that the Nuremberg trials were unprincipled. Law was created expost facto to suit the passion and clamor of the time.’
“U.S. Rear Admiral H. Lamont Pugh, a former Navy Surgeon General and Commanding Officer of the National Naval Medical Center thought likewise. He wrote: ‘I thought the trials in general bordered upon international lunacy. I thought it particularly unfortunate, inappropriate, ill-conceived and dupably injudicious that the United States should have been in the leading role as prosecutors and implementators of the trials of German participants or principals.’ “ [THE FACTS--AND THE MYTHS--ABOUT THE HOLOCAUST, Andrew F Carter, p.18]
I thought that it would be useful to associate the phrase “international lunacy” and “international communism.” The admiral, here cited, may have had that in the back of his mind. Be that as it may, let’s proceed with this citation. Attend:
“Even Robert Jackson, the chief U.S. prosecutor at the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal told President Harry Truman in a letter dated October 12, 1945 that: [The Allies] ‘have done or are doing some of the very things we are prosecuting the Germans for. The French are so violating the Geneva Convention in the treatment of [German] prisoners of war that our command is taking back prisoners sent to them [for forced labor in France]. We are prosecuting plunder and our Allies are practicing it. We say aggrssive war is a crime and one of our allies asserts sovereignty over the Baltic States based on no title except conquest.‘ “ [supra]
It is instructive that our leaders always use words such as “French” and “Russian” (as do the media), when the impelling agent and/or controlling element driving the vengeful, hateful, destructive and often criminal actions are Jews. Be that as it may, these are not the last words on Nuremberg by a long shot. Consider:
“Although the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials have become a mammoth event in history, not all of those who participated came away impressed with the execution of ‘justice.’
“For example, Charles F. Wennerstrum, an Iowa Supreme Court justice who served as the presiding judge in the trial of German generals told the Chicago Tribune on February 23, 1948, ‘If I had known seven months ago what I know today, I would never have come here. The high ideals announced as the motives for creating these tribunals have not been evident.’
“According to the judge, ‘The entire atmosphere here is unwholesome…Lawyers, clerks, interpreters and researchers were employed who became Americans only in recent years, whose backgrounds were imbedded in Europe’s hatreds and prejudices.
” ‘Most of the evidence in thr trials was documentary, selected from the large tonnage of captured records. The selection was made by the prosecution. The defense had access only to those documents which the prosecution considered material to the case.’
“Wennerstrum left Nuremberg ‘with a feeling that justice has been denied.’ “ [supra]
Now, the judges reference could hardly be to any other newcomers to America than to Jews. I assume that his reference to the “imbedded hatreds” is a rather cryptic reference to the torturing of German prisoners, including the breaking of teeth, bone and bursting of soft tissue associated with male genitalia. Those who doubt that those “wonderful, sweet , intellectual people” could do such things are so ignorant and naive as to warrant the assignment of a chaperone to keep them from misguided disaster. Please pay careful attention to the following citation:
“Is it just possible that the American investigators during the Dachau war crimes were somewhat biased and had their own agenda?
“The legal advisor to the court was Col. A. H. Rosenfeld. The chief of the War Crimes Committee was Lt. Col. Burton Ellis. His assisstants were Raphael Shumaker, Robert E. Byrnes, William Perl, Morris Ellowitz, Harry Thon and a Mr. Kirschbaum. Of these individuals–all with the exception of Byrne–have identifiably Jewish names.
“No wonder that Justice Wennerstrum, president of one of the war crimes tribunals, resigned in disgust and later charged that the prosecutors, ‘instead of trying to formulate and reach a new guiding legal principle, were moved only by personal ambition and revenge…[and that most of the court personnel] consisted of biased persons who, either on political or racial grounds, furthered the prosecution’s case.’
“Earl Carroll, an American attorney on the war crimes tribunal, went so far as to allege that sixty percent of the prosecutor’s staff were German Jews who had left Germany prior to the war, suggesting, obviously, that these German Jews were incapable of carrying out an unbiased inquiry and prosecution. Carroll’s allegations are significant, of course, if only because the German Jews, in particular, had an obvious bias that would undoubtedly have affected their approach to their duties.” [supra, p.19]
To me the sadest part of the whole business is that our judicial system has come to reflect this same Jewish “scholarship.” Increasingly, we see what appears to be ex post facto laws applied to cases. Congress at this time will past any legislation that jews demand, especially if it can be buried in some other bill. The Justice Department has been imbedded with singular units, such as the Office of Special Investigation (“OSI”), typically staffed by Jewish attorneys and supporting cast, to chase down “Nazis” and the like. Jorge W. Arbusto reigns over an administration which not only justifies torture but employs it with alacrity. “W,” having neither feel nor knowledge of anything legitimately American, throws captured “enemies” into concentration camps in the Caribbean for indefinite confinement. His wife assures those that are concerned with the loss of fundamental principles of liberty and property: “They hate us.”
Is this not the classic plea of the “persecuted Jew?” Indeed!
Further, this same people are now directing the Department of Justice and leaning on State Attorney’s offices to prosecute people once again-and still again–and still again–until conviction is obtained. The fact that a jury trial has found someone not guilty carries no weight anymore. New charge–after new charge–after new charge are presented by fedlaw agents, until a guilty verdict can be had. If not had by one jury panel, denounce it and demand another–and another–and another. Typically, such matters are meant to “send a message.” The new “law of symbology” is meant to “educate” all “retrogressive” forces that “intolerance” (or some similar Masonic and Jewish “watchword”) will not be tolerated.
Certainly, Germans got the message, shut up for the most part, and put their backs to the hard task of creating a livelihood in a devastated land, thereby allowing themselves the privilege of paying reparations to the Jews and their “state” perpetually (it seems). Jews have never been ones to deny themselves the “goodies’ that come from tribute. By skillfully reinvesting German marks paid as reparation, Jews have undoubtedly taken quiet control over significant areas of the German economy. “What’s not to like?” they gloat.
Downnlaced, 2008.
FYI: FINANCING THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
American schoolbooks today increasingly reflect the American ruling circles’ reluctance to focus on the role of Jewish financiers in our wars. When touched upon, it is usually in the context of a positive contribution. Jews are rarely, if ever, criticized. When such criticism occurs, it typically involves one Jew taking another to task over an issue. In part this is also due to the unfounded belief among many sections of “Christianity” that Jews are “Israel,” inheritors of the Abrahamic Covenant, and most emphatically not to be “cursed” but to be “blessed” always, as the “apple of God’s eye.”
Such absurdity need not be addressed here, as salvation is “not of the Jews” but of the Messiah Yahshua. The word, incidentally, translated “Jews” in that famous passage, ioudaios, which is a Greek word, actually means: “of the country of Judea.” When the Messiah spoke to the Samarian woman, he was actually leaving Judea and was referencing Himself. He was the salvation–not Judeans, or Jews. [see John 4:22]
Returning, then, to the focus of this posting, the financing of the soldiers to be employed by George III against the Colonial Revolutionaries was not so easy. This was a “brother against brother” situation, which did not appeal to many young British subjects. What was the king to do? Consider:
“Due to the intrigue carried on by the private money powers, the American Revolution was, according to some historians, unwittingly financed by King George III himself.
“Meyer Amschel, of Frankfort-on-the-Main, entered the scene. He conceived the idea of enlisting young men as mercenary troops, painting to them the glories of military service, etc. When King George III was unable to secure British soldiers to fight their cousins across the Atlantic, he went to the Landgrave of Hesse Cassel, at Hanau, near Frankfort. George III paid $20,000,000 to the Landgrave for approximately 16,800 Hessian mercenaries ($1,200 per head) who had been organized and trained by Meyer Amschel.” [MONEY CREATORS, Gertrude M. Coogan, p.181]
Now, I feel obliged to offer a view that many of these “Hessian mercenaries,” trained by Meyer Amschel, were, in fact, Jewish cutthroats of the sort who surfaced during the French Revolution, causing great bloodshed and blasphemous doings then. This same sort surfaced in the American Civil War in “Bloody Kansas.” They surfaced again in Hungary during its revolution and, of course, in the Tsarist Russia, later. Had the British succeeded against the Colonialists, I believe many of these proposed Jewish “Hessian soldiers” would have stayed in America, rewarded with much of the lands that prior to thw war, belonged the leading Colonial families of the Revolution. Only a Ku Klux Klan sort of counterrevolution might have up-rooted the new Jewish power in America, much as it temporarily did in the Deep South after the War Between The States ended in an occupied South. General Grant had then remarked angrily upon the hordes of Jews traversing the South, buying land and other property for pennies on the dollar, violating Grant’s own edicts in the process. Be that as it may, let’s continue, shall we?
” The Landgrave loaned this $20,000,000 to Meyer Amschel at a low rate of interest for ten years.
“It is well known that the foreign borrowing of funds for the American Revolution was accomplished through the efforts of Robert Morris. It is not so well known (although it is boasted of by some historians) that Robert Morris secured his funds from Haym Solamon. It is furthermore stated that although Solamon ‘gave’ everything he had to the American Revolution, he still remained the richest man in America! That is real genius. [supra]
Parenthetically, it shows why Jews turned so energetically to usury and its disreputable financial “kinfolk.”
“Those who know anything of international banker solidarity will appreciate immediately that Meyer Amschel (whose family of five sons and five daughters took the name of Rothschild from the Red Shield which hung in front of Meyer’s shop in Frankfort-on-the-Main as his trade-mark) loaned the money to Solamon, which was in turn loaned through Robert Morris to the American Colonies. Thus, George III paid for the American Revolution and the international financiers played both ends against the middle; no matter who lost, they won, and lives were sacrificed on both sides.” [supra, pp.181-182]
People, this is not an isolated event but occurred again in the U.S. Civil War, where August Belmont and the Erlanger Brothers, both agents of the Rothschilds, loaned to both sides. It probably happened in every major war we’ve fought, typically against closely related kinfolk temporarily dubbed “enemies.”
Downnlaced, 2008
FYI: ANCIENT SPAIN WAS HEBREW COLONY
Lands and people change through time. For some lands there is a wholesale change of “native sons.” We see it often in contemporary times. As a matter of fact, it is happening here in America.
Spain, or the peninsula which modern Spain presently dominates, was not always referenced as Spain, or even as its neighbor, Portugal. Yet, it is a land of ancient importance. In part this was due to a favorable climate and to natural resources. In the Roman era it was a desirable province in which to replenish ones dwindling vault. Let’s consider those ancient days, as schools generally fail to properly touch upon its importance.
“…Maps of Europe show Spain and Portugal on the ‘Iberian Peninsula.’ Any language teacher will tell you that ‘Iberia’ means ‘land of the Hebrews.’ Also, the Spanish river Ebro is derived from Eber, the grandsire of the Hebrews. The river Guadalquiveir was originally Wadi-al-Hibri, which in Moorish means ‘the river of the Hebrews.’ The modern Spanish city of Cadiz was originally Gaderia, or ‘city of Gad.’ It was named when men of the tribes of Gad and Dan worked the mines in ‘Iberia’ during the reign of King Solomon in Israel 1,000 years before Paul came to Spain!
“There is an ancient tombstone in Sagunto, Spain with this epitaph in Hebrew: ‘This is the tomb of Adoniram, an officer of King Solomon, who came to collect tribute, and died the (illegible) day.’ Spain, and probably France and Italy, were tributary to Solomon, paying taxes for military and political protection, but were not conquered people!” [PAUL & JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA, Sheldon Emry, p.15]
It seems that this very sort of thing began the unraveling of the Israelite Kingdom, as Solomon’s excesses mounted with his years. With the advent of the callow and greedy Rehaboam, who followed in his father’s footsteps–not in wisdom, but in taxes, the question of taxes split the kingdom in twain. Oppressive taxes are a historical problem not limited to Hebrews, and always require a brutal martial force to collect it. The last is never a signature of a happy society.
Downnlaced, 2008.
FYI: HEBREWS IN ANCIENT BRITAIN
Although it is now a given that a portion of the Hebrew people settled in the British Isles and adjacent areas, nevertheless, it is little understood today by ordinary Americans. This is completely a function of the baleful influence of those forces in America who have been able to seize power and institute the Era of the Resident Evil in America and the world. Part of the “new order” is that schools must teach all the information that is fit to be printed. Hence, the Age of Information also became the Age of Misinformation and Dysinformation. To accomplish the educational aim of an unrounded education, the pedagogical elite had to employ material omission as a strategy for success. No child was to be left behind in the “dumbing down” process.
As a tactic, book theft and book burning became useful forms of elimination. Obviously, hiding the pertinent data was the first step in denying its existence.
Consider one well known historian of old, as he describes the relevant issue.
“Ptolemy, one of the best known of the ancient historians, identifies the people of the British Isles this way, ‘They were peopled by descendants of the Hebrew Race, who were skilled in smelting operations, and excelled in working metals.’ Yes, Israelites in the British Isles a thousand years before Christ, and it is so written in the ancient history books!” [PAUL & JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA, Sheldon Emry, page 19]
It should not be necessary to say this, but with the misinformation regularly passed forth by Jews and most Protestant preachers, as well as other, one must state clearly that the reference to “Hebrews” is not meant to be a synonym for “Jews.” The sons of Judah by Tamara may have had their role to some extent, but not the sons of Judah by the Canaanite woman, Sura.
The relationship of the Hebrew and Israelite people with Iberia (derived from Eber, who was descended from Shem and “father” of the “Hebrews”), the Hebrides, the British Isle and related areas, was ancient, colonial, and ordained by the Most High. What is, is; what will be, will be. Selah.
Downnlaced, 2008.
